1. Introduction
1.3 Research Significance
國
立 政 治 大 學
‧
N a
tio na
l C h engchi U ni ve rs it y
will also analyze whether government succeeded or not in building a more positive yet modern image of the nation by hosting the Asian Games 2018.
1.3 Research Significance
With respect to theoretic significance, there are mainly two gaps identified in this study.
First, a review of literature shows that there have been numerous published articles about nation branding through mega-sport events but there is few, if any, research on nation branding of South East Asia countries, especially Indonesia. Most of previous studies analyzed nation branding though sport events hosted by Africa amd Middle East (East Asia) countries (Knott, 2014; Knott
& Fyall, 2017; Kobierecki & Strozek, 2017) The Asian Games 2018 has received a lot of public attention; since it is the biggest sports event in Asia and second biggest after Olympic however it was hosted by Indonesia as a developing country. Likewise, it has been 57 years passed since the first Asian Games hosting Indonesia has ever done in 1962. A lot of efforts will be put in the series of this event to grab people’s attention, to repair the negative perspective people had about the country, and at the same time to bring back the glory Indonesia brought in the Asian Games 1962.
Second, previous study mostly utilizes questionnaire or online survey method to see the leveraging nation branding opportunities (Hakala, Lemmetyinen, & Kantola, 2013; Yee, 2009;
Cristea, 2015) while in this research a video content analysis will be conducted to see both visual and textual messages delivered by the government of Indonesia through the sport games at the same time.
‧
國立 政 治 大 學
‧
N a
tio na
l C h engchi U ni ve rs it y
CHAPTER 2 LITERATURE REVIEW
2.1 The Concept of Nation Branding
A succinct and often quoted definition of a positive or successful brand is given by Doyle (1992), who suggests that ‘a successful brand is a name, symbol, design, or some combination, which identifies the “product” of a particular organization as having a sustainable differential advantage’. Macrae, Parkinson and Sheerman (1995) defines that a brand represents a unique combination of characteristics and added values, both functional and non-functional, which have taken on a relevant meaning that is inextricably linked to the brand, awareness of which might be conscious or intuitive, while Aaker (1996) argues that a brand is a multidimensional assortment of functional, emotional, relational and strategic elements that collectively generate a unique set of associations in the public mind. Every country has their own unique name and images in the mind of people internally (locals, governments) and externally (international stakeholders, tourists, etc), so a nation does have brands with or without any conscious efforts in nation branding, as each country has a current image to its international audience, be it strong or weak, clear or vague (Fan, 2006). So, simply said, nation brand is the total sum of all perceptions of a nation in the mind of international stakeholders which may contain some of the following elements: people, place, culture/language, history, food, fashion, famous faces (celebrities), global brands etc (Fan, 2010).
Dinnie (2008) has presented that the original application of branding on a product has revolutionized to service branding and corporation branding and both service and corporation branding has in turn evolve into nation branding. Adapted from Balmer (2002), compared to
‧
國立 政 治 大 學
‧
N a
tio na
l C h engchi U ni ve rs it y
corporate branding, the focus of nation branding is centered to the nation, managed by the country leader, delivered by the member of entire nation, while corporate branding focuses on the company, managed by the CEO, and delivered by the whole company staffs and members.
However, still, both of them have similarities to one each other, which the attention and support comes from multiple stakeholders, it was accomplished for a long time horizon purpose, and use strategic manner to implement the branding.
Some major definitions of the nation branding concept show significant differences in the focus and purpose or outcome of nation branding as shown below:
1. To remold national identities (Olins, 1999)
2. To enhance nation’s competitiveness (Anholt, 2007; Lee, 2009)
3. To embrace political, cultural, business, and sport activities (Jaffe and Nebenzahl, 2001).
4. To promote internal and external economic and political interests (Rendon, 2003;
Szondi, 2007).
5. To improve a nation’s image or reputation (Gudjosson, 2005; Fan, 2006, 2008b, 2009) Identity, image and reputation, though often used interchangeably, the three terms are, in fact, different constructs. They all refer to mental associations generated by knowledge and past experience. Identity is about self perception. A nation’s identity refers to the essentially irrational psychological bond that binds fellow nationals together and which is supposed to constitute the essence of national identity. Image is what is projected to other while reputation is the feedback received from other (Whetten & Mackey, 2002). Image and reputation, which is the reciprocal of image, both are components of a symmetrical communications process between the nation (self) and its international stakeholders (other).
