Welcome to this special series of Bloom Consulting Conversations. Hosted by Clare Dewhirst, Director of City Nation Place, this series explores the world of Nation and City Branding, focusing on Bloom Consulting’s 14 key steps for building an effective Nation Brand Strategy. Each episode highlights one crucial step.
In this episode is a concluding conversation as we have completed all 14 steps of Bloom Consulting’s 14 Steps to Nation Branding. Joined by José Torres, CEO of Bloom Consulting, and Dr. Keith Dinnie, President of Bloom Consulting, we will be answering broader questions and issues around Nation and Place Branding sent in via LinkedIn from our listeners.
Clare: So, are you ready for your questions, José and Keith? Shall we kick off?
José: Yes, we can.
Keith: Yeah.
Clare: Lovely! Okay, so the first question that we had come through was about convincing policymakers and politicians of the value of Nation Branding. One of the key words in this question is the “long term.” We know that politicians like to win votes, but how can we convince our political leaders that Nation Branding is something you have to be in for the long term and that it has value over the long term? Who shall I come to first? Shall I come to you, José?
José: Yes, by all means! Well, Clare, I think this is a crucial question and one that we are asked many times on projects, even before we start working on them, or by our listeners.
One of the key things, Clare, that you are very well aware of because City Nation Place was also part of this, was the Impact of Nation and City Brands on the local economy. If you recall the conclusion of that study, which was the first in our sector, it showed that the perception and reputation of countries and cities do have an impact on the economy. On average, we are talking about a 25% impact on the economy. Specifically, this relates to the attraction of tourism, investment, and talent. We all know that is not Nation Branding itself, but the Nation Brand does have an impact on these transactions. This is very important for countries because, in the end, you are investing time and money. This shows there is a return on that investment.
This is one of the most important arguments, which is very tangible, scientifically demonstrated, and proven. I think this would be one of my main arguments.
Clare: Yeah, as you and I have shared that research, José, with people in the City Nation Place community, we’ve seen places using that research and using that hard economic impact to achieve or retain budgets for their Place Branding work. So, it obviously does have sway.
But I guess there’s another problem here, and maybe Keith, you might have something to say about this. There’s the misconception that politicians and people outside of the Place Branding world have about what Place Branding or Nation Branding is. Particularly, politicians do like a new logo, don’t they? They do like a new ad campaign. It makes them feel very good. So, how do we show them that it’s something more than that? What do you think, Keith?
Keith: Yeah, that’s a great question. If the policymakers and politicians don’t buy into Place Branding, then not much is going to happen. I think partly it’s a question of education, and that was actually the motivation for me to write my Nation Branding book, published in 2007.
At that time, when I was researching Nation Branding, it was pretty clear to me that most policymakers and politicians just did not understand Place Branding at all. But they were spending public money, taxpayers’ money usually, on advertising campaigns that had no impact whatsoever. There was no continuity, no brand building. It was just ad hoc, fragmented activities that contributed nothing to the Nation Brand.
So, informing and engaging with policymakers and politicians is essential to make sure they realize that it’s not just a logo, slogan, or advertising that’s important. But for education to work, there’s got to be a willingness to be open to it. And obviously, politicians are very focused on their own survival and their government’s survival. So, it’s very easy for Nation Branding to drop down their list of priorities. I think it’s a combination of education and making it clear to politicians that if they don’t take a proactive approach to managing the Nation Brand, then their country will be at the mercy of global media and whatever narratives are being pushed by global and social media. Being passive and hoping things will be okay is really not an acceptable approach.
I’ll just bring a final point here. To get politicians on board, you have to make it as easy and painless as possible for them to be part of Place Branding, Nation Branding, City Branding, or Region Branding. Politicians, if they don’t have a background in branding, are not naturally going to be inclined to participate. It’s necessary for Nation Branding teams to structure campaigns so that politicians only need to show up. If you have a trade event or a delegation going out, just make it very straightforward for senior politicians to participate, without them having to spend days wondering what to say. Basically, put it on a plate for them, so it’s as simple as possible for them to engage.
