Burger King versus Wendy's - who has made the biggest mistakes

Only two fast food franchises actually stand out as knowing what they are doing. McDonald's and Tim Horton's. Even when McDonald's changed their slogan and poor Ronald disappeared, you still knew it was a McDonald's ad. And they've stuck by their new branding for a long time, even in the face of criticism. Tim Horton's has handled their brand so well that you know you're watching or listening to a Tim Horton's ad by some magic combination of music, tone and relationships without really being able to define how you knew.

And then there are Burger King and Wendy's. Two very different, dreadful accidents of marketing.

Wendy's fell prey to a lack of planning (at least that is my assumption since I really can't see Dave Thomas approving the messes that have been produced in the last few years) and to hitching their brand to the all too delicate thing that is a human being. I had great respect for Wendy's marketing when Dave Thomas was at the helm. He was personable. He looked and spoke like everyone's favourite uncle. But since Dave's passing, Wendy's has been a curious mix.

This is not necessarily the fault of the advertising agency handling their work. Sometimes the creative can only be as good as the creative brief the client provides. I'll never know who holds responsibility for the current fearful campaign. But seriously, who is the audience they are trying to reach with ridiculous red braided wigs on unlikely candidates? Sure men in their early 20s love humiliation as a form of humour, but is this truly the audience? And while humiliation might be funny to some, it is only funny when it happens to someone else. So where is the connection the audience is supposed to make with the characters in the ads? And when I look at the patrons at Wendy's, I'm not seeing a lot of 20-something men.

Business brands need to be careful about hanging their hat on human beings. Humans are fragile machines that will eventually break down, sometimes beyond repair. If there is no other choice but to have the owner (or heaven forbid, his children) be the face of the brand, make sure there is a succession plan in place, not just for the business but the brand.

And then there is Burger King. If there is nothing else to measure the dysfunction of their marketing, there is certainly the impression that more Burger King's have closed in my adult life than have opened. And in the ones in my area that have survived, you could shoot a cannon into them and never hit anyone.

Again, I preface this with the disclaimer that it may not be the agency's fault. blah, blah, blah, see above.

Biggest question - what defines Burger King's brand? They have tried so many different tactics, personae and music riffs over the last decade. There has been no consistency, no staying power with any of the brand representations. Pick something for heaven's sake, and then stick to it. It would be nice if you didn't choose to frighten people (the King Mask character peaking in windows and suddenly being discovered in your bed was the stuff of horror films). And maybe stick by your marketing team, instead of ditching them when sales go down. Tim Horton's has that figured out. They've been working with the same people for over 10 years. And it shows in the calibre of their marketing and in the size of their audience.

I may be dating myself but "have it your way" had some legs. Still think it has some legs. Especially in this era of "what's in it for me".

So two brand lessons here, no matter what size your business may be. 1) Don't hang the brand on a human but if you need to, have a succession plan. 2) Make some good decisions about what your brand is, and then stick to it. Should sales go down, do some research to find out why before you blame the marketers and rush in to change everything.