Download Introduction - Association for Consumer Research

Global Advertising Standardization in Japan and the United States: A Closer Examination
of High-involvement Products.
Melina Hurst Young
Jay Ray Advertising
Eugene Sivadas
University of Washington, Tacoma
Melina Hurst Young, 8822 176th St Ct E, Puyallup, WA 98375; phone: 253.250.8064; email:
[email protected]. Eugene Sivadas, Associate Professor, Milgard School of Business, Campus
Box 358420, 1900 Commerce Street, University of Washington, Tacoma, WA 98402; phone:
253.692.4707; email: [email protected]
1
Global Advertising Standardization in Japan and the United States: A Closer Examination
of High-involvement Products.
ABSTRACT
The question of whether to standardize or adapt advertising internationally remains a matter of
great importance to researchers and practitioners. While studies have compared the use of
standardization between high-involvement and low-involvement categories, research within
either of these categories is limited. In general, researchers have concluded that highinvolvement products generally have more standardized advertisements than low-involvement
products. This paper compares the standardization levels between different high-involvement
product categories. We examine high-cognition and low-cognition high-involvement products.
The research questions are examined via content analysis of print advertisements of highly
circulated American and Japanese magazines using a framework developed by Harris and Attour
(2003). A modified coding scheme was developed for advertisements that contained no text.
Results indicate that ads for low-cognition high-involvement products are more likely to be
standardized across these two cultures than ads for high-cognition high-involvement products.
Second, prior research has suggested that television advertising is more likely to be standardized
than print advertising, but little is known about what type of print advertising is more likely to be
standardized. We find that picture ads are more likely to be standardized than ads containing
text.
2
Global Advertising Standardization in Japan and the United States: A Closer Examination
of High-involvement Products.
EXTENDED ABSTRACT
Companies that standardize their advertising across the globe have a lot to gain through
decreased costs, increased efficiency, a uniform global image and better ability to develop ideas
to their full potential (Mueller 1992). Advertising is standardized when elements such as copy
and visuals are kept the same across countries (Nelson and Paek 2007). Thus, it is not surprising
that the question of advertising standardization has received a great deal of attention from
researchers (cf. Boddewyn, Soehl, and Picard 1986; Kripalani, Laroche, and Darmon 1988).
While standardization is more cost effective than adaptation, some messages may not transfer
well between cultures. The question of what to standardize, as well as how much, are very real
concerns for marketers (Mueller 1991). While many studies have compared high and lowinvolvement products, there has been little emphasis on variation of standardization within either
of these categories. The objective of this paper is to examine if different cognition levels and
types of advertisements (picture versus text) affect standardization of high-involvement products.
This study looks at the print advertisements from two countries, the United States and Japan.
Japan is an ideal comparison country because on the one hand it is affluent, economically wellintegrated with the United States and has a large and mature advertising marketing while on the
other hand it has very different cultural traditions (Hall 1976).
While it has been suggested that advertising for high-involvement products tend to be more
standardized and differences in standardization have been noted across product categories, most
such efforts have compared the difference between high and low-involvement products (cf.
Mueller 1991). Less attention has been paid to differences in standardization across various
categories of high-involvement products. Second, prior research (cf. Mueller 1991) suggests that
television (visual medium) has greater standardization than print (textual medium). However,
less is known about differences in standardization across various types (visual versus textual
advertising) of print advertising. While research in consumer behavior suggests that recall and
attitude influence is greater for advertising with pictures (cf. Mitchell and Olson 1981; Unnava
and Burnkrant 1991) little is known about whether this element has an influence on advertising
standardization.
To address these questions, we used the content analysis methodology. This technique is widely
used in the global standardization context (cf. Mueller 1991; Harris and Attour 2003; Whitelock
and Chung 1989). Since our study focuses on different types of high-involvement products, we
selected three high-emotion/low-cognition product categories: jewelry, apparel (clothing and
shoes), and accessories (purses and other accessories). The jewelry category excludes watches,
which are included in the high-cognition section. High-emotion/high-cognition focuses on the
following three product categories: electronics, watches and automobiles. Watches are not
included in the jewelry section because they provide more function than traditional jewelry and
therefore more cognitive thought is put into the purchase of a watch.
3
We selected popular, widely circulated magazine titles from both countries. From the United
States we selected three women’s magazines Cosmopolitan, Elle, and Vogue, two business
magazines Forbes and Fortune, two men’s magazines GQ, and Men’s Health, and the cultural
magazine Vanity Fair. From Japan we selected two high-end women’s magazines Ginza and
Glitter, and additionally Elle Japan. We selected four men’s magazines Huge, Goethe, Leon, and
Sense and the business magazine Forbes Japan. An American National with a degree in
Japanese Linguistics currently working in Japan translated the text for all the ads that were
analyzed. We analyzed print ads published in these magazines during one single calendar month.
We used a modified version of the coding scheme developed by Harris and Attour (2003) (See
Appendices A and B). We have developed a second coding scheme to allow for the
advertisements that do not have text. After reviewing all of the advertisements published in
these 15 magazines during one calendar month we found there were 81 matches. A match is
created when a brand is advertised in both countries. 32 of these advertisement matches fell into
the high-cognition category, while 49 were low-cognition. 52 of the matching advertisement
pairs were scored using the “Picture” coding scheme, while the remaining 29 fell into the “Text”
category. There were a total of 47 brands represented including: Citizen, Dolce & Gabbana,
Louis Vuttion, Prada, and Volkswagen.
