Beyond Caste and Religion: The GIVEF Framework Decodes How Indians Really Vote

Beyond Caste and Religion: The GIVEF Framework Decodes How Indians Really Vote

A Political Consultant's Journey from Advertising Psychology to Election Strategy

My journey through the captivating communication realm led me to my true calling in political communication consulting. During my time in advertising, I was captivated by consumer psychology models, notably Richard Vaughn's innovative FCB Grid and, later, the even sharper insights offered by the Rossiter-Percy Grid. Praveen Vaidyanathan's recent post about the FCB Grid brought back memories and sparked a thought: could I adapt these advertising frameworks for political communication?

I thought about how much fun it would be to chat with my 21-year-old self—after all, who better to debate and discuss this topic than me at that age? So, I decided to dive into a conversation with my past self. To keep things simple, let's call my 21-year-old self "YT" and my current self "I" or "me." What else did you expect? An Old T? Never!

Let's start over a cup of chai, as most great political discussions do.

YT sat across from me with a familiar black notebook in hand. His eyes sparkled with curiosity. "How do we create an Indian voter engagement framework that shapes the future of election strategy?" he asked, enthusiasm shining through as he eagerly sought to learn.

I leaned back, took a sip of my Kadak-Ginger chai, and smiled. "To understand how to win elections in India, you first need to understand how Indian voters think. Forget the old caste, religion, and geography classifications for a moment. Instead, let's look at how voters make decisions—not just who they are, but why they vote the way they do."

"Go on," YT said, flipping to a fresh page.

"So, the current political scene in India? It's complicated. We need a better way to figure out how people vote. Inspired by marketing models like the Rossiter-Percy Grid, let's create our own model. Let me call it the Great Indian Voter Engagement Framework (GIVEF). It's just like those marketing models but for politics. Instead of just putting voters into boxes, it looks at how much they actually care about politics and what makes them choose who they vote for - their head or their heart, basically."

His pen was already moving. "So, what does that look like - this GIVEF of yours?"

I sketched two axes on the blank sheet of paper with my thick, dark, black rubberband pencil. "Imagine a grid. On one side, you have high and low political involvement. Some voters live and breathe politics, like voters from UP and Bihar, and others barely pay attention, such as voters from South Mumbai. On the other axis, you have Rational and Emotional Decision-Making—some voters base their choices on policies, governance, and data, while others vote based on identity, sentiment, and charisma. This gives us four quadrants, four distinct voter types."

This visual represents how the four voter types are positioned across the axes of political involvement and decision-making approach.

1. The Policy-Conscious Analytical Voter (High Involvement, Rational Thinking)

"Basically, these voters are your city folks, the ones with degrees, professionals, and smart students. They'll actually read your stuff, know what's happening, and care about the numbers and how you're running things. Forget the hype and drama; your lofty slogans and theatrics will not work. They want results. Show them the evidence, or they'll vote someone else in."

"How do we reach them?" he asked.

"Okay, so to get people who are really paying attention, we should get them involved in discussions, write-ups, and reports on how things are actually run. Let's put together clear comparisons of what leaders have done and get this information out there on X-threads, LinkedIn articles, detailed white papers, and longer podcasts. The key is to stick to the facts and avoid just talking points since that's what they really want to see."

"Let's look back at the Delhi Assembly elections of 2020! AAP embraced a smart strategy to connect with the educated middle-class voters of Delhi. They shared a thorough report card on their achievements in education, healthcare, and subsidised utilities, which really resonated. According to the post poll analysis data, the 'Lage Raho Kejriwal' campaign, highlighting real policy successes, won the hearts of 54% of college graduates in important constituencies."

2. The Identity-Loyalist Ideological Voter (High Involvement, Emotional Thinking)

I continued, "Then you have the Identity-Loyalist Voter. They're all in, but it's more about feeling connected to a whole vibe – like an ideology, a shared culture, and the history of their group. It's way deeper than just picking a candidate; they see themselves as part of that party."

"So, they're party loyalists?"

"Not just that. They are ideological loyalists—whether it's nationalism, regional pride, caste solidarity, or religious identity. Their trust is built over decades, not policy cycles. They are unlikely to switch their loyalties based on governance performance. Winning them requires emotional storytelling, reinforcing history, and deep community engagement. They believe in hero-worshipping, favouring strong personalities and visionary leadership. You win their hearts first—only then do you win their votes."

"Apart from BJP at a national level riding on the nationalism and Hindutva wave, the DMK in Tamil Nadu and TMC in West Bengal are successful examples of this narratives."

3. The Pragmatic Beneficiary (Low Involvement, Rational Thinking)

"Now, here's where things get interesting," I said, drawing his attention to the Pragmatic Beneficiary. "They don't engage in political debates. They don't care about ideology. What they care about is: 'What will I get?'"

"So, the voter who votes based on welfare schemes and local development?"

"Exactly. The rural farmer who cares about MSP pricing, the urban poor who needs subsidised LPG cylinders, or the daily wage worker who benefits from free healthcare. They aren't voting for a party—they're voting for direct, tangible, and most immediate benefits. They will vote for you if you prove that your governance has delivered or will likely deliver on your manifesto promises. If not, they'll run away as fast as they came. They respond well to development-based campaigns, especially in elections where an incumbent has worked for local progress."

"How do you reach them?"

"Through testimonials—real beneficiaries sharing their success stories. High-frequency TV ads, WhatsApp forwards in local languages, and door-to-door outreach. Forget X—these voters rely on community influence, newspapers, and word-of-mouth."

"Here we come back to BJP, the OG of beneficiary-led campaigns. Be it a PM-KISAN scheme, which provides ₹6,000 annually to farmers, helped them secure rural votes in the 2019 elections (post-implementation surveys showed that 71% of direct beneficiaries of PM-KISAN voted for the party) or Madhya Pradesh's Laldli Behna scheme, which helped them secured an unprecedented victory in the 2023 state elections."

