Stephanie Unterweger

How do we raise—and lead—people who thrive in uncertainty? Let them wander.

In this personal essay, marketing executive and AI strategist Stephanie Unterweger reflects on a year when her family stopped consuming and started creating. What emerged was a household workshop of experimentation: 3D printing managed by a ten-year-old project manager, luxury perfumes reverse-engineered with AI, a secret YouTube content empire, Roblox games in perpetual beta, a children's book stuck in illustration purgatory, and an app that accidentally infringed on Deloitte's intellectual property (lesson learned).

It's chaotic. It's messy. And it might be the most valuable education her kids have ever received.

After watching her daughter burn out from competitive swimming before age twelve—a casualty of early specialization—Unterweger made a different choice: prioritize curiosity over mastery, exploration over expertise. The result? Kids who teach themselves video editing, problem-solve through failure, and iterate without fear. In other words, exactly the capabilities businesses struggle to cultivate in their own talent.

This essay sits at the intersection of creativity, innovation, and education. It challenges the conventional wisdom that focus and specialization are the fastest paths to success—for children or for organizations. Instead, it makes a case for wandering: the kind of unstructured experimentation that builds adaptability, creative confidence, and the courage to be bad at something long enough to get better.

For leaders navigating a world that demands constant reskilling and creative problem-solving, the lessons here extend far beyond parenting. Innovation doesn't start with strategy decks—it starts with permission. Permission to try, to fail, to build things you have no business building, and to learn out loud.

A funny, heartfelt, and surprisingly relevant read for anyone thinking about how we develop people who can thrive in uncertainty—at home, at work, or anywhere the future demands reinvention.

Why Marketing Leaders Must Embrace Calculated Risk to Drive Brand Evolution

In boardrooms across the globe, a familiar refrain kills bold marketing initiatives before they begin: "We need to protect the brand." While this sounds prudent, it has become fear masquerading as strategy. What began as legitimate concern about brand equity has morphed into a convenient excuse for inaction, stagnation, and ultimately, irrelevance.

The uncomfortable truth: 70% of digital transformations fail due to resistance to change, according to BCG research. Yet many initiatives never reach implementation—they're killed in planning meetings by leaders wielding "brand protection" as a shield against innovation.

Consider the data: 89% of large companies have digital transformation initiatives underway, but they've captured only 31% of expected revenue, reveals McKinsey. Meanwhile, companies with strong digital capabilities earn two to six times higher shareholder returns than those falling behind.

The most dangerous thing you can do to your brand today is nothing at all.

The False Choice: Protection vs. Evolution

The fundamental flaw in brand protection arguments is presenting a false binary: protect the brand OR innovate. This thinking is intellectually lazy and strategically dangerous.

True brand protection requires evolution. A brand that doesn't adapt becomes irrelevant, making it more vulnerable—not less—to competitive threats and customer defection.

Harvard Business Review research on brand differentiation studied 275 companies over 11 years, finding that customer perceptions of brand distinctiveness directly correlated with stock performance. Brands that stood still, regardless of how "protected," lost value.

McKinsey research shows that brand innovators grow their top-line four percentage points faster than less-innovative companies. Research on reputation risk reveals 70-80% of market value comes from intangible assets like brand equity—making organizations especially vulnerable to being perceived as outdated or irrelevant.

Case Study: Nike—Calculated Risk as Strategy

In September 2018, Nike launched its controversial Colin Kaepernick campaign for the 30th anniversary of "Just Do It." The former NFL quarterback had protested racial injustice by kneeling during the national anthem.

The backlash was immediate. Videos of burning Nike shoes went viral. Conservative pundits called for boycotts. Nike's stock initially dipped.

Yet this wasn't reckless—it was calculated brand evolution rooted in deep understanding of Nike's core values and customer base.

The Results

According to case study analysis, the calculated risk paid off spectacularly:

• $6 billion increase in brand value

• $163 million in earned media

• 31% bump in sales

• First Emmy award since 2002

The campaign succeeded because it was authentic to Nike's brand values of challenging the status quo and standing up for athletes who inspire change.

Nike's risk-taking extends beyond campaigns. Since 2011, Nike has grown direct-to-consumer sales from 16% to 35% of brand revenues, fundamentally transforming its business model while competitors clung to traditional wholesale relationships. This required billions in digital infrastructure investment, risking key retail partnerships, and rebuilding supply chains.

The result? Nike now generates more in DTC sales alone than some competitors make annually.

Case Study: Kodak—The Cost of Risk Aversion

Perhaps no case illustrates the dangers of excessive brand protection more powerfully than Kodak. The irony is unbearable: Kodak invented the first digital camera in 1975. Yet the company that pioneered digital photography was destroyed by it.

Research on Kodak's failure reveals the company suffered from:

• Culture of risk aversion reluctant to invest in technologies without immediate ROI
• Traditional hierarchical structure with centralized decision-making that couldn't respond quickly
• Over-reliance on film revenue creating financial lock-in
• Misplaced brand protection prioritizing short-term film profits over long-term opportunity

According to case analysis, Kodak's management wrongly assumed the digital transition would be slow, underestimating how quickly consumers would adopt digital cameras and smartphones.

