An Assessment of City Branding Techniques used in London & Barcelona Olympics Campaign–

For the Development of the Location Brand Equity Model

By Susanne Jeppsson 12830921 BBUS612: Dissertation

WBS _Supervisors: Frank Auton and Richard West - Due 28 Apr 2014 – Word Count: 4993

1

ABSTRACT

Purpose – The purpose of this study was to identify and evaluate the strategic and tactical

differences between the London Olympic Campaign 2012 and the Barcelona Olympic Campaign

’92 to develop the Location-Brand Equity Model.

Design/methodology/approach – An interpretive qualitative approach was undertaken with 20

respondents from the foreign student stakeholder group. They answered two questions

electronically: (1) “what comes to your mind when you think of this city?” and (2) “what was

the main reason for studying in this city?” to reveal the held city identity of London.

Findings – Primary findings reveled that city identities could be divided into objective and

subjective categories. The dominant objective views associated London to historical and iconic

buildings, related to its use in the London Olympic campaign. Dominant subjective views

identified it as the European capital for educational standards.

Practical implications – Held city identities established a certain expectation level that must be

met or surpassed to generate satisfaction and loyalty. This links together the stages of brand

loyalty and salience, which breaks down the hierarchal structure into a circular process. This

implies that cities must always measure the expectation levels of various stakeholders and form

a combination of tactics to reinforce the city’s objective and subjective city identities.

Originality/value – Findings have proposed a newly developed Location-Brand Equity model

that better represents the brand building-and evaluation process of successful cities. It

emphasises the vital area of expectations-and satisfaction levels that has previously been

neglected. It additionally suggests city campaigning tactics and explains that the effectiveness

of city branding campaigns depend on the successful execution of individual tactics. This

presents city brands with an insight that creative combinations of initiatives can lead to equity,

which deviates from the previous model that stipulates a bottom-up flow of effects.

Research limitations/implications – The study only examined two Olympic campaigns and one

stakeholder group. Due to time and resource restrictions, future research is encouraged to

involve more stakeholders and compare findings to other city branding initiatives.

2

TABLE OF CONTENTS

1. Introduction .................................................................................................................... 3

2. Theoretical Foundations ................................................................................................. 4

2.1 Literature Review ........................................................................................................ 5

3. Research Focus................................................................................................................ 6

4. Research Objectives ........................................................................................................ 7

5. Methodology ................................................................................................................... 7

6. The London Olympic Campaign 2012 .............................................................................. 8

6.1 London Evaluation of Campaign Success .................................................................. 11

7. The Barcelona Olympic Campaign 1992 ........................................................................ 12

7.1 Barcelona Evaluation of Campaign Success............................................................. 13

8. Summary of Key Campaign Elements ............................................................................ 14

9. Summary of Main Primary Findings .............................................................................. 15

10. Detailed Analysis of Findings ......................................................................................... 16

10.1 Brand Salience ........................................................................................................ 17

10.2 Brand Associations .................................................................................................. 19

10.3 Brand Resonance .................................................................................................... 23

10.4 Brand Loyalty .......................................................................................................... 23

11. Theoretical Implications ................................................................................................ 24

12. Research Limitations ..................................................................................................... 26

13. Future Research Opportunities ..................................................................................... 26

14. Conclusion ..................................................................................................................... 27

15. References .................................................................................................................... 28

16. Bibliography .................................................................................................................. 33

17. Appendices .................................................................................................................... 35

Appendix I: Population Density in Europe .......................................................................... 35

Appendix II: Collected Respondents’ Answers .................................................................... 35

Appendix III: Collected Respondents’ Answers ................................................................... 37

Appendix IV: Political Contributors to Barcelona ‘92 ............................................................ 38

Appendix V: London Olympic Games Budget Breakdown (LOCOG) ........................................ 38

3

1. INTRODUCTION

City branding as a field of study is considered a newly emerged term in the urban management

and marketing industry (Kavaratis, 2004, Dinnie, 2011). It integrates concepts from product-

and corporate branding, tourism destination marketing, place-and event branding as well as

city planning (Hankinson, 2001; Kavaratzis, 2007). The practice sprung in the midst 1900s when

cities became more urbanised and increasingly competed against each other by attracting

companies across Europe (Bailey, 1989). These were to generate manufacturing jobs (Bailey,

1989) with the ultimate aim of stimulating economic growth (Kotler et al. 1999). This practice

of “city boosterism” (Gold and Ward, 1994) is therefore of importance as financially resilient

cities become key drivers for increasing employment, social progress, creating improved life

standards and attracting talent (Florida, 2008). They also increase creativity, innovation and

cohesion as well as foreign businesses investors that sustains the urban developments (EU,

2013; Rehan, 2013; JRF, 2014). Since the 1900s, the discipline has evolved to focusing primarily

on the application of city branding (Rehan, 2013). Initiatives have often been related to mega

events that provide considerable international exposure (Beriatos and Gospodini 2004,

Kavaratzis, 2007). The question often raised is what makes good city branding and how can its

success be evaluated?

In order to understand the practice of city branding, it would first be appropriate to describe

what makes a city. Often defined as an administrative unit with a certain population density

(EU, 2013), it can also be the accumulative perceptions of urban lifestyles and specific

cultural/social features that drive economic activity and exchanges (EU, 2013). This has

repeatedly highlighted the question of “who” a city is and what it stands for (Florida, 2008).

More than 66% of Europeans today (Appendix I) and 50% of the total world’s population now

live in urban areas (EU, 2013). This worldly figure is predicted to grow in 2025 to 75% (UN,

2012) which highlights cities’ need to proactively shape and sustain a competitively advantaged

image or identity.

The difference between an imageless city and a city brand is the unique composition of

elements that provide a differentiation and relevance to its various target audiences (Dinnie,

2008: 15). These cities use marketing efforts on a national, regional and governmental level

(Papadopoulous, 2004:36) to form campaigning strategies and manage its resources,

reputation and image to favourably position them in face of European integration and

globalisation (Ashworth and Kavaratis, 2005, Dinnie 2011). From the point of utilising

campaigns, this thesis aims at introducing the London 2012 and Barcelona 1992 Olympic

4

campaigns and evaluate their effectiveness against primary research. Focusing on the foreign

student stakeholder group, findings will be incorporated to develop one of the most common

models for evaluating city campaign success (Pike, 2008: 56): the Location Brand Equity Model.

The final section will conclude with the importance of findings and recommendations for cities

that will host promotional city campaigns.

2. THEORETICAL FOUNDATIONS

The subject of evaluating city campaigns has been under much debate due to lacking research

regarding measurable and effective destination brand models (Hankinson, 2001; Boo and

Busser, 2009). This in turn has led many researchers to question what theoretical frameworks

are most appropriate for building successful city brands (Qu et al, 2011, Hankinson 2004). The

most predominant were the network approach (Dinnie, 2011), stakeholder theories

(Merrilees et al, 2005) match-up models (Xing and Laurance, 2006), classical product-based

branding theories (Hankinson 2004, 110) and corporate branding models (Kerr, 2006). The

mentioned network theory argues that public and private sector organisations must

collaborate to form a coherent brand (Hankinson, 2004). This is elaborated on through the

stakeholder theory that argues the network approach is too simplistic because the stakeholders

that collaborate all hold conflicting interests. It therefore suggests that the variety of

stakeholders’ interests must be met to form a strong city identity. A combination of various

models have subsequently been used to “match-up” what individual models lack (Xing and

Laurance, 2006). Apart from this, many researchers settle with viewing cities as corporates and

therefore resolve to corporate branding models (Kerr, 2006).

Common opinions are that cities are deemed complex and multi-dimensional by nature (Dinnie,

2011; (Kavaratzis 2004; Rainisto 2003; Trueman et al. 2004). This leads to the argument

whether one single framework can be developed to measure different cities. It is worth

considering that perhaps one framework can be utilised for cities that share similar

characteristics such as size or features. In support of this argument, Keller (1993) developed

the Consumer-Based Brand Equity Model as a measurement for building strong brands across

various products. From its wide acceptance as a reliable measuring business tool (Andersen

and Nielsen, 2009), it has been adapted for destinations and locations (Xing and (Leurance,

2006; Konecnik, 2007, Pike, 2008; Boo et al, 2009) – establishing the Location-Brand Equity

Model. This framework has been used in recent city branding studies (Tasci et al, 2007;

Konecnik, 2007; Pike, 2008; Qu, 2011; Garcia et al, 2012) and is considered in need of further

5

developments by Hankinson (2001) and Garcia (2012). This provides validity for using it in this

particular thesis.

