EVALUATION OF THE EFFECTS OF NIGERIA’S INTERNATIONAL IMAGE AND REPUTATION MANAGEMENT ON FOREIGN NATIONALS’ PERCEPTION OF THE COUNTRY

ABSTRACT

The management of image and reputation had over the years been restricted to corporate organizations. This trend has assumed a different dimension as most countries now evolve various strategies of building good image and reputation that can attract better relationship among the comity of nations. In spite of the efforts so far made by Nigeria, there still exists a general global discontent with the disposition of other countries of the world towards her. The damaged image and reputation occasioned by long dictatorial military rule, corruption among various organs of the society, the perennial lack of electricity supply that affects the production potentials, among several other problems have become the lot of the country since her political independence in October 1960. All these have been exposed by foreign and local media publications to the knowledge of other nations. The perception of other countries about Nigeria had not been the best considering these adverse publicities including unpleasant diplomatic commentaries and warnings about foreign nationals visiting Nigeria, especially the American prediction of the country breaking up in 2015. The dangers posed by terrorism, kidnappings, armed robberies and the activities of advanced fee fraudsters commonly referred to as “419” have all added to the ugly sign-post. The international community had related with Nigeria under fear, doubts, suspicion and distrust.  This situation had prompted some of the agencies of the federal government including the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, diplomatic missions abroad, officials and students in foreign countries, customs and immigration officials, among others, to be more conscious about their actions and activities in dealing with foreign nationals and other matters of national interests. However, the present state of affairs has changed, judging by the current  events  around  the  world prompting the government  to be increasingly concerned and  conscious  of  her reputation relative to other countries. Nigeria had established and maintained diplomatic missions and representations in different countries of the world and made concerted efforts in the use of technocrats and career diplomats as her representatives. The essence of this approach was to ensure that these representatives provided better knowledge and understanding about her people, culture and economic potentials to other countries of the world, in an attempt to create better image and reputation for the country.  Expectedly, with these robust efforts, including the engagement of the services of experienced public relations professionals to assess, build and effectively manage her image and reputation, the  government  and  people  of  Nigeria  seemed  to  be  confident  that  the  nation’s  image  and  reputation  in  the international community remained positive and that other nations are having good disposition towards her. The effectiveness of these image laundering efforts had not been evaluated. The objectives of this study were to: (i) examine the extent to which foreign nationals’ perception of a country affects her image and reputation, (ii) assess the contributions of the various diplomatic representations managed by the relevant federal government agencies, (iii) determine the effect of public’s perception of a country’s image and reputation problems on government’s effort at solving them, (iv) examine the role of the media in projecting the image and reputation of a country, and (v) assess the extent public relations was used by federal government agencies to create favourable image and reputation for the country.

The study adopted the survey design. The population of the study was 568,841 consisting of selected 13 federal government agencies, members of the diplomatic corps/expatriates and government-owned Media houses. The sample size of 400 was determined, using Taro Yamane’s formula. Peer-review method was used to test the validating of the research instrument. Cronbach Alpha was used for reliability test with a value of 0.88 and an inter-item of coefficient of 0.94. The five hypotheses formulated in the study were tested with Linear Regression for hypothesis 1, Wilcoxon signed ranks test for hypotheses 2, 3, 5; and Friedman Chi-Square test for hypothesis 4. The results of the study are that foreign nationals’ perception of a country has significant (< 0.05) effect on her image and reputation. The various diplomatic representations managed by the relevant federal government agencies have not contributed significantly (< 0.05) towards a positive image and reputation for the country. The public’s perception of a country’s image and reputation problems has significant (< 0.05)

effect on government’s efforts at solving them. The media reports about a country have significant (< 0.05) influence on her image and reputation. Federal government agencies do not make significant (< 0.05) use of public relations in creating favourable image and reputation for the country. With these results, a number of specific recommendations were made, which were subsumed under the broad recommendations offered by two models: SPAROW-LEE Image and Reputation Elevation Model and OAK TREE Image and Reputation Management Model. These, no doubt, will help in addressing the nation’s current image deficit and equally boost the knowledge and understanding of both scholars and professional image managers on nations’ image and reputation management the world over.

CHAPTER ONE INTRODUCTION

1.1       Background of the Study

A country’s image and reputation are as important as the country itself. Evidently, no country, the world over, toys with her image, reputation and identity. Everything is done both locally and internationally to preserve, protect and project those virtues and symbols that promote national honour and dignity. The burning of the national flag or the tainting of the national colour of a particular country by protesters on the streets of a foreign country or within the precinct of her foreign mission’s building as often witnessed during some unresolved socio-political crises, to a large extent, portends a bad omen or a sign of hate or outright rejection. And that could signal a bad image and reputation for such country.

Nigeria as a country is part of the larger heterogeneous global community. Before, during and after her independence on October 1st 1960, it has been engaging in various forms of diplomatic shuttles and representations to enhance her international reputation profile. Unfortunately, with her ugly civil war experience early in her independence years, a lot more effort had to be engaged to reassure the international community that the country is indeed a force to reckon with in the global enterprise.

Relying on her conviction of making African continent the centre-piece of her foreign policy thrust, Nigeria has, over the last four decades, contributed immensely in promoting peace and economic development in the sub-Saharan Africa. The outbreak of internecine wars and political upheavals in some West African countries like Liberia, Sierra-Leon, Ivory Coast, to mention a

few, in the early 1990s and late 2000s brought out the true influence of Nigeria in the sub- regional affairs.

