Sticking with the Nation branding theme of the previous post, the 2016 World Happiness report is out. You can download the full report here. Of the 157 countries that participated in the project, Malaysia is the 47th most happy country, 25 places below Singapore at 22 and way above Indonesia at 79.
Denmark top of the world happiness index
The sample size is 3,000 and its purpose is to, “survey the scientific underpinnings of measuring and understanding subjective well-being.” One section of the methodology caught my eye, “..continued with our attempts to explain the levels and changes in average national life evaluations among countries around the world. This year we shall still consider the geographic distribution of life evaluations among countries, while extending our analysis to consider in more detail the inequality of happiness – how life evaluations are distributed among individuals within countries and geographic regions.” It caught my eye but I’m not sure what it means!
One argument in the report suggests “people are happier living in societies where there is less inequality of happiness.” Which I think means “People are happier where everyone is happy.” If I’m right, I don’t think that’s particularly ground breaking information.
However, the section on Measuring and understanding happiness is interesting and worth a look. In fact the whole report is worth a look but I won’t be taking it too seriously. Oh, and the happiest country in the world? Denmark. Why, because everyone looks out for everyone else. The government’s social policy really is social and embraces everyone which has created a civil society where everyone has the freedom and income to make their own life choices. Food for thought there.
Place branding is a generic term for all the elements of a nation or country brand, cities, states and regions and even destinations within those areas. In South East Asia alone there are more than 600,000 destinations competing for investment, talent and tourists. In an effort to match their destinations to stakeholder requirements for value, smart places are developing brands that investors, talent and tourists embrace.
Our company Fusionbrand is working on a brand for one state government in Malaysia and in the past have worked with other state governments, tourism boards, enterprise zones and the Malaysia Tourism Board. It’s always a privilege when we win a destination or place branding project because such projects have a major impact on society.
Many nation brands are victims of the politician’s need for quick wins
The Place Brand Observer heard about our work and got in touch with me in February and suggested an interview. The Place Brand Observer is a fantastic resource for anyone responsible for branding nations, cities, states and regions, public diplomacy and reputation management.
The site features insights into the industry, interviews with experts in destination branding from around the world as well as tutorials and case studies of successful branding of countries, regions, cities and destinations. It’s a meeting place for the brains and the brawn of the place branding industry. If you are involved in place branding or simply want to know more about the industry, I strongly recommend you sign up for their excellent news feeds.
You can read the full interview here . I thought it was a really good interview and we discussed data driven branding, country brands, Malaysia airlines and the link between the legacy carrier and the country. I hope you find the time to comment, good or bad!
Malaysia’s January automotive sales nose dived 12% to 44,591 units although this was expected after the record highs of December 2015. Japanese firms were hardest hit with Toyota sales down 27%, followed by Nissan 22% and Honda down 12%.
It’ll take more than a new logo and a dubious tagline to stop Proton’s slide
Proton continued its slide with sales down 13%. And even though Perodua sold less cars this Janaury than it did in 2015, the relative newcomer to the industry saw its market share increase to 35% giving it more than double Proton’s market share. In an effort to stem the bleeding, Proton has created a new logo and tagline but Perodua is undeniably Malaysia’s number one automotive company.
Mercedes Benz sales went through the roof with a year on year increase of 139%. Mercedez Benz sold 1,027 units in January 2016, up from 430 in January 2015. Mercedes Benz was the only top 15 brand to sell more cars in January 2015 than it did in December 2015.
BMW and Audi probably spend more on traditional advertising than any of the other luxury brands and have been particularly active recently but neither brand was able to match the performance of Mercedes Benz. Audi sales were down over 40% in January over the previous month although they did manage a modest 9% gain over January 2015.
BMW fared better with a gain of 23% over January 2015 but compared to December 2015, sales were down 25%. This fall in sales would probably explain why BMW is now offering a longer warranty although anecdotal evidence suggests the BMW brand is losing its lustre in the local market.
