In this second article of our series on Nation Brand Indexes, Victoria Berry, Strategist at FutureBrand North America, discusses the characteristics of the Country Brand Index and analyses the results and challenges of the Korea Brand in the 2010 edition.

• The CBI’s objective is to determine how close perceptions are to reality and provide a consistent framework for improving these perceptions.

• Data on 110 countries is collected from 3,400 frequent international business and leisure travelers in 13 countries around the world, as well as industry experts in 14 major metropolitan cities.

• Associations are the real drivers of country brand strength, and the CBI weights in favor of these. The CBI also digs into and beyond the data to uncover and highlight interesting insights designed to expand our collective understanding of country branding.

• South Korea’s strongest association dimension is Good for Business, ranking 21 out of 110 countries. The weakest dimension is Heritage & Culture, which is at 99 out of 110 countries.

• Heritage & Culture and Tourism are two dimensions where brand South Korea is underperforming and needs to improve awareness and familiarity of these assets.

• South Korea should also be perceived more strongly for its Attractions, in particular from its numerous World Heritage-listed sites.

• Some of the assets of Korea that could be leveraged to enhance its perception as a cultural destination are cuisine and modern culture.

The first article of our series on the Anholt-Gfk Roper NBI can be read here.

I. About the Futurebrand Country Brand Index

Branding Korea: What are the origin and the objectives of the Country Brand Index (CBI)? What role has it played in advising country brands worldwide since its creation in 2005?

Victoria Berry: The Country Brand Index is designed to measure perceptions of country brand strength across multiple dimensions. Its objective is to measure people’s perceptions and provide a consistent framework for improving these perceptions. The Index is a ranking of countries according to their individual brand strength, its purpose is to provide a sense of relative position against regional and global competitor country brands, as well as a benchmark by which to measure change in brand strength over time. But it also serves to advise country brands, helping to show which areas could benefit from a different focus or a change of strategy. However, while the Country Brand Index does look at the perceptions of country brands relating to tourism, business, culture and politics, the Index does not seek to present an absolute measure of country brand value, political or economic power – this is the work of other research.

Branding Korea: What is your process and method to measure and collect data? Are there any specific categories or values that you emphasize more than others?

Victoria Berry: The 2010 Country Brand Index marks the sixth edition. And, as our most comprehensive Index to date (evaluating 110 countries this year), the study incorporates a global quantitative research study with 3,400 international business and leisure travelers from 13 countries on all five continents, which was qualified by in-depth focus groups that took place in 14 major metropolitan areas around the world. The overall country brand score is calculated using FutureBrand’s Hierarchical Decision Model (HDM), which measures overall country brand performance in the following areas: Awareness, Familiarity, Associations, Preference, Consideration, Decision/Visitation and Advocacy.

After six years of research, we know that Associations are the real drivers of country brand strength, and we weight in favor of these. This year, we looked at 26 attributes across five key association dimensions: Tourism, Heritage & Culture, Good for Business, Quality of Life and Value System. The score across these five dimensions is then married with the performance in the six other areas of brand strength: Awareness, Familiarity, Preference, Consideration, Decision/Visitation and Advocacy; and the final rank position of each country is developed using a statistical model that accounts for the previous year’s position of each brand.

II. The Korea brand: Performance and Opportunities

Branding Korea: According to the 2010 edition of the CBI, what are the main strengths and weaknesses of the Korean National Brand?

Victoria Berry: Overall, Awareness and Familiarity are moderately strong for South Korea. While Advocacy is low at 72 this year (down 37 places from 2009), the fact that strength in Preference, Consideration and Decision/Visitation is on the rise is an encouraging sign.

South Korea’s strongest association dimension is Good for Business, ranking 21 out of 110 countries. The weakest dimension is Heritage & Culture, which at 99 out of 110 countries, is also one of the Index’s lowest performing countries overall. The attributes that contribute to the Heritage & Culture dimension – History, Art & Culture, Authenticity and Natural Beauty – all suffered significant ranking declines from 2009.

South Korea shows moderate brand strength in the association dimensions Quality of Life and Value System, which takes into consideration a country’s education and healthcare systems, standard of living, safety, job opportunity, political freedom, environmentalism, tolerance and freedom of speech, among other attributes.

In terms of Tourism, South Korea shows moderate strength overall at 67 out of 110 countries. Value for Money is ranked 65, Attractions is ranked 81, Resort & Lodging Options is ranked 81 and Food is strong at 19 out of 110.

Branding Korea: What are the main aspects and opportunities that the Korea country brand should focus on or emphasize in order to gradually increase its ranking over the next years?