The country, alongside other viable member states, established the ECOMOG Force (ECOWAS Monitoring Group), which has now transformed to ECOWAS stand-by force, charged with the responsibility of quelling political unrests and other forms of undemocratic tendencies by some antisocial elements in the sub region. The ECOMOG, literally under the dominance and control of Nigeria, eventually navigated those above-mentioned countries back to the path of peace and political stability.

Nigeria’s voice in the African Union (formerly Organization of African Unity- OAU) is not only loud but equally vibrates across the globe. The United Nations, the European Union and the United  States  of  America  have  collectively  and  variously  attested  to  this  fact  when  they described Nigeria as a “strong voice in Africa and reliable ally in global peace initiative…,” Egwu (2007).

At the world level, Nigeria, no doubt, has actively participated in the search for lasting peace and socio-political development of different countries. All these tremendous efforts (which often cost a fortune) were channeled through peace-keeping operations. At various times, the country’s military and police personnel were dispatched to different countries under the tutelage of the United Nations to partake in various operations. And fortunately, the nation’s armed forces have at various times given good accounts of themselves thus elevating the reputation profile of the country.

This seemingly endless search for good international image and reputation by the country over the years has equally led to the establishment of the Technical Aids Corps Scheme in 1987. The establishment of this unique scheme according to the Federal Ministry of Foreign Affairs, ‘‘was borne out of a desire by Government to streamline the nation’s hitherto uncoordinated foreign aid and technical assistance policy.” Since its establishment, it has become a veritable tool of the nation’s foreign policy, playing a pivotal role in consolidating relations with friendly countries of the African, Caribbean and Pacific regions of the world.

The country’s journey to building good and sustainable international image and reputation over the years has equally led to her participation in different forms of international/bilateral agreements  with  different  countries  and  international  organizations/agencies.  To  promote internal societal-approved conduct, good moral and ethical behaviour among her citizens as well as projecting acceptable image to the international community, the country initiated some vibrant domestic legislation. These include: Economic and Financial Crimes Commission Act, 2004 (EFCC Act, 2004); Corrupt Practices and Other Related Offences Act, 2000 (ICPC Act, 2000); Code of Conduct Act, 1989; Advance Fee Fraud and other Fraud Related Offences Act, 2006, etc.

At  international level, we had some Bilateral Treaties signed by the country. Such as Law Enforcement Cooperation Agreement with    the United States of America, 2001; and Nigeria/South Africa Bilateral Treaty on Criminal Matters, 2001. Nigeria is also a signatory to some regional treaties like  the ECOWAS Treaty on Exchange of Information on Criminal

Matters; and African Convention on Prevention and Combating Corruption. Some of the international treaties signed by the country to show her commitment to transparency and good conduct with a view to boosting her international image and reputation are : United Nations Convention  Against  Corruption  (UNCAC),  signed  in  2003  and  ratified  in  2004;  Schemes Relating to Mutual Assistance in Criminal Matters within the Commonwealth (including amendments made by Law Ministers in April 1990, November 2002 and October 2005); the London Scheme  for  Extradition within  the  Commonwealth (incorporating the  amendments agreed at Kingstown in November 2002); United Nations Convention Against Transnational Organized Crime (signed in December 2000, ratified June 2001).

This convention requires member-states to criminalize participation in an organized criminal group and the laundering of the proceeds of crime, to criminalize corruption and to  adopt measures to combat it, to freeze, confiscate and forfeit assets, to extradite offenders, to render mutual assistance in transnational criminal matters and to foster cooperation in law enforcement.

Flipping through her chequered history of post-independence 50 years, one can confidently say that Nigeria has come of age. It has pulled through the thick and thin of life and toiled the foibles of national development. So many odds have directly confronted the nation even to the extent of threatening its cohesion and corporate existence, yet in unity it stands, and with faith in God, it forges ahead with impressive equanimity.

In spite of this enviable and determined march towards national Eldorado, a handful of vices and perspicacious omen have erupted along the path to, not only blight her image and reputation, but

equally threaten her self-esteem and conspicuous position among the comity of nations. This, no doubt, has largely accounted for the passenger seat the country has been consigned to in global affairs for over two decades now. The several years of military rule in the country has not helped matters either. At a point, due to the oppressive, aggressive and repressive template of the military’s misrule, the country was even treated as a pariah nation, which evidently crippled our collective psyche, the fledgling economy, social esteem, sense of pride; and literally pulverized what was left of our international image and reputation (precisely between 1994 and 1996 during the reign of the late Gen. Sani Abacha).

Successive governments in the country have in various ways made concerted efforts at shoring up the image rating of the nation but a brick wall seems to always be in direct confrontation, as a lot of water appeared to have been allowed to pass under the bridge over the years. So many vices have surreptitiously crept up under the cloak of lasting maladministration and visionless regimes that were foisted on the country for a very long time. With the advent of democratic governance, some breath of fresh air or so seemed to have been regained. But that too was not to last long as corruption and other modern-day social vices like terrorism were quickly packaged and detonated on the political arena, thus setting the nation once more on a journey backward.