But of most interest to me was the performance of Mazda. Mazda has come from nowhere to take 3% of the market share in Malaysia, up from 1% five years ago. This is an extraordinary feat because Mazda spends very little on advertising. Which is probably just as well because the advertising they do revolves around the words ‘ZOOM ZOOM’ and poorly written copy.
Seriously, what is this ad saying?
For instance ‘A new era of driving experience’ doesn’t make sense. The copy begins, ‘New levels of freedom, new levels of versatility. New levels of pure enjoyment on the road.’ Obviously the person who wrote that doesn’t drive on the roads of KL. Certainly not during the daily commute or on a wet Friday afternoon.
The copy also breaks the cardinal rule of not providing any solutions to problems but instead rambles on about nothing. I mean seriously, how can the CX-3 really be ‘designed and engineered to evoke emotions by closely matching human sensibilities?’ Get real. The copy is cold and doesn’t talk to anyone and ends with Zoom-Zoom is unique. It certainly is. I could go on but I’ll spare you the pain.
This is what I meant when I wrote my book Stop Advertising, Start Branding. It’s not that you should stop advertising, it’s that you should stop poor or weak advertising. Mazda is doing really well at the moment in Malaysia and globally. It has tripled its market share and could be on to something spectacular. But it needs to do more than churn out this sort of advertising because it is wasting money and it may have a negative effect on the brand. It needs to Stop Advertising, Start Branding.
I am yet to visit a Mazda showroom so can’t tell you about the experience. I will endeavour to do so and we’ll do some research and report back to you.
Back in July 2013 I wrote a post about how Proton must fast track its branding activities. You can read the full article here. Two years before that in 2011 I wrote about that the first rule of auto advertising was ‘to keep it real’. You can read that post here. More on this in my next post.
The first post quotes then Proton Edar CEO Hisham Othman as saying that the company, “Would pay greater attention to product quality and customer service.”
Fast forward to March 2016 and Proton Chief Executive Officer Datuk Abdul Harith Abdullah is promising, “new product introduction, network rationalisation, the introduction of new dealers and upgrading of services at our centres.”
Proton is in big trouble. Its market share has dropped from close to 80% to 17% in little more than 20 years. Proton service centres rarely deliver on promises made and many consider the cars to be inferior to the competition and over priced.
In other words, the brand and its reputation is in tatters. Abdul Harith has acknowledged the problem and has vowed to “reform and rebrand.”
What we don’t know at this stage is what Abdul Harith and his team consider to be a rebrand. Certainly some of the noises coming out of the firm are good.
For instance he stated at the weekend, “We have an audit team going out there to make sure that key performance indicators are met.” That’s a good start. The service centres and their ability to look after customers are key to this rescue mission. On this matter he said, “To address the poor quality of our customer services at after-sales operations, key improvement initiatives will include network rationalisation, the introduction of new dealers and upgrading of service at our centres.” Owning up to the faulty hose deception is another good start. As is getting rid of crap dealers, as long as they aren’t replaced with more crap dealers.
Meanwhile, Hong Leong Investment Bank wrote in a report that, “negative consumer perception on Proton’s quality has been a major blow to the national carmaker for many years.” The report adds, “various programs have also been introduced to improve (the) customer experience and provide more value-add services, such as courtesy car service, pick-up and delivery service, quick service money-back guarantee, mobile assist service and one-stop customer care line.” I know what you are thinking – this isn’t the first time Proton has gone through this process.
So can Proton survive? Provided the new Proton cars really are exceptional and meet target market requirements for value. If they are still poor and the team tasked with implementing the rebrand don’t know what constitutes the level of service consumers are looking for and they are able to train the service centre owners and staff to deliver meet those requirements for value at every touch point and every time, it has a fighting chance.
In other words, a rebrand is not the CEO standing up and repeating what his predecessor said 3 years ago. It’s not a change of logo or an advertising campaign. It’s a ‘fit for purpose’ product that is able to deliver on promises made. It’s a comprehensive overhaul of all the processess and systems involved in delivering the value the customer needs.
