Bris Rocher, PDG du Groupe Rocher

What interests me is, of course, to pass on, but to pass on an asset, a heritage that makes even more sense tomorrow.

Hello.

It's a family group. That's how I would describe it. It's a family group that has remained attached to its roots and to the DNA of its founder, who is your grandfather. Yes, exactly. And it's not so much the fact of being in the cosmetics or textile universe with Petit Bateau that characterizes the group, but rather its DNA and ultimately the initial will of its founder, my grandfather, to make it a citizen group, I don't know if that's the right term.

And I'll tell you, it's a complicated question. I consider myself more of a passer, first and foremost. I inherited the group, at least its management, and part of its capital. And I will have to pass on this group. So there is this desire to pass on. An intrapreneur, an entrepreneur... an intrapreneur is not necessarily someone who is a shareholder themselves, so that's not my case. I am a shareholder, I have a part of the capital. But if I come back to this subject, which is an important subject of being a passer for you, you could pass on the capital so that the family can continue to manage the major directions or strategy. Do you already see or imagine that it's not a very heavy weight to pass on, that your children could also lead the group?

Not necessarily. First of all, we'll see who wants to take over from a managerial point of view. But for me, the shareholders, especially in a family group, are there to guarantee a foundation of values, the DNA of the group, etc. So it's first and foremost the role of the family. Afterwards, if some want to get involved operationally, well, yes, why not? But first, it's too early to say, especially for my children. My eldest is 7, so we'll wait. No pressure, no pressure. But what interests me is, of course, to pass on, but to pass on an asset, a heritage that makes even more sense tomorrow. Concretely, what I would like is that those to whom I will pass on have the same chance as mine. I could have inherited a tobacco group, for example. We had that conversation not long ago. But I had the chance to inherit a group that is in tune with the times. That doesn't mean there aren't challenges to address, there will always be. But my role is to pass on something that is as impactful as what I received. So that means I have a lot of work ahead.

Forced to, because since my job is to pass on an asset that is even more sustainable tomorrow, the question of the sustainability of the asset arises from the start. As the world evolves, we have to transform the asset, make it evolve. What allows us to evolve things is to step out of our comfort zone. And once you step out of your comfort zone, you make some people more or less comfortable with it. So you have to show conviction, leadership, and take everyone along. It's not impossible, it's never a walk in the park. Especially in an industry where people don't necessarily trust those who don't have gray hair. And listeners who can't see you, you have a few now, but not long ago. When you take the helm of this group, you are very young, you give a direction. So there might be reservations: 'Does he have the experience? We can understand the vision, but the experience to get there?' Did you hear those remarks? Did you pay attention? Were you sure of yourself, without doubt?

The United States was a pain for a long time. I think we had to struggle in that market in the 80s, and we finally succeeded three years ago. Do you know why you succeeded? Did you start selling differently, the message, the why? Why did you succeed after so much energy and money? What changed for it to work? And listeners, you spent two years of your life there. Yes, it was very complicated for years. The group originally was beauty products based on plants, but sold by mail order. The French model was duplicated by contagion, as if borders didn't exist, and mail order lent itself very well. Except that in the United States, for cultural differences, language, geographical distance, for many reasons, we never succeeded. Maybe the approach wasn't the best. It caused us some problems. At the time, there was a slogan: 'One man, one idea, one million.' So the person left and went, and it worked or didn't. For us, the United States we never succeeded. And when it lasted for a while, there was even the idea internally that it wasn't for us, we shouldn't go there, shouldn't test ourselves. But the Rocher Group has always been able to pivot when faced with a wall. We've always been able to pivot, overcome the obstacle, or go around it. Originally, it was a mail-order brand. When the postal strike of 68 happened, mail order no longer worked. What did my grandfather do? He opened stores, both to have a high street presence and to bypass and no longer depend on the public sector. The same idea behind it. I was obsessed with it. We know retail is more complicated today because of the internet and the health crisis we're living through, with 95% of our stores closed. A closed store makes no revenue. I had anticipated this phenomenon because we've seen traffic declining for years. So I moved towards another business that we already practiced, especially with the acquisition of Stanhome, which is direct selling, what Americans call direct selling, but which has evolved into social selling. So instead of home parties, it's meetings on social networks, without geographical proximity. I hadn't anticipated that we would have a health crisis and our stores would be closed; I just saw that mail order was going to disappear. What made the group's strength was being on two distribution channels: retail and mail order. So I needed to find a new relay to always have two distribution channels. Since we had made an incursion into direct selling, which was also modernizing thanks to social networks, I said to myself, we'll develop that. So an opportunity came our way with the possibility of acquiring an American brand that operated on that distribution channel in the United States. So we had to go for it. It was the biggest acquisition the group had ever made. How long was it announced? Oh yes, it was a turnover of half a billion at the time, so it was a huge sum. So we made that acquisition. It was risky: we had never succeeded in the US, and on top of that, it was a significant amount. Well, I'll say it: it's all very conventional. What makes the difference? The women and men of the company, that's what constitutes the company, the team. We put a team in place, and we have to recognize they did an extraordinary job. Did you keep the team that was there when you bought it? Partly, but not all. The CEO at the time was at the end of her career and wanted to leave, so that was agreed even before the acquisition during the process. So we had to change three people; we capitalized on competent people, renewed the team, and it works. It works.

