Moving forward while looking back

Everyone in marketing has an opinion about the Cracker Barrel fiasco.  What they were trying to achieve merits consideration because it is a problem many brands wrestle with. How do we move into the future without losing our past?

The brand has been struggling, so “let’s not change” is not a viable strategy.  But “change everything” didn’t prove very successful, either.

In her “Choice Hacking” blog, Jen Clinehans discusses Tide’s somewhat analogous struggles with the introduction of Cold Water Tide.  The brand initially chose a blue bottle, under the assumption that blue would be shorthand for cold.  Instead, blue proved shorthand for “not Tide.” 

Consumers were used to seeing Tide in the orange bottle.  People couldn’t find the new product at shelf because they were looking for the wrong thing.  So, P&G switched the packaging to the familiar orange (with splashes of blue on the label) and, voila, problem solved. 

Her point (and one I agree with) is that marketers should be very slow to change their brand assets.  So, tweaks to the Cracker Barrel logo or interior would have been fine.  And maybe, after a bunch of little tweaks over an extended period, it would feel like a different brand. But you risk credibility making a sweeping overhaul all at once.

Branding consultant Vince parry sees it differently.  He believes Cracker Barrel should have gone all in and stuck with its changes even in the face of the firestorm.  His point is that a failing brand has to make major changes.  The new logo wasn’t good, but he thinks they should have embraced that:  “Instigate a nationwide movement that harvests today's love of deeply flawed humanity as an American value. Embrace Cracker Barrel because it's just like us--ugly on the outside, but truly American on the inside.”  We may not fully agree with that, but it is a perspective worth considering!