It’s the collection of data and having the knowledge to interpret and use that data. It’s the ability to deal with issues and crises in an open and transparent manner. It’s the ability to work with potential customers, assuage their fears with solutions that matter to them, and often only them. It’s about going the extra mile, time and time again and often in different ways.
It’s about communications that resonate. Not about a ‘big idea’ created by an advertising agency or the CEO. It’s about talking to customers in a language that they understand and will address their concerns.
It’s an ongoing relationship with the customer that turns them into fans and advocates. If all these are in place then Proton could achieve it’s target of 150,000 vehicle sales this year and start to reverse the decline in its market share.
This is the first in a series of articles where we will track Proton and see how it is doing.
There is a lot going on in the world of website design and development and it can be hard to keep up. As a result, some CEOs believe the only way to stand out is to give creative people free rein over the design of their website.
Now I’ve written about Lexus before and I mention them in my book (which incidentally you can buy from the Fusionbrand website) because they are spending a lot on marketing but don’t seem to appreciate the importance of the experience in the consideration process. Plus, every time I see a new billboard or print ad it seems to be telling me something different. There isn’t any consistency in their communications.
And then I saw a digital ad this morning and clicked on the link and came to this Lexus Asia website. In my opinion (and don’t forget all comments on this site are my opinion) this website is a serious contender for the worst website of 2016.
At least TRY to make your content real and believable
People today are time poor and impatient. They don’t want to sit around and wait for your complicated video to load (unless they are given an option to look at the video). And once they’ve watched the video they don’t want to have to burn up a lot of grey matter listening to a lot of nonsense and figuring out how to navigate around the site.
The Lexus Asia site looks good but is terribly complicated. It also looks different to the Malaysia site and uses a completely different approach to the Lexus Malaysia site which also has it’s own tagline.
Now following my terrible experiences with BMW, I’m actually in the market for a new SUV and I went to the site to arrange a test drive for the weekend but left angry and frustrated and without a test drive.
So if you designed the Lexus Asia website, here are 5 free tips that you might want to cut out and put on your wall.
1. Your website must be consistent and responsive. This means it must look the same on any screen and adapt to a users screen size to ensure a seamless experience. Your site isn’t the same on a smart phone, losing the consistency that is key to successful brand building.
2. Your website must be easy to navigate and have a clear, easy to follow layout. Get anywhere in three clicks or less is the general rule of thumb.
3. Flash is very last year and search engines don’t like them and some older browsers even block flash.
4. Your site should be free of clutter.
5. Make sure your video scripts make sense – “Luxury is stiff. It’s very lobster.” Seriously?
The Lexus site was overwhelming. Beautiful and creative perhaps, but it’s only there to get visitors in for a test drive, not to win an award. Oh wait, maybe that’s it!
Malaysia has joined Australia, Ireland, France and the UK by anouncing the introduction of plain packaging for tobacco products, however unlike the other countries who have announced a deadline of May 2016 for the new law to come into effect, Malaysia has not given an implementation date, saying only it will happen in stages.
Price increases and plain packaging have seen a big reduction in smoking in Australia, especially amongst teenagers so it is a logical step for Malaysia. Malaysia and other countries like Singapore have tried more traditional campaigns including shock and awe advertising but these have failed to have any long term impact on the number of smokers in the country.
Smoking statistics in Malaysia
In Malaysia, 25% of smokers are reported to start smoking before they are 10 years old. It’s not known how much smoking costs Malaysia but in Canada, a country with a lower average number of smokers but a similar sized population, smoking costs the Canadian government around RM10.5 billion in direct health care and another RM38 billion in lost productivity. Meanwhile revenue from taxes on cigarettes totaled around RM9 billion. Canada is a good benchmark for Malaysia because approximately 5.7 million Canadians smoke, about the same as Malaysia.
According to the Star Newspaper, Malaysia’s treasury generates RM3.28 billion from duty on cigarettes yet could be losing 3 times that in health care costs and 10 times that in lost productivity.
