Home >> Africa >> Nigeria & Niger

     Email   Print 

Review of the Nigeria Image Project: Relevance of Communication Theories to Country Branding

Uche Nworah - 5/6/2005

Change, innovation, political, economic and social reforms are currently being implemented by different governments in the developing economies of the world. The governments of these countries are beginning to realise that long periods of over dependence on the developed countries for economic aid and assistance may finally be coming to an end, as these developed economies are now looking inwards to solve their own problems, which have become more imminent in the face of increasing competition in a rapidly changing and globalised world.

Nigeria, being one of such developing countries, launched the Nigeria image project (recently renamed the heart of Africa project) in July 2003; the project is aimed at re-orienting Nigerians and also to promote Nigeria¡¦s image abroad, with a view to attracting foreign direct investments (FDIs). Nigeria¡¦s Minster of information, Chief Chukwuemeka Chikelu while speaking at the launching of the project in Abuja, Nigeria described the project as both informational and orientational in nature involving both the print and electronic media, public relations practitioners and advertising agencies.

However, the project has been criticised by Nigerians as a waste of tax

payers¡¦ money, some of the critics argue that the project may just be one of

such several government projects used to siphon away public funds, they

readily cite previous related efforts such as the war against indiscipline

(WAI) Mass Mobilisation for Self-Reliance and Social Justice

(Mamser) campaigns, both orientational and informational campaigns that were started and then abandoned by past Nigerian governments.
This paper will attempt to review the Nigeria image project¡¦s conceptualization and implementation, from the perspectives of the diffusion of innovation theory and the multi-step flow of communication theory.

Methodology and limitations

This is only a pilot study, exploratory and limited in approach. I used questionnaires to gather the data for the research, both closed and open -ended questions were contained in the questionnaire, in order to avoid ambiguity and ensure clarity, the questionnaire was piloted amongst fellow doctoral students before administering, also the researcher personally administered the questionnaires so as to clarify any further unforeseen difficulties with the questionnaire completion. All the 20 questionnaires administered were completed and returned by the respondents, and thus were considered usable by the researcher. The sample size of 20 respondents were selected based on convenience as only respondents within easy reach of the researcher were selected, of the respondents, 10 are Nigerian professionals living in the UK and 10 are also Nigerian professionals living in the UK but were considered to be opinion leaders by the researcher because they meet the basic criteria used to determine opinion leadership. Rogers (2003) has classified the general characteristics displayed by opinion leaders as follows:

1. They have greater exposure to mass media than their followers
2. They have more cosmopolite than their followers
3. They have greater contact with change agents than their followers
4. They have greater social participation than their followers
5. They have higher socioeconomic status than their followers
6. They are more innovative than their followers (especially when a social system favours change).

The word follower in this context is used to refer to all those who may hold the opinion leaders in high esteem and thereby accord them legitimacy and credibility. The oversimplifications of the term, follower is necessary for the sake of clarity (Rogers, 2003). Also it is important to point out that the concept of opinion leadership is contextual and subject bound because according to Merton (1949) cited in Griswold (1999), opinion leadership is not limited to specific issues. Individuals, who act as opinion leaders on one issue, may not be considered influential in regard to other issues. This view is upheld by the wikipedia entry on opinion leadership, it states that a person that is an opinion leader in one field may be a follower in another field.
The respondents and their opinions may not be representative of the opinions of the other millions of Nigerians and opinion leaders. Also the diffusion of innovations and the multi-step flow of communication theories selected are not exclusive as there are also several other development and communication models and theories which may appropriately support the Nigeria image project¡¦s conceptualization and implementation.

Hypothesis

1. Nigerian citizens and Nigerian opinion leaders were not consulted during the conceptualization of the Nigeria image project
2. Nigerians and Nigerian opinion leaders are not involved in the implementation of the Nigeria image project.

The Diffusion of Innovation and Multi-Step flow of communication theories

Discussions of change and change management usually center on the pioneering work of Ryan and Gross (1943) and their formation of the diffusion paradigm, this was followed by the works of other scholars most especially Everett M. Rogers who published the book, Diffusion of Innovations in 1962. Rogers asserts in the book that getting a new idea adopted, even when it has obvious advantages is difficult, and also that many innovations require a lengthy period of many years from the time when they are introduced to when they are widely adopted. This assertions may seem to reflect the current situation with the Nigeria image project which is still viewed with much pessimism by Nigerians and hasn¡¦t yet started achieving the results hoped for by the initiators (the Nigerian government), However, Rogers¡¦ assertions are based on the assumptions that the innovation and change programme have followed the basic diffusion of innovations steps.

