Does Branding work for politicians?
View(s):Does Branding work for Political campaigns? Do people know the difference between a political brand and a normal brand?Are politicians successful in making use of marketing techniques for their campaigns?Do people consider political brands and do they really get the benefit from political brands?
Given the colossal amount of money being spent on media, it’s worth asking bellow questions;
1. Does it make sense for politicians to spend so much money on advertising?
2. How much money would have been spent on political marketing?
3. Does it really affect the decision of the voter?
4. Why do politicians pay such a colossal amount of money on marketing?
5. Are the techniques applied on marketing campaigns and branding of consumer brands the same?
Marketing fraternity of Sri Lanka are well aware of the amount of money being spent on marketing campaigns. They are also aware of how the mechanism works. There is even far better understanding on how political brands work and the difference between a political brand and a normal brand that is advertised on media.
For the non-marketing fraternity it will be important to know how branding works or rather how advertising works on branding. Advertising is predominantly about communication. Conventional wisdom would say that the communication process begins with the sender and ends with the receiver. Medium which is used in sending the message across from S to R, lies between the S (Sender) and the R (Receiver).Unlike in conventional or standard communication process, in the marketing communication process (where the brand owners try to communicate to the user or to the consumer, the communications process begins with the receiver.) The message is encoded in such a way that the users / consumers (receivers) can decode. In the process media is used to carry the message. In marketing communications there are 5 communication mix elements which come into playto take this message to the consumer. The same applies to political campaigns too.
What are the marketing communication
mix elements and how are they
applied in political campaigns?
Advertising (Is this the first element in the marketing mix?)– This is about taking a message to a given target audience by an identified sponsor. In the case of a political campaign the identified sponsor is; the political party or politician. This is the reason why it says “this is a paid advertisement”. In other words, the particular media institute (TV or Radio Channel or the station) tries to say that it’s been paid by an identified sponsor. Ideally this tag should be in all commercials but it’s not used in non-political commercials.
Second element of the marketing Communication mix is – Sales Promotions. This is about creating a short term boost in sales by encouraging the consumer to buy the brand by means of giving away an immediate benefit. The focus of this is short term. This is widely used in political campaigns where the voters are given free material, free benefits just to get the vote. Giving away houses, bikes, rice packets, money etc fall under this. This has no long term benefit to the consumer. It’s only a short term gain which is given to the consumer to induce trial. But as a consumer you always have the option of continuing or leaving the brand after trying once if it’s not suitable for you.
When this is applied in politics it’s really dangerous ifthe voter votes for the politician based on short term benefits, which has no long term value creation. Once the election is over, the voter will be forgotten and there will be no value created for to the voter.
Next elements of the marketing communications mix is Personal Selling which is widely used in today’s context where salesmen/ women go from door-to-door selling their products and services. Best example is insurance. The same is used by politicians; going from door-to-door greeting and meeting the voter-base in each area reminding them to vote.
Fourth element of the marketing communications mix is Direct Marketing. It’s the process where the end consumer is directly targeted and personally addressed with a personalised message to convince the consumer that the brand knows the consumer better than anyone else. This technique is also used by political candidates, convincing voters that they can empathize better with the voters thanother candidates. Hence, it’s a qualifier for the particular candidate to ask for votes.
Last element of the marketing communications mix is PR (Public Relations). In this technique the prerequisite is to have a reason to talk about the brand.
The brand has to give reasons for the consumers to talk about it. It’s obvious that the given reasons should be good reasons for consumers to talk well of the brand as in the absence of a positive reason people will talk ill of the brand. Applying this technique in political campaigns we can see how negative PR is created about the opponent. Rather than giving valid reasons to talk about the candidate in concern, the contrary is executed by giving reasons to hate the opponent.
Sri Lankan political arena consists of more mud-slinging than giving good reasons to believe in a particular candidate. In branding, if one brand keeps criticizing the other brand, the former gets out of the market before the latter. But in the game of politics, if one keeps criticizing the opponent, the latter will accumulate so much bad publicity and the one who criticizes the other would probably win the election.
What are the core-elements
of brand-equity and brand-equity building?
As we believe in branding and marketing, in order to develop a brand, there are four key areas that a brand needs to pay attention to. These are also known as brand equity elements. Brand equity is defined as the differential effect that the brand can have on its consumers response to the brand or the value endowed upon a brand which reflects in the way consumer think, feel and act about the brand. Both definitions mention one common factor and it is; consumer reaction or attitude towards the brand. What are the key elements that control ones emotions towards a brand?
There are four key elements that are considered to be the best elements of Brand Equity. What are they:
Brand Awareness – How far people know the brand or are familiar with the brand. David Aaker defines 6 levels of brand awareness;
i. Brand recognition ; the ability to identify the brand when it’s seen
ii. Brand recall : the ability to recall the brand name when the category is given
iii. Top of mind recall: When the category is given what’s the first brand that comes to one’s mind
iv. Brand Supremacy – When the category is given there’s only one brand comes to the minds of the consumer
v. Knowledge of the brand – Consumer knows sensitive information about the brand.