Between 1999 and 2010, two major image crystallization programmes were launched on the world scene with a view to, once again, putting Nigeria on the ladder of global reputation ranking. Frank Nweke, a former Minister of Information and Communications in the early 2000s introduced an image promotion programme christened; ‘Heart of Africa Campaign.’ The underpinning intention of this programme was to sell Nigeria to the global community as “a

richly endowed and beautifully adorned bride that regulates the pulse of Africa” (Nweke, 2005). The world attention was, to some extent, directed towards Nigeria to see what good that could, as promised, come from it. Upon her appointment as Information and Communications Minister in the administration of the late President Umaru Musa Yar’Adua in 2008, Professor Dora Akunyili also tinkered with the idea of crafting an attractively robust international image and reputation for Nigeria. In driving her dream through, she came up with the “Rebranding campaign.”

However, the rebranding campaign came under heavy knocks from many Nigerian elites within the country and in the Diaspora. It was criticized for lacking in substance and direction as well as promoting the successes and image that only exist in the imagination of the promoters. That notwithstanding, Osagie (2011) observed that the campaign has offered the world a window through which they were able to peep at Nigeria and all what obtains therein.

According to Oludare (2010), even though some critics claimed that the rebranding campaign was more of an attention seeking device, it is not a bad attempt as we perceive it as an effort aimed at  seeking attention to  a  product or brand that  dearly  needs a  global adoption and patronage. Successes achieved are better sustained through attention-seeking. Akinyele (1989) stated that if one doesn’t blow his trumpet, his detractors might steal it and blow against him. Public relations is good deed publicly acknowledged, (Jefkins, 1986). As Black (1984) put it, no effort should be spared at communicating organization’s success to the public; for through that an enviable corporate profile could be achieved (Oracca-Tette, 1982).

Nigeria needs the world just as the world needs Nigeria but there is a missing link. And that is the shortfall in the nation’s international image and reputation. Incidentally, no nation can attract international patronage while everything around her is unattractive. Deephouse (2000) stated that good and favourable corporate reputation opens doors of success to organizations and even nations of the world. Little wonder that local and multinational corporations and even governments of different countries now actively engage the services of renowned reputation managers in flipping the coin in their favour, image-wise these days. According to Fombrun (2003), the developments in the field of corporate reputation and their corresponding suggestions on what  influences reputation and  how  it  does so,  have  led  to  the emerging discipline of reputation management.

Just like a product or service being provided and marketed by a corporate organization, image and reputation have become special and unique brands that a country will have to professionally package and sell to the global market to attract the desired attention and goodwill. As it does so to the external public (i.e. the international community), so it does to the internal public (the citizens) in order to have a peaceful, friendly and convivial atmosphere to steer the ship of governance. Fombrun & Van Riel (1997: 10), put it this way:

“A corporate reputation is a collective representation of a firm’s past actions and results that describes the firm’s ability to deliver valued outcomes to multiple stakeholders. It gauges a firm’s relative standing both internally with employees and externally with its stakeholders, in both its competitive and institutional environments.”

Events in the past five years in Nigeria suggest that the country in its history of over half a century (of independence) has never been so serious in the search for a good and befitting international image and reputation like it now does. So many programmes have in the past one decade been initiated by successive administrations with a view to placing the country on the favourable side of global attention. The Federal Ministry of Foreign Affairs stated in its official website: www.mfa.gov/, that more than ever before, it has been re-energized, refocused and repackaged to operate full-throttle at the international arena to garner as much goodwill and reputation as possible for the country.

On Tuesday 17 May 2011, the President and Commander-in-Chief of the Armed Forces of Nigeria, Dr Goodluck Ebele Jonathan, GCFR, inaugurated a “Presidential Committee on Foreign Relations.” To serve on this crucial international image and reputation building and management committee is a former Secretary General of Commonwealth of Nations, Chief Emeka Anyaoku, among others. In the President’s brief speech, he made it crystal clear that no effort should be spared in giving Nigeria a strong voice in the international community through effective representation and favourable diplomatic activities.

In February 2011, about 25 Ambassadors were cleared by the Nigerian Senate (the Nigerian upper  legislative  chamber)  based  on  the  recommendation of  the  President  of  the  Federal Republic of Nigeria, and subsequently sworn-in by the then Honourable Minister of Foreign Affairs, Mr. Odein Ajumogobia, SAN, with a view to projecting the country in very sterling qualities and favourable light to their respective host countries. In a blaze of good luck and combined effort  of providence,  the  country for  the  very  first  time  in  about  two  decades,

organized what the local and international communities, friends and foes alike described as free, fair and credible general elections. The Foreign Affairs Ministry spontaneously cashed-in on this milestone to launch a diplomatic reconnaissance to convince the international community that Nigeria can, indeed, get it right. Many critics and observers have watched in utter stupefaction how the tide is moving in Nigeria, not too certain which direction the pendulum will finally swing to.

With all this put together, one cannot conclusively tell the true position of Nigeria’s image. Many have asked if the country’s international reputation has leapt on the upward swing or whether  the  international community  now  sees  us  as  reliable,  trustworthy and  responsible partners in the global project. It is also important to know how our citizens are now being perceived and treated in foreign climes in the aftermath of this potpourri of image and reputation cocktail.

These and many others have been unveiled in the study to ascertain the current image and reputation of Nigeria, not losing sight of the fact that image can only be what it is, favourable or unfavourable. An image cannot be invented or polished, although it can be changed. Thus, research in this area of a nation’s life could unarguably be considered as a worthy adventure with wide range of implications.  Specifically,  this  study thoroughly investigated various  federal government agencies in the country whose activities directly and indirectly affect, shape or deface Nigeria’s international image and reputation. Also there was an in-depth assessment of the  current  image  and  reputation  of  the  country.  The  knowledge  gained  through  these

investigations will serve as a compass to guide us through the terrain of the nation’s international image and would also help in seeking the way forward.