Diffusion in this regard refers to the process in which an innovation (the nigeria image project) is communicated over time through certain channels (opinion leaders, mass media), amongst and to members of a particular social system (nigerians) and also to other key stakeholders and publics (foreign nationals and potential investors).
Innovation however, refers to an idea, practice, or object that is perceived as new by an individual or other unit of adoption. (Rogers 2003). From a technological perspective, the American Science Foundation describes innovation as a technology new to a given organization. Definitions of innovation vary as much as the body of knowledge and literature on the subject, Wolfe (1994) cited in Dalgish and Newton (2004) lists the stream of literature on innovation as follows:

- Diffusion of innovation
- Organizational innovativeness
- Process theory models.

The themes in the different approaches all revolve around newness, novelty and change from the old order in their descriptions and explanations of the meaning and scope of innovation.

Rogers (2003) classifies the 7 seven roles of the change agent (the Nigerian government) in the innovation diffusion process as being:

1. To develop a need for change
2. To establish an information exchange relationship
3. To diagnose problems
4. To create an intent to change in the client
5. To translate an intent into action
6. To stabilize adoption and prevent discontinuance
7. To achieve a terminal relationship

Also, he described the clients¡¦ (Nigerians and other key stakeholders) innovation adoption stages as follows: Awareness „³ Knowledge & Interest „³ Decision „³ Trial „³ Adoption/Rejection

Clarke (1994) who described the stages of technological innovation as follows also supports the Rogers¡¦ classification:

- Knowledge
- Persuasion
- Decision
- Implementation
- Confirmation

This writer is of the view that although Clarke wrote particularly about technological innovations, his classification can also be applied to other disciplines because innovation studies are multi-disciplinary and can be applied to the fields of science, art, humanities etc.

There is also a general concern with the adoption rates of innovations and change; this may be as a result of the different variables, which determine the rate of adoption of innovations. These variables as described by Rogers (2003) are:

- Perceived attributes of innovations (relative advantage, complexity, triability, compatibility, observability)
- Type of Innovation ¡VDecision (optional, collective, authority)
- Communication channels (mass media or interpersonal)
- Nature of the social system (e.g. its norms, degree of interconnectedness)
- Extent of change agents¡¦ promotion efforts.
- To add to Rogers¡¦ list, I will also include factors such as:
- The socio-economic background of the clients (Nigerians and other key stakeholders)
- The credibility of the change agents (the Nigerian government)
- The extent to which the clients (Nigerians) are involved in the entire process, from conceptualization to implementation.
- The consequences of non-adoption or the rewards of adoption (as perceived by the clients)

Rogers (2003) have summed up the varying degrees of innovation adoption into the adopter categorization:

1. Innovators (2.5%)
2. Early adopters (13.5%)
3. Early majority (34%)
4. Late majority (34%)
5. Laggards

Communication is a very important part of the diffusion of innovation process, as a result previous studies of innovation aimed to promote development communication, mostly in the third world countries of Latin America, Asia and Africa who were still struggling with poverty, illiteracy, poor health and a lack of economic, political and social infrastructures. (Waisbord 2001). Traditional African media systems such as the town criers, market square and interpersonal relationships, as well as the western media of mass communication (radio, TV, press) were expected to play big roles in the innovation diffusion process.

It would seem therefore that it was as a result of the assumed powerful effects of the media, as expressed in the linear views of communication scholars such as Lasswell (1948) that mass communication was a study of ¡¥who says what to whom, through what channel and with what effect?¡¦ that gave rise to the transmission and bullet models of the media, the audience were regarded as sitting ducks and gullible for media content, therefore any new innovations and change could be peddled in the media, and achieve great and desired effects.

Prevailing low literacy amongst the citizens at this period, particularly in Africa meant that so many people could not access media content in their original format, such people therefore had to rely on the more learned and socially aware members of the society, this gave rise to the concept of opinion leadership, and also saw a shift from the prevalent bullet theories of the media to what became known as the two-step flow theories of communication.

Griswold (1999) writes that the two-step flow theory of communication originated from the researches of Paul Lazarsfield, Bernard Berelson, and Hazel Gaudet who published the findings of their research about the 1940 American presidential elections in the book The people¡¦s choice (1948). Lazarsfield et al (1948) posit that ¡§ideas flow from radio and print to the opinion leaders and from them to the less active sections of the population.¡¨

The two-step flow of communication was generally believed to be too simplistic in the way it viewed communication flow from the source to the receivers and did not recognise the role of different communication sources or channels in the process, a process described by Rogers (2003) as being far more complicated than just two-steps.

