February 2, 2026
wolterke/Depositphotos.com
Is Target’s Michael Fiddelke Focused on the Right Four Priorities?
In a letter delivered to Target customers, employees, and business partners, newly minted CEO Michael Fiddelke outlined the four primary priorities he envisioned as taking center stage in the next phase of the retailer’s ongoing turnaround effort.
“And while we have real work to do, we are clear on who we are, our unique place in retail and in the hearts of our guests. We are equally clear on the opportunity in front of us. Our guests want great design, real value and experiences that delight,” Fiddelke began after offering his thanks for being afforded the opportunity to lead the brand.
“That’s where Target has always been at its best, and it’s what grounds the important work in front of us now,” he added.
The four stated priorities that were of the utmost importance for the new CEO included:
- Curation with conviction is the key to demonstrating leadership via merchandising authority: Here, Fiddelke signaled that “design, style and value” were fundamental to capturing the core promise made by Target.
- A focus on improving the guest experience: The new CEO was quick to underscore the importance of frictionless customer interactions, whether in-store or in terms of e-comm sales. The words “inspiring” and “welcoming” were attached as necessary components of guest interactions, putting a positive spin on this customer-centric pillar.
- Pushing for more tech: By “accelerating technology” in a second appeal to reducing friction, Fiddelke also highlighted opportunities to leverage technology in the service of empowering workers as well as experiential retail more broadly to “create more personalized, joyful experiences” for shoppers.
- Strengthening teams and communities: Without going into too much detail, Fiddelke suggested that greater investment in workers (particularly around upskilling to meet the demands of today’s — and tomorrow’s — workplace) and community relations would be a centerpiece of his coming tenure.
Target CEO Michael Fiddelke Takes the Helm at a Turbulent Time
Fiddelke isn’t exactly walking into a cushy gig. Headlines continue to be produced surrounding the company’s comparative lack of decided political stance regarding the ongoing ICE operations taking place in Minnesota, and in Minneapolis more particularly, where Target is headquartered.
According to CBS News, while Fiddelke joined more than 60 other CEOs of Minnesota-based companies in signing a joint letter calling for the de-escalation of tensions in a clear nod to the ongoing clashes between ICE agents and activists. However, activist groups have since ramped up the pressure, with demonstrators organizing sit-ins within Target stores and protesting against ICE in front of Target HQ in recent days.
And as CNN Business noted, Target is also facing broader difficulties in reviving its sales — and its image. Understaffed and disorganized, untidy stores have left customers displeased, and sales have been less than impressive. The stock has shed about 30% of its value over the course of the past three years.
“It’s an enormous job. There’s a lot to fix there,” said Scott Mushkin, a retail analyst at R5 Capital, per CNN Business.
BrainTrust
Mark Ryski
Founder, CEO & Author, HeadCount Corporation
Bob Phibbs
President/CEO, The Retail Doctor
Anil Patel
Founder & CEO, HotWax Commerce
Recent Discussions
Discussion Questions
Do you believe Michael Fiddelke has correctly identified the most important four focus pillars for Target’s future success? What’s missing, if anything?
Do you believe Fiddelke will be successful in navigating a new period of sales growth and improved customer experience for Target? Why or why not?
Poll
Loading …
Why has Target lost sales and share? It isn’t because core customers are spending less overall; it’s because they have moved some spend away from Target. When we analyze the drivers behind this, two things in our data stand out. First, assortments in some categories are not as compelling as they should be – there’s a staleness that’s driving down conversion and spend. Second, the store experience has too much friction that’s putting people off visiting in the first place and/or reducing the propensity to browse when they do. Those are the first two priorities on the list. So not only are they correct, but they’re in the correct order. That said, words are easy. Execution is more difficult.
In conversation with some of their analytics team, they’ve seen a significant decline in traffic tied to their announcements around DEI and their perceived lack of leadership on the events happening in Minnesota, and across the country at the moment. They built a customer based on their community values. Now they find themselves in the unenviable place where shopping there has become a values statement for many of their guests. This only serves to amplify their other issues. Mr. Fiddelke and the leadership there continue to stay silent and toe the line. This is now a sustained boycott- even it’s only 3-4% of their guests, it’s showing up in there preformance and this will make any turn around far more difficult.
I don’t entirely agree. The DEI situation has been badly handled and I am sure it has had some impact (though our data and that which I have seen from Target suggests it’s not that significant on a national basis). However, it is not a primary cause of Target’s woes. The main factors are related to product and experience. And actually, these things were causing problems and declines long before DEI became a hot topic. So they are the first thing Target should address. The other point, of course, is that focusing on politics is a hiding to nothing: it will please some, sure; but it will also alienate others. It’s not the ground from which they can win.
