Dialogue: A sensible and positive investment in the future

By MICHAEL SMYTHE*

How can a far-sighted, well-conceived, collectively creative, thoroughly developed, innovative investment in adding value to a unique New Zealand resource get any coverage in the news media?

It is far too good a story to be told on its merits. It would look like a public relations piece published for free by the fearless Fourth Estate.

Answer: Compile a schedule of every fee, expense and overhead remotely associated with the project over three years. Make sure the data reaches a seasoned headline-grabber, then stand clear and wait for the inevitable.

It worked: "$831,000 logo slammed by Peters" was a typical headline last August. Then, two weeks before last Friday's official launch, some newspapers, ignoring the embargo, acquired the logo from the trademarks register (in the public domain) and had Winston Peters recycle his old press statement with the cost rounded out to $1 million for good measure.

Hey-presto, a scoop. "A costly squiggle", sneered one editorial. Mr Peters even managed to get some newspapers to parrot his ludicrous line: "It's a rip-off. One million for six lines? That's $166,666 per line." PR mission accomplished.

There is, of course, the real story. In May 2000, Prime Minister Helen Clark announced an $86 million cultural recovery package. Business strategists increasingly recognise the power of a corporate culture to affect bottom-line performance. The Government believed that New Zealand's cultural infrastructure was in such a fragile state that an urgent injection was needed to restore its health.

Te Waka Toi, the Maori arts board of Creative New Zealand, identified one project as a priority for investment - a process for distinguishing authentic Maori artwork from the plethora of imported imitations that were devaluing a unique resource and confusing consumers.

A three-year project plan was presented; a budget was allocated. And less than two years later, the means of delivering the desired outcome was launched - the Toi Iho Maori Made mark strategy.

Does it meet a legitimate need? Yes. It is a paradox of globalisation that niche markets place a higher value on unique expressions of minority cultures. When the demand for cultural iconography is so high that suppliers resort to importing illicit imitations and approximate appropriations, the integrity and quality and, thus, the value of the culture is deeply undermined.

Apart from being spiritually and culturally offensive and, thus, socially destructive, succumbing to such an invasion is economically crazy. The market demands a way of distinguishing the dusky dolls and dubious jade from the genuine article.

Should it cost so much? It does seem like a generous budget, especially if it is applied only to the cost of the logo. But when we recognise that it covers consultation, legal fees, policy development, research, design, promotion, marketing and initial implementation it seems more reasonable.

Unlike most branding projects, the client was not immediately identifiable or equipped with an agreed, developed strategy. The Maori Made mark budget covers everything from initiation to implementation.

It is a testament to all those involved in such an emotionally charged, nationwide, multi-iwi quest that any outcome was delivered at all, let alone the elegant, energetic-gentle, robust-delicate, traditional-contemporary, uplifting-functional logo and strategy that has emerged with strong stakeholder approval and ownership.

Investing less than 1 per cent of the cultural recovery package in a strategy to improve standards, enhance market value, make creative careers viable and increase overseas funds retained in New Zealand seems like money well targeted.

How can Maori art be distinguished? With difficulty. It is probably easier than defining New Zealand movies or music or design or manufacturing. But it is not as simple as authenticating antiques.

This is about giving a contemporary culture a place to breathe and grow strong. Acknowledging that Maori may work with non-Maori, a mainly Maori mark and a Maori co-production mark are included in the strategy.

Should the Government be involved? Absolutely. New Zealand's ability to deliver a quality education and health service to its citizens is dependent upon earning foreign exchange through export and tourism.

Our tiny economy can make a living by becoming a low-priced sweatshop for multinational brands or we can distinguish ourselves in a way that is valued. We can be commodity price-takers, or premium price-makers.

Little, young New Zealand is far more likely to take on the world successfully with a pragmatic partnership of free enterprise and Government initiative and resourcing.

The Toi Iho Maori Made mark story deserves to be discussed in the context of a robust debate about integrated economic, cultural and social development. But when it is evaluated in that light, the news becomes too good to be newsworthy.

Perhaps that is proof that it is a sensible, positive investment in the future of all of us.

* Michael Smythe is a design management consultant.