1.2       Problem Statement

At the attainment of political independence on October 1, 1960 and the first two to three decades that followed, Nigeria enjoyed a robust goodwill in the comity of nations. Her international reputation profile rose astronomically to the envy of many African countries and even the developed economies of the world. Her currency, the Naira was at par with the Great Britain’s Pound Sterling. The American Dollar was dwarfed by the intimidating stature of the Naira in its purchasing power (Aluko, 2003). Many countries of the world fell heads over heels for the emerging giant of the black continent of Africa. A number of developed countries queued up to do business with Nigeria while smaller countries of the third world extraction came cap in hand to seek financial aids from Nigeria. At a time, even the world greats like the United States of America’s entrepreneurs would readily prefer to be paid in the Nigerian currency for business transactions  undertaken within  the  shores  of  the  country due  to  its  weight,  economy and immense goodwill anchored on a robust international reputation (Adedeji, 2007).

Rather unfortunately enough, in the decades that followed thereafter, precisely from the mid-

1980s, the story suddenly changed. According to Olalekan (2005), the country’s image and international reputation rating took a dramatic plunge into infamy. The mere mention of the name “Nigeria,” scared and overwhelmed foreigners with the feeling that an evil or dastardly act is about to be committed. No trust, reliability or confidence is attached to the citizens any longer. At foreign airports, her citizens now enjoy the treatment of lepers. On sighting the “Green

Passport,” all security agencies are placed on red alert ‘as anything untoward could happen.’ All emigrants from Nigeria are kept in long and humiliating wait at various entry points of foreign countries.

One might be tempted to ask what is in a name and image. A lot is attached to the duo of name and image. “A good name is rather to be chosen than great riches” (Proverbs 22:1). Evidently, good names have been opening several doors of favour and opportunities to the possessors, right from the time of creation. An American or British citizen does not have to spend much time telling the visa officer of any country of the world about him or herself. The good name and reputation of the countries speak for them instantly on sighting their international passport.

Many have demanded to know at what point Nigeria has started to get it wrong. Have we, as a nation, been able to properly evaluate our conducts and tell ourselves the truth? As many had argued, the Rebranding Campaign of the former Minister of Information and Communications, Professor Dora Akunyili, fell short of sincerity as it only garnished the image of Nigeria, leaving out the damning facts that stare one in the face.

Colton-Lacon (1975) did say that, the best way to evaluate and assess your reputation is to be praised by honest people or to be abused by rogues and evil people. According to Egwu (2007), it is debatable that in the last several years since 1960, whether Nigeria as a country has acquired any reputation or good image to protect and defend. It is our thesis therefore, that what we should be addressing and what has been addressed in recent times is the management of the disreputation and notoriety of Nigeria, nationally, continentally and globally. Nigeria at a time in her chequered history enjoyed the infamous status of a pariah nation. No thanks to the abysmal

level our reputation has sunk to (Adesanya, 2001). A highly respected international journalist, Bowden (2008), synthesized the following scenario in a chapter on Nigeria in his book:

“Nigeria has a terrible reputation. Tell someone that you are going to Nigeria and if they haven’t been there themselves, they offer sympathy. Tell anyone who had been to Nigeria and they laugh. Then they offer sympathy. No tourists go there. Only companies rich enough to keep their staff removed from the realities of Nigerian life do business there. And big companies rarely mention Nigeria in their Annual reports; ‘for fear of what it will do to their share price. Journalists treat it like a war zone. Diplomats regard it as a punishment posting. Everyone has a story from beyond normal bounds of credibility. Some are terrifying, most are funny, Nigerian politicians try to pretend that its bad image is some western conspiracy against Nigeria and Africa. It is not just white visitors who fear it. I told a Ghanaian cab driver in London that I was going to Nigeria. He was quiet for a moment, and then he said, ‘I lived in Lagos once. Give me a million – a billion pounds – I would not go back there. Never. It is the most terrible place in the world…’’

Bowden’s book which was first published in 2008 to much critical acclaim, described Lagos, the commercial nerve centre of Nigeria as  “New  York without good  manners which survives, pulsates, grows and works just as Nigeria, a failed state, works” (Bowden, 2008).

For Nigeria, a country like all other countries of the world needs foreign direct investment to sustain its  impressive 6 to  7% growth rate per annum (Adefuye: 2010). This international assessment and rating is, to say the least, extremely damaging. The former Nigerian Foreign

Affairs Minister, Odein Ajimogobia, SAN, in a paper in 2010, which was delivered to the

Council of Foreign Relations in Washington D.C. on 4th August, 2010, stated that:

“The unconstructive and prejudicial negative portrayals, images and generalizations of the country that are syndicated through global media networks and by journalists with new stories to tell totally ignore the progress that the country has made against all odds” (Ajumogobia, 2010)

The Nigerian Ambassador to the United States of America, Professor Ade Adefuye, in a world press conference in Washington D.C. in 2010, took a swipe at the international media. According to him, Nigeria has been maligned by journalists who have chosen to ignore the positive and blow the negative out of proportion. No doubt, the media, both local and foreign, have not been too fair in their analysis and reportage of the events in Nigeria. But even at that, Nigeria’s image and  reputation  on  their  own  have  never  been  inspiring  in  anyway.  Vices  are  now  freely celebrated and institutionalized in place of virtues. Good ethical and moral conducts have been thrown overboard. All rich societal values have long been eroded (Egwu 2007 ).

