Domino’s, the once-proud leader of delivery pizza chains, is now introducing a line of toasted submarine sandwiches.  McDonald’s now offers McCafe drinks in vanilla latte, cappuccino and mocha.  What’s next?  Will Quizno’s add pizza to their menu?  Will Starbucks start serving burgers?

This happens all too often. Far be it for me to question the wisdom of the high-paid executives at McDonlad’s, but these moves will only serve to weaken their brands over time. Brands are strong because people instantly know what they stand for.  When you want a cup of coffee, what brand comes to mind?

McDonald’s and Domino’s are huge companies trying to grow market share.  My point isn’t to criticize them, but to offer a lesson for companies for whom the brand is still important.  Are you trying to be something you’re not?  Are you thinking about offering a new service or product to increase your sales?  If you are, think about it carefully.  You could be toying with the long-term health of your brand.

Up late last night, I got into a discussion on Twitter with Al Krueger (fellow Milwaukeean and very smart fellow) about branding. He tweeted about the new Volkswagon ads, featuring Brooke Shields promoting VW’s new minivan, the Routan.  He wondered if the mere fact that VW even offers a minivan was detrimental to the brand.

He’s right.  To me, the VW brand has stood for fun, free-spirited, driver-oriented cars that were relatively affordable.  When the VW brand had its renaissance in the late 80s and early 90s, it positioned itself as the car for twentysomethings who wanted vehicles to haul their mountain bikes, surf boards, snowboards and other toys.

Following their success of the 90s, VW made a number of product moves that varied in their adherence to the Gen X brand they had established:

• The Beetle was universally lauded as branding genius.
• The Touareg, an impossible-to-pronounce, me-too SUV.
• The Rabbit, which harkened back to the pre-Fahrvergnügen 70s and 80s.
• The Routan, VW’s entry into the minivan market a mere 20 years late.

Of the above, only the Beetle and the Rabbit reinforced the brand VW had established during my college years.  The rest simply round out their lineup to appeal to a broad range of customers.  There’s no question that VW’s brand, like many others, especially in the automotive industry, has become somewhat homogenized.  Unfortunately, I think that was inevitable.

As VW has grown, they likely have found it necessary to offer products for nearly every customer at every stage of life.  This sacrifices some of their brand identity, but does it help them survive, long-term?  One need only to look at Harley-Davidson to see the potential pitfalls of being a large brand so strongly tied to a single brand identity.

Or do the few performance-based products in their lineup (they also offer a GTI and I’ve heard rumors of the Sirocco coming back) do enough to preserve at least some of their core brand roots?

VW has become a global giant with factories to keep open and stakeholders to satisfy.  I think once you get to be a certain size as a company, there is only so much branding you can do.  You no longer have the luxury of being able to appeal to a niche audience.  The more egregious branding crime was committed by VW’s cousin, Porsche, with the introduction of the Cayenne.  A Porsche SUV?  Really?

That’s the beauty of smaller or more specialized companies.  They can afford to be very targeted with their branding.  In fact, you could argue that they can’t afford not to.

As for Volkswagon, a brand beloved by people my age, it seems they’ve crossed over into big-brand territory.  It’s kinda like growing up.  You don’t know when it happens, but one day you’re living in the city and partying every night, then you wake up with kids, a house in the suburbs, a mortgage.

And a minivan.

If you’re familiar with Starbucks, you know they typically have three varieties of coffee on their menu each day – two “regulars” and a decaf (which won’t be referenced anymore, because really, who cares about decaf?). This was nice because it allowed coffee lovers, like me, to choose between a bolder or a milder brew.

Not long ago, they started offering their Pike Place Roast every day, and one other variety on a rotating basis. I understand the reasoning here, cutting costs and all that. Sure, I wish they were offering more instead of less, who am I to tell Starbucks how to run their business? But how they go about it provides a lesson in customer satisfaction.

After noon, they only offer the Pike Place Roast. Anyone wanting the Estima, Verona or any of the other varieties is out of luck. What’s worse is they leave the description of the other blend up on the blackboard. So people like me come in, read about the aromas and rich flavors awaiting us in a Grande Estima, and decide to order it. Only to be disappointed when the barista says only Pike Place Roast is available.

Why do this? Why create a scenario where customers will be disappointed? Other coffee shops I go to, like my favorite, Alterra, serve two varieties all day every day. How hard is it to brew two kinds of coffee? If they feel they must brew just one, at least take the other one off the menu, so customers don’t get the false impression of choice.

The lesson here, I think, is about expectations. If you give your customers a “menu” of your capabilities, offerings or products, then tell them they can’t have the one they choose, that creates a negative experience. If your menu is a bit smaller, but all the items are available, you guarantee they will not be disappointed.

Every four years, they sprout up in front yards across America. Colorful lawn placards, in varying combinations of red, white and blue, declaring the preferred candidate of the occupants of the home beyond.  Other pieces of Election Flair can be found in the form of bumper stickers, buttons, and pins.

I’ve never been one to put up lawn signs.  But seeing them all over my neighborhood makes me wonder: do they have any affect?  Are they worth the investment by the campaign?  Do they make passers by think about their voting intentions?

My guess is that on truly undecided voters, lawn signs, bumper stickers and the rest have very little persuasive effect.  Certainly they aid brand awareness, but in an election year, it’s hard not to know who the candidates are.  They may also have a cumulative effect if an entire neighborhood is littered with signs from one candidate or another.  And certainly they serve to give the sign’s owner a sense of connection and participation.

But do the lawn placards have any persuasive effect?  I don’t think I’m going out on a limb when I say they don’t.

But maybe they can.  What if the lawn sign didn’t just show that the owner supported the candidate, but also why?  Imagine if the lawn sign directed viewers to a You Tube channel where they could see an uploaded video or written testimonial from the specific homeowner.  It wouldn’t be difficult. Simply ship the sign with a set of instructions for people to upload their videos.  The site would have to be moderated somehow to prevent shenanigans from the other side’s supporters, but that’s not insurmountable.

The best part is the site could take on a life of its own, with a collection of thousands of voters’ testimonials.  It would certainly get coverage in the conventional media, and it would show the connections people have to the candidate.

It’s an idea.  What are some other ways lawn signs could work a little harder?

I heard about a commercial cleaning company that was fired by a client because of the owner’s fancy car.

On a routine visit to check on one of his crews cleaning a client’s office, the owner rolls up in a flashy new Mercedes.  Apparently commercial housekeeping is pretty lucrative.

That got the office buzzing.  Our hero’s car didn’t sit well with many employees who get around in ordinary Chevys, Fords and Hondas.

A week later the cleaning company’s contract was canceled.

Why?

Maybe it was a coincidence.  Maybe it was jealousy.  Maybe that expensive car caused the client to look for a better deal.

It doesn’t really matter.

The problem is the cleaning company owner was projecting an image that was contrary to the expectations of his customers.

Is this fair?  No, but that’s life.  People make business decisions for all kinds of reasons that have little to do with reason.  When our perceptions don’t line up with expectations, we sometimes react negatively.

A high-powered lawyer showing up in a rusty ’98 Toyota Corolla (like that would ever happen) would have yielded similar results as our unfortunate cleaning guy and his Mercedes.

If you are highly visible to your customers, you represent your brand.  Heck, you are the brand.

Know what your image is and look the part.  Not just your car or your clothes or your car, but how you answer the phone, the jokes you tell, the lunch you order, the furniture in your office.

When you’re on the clock, you have to be your brand.  You can be yourself on weekends (maybe).