BJP and Congress: who’s got better slogan?

In an old paper, Kohli, Leuthesser and Suri (Busiess Horizon) suggest that brand identity is represented through troika of three elements: brand name, symbol and slogan. Name and slogan are verbal and symbol is visual. These take verbal and visual route to information processing. Slogans communicate brand’s ideology in verbal shorthand-its vision, promise and philosophical core. Symbols facilitate recognition slogans through recall can effectively communicate brand’s meaning and how it is different.

Brands need to communicate what they stand for and how are they different. The base to brand building is brand awareness on which brand image or knowledge is build. Most people are able to recall both BJP and Congress names and can also recognize their respective symbols. It is the slogan that assumes importance in every election. Ideally it should communicate brand’s core proposition which should resonate with inner voices of voters and establish its difference. Catchy and memorable slogans may create recall but the question arises do they do beyond? Do they get elaborated into personally relevant meaning? Consider the following slogans of BMW:

• The ultimate driving machine
• The joy of driving

The driving machine is about the product but the ‘joy’ is personally desirable outcome.

Now consider the slogans of two parties in 2019 elections:

• Abki bar phir Modi sarkar (BJP)
• Ab Hoga NYAY’ (Congress)

The first slogan is based on assumptions that people know what Modi sarkar means but does not go on to connect with voters’ craving. It hangs in air and assumes people would be able to elaborate it into its extended meaning and find something worthwhile to develop favorable disposition. The Congress’s slogan (only slogan) is better for it focuses on a timeline and the word ‘Nyay’ offers hope at the literal level (translated into justice of different kinds including social, religious and economic) and for those who are informed the word expands into Nyay scheme.

What is the better way for BJP to connect with potential voters? Make the slogan rhyme with its core agenda or achievements. Consider something like:

• Akankwaad per atoot prahar . Abki bar phir Modi sarkar
• Paanch saal bina kisi bhrastachar, Abki bar phir Modi sarkar

Some slogans can have promises embedded in them. Don’t you think it is better way to connect with the voters?

Rahul Gandhi, Mount Kailash, Brand Congress and Wisdom of Sun Tsu

Rahul Gandhi’s earlier temple run just before Gujarat election had effects. But the question was on whom and what?

RG is custodian of one of the top political brands. His actions express or subtle; small or big; direct or indirect influence on what Congress brand stands for. Core to its brand identity have been ideas of secularism and liberalism. This cocktail made enormous sense to its core constituencies of voters, mainly the Muslims and liberal Hindus. The brand resonated so much that Congress governed India, the Congress which ruled India for several decades, virtually unchallenged.

But Rahul now seem to have embarked upon a journey to transform brand Congress my his new found fancy for temples. The latest being his visit to Mount Kailash after a great temple run in Gujarat.  The question is what is his projection as ‘Hindu’, ‘Bhakt’, ‘Shiv Bhakt’, ‘Janaiu dhari’, ‘believer’, etc  is doing? In this regard the wisdom of Sun Tsu is particularly illuminating, and he writes in his Art of War:

‘whoever is first in the field and awaits the coming of enemy will be fresh for fight; ..the second in the field has to hasten to battle, will arrive exhausted’.  

What is needed to bring about this position? To that he says:

‘it is more profitable to draw the enemy at a place and time of your choosing rather rush on the offensive seeking him’.

The words, ‘to draw the enemy’ and ‘of your choosing’ are critical. RG and his strategists seem to be precisely doing the opposite. They are moving him to precisely where the BJP would want him and him party to be: in temples. Temples are like BJP’s fortresses on high grounds with defenses that cannot be penetrated. What BJP’s strategists should be doing is actually done by the Congress’s Generals. They are pushing their most prized warrior in a terrain of huge strategic disadvantage.

Sun Tsu futher explains:

‘..together with compelling bait, helps to draw the enemy in a desired locality, in the latter (move), striking at this vital point will force the enemy cease offensive action and divert his men in the defensive mode’

The earlier temple run made the Congress spokesperson defend volley of scathing sharp attacks. This opened a whole lot of questions about his religion, devotion and others. Politically impact did it have on Congress’s core franchise, the Muslims and liberal Hindus? , Nothing but frustration. So if you want to buy a cola what must you buy RC Cola or some local cola brand when you can have the original and authentic Coca Cola?

In the world of business, companies know that a brand is the most precious asset in contemporary scenario. And brand must stick to its core identity. Straying away from its DNA, the brand alienates its core franchise and positions itself as fake and inauthentic.

SP-Congress Alliance and Lessons in Branding

Indians do an elaborate consulatations with pandits and astrologers before selecting marriage partners. Similarly companies do elaborate exercise before mergers and acquistions. This is also true in branding. The decision to merge two brands may be taken by top managers but it has everything to do with non-managers, i.e. consumers. What may ring excellent in rational calcuations may not make much sense from consumers’ perspective.

