Wednesday, January 12, 2011

Country of origin effects

Often when we talk about branding, there is an innate concept that surfaces which is called the Country-of-origin(COO) effect. This simply means that the buyer's decision making process is biased based on the country of origin of the offering.  There may be many factors responsible for such associations of buyer s with a particular country some of which can be i) The ancient business of the nation (The watches in Switzerland)  ii) The Technological revolutions happened in the country(Japan and Germany). iii) The economy iv) The government
v) The wealth index(most important one).
This concept can be associated with many examples like the swiss watch or the scotch from Scotland or the French wines and list can go on and marketers implements this concept extensively to position their brands.

I am here to quote one such example where in COO effect could be seen operating as a success mantra for the offering.
It is still fresh in our hindsight, the 22nd feb,2009 when in the rampart of the 81st academy awards, the trumphets of Jai ho was blown and the son of BHARAT BHOOMI was awarded the oscar for the first time in musical category. Yes!!!!!! i am talking about the Slumdog millionaire, the movie that stole many awards in many events in that year and was one of the most successful movies ever made.
 But before getting carried away with the ecstacy, answer a question. How many of you have heard about a movie called Traffic signal. If we start digging from our memory, a wavy picture starts coming to our mind that we have heard about this movie somewhere. Let me reinforce your memory a bit. This was a movie by Madhur bhandarkar, released in the year March 2007. A movie that couldn't do wonders in the box-office but was made on the same lines as Slumdog exactly a year ago but we cannot say that theme was the same as we cannot challenge a hollywood movie's authenticity.
If you ask my point of view, i found Traffic signal a far better movie compared to slumdog but that's a different story.
However, the success of slumdog was surely due to one factor acting in several ways over the same movie:
- Poverty and India are siblings (atleast, the world perceives so) and the developed babus of the globe want to see our nation subdued, miserable, and poor despite the fact, that we are one of the fastest growing nations of the world. So, when we say that we are showing slums from India, the automatic thirst and passion operates over the world's most of the corners to see how subdued these dogs are & pamper themselves imagining their superiority. The poverty from India makes the global buyer's biased towards the offering as mentioned in the earlier part of the discussion. So did happen for slumdog. How convinced we Indians are with the fact that anytime we are shown subdued and caught in the spiral of social inequality, we are awarded oscars. It happened for Bandit queen and so happened for slumdog. However, when a movie like Lagaan, which shows Indians defeating the west, is not awarded anything even though it is best in the category.
Here, off course the Wealth effect accounts for the COO effect and it is a evident fact that our PPP says our poverty story.
Off course, Indians have gifted the world with many other gems apart from poverty but no one discusses about it that often.
Some of them are Ayurveda, Yog, Surgery(Father of surgery is susruta), kohinoor,Investment in gold (now called bullion) etc. But while availing these, does the buyers have a bias in their decision because of COO????
I have serious doubts. Forget about COO, Americans have even tried to infringe into our heritageous products like Basmati, Tulsi, Neem, & Turmeric and tried associating their country's name with it.
There are many unsung stories like this from India which is not associated with India anyways, but when it comes to poverty come what may, we stand to become the burning example of it.



So, i conclude the discussion saying that historic marketing concepts has evolved and the world uses it extensively also but what is dangerous is that the consumer tends to become more and more prejudiced in their decision making process as acceptability is something that the world need to learn to survive.

8 comments:

  1. Before I comment just have a reading of this (source: Wikipedia)
    Mother India (Hindi: मदर इण्डिया, Urdu: مدر انڈیا) is a 1957 Hindi film written and directed by Mehboob Khan and starring Nargis, Sunil Dutt, Rajendra Kumar and Raj Kumar. The film is a remake of Mehboob Khan's earlier film Aurat (1940). The film was fifth Indo-Russian co-production, and was preceded by Pardesi (1957), also starring Nargis Dutt. In 2005, Indiatimes Movies ranked the movie amongst the Top 25 Must See Bollywood Films. The film ranked #3 in the list of all-time box office hits.

    The film was India's first submission for the Academy Award for Best Foreign Language Film in 1958, and was chosen as one of the five nominations for the category. However, the submitted entry was dramatically different from the original version released in India. The version sent to the Academy was edited down to 120 minutes from 160 for the benefit of a foreign audience. The 120-minute version was later distributed in the US and UK by Columbia Pictures. The film came close to winning the award, but eventually lost to Federico Fellini's Nights of Cabiria by a single vote.

    I think it was a great achievement to come close to winning an Oscar during the times when India was not self sufficient to produce a movie on its own. Mother India as the name suggest its COO effect in the name itself also portrayed a true picture of how poverty and Zamindaari leads to a human turning Dacoit.

    I therfore do not agree completely that showing poverty can only win an OSCAR for India...

    ReplyDelete
  2. ur point is well taken JD but i disagree on one count where u say that AR Rehman should have won Oscars for Roza rather than Slumdog Millionaire.However Oscars for music score can be given for American movies only and the only award in a foreign category is that of the best foreign film....thus the argument that he should have won it for Roza stands null and void.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Thanx for the knowledge rahul as i was not aware of it but my argument still holds on the ground of the essence it carries. Rahman was just an example in potraying it. Thanx anyways n sorry for the misrepresentation.

    ReplyDelete
  4. @ mohit,
    If i could remember clearly, the movie which u r talking about has shown many social tangles that use to exist in our society. The movie has shown societal clashes, people turning resilient when they outburst their anger, their subduedness in the society, miserable conditions under which a human can survive. of course this was not central issue but was incidental. The movie also show bandits and dacoits at some point which is again curse to the society. I have no offences from the movie as i liked it a lot but ur point with ur permission does nothing but reinforces my point.
    Thank you.

    ReplyDelete
  5. @ mohit,
    By the way mohit i never said that poverty can only win an oscar for india. The point is still deeper, i tried to point out that buyer can be biased on their decisions if they dont start accepting the globe. This is very vital as the third world is pivoting most of the services to the world n 2morrow the will have no option.
    Winning an oscar was just an example n was incidental in nature. There was a deeper marketing philosophy involved i.e... a change in the entire positioning of many brands and develop associations which hold holistic market in perview. The usage of Coo has to be more judicious. I hope u got it now.

    ReplyDelete
  6. @jd.....the whole point of discussion in ur article rotates around Oscar....and u very well talked about poverty and oscar in the following statement:

    'The poverty from India makes the global buyer's biased towards the offering as mentioned in the earlier part of the discussion. So did happen for slumdog. How convinced we Indians are with the fact that anytime we are shown subdued and caught in the spiral of social inequality, we are awarded oscars. It happened for Bandit queen and so happened for slumdog. However, when a movie like Lagaan, which shows Indians defeating the west, is not awarded anything even though it is best in the category'.....

    And i am very against the usage of the word 'third world',....India as u said is beyond poverty and has lot to offer to the developed world in terms of services in near future...COO as far as i understand helps in acceptability of the product or service and so a bollywood movie too is indifferent in the case....

    ReplyDelete
  7. THird world is something that they use for us not me using for this great nation. This is one word even i hate but its always used for many asian and african nations which unfortunately includes india.
    I respect ur views on COO n i dont find it digressing from mine.
    The oscar and poverty is to relate the biasness of the buyer n i never said that it is the only way to win an oscar but till now it has not happened.
    The movie that u talked about as i said in my second comment also reinforces my point.

    ReplyDelete
  8. Cool..so great debate n thus ur blog gets good publicity..one more concept of marketing FREE PUBLICITY...LOL

    ReplyDelete