It may be trite to argue about the daunting task of welding together such a composite mosaic of

250 ethnic nationalities into a modern nation state. It is equally trivial to recount Nigeria’s travails arising from ethnic divisions and disagreement – six destabilizing coup d’état, a devastating 30 months civil war, a fragile oil economy vulnerable to external shocks, numerous ethno-religious  conflicts  (like  the  one  that  reared  its  ugly  head  immediately  after  the

announcement of the April 16, 2011 results of the Presidential election in some parts of Northern

Nigeria); violent crisis in the oil producing region in the Niger Delta, etc.

Honestly, these do not by themselves constitute credible or acceptable reasons for where Nigeria is today because multi-ethnicity and oppressive military rule and their attendant challenges are not peculiar to any one country (Maku, 2011). All these arguments, plausible or contrived, do not change where we  are,  as  Jefkins (1987)  said  that  image  remains what  it  is.  It  cannot  be embellished or decorated to deceive the people. Nigeria today is what it is. And our image and reputation today remain what they are in the perception of the international community (Sambe,

2009).

As  Ambassador  Princeton  Lyman  recently  pointed  out  in  a  well-meaning  critique  and perspective on Nigeria’s situation, and its prospective slide into irrelevance to the United States, corruption was a fact of life in many countries that made quantum leaps in development over the same period of independence like Nigeria. That may well be incontrovertible. Yet, we cannot completely discount the impact of our complex heritage of ethnic and religious diversity or the lingering impact of colonial policy of divide and rule that sowed distrust and rivalry amongst diverse but otherwise largely harmonious neighbours.

President Goodluck Jonathan had said in a brief speech on the occasion of the ‘Presentation of Certificate of Return’  by the  Chairman of the  Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC), Professor Attahiru Jega at the INEC headquarters in Abuja in April 2011, that:

“I have set in motion a process of profound political and economic reforms that were initiated by my civilian predecessors to engender political stability, economic growth, wealth and job creation.”

At the core of this reform, as further elucidated by the then Minister of Foreign Affairs, Odein Ajimogobia, is rejuvenating a policy of uncompromising supremacy of the rule of law, transparency, accountability, openness and due process in governance and public procurement.

This study did a critical examination of all the issues raised above with a view to charting a healthy and globally accepted course for the building and management of Nigeria’s international image and reputation, not losing sight of the endemic challenges that the country has to surmount to evolve a new dawn in all spheres of her national life.

1.3             Research Objectives

Image and reputation management has become an area of interest to many countries of the world as most leaders have suddenly taken it upon themselves to act as the brand managers of their respective countries.  Efforts  so  far  made  by  researchers  in  evaluating  the  effects  of such programmes are still very much limited to the advanced countries of Europe, America and perhaps Asia. Specifically, we had rich experiences from Spain during the hosting of the 1992

Olympics games in Barcelona; United States of America also offered some rich lessons shortly after  the  2001  Terrorist  attacks  on  major  national  assets  in  New  York  and  Pennsylvania; Germany had a fair deal of international image and reputation management experience when it hosted  the  Federation  of  International  Football  Associations’  (FIFA)  World  Cup,  tagged Germany 2006; Similarly, Russian Government did an evaluation of her international image and

reputation and came up with an image crystallization programme tagged: “Kanal Russia Today;” and finally, United Kingdom also evolved an image programme captioned: “Cool Britannia,” after an image evaluation that revealed that no country can fool people with colourful brochures or new buildings as an identity cannot be sustainably changed unless it fits with reality, Pink (1999) .

In Africa, particularly Nigeria, there has not been such research work so far, even though several image and reputation management programmes had been carried out at one time or the other. It is against this backdrop that this study set out to do a thorough evaluation of the effects of the several efforts so far made by successive administrations in the country since the attainment of independence in projecting a favourable image and reputation for the country. Since all these image and reputation programmes are primarily aimed at attracting favourable perceptions of the country from foreign nationals, our objectives were thus outlined as follows:

1.           To examine the extent to which foreign nationals’ perception of a country affects her image and reputation.

2.           To assess the contributions of the various diplomatic representations as managed by the relevant federal government agencies,

3.           To determine if the public’s perception of a country’s image and reputation problem has effect on government’s effort at solving it,

4.          To examine the role of the media in projecting the image and reputation of a country,

5.           To assess the extent public relations was used by federal government agencies to create favourable image and reputation for the country.

1.4       Research Questions

Having outlined the various research objectives that this study will address, we can now set out to provide answers to the following research questions:

1.          Does foreign nationals’ perception of a country have significant effect on her image and reputation?

2.          Have the various diplomatic representations managed by the relevant federal government agencies contributed significantly towards a positive image and reputation for the country?

3.          Does  the  public’s  perception  of  a  country’s  image  and  reputation  problem  have significant effect on government’s effort at solving it

4.         Do media reports about a country significantly influence her image and reputation?

5.          Do  federal  government  agencies  make  significant  use  of public  relations  to  create favourable image and reputation for the country?

1.5       Research Hypotheses

1:       Foreign nationals’ perception of a country has no significant effect on her image and reputation.