Strong brands derive their strenght from dedicated often fanatic like consumer following. Brand is another synonym of bond. And this bonding is based on multiple layers of mutually satisfying intersections. Further, what sits at the heart of strong brands is uniquness or distinction based on functional or psychological value delivery. Consider: Volvo for long stood for safety,BMW defines itself as ultimate driving machine and pleasure, Mercedes is stately and engineering excellence, Coke is ‘real’ and Pepsi is for new generation. It is brand’s distinction which connects it with a specific consumer group.

Now consider the rationality of brand merger: two strong brands if merged would bring two consumer franchises together under one mega identity. So if Coke and Pepsi come together in one idenity it would create one huge cola brand and Nescafe and Bru would create a big coffee entity. So CokePepsi would seamlessly merge two consumer segments and transfer their allegiance to combo brand. The reason from one side is often non-reason from the other side.

Consumers develop allegiance, affinity and loyalty based on the principle of singularity. That is, a brand appropriates singularly one proposition relevant and meaningful to a segment. The consumers of  Closeup want ‘freshness’ and Pespodent’s consumers want ‘germi-check’.  And there is little un-substantial number of consumers who want both. The segmentation and market slicing is essence of strategy that aims to ‘carve out’ a niche out of an existing market. The consumer heterogeniety manifests in segments and ultimately creation of multiple brands.

What effects would a combo brand would have on their previously committed consumers? They are likley to disenchanted, disgusted and raged depending upon their level of involvement. The core consumers are likley to feel abandoned, betrayed and violated.  The combo brand assumes that consumer differences are superficial and open to merger. Which is far from truth especially in high involvement emotional situations? However, for the indifference fence sitters nothing matters.

Now consider what happened to SP, a strong brand whose franchise was cultivated on certain principles that made sence to a select group. The votes polled in favor of SP came down from 2.20 crores in 2012 to 1.89 crores in 2017. Now consider Congress, it votes came down from 28 lakhs to 7 lakhs in 2017.

So one plus one is not always a good strategy in marketing and branding. Never try to make a brand which creates it value proposition by borrowing elements of available strong brands.

Tactical solution, Strategic problem, Theory of reasoned action and Pollution in Delhi

Consider some of the headlines:

• Pollution, Reasons and People Behavior
• Air pollution: Delhi shuts schools, bans construction work
• Delhi pollution: Centre says it is an ’emergency situation’\
• Indian Medical Association issues advisory, asks Delhiites to stay indoors
• ‘80% of air pollution problem in Delhi is derived from here itself, 20% is from crop burning in neighbouring states; need to address this’
• Supreme Court to hear plea on alarming Delhi air pollution
• Delhi LG holds a meeting on pollution issue with CM Kejriwal, Delhi Commissioner of Police, Delhi transport minister and other officials
• Delhi Air pollution: Delhi shuts schools, bans construction work
• As Delhi chokes, India Inc steps in to shield staff from pollution
• Delhi Air pollution: Delhi shuts schools, bans construction work
• Air Pollution in New Delhi Gets Dangerously High During Diwali …

The pollution level in Delhi has risen to level that in a way robs citizens of their right to safe and healthy living. If terror and incursions across the line of control put life of Indian citizens at risk, the pollution within our cities is no different. Both lead to same outcomes. Both are enemies, except that domestic enemy invites divergent opinions and milder response. Lack of consensus is one big reason why things don’t get implemented. But consensus based decisions are not always timely and correct. Difficult situations require tough and decisive actions. If there is identifiable enemy outside, equally offensive foe thrives within.

First of all there is no dearth of opinions on what causes pollution in Delhi and how much. The list includes causes like vehicular emission, construction activity, coal and wood burning, poor quality of fuel, city waste burning, industrial emissions and dust on streets due to open surfaces. The cause that dominated news now includes stubble burning in neighboring states.

What is of concern in this air pollution? It includes gases and substances that pollution is made up of.  These includes lead, particulate matter, and gases likeNitrogen oxides (NOx). Carbon monoxide (CO). Sulfur dioxide (SO2). Pollution is bad because of its consequences. It is a health hazard and is related to respiratory problems, lung damage, asthma and cancer. The elderly, children and ill are particularly vulnerable.

Broadly two the contributing factors can be classified into two categories: the micro or the ones within in individual’s control and macro which related to governmental interventions. The macro contributors like emissions from power plants, diesel policy, politician-contractor nexus (footpath tiles changes), enforcement pollution policy on industrial units and road encroachments.

