BRL Hardy: The Post Merger Success

Perhaps the main drive for BRL Hardy’s post-merger success was the fact that the two merged companies were so distinct from each other. BRL was a company that sold fortified wines and took a bulk and volume approach, and thus had as one of its main assets its grape resources. Hardy’s on the other hand was a recognized, traditional award-winning brand wine that had marketing expertise and brand recognition. This essentially meant that Hardy had the know-how and innovation while BRL had the funds and resources to implement the ideas.

Another reason for the success was the appointment of Steve Millar as CEO of the newly merged companies. Millar’s management placed an emphasis on turning BRL Hardy into a global powerhouse brand by emphasizing the need to decentralize risks and responsibilities while still maintaining the accountability of central management. Steve Millar also took a rational approach by focusing on the Pareto Principle, the law of the vital few (the “80-20” principle), in business. That is, he recognized that 80% of achievements roughly come from 20% of the amount of time and effort spent. He thus decided to focus his operations on getting 80% success with around 20 projects as opposed to 100% success with just one or two.

The overall company strategy was also a big reason for the success that occurred post-merger. The company’s central leadership decided to emphasize the majority of their sales in the domestic (Australian) market which resulted in stately domestic bottle share and increasing company profitability. There was also an emphasis on cutting costs and finding ways to improve efficiency such as reducing the number of brands offered as well as employees by repositioning with only a few strong brands.

Chris Carson, the experienced Hardy manager, was also vital to the success