Record low in voter turnout for EU elections- what Bruxelle can learn from Marketers

During the first election in 1979, 63% of the people still voted in the EU parliamentary elections; last week we have reached a record low turnout of only 43% - a clear sign of a weakening trust in the institutional government. What are the reasons? Already years ago – before the eastern enlargement to add 10 Eastern European countries to the EU core of 15- the debates circled around whether the EU will be able to sustain all the growth initiatives at once. “Integration vs Enlargement” were the key words in the argument. In many ways- I wondered- the political move resembles the characteristics of a typical brand extension. And while a brand manager would have argued that the EU and its prospective new members are not ready for an extension, politicians in Bruxelle chose the opposite. Let’s enlarge first, and then take care of making the system work, especially bringing the EU closer to the people.

When looking at certain brand categories such as vodka with Absolute (Sweden), Finlandia (Finland) or Smirnoff (Russia), it becomes obvious that not only for an international organization -like the EU brand- countries can be powerful symbols of brand association. Take a careful look at a Louis Vuitton watch, and you’ll note that it is ‘Swiss Made’. Switzerland’s legendary watch- and clock-making history seems fundamental for Louis Vuitton to keep its perceived quality during the transfer phase, just as Louis Vuitton’s migration into the shoe business was associated with the claim ‘Made in Italy’, because it is the well-known origin of elegant shoes. Louis Vuitton higlighted its decade-old strategy of using country-of-origin as part of its a branding strategy. The key for the succes of these extensions seems to have been that the consumer was able to believe that the core values surrounding the mother brand sit comfortably with the newly introduced product. This match between the original EU values and its new member states has not been very prevalent until today- as it became obvious in the preface to the Iraq war, for instance. There are few brand links beyond the EU logo.

In the marketing world, some corporate names (such as Kraft, GE or Ford) are on so many products that they lack strong specific associations. Their value then is primarily to provide feelings of recognition and perceived quality. However, the EU brand also did not seem to be well established at the time in the mind of its people at this stage. Only if the original EU 15 brand associations were very strong, transfer of negative associations (of the new members) to original brand (the EU core) would be less likely.

Because this was not the case, the extension not only dramatically watered down the key asset and brand name of the EU in its original setting, but also in the new context- the voter turnout was the lowest in Eastern Europe, with some countries only reaching around 20%.

To return to the initial question: From a brand manager’ point of view, was it wrong to enlarge the EU rather than integrating its core first? Probably yes. While the political implications are complex, a brand manager would have criticized the EU for another strong reason: the extension has not been supported by communication to transport the EU core values to the new members and enhance the brand image altogether. Mental associations that are shared, are strong, shared by many and affect consumer behavior should have been promoted strongly. Only that way, the enthusiasm and trust in the institutions can be substantially leveraged, in order to ensure a solid operational basis to the EU functioning through the mandate of the people in the long run. Branding and politics do not exclude each other. The Obama election campaign can serve as a great example for this endeavor. Change - and Positioning - You Can Believe in.

Francesco Wesel MA
Integrated Marketing Communication
www.francescowesel.com
www.brandnewtimes.blogspot.com