2:            The  various  diplomatic  representations  managed  by  the  relevant  federal  government agencies have contributed significantly towards a positive image and reputation for the country.

3:       The public’s perception of a country’s image and reputation problem has no significant effect on government’s effort at solving it.

4.        The media reports about a country do not have significant influence on her image and reputation.

5:       Federal government agencies make significant use of public relations to create favourable image and reputation for the country.

1.6:    Significance of the Study

Ideally, a study on international image and reputation management is very important to individuals,   corporate   organizations,   non-commercial   organizations   and   of   course   the government of Nigeria. This is so because from all indications, this is arguably the first time an evaluation of the various image and reputation management programmes so far undertaken by successive administrations in the country through the relevant agencies will be evaluated with a view to ascertaining the effects it has had on foreign nationals perception of the country and her citizens. Those in the academia too will, no doubt, benefit immensely from this study as they have been offered useful and reliable literature to further their research effort in the field of image and reputation management at the private sector level, public sector level and also in the international image laundering business which is fast becoming an area of global interest and attention in line with the new world order. Key formulators of international relations policies particularly the top functionaries of Federal Government Agencies, like the Foreign Affairs

Ministry and Nigeria diplomatic missions in different countries of the world will find a reliable companion in the findings and recommendations of this study.

In all, there is an overwhelming confidence and assurance that the result of this study could serve  as  collector’s  item and  reliable  reference  material  for  all  Nigerians,  particularly the principal actors in the Nigerian international image and reputation management project. The Federal Ministry of Information, National Orientation Agency, the various security agencies in the country, the National Assembly, all those in governance and position of authority in the country; and of course, the common man on the street of Nigeria who is conscious of a better image for the country has been offered a food for thought through this study. Major image and reputation policy formulators within and outside the country, particularly captains of industry will definitely find a useful ally in this research work as there has never been a detailed research work on a nation’s international image and reputation in Nigeria.

1.7       Scope of the Study

This study was intended to address a wide array of issues relating to Nigeria’s image and reputation abroad; starting from an in-depth assessment of the current impression people, other than her citizens, hold about her. This appraisal is, no doubt, multi-dimensional in nature. It covered a wide area to garner enough information and facts relating to both individual and institutional perception of the country

In  line  with  this  approach,  the  relationship  between  a  country’s  image/reputation and  her perception by the international community as well as those factors that promote a nation’s image

and reputation abroad were analyzed. Similarly, the various diplomatic shuttles undertaken by the federal ministry of foreign affairs were thoroughly assessed with a view to ascertaining their relevance  and  the  degree  of  success  so  far  recorded.  The  contributions  of  all  other  key government  agencies  to  the  country’s  current  image  and  reputation  were  measured  while bringing to the fore all the identifiable barriers or impediments to the efforts at realizing good and favourable image for the country. The role of the international and local media in the projection of the favourable image or otherwise of the country to the international community was also  assessed. Effective use  of public  relations  is  very  important to  the  building and sustenance of a nation’s image abroad. The extent to which this was used by the relevant federal government agencies in creating favourable international perception of the country was also an area that was thoroughly investigated in the course of the study.

1.8       Limitations of the Study

There were hitches in data gathering and access to information in some of the government agencies, particularly in the various security organizations in Nigeria as most of the information requested were tagged as “classified” thus making it difficult for us to get all the needed facts to aid the study. Similarly, the fact that image and reputation problems are not limited to Nigeria alone, offered challenges on knowing and ascertaining what obtains in some other countries of the world, as the research could not easily be conducted outside the country for pecuniary reason. All the same, the information gathered in the course of the study from within our shores and the immense support in the supply of literatures and allied materials by some foreign embassies in Nigeria, particularly American embassy, United Kingdom embassy and South African embassy had tremendously enriched the study.

1.9       Definition of Terms

In the course of this study, some terms appear dominant and thus need further explanation. These are as follows:

Image

Image is a term frequently used in the field of public relations. It means the impression people hold about a country, business organization or an individual. In the ordinary social parlance, image is considered to be the mental picture people form about anything around them. Such impression could be stereotypical or just formed out of mere prejudice. That is the more reason why countries of the world and business organizations work hard to project and promote a good and favourable image at all times. To many, image is a direct product of perception. What we perceive is what we work on; and further transmit to others to form their own opinion, (Alfonso,

1999).

Davis (2007: 34) opined that “Image is a composite mental or sensual interpretation; a perception of someone or something, a construct arrived at  by deduction based upon all the available evidence, both real and imagined, and conditioned by existing impressions, beliefs, ideas and emotions.’’ To a large extent, perceptions can be, and are often intuitive, relating to, for instance, aesthetic qualities, fundamental truths absolute ‘givens,’ basic understandings. Image may be cultivated that are factually accurate reflections of reality or essentially ephemeral and insubstantial. They may be relatively honest or downright deceitful, randomly communicated or carefully contrived.

Image Management

In public relations, image is treated as a tangible product that desires adequate promotional efforts. Just as products and services are packaged in glowing qualities, so is the image of a country packaged in the best form possible to attract favourable global attention. It cannot be effectively built and managed without adequate branding. In the image management business, Nigeria like other countries has become a corporate brand that has to be skillfully designed,, packaged and labeled or branded for effective presentation to the global community. Ideally every corporate brand must have a corporate image to make a mark in the market. Corporate image is the image of a company or country; how it is perceived by the public at large while branding refers to the specific identification of an organization through naming, packaging, marketing and advertising by which it becomes known and trusted (Hoffman, 2007: 37, 82).

