Amazon, Walmart composite
iStock.com/hapabapa | iStock.com/Sundry Photography

May 28, 2025

Walmart’s ‘And’ vs. Amazon’s ‘Why’: Which Retailer’s Philosophy Is Better for Business in 2025?

In a May 27 observational piece written by Retail TouchPoints editor Nicole Silberstein, two competing philosophies — each concisely condensed into a three-letter word — were set against each other for comparison and contrast.

The two companies in question? Walmart and Amazon, a pair of the largest retailers on Earth. Their respective philosophies, Walmart’s focus on “and” and Amazon’s emphasis on “why,” were highlighted, inviting deeper examination and evaluation of their effectiveness.

Walmart as an ‘And’ Company, Blending Perceived Counterbalancing Forces

Silberstein first quoted Walmart CEO Doug McMillon in remarks he’d made in an April 9 update concerning the company’s financial future.

“We’re an ‘and’ company: People and tech. Stores and eCommerce. Innovation and execution,” McMillon said, seemingly underscoring Walmart’s goal of blending disparate elements of each facet of its operations to achieve not only balance, but a foothold to serve each individual customer’s or client’s needs.

The Retail TouchPoints editor then provided a quick debrief on Walmart’s history, from its 1962 founding to quickly becoming the default “everything store” years in advance of Amazon’s adoption of the moniker. And as Silberstein pointed out, Walmart almost certainly influenced Amazon’s early focus on becoming a low-price leader — and on building a reputation around that identity. However, Walmart seems to have pivoted slightly to allow Amazon and other retailers to take the lead on certain business fronts, then adopting what proves successful.

“More recently, though, Walmart has shifted somewhat out of the realm of first mover when it comes to new innovations, making its current strategy seem a bit more along the lines of ‘business as usual AND whatever Amazon is doing,’” Silberstein opined, bringing the “and” back into focus.

In her analysis, Silberstein characterized Walmart’s “and” philosophy as a strategic willingness to let Amazon test “wild ideas” — often at some significant expense — and then jumping on “only the opportunities that prove to be successful,” adding these tactics to its own arsenal. Playing conservatively at the high-rollers’ retailer table seems to be working for Walmart, she noted, with the blue-and-yellow brand also holding a distinct advantage over Amazon in terms of its brick-and-mortar presence — an arena wherein Amazon has struggled to gain a meaningful foothold.

Amazon’s ‘Why’ Question: Fundamental to Its Continued Growth

Discussing Amazon, Silberstein cited CEO Andy Jassy’s April 10 letter to shareholders.

“Amazon is a ‘why’ company. We ask why, and why not, constantly. It helps us deconstruct problems, get to root causes, understand blockers, and unlock doors that might have previously seemed impenetrable. Amazon has an unusually high quotient of this WhyQ (let’s call it ‘YQ’), and it frames the way we think about everything that we do,” Jassy wrote at the time.

The “why” questions were numerous, beginning with “Why can’t we offer customers every in-print book?” and evolving from there to include more daring questions such as “Why should we be the only sellers of items in the Amazon store?” — opening the door to marketplace platforms, such as Walmart’s own — and “Why not experiment with relevant advertisements in our store to expose customers to new sellers and items?” — earmarked as a cornerstone of today’s vibrant and growing retail media network landscape.

With other “why” questions leading to the creation of Amazon Web Services and Prime Video, Silberstein pointed out the boldness with which Amazon embraced diving into avenues outside of the established framework of a traditional retailer.

“Indeed, Amazon’s solutions to these questions have often resulted in unexpected answers that at first seemed counterintuitive: A retailer letting other companies sell from its store? A retailer offering a streaming content service? A retailer selling its technology to other retailers? A retailer offering its industry-leading delivery service to other merchants?” she began, before quoting Jassy once more on the essential nature of risk-taking and experimentation for the company.

“Every one of these ‘Whys’ have led to significant invention, and every one of them have made customers’ lives better and easier. Some of these seem obvious now, but at the time these were provocative questions that required curiosity, risk-taking, experimentation and persistence to make these into success stories,” Jassy concluded.

With Silberstein pointing out that Amazon exhibited no sign of backing down from its experimental methodology, it appears that both companies — Walmart with its focus on reinforcing fundamentals while moving heavily onto proven ground, and Amazon constantly testing its capabilities in new or emerging technologies and potential markets — have established successful, if vastly different, business philosophies.

