Episode 30. Lessons in Failure - Tupperware & Tervis Tumbler

Tupperware Inc. (Orlando) and Tervis Tumbler (Venice), once titans in their respective industries, have both filed for bankruptcy protection in recent months. Their shared downfall reflects a broader trilogy of corporate stagnation; failure to innovate, failure to adapt, and a failure to evolve.

?

Failure to Innovate

Both Tupperware and Tervis Tumbler were pioneers in their fields - Tupperware revolutionized household storage with its air-tight containers, while Tervis was known for its insulated drinkware. However, neither company kept pace with evolving product trends.

Tupperware struggled to modernize its offerings in a marketplace increasingly dominated by eco-friendly and multi-use alternatives. Competitors such as Rubbermaid and Oxo began offering products with innovative features like modular designs and BPA-free materials, while Tupperware remained tied to its mid-20th-century products.

Tervis Tumbler, known for its iconic double-walled cups, likewise failed to capitalize on its once-strong brand recognition by introducing new features or product lines. Tervis cited a "disruption of the market” and drop in retail spending.? But that didn't stop competitors like Yeti and Stanley from introducing alternatives that appealed to younger, more active consumers.

?

Failure to Adapt

The rise of global competition and new direct-to-consumer models disrupted both companies. Tupperware, which traditionally relied on in-home parties and direct sales, failed to embrace the shift toward e-commerce quickly enough. This left them vulnerable to competitors that offered similar products with the convenience of online shopping and delivery. Tupperware's pricing strategy struggled against lower-cost competitors offering similar functionality.

Tervis was slow to respond to changing market dynamics. The rise of online retailers and big-box stores allowed competitors to rapidly scale their reach. Tervis’s reluctance to overhaul its sales strategies and capitalize on the growing demand for customization and branding in drinkware further eroded its market share.? A Santa Barbara Community College student created a business taking favorite Hydro Flask bottle from consumers and customizing them.? Rather than replace, these customers merely want their current products upgraded; personalized form over product function!

Failure to Evolve

Consumer preferences have shifted dramatically over the past decade, with sustainability, minimalism, and lifestyle branding at the forefront. Tupperware’s reliance on plastics has become increasingly out of step with a society more conscious of environmental impact. Younger consumers, who now drive much of the market, favor companies that emphasize sustainability, and Tupperware’s failure to pivot toward eco-friendly alternatives was a major oversight.

Tervis Tumbler’s lack of diversification beyond its traditional product offerings—limited to insulated cups—led to its decline. The company was unable to tap into the rising demand for reusable, versatile drinkware options that offered more than just basic insulation. In a market obsessed with innovation, consumers expect constant improvements and new features.

Boards: A Shared Responsibility

Both Tupperware and Tervis bear significant responsibility at the leadership level, especially their Boards of Directors. Boards are tasked with long-term strategic oversight, and their inability to recognize the urgent need for innovation and adaptation allowed both companies to drift into irrelevance. From resisting digital transformations to failing to invest in R&D, both firms suffered from leadership that lacked a proactive vision for the future.?

In the case of Tupperware, the board’s failure to modernize its sales approach and its product lines ultimately alienated an entire generation of potential consumers. For Tervis, the board’s reluctance to respond to evolving consumer preferences and rising competition eroded its position in the market it once dominated.

Tom's Takeaways:?Business models must evolve just as products do.?In today’s fast-paced, ever-changing market, innovation and adaptability are essential for survival. Both companies were once thought-leaders, but without a clear strategy to meet new challenges and consumer expectations, their decline was inevitable. Ultimately, their leadership’s failure to anticipate (and alter course in the face of) change sealed their fates.