Ben & Jerry’s Separation from Unilever and the Acquisition Habit
- Brandma
- Apr 2
- 6 min read
When You Buy or Sell to the Wrong One
Big business is nothing new, but in that arena, acquisitions and mergers often seem like the logical step for expansion and growth. They offer opportunities to access greater resources, wider markets, and broader distribution channels. But what happens when the acquiring company’s values diverge from the brand’s core mission?
The story of Ben & Jerry’s and its ongoing saga to separate from its parent company, Unilever, offers a reality check example of the consequences when a company buys, or sells, to the wrong partner.
For major brands, like Ben & Jerry’s, the Acquisition Habit goes above and beyond a strategic transaction. It's making sure that values, culture, and vision are in alignment for long-term sustainability. When that alignment is lost, like it was with Unilever, get ready for a jacked up and costly separation. For micro-insurgent brands, however, the Separation Habit takes on an whole different meaning. The stakes are different when you’re not navigating a multi-billion dollar empire, but the importance of preserving your brand’s identity and mission is just as critical.
The Acquisition Habit: What It Really Means
When it comes to the Acquisition Habit, you gotta recognize what that acquisition means for the brand’s future because you're not just buying and selling a company. For larger companies like Ben & Jerry’s, the stakes are high. When Unilever acquired Ben & Jerry’s in 2000, they allowed the ice cream brand to maintain a certain level of autonomy through an independent board that would oversee its social justice mission. This decision was crucial in preserving the brand’s identity as a progressive, values-driven company.
But over time, as Unilever’s corporate priorities began to separate from Ben & Jerry’s core values, values that include activism for social causes like Black Lives Matter, climate change, and Palestinian rights, the relationship started to get raggedy. Shit got real in 2021 when Ben & Jerry’s took a stand against the Israeli occupation of the West Bank, a decision that was in direct conflict with Unilever’s broader market interests. The bias of social issues is strong in folx who want change but Unilever is all about the bottom line.
As Ben & Jerry’s co-founder Ben Cohen said in an interview with the Wall Street Journal, “In the year 2000, Unilever loved us for who we were. Now we've gone separate ways in our relationship. We just need them to set us free.” This growing separation between the parent brand and the ice cream brand highlights the inherent challenges when major corporations try to acquire purpose-driven brands without fully embracing their mission.
The Separation Habit: Knowing When to Walk Away
For micro-insurgent brands, smaller, more nimble companies built around a Founder's vision, the Separation Habit takes on an entirely different flavor. These brands often operate on a smaller scale but are just as fiercely protective of their values and mission. It's one of the things that held us back from selling the Bigmista brand.
The Separation Habit isn’t about breaking up with an unsupportive parent company. It's about knowing when to separate yourself from opportunities that threaten your core beliefs and purpose. While larger companies like Ben & Jerry’s can afford to negotiate with big players like Unilever, smaller companies like yours have to make separation decisions before the stakes get so high. For micro-insurgent brands, every partnership, every deal, and every acquisition needs to be evaluated not just for financial gain but for the impact it will have on the brand architecture as a whole.
When you’re a micro-insurgent brand, the decision to part ways can often be simpler. You don’t have to worry about the global reach or complicated corporate structures that a major company like Ben & Jerry’s does. But the Separation Habit still applies Recognizing when a deal no longer aligns with your values and having the courage to walk away before it compromises your brand’s integrity is more important than closing a big deal.
The Conflict Between Acquisition and Separation: Major Brands vs. Micro-Insurgent Brands
The conflict at the heart of the Ben & Jerry’s and Unilever saga lies in a core difference between major brands and micro-insurgent brands: SCALE. Ben & Jerry’s, as a global entity, is deeply tied to Unilever’s strategic direction and goals. The brand is a key part of Unilever’s ice cream house of brands, which includes other brands like Magnum. For larger companies, the stakes of separation are much higher, as there are more resources, people, and markets involved. And yet, the cost of staying in a relationship that no longer fits can be just as high, as Ben & Jerry’s has found in its fight for independence.
Micro-insurgent brands, small, rebellious brands that prioritize values and genYOUine™ connection over sheer growth, the decision to enter into an acquisition or to walk away from a bad deal is simpler. That's not to be confused with easy. We're talk'n a lotta zeros. But still, they don’t have the complex structures or multi-billion-dollar stakes of a major brand. Instead, they can be more agile, more focused, and more in tune with their purpose. But they also face a unique set of challenges. A bad acquisition can undermine their street cred as a brand quicker that it can for a larger brand.
For these brands, the Separation Habit is a preventive measure. It's not a crisis management type issue. They don’t wait for the conflict to grow, they build separation into their strategy early on by being intentional about who they partner with, when to grow, and when to maintain their independence.
A Case Study in the Acquisition and Separation Habits: Fight For Freedom
The Ben & Jerry’s saga is a perfect example of the Acquisition Habit gone wrong. When Unilever acquired Ben & Jerry’s, they allowed the brand to keep its mission intact, but over time, the corporate realities of Unilever’s priorities began to take precedence over the values that Ben & Jerry’s was founded on. From the firing of the activist CEO to the pressure to tone down its social commentary, the tensions reached a boiling point. As Ben Cohen reflects, “If not for that agreement, Ben & Jerry’s would have died by now, and it would be just another ice cream brand.”
In the case of micro-insurgent brands, this type of tension is much easier to avoid. Micro-brands are better equipped to preserve their integrity by making strategic separation decisions before they enter into potentially compromising deals. For them, the Separation Habit is not reactive measure but a proactive. Knowing when to say no to acquisitions, partnerships, or offers that don’t align with their mission. And if you wanna know more about how Ben & Jerry’s co-founder, Ben Cohen, has been rallying investors to buy back the company, check out Alice Wright’s article on the latest developments.
How to Protect Your Brand from a Bad Acquisition
Whether you’re a major brand like Ben & Jerry’s or a micro-insurgent brand, the Acquisition Habit and Separation Habit share key principles that can help protect your brand’s soul:
Know Your Core Values: Understanding and staying true to your brand’s core values is essential in any deal. For micro-insurgent brands, these values are often the foundation of everything they do. But like Biggie said, mo money, mo problems.
Seek Alignment: A partner that doesn’t align with your mission and values can undermine your brand’s credibility. Whether you're a large corporation or a small business, your partners should complement and support your core mission. As any dominologist will tell you, all money ain't good money.
Retain Control Over Your Brand’s Soul: Protecting your brand’s identity means not letting external forces dictate your message. For micro-insurgent brands, this might mean avoiding acquisitions altogether or retaining significant control post-acquisition. Another option is the Licensing Habit.
Think Long-Term: The right acquisition or partnership is not a short-term growth strategy. You're looking for long-term alignment with your brand’s future and objectives. This is especially important for major brands like Ben & Jerry’s, where the scale of the deal can have lasting consequences.
Ben & Jerry’s fight to regain its independence from Unilever is a reminder that acquisitions and separations are about more than capital gain when you want to preserve what makes a brand unique. For major brands, the cost of staying in an unhealthy acquisition can be a slow loss of identity, while for micro-insurgent brands, the risks are more immediate. The key is to stay true to your mission and values, and recognize when the time comes to separate from a partnership that no longer serves your brand’s soul.
Mastering the right Brand Habits, Brand Leaders can avoid the pitfalls of misaligned acquisitions, ensuring they protect their purpose-driven legacy while navigating growth and partnerships in a way that preserves their a legacy.
Comentários