So much of Target’s challenges have been a result of self-inflicted wounds. The moment a retailer starts losing sight of the critically of every person who enters the store, they are asking for trouble. Consumers today have zero patience. There’s so many other places to get virtually everything any retailer offers, no retailer can afford to squander their store visits. Over the last several years, Target has been squandering their traffic and giving their valued customers reasons to shop elsewhere. Directionally, Mr. Fiddelke appears to be focused on the right priorities – but this is no time for hollow promises. If Target wants to get back to growth, it needs to execute the basics effectively, as it has done in the past.
Insightful observation that few talk about. “Consumers today have zero patience.”
While in a Target in SW Florida today, I noted a significant amount of out of stocks & only 2 checkout lines open. It was a disappointing shopping experience. Focusing on what constitutes a delightful experience needs to be a top priority.
Plus, Target needs to take a leadership position on what is happening in its community. Timidity with these initiatives will only serve to accelerate its performance issues.
What’s missing, of course – or has been mising, really – is the abilty to deliver on goals; “the all hat no cattle” issue has become systemic.
This cowboy is hiding in the barn.
On Day One he should’ve rolled back their DEI policy to what it had been. The fact that he didn’t does not bode well for his leadership..
Their trying to please everyone approach to social engagement, and their abandonment of the core values their target customers care about has amplified the operational challenges Target is dealing with. Perfect storm.
Boy is that a motherhood set of priorities. All I see in real life is expense management
I think Michael Fiddelke has articulated directionally sound strategic pillars, but the challenge for Target isn’t just what the company plans to prioritize — it’s whether those priorities squarely address the foundational execution gaps that have eroded core competitive strengths. In-stock execution on basic essentials remains a persistent issue, and when customers can’t find the basics they shop for most often, it undermines all higher-order strategic initiatives. Effective promotional mechanics — long a Target strength — have also lost consistency and clarity, eroding both traffic and basket productivity. Without first tightening these bedrock elements of retail performance, aspirational pillars — whether digital innovation, loyalty enhancements, or ecosystem expansion — risk being layered on a foundation that still leaks value.
That concern extends to areas where Target historically differentiated: private and designer brands in apparel and home, and its food assortment, particularly fresh. Target hasn’t invested with the discipline or focus we’ve seen from competitors who have made fresh and curated private brands central to their value proposition. Private brands should be a strategic lever for differentiation and margin strength, yet Target’s home and apparel brand portfolios have become increasingly inconsistent, leaving room for fast fashion and specialty players to capture market share. In food — especially fresh — Target has yet to demonstrate a coherent strategy that compares to grocers who have doubled down on fresh execution, local assortment, and price/value clarity. These foundational commercial elements can’t be afterthoughts if Target is serious about sustainable growth.
So will Fiddelke be successful in navigating a new period of sales growth and improved customer experience? It’s too early to make a definitive call, but success will depend on anchoring big-picture strategy with disciplined investment in retail fundamentals. Strategic pillars matter only if they are grounded in excellent availability, a relevant assortment, consistent value, and executional precision. If Target can tighten availability on basics, revitalize promotional clarity, amplify distinctive private brands with real product and price value, and clarify its approach to fresh food, then the broader initiative becomes credible. Without that, even the strongest strategic pillars risk becoming aspirational signposts rather than engines of growth. In my view, the work ahead isn’t just about defining priorities — it’s about getting the basics right first, so the rest of the strategy has a sound runway to deliver.
The priorities are headed in the right direction, but they only matter if they fix why customers have moved some of their spending elsewhere. Target has not lost appeal because customers no longer care about design or price. The issue has been weaker assortments and uneven store execution.
Merchandising needs to lead the turnaround. When assortments feel tired or hard to shop, traffic and sales decline, no matter how much is spent on experience or technology. The same problems show up in stores. Thin staffing, cluttered aisles, and slow checkout make visits frustrating and encourage customers to look for alternatives.
Technology and team investments can help, but only if they make daily work easier and support the basics. Trust comes back when stores run well visit after visit. If these priorities lead to better assortments, cleaner and better-staffed stores, and teams that are set up to do their jobs well, they can support steady improvement.
Dear Target,
Those people who walk in the door are not “guests”. They are customers. The quicker you realize that, the better off you will be.
I don’t think that was a hard letter to write. Leaving out the politically sensitive issues, It hits the right notes. The hard part is the how and when…and directed by who? “Curation with conviction…design, style and value.” Right…exactly…but isn’t that what the merchants thought they were doing all along? Who or what is going to be the real catalyst for change? Doing a quick search I found a quote from Fr. Fiddelke. “When we’re leading with swagger in our merchandising authority, when we have swagger in our marketing and we’re setting the trend for retail, those are some of the moments I think Target has been at its highest in my 20 years,” he said. (Financial Express, Feb. 3rd 2026) Right…swagger. But hasn’t that been the assignment all long?
