kent1

7/28/2019 kent1

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/kent1 1/11

ASAC-IFSAM 2000 Proceedings 1

ASAC-IFSAM 2000 Conference Heather A. KentMontreal, Quebec Rhett H. WalkerCanada University of Tasmania

TAKING STOCK OF PLACE OF ORIGIN BRANDING: TOWARDS RECONCILING THE REQUIREMENTS AND PURPOSES OF

DESTINATION MARKETING AND EXPORT MARKETING

This paper reviews what has been advocated in respect of place of origin branding fordestination and export marketing purposes, and discusses opportunities for reconcilingthese two bodies of theory to mutual benefit. Three case studies serve to highlight keyissues, and the paper concludes with implications for future research.

Introduction

The final two decades of the twentieth century have witnessed a rapid increase ininternational business, with particular impact on international tourism activity and export trade

(Johansson, 1997). At the same time, however, this increasingly global perspective has intensifiedcompetition among a broad range of products (Johansson, 1997). Consequently, many goods andservices are perceived to have become more homogenous as producers become ever-more adept atmatching the strengths of the offerings of category leaders (Johansson, 1997). This has created achallenge for export marketers: how to differentiate goods and services in a way which is bothsustainable and attractive to buyers (Aaker, 1991)?

In response to this challenge, many businesses have turned to their place of origin (PO) as ameans of positioning and contrasting their offerings from those of competitors in the minds of potential buyers (Echtner and Ritchie, 1993; Aaker, 1991). This PO is most commonly typified as acountry (Bilkey and Nes 1982), but may also be a state, region or city (Thakor and Kohli 1996;

Thode and Maskulka 1998). Stereotypes associated with the place from which a product originates

have the potential to influence buyers' evaluations of its worth, effectively positioning the productpositively or negatively in the minds of buyers (J ohansson, 1988). Consequently, over the pastdecade in particular, many governments have become increasingly pro-active in coordinatingcampaigns to promote positive images of their respective countries, states, regions, and cities, withthe aim of supporting local producers competing in both international and domestic markets (Graby,1993; Kotler, Haider and Rein, 1993).

At the same time, the creation of an image suitable and appropriate to the marketing of tourism destinations has received increasing interest among researchers as well as practitioners(Echtner and Ritchie, 1993). The importance of this has been borne out in a range of studiesincluding those of Pearce (1982), Woodside and Lyonski (1990) and also Selby and Morgan (1996),each of which conclude that there is a strong relationship between positive destination image and

positive purchase behaviour amongst potential tourists. To date, however, it appears that little, if any, attention has been given to the question of whether these two roles are necessarilycomplementary or might be potentially conflicting.

In this paper, we argue that although it may be possible to use a single PO identity withequal effect for both export and destination marketing purposes, this cannot be assumed.Positioning strategies devised for export marketing purposes may well hold the potential tocontribute beneficially to marketing a PO for tourism purposes. Conversely, the manner in whichtourism destinations are marketed may create lasting impressions in the minds of potential

7/28/2019 kent1


7/28/2019 kent1



importance" (Momsen, 1999: 212). This is born out in Ahn and Ahmed's (1994) research into themarketing of South Korea as a desirable tourism destination. Their findings highlight the negativeimpressions associated with media reports of unethical business behaviours, and also the damagingstereotypes associated with low-quality goods in industrial and consumer markets, as considerablebarriers to attaining an appropriate and positive image for the nation as a holiday venue.

What Selby and Hunt (1996) have to say, however, raises at least two other related

considerations. Firstly there is the matter of determining the breadth of what they term 'organic'influences, and secondly there is the challenge of ascertaining the ways in which these influencescontribute to the formation of overall place images. In addition, the degree to which negativeorganic images can be modified (Selby and Morgan, 1996:293) also needs to be investigated. Thispoints to a need for further research into the nature and impact of place images and how they areformed, possibly with reference to the use of PO branding campaigns designed as a part of exportmarketing efforts.

Place-of-Origin Branding in Export Markets:An Overview of Current Theory and Its Implications

A product's PO can have a potentially significant influence on the decision-making of

buyers (Papadopoulos and Heslop 1993). While this may seem almost intuitive, the precise natureof the effect is yet to be fully determined. Researchers have sought, with mixed results, to unravel anetwork of influences upon purchase decisions to determine when, where and amongst whom POhas its greatest effect. In a climate of intense competition, international marketers are eager tounderstand circumstances under which PO effects occur and, more importantly, how these can bemaximised for optimum outcomes in terms of sales and profits.