Discussion Questions

Which retailer’s philosophy will prove more successful in 2025 and beyond?

What other factors will play a prominent role in your estimate of what’s to come?

Given current and expected near-future macroeconomic conditions, is it wiser to be more tactically conservative, as Walmart is depicted in this analysis, or more thoughtfully experimental, as Amazon is cast? Are there any other major brands or retailers that could be discussed in this context?

Poll

26 Comments
Oldest
Newest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Neil Saunders
Neil Saunders

Honestly, this is all a bit contrived. Both Amazon and Walmart ask why. Both Amazon and Walmart are retail and technology. They actually have a lot in common in that they are both retailers with extremely strong operational foundations, both have ancillary revenue streams, and both have traditionally been more functionally oriented and are now trying to push into added-value segments. For Amazon, this is about luxury and premium and in-person grocery experiences. For Walmart, this is about better mid-tier and entry-premium brands and improved store experiences. Despite the fact that they compete, both are winners. 

Last edited 5 months ago by Neil Saunders
Shep Hyken

I don’t agree that Walmart is an “AND” company. While their CEO referenced the AND concept, it was not meant to be compared to Amazon. While maybe not as quick to make decisions as Amazon, Walmart has advanced retailing to an incredible level. The only way that happens is to continuously ask, WHY. Based on the commentary, I’d say they are an AND and WHY company.

I have always appreciated how Amazon is a leader in so many areas. They try, test, tweak, test some more, etc. They are constantly asking, WHY.

Put another way, I see this as more of “WHAT IF” types of questions. What if we tried this? What if we did what they are doing? What if we did what they are doing in a different way?

Gene Detroyer
Famed Member
Reply to  Shep Hyken

When I teach, I teach, “WHY” is the most important word in business.

Jeff Sward
Famed Member
Reply to  Gene Detroyer

I have a 6-step thought process to my whole merchandising and planning thought process. WHY? is in boldface in 3 of the steps and part of the underlying logic in the other 3 steps.

Carol Spieckerman

I’m not feeling this construct as described. Both companies are “and” focused as evidenced by each’s highly diversified platforms (products and brands, and services, and solutions, and…) Both are “why” focused as well, with Amazon perhaps leaning into “why not?” and Walmart vetting with “why this, why now?” Walmart has not waited on the sidelines so Amazon can take the big risks (why would it when many Amazon actions don’t fit Walmart’s model?). Walmart is not aping Amazon, it’s stepping out, scaling or failing fast, and breaking new ground in ways that uniquely support its platform.

Doug Garnett

I’m in agreement this is all a bit arbitrary. Amazon’s expression of “why” concerns me though. While it might have been lovely at the start, they have moved beyond such naïveté. Besides, they too easily sound like the seagulls in Finding Nemo chanting “mine”…

Paula Rosenblum

We have different opinions on Amazon’s “Why” (which really should be ‘why not,” by the way). I think Bezos was a master of managing PR and getting the entire retail industry to follow him down a garden path that they couldn’t afford. So many of Amazon’s short-lived innovations existed solely to distract everyone else. And for a very long time, Bezos was successful enough that you hardly noticed that the company’s retail operations weren’t particularly profitable.

i was (fortunately or unfortunately) the only RSR partner in the office the day the acquisition of Whole Foods Market was announced. I got calls from as far away as Germany. That’s crazy. Now we can look back and ask ourselves…is Whole Foods Market any better off than it was when Amazon bought it? Nope.

i think MacMillon has managed this brilliantly. He leverages his stores so he can keep up with speed (without buying his own fleet of jets), makes sure he matches prices, and has seriously cleaned up the company’s image.

AWS will win in its space. Amazon retail? Not so much

Gene Detroyer
Famed Member

I like “Why not?”

Scott Norris
Scott Norris

Walmart may not have airlift capability, but they practically control J.B. Hunt for a ground fleet. I would not be surprised if they make strategic investments in containers and ocean freight if asset values become a bargain; it would represent more vertical cost control and logistical flexibility. Even in logistics, Amazon and Walmart aren’t necessarily head-to-head competitors, but it would be easier to split Amazon’s wholesaling and transport operation into its own independent company; whereas Walmart’s entire existence revolves around its DCs.