The good news is that the letter hit the right notes. The tough news is that there are a lot of tough cultural and execution issues to readjust along the way to Target’s former glory. And it has to be accomplished in a market that is more competitive than ever.
The current priorities assume a world where consumers still choose to shop at Target. But the looming retail transformation isn’t about whether Target’s stores are ‘inspiring and welcoming’; it’s about whether Target will even be in the consideration set when AI agents make purchase recommendations or decisions. Walmart is building data infrastructure and logistics capabilities to be the default fulfillment engine regardless of where the transaction originates. Amazon owns the infrastructure layer. Target’s priorities read as if this shift isn’t happening.
Even treating these four priorities as operational themes rather than strategy, execution remains the critical uncertainty. ‘Curation with conviction’ risks becoming just another buzzword without merchandising accountability. Improving guest experience is table stakes, a catch-up play requiring genuine workforce investment, not rhetoric. Accelerating technology is couched in human-centered language but could easily become a cost-cutting lever rather than an experience multiplier. Strengthening teams and communities, the least detailed priority, is actually the foundational enabler for the other three, and this has been Target’s biggest execution gap over the past 12-18 months.
Fiddelke’s leadership reflects less a strategic repositioning and more an attempt to improve operational execution within a business model whose fundamental premises about consumer behavior are being disrupted.
More Discussions
Will a Hybrid Pharmacist Role Help Solve Labor Issues for Walgreens?
Will a Hybrid Pharmacist Role Help Solve Labor Issues for Walgreens?Should Burger King’s President Be Giving Out his Cell Phone Number?
Will this move by Burger King’s Tom Curtis drive meaningful results?How Much Of A Discount Drives New Grocery Trial?
How Much Of A Discount Drives New Grocery Trial?
Why has Target lost sales and share? It isn’t because core customers are spending less overall; it’s because they have moved some spend away from Target. When we analyze the drivers behind this, two things in our data stand out. First, assortments in some categories are not as compelling as they should be – there’s a staleness that’s driving down conversion and spend. Second, the store experience has too much friction that’s putting people off visiting in the first place and/or reducing the propensity to browse when they do. Those are the first two priorities on the list. So not only are they correct, but they’re in the correct order. That said, words are easy. Execution is more difficult.
In conversation with some of their analytics team, they’ve seen a significant decline in traffic tied to their announcements around DEI and their perceived lack of leadership on the events happening in Minnesota, and across the country at the moment. They built a customer based on their community values. Now they find themselves in the unenviable place where shopping there has become a values statement for many of their guests. This only serves to amplify their other issues. Mr. Fiddelke and the leadership there continue to stay silent and toe the line. This is now a sustained boycott- even it’s only 3-4% of their guests, it’s showing up in there preformance and this will make any turn around far more difficult.
I don’t entirely agree. The DEI situation has been badly handled and I am sure it has had some impact (though our data and that which I have seen from Target suggests it’s not that significant on a national basis). However, it is not a primary cause of Target’s woes. The main factors are related to product and experience. And actually, these things were causing problems and declines long before DEI became a hot topic. So they are the first thing Target should address. The other point, of course, is that focusing on politics is a hiding to nothing: it will please some, sure; but it will also alienate others. It’s not the ground from which they can win.
So much of Target’s challenges have been a result of self-inflicted wounds. The moment a retailer starts losing sight of the critically of every person who enters the store, they are asking for trouble. Consumers today have zero patience. There’s so many other places to get virtually everything any retailer offers, no retailer can afford to squander their store visits. Over the last several years, Target has been squandering their traffic and giving their valued customers reasons to shop elsewhere. Directionally, Mr. Fiddelke appears to be focused on the right priorities – but this is no time for hollow promises. If Target wants to get back to growth, it needs to execute the basics effectively, as it has done in the past.
Insightful observation that few talk about. “Consumers today have zero patience.”
While in a Target in SW Florida today, I noted a significant amount of out of stocks & only 2 checkout lines open. It was a disappointing shopping experience. Focusing on what constitutes a delightful experience needs to be a top priority.
Plus, Target needs to take a leadership position on what is happening in its community. Timidity with these initiatives will only serve to accelerate its performance issues.
What’s missing, of course – or has been mising, really – is the abilty to deliver on goals; “the all hat no cattle” issue has become systemic.
This cowboy is hiding in the barn.
On Day One he should’ve rolled back their DEI policy to what it had been. The fact that he didn’t does not bode well for his leadership..
Their trying to please everyone approach to social engagement, and their abandonment of the core values their target customers care about has amplified the operational challenges Target is dealing with. Perfect storm.