Clare: Yeah, I hear you. That makes perfect sense. One of the things that we’ve talked about in the past episodes when we’ve covered the steps is we know that the narrative needs to be authentic and reflect that place. That’s all well and good when everything that’s happening in that place, that country, is a positive story. Obviously, you want the positive stories.
One of the questions that’s come through from one of the listeners is around the reconstruction of a Country Brand after a period of violence. This question actually references Ukraine. The Ukraine brand team have never stopped promoting their Nation Brand and aligning it to their values to gain global support in their fight against Russia. They’re also thinking about the rebuilding of Ukraine, and they’ll want to put other messages into that. It references Sydney, Haiti, and the Sahel countries after a war or after a disaster.
What role can Country Branding play, and how do you rebuild the image of a country? Have you got any thoughts around that, José?
José: Yes, definitely! I believe that the approach should not be different from any other Nation Branding process. I think it should be exactly the same. You should have the same principles. Of course, you’re not going to have the same tactics. The tactic is different, but the approach is the same. So, the logic is the same. If you remember, Clare, one of the steps we have is to create realistic objectives. So, you need to understand what the objective of the Nation Brand initiative is, right? Depending on the country, depending on the city, you need to set those objectives. But the process should be the same. You should approach it the same way. There should not be any difference from any other Nation Brand initiative. And you say, “Well, can you go back to some examples?” and say, “Well, just looking at history.” One of the things that our audiences need to understand better is that this takes time. So, this is something that takes time. This is something you cannot achieve with a quick win, a quick fix, and so on.
And alluding to what Keith said about leaving this to the mercy of third parties if you don’t have an initiative—today, this is actually a risk factor. We have one of the steps where we talk about mitigation of risks, right? But today, there’s a kind of fight in terms of violence towards nations. There’s already violence towards narratives that actually attack nations. Some of the Nation Brands are already in crisis mode. They have to put this into their risk mitigation factors. This was not seen before or is relatively new—over the last five years—and also came from the global conflicts we are seeing today.
It used to happen to one or two countries, but now it’s an attack on all of them. Sometimes—and you’re seeing this, and our data is showing this—you have more and more violence, fake news, deep fakes with AI, and altered images. It’s very difficult to validate the information that reaches you. So again, this is thanks to technology and the current geopolitical situation, but countries need to pay attention to that because they are being attacked with false narratives and incorrect information, and it is very difficult to manage. This affects their brand. Countries and cities—especially countries—need to pay special attention to this today, more so than they did five years ago.
Clare: Yeah, as Keith said earlier, it’s about controlling the narrative; otherwise, there’s going to be a narrative going on anyway. That’s why it’s important to have a Nation Brand Strategy. I guess, as Ukraine has proved, even during a time of conflict.
José: Yes, exactly. I would even say more than controlling—it’s about contributing to the narrative, because you cannot control the narrative. You also want to have a say in what is being said.
Clare: Interesting. Subtle, but important difference. Keith, what do you have to add to that? What do you think are the tools that a country can use as they’re coming out of a disaster or a time of conflict to reinforce the narrative that they want to contribute to the global discussion?
Keith: I would agree with José that the fundamentals are the same in building a brand. There needs to be a logical process, lots of stakeholder engagement, and you kind of develop it that way. You mentioned Ukraine a couple of times, and I would say the way that President Zelensky presents himself on the global stage—visiting different countries in person—and what’s very noticeable in his appearances is that his message is very much tailored to the countries he’s in. So, it would be quite a different message in France compared to the United States compared to the UK, and I think there’s a real lesson there for other political leaders who don’t really showcase or represent the country in the same way. Also, in terms of modulating the message to different international markets—some Nation Branding is still very clunky. There’s one message, and that message is projected with no cultural sensitivity to other international markets.
And I’m just saying a couple of examples of countries that have suffered violence. I feel that tourism offers one kind of sector that can quite quickly emerge from that kind of scenario, which Croatia has proved. We’re actually seeing this right now with Lebanon. There are huge problems still—economically, politically, socially—but it seems the tourism sector is coming back to life. Obviously, the tourism sector is not the whole Nation Brand, but it can be in the vanguard of readjusting global perceptions in a more positive direction.
