Cracker Barrel is enduring a public relations crisis, but contrary to what some claim, it’s not about “going woke.”
Unlike Bud Light or Target, whose recent controversies were deeply enmeshed in cultural politics, Cracker Barrel’s struggles derive simply from a management team that misunderstood what makes their brand beloved.
The company’s real blunder stems not from political alignment, but from chasing trends and ignoring its core customers.
Corporate history is littered with missteps like this. Forty years ago, Coca-Cola famously launched “New Coke” to mimic Pepsi’s sweetness. They believed taste tests were the key to winning back market share.
The backlash was immediate and fierce — consumers rejected the change, prompting a quick return to “Coca-Cola Classic.”
The lesson: A brand’s core identity, and what its loyalists cherish, matters more than keeping up with the competition.
Cracker Barrel now finds itself in a similar position. For decades, the brand has sold more than food; it has delivered memories, comfort, nostalgia and tradition. With its rustic décor and welcoming service, Cracker Barrel evokes past eras when people gathered around a fallen barrel to share meals and stories.
Management, focused on reversing a years-long slide in customer traffic, looked outward instead of inward. Rather than listen to long-tenured diners, they hired an “innovative” CEO from the fast-food sector, betting that a massive rebrand would attract younger guests.
Changes included renovations, new menus and — most contentious of all — a new logo that stripped away the brand’s signature imagery. Instead of revitalizing the business, these changes sparked outrage. Loyal, older customers felt abandoned by a company that seemed to value trendiness over tradition.
Meanwhile, attempts to attract younger diners fell flat, as newer generations didn’t have the same emotional attachment to the restaurant. In chasing a market who never loved them, Cracker Barrel managed to alienate those who did.
Some shareholders, such as major investor Sardar Biglari, urged caution. Biglari called the renovations “folly,” reminding all that “heritage is what got Cracker Barrel this far.”
But management pressed forward, rolling out expensive redesigns and changes at dozens of locations.
Negative feedback poured in — from social media, customers, and the financial community. Stock prices slumped, and the brand faced ridicule, with critics decrying its “whitewashed” and stark new look.
Meanwhile, partisan commentators accused the company of a “woke” agenda.
In reality, the evidence points not to cultural politics but to simple mismanagement: leadership failed to appreciate the emotional and cultural meaning of the Cracker Barrel experience.
A disconnect between corporate leadership and the front lines made matters worse. Cracker Barrel’s board, full of new members with little company history, apparently lacked real understanding of both the brand’s ethos and its loyal following.
Unlike some best-in-class companies that ask executives to work on the ground — such as McDonald’s Founders Day — Cracker Barrel’s leaders appeared distant from customers’ actual experiences.
Perhaps the largest error was the brand’s defensive posture. Instead of quickly owning the mistake, Cracker Barrel doubled down, issuing corporate statements that failed to address genuine concerns.
Eventually, mounting pressure forced a partial reversal of some unpopular changes, including a hasty restoration of the old logo and a halt on restaurant remodels. But by then, the damage had been done: leaders seemed reactive and disconnected, rather than confident and transparent.
Cracker Barrel isn’t alone in this predicament. Bud Light’s poorly conceived campaign and Target’s abrupt reversal of diversity commitments both resulted in lost trust and lasting sales declines.
The lesson from each debacle: Know your audience and don’t swerve from your core values for the sake of fleeting relevance.
The path forward is not easy, but it is clear. Cracker Barrel’s mission should be restoring trust and honoring what made the brand special.
This means true listening — with humility — to loyal customers and shareholders. It means transparency from the CEO and the board, and a recognition that authenticity and tradition are not liabilities but assets.
Efforts to reengage the core audience should center on open communication, a return to classic branding and a renewed focus on the “secret sauce” of comfort, familiarity and community.
Investments should aim to enhance — not erase — what longtime guests already love. It’s easier to keep an existing customer than win a new one.
Cracker Barrel’s competitors will always beckon with new ideas. But the company’s future success rests on confidence in its own story and values. When brands lose sight of their heart, the market notices.
The tremors caused by this marketing blunder are real, and Cracker Barrel’s recovery may be slow. But with ownership of its mistakes, a willingness to learn and genuine respect for its roots, Cracker Barrel can bring its brand back home.
Let’s hope the right people are finally listening.
O.C. Ferrell is the James T. Pursell, Sr. Eminent Scholar in Ethics at Auburn University’s Harbert College of Business and former president of the Academic Council of the American Marketing Association and the Academy of Marketing Science. Linda Ferrell is the Globe Life Professor of Marketing at Auburn University’s Harbert College of Business and a former president of the Academy of Marketing Science. She serves on the board of Responsible Research in Business and Management.