‧
國立 政 治 大 學
‧
N a
tio na
l C h engchi U ni ve rs it y
The main concerns of nation branding are the image and reputation a nation have towards the world. A nation’s image is defined by the people outside the country; their perceptions are influenced by stereotyping, media coverage as well as personal experience. Similar to commercial brands in the marketing sector, a nation’s image can be repackaged, repositioned, and communicated in a professional way. The relationship between national identity, nation branding and nation’s image can be summarized as below:
Figure 2. Differences of National Identity, National Branding, and Nation’s Image
(reproduced from Fan, 2010, p. 5)
The origin of nation branding study can mostly be found from four different sources, namely, country-of-origin (Papadoplous and Heslop, 2002), place or destination branding (Kotler, et al, 1993; Kotler and Gertner, 2002; Morgan, et al, 2002), and more recently, public diplomacy (van Ham, 2001; Melissen, 2005; Fan, 2008a), and national identity (Smith, 1991; Bond, et al, 2001), and Lee (2009) which offers a good comprehensive review of the literature. Unlike the studies on country-of-origin and place branding that have a clear focus on promoting specific economic interests (export, tourism, or inward investment), nation branding focused on a country’s overall image on the international stage covering political, economic and cultural dimensions (Quelch and Jocz, 2004; Fan, 2006).
The need for nations to manage their image has been widely acknowledged in the literature (Olins, 1999; O’Shaughnessy and Jackson, 2000; Kotler and Gertner, 2002; Morgan et al., 2002; Mihailovich, 2006; Avraham and Ketter, 2008; Hankinson, 2009). Country image has been essentially studied from a consumer perspective (Roth and Diamantopoulos, 2009),
‧
國立 政 治 大 學
‧
N a
tio na
l C h engchi U ni ve rs it y
tourism promotion (Yee, 2000; Ai.pop and Macovei, 2007; Laws et al., 2002; Dore and Crouch, 2003; Pike, 2005) to encompass additional functions for instance investment attraction (Capik, 2007; Cho et al., 2009; Arregle et al., 2009; Lee and Rugman, 2009), promotion of exports (Tesfom et al., 2004), and public diplomacy (Cowan and Cull, 2008; Fullerton et al., 2009).
While in facts, governments may also cooperate with each other to develop supranational region brands (Dinnie et al., 2009), where the challenges of stakeholder coordination assume even greater dimensions.
2.2 Competitive Identity
Simon Anholt (2007) has recently re-coined the concept of nation branding as
“competitive identity”, which is described as a new model for enhancing national competitiveness using both public diplomacy and brand management. Nation branding (Anholt, 200) is not just about tourism but rather a collaborative effort of the various faculty, including the promotion of tourism, investment and trade, plus public and cultural diplomacy (Kahn, 2006). For this reason, Anholt (2007) prefers to use the term “competitive identity” to “nation branding” because managing the brand name of a country concerns the reputation of the nation, and it involves the national identity, policies, and economics of competitiveness (Yee, 2000).
Positioning acts as the starting point when a competitive identity of a nation is about to be built—the place which that nation holds in the collective mind of other nations. Positioning is conducted based on the existing link between the position held in the mind of customer and the position held in the market, compared with the competitors (Pop, 2000). At the same time, Simon Anholt (2002) asserts that, in order to create a fair, rounded, and attractive picture of a country in people’s minds, a balance must be maintained between the different elements.
‧
國立 政 治 大 學
‧
N a
tio na
l C h engchi U ni ve rs it y
Competitive identity differentiates one nation to another with its competitive advantage in the global market. The terms of “one world, one market” has been brought as the impact of globalization, in which create the system of because the easiness and efficiency of technology and information access people have nowadays. This fact leads to a more competitive market for tourists, consumers, investors, entrepreneurs, international sport events, international media, talent, and so on. A nation should be concerned because the reputation of a country becomes the integrity of the nation, generating trust from its existence in the world, and the respect earned from all of that. In essence, the brand identity of a place becomes the competitive identity of the nation.
According to Anholt (2002), every nation has its own brand and a nation obtains their brands from public opinion (Anholt, 2008). People usually conjure up an image or multiple images when a country is being named. If you talk about France, people would think romance. If you talk about Thailand, people will think about their signature dish “Tom Yum Goong”. The perception varies from one to another because it highly depends on individual experience and/or association through either experience or media exposure (magazine, internet, word of mouth, or the other medium). Products and services, corporations and even the country’s inhabitants contribute to the country’s image.
