shake shack marketing

Chick-fil-A, Starbucks, Taco Bell, McDonald’s Master The Forces of Alone-And-Together

We live in an uncertain world. We have become more skeptical and distrusting. Our environment seems unsettled, unpredictable and unstable. And, then, to magnify these feelings, we experienced Covid-19.

During the coronavirus pandemic, many behaviors and attitudes changed. Our desires for satisfaction of contradictory needs and wants grew stronger. We simply do not want to compromise. We are no longer willing to trade off. It seems as contradictions rule.

Brand-businesses that were strategically and culturally flexible – able to address our contradictory needs and wants – emerged successful from the siege of coronavirus. Managing paradoxes is now an essential strategic characteristic for brand-businesses in their quest for high quality revenue growth. The fast food industry has been particularly successful at managing in our post-pandemic paradox planet.

One of the most visible and game-changing paradoxes that brand-businesses face is the idea of Alone and Together. Or, as some brand-businesses call this, Connection and Disconnection. The Economist magazine calls this paradox the Hermit Consumer. The hermit consumer is someone who no longer has the stomach for services, as services involve directly dealing with other people. 

Interestingly, certain behaviors honed during lockdowns have endured. of The Economist’s observations. Increasingly, people eschew “up-close-and-personal services.” People work at least one day from home. People changed their attitudes about being social, opting for more solitary pursuits. The Economist concludes that, in general, Covid-19 pulled people apart.

The Economist’s data support a world of reduced in-person socialization. People changed their attitudes about being social, opting instead for more solitary pursuits. Or as another observer wrote, people emerged from the pandemic with less tolerance for interacting with strangers. As one consumer told a reporter, “I lean on that feeling of not wanting much interaction. Working from home for three years really zapped my social skills.” 

But, at the same time, belonging still remains a strong human need. We just do “belonging” differently than we did pre-coronavirus. Managing the intersection of connection and disconnection is now a signal of brand-business leadership expertise and intelligence.

No industry has mastered the art of connection and disconnection better than the fast food industry.  The New York Times heralds this force as the age of the drive-thru. The drive-thru allows for anonymity while someone at the window is focuses only you. Apparently, anything more personal, such as employees walking through the drive-thru lines taking orders is way too much “interaction” for some people. One customer told The New York Times, “I got out of the habit (of being social). I think I’m like a lot of people who just don’t necessarily like being social that much anymore.” Another customer responded, “I do the drive-thru so I can be antisocial.” 

Here is how some fast food brand-businesses are managing the contradiction:

  • Chick-fil-A is planning a two-story four lane drive-thru that will be able to manage 75 cars at a time.
  • Taco Bell opened a store with no dining room and a kitchen on the second floor. On the ground floor, there are four drive-thru lanes. Three lanes are dedicated to delivery drivers and customer app-order pick-ups. The fourth lane is for drive-ins. 
  • McDonald’s states that currently 40% of sales are from digital orders. McDonald’s recently opened a store in Dallas, TX, that has no dining room. 
  • Shake Shack just opened a drive-thru option.
  • Popeye’s is cutting the size of its dining areas. 
  • Starbucks is expanding drive-thru lanes forsaking its original proposition as our “fourth place.” It seems that sitting in the café is not as appealing (too social?) as driving away with an order to take someplace else.

But, this new love of the drive-thru is drive-thru with a twist. Yes, consumers – mainly younger generations – prefer the drive-thru. But, just because they prefer being alone in their car does not mean they are alone. Posting the solitary experience on social media has become de rigeur. 

Socializing the solitary is the new DTC. Previously, in marketing, DTC meant direct-to-consumer. Now, there is a subtle change: DTC means drive-thru-culture. And, drive-thru culture optimizes both feeling connected while being disconnected. The president of Taco Bell told The New York Times that Gen Z customers have made the drive-thru cool. Posting on TikTok while placing an order is now a usual occurrence.

One example of how belonging has changed is the video from a YouTube star. He and his pals visited drive-thru lanes of 100 different restaurant brands over the course of three days. The New York Times reported that the 23-minute video of this DTC garnered almost 10 millions views.

There is another dimension to the alone-together syndrome: safety. People felt unsafe during lockdowns and post-lockdowns. Drive throughs are safe. In the movie Apocalypse Now, when Frederic Forrest’s character, Chef, comes fac-to-face with a tiger in the Vietnamese jungle while picking mangoes, his fearful answer is, Never get off the boat.” Today’s mantra is “Never get out of the car.” One university student stated that she visits drive-thrus at last 8 times a week and posts her interactions on TikTok. She thinks that there is something about the car that makes her not want to get out of her car.

It is not just the drive-thru, though. Apparently kiosks are also favored by Millennial and Gen Z customers. According to QSR Web, 67% of Gen Z customers prefer kiosks to interacting with a crew member at a fast food store. Fifty-eight percent (58%) of Millennials agreed. Other data from Catering Insight shows that more than 60% of Millennials and nearly 80% of Gen Zers found using a kiosk easier to manage than reading a menu board.

For Gen X customers, a kiosk makes creating a custom order easy; a kiosk reduces ordering pressure; providing more time for browsing the menu; was easier to navigate and allowed the customer to track the order on the screen. And, you do not need to deal with crew members.

We accumulate masses of digital friends while we marginalize in-person interactions. Social media has been the leader in optimizing individualization and interconnectedness. Now, technology is allowing restaurants to challenge that leadership. Kiosks and drive-thrus are masters of the alone-together paradox. Take-out the food by yourself and spread the experience to the world.

The New York Times finds DTC as supported by the automobile. But, as kiosks show, there are ways to deliver alone but connected that do not necessarily need a car. Cars do isolate us but so do other technologies that help us avoid personal interaction. And, the web’s social media platforms deliver belonging, even if belonging is online only and not in real life.

The fast food industry has jumped on the band wagon of satisfying the need to be disconnected and connected at the same time. The desire to be anonymous while belonging to a digital world of recognition is a growing need. The ability to optimize these contradictory needs is changing the world of fast food. What industry will be next?

Kellogg’s: Institutionalize Change or Change Will Interfere With Success

Change happens all the time. Today, it is almost impossible to keep aware of everything that changes around your brand. Customer behaviors change. Attitudes change. Competition changes. Competitive strategies change. Technology changes. Devices change. Distribution channels change.

To deal with change, some organizations implement change initiatives. A change initiative has a program, an HR course, a set of slides, a video, a script, an app, a dictionary, a metric (or series of metrics), and, in many cases, a slew of young, junior consultants who take up a lot of office space. 

Sometimes, when there is new leadership, there is a change initiative: new person, new ideas. If you happen to work in a place where the president or the functional chief changes at a rate of every two years, you can expect to have frequent change initiatives. 

This is not the meaning of institutionalizing change. 

Can you make your brand-business accepting of change? Ca you lead the organization into corporate flexibility with discipline? At the same time, can you put a stop to change-for-the-sake-of-change? 

In a rapidly, uncertain, changing world, brand teams need to be flexible. Brand teams need to be able to make changes when necessary. The biggest challenge for a brand-business is ensuring that brand teams – and the brand-business – are open to change and that the organizational environment is conducive to change. 

In order for change to be genuine and not superficial, cultural change initiatives must be consistently reinforced, widely communicated, supported from the top of the organization and realistic for the organization’s circumstances at that time. Change must be rooted in reality and not due to the whims of a new executive or eager HR department. Brand-businesses must create an organizational atmosphere that is conducive to change. 

For example, a manufacturing company decided that everyone in the organization should be creative. A change initiative required every individual to participate. Asking people to be creative is a fruitless task: some people have this characteristic, others do not. It is unrealistic to expect everyone to be a Steve Jobs. The project was a failure. Everyone returned to business as usual. 

