If we try to evaluate the communication of government bodies through the lens of brand communication principles, we will have far more losers than winners.

While it’s understood that branding communication has only a certain role to play in the overall success of an idea, any inadequacy becomes hard to ignore because the scale and magnitude of government communication is huge. If a small improvement can do wonders, even a little neglect can have an adverse impact. Here are the brand playgrounds where organisations fail to perform.

Goal vs message During crafting of communication, the temptation to say What the product/offering does rather than what it does to your audience, is tough to resist. India Tourism certainly fell prey to that temptation.

So, even though Incredible India is a great campaign idea and the thought was to communicate the good efforts of the government to attract and please tourists, the message “Incredible India - the mantra to woo tourists” sounds more like an internal commercial goal. Yes, it’s agreed, all efforts are ultimately to woo the tourist. But do you say to somebody that you are trying to woo them?

Why more of the same thing? Brand extension is an area where even consumer-facing companies falter often. In business, the judgmental errors regarding brand extension arise from ignoring the long-term concerns and focusing solely on short-term gains. In government communication, brand extension errors happen because of the lack of understanding itself. The desire to have more IITs or IIMs is a result of this lack of understanding. Why do policymakers want to have more IITs or IIMs?  Why can’t they just say, we will create institutions that will be the best? Even better than the IITs?

The explanation is that bestowing the IIT/IIM name on other new institutes will help ease  availability  of  faculty, establish brand equity, leverage resources and so on. Even so, the risks of brand dilutions are graver than any possible short-term benefits in sight. Policymakers might want more students to graduate with an IIT badge.

But if more world-class students are what is needed, is it dependent on the name of the institute? It’s not brand IIT which makes students accepted worldwide. It’s the student which makes IITs what they are today.

As branding principles say, the power of the brand is in restricting it.

A case in point is that of the Indian School of Business (ISB). ISB made a mark not by aspiring to be an equivalent of IIMs but by the vision of being the best. It is fair to say that its equity today would be better than many other recently floated IIMs.

The everywhere brand Naming airports and pubic places such as stadiums and hospitals after politicians and public figures is another age-old branding error.

As we know, the name is a crucial element of brand building. Giving the name of an already well-known public figure to a new organisation or establishment doesn’t contribute towards creating any new unique identity for the establishment. As often, the reasoning for these decisions is mostly political.

It might satisfy some egos and the move is generally presented as a tribute to that politician or the public. But one loses out on creating uniqueness and affinity for the establishment.

An ideal brand name should be unique. Borrowing the name doesn’t help.

Pankaj Korwar is a brand and business strategist

comment COMMENT NOW