2.1 LITERATURE REVIEW

From reviewing researchers’ opinions and use of various frameworks, it becomes clear that the

most common conclusion is that the practice of branding cities is complex and considered

distinctive in its own nature (Trueman et al, 2007:23). As mentioned above, several researchers

draw it parallel to corporations to simplify the understanding of its practice (Trueman et al,

2007:22, Kavaratzis, 2004). This involves expressing the city’s visual, verbal and behavioural

attributes through its core values, beliefs, culture and overall design (Simoes and Dibb, 2001;

Knox and Bickerton, 2003). However, Dinnie (2011) argues that most cities have no defined

value, belief or identity that is shared across its wide audience, ranging from independent and

competing businesses, communities, tourists, residences, students, governmental bodies or

organizations (Merrilees et al, 2005). This audience is characterised as a multifaceted

compilation of stakeholders with no shared city identity (Trueman et al, 2004; Merrilees et al,

2005). Merrilees et al (2005) therefore emphasises the importance of applying a “filer concept”

that encourages practitioners to see the city through stakeholders’ eyes, implying that each

stakeholder group has one common city identity.

Other researchers disagree and argue that a strong city brand must form a coherent identity

by seeking consensus across different stakeholder groups (Skinner and Croft, 2004; (Hankinson,

2007). Others have added that this might be an impossible task (Friedman and Miles, 2002;

Fitchett, 2005; Murtagh et al, 2008; Dennie, 2011). Without consensus, cities are considered

obliged to form promotional strategies that deliver several messages (Nandan, 2005). This risks

creating an incoherent city brand (Shiva, 2005), meaning that people cannot relate to it or find

it attractive in comparison with other cities. What has been overseen in literature is whether

one identity can be established across stakeholders by communicating it through different

messages. It can also be argued that communicating several messages will turn ineffective as

people can belong to more than one stakeholder group simultaneously, i.e. being a business

owner, resident and student all at once. This means that different messages communicated

towards one person risks being lost – making a city branding campaign ineffective. From this

viewpoint, Dinnie argues (2011) that city brands have no a “one-size-fit-all” solution which is

agreed upon among researchers.

6

Noticeably is a certain level of confusion among academics and practitioners alike regarding

what makes successful branding to cities (Anholt 2006; Hankinson 2004; Hauben et al.

2002; Kavaratzis and Ashworth 2005; Rainisto 2003; Trueman et al. 2004). However, the holistic

approach of the multi-stakeholder theory has provided most current directions for tailoring

communications which clearly deviates from previously used methodologies (Merrilees et al,

2005; Lo Piccolo and Schilleci, 2005; Warnaby et al, 2004). The role of city image and identity

has therefore become more important together with the construction, communication and

management of the general city perceptions through campaigns (Karavatis, 2004). These range

from visual identity tactics, creation of landmarks and various types of events (Karavatis, 2007;

Florel et al, 2006; Greenberg, 2009; Thonick, 2014).

Several tactics have been recommended but with little indication of individual cities’ identities.

There is also lacking information regarding what tactics form a city identity and how other cities

can use these tactics to reach a desired positioning. These research gaps will be filled by

conducting a comparison study between the London 2012-and Barcelona 1992 Olympic

Campaigns. As it is considered mandatory on researchers to assess whether current

frameworks and practices for city branding are appropriate (Skinner and Croft, 2004:4), this

thesis will evaluate their branding initiatives to develop the Location-Brand Equity Model (Pike,

2008). This will demonstrate a better representation of the building-and evaluation process of

successful city brands.

3. RESEARCH FOCUS

Selecting cities that hosted the Olympics Games was deemed fitting as cities generally utilise

major events for generating resources that facilitates extensive city branding initiatives (Greg

and Wilson, 2004, Smith, 2008; Immler, 2014). As the purpose is to develop the Location-Brand

Equity Model, it was deemed fitting to select award-winning cities based on their campaigns.

London in particular has often been excluded from investigations due to its size, prominence

and extensive use of media (Hankinson, 2001). However, it was awarded “The Best City in The

World” (Anholt’s City Brand Index, 2013) and used Barcelona’s City Model as a tool, which

provided a rejuvenation blue print for East London (Moore, 2002, Thornley, 2013). This model

was created as part of Barcelona’s Olympic campaign in 1992, which was awarded “The Most

Successful City Campaign” (Dinnie, 2011). This provides a linkage between the two cities under

study and allows Barcelona’s success story to be used as a relative measure.

7

4. RESEARCH OBJECTIVES

I. To identify commonalities and contrasts between the London Olympic Campaign

2012 and the Barcelona Olympic Campaign 1992.

a) To evaluate the effectiveness of their individual strategic and tactical

differences.

II. To identify London’s city identity through primary research among the foreign

student stakeholder group.

a) To determine the implications of current city perceptions on the Location-

Brand Equity Model

III. To incorporate primary and secondary findings for the development of the

Location-Brand Equity Model for future city branding practices.

5. METHODOLOGY

Secondary research will support the majority of findings for the analysis, ranging from up-to-

date governmental publications, journals, books and reports. This will however be incorporated

with primary research findings. As the research area of city branding and particularly in relation

to city campaigns has been limited, the primary research takes on an interpretive methodology

for generating richer data. To ensure a broad bases sample, the non-probability judgement

sampling technique was adapted which involved attaining student respondents from different

foreign countries. Intentionally selecting the most appropriate respondents was for this

research purpose deemed most appropriate (Marshall, 1996; Patton, 2005).

The sample size of 20 was restricted to answer two open-ended questions electronically: (1)

“what comes to your mind when you think of this city?” and (2) “what was the main reason for

studying in this city?” as recommended by Dinnie (2011) in his book City branding: Theory &

Concepts. Respondents were identified by name and email and their data held in a secure and

password protected database before collecting individual responses into tables (Appendix II).

Repeated wording and statements were identified to specify emerging themes. Full quotes will

be used in the analysis but has due to data protection purposes been anonymised. This will

reveal the held city characteristics of London (Dinnie, 2011) and assist in relating it to the

evaluations of the London Olympic campaign and the development of the equity model. The

London Olympic campaign will therefore become the focus under study, supported by the

Barcelona campaign.

8

6. THE LONDON OLYMPIC CAMPAIGN 2012

The London Olympic branding strategy initiated from the idea of transferring the Games

beyond sports to creating a sense of citizen inclusion. This lead to the promotion of “Total

London Campaign” (Girginov, 2013) that communicated the following key messages:

1. Hope of a better world

2. Dreams and inspiration/enthusiasm

3. Friendship and fair play

4. Joy in the effort

Tactics divided into different initiatives: (1) The Look and Feel Programme, (2) The Spectaculars

Programme, (3) Your London 2012, (4) The Look of London, (5) The London Live 2012, (6) London

Outdoor Touring Festival (GLA, 2011).

Its main aspect “The Look and Feel Programe”, aimed at collaborating with GLA and LOCOG to

rejuvenate London’s image and create a distinct and consistent look of the Games that would

deliver an exciting experience throughout all London boroughs (Girginov, 2013). From this

objective, the campaign utilized London’s most famous landmark destinations that stretched

across the Olympic Park, Excel, Greenwich Park, Woolwich Barracks, Earls Court, Wimbledon,

Lords, Hyde Park, Victoria Park, Trafalgar Square, London borough of Tower Hamlet, Wimbley

and Central London (including West End, City, Southbank, Museum Quarter and Kings Cross)

(Girginov, 2013).

