DISCUSSION THEME 1:
The Sector in Motion
David: What are the biggest shifts shaping the packaging sector right now, and which are having the greatest impact on your business?
Matthew: The biggest shift isn't any one crisis. It's the rise of the unexpected. Volatility is no longer a phase in the cycle; it's the environment we're operating in every day.
Geopolitical conflict, tariffs and changing trade policies are creating disruption, often with second- and third-order effects across energy costs, freight and supply chains. In packaging, we see these pressures early because we're embedded in so many consumer and industrial value chains.
Three developments stand out. First, customer visibility is shortening. Customers are ordering later, in smaller quantities, and committing less to their forecasts. Where we once had reasonable visibility over the next couple of quarters, we're now often looking at weeks. That affects inventory, manufacturing capacity and workforce planning.
We're also seeing uncertainty breed caution. Decisions around product launches, market entry and investment are taking longer, and growth has become far less predictable. We're having to fight for and earn every bit of growth.
At the same time, the role of packaging has become more critical. Customers increasingly recognise that packaging isn't simply a component. If a closure is missing, a filling line can stop just as surely as if an ingredient is unavailable. Supply reliability, flexibility and alternative sourcing now sit alongside quality and innovation in customer discussions.
There's also structural change, particularly around sustainability. In Europe, it's moving from an aspiration to a regulatory requirement, including through the Packaging and Packaging Waste Regulation.
Ultimately, the greatest challenge is the unexpected. You can't rely on yesterday's logic to navigate today's turbulence.
David: How are these conditions changing the decisions companies in your sector need to make?
Matthew: Companies are moving from optimising primarily for efficiency to balancing efficiency, resilience and optionality. We used to ask, "What's the most efficient way to do this?" Increasingly, we're asking, "What's the most resilient way to do it while remaining cost-competitive?"
In sourcing, for example, the lowest-cost, single-source model looked brilliant until it didn't. Supply shocks exposed its vulnerabilities, and customers are now weighing the cost of not having a product against the unit price. That makes dual sourcing, regional alternatives and local supply options more important.
Inventory is another example. Rather than choosing between just-in-time and just-in-case, companies need targeted buffers for critical products while remaining lean elsewhere. Planning is changing too. Annual budgets remain important, but rolling forecasts, scenarios and pre-agreed decision triggers are increasingly valuable. At TricorBraun, we're working to establish those triggers in advance, so we know how we'll respond if conditions change or growth falls short of expectations.
We're also seeing customers look for fewer, stronger partners who can help them navigate uncertainty. That means getting closer to customers, understanding their needs and providing solutions that go beyond the immediate transaction.
DISCUSSION THEME 2:
Agility in Practice
David: Mid-cap companies are often considered more agile than larger organisations. Where do you see that advantage showing up in practice?
Matthew: The Mid-Cap Advantage article made a point that really resonated with me: mid-cap companies can be large enough to matter but small enough to move. The advantage isn't simply speed. It's the speed of alignment.
I see that showing up in three ways. The first is in everyday customer relationships. Mid-cap businesses can often be easier to do business with, offering flexibility, responsiveness and a level of service that larger organisations may struggle to provide economically. At TricorBraun, we often operate where customers may be too small or their requirements too complex for larger manufacturers to prioritise. That's where mid-cap companies can differentiate, offering a level of white-glove service that others may not be willing or able to provide.
The second is responding to volatility. In a mid-cap business, you can bring commercial, operational and financial leaders together, agree on a course of action and start executing quickly. Having worked in larger manufacturing organisations, I've seen how much longer that alignment can sometimes take.
The third is seizing opportunities. You can place decisions closer to customers and act when an opportunity emerges. At TricorBraun, we acquire smaller businesses and want to preserve their entrepreneurial spirit. That requires a willingness to act and an acceptance that not every decision will succeed. That's part of playing to win, and it's a lot more fun than playing defence.
But this advantage isn't automatic. The danger is that mid-cap companies become so focused on professionalising that they slow themselves down. You have to be intentional about decision rights, shared priorities and culture, or you risk losing the agility that made you successful.
David: How do you balance acting decisively when the information available may still be incomplete?
Matthew: Waiting for certainty is itself a decision, and often an expensive one. The real skill is matching the speed of a decision to the cost of being wrong. In a volatile environment, you're rarely going to have complete information, so a few disciplines are particularly important.
- Understand the type of decision you're making. Most decisions are reversible — what Jeff Bezos describes as two-way doors. You can move forward and change course if necessary, and those decisions can often be made quickly, perhaps with 60–70% certainty. Other decisions, such as a major acquisition, carry greater risk and require more consideration. But even then, you need a deadline to avoid paralysis.
- Be clear about what you know and what you don't. I like to ask: What do we know? What are we assuming? And what would need to be true for us to change our minds? That last question is powerful because it turns uncertainty into something you can actively manage.
- Build in reversibility wherever possible. Stage commitments, pilot initiatives and establish early indicators that tell you when to invest further or pull back.
The cost of delaying a decision isn't always visible, but it's real — and it compounds.
DISCUSSION THEME 3:
Leadership for What Comes Next
David: What do you look for in the leaders around you when the organisation is navigating significant uncertainty or transformation?
Matthew: First, I look for learning agility. Experience is valuable, but I want people who can exercise judgement rather than simply rely on what worked in the past. In a world that keeps changing, you need the application of knowledge rather than the reapplication of experience. Past success can become a trap, so we need a culture of people who want to keep learning.
For senior leaders, it's also important to understand the entire value chain while having the humility to recognise that others may know individual parts of the business better than you do. You need the perspective to see the bigger picture and the willingness to seek expertise, particularly when things are moving quickly.
I also look for leaders who can provide clarity without pretending to have certainty. People understand that nobody has a crystal ball. What they want to know is where we're going, what we know, what we don't know and what we're going to do. Communicating that calmly and consistently is incredibly important.
And finally, energy and resilience matter. Change can be draining, so you need leaders who bring energy into the organisation, make the people around them better and build capability beyond themselves. You don't want someone who becomes a hidden risk because they're the only person who can get things done.
David: Looking ahead three to five years, what will distinguish the industrial companies and leaders that turn this period of disruption into advantage?
Matthew: I think it will be those choosing to play to win rather than playing not to lose. A wait-and-see approach is legitimate, but I don't believe it's how you turn disruption into advantage. More often, it leaves you in the middle of the pack, and that's not good enough for most companies. You need to be on the front foot, anticipate change and take a position.
There are a few principles that I think will make the difference. The first is to be better before being cheaper. Compete through differentiation and focus on delivering greater value to customers and outperforming competitors rather than relying on price alone. The second is to put revenue before cost. Sustainable performance starts with finding growth opportunities, getting closer to customers, entering new markets and winning market share.
But there's an important caveat: don't let cost discipline come too late. A growth mindset cannot become an excuse for ignoring structural inefficiencies. You need to recognise when conditions are moving against you and be prepared to act early.
About the Mid-Cap Advantage Series
Boyden's The Mid-Cap Advantage: Industrial Leadership in an Era of Volatility explores how mid-cap industrial companies can leverage their agility, entrepreneurial mindset and leadership capabilities to navigate uncertainty and build competitive advantage.
This Q&A series extends that conversation, bringing together firsthand perspectives from senior executives across industrial sectors and markets. Through the global reach, relationships and sector expertise of Boyden's Industrial Practice, we explore the real-world decisions, challenges and leadership capabilities shaping the industry's future.
Read the original article.