Research into PO effect has tended to focus on whether PO information is attended to bypurchasers, and has also involved empirical testing of how and why this effect may differ acrossproduct categories, the nationality of surveyed respondents, and the origin of the product itself (J ohansson, 1988). During this time the importance and impact of stereotyped views of countrieshas remained a key pillar of interest (Bannister and Saunders, 1978; Johansson, 1988). Many

researchers have observed buyers’ quick acceptance of goods such as Swedish furniture and Italianceramics, and a corresponding hesitation over items such as Russian automobiles or Japanese pizza(Morello, 1993), but the question remains: why does this occur? Significantly, Roth and Romeo(1992) have found that if a high degree of ‘fit’ exists between a country’s image and the importantattributes of a product category, the potential that PO effects will be included in decision-makingprocesses is maximised. Correspondingly, their findings also suggest that products to be promotedusing PO branding require careful selection and that, if endeavouring to promote a seeminglyincongruous match, a strategic use of marketing communication materials to modify the countryimage (CI) or the salience of product dimensions is likely to be necessary.

Lampert and Jaffe's (1998) investigation into the impact of PO along a product's life cyclealso contributes significantly to management's knowledge of when and why the PO effect is likely

to be greatest. They propose that a product moves through its life cycle from an introductory period,where there is no experience of a product and the country image halo effect is dominant, through tothe maturity phase where the effect of country image is minimal. They also contend, however, thatthe degree of 'image crystallisation' is a fundamental issue. By this they mean that if, while aproduct is in its growth/maturity stage, other products emerge from the PO which have salientdimensions in common with the initial product, the projected and perceived country image maybecome strongly unified and crystallised. Although yet to be researched further, implications of thismodel centre upon the possibility of modifying negative images, or confirming positive stereotypes,

7/28/2019 kent1


7/28/2019 kent1



to build and convey a positive image of New Zealand. It bears noting that the impact and claimedsuccess of TNZW campaign to date has been registered primarily in the context of exportmarketing. This is not to say that there has not been a beneficial affect on tourism, but the precisenature and size of this affect has yet to be fully determined. Furthermore, it is not known which of the six brand values are most relevant and effective for export, as distinct from destination,marketing purposes.

(ii) Brand Oregon

The Oregon Economic Development Department's (OEDD) Brand Oregon strategy wasformulated for reasons and purposes almost identical to those of TNZW, i.e. to support themarketing of goods outside the state, to promote tourism interest and investment in the state. Ratherthan choosing a single positioning strategy, believing that this may stifle industry and communitydevelopment (OEDD, 1997), all local businesses are encouraged to incorporate one or more of fourmajor 'Oregonian' attributes within their marketing materials. These attributes include:

! Quality of life and related focus on quality products/services;! Environmental awareness and sensitivity;! An entrepreneurial, creative environment that fosters innovation; and

! Natural beauty (OEDD, 1997).

While companies are urged to consider including the word 'Oregon' in their business name,they are also encouraged to develop their own, unique 'place-positioning' dimensions. In this way,the overall image of Oregon continues to be augmented by new and additional attributes whichevolve progressively to the potential benefit of all stakeholders. Despite the potential forinconsistency, the strategy has achieved its aims, particularly in supporting emerging businesses andkey industries, including tourism (OEDD, 1997). In fact, the Oregon Tourism Commission (OTC)has played a key role in building the Oregon brand, reaping its own benefits while assisting manyother businesses in the process.

In assessing the effectiveness of the Brand Oregon initiative, the OTC reports that its key

performance indicators of tourism income and visitor volume have witnessed dramatic increasesover the past ten years. In addition, it is claimed that sales of products capitalising upon the BrandOregon image have also experienced considerable increases. One particular winery attributes anability to claim leader status in premium markets upon leveraging the increasingly well knownenvironmental purity of its Oregon origins (OEDD, 1997). Further, this company notes that theOregon image has been pivotal in attracting human and financial capital, investments which havenot only allowed the estate to expand, but which have contributed to the cycle of further enhancingand promoting the Brand Oregon image (OEDD, 1977). One of the key elements claimed tocontribute to Brand Oregon's success to date lies within the combined efforts of the tourism andtrade sectors. Because the effectiveness of the OTC’s place branding initiatives resulted in manycompanies mimicking their approach, it seemed only logical to instigate a coordinated campaignwhich reaped the benefits of unified voice, ultimately promoting consistent positive images to build

equity in the Oregon brand (OEDD, 1997). What, however, is not known is which of the four mainattributes work best in achieving each of the OEDD’s stated objectives.