The two-step flow of communication has now given rise to the multi-step flow of communication which recognises the several networks of interconnectedness in the communication process, which includes opinion leaders, family unit, peer groups, non-traditional sources and influences etc.

Findings

Research question 1: Do you know about the Nigeria image project?

16 (80%) of the respondents answered positively and said they know about the Nigeria image project, 10 respondents (62.5%) said they read about the Nigeria image project in some Nigerian media online websites, while 6 respondents (37.5%) said they heard about the project from other second hand sources (friends, family and associates).

On the other hand, 4 (20%) of the respondents said they have never heard about the Nigeria image project.

20% seems quite significant, to make the researcher to conclude that the government of Nigeria, as well as those concerned with the implementation of the project, may be failing in the first stage (awareness) of Rogers¡¦ classification of innovation process. For such a programme that concerns every Nigerian, both at home and in the diaspora, it is quite important for the success of the project for Nigerians to be at least well informed and made aware of the project¡¦s objectives as well as its benefits to Nigeria and her citizens. This may mean that the government of Nigeria should review and improve its communication objectives, regarding the Nigeria image project, with a view to achieving maximum awareness of the project amongst Nigerians both at home and in the diaspora.

Research question 2. Did the government of Nigeria and its officials and agents consult you or any Nigerian association you belong to, for your inputs in the conceptualization of the Nigerian image project?

Quite interestingly, 10 (100%) of the opinion leaders amongst the respondents responded in the negative, while also 10 (100%) of the remaining respondents answered negatively. Considering that some of the opinion leaders who responded to the questionnaires are church leaders, medical doctors and journalists, with large daily contacts with Nigerians in the course of their professional duties, the government of Nigeria may be missing out on the benefits of using such opinion leaders to sell the Nigeria image project to Nigerians.

The findings here confirm the first hypothesis of this paper that Nigerian citizens and Nigerian opinion leaders were not consulted during the conceptualization of the Nigeria image project.

Consultation with key stakeholders is an important part of the diffusion of innovation process. Stiasny (2004) in her paper Changing the culture and practice of the educational organisation writes that ¡§¡Krestructuring may indeed be necessary, but so often the jump to set up a restructuring is premature and attention to the organisational culture is ignored, people are not consulted-the personal investment is not engaged¡¨.
Other researchers who write that people are more likely to cooperate and bring change if they are consulted about the process and if they also feel that they have a stake in the entire process support her views.

Research question 3: Are you involved in any way, with the implementation of the Nigeria image project? (If yes, please state in what ways. if no; please state why you are not involved)

Being an open-ended question, the respondents were expected to provide their own independent answers. The common themes deduced by the researcher from their answers were that all the respondents did not have a sense of being part of the implementation of the Nigeria image project, believing that it was the job of the Nigerian government and her officials. It is the understanding of this researcher that the Nigeria image project actually concerns every Nigerian, but this fact is not being well communicated to Nigerians themselves, hence the apparent confusion about the roles Nigerians are expected to play in the project. There appears therefore to be information and knowledge gaps amongst nigerians concerning the Nigeria image project, the project coordinators should address this issue and specifically inform nigerians at home and in the diaspora of what roles they should play in the process. Because there is not any confirmation from the respondents of their involvement with the implementation of the project, probably as a result of the respondents¡¦ non-perceived roles in the projects¡¦ implementation, the second hypothesis of this research is also upheld which is that nigerians and Nigerian opinion leaders are not involved in the implementation of the Nigeria image project.

Conclusion

The findings show that the information and orientation aspects ascribed to the Nigeria image project by Nigeria¡¦s information minister is yet to have any effect as the primary recipients (nigerians) and secondary recipients (foreigners and potential investors) are yet to be targeted by any such messages, both in the mass media or through other interpersonal channels. This is quite disappointing especially since it is almost close to a year since the project was launched, the continued lack of any strategic plans to effectively implement the Nigeria image project is not helping Nigeria¡¦s plans to attract potential investors, and also re-orient her citizens to think Nigeria first, and promote her ideals and culture in the different parts of the world where they may reside.

Finally, this researcher is also recommending social marketing to the Nigerian government, a process that will involve branding and marketing professionals. Rogers (2003) describes social marketing as the application of commercial marketing strategies to the diffusion of non-profit products and services.
Countries such as South Africa successfully employed social marketing in their Proudly South African campaign; Spain, Wales, Canada and Turkey have also successfully carried out similar campaigns.