Brands are dynamic. Brands are active promises about what they will do for the customer. Brands do not do well in closed, apathetic and lethargic organizations. Brands need continuous renewal. Brands must live in environments which are conducive to change and creativity. This does not mean everyone is a capable of change or creativity. It does means that the atmosphere is accepting of change and the creativity to deal with change

Brands do not naturally live and die by some brand life cycle. A brand can live forever, but only if it’s properly managed. This means the teams must be aware and alert to marketplace changes and anticipatory ideas for satisfying customer needs. Without the continuous renewal of innovation or renovation, the brand will stagnate. The business will stagnate. Sustainable growth requires building a continuous renewal cycle.

This brings us to Kellogg’s – pre-W.K. Kellogg spin-off.

In case you missed the news, on October 2, 2023, Kellogg’s broke away from its historical, authentic, provenance spinning off cereals as a standalone (shall we say stand away from me) company. Kellanova is the new home of Pop-Tarts, Pringle’s, Rice Krispy Treats and Cheez-its: the snack brand enterprise. Legacy cereal brands – now a new company, W. K. Kellogg – are, as The Wall Street Journal said, “somebody else’s problem.” 

Did this rejection of cereals have to occur? Instead of revitalizing its cereal brands, Kellogg’s gave in to declining cereal-eating behaviors, sales and profits. Kellogg’s pushed those cereal brands away from the more desirable and more profitable snack food brands. Much of the negative performance of the cereal brands was due to self-inflicted wounds.

Rather than blame themselves, reporting indicates that executives believed the major problems in cereal were a factory fire and a worker strike. However, there are data, trends and balance sheets that show how cereal was on a decline for some time. Kellogg’s was aware of the problems in the late 1990s. Breakfast habits changed. Concerns about too much sugar increased. Today, price points are at extraordinary heights – such as $8 a box offerings. Once again, store-brands have stepped up to the proverbial breakfast bowl with high quality products that taste the same or better than past brand name generics.

There was some inherent arrogance at Kellogg’s fueling the belief that consumers would continue to eat sugared cereals for the rest of time. There was also the belief that allowed Kellogg’s to keep on keeping on with the same ideas that were successful in the past. Doing what worked in the past when the world around you has changed is massive brand mismanagement supported by hubris.

The Wall Street Journal indicates that, for example, Kellogg’s did not take the time or spend the money keeping Special K and Kashi, its two “good-for-you” brands up-to-date relative to what defines healthy. Customer perceptions about what exactly defines good-for-you change frequently. Unfortunately, this avoidance of updating a brand while staying true to its brand essence was on ongoing behavior with Kellogg’s. In 2016, reports indicated the same depressing decline in Kellogg’s cereal brands. 

It is no surprise then that Kellogg’s finds itself with brands that are failing to generate profitability. Without innovation, renovation and awareness of altered customer states, brands tend to wither.

It is not only Kellogg executives who have lost interest in Kellogg’s cereal brands. The cereal stand-alone company has been losing share ever since October 3rd, 2023. Worse yet, in order to implement changes to the W.K. Kellogg supply chain, the new cereal company will need to take on significant debt.

Turns out, Kellanova’s high snack food prices makes the newly formed company look great. But, because of the high prices, snack volumes declined 7.4% for the last quarter. High prices for boxes of cereals caused a 13.4% decline in volume at new company WK Kellogg. Using high price rather than innovation, renovation and designing actions for managing change is a formula for failure. Kellanova may soon see the same declines as cereals unless there is ongoing innovation and renovation.

What can brand-businesses do to become conducive to change? Here are three actions for institutionalizing change within the organization.

  1. Focus on strategic dexterity

Strategic dexterity is the ability to manage both planning and flexibility. Strategic dexterity is being able to create and activate prearranged, agreed strategies while being open to and able to evolve when disruptions happen or when business, environmental, political, geographical circumstances alter the landscape.

Critical to strategic dexterity is being strategically sensitive. Strategic sensitivity means having an informed grasp of the potential scenarios and areas for possible disruption. Strategic dexterity allows brand-businesses to be resolute and responsive, disciplined and dexterous at the same time.

Kellogg’s seemed to behave in a strategically insensitive manner. Being strategically insensitive means disregarding the changing world. This means not having the insight to understand what possible changes may occur. Not paying attention to customers, their needs, their problems or their beliefs and behaviors. Such insensitivity is equal to not being up-to-date. Strategic insensitivity insulates a brand-business from innovation and renovation. As for Kellogg’s, strategic insensitivity allowed executives to continue believing and acting as if what worked in the past will continue to work.

  1. Implement Internal Marketing

Organizational alignment and commitment around the possibility of change are essential. A brand-business’ people are its first priority. Employees must come first. Without internal marketing, a brand-business runs the risk of acquiescence rather than adherence. Internal marketing ensures that everyone is together in agreement and alliance.

Internal marketing 1) informs everyone and keeps them informed; 2) defines success so everyone knows what winning looks like; 3) provides educational opportunities so everyone can perform to expectations and experience attitude change; 4) recognizes and rewards genuine progress by celebrating the small successes; and 5) educates employees as to what this change means to them and their positions.

  1. Ensure organizational diversity in thinking

Corporations put a great deal of effort into diversity programs and education. These are designed to produce a fair, safe and representative workplace that is sensitive to different cultures, genders and ethnicities. On the other hand, not enough effort is placed behind diverse ways of thinking.  Many organizational cultures tend to hire those who fit in.

A consensus-driven culture usually does not hire iconoclastic individuals. And, iconoclastic individuals may feel uncomfortable when they are forced to conform or forced to struggle daily in breaking down barriers to new ideas and change. Cultures that are analytic tend not to want lateral thinkers. Creative cultures have trouble assimilating linear thinkers. If you are a technology-dependent company, it makes sense to hire people who are comfortable and expert with technology. If you are a financial company, it makes sense to hire those who know finance, spreadsheets, accounting and so forth.  In the 1990’s, enterprises that wanted innovative ideas created “skunk works” crews that had separate offices and locations with teams that were not integrated into the mainstream of the business. IBM did this with the ThinkPad group. Today, some organizations, recognizing the need for creativity, hire consultants to educate employees into creativity.

Different perspectives allow for more creative productive thoughts that lead to actions. Hiring for skills, as well as for diverse thinking, benefits brands and the businesses that own them. For example, synthesis is a skill that is essential to forming relevant, actionable information from reams of data. Synthesis creates ideas formed from reviewing different disciplines, generating something new from existing knowledge. Brand-businesses should hire brand people who may have skills outside of an MBA or a statistics background. Brands need lateral thinkers as well as linear thinkers. Institutionalizing change relies in part on having people who think differently on board.

Change happens. The only predictable characteristic of change is that it is unpredictable. Brand-businesses must be able to manage when change happens. Those brand-businesses that were flexible were able to survive the upheavals of COVID-19. 

There are many brand-businesses that retreat to the comfort of what worked yesterday rather than face the facts of change.

Ensuring that a brand-business is conducive to change is a critical factor in generating high quality revenue growth leading to enduring profitable growth. These three must-do’s for creating a change-acceptable enterprise should be on every brand-business agenda.

Food Halls Satisfy Our Need For Safely-Adventurous Self-Expression

There are many reasons for why we eat. Knowing what food-consumption needs your brand-business satisfies is critical. Needs-based occasion-driven segmentation is fundamental to brand-business success. The latest example – phenomenon – derived from needs-based occasion-driven segmentation is the Food Hall. Some may say that a Food Hall is a channel, not a need. In a few cases, for some people, that may be the case. But, understanding why we eat helps demonstrate how a Food Hall satisfies a need.

Needs-based occasion-driven segmentation helps define a brand-business’ strategy and policies. Needs-based occasion-driven segmentation helps to answer the questions: Who is the customer? What are the customer’s needs and problems? What are the contexts (how, when where) in which these needs and problems occur for these particular customers? 

