China Travel Branding

Q: Background on the Country Brand Index?

A: This is the fifth consecutive year of the Country Brand Index study. The methodology is based on a three tier approach relying on 1) research involving approximately 3,000 international business and leisure travellers from nine different countries; 2) an expert panel of 47 persons and; 3) analysis of third party data such as World Economic Forum papers etc.

In addition to measuring 29 specific associations or attributes of countries, we also assess whether those associations in fact lead to preference for that country using our Hierarchical Decision Model, which tracks overall awareness through associations, preference and ultimately advocacy. This is what separates the FutureBrand Country Brand Index from other research studies. Other indexes measure brand image only, while we track the effectiveness of the brand in creating preference and advocacy, as such ours measures actual brand strength. Traditionally countries have been promoted for the purpose of attracting tourism, investment and trade in a series of communications programs, and therefore conducted by governments as stand alone marketing investments but now a days country brands should generate more comprehensive and integrated stories of what they have to offer. Numerous governments are furthermore grasping between the differences of marketing, branding and sales. It is clear that marketing creates positive conditions for sales to occur, but branding creates the overall framework for marketing to play its role within. For example, in the 2009 Country Brand Index Australia fell from 1^st (2008 Top Country Branding Ranking) to 3^rd. If one looks closer at the data it is clear that a key drop was recorded in the ‘Friendliness of Locals’ attribute, from 5^th in 2008 to 14^th in 2009. During that period there were negative reports of Asian students being harmed as well as international refugee issues which raised eyebrows internationally. As such the drop from 1^st to 3^rd is not surprising.

Most governments are not structured and strategically equipped for pulling their various departments together, with each of their various departments working in isolation of one another. The instinctive competition for limited resources ensures that little cooperation is in place, and this is the significant country brand challenge – how to structure the brand management of the country. 

Q: Despite the successful hosting of the 2008 Beijing Olympics China does not feature prominently?

A: The 2008 Country Brand Index data was collected just prior to the Olympics while the 2009 CBI data was collected post Olympics, so we do get a good picture of the impact. Major events such as the hosting of an Olympic Games have a two-fold impact of 1) drawing many visitors to that country and; 2) attracting a large TV audience, and as such China had high visibility. This visibility is much more powerful than traditional advertising campaigns based around 30 second commercials and paid media. What captures people’s imagination is what the country is really like, the culture, the authenticity, what the normal people are really like etc., these attributes are conveyed very powerfully through major events. A further example is what is expected for South Africa in hosting the 2010 FIFA World Cup, a big jump in brand power from 2008 to 2009. In the overall ranking South Africa jumped from 59^th to 37^th in 2009 while the ‘Desire to Visit’ attribute recorded a jump of 33^rd place to 18^th position for 2009 over 2008.

China for its part jumped from 56^th position to 48^th for the overall branding ranking in 2009. China’s overall image association is currently deeper, richer and more authentic due to its received exposure. The conjured up images of Beijing a mere four years ago included the Forbidden City, Temple of Heaven and Tiananmen Square (with possible negative connotations) whilst now it is viewed as a city of incredible skyscrapers and amazing sports complexes (Birds Nest & Water Cube) to the point that Beijing is now viewed as a mixture of modern and traditional. The attributes of ‘Friendliness of Locals’ increased from 68^th to 54^th while ‘Outdoor Activities & Sports’ also improved from 71^st to 63^rd, ‘Shopping’ increased (22^nd to 2009’s 16^th) and ‘Ease to do Business’ catapulted from 54^th to 31^st. As you can see from this data China is a classic case of improving weaknesses as opposed to increasing brand strengths.

China has thus made great strides but it is vital for them to maintain the momentum. China is a powerful country with a non-powerful brand meaning that people recognise the importance of China, but they don’t particularly like it. This is textbook perception problem at play here, for example, in terms of ‘Environmentalism’ China slipped further from 77^th to 82^nd position as China persistently conjures up negative environmental perceptions but this can be turned around quite quickly. China is now the world’s number one producer of eco-technology, something that President Hu Jintao himself is starting to focus on in his international addresses, and they are already starting to improve perceptions. China just needs to keep the momentum going to ensure that perceptions of the country continue to align more closely with the reality on the ground. A final comparison is Indonesia where the reality is that real progress in being made in the country in terms of the economy, education, justice etc., but it is still perceived poorly as a weak and inherently corrupt country.

Q: Was Obama’s election wholly responsible for America’s number one ranking?

A: America is always a strong brand but the Obama factor was critical. There are a wide variety of measurements however but there does seem to have been a feeling of relief that the Bush era was over. Furthermore, the election of President Obama signalled that America has ‘returned’ to its traditional progressive values that may be an effect that outlasts Obama’s influence as an individual. 

Q: The 2009 Top Country Brand Rankings include mostly traditional Western countries?

A: The reality of country situations on the ground are not necessarily inline with the brand strengths they maintain. The importance of the country brand’s are in how they are able to capture the audience’s imagination and as such the traditional Western countries have very powerful brands. Our research is based on a good cross section of respondents so it is clear that the more Western brands have captured the imaginations of those respondents residing in the East. Japan (overall no. 7) is an exception but its renowned distinctive culture, history and prowess in technology and business for decades has resulted in its strong brand. 

Q: This year Country Brand Index has included a regional ranking?

A: The regional rankings are a composite ranking which are becoming increasingly essential in the world’s geopolitical-economic shakeup. The Asia Pacific region (ranked 2^nd after Western Europe) deserves special attention in that they account for seven of the Top 10 brands ranked for ‘Authenticity’, six out of the Top 10 in ‘Value for Money’ and five of the Top 10 in ‘Desire to Visit/Visit Again, Ideal for Business and Extended Business Trip’. This is a great combination basis from which to develop further.

Tim is the main Asia Pacific presenter of FutureBrand’s global Country Brand Index study.