While designing the packaging artwork for new brands or new products, I often come across suggestions by people to include claims like “Made in Ghana”, or “Made in Nigeria” on the packaging. A lot of people think that drumming up nationalistic sympathy by claiming to be indigenous will help gain sympathy from the consumers and induce trials. While, this may work to a certain degree under politically motivated propaganda filled airwaves, I don’t think I can quite agree to this as a strategic move; and your packaging is supposed to be a big part of your strategy. In this post, I will lay down my reasoning for believing so.
Ask the question: Does it really add any value to the brand?
If you are making a claim of being “Indigenously made”, it can only be relevant or useful if your country is known to have high standards in that product or ingredient or the quality of manufacturing standards. For example, Japan is known to have high operational standards. It means something to the consumer, that if he or she buys a car from Japan, it is likely they are buying something of high quality and of some repute. In my mind, a “Made in Japan” car would carry a trust value than most other countries.
Or for example, if a food brand says made in EU: people know EU has high standards of consumer protection in terms of food processes and ingredients. So, you would inherently have some trust in the product, as opposed to let’s say some country which is not known for consumer protection standards.
Examples can go on and on. I have worked in India, Nigeria, Ghana and explored Morocco a bit. In all these countries, there are strong positive feelings in consumers for imported or foreign made products. Products made within the country do not elicit the same faith as the ones brought from developed countries abroad. In fact, in some of the countries there is a strong association of poor quality in the minds of the consumers. So, if the country has a poor perception of manufacturing standards or quality standards, then you are probably putting yourself at a disadvantage in terms of consumer trust by putting a claim of being “Made in so & so country”.
So, before you make claims of Where you are produced, it would make sense to look at whether the claim will have a positive connotation in line with the brand and whether it enhances the product image in terms of the features. If not, then you’d rather not put it.
What is the message that you’d want consumers to get?
Anyone can speak a lot of things, given a platform. But in order to make the most of it, you’d need to speak relevant and meaningful words. If you ramble or end up being verbose, you’d lose the chance to make an impression, as against someone who speaks very coherently and concisely. That is exactly how I see the communication on the packaging of a product.
The packaging of the product is the platform where you get a chance to make an impression on the consumer. You need to use that platform wisely and communicate exactly what your brand stands for, so that the consumer can take away the message you want them to take. Speak about the brand quality, or use creatives that project the brand perception you’d want the consumer to have. Do not waste it on claims that are irrelevant to the brand.
For example, if you are selling a pack of healthy biscuits that moms can be happy to give to their children in school, then put that on the pack so that mums understand what they are buying. If you put a “Made in India” pack of biscuits, would it be relevant to the mothers? Irrelevant messaging just dilutes the message you’d want to convey.
Brands Should Never Associate with Politics or Nationalism
Personally, I believe Brand Identity and Political Identity are 2 very separate things on entirely different planes of existence.Â
The brand exists to offer a certain value to the consumer in terms of its functional benefits and the characteristics it projects which can appeal to the emotions of the consumer. Brands are supposed to be very personal.
While on the other hand, nationalism is driven more often than not by political motives. Even if by any chance, the sentiments seem positive at the moment, it might just get derailed any point in time. And when the shit hits the fan, brands might not have anywhere to run for cover.
Take the example of the famous brands like Adidas and Puma which supported Hitler and the fascist regime back during World War 2. It might have all seemed hunky dory at that point in time, but today Adidas tries really hard and spends a lot of money to cover up its past. The more recent fiasco with Kanye West (who was tied up with Adidas) and his Anti-semitic comments refreshed memories of how Adidas supported the Nazi Party historically. There you go, if you didn’t know about it, it is because Adidas has tried very very hard to cover it up, and yet, here we are, talking about how Adidas helped Nazi Party kill many innocent Jewish people.
They might still be successful in covering things up by spending more of its billions of advertising and PR money. But you know what, having to spend so much for past sins actually proves my point. There is really no space for nationalism and politics in brand building.
No matter what the consumer sentiments are, no matter what the ideologies are, it should not be in any way connected to the brand.
Time and again, this matter keeps popping up at work. I heard similar suggestions back in 2010 when I was a fresh graduate out of B-school. And this year in 2024, once again I received the same suggestion again. I guess as long as I keep launching new brands, and work with new people, I might get this suggestion again from someone new.
I guess it feels like a low hanging fruit to jump on the bandwagon of nationalism. One might argue, it is the trending news and everyone is talking about it, then why don’t we do it as well? Well, as much as it feels like the in-thing to do, riding on nationalistic sentiments is just a shortcut that I would definitely avoid. Period.