Investment and branding: two sides of a coin

When somebody buys something or invests in a venture they do so because they are investing emotionally in a product. One still has to be rational and practical but one also has to invest their emotions in something. The same way when a farmer plants he is investing his hopes in a venture, money can be replaced but faith and hope are harder to replace. Africa is associated with too many negative values; such as war, famine, corruption, disease, more war. So an investor marks up the risk and demands unreasonable profits. It has been estimated that a dollar invested in Africa gets a return on average of 7% per annum, as opposed to 3% in the west. The investors themselves are aware of the benefits of investing in Africa, but shareholders in the west still regard Africa as a risk. So nations try to brand themselves as a haven of sanity in a sea of economic madness, this attracts more investment but no nation is an island and effects of neighbouring countries are shared in this globalised world. Rwanda has largely succeeded in rebranding itself as a haven for investment, but the overall perception of Africa still affects us. Last week I talked about how cultural products help to rebrand a country and attract investment in other sectors. However the real product you are selling is Rwanda, it is the history, the culture, the potential and the national character. Think Germany and you think – austere, serious people with a hard-work ethic and high quality goods. In branding you make the best of what you are given, if you are given lemons then you make lemonade. The Germans are called austere and serious and they play up to that strength, Rwanda can do the same. The best example of rebranding a nation was done by Thomas Sankara, he changed the name of Upper Volta to Burkina Faso “the land of indomitable people.” He changed a geographical description to a self-fulfilling prophecy, or a positive mental image for a nation. At the moment there is a drive to rebrand Rwanda but it needs support from all sectors of government, RDB is leading the initiative because they need to attract investment but other organs should be more involved. It is a double-sided coin where we need to change the world view of ourselves but most importantly we need to change how we view ourselves because we are all ambassadors and brand-managers. What we believe of ourselves and how we conduct ourselves will reflect in higher investment. We are rebranding as a place mostly free of corruption, with the rule of law, with a virgin economy, with hard-working people and we are succeeding. However, a brand must be kept fresh, redefined, revamped and all this because of the cynical world we live in where people become desensitised. So this requires us to be multi-faceted and able to change to take advantage of niches or sudden advantages but we must remain the same, the modern branding paradox. Ends