Since 1991, Malaysia has spent over RM100 million on advertising to try and reduce the number of smokers in the country and in 2003 introduced the ‘tak nak’ campaign which you can read about here which seemed to do little more than raise awareness of the dangers of smoking but did little to reduce the numbers of smokers in the country, 20,000 of whom die from related diseases every year.
According to the Guardian newspaper, global tobacco sales are more than RM2.2 trillion and generate more than RM140 billion in profits for the top six tobacco firms. That equates to a profit of RM4,000 PER SECOND of every day!
The implications for the tobacco brands are huge and they are likely to fight such steps. It’s a complicated issue but with 25% of Malaysian smokers – that’s over 1 million Malaysians – starting under the age of 10, plain packaging is a good start but it is a tactical initiative and it won’t solve the problem on its own so needs to be part of a strategic branding initiative from a strategic brand consultancy such as Fusionbrand.
This post from the poke on how to start a creative agency is actually very funny yet at the same time a sad reflection of the confusion around building brands.
Unfortunately, too many firms are under the impression you hire a creative agency to build a brand using creative driven tactics and in particular advertising, that are pushed out across media that few consumers pay any attention to. And even if the advertising is on digital platforms, it rarely understands how consumers live their lives, the environment they are advertising in and the needs of those consumers.
Too many CEOs are seduced by the creative industry
The ‘suits’ as they are called of the agency seem to have an almost hypnotic power over clients. And when they tell potential clients that the way to build a brand is with creative driven advertising that costs a lot of money they nod and write the cheque.
Then, when you ask the suits (if they haven’t moved on to another company) why the advertising didn’t work, they often blame the client and tell him that he shouldn’t have approved the initial campaign or the campaign was right but he didn’t spend enough money the first time around.
And the only way to solve the problem is do it all again and despite failing the first time, they are the team for the job. Sadly, most clients will agree and waste yet more money on a creative campaign that rarely helps build the brand.
Some advertising is very good but that doesn’t mean it works. The reality is that most advertising doesn’t work, especially with millennials who have seen their parents let down by so many products that failed to deliver on promises made through creative driven advertising. Instead they trust the opinions of their friends or others like them who share their space and their interests and have no ulterior motive but to help a friend or like minded soul.
Authentic Brand consultants understand this better than any creative agency. They know that to lay the foundations for your brand you must develop a customer centric organisation that looks at delivering economic, experiential and emotional value to customers at every touch point and every time.
Sometimes this involves advertising but more often than not, it requires nothing more than improvements to the delivery system. It’s not as cool as advertising but it is much more effective. And more often than not, it’s a lot cheaper and improvements are immediate.
For more information on the difference between a brand consultant and an advertising agency, please read this.
I was concerned yesterday when I read your comments that rebranding of Malaysia Airlines (MAB) is not a priority. It was reported that you said, “undertaking a rebranding exercise without having a strong foundation would create a vacuum in the carrier.”
TS Azman Mokhtar
This worries me because I think you are wrong. Malaysia Airlines desperately needs to rebrand. Secondly, you are contradicting what we’ve been hearing from Christoph Mueller who said, “A brand change is a necessity.” This contradiction is only going to make Mueller’s job more difficult, as well as confuse an already confused global public and weaken trust in the ability of the company, whichever one is trying to restore trust in its ability to run a global airline.
But most worrying of all, is that if you as the respected Managing Director of Malaysia’s flagship sovereign wealth fund are making such statements, I am concerned you have been given the wrong advice about what constitutes a brand and branding. Because the structural changes implemented in a rebrand form the foundations for the business to deliver on the promises it makes at every touch point and in relationships with existing customers.
It may be that you have been told a rebrand is nothing more than a creative driven exercise based around a new identity, tagline and statement. That these are then promoted across traditional channels using traditional media in the hope that the new identity will resonate with prospects, boost sales and retention and make the world forget about the twin tragedies, poor management, questionable practices, gap between promises and reality and shallow offering.
This of course is mutton dressed up as lamb and couldn’t be further from the truth. But sadly it is not uncommon. In the 1960’s, 1970’s and 1980’s, with few conduits to consumers and limited competition, this type of creative driven branding often worked. Companies such as Coke, Malaysia Airlines, Nestle and Unilever spent billions of dollars using this approach and increased sales and made profits.