(Source: Wired, 2014: The Olympic Park & the ArcelorMittal)

9

The majority of resources were invested into building the Olympic Park and organizing the

venues, which became the centerpiece for regenerating East London. A complex network of

organizations had overlapping responsibilities and accountabilities for raising the standards at

boroughs in which events and constructions were held. “The Spectaculars Programme” for

example aimed at creating a consistent visual, feel and creative experience by dressing up the

city with flags, banners, colours and planting schemes (Girginov, 2013). Other activities involved

improving the transportation network and emphasizing the “feel concept” from multiple

stakeholders in the public and private sector through the “Streb” and “Circus Circus” initiatives.

(Source: Enews, 2012: Streb dancers at London 2012 Festival) (Source: The Guardian, 2012: Piccadilly Circus Circus)

(Source: Skyscrapercity.com, 2014: Regent Street Decoration)

10

Areas such as Oxford Street, Regent Park, House of Parliament and Wimbledon were used to

attract visitors by featuring the “Look of London Festival”. The purpose was to use historical

locations and iconography to reinforce the London brand image in relation to history, culture

and future (Girginov, 2013). Placing the five interlocking rings at London Bridge and promoting

the ArcelorMittal inside the Olympic Park increased visitation and tourism. This type of

symbolism was later deemed positive as it remained in visitors and residences memories.

Another feature that people remembered was the engagement of local communities through

“Your London 2012” (Girginov, 2013). This dealt with enhancing the green spaces in boroughs

through environmentally sustainable sourcing (Dabbs, Kiely and Stanford, 2012). The purpose

was to add to the “look and feel concept” in the aim of becoming the greenest hosting city for

the Games (DEFRA, 2013). Volunteer ambassadors were also seen as memorable for improving

the experience of participators who reported increased satisfaction levels (Girginov, 2013).

The final initiative was The London Live 2012 which aimed at creating inspiring spaces to share

Olympic highlights, the atmosphere and celebration (GLA a, 2011). Working together with

promoters such as Live Nations, cultural activities could be achieved using digital content, music

concerts, sport activities, interactive exhibitions, outdoor art events.

(Source: The Guardian, 2012: Olympic Rings at London Bridge)

11

6.1 LONDON EVALUATION OF CAMPAIGN SUCCESS

Governmental documents relating to the net economic growth reveal that the UK economy

benefitted from the increased tourism streams, generating £600m from local consumptions

and ticket sales (Gov.UK, 2013). Although employment within the active areas increased with

893,000 over the period and trigged socio-economic change in East London, it is stated that

the Games approximately broke even with the Olympic investments (Thornton, 2013). Totalling

the Olympic budget to £8.921bn (Gov.UK, 2013; The Guardian, 2012) represented 101%

overspending from £4.2bn estimates in 2005 (University of Oxford, 2011). This classified

London as hosting the most costly Olympics ever, implying a lacking spending accountability

and acknowledgement whether the benefits surpassed the costs.

There has been limitations of obtaining real figures and the Olympic Delivery Authority (2012)

only reveals examples of Key Performance Indicators (KPIs) that were visualised in form of

Programme Dashboards. These were divided into main themes of Olympic Programmes,

Venues and Infrastructure, Athletes’ Village and Transport, Park Transformation, Park

Operations and finally; Design – Health – Safety – Environment (HS&E). These including metrics

such as Progress via Earned Value, Key milestones & Public milestones, Anticipated Final Cost

against Budget and Priority Themes (ODA, 2012). Reviewing several governmental reports and

from Olympic organisers, the evaluation methods were not considered highly effective as they

lacked figures of how the Olympics met interests and expectations of various stakeholders

(Gov.uk, 2013; ODA, 2012; University of Oxford, 2011). It additionally failed to reveal what

areas of the execution was determined successful or unsuccessful against specific economic

indicators.

(Source: Hello Yorkshire, 2012: London Live Festival)

12

7. THE BARCELONA OLYMPIC CAMPAIGN 1992

Part of Barcelona’s first major transformation began with the hosting of the Olympic Campaign

in 1992, later classified as one of the most successful city branding campaigns in the world

(Calavita, 2000; Monclús, 2000). This was reflected in the city’s first Strategic Metropolitan Plan

(Botella, 1995: 99) that supported the following aims of the campaign:

1. Stimulating the transformation of the city

2. Involving all citizens in the collective city project

3. Show the redesigned city and its differential attributes to the world

4. Demonstrate Barcelona’s capacity for organizing and managing this mega event

5. Optimize the development of infrastructure for the future benefit of its citizens

(DInnie, 2011, p 121).

The main aspect of the campaign was the rejuvenation of the city’s image, positioning it as a

differentiated contemporary yet historic centre; being innovative, welcoming, daring and

initiative-taking to stimulate the local economy and urban developments (Botella, 1995). The

strategy was to place Barcelona as the economic hub of southern Europe with a vibrant

cosmopolitan feel and with a rich cultural heritage (Monclús, 2000).

Emphasis was therefore placed on symbolism by restoring architectural heritages such as

Gaudi’s Sagrada Familia and Park Guell as well as building photogenic monuments such as the

Fish Sculpture Gehry and the Communication Tower (Balibrea, 2001). These initiatives

generated increased publicity in international media and improved Barcelona’s reputation.

(Source: Arch Daily, 2014: Gaudi’s Sagrada Familia) (Source: vegijudit , 2014: Park Guell)

13

This Strategic Metropolitan Plan was enabled through collaboration with conflicting

governmental groups; the socialist party that controlled the Barcelona City Council & the

Provisional Council as well as the Convergence and Union Party that controlled the Generalitat

(Botella, 1995, p 139-48; Appendix IV). The four Olympic sites (Montjuic, Diagonal, Vall

d’Hebron and Marina Park), the new neighbourhood Diagonal Mar (including high-priced

housing, hotels, leisure facilities, commercial outlets) and other restoration projects outside

the region was thus created. The tactics combined allowed “the Capital of the Mediterranean”

and the “Quality of Life” identity to emerge, positioning them as one of the leading European

cities (Thornley, 2011).

7.1 BARCELONA EVALUATION OF CAMPAIGN SUCCESS

The total spend mounted up to $9.4 billion (Appendix III), including rejuvenating constructions

outside the Games (Brunet, 1995). The noticeable strategy behind spending was that only

38.5% of total investments were focused on Barcelona, the remaining 61.5% was allocated

towards building work outside the city (Brunet, 1993). The impact of change was therefore

spread towards the outer regions, which was reflected to the perceived benefits and optimism

levels within as well as outside Barcelona. The general measurements undertaken by the

Spanish government were satisfaction levels of various stakeholders against ROI on

organisational and direct investments (representing 85.5% of Olympic expenditures) and

economic KPI related to local consumption by non-resident visitors (estimated at 46,090 million

pesetas; Brunet, 1993b: 105). Despite the ambiguity regarding whom the campaign benefitted

(Source: People’s Daily, 2014: Fish Sculpture Gehry)

(Source: Sovibrant, 2014: The Communication Tower)

14

most (Moragas and Botella, 1995), there was a noticeable increase of tourist visits via Barcelona

airport (domestic and international), employment rates and revenue streams from commercial

origin (investments of private/public enterprises) (Brunet, 1995). Surveys also indicated raised

expectation levels, street atmosphere, sense of security, access to facilities, public

transportation and traffic, life standard perceptions of Barcelona as well as foreigners’ city

impression rates (Brunet, 1993b: 109-110). Barcelona’s evaluation methods were considered

in better alignment with its activities and shows a greater priority towards its people.

8. SUMMARY OF KEY ELEMENTS

The purpose of highlighting the commonalities and contrasts in London’s and Barcelona’s city

branding campaigns is to identify and evaluate the features that might be relevant for the

development of the Location-Brand Equity Model.

The main contrast between the two campaigns was the intended mission behind the strategies.

Barcelona had clearly formulated a message to become “the Capital for the Mediterranean”

and the center for “Quality of Life”. London on the other hand mainly intended to spread

feelings of enthusiasm and inspiration during the Games. This meant that whilst London

focused on providing memorable events for citizens and visitors to participate in, Barcelona

utilized most of their resources to rejuvenate their city – thus focusing on historical buildings

and creating a certain feel or atmosphere from its built environment. Both however used the

opportunity to improve their city’s image and reputation as well as drive traffic into popular

and iconic areas. This highlights their use of iconography and symbolism. Creating a memorable

experience through stimulating the “senses” were detected in both but more in London in

relation to the human interaction provided by its ambassadors. Collaboration between

stakeholders enabled both cities to achieve their individual goals.

