Usually not. Brand standards govern how the work is done; the requirement is that the investor controls the enterprise through ownership or operational control. The franchise agreement's management, appointment and step-in clauses are what determine the answer.
Standards are not control; appointment rights are
Hypothetical example: a Mission contractor's franchise agreement requires approved uniforms, a supplier list and monthly reporting, but also gives the franchisor the right to install its own manager if quarterly targets are missed. The first three provisions are ordinary and do not disturb his direction of the business. The fourth is a problem, because it means his control is conditional on performance and the franchisor can displace him.
He should either negotiate that clause out, have it limited to cure periods with his consent, or expect the consular officer to ask how he develops and directs an enterprise the franchisor can take over. Ownership of at least half the entity, authority over hiring and pricing within brand limits, and personal exposure to profit and loss are the facts that establish the requirement. The manual describes the method; it should not describe the boss.
Hypothetical example: A Canadian landscape-design entrepreneur plans to buy a U.S. irrigation business with a silent partner who will own half the shares. The first review should trace nationality and ownership through every entity, then inspect the operating agreement for who controls daily decisions.
The investor needs a real ability to lead the business's operations, while the business must be a genuine commercial operation and not merely a passive holding. Use share registers, governing documents and the purchase agreement to settle the arrangement. If equal ownership removes practical control, revise the governance before funds are committed rather than relying on an informal understanding.