Broadcasting corporate driven messages across mass media is not branding
Mass media, which was so powerful during this mass-market economy, was the logical vehicle to enhance the impact of creative-driven branding with a corporate controlled message and reach and repetition. In this environment, the company defined the brand and the consumer accepted that definition.
But the mass-market economy no longer exists. Today’s customers are increasingly overwhelmed with those creative images, taglines and promotions and the disruptive nature of that messaging and underwhelmed by the gap between promises made and reality. They now block out much of the noise and look instead to other consumers for information.
In this new economy, where consumers not companies define brands, the definition of a brand and how to build one has changed. Creative ideas are great, but consistency, information, knowledge and relationships are better.
Whilst every brand is different, the fundamentals of building a brand can be applied across sectors. Today Tan Sri, if you want to build a brand, as apposed to make sales, you need to develop a long-term profitable bond between you and your customer. This can only be achieved if you understand how to deliver economic, experiential and emotional value to those customers and on their terms. And you must back this up with everyday operational excellence and at every touchpoint every time.
Once respected managers of sovereign wealth funds such as yourself, our CEOs and government servants understand that this is what constitutes a brand and branding, the sooner we will be able to build world-class brands or in this case rebuild a world class brand that can once again compete with the best carriers out there.
This is especially relevant as the TPPA and AEC will see a massive influx of competition. If we don’t have any brands, our companies will struggle to stay relevant in the new economy.
Tan Sri, I do hope you read this and see my comments as feedback not criticism.
Yours sincerely
Marcus Osborne
MD Fusionbrand Kuala Lumpur
Contributor: Nation Branding: Concepts. Issues. Practice. Routledge. January 2016
Author: Stop Advertising, Start Branding. Published March 2016.
I’ve been looking forward to the new Malaysia Airlines (MAB) brand from both a professional and a personal perspective. Professionally, I’m eager to see what direction a global company with a huge reputation proposes for the carrier. Personally, I’m a big fan of Malaysia Airlines and have been for over 20 years. I also believe a national carrier is a critical component of any nation brand and building a nation brand is harder without a national carrier.
Right now, despite a new CEO and one presumes new management, the brand seems to be directionless. I think 3 launch dates for the new brand have come and gone and each time the date passes, there is a deafening silence from management.
Meanwhile corporate driven messages tell us the new brand focus will be on ‘making the customer experience change.’ In mid 2015 we were told that in December 2015 the airline “will begin installing new cabin seating and improving inflight entertainment, customer service and on time performance. New technology, lounge concepts and catering would be introduced and the uniforms may change.”
This is not the new cabin seating I was expecting
But I can’t find anyone who has witnessed the ‘new cabin seating and improved inflight entertainment.’ I hear complaints about the poor state of aircraft and have witnessed it myself. Delays are inevitable when launching a new brand but in a social world, these delays must be explained. There is nothing wrong with being normal.
Poorly thought out announcements are made regarding long haul flights that result in global condemnation and humiliating U turns but management remains silent. Days later, as if nothing happened, a press release is sent out about the new beginning at MAB and how the CEO will ‘boost product offerings and rebuild confidence in the carrier.’
What does ‘boost offerings’ mean? Does it mean make it cheaper? The lines between Low Cost Carrier (LCC) and Legacy Carrier have become blurred. The low cost carrier (LCC) model is familiar to just about everyone who travels. Basically you purchase the use of a seat on a (very cramped) plane and then pay through the nose for anything else such as luggage, food, drinks and even the location of the seat.
The alternative is Legacy carriers but I’m not really sure what they are. The term came out of the USA but today, seems to apply to any national airline not making money. With a legacy carrier or national airline, you pay one fee that covers everything including what should be a postive, even memorable experience.