Finally, Barcelona’s evaluation methods were considered more aligned with their objectives. It

related it to various stakeholders (citizens, tourists and businesses) and to their perceived

benefits/satisfaction levels against economic improvements. London however seemed to focus

more on the key milestones and effect of increased visitor traffic and how these influenced the

UK economy.

15

9. PRIMARY FINDINGS

When asking the first question “what comes to your mind when you think of this city?” the most

emerging theme was tourist locations, including historical icons such as the Big Ben and the

London Eye as well as places that drive cultural activities i.e. theatres. This was then followed

with the second strongest theme of London being a multicultural city – thus encapsulating a

lifestyle of the capital. Although these were mentioned most across varying respondents, the

final emerging theme: emotional attributes, which could be referred to as the city’s personality

traits (Kaplan, 2010), was only referred to once among all respondents. This shows that

collectively, people have created an image of London, which does show a correlation with

London’s Olympic initiatives as discussed in the analysis. However, in relation to the city’s

image, there was no unified personality trait across respondents, indicating an ineffective

communication approach in relation to the campaign.

Q1. EMERGING THEMES SUB-CATEGORIES

1. Tourist Locations Historical buildings Monuments Architecture style Cultural heritage

2. Multicultural city

Hub Diversity Social life

3. Emotional Attributes Inspiring Solidarity Generosity Respect Fun Freedom Dynamic

When asking the second question “what was the main reason for studying in this city?”

respondents showed more shared reasons or stakeholder interests; breaking down into the

quality and value of a London education, to learn English and the range of opportunities offered

by the city. The discussion of how these interlink with the London Olympic Campaign

effectiveness will be discussed in the analysis with the use of quotes.

16

Q2. EMERGING THEMES SUB-CATEGORIES

1. Quality and Value of Education Central city in Europe in regards to education London universities known worldwide Educational system quality Reputation of courses Value of a London university’s certificate

2. To learn English London’s proximity to other European countries Build a future

3. More Opportunities Range of companies The people and cultural lifestyles Allows an adaptation of different cultures to work in better conditions

10. DETAILED ANALYSIS OF FINDINGS

Analyzing the commonalities and contrasts between the two campaigns helps to identify what

areas within their approaches support or weaken the location brand-equity model. It also

identifies what initiatives were deemed more effective against others. Using the model as a

structure to evaluate the main campaign features allows the formulation of a more

contemporary and sustainable model for building a strong city brand.

The consumer based-brand equity model was first developed by Kevin Lane Keller (1993) and

explains from the perspective of the individual consumers that a brand must successfully

achieve the underlying building blocks before reaching the most desirable state for generating

brand loyalty. The adapted destination brand-equity model (Pike, 2008) below demonstrates

the differential effects of brand knowledge on stakeholder’s response to the marketing of that

brand. A strong city-brand equity thus occurs with brand familiarity and with favorable, unique

and memorable associations.

17

10.1 BRAND SALIENCE

The model starts from building strong “brand salience”, defined as the degree to which a city

is carefully thought about when making a “purchase decision” (Daye, 2010). The decision of

what city to travel to, invest, study or live in reflects its ability to establish an unaided top-of-

mind presence with the target audience (Pike, 2008). According to Carmen et al (2004), this

begins with forming a unique city identity from a message. Here it becomes important to

distinguish cities’ image and identity –the first being created by marketers and the second: the

actual image held by stakeholders (Keller, 1993).

London’s messages of “hope for a better world, dreams and inspiration, friendship and fair play

as well as joy in the effort” (Girginov, 2013) were emotional by nature. These are effective for

building connections and increase perceived value between the brand and its audience (Brian

and Nowak, 2000). Utilizing this so-called associative learning principle is considered to

establish positive memories that are projected onto the city, making people remember them

fondly. This indicates London’s use of cause-related marketing (Brian and Nowak, 2000), which

provides the city with certain personality traits as revealed from several respondents:

(Source: Pike, 2008: 56)

18

“When I think about London I think about an inspiring city”

“/…/ the first things that come into my mind are: Respect, multicultural, dynamic, advance.”

“/…/solidarity and generosity”

These personality traits relating to human qualities are transformative (Hendon and Williams,

1985) and enables the audience to relate the city to their own self-concept. This is deemed

effective for brands that have difficulties communicating a distinct benefit appeal and therefore

use emotions that are relevant across different stakeholders (Immler, 2014). However, three

out of the twenty respondents mentioned these personality traits, which shows its lack of

dominance. As they additionally were not shared between each other, London is considered to

have developed an incongruent identity among the student stakeholder group. It can however

be explained by the messages lack of correlation with the campaign’s most central features.

Adell and Burke (1987) therefore argue that an informative approach is more effective as it

ensures that the desired identity is created across a wide audience. It provides more control

for shaping the city image as it becomes communicated through tangible assets, i.e.

promotional material, slogans and even building work such as restorations of cultural heritages

(Dervin, 1981; Adell and Burke, 1987).

Barcelona’s messages were in relation to this argument much more aligned with its desired

positioning and execution, having the slogan “Capital for the Mediterranean” being

emphasized. This is an example of a city that in contrast to London stimulated its “feel” by the

newly built cosmopolitan atmosphere, which indicates several benefits i.e. economic growth,

improve life standards, reputation etc. Although these appeals relate to many stakeholders’

interests (IpKin and Dioko, 2013) it is worth considering that the preferred approach relate to

past events that have altered stakeholders perceptions. This becomes important because

campaigns can then utilize the opportunity as a crisis management to directly change its image

(Calavita, 2000).

London for example experienced the riots in 2011, which damaged the capital’s reputation

among 80% of businesses and 73% of firms believed it would trigger civil disorder upon hosing

the Olympics (BBC, 2011). Even China reported worries regarding London security system (BBC,

2011). Due to citizen’s behavior, London formed an identity of being violent, out of control and

lacking of standard (The Guardian, 2011) which helps explain the effort of utilizing the

campaign to change the attitude and morale of the inhabitants through inspiring events.

19

10.2 BRAND ASSOCIATIONS

The second layer of brand building is achieved from the quantity and quality of memory

structures (Vieceli and Alpert, 2002) This means that a city must subject its audience to a great

deal of favorable brand associations and ensure that these are relevant enough to be

remembered long-term (Romaniuk and Sharp, 2004). Primary research findings demonstrate

that London is mostly associated with tourist/historical places and iconic buildings.

“It's silly but the first thing I (still) think of are the monuments: Big Ben and the Tower Bridge.”

“The first thing I thought about was the historical buildings and the countryside…I think that was from movies like Pride & Prejudice I used to watch back home”

“Big Ben and London eye...I guess tourist places because London is mostly a tourist place.”

“I think about the tourist aspects…I think mainly the famous buildings and the typical

architectural style…I just love it.”

This is directly reflected upon the utilization of symbolism and iconography, defined as the

intangible representation of images, places or objects through attached meanings (Cosgrove

and Daniels, 1988). This was effectively used in both campaigns where all events drew visitors

together to experience the cities unique physical attributes. The dominant associations among

respondents can be explained from two premises. People form an understanding from first-

handedly “meeting” the city brand (Crang 1998). Experiencing the built environment including

architecture, statues, monuments and new constructions is the first and most solid indication

whether London delivered on its promises (Holloway and Hubbard 2001). The second relates

to representations of London through films, novels, paintings, news reports etc. (Kavaratzis,

2007). It becomes apparent that respondents from the first and second quotes had formed

previous perceptions of London before visiting the city. Importantly, past sources may have set

expected benefits, which in turn may impact satisfaction levels when experiencing the city

(Vargo and Lusch, 2008; Ipkino and Dioko, 2013).

Promoting famous locations in London will create a “collective hallucination” (Keller, 1993) that

is a false representation of the reality. London is in fact divided into individually branded

boroughs with contrasting environments (Hankinson, 2011). This forms various sub-brand

associations, which risks disappointing visitors that experience London for the first time.