Applying the same in the political context will help you understand this better;
Candidates need to make sure their name is known with their face by voters. That is brand awareness.
Brand Recognition – Can the voters identify the candidate when they see the face
Brand recall – Under the prevailing preferential votes system, it’s important for the candidate to make sure that s/he is recalled within the first three as there are only three preferential votes allowed per voter.
Top of mind recall – That’s when a particular candidate’s name comes first among all the other names at the polling booth, as it’s important for them to lead the district or area they contest in.
Brand Supremacy – You may have heard people saying that; ‘I can only think of one person to vote and don’t know if the others deserve my vote’. In brand marketing it’s referred to as Brand Supremacy.
Knowledge of the brand and opinion about the brand naturally come when the voter knows the candidate for a long time. Hence, any candidate would not waste energy and resources on the last two categories of his voter base. Instead s/he would try to work more on recall and top of the mind recall during the election period. The reason why most candidates advertise on media is for those the three reasons (to build recognition, Recall and top of mind recall)
Comparing brands with politicians
If it’s a brand it needs to go through the diffusion funnel which begins with awareness and then moves to consideration. As a political brand, many would try to create awareness first but later wants the voter to consider the candidate. After Awareness and consideration then comes the bottle neck in the process; Trial. In the case of a FMCG brand the consumer can try a brand and if it doesn’t deliver what it’s supposed to deliver the consumer has the option of changing the brand in the next buy whereas in voting the voter will not get a chance to immediately change the person who gets appointed as the particular candidate can be in power for 5 years. As we have experienced in the past, when the voters decide to vote based on media campaigns of the candidate; they have no way of testing the candidate prior and once elected there is no chance of changing them either. Therefore, people should be extremely careful and considerate about this aspect. If a consumer likes a particular brand, they can always buy it over and over again. But if a particular candidate is preferred over the others, there is no chance of changing them for five years. Hence, it’s important to understand though consumers can change brands as and when they wish, voters won’t stand the chance of changing them in the short run. If it’s a political brand the consumer can pick three brands after consideration and the target of all the political brands is to be within the first three.
Association and brand equity
One of the key elements of Brand equity is; Association. Certain brands have made associations with certain sports and it helps the brand stand tall among other brands in the category. For example Siddhalepa has made an amazing equity with the image of a traditional oriental doctor. Taking an example of how Redbull created a blue ocean by introducing energy drinks for the first time to the world (Of course I personally don’t believe in energy drinks) by associating with extreme sports to form an image about energy is another classic example out of Sri Lanka. If we take a look at the same from a political campaign point of view; How Obama won the presidential election revolving around the theme “change’ creating a strong positioning of his stance as the presidential candidate will remain as a classic example of how Politically Association accompanied in winning an election. This is where candidates sometimes try to associate with President’s or Prime ministers images in their campaigns to create an association to convince the voter.
Performance and Brand Equity
Performance of a political candidate can only be seen during the tenure of the politician who gets elected after the election. People will only get to change them after five years as they get five years to perform after an election. What’s important to mention is that if each politician has played their role and has done their task well, there is no need to run campaigns as people already know what they have done for the betterment of the country and for the people in the areas they represent. In the absence of performance, the political candidates are miserably failing in convincing people to re-elect them and the same makes them look miserably failed in their campaigns. Therefore, what candidates should do is to work hard in serving people when they are in power so that there is no need to convince anyone to vote for them as they already know how well they have performed.
Loyalty and Brand Equity
Loyalty is referred to as the bond or the connection that the brand has created with people. When it comes to political brands, if people are loyal to them due to resonance or bond, they have with the candidate, people will surely vote for them. Most of the people who vote for the candidates have not even seen them once in their whole life time but they still vote as they have heard of the good work the candidate has done in the past.
Therefore, it’s quite evident that politically or nonpolitically if the candidate has served the nation or worked hard in their respective field, there is a thick chance for them winning an election. People are smart enough to choose between who has performed and who has not. Performance doesn’t mean essentially being a good speaker.
It’s also about being a great doer and a great performer. Needless to mention that Sri Lankans choose candidates for their talent, knowledge and maturity. Hence, candidates should know what they can bring to the table when they contest.
In today’s context politicians are constantly being monitored by voters on social media as opposed to the past where Sri Lanka had only two TV channels and what was communicated on them was the ultimate truth. But in today’s context people are more informed and are well aware of what’s going behind the screen.
Hence, the strategies used in 1980s and 1990s may not work anymore. Therefore, being true and credible will be the only way for a brand to win people. Failing to be faithful and true to people will not provide any brand with the chance of being purchased if it’s a consumable brand and not being elected if it’s a political brand.