Nowadays, a lot of so called legacy carriers mimic the low cost carrier model. Many of them do it quite well, others not so well. Malaysia Airlines seems to bounce between the two. It recently offered business class seats to London at the ridiculously low return fare of RM3,400. However, just like LCCs the rate excluded GST (6%), taxes and fees and added a caveat that additional baggage and fees may apply. I didn’t check but I suspect this would have bought the figure to the same level as competitors.
MAB needs to focus on delivering on the promises it is making not slashing prices
This is a dangerous game because if Malaysia Airlines cannot compete on price with the Middle East carriers, it won’t be able to compete with LCCs like Air Asia. According to the Economist newspaper reporting on a KPMG study, “a legacy airline operating an Airbus A320 between London and Rome spends US$12,000 more on each round-trip than a low-cost airline.” Whilst the amounts may be different, the additional perceptage is no doubt the same in SE Asia.
Malaysia Airlines should focus more on improving its product than trying to discount its way through low seasons. Instead of trying to match the LCCs with their basic services and expensive add ons, Malaysia Airlines should seek to improve its relationships with its customers and offer a premium service rather than discounts, especially to its passengers at the front of the aircraft.
And it needs to start communicating with the public. Successful brands today are built on accessibility, transparency, collaboration, retention, personalisation and integrity. And consumers not companies determine the success of brands. Corporate driven press releases are not as effective as positive comments shared across social media. Malaysia Airlines needs to get its head around this.
And it must do it now because Air Asia, once the poster boy of LCCs is struggling to stay relevant and is looking to innovate. If it looks to Europe or Australia for inspiration, it will see the likes of Easy Jet and Virgin Australia morphing into legacy carriers. According to the Economist, this may leave legacy airlines “in a perilous state, regardless of their location and size.”
And before anyone says Malaysia Airlines is a private entity and doesn’t need to explain anything to anyone. Just remember that this is the 21st century not the 20th century. Consumers are smarter and acquire knowledge not from brands but from those who use them. And besides, Malaysians have invested billions in the carrier and they have a right to know what is happening and why deadlines are not being met.
If Malaysia Airlines is serious about its brand, someone needs to take charge of the communications and take charge now because I for one, don’t want to see this once great airline continue to make these elementary mistakes. Otherwise the only thing serious about the rebrand will be its inneffectiveness.
What was once a globally respected icon of the aviation industry is in danger of becoming the laughing stock of the world and an embarrassment to all Malaysians.
The arrival of Christoph Mueller seems to have done nothing to challenge the status quo. Last Tuesday we saw MAB make the extraordinary decision to introduce baggage limitations for long haul passengers to Europe.
Citing safety concerns, the carrier temporarily banned check in luggage to destinations in Europe. No details were given but MAB seems to be in panic mode after the previous tragedies.
What a branding disaster! I presume that senior management made the decision only after a great deal of discussion that should have focussed on the likely reactions of consumers who were slowly coming back to the airline.
Unsurprisingly, the market erupted and the carrier was ridiculed globally with plenty of negative banter on social media. Unsurpringly, in less than a day MAB made a humiliating U-turn.
Malaysia Airlines – is this how you restore confidence in an airline?
I for one am absolutely gobsmacked at this latest branding disaster. We were told last year that a new brand was to be launched in December yet there is no sign of the new brand. And the lack of an announcement about the rebrand delay needs to be addressed.
Following the fiasco, management attempted to justify the decision by claiming ‘unseasonably strong headwinds’ and a circuitous route was the cause.
Three days later, the carrier released a press release informing us that the overhaul of the airline was “bitter, and the fitness programme required to bring us back into shape would cause a lot of sweat and sometimes tears. But it would be rewarding in the end.”
I won’t reproduce any more of the press release because it goes on to suggest more effective competitors from the Middle East have increased MAB’s costs by 20% and that the deal with Emirates is a good thing for Malaysians. It also talks about ‘rebuilding confidence’ and a new ‘collaborative style’. You can read the full press release here.
I’d like to know how the airline is going to rebuild confidence when departments and management appears to be doing anything but collaborating. And if there is collaboration, then someone should have stood up and stopped this farce before it began.
brandconsultantasia.com 