We talked about the United States, and it's true that it's a place that makes many entrepreneurs dream because of the size of the market. When it works, it can work very well. You were talking earlier about your grandfather, who was not very international. Paris was far from La Gacilly, as you said. That's something that surprised me, knowing your deep love for that region. The headquarters today is in Issy-les-Moulineaux in the Paris region, although there is still activity in Brittany. But in a country that is extremely centralized, do you think that today the next Yves Rocher or Rocher Group could have its headquarters in La Gacilly, have people and find strong skills there, bring people? Do you think this vision that your grandfather had 60 years ago is complicated in a centralized country like ours? Could you imagine it being different?

I say we're in a strange world, for two reasons. First, I think there is a lack of authenticity behind this type of brand. And it meets the need of these young girls who see in this young girl, a young woman, a model. Yes, but that's maybe what's a bit saddening. And the second thing that strikes me is that I say Coty are not the first to make this mistake. When will they learn? So, and they have a lot of work to do. I know we'll talk about it later. When L'Oréal makes a controversy by deciding to remove from their beauty products anything that could be whitening, especially in Asia, in the context of the Black Lives Matter movement, what do you think as a citizen, not as a boss?

But if there's a lack of authenticity, for me, I have a very strong conviction: I think that all companies in the world should commit to becoming a form of mission-driven company. But a mission-driven company for me does not mean being in every fight, because a mission-driven company is one that seeks to combine both economic performance and consideration of the common good. From the moment the company wants to be in every fight, it jeopardizes its own profitability and therefore its sustainability. So what does it mean? It means defining your deep reason for being and therefore committing to a fight, but not 150 fights. For us, for example, we became a mission-driven company in October last year under the PACTE law. I think we've been a mission-driven company in reality from the start. But following that, I was contacted by the LICRA, SOS Racisme, I was asked about gender equality, etc. I'm not saying these fights are not valid; I'm just saying that's not our fight. They are all valid, but it's not our main fight. Of course, I pay attention to that, but it's not the fight we will be most engaged in. We will be engaged in our own fight. And you define it how? Reconnecting women and men to nature. That is fundamental for us, that fight. Again, why? Because it's root, it's the authenticity of the brand, and it comes from my grandfather. This fight, my grandfather, as I said earlier, he lost... he always had very serious health problems. He was always in deficit, to the point that his parents had to school him at home. As a result, he had a very strong closeness with his father. But at the age of 14, he lost his beloved father. So it was a family tragedy for him. Put yourself in context: 14 years old, in 1944, in a small village in La Gacilly, not much distraction for a kid that age. And what did he do? He took refuge in the Breton moor for two years. He didn't sleep in the forest, but he spent his days there, and it brought him a form of peace, serenity, protection. It comforted him in a way. And in fact, that's the beginning of his entrepreneurial project. Ten years later, when he started his business, he did it with this desire to preserve biodiversity, because he realized that nature had a positive impact on our well-being. And that's our fight.

