Take a Stand

As I write this, the local news is covering massive protests of the Olympics torch relay in South Korea, while the BBC is reporting that a shipload of Chinese weapons is en route to Zimbabwe and looking for someplace that will give it permission to dock and unload. Meantime, Desmond Tutu has called on world leaders not to attend the Summer Olympics Games.

It's the stuff that gives sponsors nightmares.

Media and consumers alike are asking tough questions of sponsors, while most sponsors are claiming that they “aren't political organizations” and that the Olympics aren't about endorsing a country, they are about sport.

Try telling that to China, because for them, it clearly is all about showcasing and glorifying their country. Doubt me? Try turning on the Discovery Channel without seeing one of the seemingly dozens of documentaries about China's wonders-of-modern-architecture, Olympics-driven infrastructure projects.

China's agenda with the Olympics is crystal clear, and for sponsors to ignore that agenda in favor of a position that is more convenient for them is unrealistic.

I'm not bagging everything about China. I've been there (and seen the documentaries!) and am duly impressed by some of the staggering feats of economics and engineering that they have accomplished in a very short time.

But that's not China's whole story. You know it, I know it, sponsors know it, and their customers know it. And a significant proportion of us really do care about the darker side and the human beings affected by it.

So, while sponsors may not believe they are “political organizations,” they have nonetheless been forced into taking a political stand — either consciously or by omission — in miscalculating the level of global outrage.

The fact that China has recently been outed as a supporter of the Sudanese government, and is now selling arms to Mugabe's regime, has compounded the problem many fold, and I can't imagine that any of those additional issues would have been anticipated when Olympics sponsors signed on the dotted line.

Here's the rub: Best-practice sponsorship is about aligning with and adding value to the target markets. It's consumer-driven, and in true consumer-driven fashion, sponsors should be receptive and reflect the concerns of their target markets.

The smartest move a global sponsor of the Olympics could make right now — the best thing for the brand — would be to take a stand and walk away. It would imbue legendary status (and cojones) to the brand, and a degree of respect and power to their target market that would be unrivaled by anything an Olympics sponsorship could deliver. This assumes, of course, that the sponsor is trying to appeal to a savvy, current-affairs-literate marketplace. If you are a sponsor in that category, just think about the power of pulling out. Then think about the impotence of toeing the line just because it's China.

Clearly, China is a huge market, but it's not worth undermining your relationship with the rest of the world just to keep China happy.

And now I wait for the threatening letter from the IOC …

Kim Skildum-Reid is a corporate sponsorship strategist, trainer, and co-author of global industry bestsellers The Sponsorship Seeker's Toolkit and The Sponsor's Toolkit, and author of The Ambush Marketing Toolkit. Her Web site, www.powersponsorship.com, is a comprehensive sponsorship resource.

For more articles on events, go to http://promomagazine.com/events