Global research studies over decades indicate that there are a handful of universal needs when it comes to eating. These big universal needs are either physiological or psychological, or both. These big universal needs are also multi-dimensional. For example, Hunger is, of course, a universal physiological need. The universal Hunger need has dimensions such as satisfying real hunger, satisfying energy re-fueling or satisfying a nutritional dimension. Break is both a physiological and psychological need. We may need a psychological lift or an escape. We may need a physiological time out. Or we may want not to cook, which can be both physiological or psychological. 

Self-expression is a need for why we eat. Self-expression has multiple dimensions including the need to be adventurous. Food Halls are where people can satisfy their need to feel adventurous via eating out.

According to The Wall Street Journal’s recent report, Food Halls are becoming ubiquitous eating destinations. The reason provided by The Wall Street Journal? People who moved to the suburbs during COVID want to replicate their city dining options of different cuisines and local chefs’ versions of different cuisines. The Wall Street Journal focuses on the real estate angle (profitable ways to use empty mall space). This explanation misses the point that Food Halls address an unmet personal need. 

Satisfying an unmet need – or solving a problem – are two of the best ways for a brand-business to generate high quality revenue growth. And, The Wall Street Journal’s explanation does not address Food Halls in places like Miami. In the Miami area, there are about 9 different Food Halls, including Shoma Bazaar, Julia & Henry’s, Lincoln Eatery, MIA Market and Oasis Wynwood.

Unlike a Food Court which is populated by fast-food restaurants, a Food Hall is a splendid collection of ethnic, gourmet and local craft eating and drinking opportunities. 

Food Halls offer creative dining experiences along with the breweries, grocery stores, butchers, food boutiques, artisan/local food products and entertainment. Food Halls contain multiple restaurants, usually with counter-service and communal seating. Food Halls are usually showcases for local chefs with safely-exotic cuisines such as Korean, Syrian, Nepalese, smoked meats, BBQ and rustic Italian, for example. Food Halls are eating destinations where local, artisanal chefs curate dining options.

There are no McDonald’s, no Cinnabon, no Panda Express. Forget Sbarro and Sonic. There are no plastic utensils. The Food Hall, according to online reporting, is “the cooler, hipper cousin” of the Food Court. These trendy, popular, experiential establishments are not just for East Coast or West Coast diners. Middle America is enchanted as well. Cities such as Omaha, NB, Reno, NV, Dunwoody, GA and Cincinnati, OH have Food Halls.  Minneapolis, Kentucky and Pittsburgh have Food Halls. Small towns across America have Food Halls. The Wall Street Journal states that there are 364 Food Halls dotting the American food landscape, with more on the way. A request for articles on Nexis for the last month turned up over 300 stories. The sixth-month request showed 1288 pages of articles.

Even Wegman’s, the very popular American grocery chain, is adapting to the Food Hall concept with its Astor Place, NYC, store. The Astor Place Wegman’s has a Food Hall offering sushi, salads, sandwiches, soups, pizza, wings, hot Asian cuisine and made-to-order and packaged Mediterranean options.   Food Halls are multiplying because Food Halls satisfy a need for self-expression. This is the definition of a market: people with a need. And, Food Halls are a growing need. Data indicate that the Food Halls market will grow to $71.69 in 2 years.

You might not want to participate in extreme sports, yet you may desire adventure. You might not have a passport. You might not want to travel outside your state or your neighborhood. Yet, you might not want to eliminate excitement and adventure from your life. Food is a safe, personally-expressive way in which to satisfy a need for adventure. Food Halls deliver the newest tastes and flavors. Food Halls challenge a diner’s taste buds. Food Halls provide the exotic within one’s own neighborhood.

Additionally, one critical aspect of self-expression is personalization. People want the ability to individualize a brand experience; they want to have it their own way. A Food Hall allows a diner to walk around to create a unique, individualized menu. The combination of a personalized menu curated by local chefs reflecting global tastes and dishes is an extraordinary way in which to optimize the marketing challenge of catering to the contradictory force of globalization, localization and personalization.

Needs-based occasion-driven segmentation shows that Food Halls are more than just a real estate play. Food Halls are a context for satisfying a driving customer need.

barnes & noble brand

Barnes & Noble: Navigating At The Intersection of Global, Local And Personal

One of the most important issues for brand-business leadership today is navigating the intersection of global, local and personal. One brand-business that has found its way in this marketing landscape is Barnes & Noble.

For a long time, being locally relevant was not considered necessary for brand-businesses, except for language and monetary currencies. Ubiquitous, uniform, global brand-business marketing was profitable. Standardization was efficient and effective. Organizationally, power remained in the center.

Things have changed. Today, we live in a highly connected, over-informed, technology-driven world. People have a love-hate relationship with globalization. We appreciate the comfort and reliability of iconic, recognized brands, regardless of geography. Yet, we bemoan the homogenization of products and services. We yearn for authentic, locally-occurring experiences. Globalization sacrifices local experiences on the altar of sameness. We want the safety, security and predictability of global brands. But, we feel that global brands are powerful behemoths that do not understand who we are as individuals.

There is a tension between global and local organizations. It is common to hear phrases such as, “My region is different,” or “I am accountable only for my market, or “I will design and implement plans for my area of responsibility.” The result: a fight against common goals. 

Add to this mix the factor of personalization. Technology allows us to demand experiences that are precisely and intimately tailored to each and every one of us. We desire the highest personalization when it comes to goods and services. 

Our brand-business landscape features the collision of these three forces:

  • Globalization delivering a familiar, consistent, reliable brand experience;
  • Localism delivering a relevant and respectful brand experience; and
  • Personalization delivering a unique branded experience that recognizes and reflects the customer, exclusively designed to meet that customer’s individual needs.

Barnes & Noble, the iconic American bookseller, is managing with excellence at the center of these three colliding forces. The New York Times wrote that Barnes & Noble is overturning a key element of brand management – consistency – by adding local and personal to standardization. 

This is not exactly true. 

Homogenization alone is no longer a desirable characteristic. Even McDonald’s has different menu items in different geographies. In France, there are French cheeses and Actimel, Danone’s probiotic yogurt drink. Barnes & Noble recognizes the consistency of the Barnes & Noble brand promise along with the relevance of localization and the uniqueness of personalization. A winning trifecta.

Under CEO James Daunt, Barnes & Noble is changing the way books in mass market bookstores are sold. He is not throwing out the overarching Barnes & Noble brand-business Brand Promise and Brand Essence. That commonality of a familiar, consistent standard of reliable book buying experience still exists – it is still Barnes & Noble. Consistency is not being dissolved, as The New York Times states. The Barnes & Noble brand core lives. The way that employees deliver that brand core is different… and better.

Each Barnes & Noble store now has the freedom to reflect the interests, tastes and preferences of neighborhood which it services. This affects not just the books that are offered. The addition of local and personal affects store design and store management. 

Reflecting local and personal while maintaining a consistent Brand Promise is not new. IHG’s Hotel Indigo is an example of localization ad personalization. The brand Hotel Indigo stands for branded boutiques reflecting a neighborhood. Hotel Indigo designed its hotels to generate a personal and locally reflective experience.

Mr. Daunt is asking each store’s management to be less mass market and more “my market.” Mr. Daunt is asking each store to behave in a local and personal manner, something only independent bookstores have successfully accomplished. 

One of the most important factors of successful localization and personalization is respect for the store manager. As Mr. Daunt demonstrates, the store manager is the brand manager. As reported in The New York Times, Mr. Daunt believes in local store leadership. “Local managers are given a free hand.” This means the store manager has the freedom, within the framework of the Barnes & Noble brand promise, to design and stock a store that reflects a local, neighborhood experience. After all, who knows the clientele and the neighborhood better than the store manager. The store manager becomes the brand manager who, along with his staff, creates a “dramatically” powerful local and personal experience. Allowing local teams to do what they think is best for their local customers creates “better bookstores.”

If you just want a book, as Mr. Daunt says, “The guys in Seattle will sell you one.” Barnes & Noble provides, “The enjoyment and the social experience of engagement (browsing) with books in a bookstore. That’s our game.”

