Destination or nation branding?

---

How is Bangladesh is known to the international community? When asked about travel to Bangladesh, many raise issues of security, political uncertainty, strikes, over-population, backward infrastructures and, above all, hardcore poverty. At the same time, if asked anyone who visited the country already, almost revert feelings are found in them - they say they were overwhelmed by the beauty of the country and the hospitality they received. They have happy feelings about the country.
Those who are working in travel and tourism arena of the country are well informed and raise the issue of image management procedures. Professional groups and experts gave their opinions and suggestions, but these were hardly not considered.
Anyway we were awarded a logo with the tagline Beautiful Bangladesh on December 06, 2008 by the then Caretaker Government. But if we analyse, it is not a brand but is rather a logo with a tagline. From the very beginning of its launching it received very poor response and treatment.
Since the establishment of the Bangladesh Tourism Board, the logo was embellished with a unique theme during the Cricket World Cup 2011 with the addition of the slogan: School of Life. The first-ever TV commercial on Beautiful Bangladesh was produced by the Bangladesh Tourism Board and aired at the dazzling inaugural ceremony of the mega show. It was highly acclaimed at home and abroad and very recently Beautiful Bangladesh - the School of Life won the best TV Commercial in Tourism in Zagreb Tourism Film Festival. It is an achievement no doubt for a country like Bangladesh, but one or two TV commercials may not be enough to showcase the country's resources or strengths. Projecting a country's image in this competitive world is not easy task unless every organ related to promote a country is effective and works together in a professional way.
First of all, we should think whether to go for nation branding or destination branding. Simon Anholt, the father of the Nation Brand concept, has commented: "I would be the first to admit that 'nation branding' is an unfortunate expression, since it seems to imply that branding the nation is both a desirable and a possible thing for countries or their governments to do. I would argue that branding - the act of reducing something chaotic, complex and contradictory to something simple, memorable and potent - is exactly the wrong thing for most countries to attempt. Branding is more like a problem than a solution, and it is in fact exactly what public opinion does to countries. What countries and their governments need to do is fight against this tendency of public opinion to brand the nation, not to assist in the process."
In a survey Simon Anholt showed that negligible changes happened in the image of the countries before and after the branding. He called it stickiness of national image. He further said that communications cannot change the country's image, but act as the aid to help the sellers of the country to sell. It is in fact a very difficult and complex task to change the image of a country as it is built on innumerous dimensions. If one is positive then it needs to fight another negative. That is why Simon Anholt called it struggle forever.
Considering this fact, the concept of 'destination branding' has come and has increasingly become popular. If a place, product or service acquires a positive, powerful and solid reputation, this becomes an asset of enormous value - probably more valuable, in fact, than all its tangible assets, because it represents the ability of the place or organisation to continue to trade at a healthy margin for as long as its brand image stays.
If we cite the example of 'Amazing Thailand,' it is a destination tagline, which stimulated visits to this country. By the time it started to decline, another theme 'Amazes you' has been associated with this to regain its strengths. It is more of a selling technique of destinations than nation branding. If we look to 'Incredible India', even though it was launched in 1992, but still today it gives benefits to the host. The same thing happens in case of Singapore, Nepal and other countries. As the nation brand is very much complex and the changes found is negligible, Simon Anholt defines it as the 'Competitive Identity' instead of nation branding.
Therefore, in case of a country like Bangladesh, which is known as a poor and developing country, extensive research and study should have been done for arriving at a decision whether to choose nation branding or destination branding. Nation branding involves political, cultural and business image, which seems a difficult task for Bangladesh. Therefore destination branding is more suitable than nation branding for the country. As Bangladesh is perceived as a place of different problems such as poverty, unemployment, backward infrastructures, it has still some unique resources which may act as the icon to identify the country's image - That is the competitive identity.
Beautiful Bangladesh is not shown whether it is destination branding or nation branding. As far as the treatment towards this slogan goes, it is considered to be the nation branding, which is not reflected and owned by many.
Place branding is purely different from the consumers product branding. Place is constant and carries the history from time immemorial. Over the years, because of people and their culture, behaviour with the neighbours, trade facilities, and accessibility and for many other dimensions, a typical image has already been developed for a place. If this place is thrown to the funnel of branding, it takes long time to shape its reputation. But in case of tangible product branding, consumers do not know any attribute and quality before its launching. They get the fresh idea of it and can judge the quality and essence. This is the basic difference between place branding and traditional product branding.
To identify the competitive identity Simon Anholt worked out Brand Hexagon. The hexagon clearly defines the way how to find and create the branding of a place. Policy means government is supposed to start the process and the people of a country or a place or a destination to own it. The overall process requires a national strategy where all points should be brought together for improved coordination with the establishment of common standards and quality measures.
Apart from the above theoretical illustration, brand building process involves three primary stakeholders: (i) Government, (ii) People, and (iii) Stakeholders of travel and tourism, investment and export. All three stakeholders must come together for the effective image management procedures.
It is now clear what kind of a brand Beautiful Bangladesh can be. This has been suggested that Bangladesh should be re-branded. If a decision of re-branding is taken, the authorities must follow the process professionally and every organ concerned should be made well aware of this.
The writer is Executive Officer, Marketing, Bangladesh Tourism Board. The views expressed in the article are of the writer's own