The challenge of nation branding is a daunting process (De Chernatony, 2006:21, in Dinnie, 2008a:155) notwithstanding the existence of branding frameworks that could be adopted. As seen from Fig 2.2 below, brand awareness (recognition, top of mind, brand dominance, brand knowledge and opinion), brand associations (publicity and commentaries, functional and non-functional attributes and capabilities), perceived quality (what is believed – real or fancied, from intrinsic and extrinsic attributes) and brand loyalty (repeated brand purchase behaviour) build brand equity.
47 Figure 4. Customer-Based Brand Equity Framework Source: Fayrene and Lee (2011:36)
According to Keller (2003a:67), brand awareness consists of brand recognition – the
“consumer’s ability to confirm prior exposure to the brand when given a brand as a cue” and brand recall – the “consumer’s ability to retrieve the brand from memory when given the product category”. Whilst brand awareness is important, Yousaf (2017:79) also emphasises the importance of brand associations in influencing consumer choice. This brings to the fore the significance of dealing with conceptions, misconceptions and stereotypes in brand building and management.
In a similar manner, Keller notes that brand image is, to an extent, a function of promotional programmes connecting favourable and distinct brand associations in the memory (2003:70).
Brand associations are not only driven by promotion however, but also to a greater extent by brand familiarity, knowledge, word of mouth, held market beliefs for the brand: brand name, graphics, brand identity or influential personalities. The Customer-Based Brand Equity (CBBE) Model proposes “sequentially establishing six ‘brand constructs’ with customers”
(Keller 2003a:75), which are presented graphically in Fig 5 below.
48 Figure 5: Customer-Based Brand Equity Pyramid Adapted from: Keller 2003a:75
According to Keller (2003), brand salience speaks to the public awareness of the brand; brand performance focuses on meeting customers’ functional requirements whilst brand imagery addresses the fulfilment of customers’ emotional desires. Brand imagery thus reflects the brand quality perception (Fayrene and Lee, 2011:36 and Veloutsou and Guzmán, 2017:8).
Brand judgments refer to customers’ sentiments arising from performance and imagery.
Brand feelings are the customers’ sensational reactions to the brand, whilst brand resonance relates to the association and extent of the rapport between the customer and the brand.
Shimp and Saeed (1993:87) take nation brand equity (NBEQ) to be an emotional value, which emanates from consumers’ mental pictures of and associations relating to a nation as a brand.
Nation brand equity depends upon the knowledge that target consumers have about a nation brand (Aaker, 1991:12; Keller & Moorthi, 2003:28; Yousaf, 2017:84) and reflects the branding and brand management efforts pursued by a nation. Nations are encouraged to research on and understand their brand position against the four dimensions rather than rely on gut feelings (Dinnie, 2008a:159). Keller and Moorthi (2003:78) reiterate the importance of on-going research on a nation’s brand equity. Akutsu (2001:32) quoted in Dinnie (2008b:45) also observes that “as with corporate brands, the equity of a country brand is resident in the minds of its targeted audiences”.
Brand loyalty features prominently as a key element in the brand equity literature. Wu (2017:66) gives reference to the importance of the discourse n brand loyalty in nation brand
Resonance
Feeling Performas
nce Salience Imagery Judgeme nts
Brand Relationship
Brand Performance Brand Awareness Brand Perceptions
49
building. Brand building initiatives are focussed on creating differentiation and value for consumers as the basis for building brand advocacy (Kumar and Kaushik, 2017:126).
Achieving high levels of customer brand loyalty is a vital performance metric in brand strategy. The consumer perspective for brand equity is more noteworthy and applicable in nation branding than the financial perspective.
The multiple stakeholders who aspire to influence the nation-branding outcome makes nation branding a complex process. Success in nation branding relies on the brand champions; whose conduct and behaviour should mirror the promised brand values. The principal values underlying the social character of a nation’s people derive from government institutions and socio-cultural practices. Through their socio-economic connections, people develop a consciousness of their nation’s fundamental ideologies and principles.
Pop and Macovei (2007:23) observe that nations aspire to gain a good reputation and international power, to obtain geo-strategic, economic, financial and cultural advantages, and to differentiate themselves. This conceptualisation was referred to by Olins (1992:2) as nation branding and by Anholt (2007b:3) as the competitive identity of a nation. Anholt (2010:11) suggests a shift in nation-branding discourse from a belief that the competitiveness of nations results from a ‘naive and superficial’ commercial branding process of advertising, promotion, and propaganda. Nation branding is such a complex paradigm that dwells on public perception and reality, mob consciousness, national identity, governance, ethos, and national cohesion. In their research on leadership and internal branding process, Terglav, Ruzzier and Kaše (2016:10) established that the leadership is critical in the internal branding process and in driving everyone’s emotional attachment to the brand. The leadership has the power to enhance brand commitment for it influences the acquisition of brand knowledge, shared brand values, and shared perception of psychological engagement across the organisation.
Competitive identity reflects the combination of brand management and public diplomacy with commerce, investment, tourism and foreign trade promotion (Anholt, 2007b:13) and manifests in economic (in tourism, foreign investment and exports) and psychological (collective mental associations both domestically and abroad) terms. The role of competitive identity and reputation in influencing behaviour towards nations, especially in the contemporary globalising economic and market environment cannot be overemphasised (ibid).
50
In contested and competitive global markets, traders, visitors and investors make decisions based on what they have read and heard. According to Dinnie (2010:85),
“(…) all nations navigate through the complexity of the modern world armed with a few simple clichés, and these form the background of our opinions, even if we are not fully aware of this and do not always admit it to ourselves. Paris is about style, Japan about technology, Switzerland about wealth and precision, Rio de Janeiro about carnival and football, Tuscany about the good life, and most African nations about poverty, corruption, war, famine and disease.”
It is thus critical to note that people who are concerned about themselves and their countries should make every effort to develop informed, fair and balanced opinions about other people and their countries. Societies make conclusions based on the stereotypes associated with places and people. These stereotypes, whether favourable or adverse, profoundly influence the behaviour of people concerning others, citizens, organisations, governance systems, and products. Although this may genuinely be unfair, one cannot do anything to stop that. It is challenging a nation to convince people across the world to have better understanding of the richness of other countries and their cultures (Anholt, 2007b:13).