The rules of brand-business marketing have changed. Here are some new rules to facilitate managing at the intersection of global, local and personal.

Rule #1: Have a Brand Framework. A Brand Framework describes the nonnegotiable boundaries and policies that define a brand’s common, global/national total brand experience. The Brand Framework includes the brand vision, the brand promise, the brand policies and the description of the target customer. The Brand Framework explains how to bring the brand to life by executing within the parameters of defined service and design guidelines, service behaviors, specific brand standards, trademark policy and other non-negotiable items that have to do with people, product, place, price and promotion. 

Brand-business leadership evaluates and activates all action on behalf of the brand against this Framework. It is a dynamic document, which is enriched and refreshed to reflect new learning and to keep the brand relevant.

The Brand Framework is a dynamic, liberating document.  The Brand Framework’s boundaries protect the brand-business core while allowing the freedom to create what is right for the brand in a local/regional environment.

Rule #2: Implement Freedom Within A Framework. Freedom Within a Framework allows for local and personal relevance and differentiation within the brand’s agreed global/national coherence. Freedom Within A Framework means that all of those working on behalf of the brand-business are encouraged to be creative within the boundaries of the Framework in order to attract customers and potential customers while growing customer loyalty. Freedom Within A Framework is all about regional and local creativity. 

Rule #3: The Local Manager is the Ultimate Brand Manager. Local managers make sure that each customer has a great branded experience. Local managers are responsible for ensuring that the brand-business lives up to its promises while creating an individualized, neighborhood experience. Local managers localize and personalize.

  • The local manager knows the customers best.
  • The local manager knows customers’ need and behaviors.
  • The local manager knows customers’ problems and concerns.
  • The manager knows customers’ interests and tastes.
  • The local manager knows the neighborhood. The local manager knows the business community and the potential for building strong local business relationships.
  • The local manager is responsible for local area marketing.
  • The local manager is in charge of local community outreach.

Rule #4: Trust Local/Regional Brand Leadership to Localize and Personalize. Align the organization and build a foundation of trust. Think of this as harmonization: every participant may have different parts to sing, but the customers hear a melody. For many brand-business organizations, trusting local leadership to do the right thing in the right way is minimal. Trusting local leadership is more than an org chart; it is a mindset change.

Rule #5: Allow Local leadership to take accountability for delivering the local brand-business experience.  Mr. Daunt believes in his local store management. He believes that booksellers are special people.

The three forces of globalization, localization and personalization are growing simultaneously. To win, brand-businesses must leverage all three of these powerful energies to their advantage. The world is increasingly connected. But, relevant, local differences and personalized experiences that build brand-business preference cannot be ignored. The brand-business goal is to build strong brand-businesses that are globally/nationally consistent, locally relevant and personally differentiated. Just like Barnes & Noble.

Seven Must-dos For Creating A Brand Value Strategy In the Age of Adjustment

Here is a marketing truth: it does not matter if there is a recession or inflation: the best value wins. Value is a virtue.  But, brand-businesses do not just wake up one day and have value. Brand-businesses must develop and implement a brand-business value strategy. Value is everything.

What is value? Value is customer-perceived. Value is a brand-business’ expected total brand experience (functional, emotional and social benefits) relative to the brand-business’ total costs (money, time and effort) multiplied by trust. Marketing sets price. Customers declare value. 

In 2008, during the last serious economic crisis, The Wall Street Journal ran an article describing how consumers were cutting food expenditures.  The article noted that consumers were trading down to lower-priced items. And, those cans and boxes in the back of the pantry, those staples, were now on the table. 

Fast forward.  Pepsico, home of beverages such as Pepsi and Gatorade and snack foods such as Doritos and Fritos released its July 2023, second quarter earnings. In its analyst call, Pepsico stated, “Consumers are making some adjustments.  We’re seeing consumers shopping in more stores than before. They’re looking for better deals. They’re starting to look for optimization. They’re going to channels that have better perceived value. They’re buying more in Dollar stores or they buy more in mass or in clubs. So, every segment of the consumer is making adjustment.”  Just to be clear, to optimize means “to make the best or most effective use of a condition or situation. In this particular Investor-Relations-speak, optimize means changing behaviors.

C-suite executives tell Wall Street that consumers are recovering. Recovering does not mean wanton spending. Nor does recovering mean buying those C-suite executives’ brands. Recovering means customer adjustment to a new reality. In this Age of Adjustment, consumers are moving from conspicuous consumption to careful consumption; from status conscious shoppers to conscientious shoppers. Increasingly, the purchase decision-making model is: What is it? Why is it? Can I afford it? Is it an affordable value? 

The Department of Commerce reported that prices were slightly lower in August, 2023. But, many consumers are not “jumping for joy.” Prices are still substantially higher than before COVID-19 appeared. For example, Netflix has not only raised prices but eliminated its lowest tier. The average price of a gallon of orange juice in grocery stores is $9.18, as of October 7, 2023, according to The Wall Street Journal.

Consumers are adjusting to affordability. Adjusting to affordability is the new reality. If a brand is affordable, the brand is desirable.  True affordability represents an opportunity for the savvy marketer.

Once again, frugal is becoming fashionable. Frugal is not the same as cheap. Frugal is careful, prudent and economical. People are “eating their leftovers and cooking from scratch.”

This is problematic for brand-businesses. Over the past several years, brand-businesses have raised prices, and then, raised prices again. Brand-businesses have supported these price hikes with the phrases, “Our brands are strong. Consumers are still buying. We must protect margins.”

Due to price increase, Pepsico and other brand-businesses have lower volumes. Revenue growth comes from price increases. The Wall Street Journal commented on Pepsico’s latest (October 2023) earnings call.  Pepsico’s organic volumes were down 2.5% from a year earlier demonstrating that Pepsico’s revenue growth derived from price increases. In the US, Frito-Lay volumes were flat and beverage volumes fell 6%.

The Wall Street Journal stated, “One main concern among investors has been that consumers are exhausted with price increases and are starting to cut back, which makes weak underlying volumes especially worrying.”  Pepsi Chief Financial Officer said there are “… signs of caution among consumers, such as trading down to cheaper items.” Furthermore, Pepsi CFO said, “Sales at convenience stores and food service locations, places where consumers typically cut back first when they hit economic trouble have remained robust, with the latter still growing by double digits.”

It is not just Pepsico. Its rival Coca-Cola stated in its recent earnings call that Coca-Cola sales were flat. Coca-Cola explained: “We have seen some willingness to switch to private label brands in certain categories. Across the sector, consumers are increasingly cost-conscious. They’re looking for value and stocking up on items on sale.”

Kellogg’s, at the time of its spin-off of cereals into a stand-alone company, indicated that consumers were buying more private label cereal brands as some boxes of brand-name cereals were priced at $8. The CEO of Kellanova, the Kellogg’s cereal spin-off, told investors not to worry. Customers will become used to higher prices. Sales volumes will increase. This “sticker shock” will dissipate.

Procter & Gamble just beat Wall Street’s expectations. However, as CNBC points out, P&G’s volume fell for the sixth consecutive quarter. P&G has “consistently raised prices (over the past 2 years), causing some consumers to choose private label alternatives.” Now, CNBC states that the volume declines are less than the previous year. However, P&G’s baby-feminine-family care segment experienced a 3% fall in volume. P7G’s grooming segment experienced a 2% volume decline. P&G’s fabric and home care segment experienced a 1% volume drop. 

Same with Nestlé: organic growth driven by price increases.

Investors want brand-businesses to focus on volume growth. Investors believe the customer has become weary of price hikes. Investors are shining a spotlight on a major, endemic, brand-business concern. Brand-businesses confuse value tactics and value strategy.