Paula Rosenblum
Famed Member
Reply to  Scott Norris

Your last point is interesting. If Mr. Bezos didn’t own such a large number of shares, I think the company would have been broken up ages ago. Retail is its own thing. AWS is its own thing. I guess electronics manufacture and distribution is its own thing and probably the fleets of jets and vans would go with retail.

This would expose the fundamental weakness in retail operations. Sure they throw off a lot of cash (because they sell before they pay for it) but ultimately are not terribly profitable. AWS is just this constant income stream, with the cash from retail operations funding all the servers and support.

Gene Detroyer
Famed Member

At 9.5% of Amazon, Bezos is not a controlling shareholder.

Doug Garnett
Noble Member

Couldn’t agree more, Paula. And when Amazon bought Whole Foods I noted that we should hope for unusual new insight into retail. They didn’t end up with any — instead the formerly premium brand is quickly becoming discounted. Here’s a bit about Amazon profits which may come out in a newsletter article for a friend tomorrow:

…many “radical” ideas announced by Amazon appear to have been performative. These offered Amazon shareholders visible “proof” that Amazon’s lack of profits was a result of using all available profit for experiments. Shareholders loved these throughout the 2010s and regularly claimed Amazon had plenty of profits but reinvested it all. It’s more likely that Amazon never had that profit and funded these experiments with cash flow.

Mohamed Amer, PhD
Famed Member

Strip away AWS, and Amazon’s retail is underwhelming. Walmart generates actual retail profits while building digital capabilities. That’s not following—that’s strategic discipline.

Shannon Wu-Lebron
Shannon Wu-Lebron

Amazon and Walmart have similarities in their retail business but they are also fundamentally different in not only their attitudes towards tech/innovation but in overall strategy and company culture. It is too simplistic to use the words AND and WHY to describe them.
When it comes to a retailer’s relationship with tech, Amazon led with tech, Walmart uses tech and others might deemphasize tech (Costco comes to mind). Each is incredibly successful in their own right.
There is no one-size-fits-all way of being successful in 2025 (or beyond).
The key is to be clear of what your strategy is then execute on that strategy flawlessly.

Craig Sundstrom
Craig Sundstrom

Let’s not overthink this: it’s two behemoths whose MO is to sell for as cheaply as possible (often by driving suppliers to the wall…or thru it) The most obvious difference is Amazon got fronted billions of dollar$ by oh-so-patient investors to reach this point, while Sam’s was more of a family affair.

Last edited 5 months ago by Craig Sundstrom
Perry Kramer
Perry Kramer

Both companies Balance “Why” and “And” very well. initially it was easier for Amazon to be Why company because there breath was a little Narrower than Walmart. Now that they both have a very wide set of Retail functions they will both need to balance the “Why” and “And” to the more conservatively. The conservative leaning will be increased by the economic and governmental regulatory inconsistencies.

Lisa Goller
Lisa Goller

Amazon and Walmart make each other better.

Amazon is always questioning the status quo, inventing revenue drivers and elevating industry standards.

Walmart balances tradition and digital diversification, emerging as the most omnichannel retailer on the planet.

Both retailers’ robust ecosystems will thrive.

David Biernbaum

Comparing Walmart and Amazon makes only a small bit of sense since Walmart is advancing in e-commerce, and Amazon is delving into more ownership of brick and mortar. But beyond that, the comparison efforts amount to an big apple and a big orange.

Walmart is desperately trying to compete with Amazon on-line. But I will be shocked if Walmart ever competes well with Amazon. Walmart hasn’t figured out how do run a third-party business, and Amazon, does it fairly smoothly. And it stands to reason because third parties are the lion’s share of their business.

Amazon’s brick and mortar businesses are not even a drip into Walmart’s bucket, and unless Amazon buys Walmart one day, the drip will never become even a drop. Walmart is the king of brick and mortar and probably always will be. No one can successfully emulate the Walmart business model, not even Target.

Allison McCabe

Really obvious question, but is the average consumer equally engaged with Walmart AND Amazon? Am sure there is a preference. I know WHY I prefer one over the other. There is no contest for my wallet share between two. There is room for both as consumers come from different vantage points.

Brian Delp

I don’t see these themes as competing, or really an “And” OR “Why”. The Walmart philosophy is related to their relationship to tech integration and the Amazon philosophy is broader. The point is that both are introspective, which is propelling their success and growth.