Most tragically, Kodak held over 1,000 patents related to digital imaging—intellectual property that could have positioned it as a dominant digital player. These patents were sold during 2012 bankruptcy proceedings for just $527 million.

Harvard Business Review's analysis argues that Kodak's failure wasn't about technology—it was about business model innovation. The company saw the digital future but couldn't escape the gravity of its existing profit structure.

Kodak thought it was protecting the brand by defending film. In reality, it chose slow death over transformation.

Five Principles for Calculated Brand Evolution

1. Define Your Non-Negotiables

Clearly delineate what genuinely must be protected—typically core values, customer promise, and visual identity anchors. Everything else should be in play. Gartner research shows only 14% of CMOs are highly effective at 'market shaping'—if you're only reacting to the market, you're too conservative.

2. Build a Culture of Intelligent Experimentation

Deloitte research emphasizes that "Creativity isn't always about winning. Creativity is about learning." Organizations excelling at calculated risk create structured experimentation frameworks with portfolio approaches, clear metrics, and post-mortem processes that celebrate insights.

3. Leverage Data to Reduce Risk

Gartner's Genius Brands research found that 19% of Genius brands' marketing job posts contain data science keywords, compared to just 3% of peers. Data sophistication allows testing before launch, identifying micro-segments for innovation, and modeling outcomes across scenarios.

4. Empower Cross-Functional Risk Assessment

McKinsey's risk framework distinguishes between preventable risks (should be eliminated), strategy risks (voluntarily accepted for superior returns), and external risks (must be mitigated). Too many organizations treat brand risks as preventable when they're actually strategic.

5. Obsess Over Customer Value

Gartner's 2025 CMO priorities make it clear: "Incremental improvement won't cut it." The question shouldn't be "Does this risk the brand?" but rather "Does this create value for customers in ways consistent with our brand promise?"

The Digital Transformation Imperative

The pace of change has accelerated dramatically. Consider:

• 71% of consumers want companies to understand their preferences, per Think With Google
• 64% of brands plan to implement AI tools for content creation, according to Deloitte
• 80% of consumers are more likely to buy from brands delivering personalized content, and personalization leaders are 3x more likely to exceed revenue goals

McKinsey's Technology Trends research reveals that companies with strong digital and AI capabilities capture compounding value while others fall behind.

Brands treating AI adoption and digital transformation as "risky experiments" rather than "table stakes" are already behind.

How do I know if I'm being appropriately cautious or excessively risk-averse?

Look at your track record. If every initiative faces intense scrutiny and few reach market, you're risk-averse. If you're launching experiments regularly, learning from failures, and iterating quickly, you've found balance.

What percentage of marketing budget should go toward experimental initiatives?

Successful organizations typically operate with a 70-20-10 framework: 70% on proven tactics, 20% on emerging opportunities, 10% on experiments. Given that brand innovators grow 4 percentage points faster, 10% may be too conservative.

How do I build the business case for calculated risk with conservative stakeholders?

Use competitive benchmarking and opportunity cost analysis. Show what competitors are doing and market share you're ceding by standing still. Statistics show that 50% of consumers are more likely to buy from brands they recognize—frame inaction as riskier.

What if a calculated risk fails?

Document your decision-making process, set clear success metrics upfront, and establish learning objectives. Demonstrate that failure resulted from intelligent experimentation, not recklessness. Organizations punishing calculated failures lose their best innovators.

What role does brand strategy play in talent acquisition?

Increasingly critical. Statistics reveal that 92% of employees prefer jobs at companies with better reputations, and 59% of recruiting leaders are investing more in employer brand. Stagnant brands struggle to attract innovative talent.

Conclusion: The Brands That Will Thrive

The question isn't whether to take risks—it's whether to take the right risks in the right ways at the right time.

Analysis confirms that 76% of consumers prefer brands they feel connected to, and 81% need to trust a brand to consider buying. Building that connection requires brands to be dynamic, relevant, and responsive—all requiring calculated risk-taking.

The uncomfortable reality: the most dangerous thing you can do is protect your brand from change. In an economy where 70-80% of market value comes from intangible assets, and the top 5,000 global brands increased in value by over 20% in 2024, standing still isn't neutral—it's regression.

As Nike's philosophy states: "To make big leaps, we take big risks."

The choice is stark: embrace calculated risk as a core competency, or watch your brand fade into irrelevance while competitors shape the future.

The question is: will you?

Key Sources

Harvard Business Review:

• Reputation and Its Risks
• Talk About Brand Strategy
• Kodak's Downfall Wasn't About Technology

McKinsey:

• Digital Transformation Leadership
• The Future of Brand Strategy
• Technology Trends Outlook 2024

Deloitte:

• 2024 Global Marketing Trends
• 2025 Marketing Trends

Gartner:

• CMO Spending Survey 2024
• Genius Brands Research

Case Studies:

• Nike's Digital Marketing Evolution
• Nike & Colin Kaepernick
• Kodak's Failure