Clare: It’s very interesting that you should reference tourism, Keith. One of the other questions from listeners of previous episodes was, how can destinations differentiate themselves in an increasingly competitive tourism market through Nation Branding? So, I guess that’s the question—not just about running a tourism campaign that stands out from the crowd, but about how having a Nation Brand Strategy behind your tourism messaging can give it extra heft or extra weight. Any ideas, any examples you can think of there? I’ll start with Keith, because you mentioned tourism as something that’s helped.
Keith: Yeah, I think this leads us into soft power, which we haven’t really mentioned yet, and the whole kind of resource of culture, history—everything the country has in that respect—is incredibly powerful and often underused. In terms of creating an authentic tourism brand that’s part of the overall Nation Brand, I would be looking for countries to really look at their own culture and celebrate much more their food and drink—their gastronomy. Some countries obviously do this very well—France, Italy, Thailand, and Japan have all had food as a core part of the Nation Branding for several years.
If you look at some other countries, which have their own riches in that part of their culture, they don’t celebrate it at all. I would say more focus on food and drink culture, and also music. I mean, I was just reading, Clare, City Nation Place has got a very interesting article on the role of sound in Place Branding. Why are countries not making more use of sound? Music is the obvious sound there, but it’s not just music—it’s also languages, accents, and ambient sounds in cities and in rural areas which are powerful. And there’s a whole field of sonic branding which corporations are becoming increasingly aware of, but I still suggest that many places have been slow to pick up on the potential power of sound to build their Place Brands.
Clare: Yeah, thank you for referencing that article. I agree with you. I think it is a missed opportunity, although we’ve seen a few great award entries. José, I’ll come to you on that one. How does your Nation Brand support your tourism marketing?
José: Yeah, and I think it’s important to highlight again the differentiation between Nation Branding and Nation Marketing. Nation Branding is indeed one of the parts that Keith was talking about – about soft power. It’s really about changing perception. This is the goal when we talk about Nation Branding. The objective of Nation Branding is not to sell, specifically. It’s to build the perception—to build an idea in the minds of stakeholders. So that later on, you can take those ingredients, as Keith was mentioning, and use them from a Nation Marketing perspective—which is when you promote the country or the city. We talk about City Branding as well, so this is applicable for the same. They are intertwined, but you cannot start building just purely a promotion and say, “Come to this beautiful country because it’s wonderful,” or whatever the angle we would like to go for from a Nation Marketing perspective.
If in the heads of those audiences there’s a misperception or a negative perception towards the place, then it doesn’t matter what you say—you’re not going to be able to attract the tourists to go there. Nevertheless, these are two things where sometimes the content from the left can go to the right. When I say left, I mean Nation Branding; on the right, Nation Marketing—because we have a diagram that shows this. If you go to our journal, aside from the 14 Steps, you’re going to find a lot of information about Nation Branding and Nation Marketing. Our listeners can download and read this.
But it’s very important to highlight the two and that they have different functions, and also the different stakeholders managing them. And this is just to complement what Keith was saying, because I agree with everything that you mentioned. That’s my take.
Clare: From every conversation we have, there has to be at least one thing that I take away. And although that’s something I knew, it’s really helpful to hear that so clearly articulated—that the Nation Brand or the City Brand, the Place Brand, is just about changing perceptions, and the marketing is more transactional. I think that separation might help those destination marketers, investment promotion agencies, that come to City Nation Place where the conversation sometimes gets confused in their minds.
This sounds like such a huge challenge, doesn’t it—to contribute to the narrative about your country, your city, or your region. It sounds like something that you want politicians to have bought into, and something which might have huge budgets associated with it. So, I think this is a really interesting question that came through as well: How can emerging economies develop a strong Nation Brand without the historical or financial capital that larger nations have?