For example, 

  • Reducing deal-focused messaging to less than 20% of expenditures is a strategy 
  • An Every Day Low Price is a strategy
  • A whole range of offers perceived as a best value is a strategy
  • Engineering value into a brand is a strategy

But,

  • Short-term price promotion is a tactic
  • Special occasion pricing is a tactic
  • Continuous price increases are a tactic
  • Smaller packages at the same price is a tactic

Brand-businesses must create a brand-value strategy. This is not a calendar. A calendar prioritizes tactics. A brand-value strategy is a plan. It is a plan to create trustworthy brand value.

A value strategy affects R&D, not just the marketing. Brand-businesses must engineer value into the product. Example: Whole Foods 365. A brand-value strategy is global or national. Tactics are local. Tactics are how brand-businesses execute a strategy locally. 

A goal of a brand-value strategy is “amazing value.” Amazing value is not offering a lot for the money. This is brand-value tonnage.  Amazing quality is a great brand at a great price. A great brand with a price that will entice. Staggering value is unique, high quality at a price that amazes the customer.

Here are seven must-do’s for creating a brand-value strategy:

  1. Have a unified view of “amazing value.” Everyone in the organization must share the same understanding of what amazing value is at the enterprise. Alignment is critical.
  2. Have a discipline for pricing, including a focus on price elasticity.
  3. Avoid the obsession on margins. Of course, margins are important. But, obsessively focusing on margins marginalizes the brand-business.
  4. Create branded value. Creating extraordinary value is being responsible. Engineer value into the brand. Engineer in the brand its unique, high quality and offer that brand at a great price. The customer should say, “Wow. I did not think I could buy this brand at this price.”
  5. Create brand-value that excites. Remember, the price must entice. What is the powerful price point relative to alternatives? Move from fair value to amazing value.
  6. Value, not price, must be a consistent part of the brand’s Brand Promise. 
  7. Focus on permission marketing. Give consumers permission to buy the brand-businesses products. Convenience? Quality? Wholesomeness? Uniqueness? Service? Price?
  8. Avoid constant promotions. Constant promotions create deal loyal rather than brand loyal customers. As Pepsico learned. After serious and continuous promotions on bottled water, Pepsico saw the promotions drive volume. But, these gains disappeared once the promotions stopped. According to The Wall Street Journal, grocery store promotions are proliferating. “Food makers are responding with deals. But, even with these deals, consumers are paying “more than one third more” than before COVID-19.

In the Age of Adjustment, value is the eye of the storm. This is where it is calm. Achieving the right price and becoming the best value keeps a brand-business ready to weather anything.  And, not just for today. but for the times ahead.

It is not a cliché: the best value wins.

Price hikes to save margins and to diminish effects of inflation weaken customer demand. Having a strategy to create branded value that excites at prices that entice is the way to get through the typhoon of tight times. 

Levi Brand

Levi Strauss & Co. Has An Opportunity To Break Its Brand-Business Behaviors

It is always distressing when an iconic, cultural brand-business declines. It is especially distressing when the brand-business is an ingrained part of American history. But, this seems to be the case with Levi’s. 

Levi Strauss & Co.’s latest earnings call is depressing. Yes, the brand is globally recognized as an authority in jeans. But, the brand-business missed its quarterly revenue estimates. And, Levi Strauss & Co. cut its guidance. So, shares traded lower.

However, the saddest part of Levi Strauss & Co.’s earnings call is the reasons given for the decline. Many of these reasons are self-inflicted. Unfortunately, as with many self-inflicted troubles, Levi Strauss & Co. executives blamed the consumer, the economy, the big box stores and the weather.

Levi Strauss & Co. current CEO indicated that the brand is strong. Incoming CEO, Michelle Gass, ex-CEO of Kohl’s, praised the brand as “… transcending cultures and demographics and beloved across markets.”  As for the future, Ms. Gass stated that her key areas of focus would be 1) International, 2) becoming a denim lifestyle brand and 3) transforming the brand-business into a best-in-class direct-to-consumer organization.

Whatever Levi Strauss & Co.’s strategies are, fixing some inherent blocks to success is necessary.

Reuters, the global news service, reported on Levi Strauss & Co.’s results.  Here are four tendencies for trouble appearing in Reuters article. Levi Struss & Co. must address these troubles.

  1. Believing your customer is “the value-conscious customer. This is a problem. There is no “value customer” segment. All customers are value conscious. Thinking there is a specific market segment that owns value consciousness is a massive marketing mistake. Every shopper wants a good value. The buyer of 7 for All Mankind Jeans, the buyer of Citizens of Humanity jeans and the buyer of Levi’s jeans all want a good value. The driver who purchased a Mercedes and the driver who purchased a Toyota both believe they bought a good value. Brand-businesses must not focus merely on price when discussing value. To be the best value, brands cannot compete on price alone. Brand-businesses cannot cost manage their way to enduring profitable growth. Brand-business value is more than low price. Value is what you receive for what you pay. Customers assess value by their expectation of a total brand experience (functional, emotional and social benefits) relative to costs (price, time and effort).
  1. Losing focus on the customers who love you. All brands need both current and new customers. But, focusing on the customers you have at the expense of those who may or may not just like you, is a formula for failure. Core customers are valuable. There are reams of data to support this statement. Losing even a small percentage of core customers can create a disproportionate amount of lost income for brand. It is common practice when a brand-business is suffering in the US to seek growth internationally. Growing a global customer base is great as long as the core base is not ignored. Adore the core.
  1. Deal loyalty is not the same as brand loyalty. According to Reuters, Levi Strauss & Co. used “hefty promotions” that affected its performance. These promotions affected sales at Walmart and Target. Reuters reported that Levi’s prices of its Signature and Denizen brands started at just a bit lower than $30. Analysts are worried that additional promotions and price cuts might “pressure margins.” Recently, Levi’s cut prices of around six or so “price sensitive items” sold by retailers to “jumpstart” sales. Reuters reported that in July, Levi’s cut prices on “select” pairs of jeans by $10. (This left these select jeans still $10 more than the cost pre-COVID.) Levi’s current CEO indicated that Levi’s would not be “aggressive” with promotions but would be “competitive.” When a brand-business resorts to deals, the brand-business generates deal loyal customers. Deal loyal customers go where there are deals. When a competitor has better deals than your brand, you lose. A brand-business must communicate that that it is a great brand at a great price. For example, T. J. Maxx communicates, “ Where you can always afford to be you to the Maxx.”
  1. Believing your brand can be a lifestyle brand. Not every brand can be a lifestyle brand. A lifestyle brand is an expression of the values, hopes, interests, attitudes or opinions of a group. A lifestyle brand creates a culture. Lifestyle brands want to create a way of life for a specific group of people. A lifestyle brand describes an emotional bond with its customers. Members of a particular lifestyle believe that the lifestyle reinforces who they are and who they can be.  Soon-to-be CEO Ms. Gass wants Levi’s to be a lifestyle brand. This is what Ms. Gass calls, “head-to-toe denim dressing.” Or, the “true apparel lifestyle brand.” The idea is that Levi’s image as a great denim brand can be expanded and transferred into being a true apparel brand lifestyle. Investors have serious reservations about the expansion strategy into skirts, dresses and other women’s clothing. A lifestyle brand must be more than an array of clothing. For example, clothing brand Free People’s mission is: “Lifestyle merchandising is our business and our passion. The goal for our brands is to build a strong emotional bond with the customer. To do this we must build lifestyle environments that appeal emotionally, and offer fashion correct products on a timely basis. Free People was founded on the values and principles of inclusivity and cultural understanding. Every day we strive to be better, to better serve our customer and, in turn, build a better community.”  What is the Levi’s lifestyle? Is it connected to its Iconic, Americana authenticity? Levi’s has a deep provenance. What is the expression of the values, hopes, interests, attitudes or opinions described by head-to-toe denim?

Even big, iconic brands can fall into trouble. Some people believe that there is a natural brand-business cycle from birth to growth, to maturation, to decline, to death. This is wrong. Brands do not inevitably die. Brand-businesses can live forever. Brands get into trouble due to self-inflicted actions of their owners and leaders. Levi Strauss & Co. has work to do in order to reinvigorate itself for success.

