“Natio Brands”
-AChirantan Chatterjee & Devi Yesodharan
ET Intelligence Group cont

Dr Peter van Ham
The simple fact is that a state is not a commercial product, and should not be seen as one. Consumer brands can be restyled and re-branded without too much ado, but a state has to relate to its people and any change in branded image has to be accepted by the populace. Branding cities, regions, states or continents requires the support of a vast majority of people living there; otherwise it will be hollow, unconvincing and ineffective. This is different with consumer brands, which don't have to ask the beans in the tin how they feel about their new label or image! But there are similarities. Like consumer brands, place brands have to do ongoing market research in identifying and (re)creating brand values, they need to build alliances and partnerships with as many stakeholders as possible, and need to have "brand champions" to have both the vision and the political commitment to stay on the course if there are political difficulties.

Dr Wally Olins
At a very basic level it is the same. But while a consumer brand might mean expressing the idea of a product in a simplistic, easy-to-understand way - for something which resides in the shelf, nation branding would involve amalgamating the nation's politics history and culture, for example a product like the exotic Kashmiri Shawl or the Bengalis and yet give an overall Indian feel. On the whole branding a nation is not a short-term campaign, it's a more subtle effort - it's actually a long-run, concerted program.

Q3. Would a developing and a developed nation have to approach branding differently? Are there any rules to follow?

Simon Anholt
Yes. Developed nations, on the whole, tend to have quite robust and well-established brand images, which are difficult if not impossible to change. Here, it is more a case of patient and subtle brand management. New and developing countries have a bigger task: they need to create the brand from scratch, and this requires more creativity.
The key requirements are creativity, strategy and absolute objectivity, because the things which people in a country think are interesting are very rarely interesting to people on the other side of the planet! India lies somewhere between the two: it has much that is new to tell the world, but on the other hand there are some pretty well-established views about India already in people's minds. One key task of place-branding is to take the old clichés and turn them into something fairer, truer and more useful to the country's aspirations.

The main rules of branding apply to all nations. It is only the objectives that differ. At the end of the day, just like companies, nations are 'selling' themselves to others. If they brand themselves, well they attract more customers and people trust them. Developing countries have more weaknesses to overcome - basics that have to be satisfied - such as infrastructure, communications etc. Brand propositions will vary depending on the competitors they are facing. Developing countries are trying to promote good brand images so that they can join the 'Clubs' such as WTO and EU.

Dr Peter van Ham
Yes, I think there are differences. Although there are exceptions, one can say that creating and selling international brands remains the privilege of industrialised countries. It's a matter of "value added": Nike shoes and Benetton clothing are all produced in developing, emerging nations, but the added value of the "swoosh" is enormous and makes the profit. There is a tremendous market here for developing countries, since there is no reason why consumers would not buy branded products, services from Brazil, China, etc. It's quite interesting that Tata Group of India has recently acquired the Tetley Tea Company of England, which is an example of today's globalisation working with a reversal of traditional, colonial roles. Moreover, emerging economies create new consumers who may have more emotional attachments to local and regional brands.
It's important to cater to these "emerging consumers," and not to existing ones in the West. Indian and Chinese brands may well be stronger in Asia than many western brands. Haier and Kelon, for example (who produce domestic appliances) are already stronger brands than many western competitors.

Dr Wally Olins
Actually, no. The word 'developing' might come as a stigma to many, but in essence it means that a country, which is a developing nation, is moving fast up the ladder to becoming a developed country. To my mind India has changed a lot in the last 5 years, its outside perception has evolved at quantum levels than it has in the last 15-20 years. It's true that China and its relation with India is one reason why the globe is watching the India-China development with a hawk eye. But at the same time you need not brand yourself in the shadow of China. India is a country, which can stand on its own. And there is nothing to hide about the fact that you are a developing nation - in fact that can be subtly turned around to be one of your branding tools in the campaign.

Q 4. Can a very large nation, such as India, with internal diversity, present a uniform brand? Or would it be more successful marketing individual states/cities?

Simon Anholt
Both are necessary and entirely compatible. Cultural, political, social, geographical and linguistic diversity are highly positive qualities for a nation to stress in the modern world. It's not easy, but there are few countries, which don't face the same challenges.

Dr Paul Temporal
Diversity can be seen as strength and a weakness, but there is nothing to stop India from branding itself well. It does, however, need a strategy to do this, as with all top brands. Internal diversity can be very attractive to tourism, but a weakness in terms of market distribution for foreign companies.
To address the diversity issue, there needs to be 'inclusivity,' that is, when developing the brand strategy, opinions from all sectors of government, industry and the population must be taken into account. If this does not happen, branding will fail as it did with the 'Cool Britannia' brand effort. Most of the population and business leaders were not included in agency/government strategic thinking, which essentially ended up branding London as a fashion/design/entertainment centre.
The other lesson here is to get brand strategists involved to give advice and not advertising agencies. Individual states and cities need to brand themselves but subscribe to the overall national brand proposition. So do the large Indian companies. They are all Brand Ambassadors and can influence the outside world significantly, with some autonomy but sticking to the brand values of the master brand - India. As with all powerful brands, they are driven from the top but managed at all levels.

Dr Peter Van Ham
Both options are not exclusive. It is possible to brand a country and regions and cities at the same time, as long as the "mother-brand" of India is inclusive and sufficiently general to incorporate them. There are many examples of how this can be done. Germany, for example, has both the Berlin-brand and the Bavaria/Münich-brand, who don't clash with the image of the country. The same with the United States - California is a powerful brand, but so is Florida and New York City. Obviously, they stand for different experiences and attract different people and evoke different reactions.