I mean, I’m guessing you’re going to say they’ve still got that historical capital, but it’s just people didn’t know about it. So, I guess really the question here is, what can you do that’s low-cost, or what are the resources that you can look to, which mean that you don’t have to get a massive budget signed off for your nation, city, or regional brand strategy?
José: Of course, you need a budget. Of course, you need resources to develop, like any other type of activity—any type of initiatives that concern a nation. So, there always needs to be a minimum investment and capital allocated. This could be in the form of creating a fund from contributions from various stakeholders, public or private. We’re not here to discuss financial models because that’s another aspect. It’s not because you have more money that you’re going to have a better perception. Actually, you would be surprised at the nations that have a very good perception—they often have very limited budgets. So, this is something interesting to address.
More importantly—and I think this is clear to understand—because normally it’s seen as, “Yes, we need a big budget to create a big promotion.” Again, we come back to the points and misconceptions of what Nation Branding is. Imagine you have $1 trillion to invest in a media campaign, and you just populate Times Square—which everyone knows and has a mental image of—and imagine you’d see a campaign every day for a month saying the opposite of what you believe about that country. You’re not going to change your mind just because you see messages saying wonderful things about the country. You will not change the image you have about the country. So, it’s not a matter of budget. It’s a matter of intelligence about the types of tools you have. It’s not about advertising. I’m not excluding marketing—there are communications associated with that. It’s about public opinion.
And we talk about this because you ask, “How do you change perception?” You change perception in two ways—influence and experience. Influence is peer-to-peer—the conversation we’re having here, or if I talk about the country with my friends and family, or when I listen to discussions about the country, I’m being indirectly influenced by that country and building an opinion. Or from what I read—especially digital—it’s very important.
And, you know, when we talk about Nation Branding and Place Branding 2.0, it’s really about Digital Identity. This is something we’ve talked about since 2019—how important it is to shape that perception. The one with the stronger narrative, or participation in that narrative—that presence—is really going to benefit from a perception point of view. Sometimes, the budget is zero. Nevertheless, you need structure, strategy, people writing and talking, and so on. So, it’s not about budget, but intelligence, competence, new technologies, and so on.
Experience is more tricky because when you put your boots on the ground, immediately your perception improves. In 90% of cases, there’s always a big gap between perception and reality. The perception is usually worse than the reality, except for the top 10 Nation Brands. Sometimes it happens the other way around—in those top 10, you have a very good perception. You go there and then suddenly feel quite disappointed—the perception decreases because the reality is not as wonderful as you had in your mind, right? Normally, for countries with a negative perception, you go there and your perception improves immediately. But, of course, you can’t make everyone travel to that country to change perceptions.
There’s also another aspect of experience, which is when you consume products from that country specifically. So, “Oh, this country has a wonderful product,” or “I wonder what that is,” and so on. Or even when you have a professional experience with someone from that specific country. Those are factors that change perceptions.
To conclude, really what this is about—and again, I say there’s no need for budget from a promotional point of view—but you need a budget to help nations and cities implement policies aligned with how they want to be perceived. This is what we call “walk the talk.” It’s not just “the talk.” You need to walk and then talk about the walk. It’s really about understanding these touchpoints that we have, actually in our Step Eight, where we talk about focusing on stakeholders to ensure they align with the brand, with strong governance associated.
You need to have policies—which are touchpoints—aligned with the brand, the digital aspects, and last but not least comes the marketing—not from a purely promotional point of view, but a strategic one. These are the four areas you have to work on, and most of the time, this is done by third parties, not the Nation Brand institutions. They are the ones that deliver and make those touchpoints a reality—and sometimes even the private sector.
Clare: I have some thoughts, but I’m going to save them until after Keith has answered the question as well. There are kind of two pressures there—the emerging economies, and perhaps those places with smaller budgets. What advice would you give to them, Keith?
Keith: Yeah, I would refer to the UK government’s “Great Campaign,” which I think is well established. Overall, it’s been very successful and is an example for countries to look at. However, they don’t have a huge budget.