Selling The Category And Not The Brand

Selling the category rather than selling your brand is brand-business mismanagement. Selling the category means the brand-business leadership does not know what is relevant and differentiated about its brand. Selling the category when your brand does not know what is its relevant differentiation plays into competitors’ hands.

From 1981 to 1983, Campbell Soup’s advertising campaign was, “Soup is good food.” Consumers agreed. But, soup buyers did not purchase Campbell’s. Consumers purchased competitive brand Progresso Soup. Campbell’s campaign reminded consumers about the benefits of eating soup.  The campaign did not provide the benefits of eating Campbell Soup.

Once, Kellogg’s ran a campaign about the benefits of breakfast. Again, consumers agreed. Kellogg’s reminded consumers of the benefits of breakfast. Consumers did not choose Kellogg’s products, however. Consumers went to Starbucks and McDonald’s. Kellogg’s did not remind consumers of the benefits of eating Kellogg’s cereals. Letting people know that breakfast is an important meal is great for overall healthfulness. But, that does not mean we will all reach for a box of Frosted Flakes or Froot Loops or Kellogg’s Brand Buds.

The latest Kellogg’s data show that Kellogg’s cereal business is struggling again. So much so, that Kellogg’s has just spun off the cereal business. Now, management can focus on the more profitable and exciting snack foods like Cheez-its and other fun every day foods, like Pop Tarts. W. R. Kellogg must be turning over in his grave.

Selling the category means selling the category benefits. Selling the category means not selling the benefits of your brand in that category. Category benefits are the “green fees” for a brand. Category benefits allow a brand to compete. But, category benefits do not communicate a brand’s relevant differentiators. You may persuade consumers with your views on the category. But, consumers are not necessarily persuaded to use your brand, even when flooded by advertisements.

Which brings us to Peloton. 

For some reason, Peloton appears to avoid communicating its benefits to customers. This avoidance has been ongoing. In the past, the communications were all about price. But, now, it is different. The new campaign features instructors. There has been a lot of hype around this new Peloton campaign that includes Peloton instructors. Yes, the instructors are compelling individuals. But, having an instructor telling customers that they should get off of their butts, listen to their inner voice and move may not sell Peloton memberships or hardware. In fact, Bowflex, another indoor fitness training offering, communicates the exact same message as Peloton in its current TV advertising. Bowflex states: the best you is inside, listen to that inner voice and move.

Selling the basics of the in-home exercise category may sell the category. But, as with Campbell’s and Kellogg’s, selling the category does not mean selling your brand in that category.  Why should I select Peloton over Bowflex? Is it because the instructor tells you that you can do this?

Peloton’s selling of indoor exercise is a good thing. Selling movement is a good thing. But, what makes Peloton movement different?

A noted biochemist who focused on living well once said, “If you eat it and you do not move it, you sit on it.” NPR commented on a study indicates that for those sitting at a desk, 5 minutes of movement every 30 minutes reduces your blood sugar, your pressure and makes you feel better. NPR is partnering with Columbia University on another movement study. Movement is good.

But, is movement the reason to buy into Peloton? Athletic shoes can offer movement as a benefit, too. So can free weights or NordicTrack. What are the benefits of movement? It is mystifying that Peloton does not appear to want us to know why we should move with Peloton rather than from the array of competitive offerings of in-home fitness. There are many functional, emotional and social benefits worth telling.

Dollar General (not Dollar Store), the retailer focused on serving the financially and geographically underserved, promotes its brand using benefits. In a recent interview with Deloitte, the global services group, Dollar General CMO said, “Our overall goal remains the same: to position the brand as the most convenient option to stretch customers’ dollars.” 

Dollar General communicates how Dollar General fits into the retail landscape. Dollar General communicates that it is a small-box discount retailer. Dollar General “… drives purchase consideration by telling the story of the categories we carry, the national brands on our shelves and the low prices we offer.” Additionally, Dollar General saves its customers money and time because those customers do not have to travel to the grocery or big-box store that can be 20, 30 or even 45 minutes away.” Dollar General can be the store for fill-in trips and for fuller fill-in trips due its array of choices.

For most of its stores, Dollar General operates in communities of 20,000 or less inhabitants. Sometimes Dollar General is the only store in town. Dollar General knows that connecting to its core mission is essential. 

Peloton’s communications have not connected with Peloton’s core mission. A brand must be in sync with its desired spirit. Mission statements express the brand’s intent, its purpose. Peloton’s prospectus offered the following: “Peloton uses technology and design to connect the world through fitness, empowering people to be the best version of themselves anywhere, anytime.” Clearly the instructors are aligned. You understand this if you actually take classes. But, for a prospective customer, the brand’s purposeful message is unstated. There are probably a lot of people who would appreciate the opportunity to participate in Peloton’s world view. 

Describing Peloton’s business model, a Harvard Business Review article concluded that even though participants are in different locations, participants exercise “…with a virtual community of peers and instructors” and “… the brand’s meaning extends beyond what they would experience with the bike alone.” 

This is true. But in order to increase owners/subscribers, Peloton must share its meaning with prime prospects. Peloton’s meaning has to be meaningful to both users and like-minded others. Right now, Peloton’s uplifting, positive, you-can-do-it message is not communicated to the uninitiated. It is a best-kept secret.

The Resurgence of Brand Equity: It May Be 1988 All Over Again

Something interesting is happening in brand management. Increasingly, we read about brand-businesses that are focusing on Brand Equity. It has been decades since the topic of Brand Equity was mentioned in press releases and earnings calls. Brand Equity is more than a phrase; it is an investment in enduring profitable growth of the brand-business.

That is not to say that many research firms have been making money on measuring Brand Equity for decades. However, as a brand-business driving goal, Brand Equity has been supplanted by the goals of financial engineers and private equity firms. With the quick profits from financial engineering, Wall Street has not been focused on Brand Equity since 1988 when a flurry of brand-business mega-deals were all the rage.  Kohlberg Kravis Roberts paid $25 billion for RJR Nabisco (more than double its book value); Philip Morris bought Kraft for $12.9 billion (four times book value) and Nestlé spent $4.5 billion for Rowntree (five times book value), according to The Economist. 

In 1988, Brand Equity was the driver for these acquisitions. Brand Equity is simply the customer’s perception of the financial worth of the brand identity. Brand Equity is the difference in the financial value of a branded good or service compared to an equivalent good or service without the brand identity.

A brand’s Brand Equity could be segued to a corporate balance sheet as Goodwill. In accounting, Goodwill is an asset defined as the excess of the price paid for a brand over its fair market value. A strong brand has increased Goodwill. And, that is what occurred.

And so, the brand-business world was all good. All good, until 1993. 1993 was the year that brand-business owners began to fear for their brand-businesses and their Brand Equity.

1993 was the year of Marlboro Friday. Marlboro Friday, April 2, 1993, was the day that Phillip Morris, the tobacco company, announced a drastic cut in the price of Marlboro cigarettes to fight off the generic brands that were eating into its market share. As a result, the company’s stock tanked, wiping out $13.4 billion off Philip Morris’s stock market value in a single day.  Investors also dumped shares in other consumer-goods firms. RJR, P&G, Coca-Cola, PepsiCo, Quaker Oats and Gillette were all affected as Wall Street became convinced that the extraordinary profit growth once delivered by brand-businesses was a thing of the past. All that Goodwill was wiped away from those balance sheets.

Marlboro, a cigarette brand reflecting American West individualism, freedom and pride, supported by advertising featuring the Marlboro cowboy, took such a financial hit that Wall Street said “… the Marlboro man fell off his horse.” It may be difficult to believe now, putting the negative health effects of smoking aside, but Marlboro was not only a great brand-business, its image with its associated values was extremely appealing. 

At the time, Marlboro epitomized the crisis brand-businesses were undergoing due to high prices, an economic downturn and retail own-brands. Shoppers became more skeptical. And, increasingly, shoppers saw little differentiation between name brands and retail generics.

