Oatly is one of my favorite branding case studies, and the cartons are only part of what interests me.
I keep coming back to how the product, creative voice and route to market fit together. That feels much more useful to a brand leader than a recommendation to make the packaging louder.
Oatly’s own 2021 prospectus describes its Nordic rebrand in 2013 and 2014, followed by expansion through specialty cafés and coffee shops in the UK, and a US entry focused on independent coffee shops and professional baristas. It also describes packaging as part of its advertising strategy and an in-house creative team involved across the business. [1]
Read those decisions together and there is a lot to learn. Here is what I would take from them.
Give the packaging something worth saying
I like packaging with a point of view. I want it to make me curious enough to pick it up and clear enough to understand once I do.
Oatly explicitly treated its packaging as a way to communicate with consumers. [1] My interpretation is that the carton became a useful place to make the brand feel familiar, rather than leaving all the personality to advertising.
For another brand, I would start with the questions a customer actually has. What is this? Why would I choose it? How does it fit into my routine? What makes the people behind it seem worth listening to?
A brand can answer those questions with humor, confidence, warmth or restraint. It does not need to borrow Oatly’s exact personality. In fact, I would be wary of copying the visible style before deciding what our own brand has to say.
The practical exercise I like is simple: read the packaging without looking at the logo. Does the language feel like it could belong to any competitor? Where could it become more specific, more useful or more recognizably ours?
Think carefully about the first experience
The coffee-shop strategy is the part I find especially interesting. Oatly identified baristas and independent cafés as important to its US launch. [1]
I see a clear strategic logic there: introduce the product in a setting where people can experience it in use and where someone else has a reason to know how it performs.
For a brand planning expansion, I would ask where the product gets its fairest first trial. Where will someone understand its value without needing a long explanation? Who already has a credible role in helping the customer choose?
The answer will depend on the product. A skincare brand might evaluate a retailer with strong product education. A professional tool might benefit from being demonstrated by someone who uses it well. Those are possibilities to test, rather than a rule that every brand should begin with experts.
I would also ask what happens after discovery. Can the customer find the product again? Does the experience match what they were shown? Is the next purchase straightforward?
A promising introduction needs a workable path to the second purchase.
Let creative people understand the business
Oatly’s prospectus describes its creative team collaborating directly with other functions and participating in company decisions. [1] That is a detail I would pay attention to even without the famous packaging.
My preference is to bring creative thinking into a project while there are still meaningful choices to make.
Give the team the customer problem, the commercial objective and the constraints. Let them understand where the product will appear, what the sales team hears and what customer service keeps explaining. Then ask for ideas.
I would expect a much richer discussion than one built around a nearly finished plan and a request to make it look more interesting.
That also puts responsibility on leadership. We need to be clear about the business problem, give useful feedback, and decide which risks we are actually prepared to support. Asking for bold work while approving only familiar work is a difficult brief to solve.
Keep the business results in the picture
I would be careful about turning Oatly into a story in which good branding explains everything.
For historical context, Oatly reported $783.3 million in revenue for 2023, but also an operating loss. Its results discussed supply-chain efficiency, restructuring and the work of improving profitability. [2]
Those facts belong in the case study too. They make it a more useful business conversation.
I can admire the brand and still ask how the operating model performs. I can see the value of a distinctive voice and still want to understand pricing, distribution and repeat demand. Those questions strengthen the analysis.
My takeaway from Oatly is to look for a closer fit between what a brand says, where people encounter it and what the product delivers.
Before investing in a new identity, I would ask the team to explain those connections in plain language. Why this voice? Why this channel? Why will this first experience make someone interested in a second one?
Once those answers are clear, the creative work has something substantial to build on.