Are Cracker Barrel's Woes About Logo Redesign or Something Else?
Cracker Barrel is all over the news today. So I thought I would join in. For our global audience, a little background. If there was one restaurant chain that represented Southern cooking and old-time local fare in the U.S., it’s Cracker Barrel. That Cracker Barrel was actually a national chain was beside the point. Because of the way it was themed, the store/restaurant was an institution and an homage to the timelessness of small Southern towns.
Sure, the restaurant chain had problems. Its demographic was getting older—to the point where they were dying off. That’s a big problem. The experience hadn’t changed in 40 years. That’s an even bigger problem.
The executive team decided that a wholesale change was needed, if the company were to attract a younger, more energetic crowd. The product seemed lost in another era to many people. It was my dad’s favorite restaurant, and I had made similar comments about the menu and ambiance, mostly under my breath.
Those of you who listen to our podcast will remember that Joe Pine, Aransas Savas and I did an episode on Cracker Barrel when the company first announced it’s ‘transition plan.’ We were not impressed. So, let’s break down what is going wrong and what Cracker Barrel could have done.
Strategic Mistakes
1. Branding over Experience. The first, and most obvious mistake that Cracker Barrel made was to see their challenge for the future as an exercise in repositioning the company. Cracker Barrel did what it saw its competitors do (most of whom failed as well). Rebrand. In the process it lost its authenticity, which was tied to its experience. What it should have done instead is doubled down on experiences. The company didn’t need a cleaner look. It needed new experiences that would increase the number of situations that would draw people in.
2. Demographic Target Marketing. Cracker Barrel did something that many companies do, and which rarely works. They decided they needed a new customer that wasn’t old. The problem wasn’t that they needed new customers. The problem was that they think that demographic-based target marketing is the way to go about getting new customers. Everyone can see through the scheme. The old customer feels unwelcomed. The new target audience feels reduced to a new set of colors and menu items. Instead, Cracker Barrel should have focused on situational markets. It’s a simple idea: people are attracted to certain solutions when certain situations arise. This is what McDonald’s is doing recently. They are trying to understand a wide range of ‘drinks situations,’ ‘burger situations,’ etc. They offer experiences for families, for solo eaters, etc. By increasing the number of situations they support, they make themselves relevant to people from all walks of life.
3. Formulaic Transformation. Most companies like to follow a proven recipe for change. And Cracker Barrel’s CEO seems to fall into this camp. Her every decision seems fit the ‘refresh formula.’ We all know what that looks like. How many times has Burger King attempted to ‘refresh’ its brand. ‘Clean, simple, inviting’ —these are euphemistic terms for formulaic transformation. And unfortunately, the CEO seems to have stepped into the political tarpit with some of her brand choices that were supposed to be proven recipes for change. She tried to position the brand to be more in line with the politics of one demographic but, as always happens, the other side of the politics noticed. What Cracker Barrel should have done is to develop a point of view regarding near future needs of its customers and then incrementally moved to support those needs. Do people need community (social JTBD)? Do they need Southern hospitality (emotional JTBD)? Do they need healthier comfort food (functional JTBD)? Once you know what they will need in the near future, you develop a three-year road map to move toward those jobs to be done.
One Step to Right the Ship
Now that Cracker Barrel is getting a negative response to its strategy (total market loss is somewhere between $94M and $143M !! ), what one strategy can move the company in the right direction? Today there is a lot of talk about bringing back Uncle Herschel in the logo (the grandfatherly figure who rocks in his chair next to a barrel of crackers). That may or may not be the right thing to do. And it’s also not a strategy.
Come to think of it, I’m not sure that any of the changes Cracker Barrel has made are actually future-forward business strategies. They may be old-timey brand strategy—something you would have done in the 90s. But they don’t rise to level of strategy for the 2030s.
To get the company back on track for growth, relevancy, and distinction, I don’t recommend just going back to the way things were. Instead, they should think about the customer’s relationship with time. Experience strategy is always about time value. Do people want to spend more time with restaurant? What can the company do to increase the amount of time people spend? (They used to have an answer for that, with their gift shop and rocking chairs.) Whether they stay with the new look or go back to the old look is ultimately not the issue. The issue going forward is the value of the time people spend in the restaurant.
Instead of focusing so much on look, on demographics, and on what other restaurants are doing, Cracker Barrel should start right now to focus strategically on how to increase the value of the time that people spend with their product. They should measure for time well spent. They should innovate for time value. They should obsess over whether or the product fits the situations that people need the Southern solution for. And they should go after jobs to be done that they know will make people want to spend more time with them.