Brand-businesses did bounce back. It took only two years for Marlboro to completely recoup its Marlboro Friday losses.  Observers indicated this recovery was to the strength of Philip Morris’ brands and its customers’ brand loyalty. Additionally, the cost of manufacturing a cigarette is miniscule relative to the cost of the purchase. Philip Morris was able to survive. Packaged goods brand-businesses started to focus on building the brand rather than deals.

Prior to the COVID-19 crisis, brand-businesses were battered by financial engineers who favored short-term profits to satisfy investors and Wall Street. Financial engineering, the catchall phrase for extreme cost cutting including job losses, debt accumulation, share buy-backs, increased dividends, forced spinoffs, and money siphoned into the pockets of investors rather than invested into businesses, can damage brands. Kraft Heinz with its stable of cherished icons (Heinz ketchup, Kraft macaroni and cheese, Oscar Meyer hot dogs); British Airways; Toys R’ Us, Sears and others have focused on one priority: build shareholder value at the expense of customer value. 

Financial engineers see strong Brand Equity as an opportunity to extract value rather than extend brand strength.  This is a form of brand extortion. Proponents of financial engineering take brand loyalty for granted. Investments in continuous improvement and innovation are decreased as dividends and share buybacks are increased. Monies are siphoned from R&D, customer insight research, service and increased. Monies are siphoned from R&D, customer insight research, service and support and marketing resources.

Remarkably, there is a noticeable positive trend underway. The trend is brand-business owners realizing the financial benefits of building Brand Equity rather than focusing on short-term detrimental actions of financial engineers, A recent search on Nexis for just one week of reporting turned up 645 mentions of Brand Equity.

One example is Olive Garden. A recent review of Olive Garden’s success mentions the brand-business’ focus on reducing price promotions while investing in brand equity. Olive Garden owner, Darden Restaurants’ CEO and president said, “Whatever we do is going to elevate brand equity. We’re not going to do things that are going to impact us in the long-term just for the short-term. We are focused on providing great value to our guests, but doing so in a way that drives profitable sales growth.”

Another example is Constellation Brands’ Modelo beer. Observers recognize that Modelo has been extremely “patient” with brand building efforts over many years giving Modelo a differentiated brand equity.

In Wayfair’s recent earnings call, its CEO made it clear that Wayfair’s long-term focus on building brand loyalty has been paying off. Brand loyal customers are extremely valuable.

Smucker just bought Hostess for billions of dollars after its private equity owners spent years reviving the Hostess Brand Equity.

Wall Street seems to want streaming services to focus on customer loyalty rather than behaving like scavengers for new customers. Constant chasing of new customers at the expense of current customers has not been profitable.

On the other hand, brand-business H&M, the fast-fashion retailer currently pursues a strategy of cost-cutting and buybacks.

Brand-businesses have cycled through some bad times. Financial engineering destroyed some of our most iconic brands. COVID-19 took out a few more, like Bed, Bath & Beyond. Generating high quality revenue growth leading to enduring profitable growth must always be the goal. A renewed focus on building Brand Equity is welcome. Let’s hope that brand leadership continues the trend and that Wall Street rewards those brand-businesses that choose Brand Equity building.

Cracker Barrel And Making Demographics Matter

Cracker Barrel And Making Demographics Matter

Not even COVID-19 changed the trajectory of demographics. And, although data in The New York Times indicates that global population growth may end in 2080’s, we are currently living in a world that is getting older and younger at the same time. Demographics are a marketing reality. And, brands, such as iconic Southern fare restaurant Cracker Barrel, now face a strategic conundrum. 

The older and younger dichotomy is due to the longevity of Boomers (born between 1946 and 1964) at one end of the spectrum and the cohort of Millennials (born between 1982 and 1996) and Gen Z (born between 1997 and 2012) at the other. It used to be that the demographic charts had one big bulge: the Boomers. This bulge just moved up the age range as it matured. Now, with the addition of the Millennials, the demographic charts look like a two-humped camel—a two-humped camel that will be with us for decades. The Boomer generation has longevity. The Millennial generation is just as big. Younger Gen Z already has impact. 

It is popular in the current marketing environment to focus primarily on Millennials and Gen Z and the even younger demographic groups (Gen Alpha born starting in 2010s). For example, this is what Meta is doing with its AI bots. That said, network television is seeing gold in the silver-haired market. But, for many marketers, over the next decade, brands will need to be relevant to two huge groups of people who have different values and view the world through different lenses. 

The current two-humped demographic reality – lots of older people and lots of younger people – presents opportunities for brands. Boomers have discretionary income. Millennials and subsequent younger cohorts rule the social media environment. These two demographic forces not only change the way we communicate and relate to one another. The older-younger landscape changes the ways in which brand-businesses must operate.

Two massive age cohorts with different worldviews, different values and different complexities pose an interesting conundrum for brands: which of these age groups should be targeted? What will a brand need to do differently? How can we attract and maintain both cohorts? These are interesting challenges not just in terms of product, service, store design and utility, but also in terms of communications, including language and package design. 

Because the world is getting older and younger at the same time, brand-businesses must decide what their strategies will be to address these two cohorts. 

This is the conundrum that Cracker Barrel must solve.

Cracker Barrel, born in 1969, is known for its Southern country store theme and menu. Its advertising communicates freshly made food at a fair price with a touch of care. This refers to over 20 meals for under $12. Its tag line is Take care now

Cracker Barrel describes itself as: “Cracker Barrel Old Country Store provides a friendly home-away-from-home in its old country stores and restaurants. Guests are cared for like family while relaxing and enjoying real home-style food and shopping that’s surprisingly unique, genuinely fun and reminiscent of America’s country heritage…all at a fair price. The restaurant serves up delicious, home-style country food such as meatloaf and homemade chicken n’ dumplins (sic) as well as its made from scratch biscuits using an old family recipe. The authentic old country retail store is fun to shop and offers unique gifts and self-indulgences.”

Originally, Cracker Barrell was seen as a way to sell gasoline, as its founder worked with Shell Oil. Over time, Cracker Barrell opened stores without gasoline pumps. The menu broadened. And, so did its array of “gifts.”

According to The Wall Street Journal, “Cracker Barrel Is Stuck in a Generational Gap.”  Apparently, Cracker Barrel’s core customers make it difficult for Cracker Barrel to attract younger guests. This will need to change.

About 43% of Cracker Barrell guests are 55 years old or older. A lot of the sales within this core group are “tchotchkes” such as wooden puzzles (approximately 300,000 a year) and rocking chairs (approximately 70,000 a year).

Efforts to make inroads with younger customers have strained Cracker Barrel results, affecting comparable store sales and the brand-business’ stock price (down at least a third in the past half year).

Many casual dining establishments have a laser-focus on younger consumers. But, for Cracker Barrel that is probably not the best path to high quality revenue growth. Cracker Barrel needs to design a strategy that maintains its bonds with core customers while is attractive to new customers.

From a brand-business standpoint, there are two important factors.

First, it is possible to address more than one target audience without alienating another.

During the 2004 McDonald’s turnaround, McDonald’s adopted multi-segment, multi-dimensional marketing identifying three targets with different needs:

  • Great tasting food and fun for kids
  • Healthful eating for young adult moms
  • Satisfying food for young adult males

The beer brand Modelo uses multi-segment marketing. In a report from The Wall Street Journal, Modelo focuses on its Hispanic core base and a non-Hispanic audience. “The brand strives to ensure its marketing appeals to both its core Hispanic and growing non-Hispanic customer bases, rigorously testing its ads with both groups to avoid alienating either one…. And, it (Modelo) spends heavily to run those winning ads.” 

A brand like Cracker Barrel can address multiple segments of customers. Cracker Barrel can be a multi-segment brand. It is critical to recognize that people are multi-dimensional, not uni-dimensional. To be relevant, Cracker Barrel must be also be multidimensional rather than uni-dimensional.