20

Barcelona gained its more successful adaptation towards various expectations from spreading

its city rejuvenation project outside its borders (Dinnie, 2011). This is how it managed to

provide hedonic value (Smith, 2005), forming “a coherent representation/meaning of the city,

one that is easy and pleasant to consume” (Balibrea, 2001: 189) from the outside in. The

contrasting initiatives of London and Barcelona are visualized through adapting the Social

Network Model of Scott, Cooper and Baggio (2007).

(Source: Your London, 2014)

21

Considering that successful city branding extends beyond city borders deviates from the

current ideas that initiatives should remain within a city. The main reason besides its impact

on expectations and satisfaction levels is that visitors and citizens cannot see clear lines for

when they enter the city domain. This means that even though they are geographically outside,

they may perceive it as being part of the city. This aspect was highlighted within Barcelona’s

City Model (see model on next page), where 63% was spent on rejuvenating the outer regions

which clearly had an economic impact.

(Source: Scott, Cooper and Baggio, 2007 – Adaptation of the social network model to the case of Australia)

London: central branding activities

Barcelona: holistic branding activities

22

(Source: Botella, 1995: 99)

23

10.3 BRAND RESONANCE

Brand resonance represents the willingness to engage with the brand (Keller, 1993; Pike, 2008)

concerning the city as a whole or locations within. London was deemed most effective in this

regard, having more engaging events than Barcelona where the Olympic Ambassadors would

guided and supported visitors (Dinnie, 2011). The Ambassadors were a major asset to the

campaign and functioned as the physical representations of the city. The selected candidates

had the enthusiasm, inspiration, kindness and respect for others that matched London’s

desired brand emotions (McKean, 2003; Poynter and MacPury, 2009). These personality traits

were detected among respondents within brand salience. Allowing human interaction with a

brand adds uniqueness and memorability (McKean, 2003; Poynter and MacPury, 2009) which

becomes a source of successful brand-image creation (Widler, 2007).

10.4 BRAND LOYALTY

The previous mentioned stages of brand building were aimed at establishing an identity,

association and judgment towards the brand. This final stage of “brand loyalty” represents the

desired behavioral change of the audience. This usually translates into repeat visitations and

actively referring the city to reference-groups (Pike, 2007). Similar to the first stage of brand

salience, this too is directly linked with brand satisfaction. If the stakeholders’ perceived

benefits are met, it automatically translates into high levels of satisfaction (Vargo and Lusche,

2008). When asking respondents the second question regarding their reasons for choosing

London as a place to study, the main perceptions were for its educational reputation.

“Because London in my opinion has been a central city in Europe in regards to education. They

have a higher quality in that universities in London are known worldwide. I am even

considering taking my masters here.”

“I came to London to learn English and decided to stay to study at Uni as the English system

focuses on practical aspects combining them with useful theories.”

“My aim was to receive a complete and valuable education in a stimulating environment.”

“People, the cultural lifestyle and because of the top Unis that are located in London.”

24

“I really valued the quality and reputation of the courses and universities in London. If I were to

go back, I think would be better off than the others looking for a job”

As observed from the first quote, London’s repuation as the European capital for educational

standards encourage loyal behavior among the foreign students, i.e. studying a master’s degree

in the same city.The correlation between the first and second question (1) what comes to your

mind when you think of this city? and (2) what was the main reason for studying in this city? is

that London can be categorized into holding an objective and subjective city identity. The

objective identity may be similar across various stakeholder groups, which allows future city

branding campaigns to communicate one common city identity. If a branding campaign aims

at targeting a specific stakeholder group, the effective approach to trigger loyal behavior is to

communicate the particular audience’s subjective city identity. The communicated identity

forms expectation levels that needs to be satisfied even after the campaign. If these

expectation levels are not met, then their perception and image of the city will change. This

alters the hierarchal Location Brand-Equity Model into a circular process as explained below.

11. THEORETICAL IMPLICATIONS

The brand building model has previously been visualized as a hierarchy (Pike, 2005), stipulating

that an upper building block cannot be realized without a successful completion of lower blocks

(Keller, 1993). Although it provides a structural approach for measuring performances of

branding initiates (Pike, 2005), it has been defined as an unrepresented model for the building-

and evaluation process of successful city brands. The analysis identified a relationship between

expectation-and satisfaction levels (Vargo and Lusche, 2008; Ipkino and Dioko, 2013), which

was most important between brand salience and loyalty. This developed model connect the

lowest and highest blocks, which form a circular model where expectation levels set a

benchmark for assessing new city experience. That bond becomes a point of risk or opportunity

for either strengthening or weakening the brand.

As mentioned previously, stakeholders form expectations of the city image from various

sources (past experiences, news/films etc. or from visiting the cities outer regions). Meeting or

surpassing these expectations increases satisfaction levels, leading to loyalty and economic

benefits for the brand. If however the city campaign fails to reinforce the objective or subjective

city identity, a new city perception will be formed that will subsequently affect associations,

resonance and loyalty levels.

25

The amended model has attempted to categorize branding tactics for each building block in

relation to the generated effect on the audience. Noticed throughout the analysis was however

the difficulty to place branding tactics and their effect into distinct building blocks - showing

that the reality of city branding and identity-creation is a combination of various tactics that

stretches across the building blocks. This means that achieving brand equity depends on the

skillful execution of the individual tactics.

2. Knowledge & Liking

3. Purchase & Preference

1. Awareness

BRAND LOYALTY

BRAND SALIENCE

BRAND ASSOCIATIONS

BRAND RESONANCE

Unique & consistent message Informative approach Comm. of physical assets Strong media relations Network approach

Iconography & Symbolism Urban rejuvenation Neighbourhood restorations Outside city-boarder branding

Local engagement & participation Use of sensory attributes Brand ambassadors “human touch” Multi-stakeholder collaboration

Reinforcement or reformation of city identity

HIERARCHY OF EFFECTS

(Originator: Jeppsson, 2014)

26

12. RESEARCH LIMITATIONS

The selected methodology and sample was considered appropriate and convenient due to the

time restrictions and limited resources. Being geographically restricted towards respondents in

London additionally prevented primary findings about the city identity of Barcelona, which

would have provided a more comprehensive analysis. However, no attempt was made to

include more than one stakeholder group as comparing findings between stakeholders was

outside the purpose of this study.

Moreover, it is acknowledged that the development of the Location Brand-Equity Model

encompasses findings from one stakeholder group and therefore recommends that further

research aims at expanding findings across other audiences. It additionally only provide tactical

insight in relation to the Olympic campaigns where objectives, strategies and tactics may be

different from other city branding initiatives.

The developed location brand-equity model does however becomes representative of the

stated stakeholder group and selected campaigns. Its wide acceptance as a reliable measuring

tool additionally provides validity for using it in this particular thesis.

13. FUTURE RESEARCH OPPORTUNITIES

It is encouraged that a comparative study is conducted with other stakeholder groups to

confirm findings. Another area of future investigation is to examine the implications on city

branding messages and strategies for stakeholders that exhibit more than one city brand

identity or meaning. To generalise the findings it is additionally worthwhile to conduct in-depth

interviews with city branding managers at council levels or branding agencies to identify their

individual branding processes and perceptions of their city.

27

14. CONCLUSION

The London Olympic Campaign 2012 was been compared with The Barcelona Olympic

Campaign to evaluate their effectiveness for the development of the widely used brand

performance framework: the Location-Brand Equity Model. Secondary research findings

identified that the London campaign focused mainly on emotional messages, the utilization of

historical locations and stakeholder engagements. Barcelona on the other hand used most

resources for rejuvenating the city and extending its construction work beyond the city borders.

They managed to improve the city life standards and position themselves as the “Capital of the

Mediterranean”. Whilst identifying London’s city characteristics, findings revealed that its

identity could be divided into objective and subjective city identities. The majority of objective

views associated London to its iconic buildings whilst the minority identified it in relation to

personality traits. The subjective identity was correlated to the foreign students’ interest and

therefore developed the identity of London as the European capital for educational standards.