Dr Wally Olins
Yes London is a brand in itself and so is Britain. They are not mutually exclusive to each other neither mutually competitive. For example it is very easy to project Indian dynamism through Bangalore or Mumbai than say, Calcutta. You would project Kerala as a tourist area with the backwaters but not Punjab. So it's about identifying the strengths of an area and putting them all together in a basket - a brand basket called 'India brand'. There has got to be a subtle message in the Brand India campaign which should mutually support all the raison-de-etre` for branding, i.e. tourism should be a reflection of FDI etc. I think India's strength lies in three things.
l Diversity or multiplicity whichever way you may call it, in language in food, in culture in its relations with the various states of the world.
l The size -It's a hugely spread country with a huge population.
l It's a highly disorganized and chaotic country - and in this extraordinary things can happen.

Q5. How are terrorism and political issues influential on branding? Malaysia has succeeded despite an autocratic president and being labelled as a 'Muslim nation'. Are there lessons within this success story for a country like India?

Simon Anholt
It is interesting how 'consumers' in other countries are perfectly able and willing to hold simultaneous and contradictory views about a country. For example, many young Muslims in countries like Pakistan who swear eternal hatred for America would still like to go and study at Harvard and buy Levi's. Policy actions are often not perceived to be the actions of the country, but of its administration, and this is a useful distinction.
However, extremely unpopular actions can and do occasionally spill out and 'infect' other areas of the country's international image. America is currently teetering on the brink of suffering wide-scale 'brand damage' as a result of its policy decisions. In the case of an autocratic president, the population (who are presumed responsible for producing the country's brands) can even benefit by appearing unfortunate, courageous victims of a brutal administration. Terrorism per se doesn't usually affect a country's export brands but it certainly affects inward tourism, recruitment, returning diasporas, business travel, etc., and a long program of properly thought-out 'damage limitation' is essential.

Dr Paul Temporal
Politics and branding are often at odds with each other. Political decisions can change and impact on the brand image of the country. Practically every country has to deal with crisis management, especially in the area of terrorism. But that is exactly what terrorism is - a crisis for the national brand. Malaysia has taken care to ensure minimum negative impact on its image from extreme factions. It has tried to maintain confidence and trust in its image by acting swiftly. Singapore rapidly controlled SARS and did its image a lot of good. It's all a part of meticulous brand management. Most nations are not good at this.

Dr Peter Van Ham
Certainly, one can be branded by others as rogue states, or, even worse: as members of the "axis of evil." India is neither. But the focus on terrorism does point out that "high politics" is an important, even crucial, element of a country's image and brand. India and Pakistan have not signed the NPT, but Iran has. India and Pakistan have nuclear weapons, which, in the case of Iraq, was one of the official reasons for the US to justify its military invasion. Obviously, "being on the right side" politically, is a crucial factor in the way the US and the West perceives other states. This calls for sound political leadership as well as smart political positioning and manoeuvring. In many European states, political leaders, who stood behind the US during the Iraqi crisis, have been heavily criticised by their own people. Spain and the UK are cases in point. Certainly, the position of France and Germany has damaged their standing in the US, and given staunch supporters of the US, like Poland, a political and - although difficult to measure - economic, boost.

Terrorism per se doesn't usually affect a country's export brands but it certainly affects inward tourism, recruitment, returning
diasporas, business travel, etc., and a long program of

Dr Wally Olins
I think India's fundamentalism is only a reaction to fundamentalist strains in neighbouring countries. It is an internal issue that only the people of India can deal with - as it did for the Mumbai bombings for example. At the same time almost all countries have shades of fundamentalism involved. It is not a worrying thought in a brand programme as long as such programmes are not whipped by people with vested interests to whip xenophobia or chauvinism. For ultimately that would act as a brand lag rather than a brand lead.

Q 6. Internationally, given the fact that Far East as a cluster is branding itself, the Japanese stand as an entrenched brand, and China is taking the world by wonders, what would be India's differentiated positioning for a concerted brand campaign.

Simon Anholt
Now you're asking too much! I couldn't even hazard a guess on this unless (a) I had a chance to study the country, meet the Govt, hear their plans, research the market, and (b) get paid for it!

Dr Paul Temporal
I have many ideas on this (but no contract from the government!). India is very different and unique, and has a window of opportunity in which to develop its brand. China is already working at all levels on its brand image, and this is a big threat as a competitor to India. It is developing its image via astute foreign policy, world-sporting events, and immense support for its top and promising corporate India needs to develop a brand strategy right now. To delay will not be catastrophic, but it will place India further and further behind the competition with all that implies.

Peter Van Ham
It's difficult for me to judge, and I think I shouldn't. One should realize that even in crowded market-place like the US, states like Louisiana and Wisconsin have been effective in branding themselves. The same for Wales and Scotland in the UK, and for Western Australia in Australia. "India" already has an all-in-all neutral to positive association with many people world-wide. One should start with solid market-research about the image of India and take it from there.

Wally Olins
(We didn't ask him this question)

Q7. What could the government do to improve India as a brand?

Simon Anholt
The most valuable thing is to create a small, dynamic and powerful steering group for the national brand (perhaps on a model similar to the Public Diplomacy Strategy Board which we have created here in the UK), which has the personal backing of the PM or President

Dr Paul Temporal
Ease bureaucracy, visa regulations, single window clearances, improve infrastructure. Many companies I have talked with in India say that what they have achieved has been done despite the government making things difficult! So a mindset change has to take place at the top. They must walk the talk also, once they have arrived at a strategy for the brand. .A master brand strategy is required for the India of the future, capitalising on these strengths and the intellectual power of the Indian people.