A multi-segmented, multi-dimensional approach has important strategic implications for communications, media, product development, pricing, promotion, restaurant design, packaging and so on. For example, the increased use of non-traditional media to communicate multi-dimensional brand messages to our multi-segmented markets.

Therefore, second, Cracker Barrell should employ a Brand Journalism approach when communicating with its segments. A multi-segmented, multi-dimensional approach has important strategic implications for communications, media, product development, pricing, promotion, restaurant design, packaging, and so on. For example, we are using non-traditional media more and more to communicate our multi-dimensional brand message to our multi-segmented markets.

Brand Journalism means telling the many facets of the Cracker Barrel brand story … and yet you know it is Cracker Barrel.

No single communication alone tells the whole Cracker Barrel brand story. Each communication provides a different insight into the Cracker Barrel brand-business. 

Modelo manages messaging to multiple audiences using advertising that appeals to both segments. Attracting and maintaining both Hispanic and non-Hispanic customers are key to Modelo brand-business-building. Modelo shows its advertising to its Hispanic core “… to confirm that none of its messaging was straying away from the people who had made it (Modelo) what it was.” 

With Brand Journalism, communications create a brand magazine, with each article a different story. Each edition is different: different subjects, different topics, different messages, all coming together in a dynamic, interesting, relevant; ever-evolving Cracker Barrel brand-business magazine.

Brand leaders are the editors of this brand magazine. As editors, brand leaders look not only at the subject matter, but also the style. For example, an article on Bruce Springsteen for the New Yorker must be written in a very different style than if it were written for Rolling Stone.

Cracker Barrell does not have to abandon its core customer group. And, Cracker Barrell should not do this anyway: core customers are valuable. Cracker Barrel must continue to adore its core. This does not mean that Cracker Barrel cannot focus on new customers as well. Every brand must both keep customers and attract new customers, just not at the sake of alienating the core base. Multi-segment marketing using a Brand Journalism approach to communications is a good place to start.

Smucker, Hostess And Occasion Segmentation

Market segmentation is fundamental to marketing. Segmentation is evergreen when it comes to building and managing brands.

J.M. Smucker, purveyor of jams, jellies, Jif peanut butter, Folgers coffee, Uncrustables, Carnation evaporated milk and pet food items including Milk Bone dog biscuits and Meow Mix, has just purchase Hostess brand snack foods. Hostess makes Twinkies, Ding Dongs, Ho Hos and Donettes.  

Wall Street does not appear to be happy with this purchase, as Smucker shares dropped 7% after the announcement. Wall Street frets that the frenzy around new weight loss drugs and the ongoing focus on “healthy” snacks makes the Smucker purchase questionable, especially at the price paid: $5.6 billion according to Bloomberg/$4.6 billion according to The Wall Street Journal with the assumption of $900 million of debt. Additionally, Wall Street worries that the Hostess portfolio of brands is “mature” and only sold domestically.

There are also the two Hostess bankruptcies – 2004 and 2012. Although Hostess revitalized around the iconic Twinkies brand, there are concerns about Hostess vibrancy.

Smucker, like Campbell Soup Company (owner of Pepperidge Farm and Snyder of Hanover snack brands), sees a rosy future in sweet snack food items. Data show “indulgent snacking” saw a 20% faster growth than healthy, snack-food alternatives. Smucker also believes that the Hostess purchase will “strengthen” Smucker’s power in grocery store center aisles. Observers agree that people are snacking more often. The Wall Street Journal points out that 70% of consumers eat at least two snacks a day. 

While the jury is out on how Smucker will leverage the synergies of Hostess with the existing Smucker portfolio, there is an important factor that the business press is glossing over. If Smucker can optimize this factor, the future of the Hostess purchase may, in fact, twinkle.  That factor is occasion segmentation.

Occasion segmentation recognizes that people have different needs in different occasions. As situations change, sometimes so do the benefits desired by consumers. A simple occasion segmentation is by daypart. Fast food chains see differences by breakfast, lunch, dinner, late night and all night. Beverages may segment by occasions such as start the day, between meals, with meals, alone, with kids, with friends, with business associates and in the evening.

For example, you might drink one type of beer at a sporting event and another type of beer when you are dining with a client and another type of beer when you are at home hanging out with friends. The original Starbucks segmentation focused on four occasions: Emergency (as in “I must have this coffee right now to wake up.”), At home, Coffee Break and Café Society.

Levi Strauss ran into trouble because it did not move fast enough when the yoga clothes craze began. People wanted comfortable, stylish clothes for yoga but also wanted comfortable, body-revealing stylish outfits for wearing to the yoga class, after the yoga class and on weekends doing errands. Levi Strauss discovered that casual, chic, colorful yoga clothes were relevant wear for more occasions than yoga class. Yoga clothes were relevant for going to the bank, driving the car-pool car, having lunch with friends, taking strolls with family and participating in gym classes. Most of these occasions had been blue jeans occasions. 

With snack foods, there are multiple eating occasions, including new dayparts as the lines between main meals and snacks blur. Barron’s, the financial newspaper, commenting on the Hostess purchase, wrote, “Consumers’ hunger for snacks is boosting cookie and candy makers as younger generations use them to substitute for full meals, according to research firm Circana Group. Snack sales were up 11% last year to $181 billion, the firm said.”

Grazing occasions have changed the way we eat as well. As has the shifting line between work and leisure, especially with work-from-home situations. 

Carried food occasions such as bringing lunch to work, lunchboxes at schools or hand-held snack foods such as granola and energy bars or confectionary have also made occasions more dynamic. In fact, according to an in-depth account of the Smucker purchase of Hostess, The Wall Street Journal points out that many Hostess snack foods are designed to be “eaten on the go” or “to squeeze into a lunchbox.”

What we eat at home relative to what we eat out of home are different. For example, putting Halloween aside, confectionary items for at home-consumption tend to be bought as bagged rather than individual. 

Smucker CEO, Mark Smucker agrees with the expansion of occasions. Mr. Smucker indicated that having Hostess in the Smucker portfolio would help Smucker reach people during new dayparts “beyond when they might reach for Uncrustables or Jif squeeze peanut butter.” Hostess recognizes that sometimes customer want a health snack for a specific dietary occasion. But, there are many times that customers want a snack that is designed for a treat occasion. Hostess data indicate that customers increasingly integrate healthier snacks and sweet, indulgent treats into their diets.

Mr. Smucker is not alone. Occasion segmentation is on the mind of Popeye’s president of US and Canada. In a discussion with Bloomberg, Sami Siddiqui stated that the average Popeye’s customer stopped by a Popeye’s restaurant only 3 times a year. At McDonald’s the average customer stops by 18 times a year. Mr. Siddiqui said that people talk about Popeye’s as a special treat occasion. In fast food, special treat can be a problem. The goal for Popeye’s is to become “an everyday occasion.”

Signet, the owner of Zale’s, Kay’s and Jared’s jewelry stores, is also facing issues with changing variations of occasion segmentation. Apparently, Valentine’s Day and anniversaries are now not as significant in jewelry purchasing occasions as are experiences, homemade items or dinners. According to Bloomberg, occasions such as receiving a raise or a promotion or a bonus leading to a jewelry purchase have increased. How people shop in bridal occasions has changed as well. Bridal is no longer a solely in-store experience. Shopping online for engagement rings and other bridal jewelry is growing. Signet told investors that it tracks “45 milestone occasions” in a couple’s life, each one of which is potentially a jewelry-buying occasion. 

In its IPO filing, Instacart indicates that it is pursuing an array of occasions other than home delivery of groceries. Apparently, Instacart is looking into catering, stocking food for small- and midsize businesses like preschools and corporate offices and delivering food and nutritional programs through hospitals, medical providers and insurers.

Of course, knowing who is the customer and what are the customer’s needs in a given occasion are critically important. But, occasion-driven segmentation will be key for snack food innovation and growth. Wall Street should understand the marketing implications. Smucker understands.