Most innovation briefs begin with a strong emphasis on the confidentiality surrounding the product to be disclosed. Before its reveal, you and the client’s legal team have reviewed countless pages of NDA’s, in addition to those that bind any innovation professional. Then the day rolls around, excitement is high, and surprise, you see an innovation that you’ve already seen and tested many times over, at best, in a new format, a new flavor, or with a new claim.
Despite the volume of launches, true innovation growth remains stubbornly hard to find. According to NIQ’s Innovation Measurement tool, over the past year in Western Europe, 62% of all FCMG product launches were line extensions. The uncomfortable reality is that most “innovation” isn’t groundbreaking at all. It’s predominantly close-in line extensions. Or increasingly, me too replications.
And the difference matters more than ever, yes even in the late stages of capitalism.
When “new” really means “copied”
One of the fastest growing patterns in FMCG innovation today is imitation. A competitor launches a successful concept (a functional benefit, a pack format, a product promise) and within months the category fills with near-identical versions of the same product under different brand names.
Similarly, a manufacturer takes an existing product and launches it in another market. From the inside, this often feels rational. The logic is simple: it worked for them , so it should work for us, (and with a little misplaced confidence,) it should work better for us.
But in market, this kind of me-too innovation rarely delivers growth. It creates more choice without more value, increasing clutter rather than distinction and differentiation.
The missing piece: jobs, not products
What me-too innovation often overlooks is why consumers choose products in the first place.
From a Jobs-to-Be-Done perspective, consumers don’t buy products simply because they are new. They “hire” them to solve a specific problem, make progress in a situation, or fulfill an unmet need. When multiple brands offer essentially the same solution to the same job, copying the product does not create new demand, it simply divides it.
Needs-based thinking helps explain why many copied ideas underperform. If the original innovation already satisfies the job well, replicas add little incremental value. Without a clearer job, a sharper tension, or a better solution, consumers default to habit, availability, or price, not novelty.
The illusion of safety
Me-too products feel safer than bold innovation. They are easier to justify internally, faster to develop, and less risky to launch. But that safety is misleading. These launches tend to:
- Cannibalize existing brand sales
- Compete primarily on price or promotion
- Deliver short term volume with weak repeat and in many cases, eventual delisting
In crowded categories, copying success, even your own, often means sharing disappointment.
Need advice on a new product launch?
What real innovation does differently
True innovation behaves very differently in market. Rather than following what already exists, it introduces meaningful difference: difference rooted in consumer needs, not competitor moves.
NIQ’s Breakthrough Innovation work shows that real innovations tend to share three traits:
They drive incrementality.
They cast a wider net of recruiting, attracting new buyer groups or create new usage occasions, rather than simply shifting share.
They are intentional, not reactive.
They are built around a clearly defined consumer job — then activated with disciplined execution across product, packaging, pricing, and communication.
They outperform category norms over time.
Breakthroughs sustain performance beyond launch, separating lasting growth in Year 2 and beyond, from short-term noise.
The challenge for FMCG leaders is choosing between growth-creating innovation and expensive imitation. Because in the end, innovation isn’t about being first to copy.