Victoria Berry: Heritage & Culture and Tourism are two dimensions where brand South Korea is underperforming. Considering South Korea’s assets in these areas, however, this should not be the case. It is important to improve awareness and familiarity of these assets, turning them into perceived strengths for the country brand.

In terms of the public’s current perceptions of South Korea’s natural assets – a 106 ranking for Natural Beauty and 54 ranking for Beach (out of 110 countries evaluated) – geography should be considered a weakness for the country. However, few international travelers have had the chance to explore the country’s 3,000 islands, picturesque mountains, lush rice paddies, unspoiled fishing villages, UNESCO-listed national parks and endless hiking opportunities, all of which, so far, have remained off the beaten track.

South Korea should also be perceived more strongly for its Attractions (it is currently at 81) – from its numerous World Heritage-listed sites, such as the Jongmyo Royal Shrine in Seoul; secret gardens once reserved for royal families at places, like Changdeokgung; the historic Suwon Hwaseong fortress; or the nightlife, shopping and fine dining on offer in the buzzing capital of Seoul, great journeys await every type of traveler.

With a ranking of 72 for Art & Culture, this measure is also perceived to be weaker than expected. While currently a shortcoming, South Korea has a number of assets that could be leveraged to enhance its perception as a cultural destination. Its sumptuous cuisine, with a 19 ranking for Food, offers a wide variety of regional dishes that have evolved through centuries, plus kimchi and gogi gui (Korean barbecue) and other dishes that have become increasingly popular throughout East Asia and the West. Modern South Korean culture is also well-developed in cinema, pop music and TV dramas, which have also become influential throughout the region.

As mentioned above, South Korea is recognized as having a moderately strong Value System: while it is perceived as a country with only an average degree of Political Freedom and Freedom of Speech, ranking 43 and 44 respectively in the 2010 CBI, the country receives some of the highest marks for maintaining political rights and civil liberties in the Freedom House in the World evaluation. South Korea’s government also performs well across the six dimensions of the World Bank Governance Indicators. Perceptions of South Korea’s stability and safety could be negatively affected by the country’s proximity to volatile North Korea.

II. The Competitive Landscape of Nation Brand Indexes

Branding Korea: In the first article of our series, we talked about the Anholt-GfK Roper Nation Brands Index (NBI), one of the leading global Nation Brand Indexes. The Nation Brand Dual Octagon (NBDO) from the Samsung Economic Research Institute is also gaining international recognition. How does the CBI stand in this competitive environment?

Victoria Berry: There are several key points of difference between the Country Brand Index (CBI) and the Anholt-GfK Roper Nation Brands Index (NBI).

CBI surveys 3,400 people in 13 countries, which is not as extensive as NBI’s sample of 20,000 in 50 countries. However, CBI respondents are experienced and frequent international travelers, and CBI supplements the quantitative survey with a qualitative panel of travel industry experts. Having a targeted sample of frequent travelers and industry experts enables CBI to tap into a much deeper base of relevant knowledge. While both Indexes are now annual, CBI looks at a much more comprehensive cross-section of the world’s leading countries by tracking the performance and status of 110 countries.

The CBI questionnaire uses mostly rating scale questions, which are ideal for measuring the direction and intensity of attitudes. NBI’s index is based on a survey in which respondents rate their agreement with statements about each nation. This method could introduce bias into the results by prompting respondents with definitive statements about a country’s attributes. From one perspective, the seven measures of HDM (awareness, familiarity, associations, preference, consideration, visitation and advocacy), CBI examines country brands much more deeply than NBI.

CBI 2010 is more extensive and insightful than ever. While the previous editions did not directly address two of the six focal points of the NBI survey — exports and governance — this year, CBI considers association dimensions: Quality of Life and Value System – attributes within these dimensions include “education system,” “healthcare system,” “standard of living,” “safety” and “job opportunity.” With regard to governance, the 2010 CBI report measures perceptions of “political freedom” along with “environmentalism,” “legal environment,” “tolerance” and “freedom of speech”. The four other four dimensions of Anholt’s Nation Brand Hexagon — culture & heritage, people, tourism and investment & immigration — are well covered in CBI.

The final difference between the two indexes is that NBI is presented as a summary report and CBI presents a much deeper and richer evaluation of countries as brands. CBI digs into and beyond the data to uncover and highlight interesting insights designed to expand our collective understanding of country branding. Examples of this in CBI include pages on Live vs. Visit Considerations, Countries in Momentum, Branding for Today and Tomorrow, Delivering a Country Brand and The Olympic Effect and Brand China.

Read the Part 1: The Anholt-Gfk Roper NBI