National Reputation

Image breeds reputation. As Akinyemi (1994) said, bad image evolves a disreputation while good or favourable image attracts good reputation. Egwu (2007:19) stated that our National Character or our National Image refers to our history, stability, economic success, scientific and technological success, educational success, International Relations, Quality of life, the standard of infrastructure etc. National reputation is  literally amplified by a country’s value system, attitude, beliefs, moral tone, level of honesty and every other thing that puts her in the eyes of the world  (Falodun,  1994).  According  to  Osagie  (2002:21),  reputation  is  indeed  good  name supported by credibility and trust. People often mistake image for reputation. That is wrong! Davis (2007:37) revealed that the reputation of an organization is based upon the experience of

it, which is not a prerequisite of deciding about its image. Image, identity and reputation are closely related. The identity contributes to the image and both condition the reputation

Diplomatic Representation

Diplomatic representation is all about registering a nation’s presence in foreign countries by projecting a favourable national image and reputation. Events at home, to a large extent construct a nation’s image overseas. According to Oyawale (1998: 29), external image is, to a large extent shaped by events at the home front. Nigeria’s diplomatic efforts particularly in the early years of her political independence were boosted by the impressive activities of her various information service centres established in various countries of the world, particularly the United Kingdom. The Nigerian Information Service Centre (NISC) in London was established in 1980 following the President-in-Council’s decision that the totality of the information service of the Federal Republic of Nigeria should be operated from his office. The NISC London operates from the Nigeria High Commission, Nigeria House, 9 Northumberland Avenue, London WC2N 5 BX, where it is referred to as the Information Section. In executing its core remit, the NISC has to operate within the ambit of Nigeria’s diplomacy objectives which are:

        To preserve and consolidate her political independence and freedom and maintain her unity and stability;

     To develop her national economy;

        To demonstrate unwavering commitment to the unity of the African continent, co-operation within the continent in the economic, social and cultural fields;

        To put up unyielding opposition to any form of colonialism or neocolonialism, imperialism and racism and the total eradication of these evils in the continent of Africa; and

     To promote international peace, security and prosperity.

Since  her  political  independence on  1st   October,  1960,  Nigeria  has  been  able  to  establish diplomatic representations with more than 150 countries of the world. Diplomatic representations are initiated to foster political, economic or technological ties. It is believed that as long as two people or nations relate with each other, they do not go to war.

International Diplomacy

Satow (1990) defines diplomacy as the conduct of business or interaction between states and adjusted or managed by Ambassadors or Envoys. The first practical effort towards building international diplomacy and fostering rewarding diplomatic representation is the appointment of envoys or ambassadors in various countries of the world to serve as the mouth-piece of the home government. Appendix 8 contains a list of Nigeria’s Foreign Missions.

There is the common saying within the diplomatic community that in international relations, there is no permanent enemy, no permanent friend but permanent interest. So, each nation establishes diplomatic ties with the rest of the world with the aim of “protecting a permanent interest.”  Incidentally,  once  this  ‘interest’  is  hurt  or  threatened  a  country’s  international diplomacy or diplomatic representation is put in abeyance. Thus when it becomes imperative to conduct affairs between states by force or war, diplomacy is jettisoned (Oyawale, 1998:54).

References

Argenti, P.A. and Druckenmiller, B. (2004), ‘’Reputation and the Corporate Brand,’’ Corporate

Reputation Review. Volume 6, No. 4.           London: Henry Stewart Publications.

Ajumogobia, H.O. (2010), ‘’Challenges and Prospects: Perceptions and     Reality of Nigeria at

50,’’ Remarks by H.E. Mr. H.O. Ajumogobia, SAN, OFR, Hon. Minister of Foreign Affairs of the Federal Republic of Nigeria to the Council on Foreign Relations, Washington D.C, 4th August, 2010.

Berens, G. and Van Riel, C.B.M (2004), ‘’Corporate Associations in the    Academic  Literature: Main Streams of Thought in the Reputation  Measurement  Literature,’’  Corporate  Reputation Review. Volume 7, No. 2. London: Henry Stewart Publications.

Brand S.A Focus Shifts – ‘‘Greater Emphasis on the International Image – Building.’’ 2005. Finance Week, 21 February 2005: 85

Brown, K.C. (2003). ‘’Laying Down the Law: Implications of Reputation Management for the C

–  Suite,’’  The  Gauge:  Delahaye  Media  Link’s  Newsletter  of  Worldwide  Communication

Research.  http://www.thegauge.com. 13th April, 2005.

Brown. K. C. (2005). ‘’A Sound Reputation. The Gauge:’’ Delehaye Media Link’s Newsletter of

Worldwide Communication Research.  http://www.thegauge.com . 8 June, 2005.

Burger,  D.  (2005)  ‘’South  Africa  Year  book  2004/2005,’’ 12th   ed.  Pretoria:  Government

Communication and Information System.

Carroll, C. E and McCombs, M. (2003). Agenda – ‘’Setting Effects of Business News on the Public’s  Images  and  Opinions  about  Major  Corporations,’’  Corporate  Reputation  Review. Volume 6, No. 1. London: Henry Stewart Publications.

Chandler, D. (1994), Transmission Model of Communication.