4. The Sentiment-Driven Voter (Low Involvement, Emotional Thinking)

"Lastly, we have the Sentiment-Driven Voter, who is often more focused on feelings than policies. These voters might not dive deeply into the details, but they are influenced by the charisma and excitement a leader brings. If a leader captures attention and creates a buzz, these voters are likely to rally behind them. This group often includes young, first-time voters and those from semi-literate rural and urban backgrounds. They can be easily swayed by the latest trends in populist messaging."

"So, they're influenced by social media?"

"Not just social media—mass appeal, energy, and relatability. They connect with viral moments, grand speeches, pop culture references, and leader personas - celebrity-style politics is their opium. They're the ones who share memes, watch Insta reels, and get swept up in the 'wave' of an election."

"And how do you win them?"

"By creating a movement, a spectacle, an emotional moment that sticks. Think Modi's chaiwala story, Obama's 'Yes We Can', Kejriwal's Aam Aadmi Muffler Man narrative: viral campaigns, catchy slogans, cinematic storytelling. If a leader becomes a cultural phenomenon, these voters will follow. Get Bollywood actors, cricketers, and social media influencers on your side, and you can easily sway them."

"The 2014 "Ab Ki Baar Modi Sarkar" campaign created such viral momentum that it reached 78% of first-time voters through social media platforms. The slogan became a cultural phenomenon, with even non-political brands adapting it for their marketing. This slogan is so versatile that you can coin many variations to fit your narrative year after year - "Fir Ek Baar Modi Sarkar," "Baar Baar Lagatar Modi Sarkar," "Har Baar Modi Sarkar" and so on."

YT leaned forward, tapping his pen thoughtfully. "But people change, right? I mean, someone who votes based on emotion today might become more analytical later?"

I nodded. "That's a crucial insight. Voters aren't static—they migrate between quadrants based on life circumstances, economic conditions, and political environments."

"Let me explain how voters can shift between quadrants," I said, sketching arrows on our grid. "A young first-time voter might start as Sentiment-Driven (4), moved by personality politics. As they pursue higher education or professional careers, they could shift toward being more Policy-Conscious (1). Similarly, after directly benefiting from specific government schemes, a Pragmatic Beneficiary (3) might develop deeper ideological loyalty (2) to the party that delivered those benefits."

"Economic downturns or corruption scandals can also trigger migrations—pushing rational voters toward emotional decision-making or vice versa. During the 2011 anti-corruption movement, we saw many Identity-Loyalists (2) transform into Policy-Conscious voters (1) as governance and transparency became their primary concerns."

"The most fascinating shift happens during major societal disruptions," I continued. "Look at demonetisation in 2016—it temporarily converted many Pragmatic Beneficiaries (3) into Sentiment-Driven voters (4) as economic hardship sparked emotional reactions rather than rational assessment."

"Interesting," YT said. "But I'm still wondering—does this framework actually work better than the traditional demographic approach?"

"Fair question," I replied. "Traditional segmentation by caste, religion, and geography certainly has value—these are powerful identity markers in Indian politics. But they have limitations. For example, when we only look at caste, we miss the diversity within that caste group—the educated professional from a particular caste might vote very differently than the rural farmer from the same caste."

"Our GIVEF approach complements rather than replaces traditional demographics. It adds a psychological layer that explains why two people from identical demographic backgrounds might vote differently. Think of traditional segmentation as the 'who' and GIVEF as the 'why' of voting behavior."

"Critics might argue that this is oversimplifying complex voting behavior—and they'd have a point. But models are meant to simplify reality to make it actionable. We're not claiming this explains everything, just that it provides a useful framework for campaign strategy."

"Some political scientists might also challenge the idea that voters can be neatly categorised—arguing that most voters use both rational and emotional thinking in varying degrees. They're right, but our model acknowledges this by recognising that voters can shift between quadrants."

"Can you give me an example of how these are applied in Indian election strategy?" YT asked, tapping his pen on another blank notebook page, eagerly waiting for me to answer.

"Look at how BJP has effectively mobilised ideological (2) and sentiment-driven (4) voters using nationalism, Hindutva, and Modi's personality." "Congress struggles with an identity crisis, failing to retain ideological loyalty (2) while losing pragmatic voters (3) to BJP's welfare promises."

"AAP has mastered pragmatic (3) and analytical (1) voter groups, winning Delhi & Punjab through development narratives."

"Regional parties like TMC, DMK, and TRS focus on ideological loyalty (2) and pragmatic voters (3) using regional identity and welfare schemes. BJP also follows the same strategy in new states by trying to convert pragmatic voters (3) using welfare politics while building ideological (2) support base over time."

"Wow! This is great! I have learnt a lot today!" YT leaned back, exhaling. "This changes everything. It's no longer just about rallies and speeches—it's about hyper-targeted engagement."

"Exactly," I said, finishing my chai. "Winning elections in India isn't about talking to everyone—it's about speaking directly to each voter, in the language they understand, through the medium they trust. Do that, and you don't just win elections. You shape history."

As YT closed his notebook, I smiled, realising that this conversation wasn't just theoretical—it represented a genuine shift in how we approach political communication. In a country as diverse as India, understanding the psychological underpinnings of voting behaviour might be the key to navigating its complex democracy.

The GIVEF isn't perfect, and like all models, it will evolve. But it offers a starting point for those seeking to move beyond simplistic demographic categories toward a more nuanced understanding of the Indian voter's mind.

After all, isn't that what political communication truly means? It's not just about mobilising voters and winning elections; it's about forming genuine connections and appreciating the fantastic individuals who bring life to our wonderful Indian democracy.