Political brands often market a set of ideological values and policies.
With federal elections looming and with global politics in the spotlight, researchers from Edith Cowan University (ECU) have offered political parties some sage advice, warning that broken election promises could damage the party brand and ultimately lead to a loss of political power.
In his latest research, Dr Allen Au from ECU's School of Business and Law noted that in comparison to corporate brands which offers products and services, political brands often market a set of ideological values and policies.
"In countries like Australia, where voting is compulsory, the branding of a political party is very important. Unfortunately, voters these days don’t necessarily have the time to review all of the candidate’s criteria and as such, they rely heavily on the brand of the political party when making a decision on who to vote for."
Political branding is inherently complex revolving around ideologies, leadership, and governance with the aim to gain public trust and voter support through policy positions, symbolic messaging, and emotional appeal.
"Like any corporate brand, a political brand also runs the risk of brand transgression. That is when the brand breaches either the explicit or implicit guidelines that govern the relationship with the consumers. For corporate brands this happens when a brand fails to meet customer expectations through intentional actions or neglect.
"For a political party, perceived transgressions occur with performance incapabilities or core belief misalignment," Dr Au said.
Dr Au defines political brand transgression as actions, behaviours, or decisions by political brands that violate the expectations, values, or trust of their supporters. These transgressions can lead to a perceived breach of the brand's identity or promises, resulting in a range of undesirable consequences, such as word-of-mouth-damaging behaviour, supporters’ switching intention, departure of allies, declined electoral performance and opponents' continuous erosion of brand's core value.
However, Dr Au noted that supporter reactions to transgression may be influenced by factors like the perceived size of the political brand, effective alternatives, and the brand's remedy actions.
Once the brand transgression has been identified, honesty seems to be the best policy, Dr Au noted.
"It is a difficult matter for politicians to try and balance the different interests of all of their stakeholders. But if they are open and honest about the reasoning behind their decisions, they would be more likely to maintain a good brand," he said.
