Since getting down to the writing of it, and with the experiences I have had with national branding over the last few years, I have realised that it is no easy matter to either write about national and public sector branding or indeed to do it. Even though the revenues of certain companies are larger than the GDP of some countries, branding a country is far more complex in nature.

Some of these complexities arise because within countries there exists a great deal of internal competition, as different institutions, government-related organisations and Ministries/ Departments compete for funding, public support and talent. Other competitive influenced exist via the private sector, from companies which clearly have their own agendas. Yet another difficulty is getting “inclusivity” – buy-in from all the people who represent the country. This is difficult enough in a large company not to mention a country.

However, there is no dispute about the fact that nations and public sector organisations need branding, both as a means of differentiation and as a route to survival in commercial terms, because we now live in a world of parity and mediocrity.

The World of Parity
The trend that has caused most concern in every market of the world in recent years is that of parity. Faced with a situation where their products, services, systems and technology are so easily replicable, the biggest problem for companies around the world is differentiation. How can they appear to be different and better than their competitors, whilst marketing and selling the same things?

In the world of parity, the only true differentiator is brand image. This is why people pay 1000 times the price of a Casio watch to won a Rolex, and why Nokia has a commanding 37% share of the mobile phone market. It is why Armani makes more profits in the Asian recessions than in ordinary times. Why does the waiting list for Mercedes cars in some Asian countries get longer as the price goes up – it’s to do with status, prestige and self-expression. These associations appear in people’s mind because they have been deliberately positioned as such. The “commodity” label can be shrugged off with powerful branding.

Why Asian Countries Need Branding
Why should Asian countries concern themselves with “Brand Image”?

Reason No 1
One reason is because the problems they face are the same – parity and the need to differentiate in the face of increasing competition. Just like companies in Asia, countries have to attract various customers groups and must market and sell their products, ideas and services to people in other countries.

And just as companies have found that the best way to do is not usually via lowest price, but through building perceived value, so countries are beginning to do so as well. There is a dawning recognition that a nation’s image is made up of “perceived value”, and that value can consist of intangible as well as tangible elements. Countries have entered the world of branding.

Reason No 2
To survive in a changing world means that countries must change, because relying on past reputation does not always ensure success in the future. What were good perceptions of the past may not be so good now. This is why New Zealand wants to have more than just an image of sheep and rugby by stressing more its medical science expertise and transparency; why Canada wants to be seen as a hi-tech global player in addition to a good place to go for a holiday or education; and why Britain wants to be seen as more innovative, friendly, trendy and “with it” rather than solid, conservative, reliable and “past it”.

Reason No 3
Brands are strategic assets in their own right, and can bring both power and financial rewards. They can help countries by replacing the “push” factor with the “pull” factor. Strong brands differentiate, and attract people to them rather than having to chase after them.

Reason No 4
Countries need to manage perception and control their image in order to manage particular issues of national concern. This has specific relevance to Asian countries, where differentiation is lacking, images very unclear, and where the country-of-origin factor is often detrimental to exports and domestic sales.

Whereas many Western countries have already established their identity and strengths in certain areas, Asian countries have yet to do so. Germany’s reputation for precision engineering, Italy’s association with fashion, and the romantic associations of Paris are examples. Indeed, countries like Spain, Ireland and others have carried out deliberate branding programmes to help them make a global impact.

But what do Asian countries stand for? Japan has closely linked itself to consumer electronics through its brands, but other countries do not have such strong positive images or associations. On the contrary, they often have negative images. For example, China is perceived as a producer of cheap, poor quality products. What Asian countries have failed to do is manage their brand image well by managing market perceptions, promoting strengths and eliminating perceived weaknesses.

But throughout the world, even though geo-politics and national and foreign policy agendas still dominate government thinking in the race for power and influence, these are being eroded by the attention decision-makers are giving to image and the benefits it can bring to the table.