The UK’s challenger consumer brands are redefining what it means to scale in today’s complex manufacturing and innovation landscape. While these brands have long been celebrated for their agility and disruptive energy, the path to sustainable growth now demands a more sophisticated approach – particularly when it comes to manufacturing partnerships, innovation strategy, and leadership capability.
Manufacturing is one of the most fundamental decisions a brand will make as it grows. For some, having their own factories and doing all the production in-house is the route they choose, but for the majority of challenger brands, outsourcing to a co-manufacturer is the most practical route. These partnerships, when done well, are far more than transactional; they’re built on trust, shared ambition, and long-term alignment. “Taking time to find the right partner co-manufacturer is one of the most important things that you can do,” says Rob Reames, CEO of Shaken Udder. “You need to be valuable to them, and they need to be valuable to you.”
Mark Cuddigan, CEO of This and former CEO of Ella’s Kitchen, agrees. “It’s all about communication when selecting your partners,” he says. “You need to understand what matters to them, just as they need to understand what matters to you.” That mutual understanding becomes especially important when brands are relying on their partners to help them scale quickly without compromising on quality or values.
“Taking time to find the right partner co-manufacturer is one of the most important things that you can do.”
For many smaller brands, owning a manufacturing facility is neither practical nor cost-effective. Chris Schulze-Melander, CEO of Assuri Petcare and former CEO of Proper Snacks tells us: “Typically, new brands don’t start with manufacturing in-house because it’s a different skillset and it costs a lot of money. It makes more sense to bring in one line or one range and do it in stages, because going from zero to 100 often means there aren’t the correct functions in place.”
For businesses turning over under £30 million, the volume often isn’t there to justify the investment in a dedicated factory. Richard Marris, reflecting on his experience outsourcing as Chair with Little Dish, says: “At the sort of scale we were at, it made sense to contract out. We make up a third of our co-manufacturer’s business, so we’re important to them, and we’ve built a fabulous relationship.” By outsourcing the manufacturing element, challenger brands are then able to focus on their core strengths – typically sales, marketing, and product development – while leveraging the operational expertise of their manufacturing partners.
That said, the decision to outsource or bring manufacturing in-house is rarely black and white. For Charlie Bigham’s, keeping production in-house was a deliberate choice, and, for them, it has paid off. CEO, Patrick Cairns, explains that fundamental to the business’s success is its ability to deliver delicious food with absolute consistency so sub-contracting this point of competitive advantage is not an option even considered.
The business separates and specialises its operations across two distinct sites: it has a Somerset facility which is dedicated to refining and scaling the brand’s bestselling lines, allowing for meticulous attention to quality and cost efficiency, and in its London outpost, it is able to focus on innovation, offering the flexibility and creativity needed to experiment with new formats and ideas. “We feel if we hadn’t pulled those apart, we wouldn’t be as good at doing either of them,” Patrick tells us.
This structure has enabled Bigham’s to maintain its high standards while continuing to push boundaries in product development. “We don’t have a head office,” Patrick adds. “We are co-located with our manufacturing. This means that issues that come up are addressed on a nearly daily basis.” For Bigham’s, owning the process means faster feedback loops, tighter quality control, and the ability to act immediately on consumer insight – benefits that would be difficult to replicate through outsourcing.
While this model has worked exceptionally well for Bigham’s, it is not the path that many challenger brands follow. In fact, it is common for scaling businesses to follow a more cyclical approach when it comes to their manufacturing strategy. Early-stage businesses often begin with small-scale, in-house production before transitioning to co-manufacturing as they grow. Later, once they reach a certain scale, it may again make sense to bring production back in-house and invest in a factory. The key is knowing when to make each shift. In-house manufacturing offers control and speed, while outsourcing provides flexibility, lower up-front costs, and the ability to focus on innovation. “Outsourcing means it’s much easier to test and learn,” Mark Cuddigan explains, “because you don’t have to worry so much about minimum order quantities.”
Beyond operational fit, shared values are becoming an increasingly important part of the decision-making process when brands are weighing up their co-manufacturer options, and sustainability is particularly central. “I think it’s essential that your manufacturing partners share the same views as you,” says Mark. “Otherwise, you’ll just constantly be butting heads.” Richard Marris agrees, noting that sustainability is no longer a side consideration but a core part of how businesses operate. “We’d look at every investment from a carbon perspective and energy use,” he says. From packaging innovation to cutting waste and improving energy efficiency, sustainability is now shaping how brands build, grow, and future-proof their operations.
This shift is mirrored in how brands are approaching innovation. It is no longer just about coming up with new product ideas – it now includes everything from health-led reformulation to smarter packaging and automation. Richard notes that Samworth Brothers is investing heavily in this area, backed by a team of 60 chefs and a growing focus on health-driven development. “We’re putting more quality and quantity of resource into innovation,” he says. This kind of investment reflects a broader shift in how innovation is being prioritised – not just as a creative function, but as a strategic lever for growth. By doing this, it is positioning itself to respond more quickly to changing consumer expectations, regulatory pressures, and the growing demand for healthier, more sustainable products.
“You almost have to stop growing to think about growing the bottom line.”
Or, more simply, Rob Reames says: “If you can’t come to the party with something new or different or innovative, then I don’t think you can genuinely call yourself a challenger brand. So, we have to show that innovation.”
Still, even the most forward-thinking brands will face challenges as they scale. Raising capital remains a significant hurdle, while sustainability pressures are intensifying, both from consumers and regulators. And, as operations become more complex, leadership teams are under pressure to balance growth with profitability. “You almost have to stop growing to think about growing the bottom line,” says Mark Cuddigan. “Growing the top line and the bottom line at the same time is really difficult.”
In the end, the challenger brands most likely to succeed are those that take a considered, long-term view of how they grow. That means building strong, values-aligned partnerships, treating innovation as a core part of the business, and developing leadership teams that can bridge creativity with operational know-how. Whether they choose to outsource production or keep it in-house, what matters most is having the clarity to know what works for their stage of growth, and the flexibility to adapt as that changes.