Danesi,   M&Perron,   P.   (1999),   Analyzing   Cultures:   An   Introduction   and   Handbook, Bloomington: Indiana UP.

Danesi, M. (1994), Messages and Meaning: An Introduction to Semiotics, Toronto: Canadian

Scholars’ Press.

Danesi, M. (2002), Understanding Media Semiotics, London: Arnold; New      York: Oxford UP. Davis, A. (2007) Mastering Public Relations, New York: Palgrave Macmillan.

Deephouse, D.L. (2000). ‘’Media Reputation as a Strategic Resource: An Integration of Mass

Communication and Resource – Based         Theories.’’ Journal of Management. Volume 26, No.

6. Louisiana:         Elsevier Science Inc.

Emory, A.G. (1997), A First Look at Communication Theory. 3rd Edition, New York: McGraw- Hill.

Fehlmann, R, Granhlow, H. and Passow, T. (2003). ‘’From Reputation Quotient to Country Reputation  Index:  Adapting  a  Tested  Tool  to  Measure  a  Country’s  Reputation.’’  Paper Submitted to the 7th  International Conference on Corporate Reputation, Identity and Competitivenes .May 2003, Manchester: Manchester Business School.

Fombrum, C.J. (1996). Reputation: Realizing Value from the Corporate Image. Cambridge: Harvard Business School Press.

Jefkins, F. (1987), Introduction to Marketing, Advertising and Public Relations, Macmillan Low

Cost Editions, Macmillan Publishers Ltd,     London and Basingtoke.

Goffman, E. (1959), The Presentation of Self in Everyday life, New York, N Y: Anchor/Double day.

Goodman,  M.B.  (2004). ‘’Restore America’s  Reputation Abroad.’’ Media Tenor  Quarterly

Journal. No1/2004. New York: Media Tenor Ltd.

Kunczik, M. (1990). ‘’Images of Nations and International Public Relations.’’ Bonn: The Media and Communication Department of   Friederich-Ebert Stiftung.

Kunczik, M. (2004). ‘’Images of Nationals and Transnational Public Relations of Governments With Special Reference to the Kosovo.’’ Paper Presented at the Symposium Final Status for Kosovo,Untying the Gordian Knot. April 2004. Chicago: Chicago – Kent College of Law.

Littlejohn, S.W. and FOSS, K.A. (2008), theories of human communication 9th edition. Belmont, C. A: Thomas Wadsworth.

Miller, K. (2005), Communication Theories: Perspectives, Processes, and Contexts. 2nd Edition, New York: McGraw-Hill.

Nwosu, I.E., Soola, O.E. & Nwodu, H. C. (2008), Communication for Health and Sustainable

Development in Nigeria, Enugu: Rhyce Kerex Publishers.

Nwosu, I.E. (1996), Public Relations Management: Principles, Issues and Applications, Aba: Dominican Publishers

Nwosu, I.E., Ekwo, U. (1996), Mass Media & Marketing Communications: Principles, Perspectives & Practices, Enugu: Thought Communications Publishers.

Olins, W. (1999). ‘’Trading Identities: Why Countries and Companies Are Becoming More

Alike.’’ London: Foreign Policy Centre.

Oso, L. (2003), “Mass Media and Democracy: Enlarging the Space,” The Nigerian Journal of Communications, the Biannual Journal of the African Council for Communication Education (ACCE), Nigerian Chapter, Vol. 2, Nos. 1 and 2, July: 8-20.

Pharaoh, A. (2004). ‘’Building and Managing Reputation for Countries.’’ All things Corporate

Newsletter.  http://atc.netcomsus.com.

Rishante,  S.J.  (2007), “Creativity  and  Test  Anxiety:  A  Search  for  An  Interaction,”  Public

Relations Journal: The Biannual Journal of the Nigerian Institute of Public Relations, Vol. 3, No.

2: 181-185

Robert, C.T. (2001), “Communication.” Encyclopedia of Rhetoric.

Rothwell, J.D. (2010), “In the Company of Others: An Introduction to Communication.” 3rd

Edition, New York, N.Y; Oxford University Press.

Salau, S. (2001), “Theory and Practice of Public Relations in Nigeria Educational Institutions: The Biannual Journal of the Nigerian Institute of Public Relations, Vol. 3, No. 2: 56-63.

Taylor, D. & Altman, I. (1975), “Self-disclosure as a function of Reward-cost Outcomes.”

Sociometry, 38. P. 18-31.

Vanlear, C.A. (1991), “Testing a Cyclical Model of Communicative Openness in Relationship

Development: Two Longitudinal Studies.” Communication Monographs, 58. P. 337-361.

Vanlear, C. A. (1987), “The Formation of Social Relationships: A Longitudinal Study of Social

Penetration.” Human Communication Research, 13. P. 299-322.

Werner, E. (1998), “Toward a Theory of Communication and Cooperation For Multi-agent Planning,” Theoretical Aspects of Reasoning About Knowledge: Proceedings of the Second Conference, Morgan Kaufmann Publishers: Pp.129-143. Abstract.

Werner, C., Altman, I., & Brown, B.B. (1992), “A Transactional Approach to Interpersonal Relations: Physical Environment, Social Context and Temporal Qualities.” Journal of Social and Personal Relationship; 9. P. 297-323.

₦5,000.00 – DOWNLOAD FULL PROJECT DOWNLOAD FULL PROJECT Added to cart

---

---

---

---

Related Project Topics :