The Indian voter is no different from the Indian consumer.
A few years ago a senior marketing professional made an interesting observation. There are very few brands in India which are all-India market leaders and are leaders in all four zones, all 25 states! Dig deeper and in every category you will find regional and local satraps who outsell the national leader. A true national player is one who is present as either a Number 1, 2 or 3 player in over 80 per cent of the state markets. Much of this can be connected back either to geographic proximity — where the brand has its Head Office and factories and so distribution strengths and focus. Or to the cultural affinity of the brand promoters or creators — a creator puts something of himself into a brand. So, a Tamil entrepreneur’s brand tends to demonstrate characteristics more relevant to his home state or adjacent markets — he has a better pulse of the local consumer.
Why must the electorate market behave differently?
Over the last two decades we have seen coalition governments and the emergence of strong regional parties. This time, the Congress and the BJP are striving to create a national footprint for themselves — consciously or unconsciously, it doesn’t matter. However, this is perhaps going against the cultural, social and human grain of Indian life. Historically, India has never been one country. It was always a collection of regional states, united by nothing, neither language nor food nor religion. The British first made India one; then the Congress perpetuated it post-Independence, and finally economics and marketing helped to keep it together. Going back in time, local regions were controlled by local leaders who garnered and fostered local loyalties. So, cultural regionalism has always been an integral part of India and Indians. In 1947, a united India and Indian patriotism was a good idea. It brought people together to fight a common enemy — the British. It was a tactical need — a temporary one. The momentum of that movement sustained a national feeling for forty years. But as the joy of being Indian began to wear off, it’s human that local pride began to kick in. Paul Harris, an eminent sociologist, postulates that as man begins to become a part of a bigger mass, there is an intuitive counter-search for an individual identity which, in an affiliative culture like India, is easily fed by regional aspirations. Regional parties are unconsciously tapping into this human need. Finally, there is also a social dimension to this phenomenon. As we progress and there is an upward economic movement in society, individuals are getting more and more into an ‘I-me-myself’ syndrome— concerned more about one’s individual progress and prosperity rather than worry about the larger society and community. Local issues gain in importance over national issues; regional leaders and parties are better able to understand local society’s actual needs and desires and address them in a more focused manner. The structure of the Indian democratic system — the Westminster model — gives these social, human and cultural truths more legitimacy, as people are not forced to vote for one leader or party but choose local candidates that add up to a national government!
However, it’s not just the voter truths that are driving the growth of regional brands. Another marketing truth has hit the Indian political market — the commoditisation of brands. Much as we may want to see either the three possible alliances — the UPA, NDA or Third Front — or many of the individual parties as distinct, the truth is that over the last two decades, it has been established that they are all the same. While there may be large-scale sloganeering against and ‘slandering’ of each other by the political parties, the Indian voter, through experience, knows that deep down everything about them is the same. India has had three full-term coalition governments in the past 18 years — and all have moved down the same path, economically and politically. Liberalisation is a given — the pace is the only question. Equity is an ideal, one that, everyone realises, is not easy to accomplish overnight — it will take time. And inherently Indians are a patient race. As you go down the pop strata, voters expect small steps of progress and hope — and this is where local parties score. There is greater affinity to local leaders, whose differentiation is the promise of local development. They end up being better micro-marketers. National parties, in their attempt to build national stature, tend to take on larger broad-based platforms which sound good on paper, but have little local connect except sounding like good motherhood statements. It’s interesting that while national ‘product’ brand marketers are moving towards localisation of mixes to get better local connects, national parties are going counter-marketing intuitive— reverting to build national imageries. Hard as it may sound, the average Tamilian today doesn’t care about developments in interior Punjab!
Some of these developments could be market ground reality — the lead parties want alliances but alliance partners want to go alone. However, the language of the national leaders is still stuck in the lowest common denominator of the electorate rather than custom-designed to address local needs. There needs to be a re-evaluation of political platforms. And certainly a need to bring freshness into messaging beyond communalism, stability and equitable economic development — they have become clichés!
Finally, can India ever get a Barack Obama? We are a young nation with a lot of energy, hope and optimism. Hence, intuitively, the electorate must seek out younger candidates. In that context, the two announced prime ministerial candidates are anachronistic. Is it a mistake? Culturally, India is a hierarchical society where experience and father figures are looked up to. Age gives gravitas and reassurance. It provides a feeling of security and protection. Further, as a race we are assimilative rather than disruptive — comfortable with slow, rather than transformational, change. (The only time a young leader was voted at a national level, it was based on sympathy rather than a need for change!) Given that the system operates bottom up, the presence of enough credible younger candidates on the ground can help in garnering support for a final leader with experience. Even the young seek the ‘hand’ of the experienced. In India, heritage matters more than newness.
Something worth thinking about.
The writer is Country Head, Discovery and Planning, Ogilvy and Mather, India