Internally, for the vast majority, it's hyper positive. It's a second wind, in a way. We give the purpose of the action to all employees. And we have to recognize that today it's very anxiety-inducing to work in any group. I mean, we know that 60% of jobs that will exist in 10 years don't exist today. The world has become so complex that we've even complicated our organizations. So somewhere, at the end, we end up lost and no longer understand the purpose of what we do. Yet we spend two-thirds of our lives at work. So finally defining the purpose of a company is, in a way, announcing the purpose and the reality. It's never really finished, that's also the good thing. But it's hyper positive because it puts the company back in motion, gives meaning. And frankly, what I see is that it gives a true new breath. The competition? I don't know. But since we became a mission-driven company, whenever I post something on LinkedIn, I keep seeing L'Oréal in the lead pack. So they are under the spotlight. Do you consider them as a competitor today? No, it's more complicated than that. For someone like me who tries to understand, what would be this portfolio? For example, if you take the first market, which is France, and look at market share, our first competitor is L'Oréal Paris. Yes, because it's a mass market brand, more accessible like Yves Rocher, and we are on the podium with Nivea. So sometimes it's one, sometimes the other. Now, if you take it from the business model perspective, both vertically integrated but retail and social selling, it's more like a group like Natura in Brazil, which has The Body Shop with retail and is very strong in social selling, and on top of that, naturalness. So it depends on the angle.

Reasoning solely on margin is not sufficient. I think we need to both integrate margin by saying what is the right level, but from the moment we reduce margin, we need to integrate another reasoning: what is the intangible value of my company? Because if there is intangible value, there is some value behind it. I don't remember who said it, I think it was Thierry? Thierry Martel? Yes, the CEO of Meridiam. He had a very interesting reasoning: he said that's what should be formalized in a way. I found it interesting what he said: ultimately, the more the intangible value increases, the more I reduce volatility. And I think there is something to explore there. I found his reasoning relevant because if we are just focused on margin, I feel we will be in a dead end permanently. Yet that's what happens today. I'm not talking about the Rocher Group, but a large part of companies, the objective today is how to have the maximum margin. But I think that if it's just you and me, we'll have a hard time saying how to reduce margins. We won't win; we'll be a minority. Yes, we'll be a minority because I think it's not enough. That is, reducing margin is only interesting if I increase the intangible value of my brand, the intangible value, by reinvesting part of it internally in my teams, in my development, in all sorts of things that create this intangible value. But it's so important. I think we will get there because the reality is that a brand today no longer addresses just an individual but communities. And we have to note that there is a form of awareness, slow but real, and moreover very strong because these communities have the ability to form outside geographical proximity. So there are more and more communities. And at the end of the day, a brand only flies if it has customers, and customers are citizens. You said it last time, very rightly. Thank you, I'll steal that. Go ahead, with pleasure. Ultimately, the customer votes not with a ballot but with their bank card.