Jeff Sward

In my mind, Amazon and Walmart are only kind of/sort of competitors. And each of them is executing plans and methodologies that support their very different business models. I buy in physical retail stores whenever possible. I shop AND verify quality, fit, etc AND I have immediate ownership. The WHY? of Amazon boils down to access and convenience. Let’s face it, there’s a whole bunch more product available on Amazon than there is in Walmart. Access and convenience are kind of a big deal.

My big WHY? for Amazon is why no significant brick& mortar success? (Whole Foods is a push at best.) Why didn’t they buy JCP and get into the mall business? Why not buy Kohl’s and take on Target and Walmart directly? Why get into the Sak’s equation only to bring Sak’s on line but do nothing to help save the physical stores…???

Access and convenience mean that Amazon will live forever. But so will physical retail. Why doesn’t Amazon have a bigger physical footprint by now…???

Gene Detroyer
Famed Member
Reply to  Jeff Sward

Why doesn’t Amazon have a bigger physical footprint by now…??? Maybe their heart isn’t in it.

John Hennessy

As noted in other comments, a simplistic comparison. Both retailers try new things. Both fail and reset. Each has their own strengths and weaknesses. Both continue to expand what they offer. Walmart is doing a great job of expanding into a more upscale audience. But dropping the ball on filtering marketplace seller quality. Lots of room for growth and lots of room for other retailers to better serve segments of the market.

Romit Bhatia
Romit Bhatia

Both Walmart and Amazon have their own distinct strengths and strategies. Walmart’s cautious approach may be well-suited for its current business model. This strategy can be seen as both pragmatic and risk-averse. It allows Walmart to avoid potentially costly mistakes while still capitalizing on proven innovations, but it will need to continue to adapt and innovate to stay competitive in the long term.   Amazon’s “why” culture fosters innovation and a willingness to take risks, which can be both a strength and a weakness. It will be interesting to see how these two retail giants continue to evolve and compete in the future.

Anil Patel
Anil Patel

Walmart and Amazon follow very different retail strategies today. Walmart builds on its existing strengths, growing steadily by combining stores, online channels, human service, and technology. This balanced and stable approach suits uncertain economic times.

Amazon relies on bold ideas and fast experimentation. It asks ambitious questions and acts quickly, which has led to innovations like AWS and Prime. This strategy is based on curiosity, long-term vision, and taking risks even if not every move succeeds right away.

Which approach works better depends on market conditions. Walmart’s cautious method feels safer when the economy is unstable. Amazon’s boldness pays off when growth and innovation are possible.

Both strategies have value. Success depends on clear direction and fast execution. In a fast-changing market shaped by customer needs and technology, adaptability and focus will keep companies ahead.

Mohamed Amer, PhD

The real insight here isn’t about “And” versus “Why”—it’s about risk appetite and capital allocation patterns that connect to broader strategic theory. Walmart represents what I’d call “intelligent followership”—a strategy that’s actually more sophisticated than it’s given credit for. They’re essentially running a massive real-world A/B test using Amazon as their unwitting beta tester.
Amazon operates like a startup with infinite runway, able to sustain losses on experiments because AWS subsidizes everything. Walmart operates like a traditional retailer that must generate consistent returns for shareholders. Different capital structures create different innovation capabilities.
Amazon is a high-beta growth play, Walmart is a defensive value play with growth options. In 2025’s volatile environment, Walmart’s “And” philosophy may prove more antifragile than Amazon’s “Why” adventures.
Both will survive, but Walmart’s approach teaches us that sometimes the tortoise strategy—methodical, profitable, sustainable—beats the hare’s brilliant sprints.

BrainTrust

"There is no one-size-fits-all way of being successful in 2025 (or beyond). The key is to be clear about what your strategy is, then execute on that strategy flawlessly."
Avatar of Shannon Wu-Lebron

Shannon Wu-Lebron

VP of Industry Strategy & Growth, Neudesic


"I don’t see these themes as competing, or really an “And” OR “Why”...The point is that both are introspective, which is propelling their success and growth."
Avatar of Brian Delp

Brian Delp

CEO, New Sega Home


"While maybe not as quick to make decisions as Amazon, Walmart has advanced retailing to an incredible level. The only way that happens is to continuously ask, WHY."
Avatar of Shep Hyken

Shep Hyken

Chief Amazement Officer, Shepard Presentations, LLC


More Discussions