Boardroom Battles and Activist Influence: Reshaping Governance in the Food Distribution Sector

The food distribution sector, long characterized by stable governance and incremental change, has become a battleground for activist investors in the past two years. From 2023 to 2025, campaigns targeting boardroom power shifts have accelerated, driven by macroeconomic pressures and shareholder demands for operational efficiency. Activist strategies now extend beyond traditional tactics like proxy fights to include "multi-activist swarming" and withhold campaigns, reshaping corporate governance in companies like Danone, Unilever, and Performance Food Group (PFG) [1].

The rise of universal proxy rules has amplified activists’ influence, enabling shareholders to replace specific directors rather than entire boards. This precision has led to a record 112 board seats secured by activists in the U.S. in 2025 alone, with 92% achieved through settlements [3]. For example, Artisan Partners and Bluebell Capital orchestrated Danone’s 2024 board overhaul, removing CEO Emmanuel Faber and reshaping the company’s strategic focus [1]. Similarly, Nelson Peltz’s Trian Fund Management joined Unilever’s board, signaling potential leadership changes amid stagnant growth in its food division [1].

However, the outcomes of these interventions vary. At US Foods, management resisted Sachem Head Capital’s 2022 board takeover attempt and instead pursued a stability-focused strategy. This approach yielded a 12.1% increase in Adjusted EBITDA to $548 million by Q2 2025, alongside a 56% total shareholder return [1]. Conversely, PFG’s management-led strategy—resisting activist proposals—resulted in a 19.9% EBITDA jump to $546.9 million in 2025, driven by leadership reshuffles and operational efficiency [3]. These cases highlight a critical tension: while activist pressure can catalyze change, management-led execution often proves more effective in preserving long-term value [3].

The financial performance of activist-targeted companies also reveals mixed signals. At AGL Energy Ltd., activist campaigns led to a strategic pivot, including accelerated coal exit plans and leadership overhauls [2]. Yet, such interventions risk disrupting strategic continuity, as seen in Danone’s post-Faber era, where board reshuffling raised questions about long-term vision [2]. Meanwhile, environmental and ESG issues have become central to shareholder proposals, with companies like PFG integrating sustainability into operational reforms to align with stakeholder expectations [4].

For investors, the lesson is clear: activist campaigns are not a one-size-fits-all solution. The success of governance shifts depends on the alignment of activist goals with management’s operational discipline. As the sector grapples with supply chain volatility and margin pressures, the balance between shareholder activism and executive stewardship will define the next phase of value creation.

Source:[1] Activist investors target food, consumer goods companies [https://www.reuters.com/business/finance/ripe-change-activist-investors-eye-food-consumer-goods-2023-09-11/][2] M&A Roundup: ESG Activism Case Studies [https://www.glasslewis.com/article/ma-roundup-esg-activism-case-studies][3] Sachem Head Is Said to Propose Performance Food Board Candidates [https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2025-08-29/sachem-head-proposes-board-candidates-at-performance-food][4] 2023 Proxy Season Update: Shareholder Activism on “E” Topics [https://www.wilmerhale.com/en/insights/blogs/esg-epicenter/20230724-2023-proxy-season-update-shareholder-activism-on-e-topics]