No, it's clear that for me, it's just a matter of time that I have trouble defining, but in the long term, companies that don't move towards the mission-driven company... Oh yes, yes, yes, yes. Look at what happened two years ago: the CEO of BlackRock wrote to all his CEOs of different investments through his fund to tell them they must integrate this because he identified that there would be a goodwill deficit at some point. We talked about it earlier with L'Oréal. You never looked at an offer because of a story we won't talk about? There was a significant participation of the Sanofi group, which was a shareholder of L'Oréal. That completely vaccinated us against the ability to have external shareholders. Is that something you looked at? Are there funds like PE or others that have circled around you? Not once have you looked? No, we are not sellers. But most people always say that, but for you, it's real. Actually, we are not sellers. It's false because my grandfather sold his company in the 70s. But why? Because he had health problems. So yes, I said it before. But at the time, in the 70s, it was 1973, he saw himself dying. The group was not what it is today, but he already had his children, his wife, etc. He said to himself, I need to put some money aside because if I kick the bucket, I need to secure my family. So he sold 60% of his group to Sanofi, the majority. He managed to keep control through a voting rights system, but he had sold the majority of financial rights for health reasons. At this point, it's important to say that the partnership with Sanofi was very good. In fact, I mentioned the May 1968 strikes; the stores didn't take over overnight. It was Sanofi that got us out of the financial impasse. A company never went bankrupt because it was losing money; it's always a cash flow problem, and Sanofi was there at that time. Except that years later, in the late 90s, when Sanofi decided to merge with Synthélabo, which belonged to L'Oréal, L'Oréal became the reference shareholder of the new Sanofi-Synthélabo entity. And my grandfather never imagined falling into the hands of L'Oréal when he sold his stake in the 70s. So what did we do? We bought it back. It was a legal battle, and it took a lot of time. It started in 1998, and we got out of it completely in 2012. So it took time, but we bought everything back. It's rather the opposite of what usually happens: families sell, but we bought back. I joined the company because when I lost my father at 16, I wanted to join for two reasons: first, there was a filiation issue – it was the company my grandfather created and my father had turned around because of risky diversifications in the late 80s and early 90s. The group found itself in a complicated situation, and my father took the helm and turned it around. I saw that my father was very involved in the management of the group, and I also wanted to see the other side of the coin. So out of curiosity, I joined this group. Little chance that your group will be bought in the next few decades. Even an IPO? Have you not considered it? No, an IPO is only interesting for financing international development, very honestly. Or an acquisition. An important acquisition, yes. What advice would you give to someone, not necessarily a young person, someone who wants to start out? What is important is that it must come from deep within oneself, a bit like an artist's work. The creation of a company. You really have to question the why, the mission. And it can't be the money. I'm sorry to say it, it can't be the money. In those cases, nine times out of ten it will be a flop, or you get lucky, but you never have luck all the time. So you really have to question why you're investing, why you're starting. Why, why, why. That's the most important thing because no matter what, it will be difficult. No matter what, you have to step out of your comfort zone, and if you haven't truly questioned the why, at some point you'll give up and fail. So for me, it's really the why. Why do you do it? Why define the mission? I love that. Now let's move on to some personal questions. Are you ready? I don't know, we'll see. Who is the person who made you want to dare? It's my father. What is the guilty pleasure you never dared to admit? I don't think I'm a good musician, yet I love music. What instrument? Guitar, piano. What is the childhood prank you never dared to admit? The childhood prank I never dared to admit... You never did? Were you a perfect child who never did pranks, or were you caught every time? Yes, I think I was caught every time. Which competitor would you not dare to say scares you? Who I wouldn't dare say scares me? Very honestly, in the field of competitors, we talked about L'Oréal. It's still the world's number one in cosmetics. It's not for nothing. What would you never dare to do to succeed? That's very simple: betray my values. I am a man of principle. Who is the personality you admire and would not dare to speak to? I'm not shy, no. What failure have you never dared to admit? I'm not really a man of diplomas. I don't have my driver's license. That can be seen as a failure. Who is the person you never dared to say 'I love you' to? I don't say it often enough to my wife, that's for sure. What do you want to dare tomorrow? Becoming a mission-driven company. That means transforming the company from top to bottom, so it imposes a form of rigor and determination that must be worked on over time, and it's not six months of work. And a quiz to finish, it will be simpler. Two choices: yes or no. Would you dare to say a hurtful truth? Yes. Would you dare to tell someone their idea is stupid? I'm not sure an idea is stupid; it can be improved. That's what you mean? Yes, yes, but if it's really stupid. Okay, if it's really very stupid. Would you dare to seduce to achieve your ends? I'm not a seducer. Would you dare to admit a failure? Yes, yes, yes. Would you dare to go into politics? I think it wouldn't go well at all. Do you want to say more? No, no, no, it's not for me. Would you dare to appropriate someone else's words? Yes, I've already done it. Would you dare to go live on a desert island with your wife and children for a year? You know, with remote work, Corsica is not a desert island. Is it not? Would you confirm? Would you dare to participate in the show 'Touche pas à mon poste' by Cyril Hanouna? No. Would you dare to start over from scratch? Start over from scratch? At the end of my life, yes. Bris, thank you for accepting my invitation. With pleasure. Thank you all for your loyalty and for listening to this new episode of Ose. I hope you enjoyed the show, were inspired, and most of all, felt like daring. If so, I really count on you to talk about it around you, rate it 5 stars, and leave a comment on the listening platforms. If you have questions you'd like to discuss with me or my guests, or if you simply want to suggest people you'd like to hear on this podcast, contact me on LinkedIn, just type my name Alexandre Mars, or send an email to [email protected]. Finally, if you like unique stories, also find me in my other podcast 'Contre Toute Attente' where my guests also dared in their own way and tell us how they managed to beat the odds and succeed.