Boy is that a motherhood set of priorities. All I see in real life is expense management
I think Michael Fiddelke has articulated directionally sound strategic pillars, but the challenge for Target isn’t just what the company plans to prioritize — it’s whether those priorities squarely address the foundational execution gaps that have eroded core competitive strengths. In-stock execution on basic essentials remains a persistent issue, and when customers can’t find the basics they shop for most often, it undermines all higher-order strategic initiatives. Effective promotional mechanics — long a Target strength — have also lost consistency and clarity, eroding both traffic and basket productivity. Without first tightening these bedrock elements of retail performance, aspirational pillars — whether digital innovation, loyalty enhancements, or ecosystem expansion — risk being layered on a foundation that still leaks value.
That concern extends to areas where Target historically differentiated: private and designer brands in apparel and home, and its food assortment, particularly fresh. Target hasn’t invested with the discipline or focus we’ve seen from competitors who have made fresh and curated private brands central to their value proposition. Private brands should be a strategic lever for differentiation and margin strength, yet Target’s home and apparel brand portfolios have become increasingly inconsistent, leaving room for fast fashion and specialty players to capture market share. In food — especially fresh — Target has yet to demonstrate a coherent strategy that compares to grocers who have doubled down on fresh execution, local assortment, and price/value clarity. These foundational commercial elements can’t be afterthoughts if Target is serious about sustainable growth.
So will Fiddelke be successful in navigating a new period of sales growth and improved customer experience? It’s too early to make a definitive call, but success will depend on anchoring big-picture strategy with disciplined investment in retail fundamentals. Strategic pillars matter only if they are grounded in excellent availability, a relevant assortment, consistent value, and executional precision. If Target can tighten availability on basics, revitalize promotional clarity, amplify distinctive private brands with real product and price value, and clarify its approach to fresh food, then the broader initiative becomes credible. Without that, even the strongest strategic pillars risk becoming aspirational signposts rather than engines of growth. In my view, the work ahead isn’t just about defining priorities — it’s about getting the basics right first, so the rest of the strategy has a sound runway to deliver.
The priorities are headed in the right direction, but they only matter if they fix why customers have moved some of their spending elsewhere. Target has not lost appeal because customers no longer care about design or price. The issue has been weaker assortments and uneven store execution.
Merchandising needs to lead the turnaround. When assortments feel tired or hard to shop, traffic and sales decline, no matter how much is spent on experience or technology. The same problems show up in stores. Thin staffing, cluttered aisles, and slow checkout make visits frustrating and encourage customers to look for alternatives.
Technology and team investments can help, but only if they make daily work easier and support the basics. Trust comes back when stores run well visit after visit. If these priorities lead to better assortments, cleaner and better-staffed stores, and teams that are set up to do their jobs well, they can support steady improvement.
Dear Target,
Those people who walk in the door are not “guests”. They are customers. The quicker you realize that, the better off you will be.
I don’t think that was a hard letter to write. Leaving out the politically sensitive issues, It hits the right notes. The hard part is the how and when…and directed by who? “Curation with conviction…design, style and value.” Right…exactly…but isn’t that what the merchants thought they were doing all along? Who or what is going to be the real catalyst for change? Doing a quick search I found a quote from Fr. Fiddelke. “When we’re leading with swagger in our merchandising authority, when we have swagger in our marketing and we’re setting the trend for retail, those are some of the moments I think Target has been at its highest in my 20 years,” he said. (Financial Express, Feb. 3rd 2026) Right…swagger. But hasn’t that been the assignment all long?
The good news is that the letter hit the right notes. The tough news is that there are a lot of tough cultural and execution issues to readjust along the way to Target’s former glory. And it has to be accomplished in a market that is more competitive than ever.
The current priorities assume a world where consumers still choose to shop at Target. But the looming retail transformation isn’t about whether Target’s stores are ‘inspiring and welcoming’; it’s about whether Target will even be in the consideration set when AI agents make purchase recommendations or decisions. Walmart is building data infrastructure and logistics capabilities to be the default fulfillment engine regardless of where the transaction originates. Amazon owns the infrastructure layer. Target’s priorities read as if this shift isn’t happening.
Even treating these four priorities as operational themes rather than strategy, execution remains the critical uncertainty. ‘Curation with conviction’ risks becoming just another buzzword without merchandising accountability. Improving guest experience is table stakes, a catch-up play requiring genuine workforce investment, not rhetoric. Accelerating technology is couched in human-centered language but could easily become a cost-cutting lever rather than an experience multiplier. Strengthening teams and communities, the least detailed priority, is actually the foundational enabler for the other three, and this has been Target’s biggest execution gap over the past 12-18 months.
Fiddelke’s leadership reflects less a strategic repositioning and more an attempt to improve operational execution within a business model whose fundamental premises about consumer behavior are being disrupted.