From marketing perspective, the government can launch systematic campaign based on insights to discourage (de-market) pollution causing behaviors. It is not the same thing as haphazard ad campaigns usually run by governmental agencies (like the one which is currently going which urges people to teach needy children in the neighborhood).

One of the approaches that can suggest route to curb pollution is theory of reasoned action. This theory proposes that Intention (intention to control pollution) is necessary for Behavior (actual pollution controlling actions) to occur and both are likely be related. The intention to indulge in a behavior is caused by Attitude to that behavior (liking or disliking towards polluting behavior) and Subjective norm (how people important to one view when one indulges in pollution control activities).

So it is necessary for government to cultivate Intention before people actually adopt pollution reducing behaviors. What are the strategies?

•  Create strong negative evaluation/attitude towards polluting behavior. Now the issue is do people know about polluting behaviors and its effects. The answer is probably yes. But they don’t strongly feel negative about polluting behaviors. So what is required it to link these behaviors with something important in their lives so that their attitude shifts from indifference to strongly negative (consider: is smoking bad? Answer is yes and I don’t care. But now if you show that smoking is going to hurt your most loved one-lovely daughter, the attitude is likely to shift to negative toward smoking).
•  Often people don’t care about certain behaviors (like littering on streets) because it is acceptable/it is a norm/nobody disapproves. We often seen illegitimate as legitimate because ‘everybody does it’/ ‘it’s normal’. So this norm has to be changed. The important people around can exert pressure. This power needs to be leveraged. Although difficult, yet norms can be subtly changed. If people around us start to dislike, abhor and show displeasure at our polluting behaviors, it is likely subtly pressure us into not to violate this ‘social norm’.  Many of us who visit abroad very quickly learn what public behaviors are socially disapproved and fall in line.
•  Finally, often people with right intentions do not behave in accordance to their intentions (e.g. I intend not to litter yet I do). Here comes the role of enablement by the government. The desirable behaviors would get actualized only when they are accompanied by enabling conditions (the campaign to stay indoors is a hollow waste of money- if people don’t have alternative they  would move outdoors/ the odd-even is bound to make people defy their intention in the absence of alternatives).

It is part of our DNA not adopt a visionary approach to solving problems. The tactical maneuvers to strategic problems do not help. It’s time that we seized up the situation and took a long term stand on the issue of pollution.

BJP, Modi, Criticism and Refutational Communication

• ‘India’s democracy was under assault”
• ‘Govt talking big on economy, but nothing happening on ground’
• ‘Intolerant India’
• “When it came to making speeches, Modi government got into the T-20 mode, when it was about announcing policies, it became a one-day match, and when it came to implementing promises, the government behaved as if a Test match has been abandoned,”
• “Chhe Mahine Paar, U Turn Sarkar”

These  are some of the slogans that have surfaced at different points in time criticizing Modi government. Politics is a competitive game. It is same as when two or three dominant brands attack each other to gain supremacy. Consider, how Amaze directly or indirectly hits out at Desire and the battle between Coke and Pepsi gets direct and dirty. Marketing is also an attitude building, sustaining and changing game. Leadership implies that a brand enjoys positive consumer attitude and behavior. In the last general elections, BJP was voted into power which also implied that it enjoyed an attitudinal and behavior advantage over its rival Congress. The challenge for the leader brand is to defend and sustain its market by maintaining attitude. The challenger brand, on the other hand, can thrive by shifting and changing consumer attitude in its favor.  So consider the following:

·         “We are Number 2 but we try harder” (Avis Rent a car)

• Volkswagen’s ‘Lemon’, ‘Think Small ‘ and ‘Lemon’ campaigns

This campaign by Avis allowed the company to gain significant market gains by the power of what in communication is called ‘refutational’ appeal or advertising. The communicator first raises a negative matter and then demolishes it. Volkswagen, after the Second World War launched Beetle car in the US with campaigns including the one in which it boldly claimed its car to be ‘Lemon’  followed by text refuting the claim that the car in the ad is plucked from the assembly line (lemon) by the engineers due to scratch on the glove compartment so that ‘you get plums’.  In a similar vein, Listerine which creates burning sensation in the mouth first admitted its burning sensation (negative belief, possible attack opportunity for the rival) followed by a refutation that this sensation is sign of its effectiveness. This strategy is also used by expensive brands. They first admit that their brand is expensive (therefore target of attack by lesser price brands) and then refute this claim by focusing on their long lasting quality. Why do firms adopt this strategy?

The idea behind refutational communication is to ‘inoculate’ the consumer/audience against competitor’s counter claims and destroy them. So what implications follow for the BJP government? The need is to study these attacks that the opposition is making or is likely to make in future and then use them to inoculate the audience and then refute them by showcasing what has already been done. It is better to erect perceptual defences before the enemy mounts attack.