(iii) Brand Tasmania

Established in 1999, the Brand Tasmania initiative aims to build a positive brand image of this Australian state in order to encourage increased economic activity, particularly in the trade andtourism sectors. Once again, the campaign has been developed in acknowledgement that theprojected images of Tasmania are often fragmented and uncoordinated. The inherent risk that the

7/28/2019 kent1



inconsistent activities of individual enterprises could create a disparate and potentially confusingarray of perceptions regarding Tasmania as a PO is also recognised. To counteract this, it isintended that a branding strategy will be implemented to heighten the profile, perceived quality andvalue of Tasmanian products and services and thereby:1. increase export trade opportunities;2. attract additional economic investment; and3. enhance the profile of Tasmania as a tourism destination (Principals, 1998).

The convergence between tourism marketing and export promotion strategies is explicitand, interestingly, although the initiative is based firmly within private enterprise, it receivesconsiderable guidance from the state's tourism authority. In essence, the Brand Tasmania initiativeseeks to position an image of the state based upon the attributes of superior quality of products andservices, together with a high degree of innovation and creativity. The branding strategy willsimultaneously aim to leverage characteristics associated with Tasmania's relatively unique 'distantisland' status, including its untouched natural beauty and aura of mystique, in order to strengthen thepositive dimensions of the state's existing image and to counteract potentially less advantageousassociations with the island's geographic location (Kent, 1999).

Adopting a similar approach to other international campaigns, it is anticipated that the

Tasmanian branding initiative will be executed by exporting enterprises, acting in harmony with allkey tourism marketing agencies. Short-term performance measures for Brand Tasmania focus uponadoption of the strategy by local businesses and the level of export sales generated by participatingenterprises. Media exposure of the state in key markets will also be measured and research will beconducted to gauge awareness of the state and the nature of perceptions driving its prevailing imagein export and tourism markets. Clearly, the Brand Tasmania initiative exhibits the characteristics of what appears to be an increasing trend in place branding strategy. The concept is explicitly designedto meet both destination and export marketing objectives with a single, cohesive image, to beconveyed uniformly by enterprises from two previously diverse industries. Although earlyindicators are encouraging, it remains to be seen whether these twin purposes can be successfullyachieved through such an approach.

Implications

Table 1 summarises and compares attributes used by each of these places for export and/ordestination marketing purposes. Two attributes, innovation/creativity and quality, are common toall, whereas most appear to be more or less unique to the respective marketing of each PO. In Table1 we also assess the apparent suitability of each of these attributes for export and destinationmarketing purposes.

7/28/2019 kent1



Table 1

Comparative Summary of Suitability of Place Branding Attributes

PositioningAttributes

ExportMarketing

DestinationMarketing

InvestmentMarketing

Common AttributesInnovation and Creativity ?

Quality of place, life and products ?

Balance of Attributes

New Zealand

Achievement ?

Integrity

Cultural Diversity ? ?

Environmental Responsibility ? ?

Oregon

Environmental Responsibility ? ?

Natural Beauty ? ? Tasmania

Island State Attributes ? ?

Uniqueness ? ?

This assessment suggests that, in most instances, each attribute is suitable more for onepurpose than the other, and that most attributes would not appear to be suitable for both purposes.We acknowledge that this assessment is open to debate. By the same token, however, we suggestthat it serves to illustrate that positioning attributes deemed suitable for one purpose may notnecessarily suit the other unless the aims and objectives of both are considered conjointly. Forexample, Tasmania’s island state attributes would appear to suit positioning for destination

marketing purposes; yet the relevance of these same attributes for export marketing purposes wouldseem, at least, to be questionable. Correspondingly, the innovation/creativity and quality attributesthat each place appears to emphasise for export marketing purposes seem intuitively to be lessappropriate for destination marketing purposes. Moreover, the ‘fit’ between CI and positioningattributes salient to one purpose as opposed to another would appear to be open to question. Theseapparent dichotomies or, at least, uncertainties, are compounded if one also includes the purposesand requirements of investment marketing in the comparative analysis.

