Work

How Vivaldi Helped Coca-Cola Build Its Dairy and Plant-Based Innovation Strategy

  • Food & Beverage

The Challenge

Dairy and plant-based beverages represented two of the fastest-growing segments in global beverage, but Coca-Cola had limited capability and brand positioning in either category. The company needed a clear framework for how to enter these categories — whether to build, buy, or partner — and what positioning would be credible given its brand heritage.

The Opportunity

Vivaldi conducted white space and need-state mapping for both dairy and plant-based beverages, identifying the specific consumer occasions and functional claims where Coca-Cola could build a credible and differentiated position. A build/buy/partner framework was developed to guide entry strategy for each identified The Opportunity.

The Outcome

Coca-Cola received a comprehensive innovation strategy and portfolio architecture for dairy and plant-based beverages — including prioritized entry opportunities, positioning frameworks, and a decision roadmap for how to build the category presence over time.

Coca-Cola Case Study Summary

Coca-Cola partnered with Vivaldi to develop its innovation strategy and portfolio architecture for entry into dairy and plant-based beverages, two of the fastest-growing segments in global beverage. Vivaldi mapped white space and consumer need states across both categories, defined credible positioning for Coca-Cola, and built a build/buy/partner framework that gave the company a prioritized roadmap for establishing category presence over time.

About Coca-Cola

The Coca-Cola Company is the world’s largest beverage company, with over 200 brands sold in more than 200 countries and annual revenues exceeding $45 billion. Beyond carbonated beverages, Coca-Cola has aggressively expanded into health-forward categories including water, sports drinks, coffee, tea, juice, and plant-based beverages — making its innovation strategy one of the most closely watched in the global CPG industry.

 

 

Frequently Asked Questions

What did Vivaldi help Coca-Cola achieve in dairy and plant-based?

Vivaldi conducted white space and need-state mapping for dairy and plant-based beverages, identifying the specific consumer occasions and functional claims where Coca-Cola could build a credible differentiated position. The output was a prioritized innovation strategy and portfolio architecture, with a build/buy/partner framework that gave the company a decision roadmap for establishing presence in two of the fastest-growing segments in global beverage.

How did Vivaldi identify credible positioning for Coca-Cola in these categories?

The work started from consumer need states rather than category labels, which meant the analysis was based on the jobs dairy and plant-based beverages are actually hired to perform, not on the assumption that the categories were monoliths. From there, each opportunity was filtered for whether Coca-Cola’s brand permission, capability, and distribution made it a credible entrant, which is what separated the spaces worth pursuing from the ones better left to specialist competitors.

When should a CPG company build, buy, or partner to enter a new beverage category?

Build makes sense when the category aligns with existing brand permission, capability, and distribution, and time-to-market is not the binding constraint. Buy makes sense when capability or brand permission gaps are too wide to close organically and a target asset shortcuts both, even at premium valuations. Partner makes sense when the category is still forming and the company wants to participate without committing capital, or when a strategic partner brings credibility the parent brand cannot quickly manufacture on its own.

Why is category entry harder for legacy beverage companies than for greenfield startups?

Legacy companies enter with a parent brand that already means something to consumers, which is an asset in adjacent categories and a liability in ones where the heritage actively works against the category positioning. Greenfield startups can define themselves without inheriting baggage, while legacy entrants either have to neutralize the parent brand association or accept that the category will treat the new line as inauthentic, which is why brand architecture decisions matter as much as product decisions in this kind of expansion.