For communicating its desired identity, cities need to consider the relationship between brand

expectations formed at the salience stage and satisfaction levels at the loyalty stage. This

perspective modified the hierarchal model of Location-Brand Equity into a circular process that

demonstrates a better representation of the building-and evaluation process of successful city

brands. It implies that cities must consistently meet or surpass stakeholders’ expectations as

failing to do so will impact the identity held and therefore alter associations. Cities’ success are

consequently dependent on the skillful execution of identified branding tactics.

The importance of findings and theoretical developments is related to the lacking city branding

evaluation techniques against economic impact. It provides more understanding of what makes

successful city branding through identifying effective tactics and strategies and provide clearer

guidelines for future brand building practices.

Future Olympic hosting cities should consider identifying the objective and subjective city

identities held by various stakeholders and attempt to meet these through a combination of

various tactics. The informative approach to communications was evaluated as most effective,

utilizing slogans, a brand-representation from Olympic Ambassadors and utilization of urban

iconography. Extending city branding initiatives beyond the city borders is important and

differentiates from the current ideas that initiatives should remain within the city boundaries.

28

15. REFERENCES

Anholt, S. (2006), Editorial: Why brand? Some practical considerations for nation branding, Place Branding, 2 (2), pp. 97-107.

Arch.Daily., (2014). AD Classics: La Sagrada Familia / Antoni Gaudi [online] Available at:

<http://www.archdaily.com/438992/ad-classics-la-sagrada-familia-antoni-gaudi/> [Accessed 22 Apr 2014].

Atos., (2013). Olympic Games Campaign - Our achievements [online] Available at: <http://topliners.eloqua.com/servlet/JiveServlet/previewBody/4346-102-1-10862/R2R_Utrecht_Atos%20Case%20Study_for%20web.pdf> [Accessed 22 Apr 2014].

Bailey, J. (1989). Marketing cities in the 1980s and beyond. Cleveland, OH: Cleveland State University Press.

Balibrea, M., (2001). Urbanism, Culture and the Post-industrial City: Challenging the

‘Barcelona Model’. Journal of Spanish Cultural Studies, 2 (2) pp. 187–210.

BBC., (2011). London firms say riots have damaged capital's reputation. [online] Available at: <http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-14478416> [Accessed 18 Apr 2014].

Berman, G., (2010). Financing the London 2012 Olympic Games: Social and General Statistics [online] House of Commons Library. Available at: <SN03790.pdf> [Accessed 22 Apr 2014]. Boo, S., James, B., and Seyhmus, B., "A model of customer-based brand equity and its

application to multiple destinations." Tourism Management 30.2 (2009): 219-231.

Botella, M., (1995). The Keys to Success of the Barcelona Games. In The Keys to Success: The social, Sporting, Economic, and Communication inputs of Barcelona ’92, ed. Miquel de Moragas and Miquel Botella. Barcelona: Centre d’Estudis Olimpics i de d’Esport-UAB and Olympic Museum, Lausanne.

Brian T. D., and Nowak, L. I., (2000). Toward effective use of cause-related marketing alliances. Journal of Product & Brand Management 9 (7) pp. 472-484.

Calavita, N, and Amador F., (2000). Behind Barcelona’s Success Story Citizen Movements and Planners’ Power. Journal of Urban History 26 (6) pp. 793-807.

Carmen, B., Levy, S. E and Ritchie, JR. B., (2005). Destination branding: Insights and practices from destination management organizations. Journal of travel research 43 (4) pp. 328-338.

Cosgrove, D. and Stephen D., (1981). The iconography of landscape: essays on the symbolic

representation, design and use of past environments. Vol. 9. Cambridge University Press.

Daye, D., (2010). Brand Salience: Why It’s Important For Your Brand [online] Available at:

<http://www.brandingstrategyinsider.com/2010/05/brand-salience-why-its-important-for-your-brand.html#.U1KGDPldWBI> [Accessed 19 Apr 2014].

29

DEFRA., (2013). London 2012 Olympic and Paralympic Games The Legacy: Sustainable Procurement for Construction Projects [online] Available at: < https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/224038/pb13977-sustainable-procurement-construction.PDF> [Accessed 22 Apr 2014].

Dinnie, K., (2011). City Branding: Theory and Cases. [online] Available at:

<http://books.google.co.uk/books?id=dW69d3qY9h8C&pg=PA6&lpg=PA6&dq=emergence+of+city+branding&source=bl&ots=a8TiC36eD&sig=_ryxMagA0CV7XADjC8brcPX1VJs&hl=en&sa=X&ei=rbJCU_6pNsemPeXLgLAM&ved=0CHYQ6AEwCQ#v=onepage&q=emergence%20of%20city%20branding&f=false> [Accessible 7 Apr 2014].

Enews., (2012). American choreographer and her daring dancers wow Londoners with circus-

style performance across capital [online] Available at: < http://archive.constantcontact.com/fs010/1102078751986/archive/1110343317631.html> [Accessed 22 Apr 2014].

European Union., (2013). Cities of tomorrow: Challenges, visions, ways forward. [online] Available at: <http://ec.europa.eu/regional_policy/sources/docgener/studies/pdf/citiesoftomorrow/citiesoftomorrow_final.pdf> [Accessed 10 Apr 2014].

Florida, R.L., (2008). Who’s Your City?: How the creative economy Is Making Where to Live the Most Important Decision of Your Life. USA: Perseus Book Group.

García, J. A., Gómez, M and Molina, A., (2012). A destination-branding model: An empirical analysis based on stakeholders. Tourism Management 33 (3) pp. 646-661.

Girginov, V., (2014). The London 2012 Olympics: Volume Two: Celebrating the Games. Oxon.:

Routledge. Gold, J. R., and Gold, M. M., (2008). Olympic cities: regeneration, city rebranding and

changing urban agendas. Geography compass 2 (1) pp. 300-318. Gov.UK., (2013). Press Release: Annual Report on the London 2012 Olympic and Paralympic

Games published. [online] Available at: < https://www.gov.uk/government/news/annual-report-on-the-london-2012-olympic-and-paralympic-games-published> [Accessed 22 Apr 2014].

Greenberg, M., (2009) Branding New York: How a city in crisis was sold to the world.

Routledge. Greg, R and Wilson, J., (2004). The impact of cultural events on city image: Rotterdam,

cultural capital of Europe 2001. Urban studies. 41 (10) pp. 1931-1951. Hailin, Q., Kim, L.H., and Im, H.H., (2011). A model of destination branding: Integrating the

concepts of the branding and destination image. Tourism Management 32 (3) pp. 465-476.

Hankinson, G., (2001). Location branding: A study of the branding practices of 12 English

cities. The Journal of Brand Management 9, (2) pp. 127-142.

30

Immler, N.L., (2014). (Re)Programming Europe: European Capitals of Culture: rethinking the role of culture. Journal of European Studies. 44 (3) pp. 29.

IpKin W. A, and Dioko, L. D. A., (2013). Understanding the mediated moderating role of

customer expectations in the customer satisfaction model: The case of casinos. Tourism Management 36 (1). pp. 188-199.

James, M. and Guy, O., (2011). London 2012 and the impact of the UK's olympic and

paralympic legislation: protecting commerce or preserving culture? The Modern Law Review 74, (3) pp. 410-429.

Kaplan, M. D, et al. (2010). Branding places: applying brand personality concept to cities. European Journal of Marketing 44, (9/10) pp. 1286-1304.

Karamichas, J., (2012). The Olympics and the Environment, in Lenskyj, H and Waggs, S. (eds), The Palgrave Handbook of Olympic Studied, pp. 381-93. Basingstoke: Palgrave.

Kavaratzis, M., (2004). From city marketing to city branding: Towards a theoretical framework for developing city brands. [online] Journal of Urban Development. 1, (1) pp. 58-73. Available at: <http://www.palgravejournals.com/pb/journal/v1/n1/pdf/5990005a.pdf> [Accessed 7 Apr 2014].