Clare: If I can attest to that, we have an advisory group that meets once a month online with leaders of different place organizations around the world. Often, when we’re discussing all sorts of issues, the question of budget comes up—and just the differences between budgets are huge, with no reflection on the size of the place. Some cities in the United States have budgets three times that of some Nation Brand teams in the group—probably, in fact, several of the Nation Brand teams in the group. And they’re apologizing because they don’t think they have much money—but, you know, compared to other Brand teams, they do.
We published a report on structure and governance, which included information on funding and benchmarking. It does seem that the Place Brand teams, the Nation Brand committees, and the City Brand teams always have much, much smaller budgets than the Destination Marketing Organizations, Economic Development offices, or Investment Promotion Agencies. And it makes sense—they don’t need to be the ones paying for the marketing campaign. They need their budget for research, creative work, measurement, and expertise—but not for expensive marketing campaigns.
Keith: I can absolutely believe that the UK’s “Great Campaign” budget is lower than some smaller European countries. However, I would say the “Great Campaign” is getting more bang for its buck than a lot of other campaigns. One thing they do and this would be useful for emerging countries or any country where there’s not a huge budget available—is they have been very active in partnering with industry partners such as British Airways, Cadbury, and various other British brands. They have an advisory council from industry, which helps enable these deals. That can exponentially increase the impact of what you’re doing.
The fact is big corporations have far bigger budgets than almost any Nation Branding team is ever going to have direct access to from their own government. Engagement of the private sector can be very effective for any country. More broadly, José mentioned stakeholders and alignment in the Nation Brand—but also active engagement—because there will be a lot of creativity, ideas, and influential networks available from citizens in the country.
I would suggest that not many countries are very good at activating these citizen networks. I think that’s something more countries could look into. Specifically, at a Nation Branding level, there’s lots that can be done by embassies with outreach programs. Some countries are very active—they have structured programs to engage with local audiences. This is where we get into public diplomacy and soft power again. Whereas other countries are so passive to the point that they’re doing almost nothing at all.
There’s also quite a variation depending on the personality of the ambassador. If you’ve got an ambassador in place who is committed to Nation Branding, who understands it and believes in it, then that embassy can become hyperactive for that country. But on the other hand, if you have an ambassador who’s more kind of old school and takes the view that public diplomacy and soft power are peripheral activities, then not much is going to happen through the embassy.
So, if a culture can be developed whereby diplomats at all levels within the embassy are encouraged to share their ideas and creativity, I think you could unleash a lot of positive developments—even if the budget is not huge.
Clare: Yeah. I remember we had Guðrið Højgaard from the Faroe Islands speak at the Americas Conference once—with award-winning campaigns coming out of the Faroe Islands, which is not a huge place. She was asked what she thought the secret to her success was. She said, “Our budgets are really small, and if you don’t have a huge amount of money, you have to think creatively and also use your own community—use your own team who really know your place.”
If I were going to sum up anything from this conversation, it would be that all things are possible—you need to put a lot of thought into approaching things in a structural way, and then your budget will go further, and you will be using your taxpayers’ money to the best of your ability. Bloom Consulting’s 14 Steps of Nation Branding is a fantastic guide for thinking about that structural approach to your Place Branding. José has a comment to add to that, I’m sure.
José: Indeed, it’s important what you have highlighted, Clare—and you can download this from our website, https://www.bloom-consulting.com/. This is our last podcast together, and I would like to thank you on behalf of Bloom Consulting for hosting our podcast series. It has been a lot of fun. We didn’t know we would have to spend so many years writing about it. It was the anniversary of Bloom Consulting, and I would like to say that it has been an absolute pleasure. You moderating all of these sessions brought immense value. Thank you so much, Clare.
Clare: It’s been a pleasure, José. We’ve had some good conversations. Thank you for giving me the opportunity. I’ll thank José and Keith for joining us today, answering those questions, and giving us such food for thought. Thank you to everybody who’s been listening to the podcast. Over and out!
Find all episodes here:
Spotify: https://bit.ly/3AANDFM
YouTube: https://bit.ly/3yJy51T
Apple Podcasts: https://apple.co/4e1zOy
Published on 23.09.2025