The brand image is synonymous to the country’s reputation (Anholt, 2008). A country with poor reputation (uncultured, backward, or even unsafe politically) find their marketing effort inefficient because the perception of the public opinion is low, therefore less likely to be chosen as a destination for vacation or business travel (Meeting, Incentives, Conventions &
Exhibitions—MICE) while countries with positive reputation (culture, forward, and politically safe) gain easier entry to the global marketplace with doors open, trust gained, respect given
‧
國立 政 治 大 學
‧
N a
tio na
l C h engchi U ni ve rs it y
along an expectation that quality and competence workers will be there to meet the needs (Yee, 2000).
Anholt (2008) is recognized for Anholt—GfK Nation Brand Index (NBI) which categorized six different measurements about the global perception of a country. The nation brand is how others perceive a country. The NBI is a barometer of global opinion which represents the index of national brand power of the total of 50 developed and developing countries. An analytical ranking where 25,000 people were polled worldwide on their perceptions of the cultural, political, commercial and human assets, investment potential and tourist appeal of were completed to get this index. NBI essentially measures the perception individually in each of these categories with six categories, named as the “Nation Brands Hexagon” or “Hexagon of Competitive Identity”. This index can be a useful and reliable tool to help a country or nation find out what are people’s perception about its image. It also serves to evaluate if its image is consistent to the project image and if there is a gap between the image and the actual experience (Yee, 2000).
2.3 Mega Sport-Events and Its Benefits
Mega-sport events must be held with the consideration of the benefits it will provide.
Existing literature on mega-events provides several characteristics: 1) large-scale, 2) international, and 3) have the ability to capture global media attention and focus it on a specific area (Gold and Gold, 2008). Roche (2001) defines mega-events as "large-scale cultural events, which have a dramatic character, mass popular appeal and international significance" reappears in various literature reviews and proves to be the eminent view. Previous researches emphasize more on the tripartite model of sponsorship, exclusive broadcast rights, and merchandizing that
‧
國立 政 治 大 學
‧
N a
tio na
l C h engchi U ni ve rs it y
Mega-events are a product of 20th century globalization; as the world integrated, international events provided a venue through which this phenomenon could be expressed and internalized (Carroll, 2012).
The spectacle of mega-events draws enormous attention to a specific city or nation who hosts the event, allowing it to gain the many perceived rewards. This, in turn, has led to a competitive bidding process to host the events and receive many tangible and intangible benefits (Carroll, 2012).
1. Mega-Events as Public Relations
Nowadays, mega-events which are modernly globalized have attracted both advertisers and public relations specialists. The ability to draw sponsors from the international scene for instance Johnson & Johnson, Castrol, and McDonald as the main global sponsors for World Cup 2014 is one aspect of the marketing power associated with mega-events. Kearns and Philo (2010) noted that new dimensions of global capital have allowed mega-events to become a form of "place marketing" that attracts development.
Mega-events criticized as labeled a "showcase" in which they are spectacles for either the elite and "hegemonic power or an attempt at public relations removed from realistic challenges" (Hiller, 2000, p. 440). However, an offer by the South African city of Cape Town to host Olympic Games in 2004 proved how public relations have become coiled together with bids to host mega-events. Back in 2004, a public relations campaign with the slogan "If Cape Town Wins We All Win" was run all over the city by the elite sectors in the interest of convincing the South Africa population that hosting a sports event would be beneficial for whole country and as the result, an opinion poll afterwards find 80% of respondents to be in favor of the bid (Carroll, 2012).
‧
國立 政 治 大 學
‧
N a
tio na
l C h engchi U ni ve rs it y
2. Mega-Events as Tools of Nation Building
The ability to use mega-events as public relations tools has expanded beyond merely marketing products to more political uses, including nation building. Nation building has been seen in various lights. Taylor and Kent (2009) define national identity as "the conscious identification of a group of people with shared national goals," but also note that even within one person, many identities can exist. A nation can be composed of people of various races, religions, or beliefs, but a central national identity allows for society as a whole to have a common memory is especially true when it comes to mega-sport events.
National unity works in line with national identity and has been defined as "the common ground that facilitates cooperative efforts for the benefit of the state" (Taylor &
Kent, 2009, p. 343). It supplements national identity by creating the cultural events and institutions through which the national identity is established. Both of national unity and identity are fundamental elements of nation building that can be controlled through
"strategic communications management," or in another word, public relations.
National identity and unity concepts are palpably to the ability of mega-events to affect change as public relations. The concept of national unity itself dictates that any sporting mega-event will probably become engrained in the nation’s collective memory and become a part of identification afterwards (Carroll, 2012). It can be seen through the 1996 Centennial Olympic Park bombing in Atlanta. When there was tragedy happened attacking the whole nation, sports can also invoke "powerfully emotional shared experiences" that infuse themselves within the memory of even the most casual sports fans (Black & Van der Westhuizen, 2004).