Kavaratzis, M., (2007). City marketing: the past, the present and some unresolved

issues. Geography Compass. 1 (3) pp.695-712. Keller, K. L., (1993). Conceptualizing, measuring, and managing customer-based brand

equity. The Journal of Marketing. 7 (3) pp. 1-22. Keller, K. L., (2001). Building customer-based brand equity: a blueprint for creating strong

brands. Marketing Science Institute. 1, (107) Pp.3-23. Konecnik, M. and William C. G. (2007). Customer-based brand equity for a destination. Annals

of tourism research 34, (2) pp. 400-421. Kotler, P., et al. (1999). Marketing places Europe: attracting investments, industries, residents

and visitors to European cities, communities, regions and nations. London: Pearson Education Ltd.

Lo Piccolo, F. and Schilleci, F. (2005), Local development partnership programmes in Sicily:

planning cities without plans, Planning Practice and Research, 20, (1), pp. 79-87. LOCOG., (2009) London 2012 Sustainability Guidelines –Corporate and Public Events. [online]

London: LOCOG. Available at: < http://www.actionsustainability.com/documents/downloads/london-2012-sustainability-events-guidelines.pdf> [Accessed 25 Apr 2014].

McKean, J., (2003). Customers are people... the human touch. New York: John Wiley & Sons.

Merrilees, B, Dale, M and Carmel H., (2012). Multiple stakeholders and multiple city brand meanings. European Journal of Marketing 46. (7/8) pp. 1032-1047.

31

Monclús, Francisco Javier. (2000). Barcelona's planning strategies: from 'Paris of the South 'to the 'Capital of West Mediterranean'. GeoJournal 51 (1-2) pp. 57-63.

Moore, R., (2002). Barcelona Blueprint for East End Covent Garden. Evening Standard, 23 April: 18.

Nandan, S., (2005). An exploration of the brand identity–brand image linkage: A

communications perspective. The Journal of Brand Management 12 (4) pp. 264-278.

Olympic Delivery Authority., (2012). Learning Legacy: Lessons learned from the London 2012 Games construction project [online] Available at: <http://learninglegacy.independent.gov.uk/documents/pdfs/programme-organisation-and-project-management/76-programme-dashboard-ppm.pdf> [Accessed 22 Apr 2014].

Patton, Michael Quinn. Qualitative research. John Wiley & Sons, Ltd, 2005.

Pike, S., (2007). Consumer-based brand equity for destinations: Practical DMO performance measures. Journal of Travel & Tourism Marketing 22, (1) pp. 51-61.

Poynter, G. and Iain, M., (2009). Olympic cities: 2012 and the remaking of London. Ashgate

Publishing, Ltd. Romaniuk, J and Sharp, B., (2004). Conceptualizing and measuring brand salience. Marketing

Science. SAGE. 4 (4) pp. 327-338.

Scott, N., Cooper, C and Baggio, R., (2007). Destination Networks: Four Australian Cases [online] Annals of Tourism Research. January, 35 (1) p 169-188. Available at: <http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0160738307001028> [Accessed 20 Apr 2014].

Simon Anholt Research Centre., (2013). City Brand Index. [online] Available at: <http://www.simonanholt.com/Research/cities-index.aspx> [Accessed 17 Apr 2014].

Skinner, H. and Croft, R. (2004), Creating the Cool: Exploring the concept of national branding,

International Journal of Applied Marketing, 3, (2) pp. 3-21. Skyscrapercity.com., (2014). London: Projects and Constructions. Available at:

<http://www.skyscrapercity.com/showthread.php?t=315079> [Accessed 15 Apr 2014]. Smith, A., (2005). Conceptualizing city image change: the ‘re-imaging’ of Barcelona. Tourism

Geographies 7 (4) pp. 398-423. Smith, M., (2008). When the Games Come to Town: Host Cities and the Local Impacts of the

Olympics: A report on the impacts of the Olympic Games and Paralympics on host cities. [online] London East Research Institute. [Accessed 21 Apr 2014].

32

The Guardian., (2011). Olympics 2012: Fears grow that disorder will impact on London Olympics [online] Available at: < http://www.theguardian.com/sport/2011/aug/09/olympic-games-2012-police-fears#> [Accessed 18 Apr 2014].

The Guardian., (2012). London 2012 festival success signals new era for culture. [online] Available at: < http://www.theguardian.com/culture/2012/sep/10/london-2012-festival-new-era-culture> [Accessed 22 Apr 2014].

The Guardian., (2012). London 2012 Olympics will cost a total of £8.921bn, says minister

[online] Available at: <http://www.theguardian.com/sport/2012/oct/23/london-2012-olympics-cost-total> [Accessed 22 Apr 2014].

Thonick, E., (2014). New Logo and Identity of the City of Amsterdam. [online] Brand New Review. Available at: <http://www.underconsideration.com/brandnew/archives/new_

Thornley, A., (2013). Exporting the ‘Barcelona Model’ to London: the ‘shaping’ role of the architectural profession. [online] Available at: < http://www.lse.ac.uk/geographyAndEnvironment/pdf/ThornleyExportingBarcelona.pdf> [Accessed 16 Apr 2014].

Thornton, G., (2013) Report 5: Post-Game Evaluation: Meta-Evaluation of the Impacts and Legacy of the London 2012 Olympic Games and Paralympic Games. Department for Culture, Media and Sport. [online] Available at: <https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/224145/Report_5_Economy_Evidence_Base_FINAL.pdf> [Accessed 26 Apr 2014].

Tomlinson, A., and Young, C., (2006) National Identity and Global Sports Events: Culture, Politics, and Spectacle in the Olympics and the football world cup. Ch 11, Barcelona 1992: Evaluating the Olympic Legacy. New York: State University of New York.

Trueman, M., Klemm, M., Giroud, A. (2004), Can a city communicate? Bradford as a corporate brand, Corporate Communications: An International Journal, 6 (4) pp.317-30.

UN., (2012). UN report: Revision of World Urbanization Prospects [online]. Available at: < http://esa.un.org/wpp/> [Accessed 10 Apr 2014].

University of Oxford., (2012). London Olympics on track to be 'most costly Games ever [online] Available at: < http://www.ox.ac.uk/media/news_stories/2012/120625.html> [Accessed 22 Apr 2014].

Vargo, S. L., and Lusch, R. F., (2008). Service-dominant logic: continuing the evolution. Journal of the Academy of marketing Science 36 (1) pp. 1-10.

Vegijudit. E., (2014). Park Guell. [online] Available at: <http://vegijudit2.blog.hu/2013/09/23/guell_park> [Accessed 22 Apr 2014].

Warnaby, G., Bennison, D., Davies, B. J. and Hughes, H. (2004), People and partnerships: marketing urban retailing, Journal of Retail and Distribution Management, 32 (11), pp. 545-556.

33

Widler, J. (2007). Nation branding: with pride against prejudice. Place Branding and Public Diplomacy 3 (2) pp.144-50

Wired., (2012). London Olympic Park Ready for Global Spotlight. [online] Available at: <

http://www.wired.com/2012/07/olympic-park-prepares-for-global-spotlight/> [Accessed 22 Apr 2014].

Xing, X., and Laurence, C., (2006). Effects of hosting a sport event on destination brand: a test

of co-branding and match-up models. Sport Management Review 9 (1) pp. 49-78.

16. BIBLIOGRAPHY

Andrea, L. (2011). City branding: a state-of-the-art review of the research domain. Journal of Place Management and Development. 4 (1) pp. 27-9.

Anholt, S., (2013). Anholt-GfK City Brands Index. [online] Available at:

<http://www.simonanholt.com/Research/research-city-brand-index.aspx> [Accessed 28 Oct 2013].

Asli DA. T, Gartner, W. C. and Cavusgil, T.S., (2007). Measurement of destination brand bias

using a quasi-experimental design. Tourism Management. 28 (6) pp. 1529-1540. Aurand, T. W., Gorchels, L., and Bishop, T. R., (2005). Human resource management's role in

internal branding: an opportunity for cross-functional brand message synergy. Journal of Product & Brand Management. 14 (3) pp.163-169.

Bryman, A and Bell, E., (2007). Business Research Methods (2nd ed). Oxford: Oxford University

Press. Buhalis, D., (2011). Marketing the competitive destination of the future [online] Tourism

Management Issue: The Competitive Destination. Available at: <http://epubs.surrey.ac.uk/1087/1/fulltext.pdf> [Accessed 28 Oct 2013].