In the same way that different marketing objectives require different strategies and tactics,the objectives of export marketing support, destination marketing, and investment marketing maybe such that they may not be achievable with one common campaign, and may too require discreetstrategies. This is not to say that it may not be possible to formulate these strategies in a mutually

complementary manner. In some situations and circumstances this may desirable and, quitepossibly, advisable. Certainly the Oregon experience suggests that this is possible. We would argue,however, that the objectives of each should be considered independently of each other beforeconsidering what opportunities may exist for pursuing them with one or more strategies,independent or shared tactics inclusive of positioning attributes. Only in this way can the suitabilityand likely effectiveness of strategy and tactics be best ensured.

A further complication is presented by the likelihood that in each of these three places thereare regions also promoting themselves for one or more of the same purposes, i.e. to support themarketing of goods produced within these regions, to attract tourism, and to attract investment. In

7/28/2019 kent1



this event a question is raised as to what extent these regional activities complement or detract fromnational or statewide campaigns, and to what extent there exists the potential for conflict betweenthe two. Furthermore, attributes suitable for a national or statewide positioning campaign may notbe equally appropriate or credible across all regions which also pursue their own marketingactivities, and vice versa. A question also arises as to the likely effect on CI of independentlypursued regional campaigns in addition to those of a national or statewide purview and nature.

The concept of ‘organic’ influences raised by Selby and Morgan (1996) and reflected in thework of others, has important implications for how places are perceived and marketed for export,destination and investment marketing purposes. What this suggests is that whatever is undertakenfor one or more of these purposes is likely to affect CI and how this is perceived. Correspondingly,export, destination and investment marketing efforts undertaken independently of each other arelikely to have an affect on each other and their ability to succeed in their respective purpose.Furthermore, even in situations where these efforts are planned and pursued conjointly, it isuncertain whether what is achieved will be likely to be equally relevant and beneficial.

Lampert and Jaffe’s (1998) notion of ‘image crystallisation’ may be as applicable todestination marketing as it is to export marketing. The work of Selby and Morgan (1996) suggeststhat negative perceptions can be redressed through an integrated marketing strategy designed

purposefully to achieve positive image crystallisation for holiday destinations. The research of each,however, has considered export and destination marketing respectively and independently of eachother. Consequently, a question is raised as to whether crystallisation or fragmentation would belikely to derive from export and destination marketing campaigns formulated and pursuedindependently of each other.

Research Opportunities

Each of the case studies above illustrates a common practice of developing a single brandingand positioning campaign for multiple purposes. In our view this practice is questionable.Commonality of purpose and strategy may, in some situations, be achievable and desirable; inothers, however, the attributes and images suitable for one purpose and market may not necessarilycomplement those suitable for other purposes and markets. While it has been shown that positioning

strategies devised to support export products may contain elements which can effectively supportthe promotion of places as tourism destinations and/or investment bases, we believe that research isnecessary in order to illumine:

a) conditions under which this may or may not be successfully achieved;b) situations in which this may not be advisable or feasible; andc) the appropriateness and advisability of single or multiple strategies in order to fulfil

multiple marketing purposes and to achieve multiple objectives.

Beyond this, it is also argued that, with an increasing number of place branding campaignsemerging, the question of complementarity across geographic regions should also be investigated.While national governments may choose to instigate a strategic positioning campaign for their

products in international markets, it is unclear how this might be affected by imaging campaigns of states or cities of that nation, based upon differing image attributes. Therefore additional researchinto the likely degree of coalescence or conflict in this regard would also appear to be needed.

Cases reviewed in this paper also raise a number of additional issues warranting furtherresearch. For example, while it has been claimed that the New Zealand branding initiative hasachieved success in meeting dual objectives, it is not clear which of its ‘Brand Values’, or indeedwhat combination of attributes, have been effective in supporting and improving export trade, asdistinct from creating increased tourism activity. Similarly, the experience gained through the Brand

7/28/2019 kent1



Oregon program has not yet revealed which attributes in particular contribute most suitably andeffectively to the creation of images which are relevant for discrete export, tourism and investmentpurposes.

Research conducted by Selby and Morgan (1996), among others, also points towards agrowing awareness of the impact of forces external to tourism in shaping consumers’ perceptions of a holiday destination. Although Selby and Morgan (1996) acknowledge that sources, such as the

place images conveyed through the media, may have a powerful influence on such perceptions, thisconcept remains to be fully researched. The importance of this is heightened in situations in whichplaces are becoming increasingly proactive in creating and projecting images for the purpose of stimulating export trade and investment. Therefore it appears timely to understand more fully howplace images are shaped and formed. Research into the nature, impact and relative importance of ‘organic’ sources in contributing to an overarching place image would prove useful not only todestination marketers but, also, to those active in promoting export products and investmentopportunity.