‧
國立 政 治 大 學
‧
N a
tio na
l C h engchi U ni ve rs it y
Until now, Americans still discuss the "Miracle on Ice" during the 1980 Lake Placid Winter Olympics likewise the black power salute at the 1968 Olympics by Tommie Smith and John Carlos is still remembered by the world (Carroll, 2012). The ability of mega-events to evoke memories based on their emotional significance plays a large role in shaping both national identity and national unity. Those ties between mega-events and nation building are not certainly intended, and often come as a direct consequence of their spectacle.
However, some groups actively attempt to leverage the events as a force to instill national unity or identity. Hiller (2000) acknowledges that in South Africa, some groups sought to make use of the Cape Town bid for "general civic and national interests in the fight" against the inequalities established by apartheid. Unfortunately, not all groups seek to use mega-events for such praiseworthy purposes. The government and elites in a nation can often use the glamour of sporting events to obscure the "perceived loss of the state's social responsibility" and hide the deficiencies of governance. As Horne and Manzenreiter (2010) note, a country will use mega-sport events for different reasons, even often with fewer things to do with sports, including nation building. However, the ability of mega-events to contribute to nation building outstrips the creation of national identity and unity, with the reason of its ability to affect the image of a nation.
3. Mega-Sport Events as Tools of Image Crafting
Communications research into how public relations theory can be used in nation building has suggested the importance of relationship building with international publics (Carroll, 2012). A major aspect of this is the control of a nation's image. Boulding (1956, p. 64) claim that "the basic bond of any society, culture, subculture, or organization is a
‧
國立 政 治 大 學
‧
N a
tio na
l C h engchi U ni ve rs it y
'public image,'" supports the importance of image. This ties expressly with the idea of national identification, but goes a step further to denote the importance of being recognized internationally in what Boulding (1956) refers to as a "universe of discourse”.
“Universe of discourse” suggests that a nation only exists in as much as it is recognized as a nation on the international stage. Even beyond recognition, however, it is still important to remain having a positive national image. According to Pratt (1985), if a country can demonstrate a positive, unified, and stable image, it is more likely to receive monetary support. Therefore, image control becomes paramount to any nation, especially those who need international funding for development which is a very rational reason of why Indonesia were eager to replace Vietnam as the host country of Asian Games 2018 with the current state’s debt of 4.253 trillion rupiah (Kompas, 2018).
The capacity of mega-events to attract the eyes of the world has led many countries and cities to believe that mega-events are an opportunity to rebuild the image of the host country. Some countries, such as Japan and Germany, have used the Olympics as a way to seek "redemption" after their role in World War II (Short, 2008). Mega-events have often been used as "catalysts for image creation," enabling countries to create new identities in the eyes of global audiences (Lenskyj, 2002). However, as Short and Manzenreiter (2008) state, this is notoriously difficult to achieve. The Olympic Games in Atlanta in 1996 are both remembered for significant acts of terrorism; Mexico City in 1968 was the site of massive protests, while Mainland China's desire to be viewed as modern during the 2008 Summer Games may have been complicated by media attention on human rights abuses and its relationship with Tibet. Complexity also arises from attempts by the International Olympic Committee and FIFA to separate sports and
‧
國立 政 治 大 學
‧
N a
tio na
l C h engchi U ni ve rs it y
politics. Rule 50 in the charter of the IOC attempts to prohibit political statements during the Games, but the success of this rule is highly debatable (Carroll, 2012).
International stereotypes and misconceptions makes the change of nation’s image becomes difficult (Manzenreiter, 2010). In spite of this, some nations continue to use abstract ideas to dictate why they deserve to host mega-events. South Africa, which will be examined later, widely, utilized the ideas of "Africa's World Cup" and "Pan-Africanism" to obtain the 2010 World Cup (Ngonyama, 2010). One reason this rhetoric may continue is because of the belief that mega-events can unify nations. It was hoped
International stereotypes and misconceptions makes the change of nation’s image becomes difficult (Manzenreiter, 2010). In spite of this, some nations continue to use abstract ideas to dictate why they deserve to host mega-events. South Africa, which will be examined later, widely, utilized the ideas of "Africa's World Cup" and "Pan-Africanism" to obtain the 2010 World Cup (Ngonyama, 2010). One reason this rhetoric may continue is because of the belief that mega-events can unify nations. It was hoped