Chernatony, L. (2000). Added value: its nature, roles and sustainability. European Journal of

Marketing. 34 (1/2) pp. 39-56. Dervin, B., (1981). Mass communicating: changing conceptions of the audience. pp. 71-87. Dinnie, K., (2011). City Branding: Theory and Cases [online] Google Books. Palgrave

MacMillan: England. Available at: <http://books.google.co.uk/books?id=dW69d3qY9h8C&printsec=frontcover&source=gbs_ge_summary_r&cad=0#v=onepage&q&f=false> [Accessed 28 Oct 2013].

Easterby-Smith, M., Thorpe, P., Jackson, P. R, and Lowe, A., (2008). Management Research

(3rd ed) London: Sage. Edell, J. A., and Marian C. B., (1987). The power of feelings in understanding advertising

effects. Journal of Consumer research. 5 (2) pp.54-62.

34

Florida, R., (2009). Who’s Your City? How the creative economy is making where you live the most important decision of your life. [online] Google books. Perseus Books Group: New York. Available at: <http://books.google.co.uk/books?id=s_mX10OFG88C&printsec=frontcover&dq=Who's+your+city?&hl=en&sa=X&ei=DEdyUuGUCMiV0AW54ICwDQ&ved=0CDEQ6AEwAA#v=onepage&q=Who's%20your%20city%3F&f=false> [Accessed 31 Oct 2013].

Ghauri, P and Grønhaug, K., (2005). Research Methods in Business Studies: A Practical Guide

(3rd ed.) London: Financial Times Prentice Hall. Greig, C., Purcell, T. F., and Ribera‐Fumaz, R., (2014). City of Rents: The limits to the Barcelona

model of urban competitiveness. International Journal of Urban and Regional Research. 38 (1) pp. 198-217.

Hankinson. G., (2001). Location branding: A study of the branding practices of 12 English

cities. Journal of Brand Management. 9, (5) pp. 127-142. Jing, B. X. (2009). Perceptions of tourism products. Tourism management 31 (5) pp. 607-610. Kavaratzis, M., (2004). From city marketing to city branding: Towards a theoretical framework

for developing city brands [online] Igentaconnect. 1 (1) pp. 58-73. Available at: <http://www.ingentaconnect.com/content/pal/pb/2004/00000001/00000001/art00005> [Accessed 28 Oct 2013].

Knox , S . and Bickerton , D . ( 2003 ) The six conventions of corporate branding . European

Journal of Marketing. 37 (7 – 8) pp. 998 – 1016. Lidia, E., (2012). URBAN MARKETING AND ITS IMPACT OVER THE COMPETITION BETWEEN

CITIES. Management & Marketing VIII 1 (1) pp. 39-42. Lindstrom, M., (2005). Brand Sense: How to build powerful brands through touch, taste, smell,

sight & sound. Kogan Page Publishers. Lucarelli, A, and Berg, P.O., (2011). City branding: a state-of-the-art review of the research

domain. Journal of Place Management and Development 4 (1) pp. 9-27. Marshall, M. N. (1996). Sampling for qualitative research. Family practice. 13 (6) pp. 522-526. Merrilees, B., Miller, D. and Herington, C., (2012). Multiple stakeholders and multiple city

brand meanings. European Journal of Marketing, 46 (7/8) pp.1032 –1047. Saunders, M, Lewis, P and Thornhill, A., (2009). Research Methods for Business Students (5th

ed), Harlow: Pearson Education. Simoes , C . and Dibb , S . ( 2001 ) Rethinking the brand concept: New brand orientation .

Corporate Communications. An International Journal. 6 (4) pp. 217 – 224 . Zenker, S. (2011) . Measuring success in place marketing and branding. Place branding and

public diplomacy 7 (1) pp. 32-41. Zenker, S. (2011). How to catch a city? The concept and measurement of place

brands. Journal of Place Management and Development 4 (1) pp. 40-52

35

17. APPENDECIES

APPENDIX I: Population Density in Europe 2013 (EU, 2013)

APPENDIX II: Collected Respondents’ Answers

Q1. What is the first thing that comes to your mind when you think of this city?

Q2. What was the main reason for studying in this city?

Respondent 1 Sweden

Hub London has everything I need

Respondent 2 Egypt

Freedom I know that the unis in London were going to provide me with the education to give me a proper job. You have a better chance of having a good career if I study in London than if I studied alone. I also wanted to experience another culture and learning English.

Respondent 3 Algeria

Fun Lots of opportunities.

Respondent 4 Pakistan

London eye

Quality of education and the importance of a business degree.

Respondent 5 Iraq

Big ben and London eye...I guess tourist places because London is mostly a tourist place.

Because of the value of certificate and education. In my country, I would get a good opportunity for getting a job with this qualification.

36

Respondent 6 Germany

Fashion and shopping The course I wanted to study wasn't available in my home country so I decided to go to London

Respondent 7 France

It's silly but the first thing I (still) think of are the monuments: Big Ben and Tower Hill.

The main reason I chose to study in London is because it was very accessible from Paris but still I could learn English like if I was in the US or Australia, you see what I mean.

Respondent 8 Thailand

A city with loads to do with loads of (multicultural) people.

Was born and raised in a capital and didn't think any other city in England than London that would have the same to offer

Respondent 9 Italy

Opportunities and multicultural environment

I came to London to learn English and decided to stay to study at Uni as the English system focuses on practical aspects combining them with useful theories. My aim was to receive a complete and valuable education in a stimulating environment.

Respondent 10 Vietnam

Multicultural People, the cultural lifestyle and because of the top uni's that are located in London.

Respondent 11 America

Cockney accents I just fell in love during a study abroad programme

Respondent 12 Bangladesh

I think of all the experiences that you can have in the city, there is so much to do here from the different markets, vintage shops, the theatres, the bars where you can listen to live music and the amazing places to eat. There is just so much that can be do, no one will ever get bored.

It’s one of the greatest cities in the world and the only place where I feel most at home.

Respondent 13 Romania

Diversity Quality and content of courses

Respondent 14 Spain

When I think about London I think about an inspiring city

The main reason for choosing London as a place to study was because I wanted to continue my studies in English as I believe the study method is more practical (more theory put in practice) compared to the Spanish study method and because I love London, I believe this to be an amazing city

Respondent 15 Iran

When thinking of London I see a small world, very touristic. The city itself is beautiful, very attractive with lots of distractions but also with lots of opportunities. As a capital, lots of large companies have their headquarters there. It’s a good place to start your life, learn English and make great contacts. Especially for European students since its closer than the US.

I chose London for its proximity to France and my family, and because I wanted to be surrounded by different nationalities and culture ...my boyfriend being Italian. Nowadays it’s important to open yourself to the world and adapt yourself to different cultures because companies employ more and more people from all around the world and it’s important to be able to adapt yourself to it in order to work in better conditions

Respondent 16 Portugal

When I think about London the first things that come into my mind are: Respect, multicultural, dynamic, advance.

I chose London because the teaching system is more practical and the degree is worldwide recognised.

Respondent 17 Denmark

The first thing I thought about was the historical buildings and the countryside…I

I really valued the quality and reputation of the courses and universities in London. If I were to

37

think that was from movies like Pride & Prejudice I used to watch back home.

go back, I think would be better of than the others looking for a job.

Respondent 18 Greece

I think about the tourist aspects…I think mainly the famous buildings and the typical architectural style…I just love it.

The education in London is much better than that in Greece and now is my chance to build my future.

Respondent 19 Norway

Theatres and the fact that it’s one of the world’s major metropolitan cities, it’s so multicultural.

I chose London because there are so many more opportunities here. Both in relation to education and employment.

Respondent 20 Latvia

Richer social life and lack of social service, solidarity and generosity

Because London in my opinion has been a central city in Europe in regards to education. They have a higher quality in that universities in London are known worldwide. I am even considering taking my masters here.

APPENDIX III: Financing the Barcelona Games

38

APPENDIX IV: Political Contributors to Barcelona ‘92

APPENDIX V: London Olympic Game Budget Breakdown (LOCOG)