Findings derived from research into destination marketing and export marketing hold thepotential to inform each other. Arguably, Lampert and Jaffe’s (1998) observation that the image of a place is created gradually over time through a process of crystallisation introduces a concept with

the potential to beneficially inform tourism theory and practice. Similarly, Roth and Romeo’s(1992) theory regarding the need for ‘fit’ between the images associated with a place and its exportproducts also suggests that destination marketers should strive to ensure congruence between theimages promoted of a destination and its tourism products. Correspondingly, the attention drawn bySelby and Morgan (1996) to how place images are formed and influenced holds potential value forpractitioners and researchers interested in PO marketing to support export products. Clearly, there isconsiderable scope for further research into these and associated issues, and potential value to begained from a closer integration of place branding literatures and practice.

References

Aaker, D., Managing Brand Equity. New York: The Free Press, 1991.

Ahn, J. and Z.U. Ahmed, “South Korea’s Emerging Tourism Industry”, Cornell Hotel and Restaurant AdministrationQuarterly, 35 (2-1994), 84-89.

Bannister, J.P. and J.A. Saunders, “UK Consumers’ Attitudes Towards Imports: The Measurement of National StereotypeImage”, European Journal of Marketing, 12 (8-1978), 562-70.

Echtner, C.M. and J.R.B. Ritchie, “The Measurement Of Destination Image: An Empirical Assessment”, Journal of TravelResearch, (Spring 1993), 3-13.

Graby, F., “Countries As Corporate Entities in International Markets”. In Papadopoulos, N. and L. Heslop (Eds), ProductCountry Images: Impact and Role in International Marketing, New York: International Business Press, 1993.

Heath, E. and G. Wall, Marketing Tourism Destinations: A Strategic Planning Approach. New York: John Wiley andSons, Inc, 1992.

Hu, Y. and J.R.B. Ritchie, “Measuring Destination Attractiveness: A Contextual Approach”, Journal of Travel Research,(Fall 1993), 25-34.

Johansson, J.K., “Determinants and Effects of the Use of ‘Made In’ Labels”, International Marketing Review, 6 (1-1988),47-58.

Johansson, J.K, Global Marketing: Foreign Entry, Local Marketing, And Global Management, Chicago: Irwin, 1997.

Keller, K.L., Strategic Brand Management. New Jersey: Prentice-Hall, 1998.

Kent, H.A., Brand Tasmania. Unpublished thesis, University of Tasmania, Hobart, 1999.

7/28/2019 kent1



Kotler, P., D.H. Haider, and I. Rein, Marketing Places and Nations: Attracting Investment, Industry, and Tourism ToCities, States, and Nations, New York: The Free Press, 1993.

Lampert, S.I . and E.D. Jaffe, “A Dynamic Approach to Country of Origin Effect”, European Journal of Marketing, 32(1/2-1998), 61-78.

Momsen, J.H., “The Economics of Tourism (Review)”, Economic Geography, 75 (2-1999), 211-213.

Morello, G., “International Product Competitiveness and The ‘Made In’ Concept”. In Papadopoulos, N. and L. Heslop

(Eds), Product Country Images: Impact and Role in International Marketing, New York: International Business Press,1993.

Oregon Economic Development Dept, Brand Oregon Tool Kit. Oregon Economic Development Dept, 1997.

Palmer, C., “Tourism and the Symbols of Identity”, Tourism Management, (20-1999), 313-21.

Papadopoulos, N. and L.A. Heslop (1993), “But Who Knows Where or When: Reflections on the Images of Countries andtheir Products”. In Papadopoulos, N. and L. Heslop (Eds), Product Country Images: Impact and Role in InternationalMarketing, New York: International Business Press, 1993.

Pearce, P.L., “Perceived Changes in Holiday Destinations”, Annals of Tourism Research, 9 1982, 145-164.

Principals, Brand Tasmania: Brand Objectives and Brand Idea. Unpublished workshop presentation, June 1998.

Roth, M.S. and J.B. Romeo, “Matching Product Category and Country Image Perceptions: A Framework for ManagingCountry of Origin Effects”, J ournal of International Business Studies, 23 (3-1992), 477 - 498.

Selby, M. and N.J. Morgan, “Reconstructing Place Image”, Tourism Management, 17 (4-1996), 287-294.

kent1

Documents