Comments

• 

  Alan 'Brand' Williamson February 17, 2010 at 10:39am

  Jose, Paul
  
  You guys are discussing what is arguably THE most important topic within destination tourism branding. Congratulations.
  
  You probably know that I (and Steve Cranford of US-based Whisper Branding) are probably the only destination brand developers in the world today that are in the opposite camp: Country brands should find a single, future-focused big brand idea and then bring in their hierarchy of sub-brands - states, cities and resorts - to focus on theirs - so, collectively, there is a portfolio of multiple messages for the country but with each brand within the hierarchy focused on a their single message(s).
  
  The Mantra: "First attract with a single branded proposition, then distract with multiple product offerings & experiences."
  
  Let's just consider the portfolio of brands in the news right now due to the Winter Olympics: Canada, British Columbia, Vancouver and Whistler.
  
  Brand Canada follows a multiple message strategy right now through its theme 'Explore' which sadly has resulted in this fine country dropping out of the Top Ten world tourism league table. Ditto for British Columbia and its capital city Vancouver - currently pushing multiple messages - from Beautiful to Big to Laid-Back to Sophisticated to West Coast to Home. The only exception is Whistler, focused on a single idea: Luxury Ski Resort - despite being an all-year-round destination - Whistler, today, has overtaken Vail and Zermatt as the 'World's No.1 Ski Destination' despite its outrageous prices. The power of a single focus.
  
  You see, in today's hyper-competitive marketplace, with virtually every place on earth - countries, regions, states, cities, towns, resorts, streets - all aiming to gain market share, trying to get a single message through all that 'noise' is difficult enough, but trying to get multiple messages for a single brand is virtually a marketing mission impossible.
  
  Now consider what is arguably the world's most valuable destination: Brand America: Home of the American Dream - a powerful single-focus big brand idea. Witness how Brand America allows its sub-brands to focus on their messages: New York: I Love NY (World's Capital) - Texas: Big - Las Vegas: Casinos - Hollywood: Film - Disneyland: Family Fun & Happiness - Silicon Valley: IT - Wall St: Finance, and so on.
  
  Now consider Brand Australia trying to get away from its 'Crocodile Dundee' rough, tough macho image and failing miserably. What it should do is bring its sub-brands into play - its cities such as Melbourne and Sydney and its resorts and wine regions.
  
  Let's hope we can keep this discussion going - our tourism futures depend on it!

  

  Brand Canada: 'I Am Canadian'

  You know you're from Canada if you... - created at http://animoto.com
• 

  Paul Barnett February 16, 2010 at 10:13pm

  Adventure may work for Australia, it is a very broad theme, but I don´t knwo how that would distinguish them from many other adventure destinations, and then it is in other ways limiting. I am developing guides for Brazil, and in them I will suggest themed itineraries. One will be Sport and Aventure, but I already have 12 other themes in mind for them including History & Culture, Sport and Adventure etc. The themes are intended to give inspiration and show the diversity of possibilities, and from the themes independent travellers will be able to pick-n-mix to design a holiday that includes the kinds of experiences they want, in the proportions they want. How then, do you come up with one overarching theme for Brazil. At the moment the strapline is "Sensational" which sounds ok, but is Sensational an idea that immediately makes you think Brazil, or that Brazil can ever own?
• 

  José Balido February 16, 2010 at 9:40pm

  You're right, not when branding an entire nation. But if we're talking tourism branding specifically, it should be possible to create an overarching theme for multiple messages, if it's deemed desirable to do so. And that likely needs to be determined on a case-by-case basis. If we go back to the "Australia is perceived as the land of Crocodile Dundee," for example, then at least for certain markets Australia's overarching theme could be "adventure," and different messages could focus on different facets of "adventure." Is this how you see it?
• 

  Paul Barnett February 16, 2010 at 9:24pm

  José, regarding the overarching theme common sense would suggest so, but I am open minded on this at the moment, and don´t believe that common sense is always right, and doesn´t always prevail. I would just say that marketing persons job is to sell a country the messages have to be limited to some degree, but our job is to be careful how. And then we have to be careful how to get the messages out and who we present them too. Perhaps the single story or big idea approach appeals becaus eit is a much easier option? And, regarding an overarching them that may be possible when looking at tourism only, but if you are trying to brand a nation, with the several associated objectives, is it still possible?
• 

  José Balido February 16, 2010 at 8:51pm

  Chimananda is a wise woman, Paul. Yes, in the old days of Life 1.0 a single story had to do for all markets and all niches. But today there is no excuse for a single-note message. Should there be an overarching theme that encompasses all the multiple messages at any given moment into one coherent greater message? I would say so, what do you think?
• 

  Paul Barnett February 16, 2010 at 7:05pm

  I watched a video today. It was the Nigerian novelist Chimamanda Ngozi Adichee at a TEDtalks conferencein 2009. Her talk was entitled "The Danger of the Single Story", and dealt with the impact of literature in colouring our perceptions of a place, or country. It reminded me of the idea of selling a brand based on a single "Big Idea", and rasied again my concern with this concept.
  
  A few quotes make the point clearly. She said, "The single story creates stereotypes, and the problem with stereotypes is not that they are untrue, but that they are incomplete. They make one story become the only story." And, her closing remark was even more thought provoking. She said, "When we reject the single story, and we realize that there is never a single story about any place, we regain a kind of paradise."
  
  My thought then is that the branding of a place is about telling many stories, and communicating them widely, so that peoples perceptions of a place become richer and deeper. True, this makes the marketing job more complicated, but with todays technology and media channels we have the tools to do more than ever before. It is not necessary to sell an image, it is possible to communicate many realities instead.
  
  I wonder what you all make of this?
• 

  Paul Barnett February 9, 2010 at 4:31pm

  The debate "is nation brnading fundamentally flawed" is also going on in the Linked In group Destination Strategies, and producing soem great insights. http://www.linkedin.com/groupAnswers?viewQuestionAndAnswers&dis...
• 

  BRANDING February 9, 2010 at 4:00pm

  Of course, Politics last for a short while and branding should forever; therefore, it takes strong personalities to handle the job and personalities with expertise and no political colour. This is one of many reasons that make the challenge of Place Branding so "not easy"
• 

  Paul Barnett February 8, 2010 at 5:38pm

  Here is a question for you. In terms of sustainability, isn´t destination branding a fundamentally flawed concept? We all know that branding is a long-term project, longer than most government administrations usually last. And, with changes of administrations usually come new ideas, often for the sake of new ideas. So, does this lack of consistency, of changing identity and messages, not dilute or destroy brand value for a desitnation? Is it not time for a radical re-think about the way destinations are branded and marketed?
• 

  Paul Barnett February 3, 2010 at 8:41pm

  Vikas. I cannot really comment about the Incredble India campaign specifically as I am not that well informed about it, and the impact it has had. I do hear positive things about it, and perhaps it is a good example. But, I believe it wrong to think of branding just in terms of campaign. Campaign is about promoting an image, and for sure this is part of branding. But, I think branding is far more than that. As I have suggested, I believe it can be used to inform policies and decisions that lead to sustainable development of a region. Actions driven by the brand can have a big impact, as they do in private companies. Arguably they can have a bigger impact in relation to destination branding. There are few other ways to get all stakholders focused on the same goal when the project as large as destination branding. I think this aspect of branding is at least as important, if not more so, than a tool to build a image.