The mean standardization score of the high-cognition advertisements was 38.37, compared with
73.04 for advertisements of low-cognition products. Remember, a score of 100 indicates perfect
standardization. In other words, a low-cognition advertisement is almost twice as likely to be
standardized than one for high-cognition products. A t-test indicates that the differences between
these means are significant. Text advertisements have a mean standardization score of 32.10.
Advertisements with no text, other than the brand name, have a mean standardization score of
73.04. A -test has determined that these results are significantly different.
Our research demonstrates that within the category of high-involvement products, low-cognition
product advertising is significantly more likely to be standardized. While a content analysis study
does not allow us to explore why such differences exists between low and high-cognition highinvolvement products, we would conjecture that the differential processing of information and
different psychological meanings of the two products might be contributors (cf. Friedman 1986).
Second, we find that picture ads tend to be more standardized than text ads. Mueller (1991)
found that television advertising tends to be more standardized than print advertising. She
conjectured that the economics of television advertising production made it more worthwhile to
standardize it than print advertising which was less costly to produce. We offer an alternate
reasoning that the visual elements are easier to standardize as compared to the textual elements.
Thus, not only does the visual element of advertising aid recall and have greater influence on
attitudes (cf. Mitchell and Olson 1981; Unnava and Burnkrant 1991), it is also easier to
standardize.
4
Global Advertising Standardization in Japan and the United States: A Closer Examination
of High-involvement Products.
INTRODUCTION
Companies that standardize their advertising across the globe have a lot to gain through
decreased costs, increased efficiency, a uniform global image and better ability to develop ideas
to their full potential (Mueller 1992). Advertising is standardized when elements such as copy
and visuals are kept the same across countries (Nelson and Paek 2007). When a company
standardizes advertising they can cut costs and convey a more unified brand image to the global
marketplace.
The decision to standardize advertising is not a simple one. Companies must consider the
different cultures, economic situation, and target markets of the countries they are advertising in,
media availability, potential legal restrictions of each location as well as the stage of the product
life cycle their product is in (Czinkota and Ronkainen 2007; Mueller 1992). People who
advocate adaptation of advertisements focus on the differences between nations and advise that
advertisers should be sensitive to these cultural and economic differences. On the other hand,
those who support standardization focus on the similarities of consumers “and propose that
consumers may therefore be satisfied with similar products and/or advertising
messages”(Mueller 1991, p.7). Standardization gone wrong can be detrimental to the brand and
cause difficulty when continuing to promote it globally (Laswell 2004). Incorrect perception of
the target market’s needs can lead to loss of sales, eroded brand image, and a significant loss of
market share.
5
The stakes cannot be minimized as billions of dollars are spent on advertising every year.
United States’ advertising expenditures account for over 40% of the global total (Macleod 2004).
In 2007, the United States is estimated to have spent $285 billion on advertising; that is just over
2.15% of the GDP (Johnson 2006). Thus, it is not surprising that the question of advertising
standardization has received a great deal of attention from researchers (cf. Boddewyn, Soehl, and
Picard 1986; Kripalani, Laroche, and Darmon 1988). While standardization is more cost
effective than adaptation, some messages may not transfer well between cultures. The question
of what to standardize, as well as how much, are very real concerns for marketers (Mueller
1991).
Mueller (1991) examined whether culture (US/Japan/Germany), product involvement
(high and low), and different forms of media (print and TV) affected standardization. She found
that advertisements for low-involvement products were more likely to be standardized between
the United States and Germany than high-involvement products. The reverse was true for
US/Japan: high-involvement product advertisements were more likely to be standardized than
advertisements for low-involvement products. Mueller also found that television advertisements
were more likely to be standardized than print advertisements.
Harris and Attour (2003) examined how multinational companies advertised the same
brand in six European and three Middle Eastern countries. Four product categories: watches,
cosmetics, apparel, and fragrances were studied. They found that product category was a factor
that affected the degree of standardization, with fragrance advertising most likely to be
standardized and apparel advertising least likely to be standardized. While the differences were
statistically significant, the mean standardization scores were none too different from each other.
6
While many studies have compared standardization efforts between high and lowinvolvement products and their effectiveness or lack thereof, there has been little emphasis on
variation of standardization within either of these categories. It has been suggested that luxury
items that are typically seen as high in involvement are more amenable to standardization
(Mueller 1991). Our paper takes a closer look at high-involvement products to see if differences
within the high-involvement category affect standardization. While prior research does suggest
that product type does influence the decision to standardize, the research does not draw
distinctions within the broad involvement categories. The objective of this paper is to examine if
different cognition levels and types of advertisements (picture versus text) affect standardization
of high-involvement products. This study looks at the print advertisements from two countries,
the United States and Japan. By doing so, we contribute to the international advertising literature
as well as to the involvement literature.
Japan and Japanese Advertising
Many researchers have focused on Japan and its advertising strategies (Mueller 1991,
1992; Graham, Kamins, and Oetomo 1993; Hong, Muderrisoglu, and Zinkhan 1987). Japan is an
ideal comparison country for the United States for several reasons. It is economically well
integrated with the United States and an affluent country. Their real GDP per capita in 2007 was
$33,600 as compared to the United States’ $46,000 (World Fact book). Japan is a large and
mature advertising market where 2005 advertising expenditures reached ¥5,962.5 billion
[approximately $50 billion], an increase of 1.8% over the previous year” (www.dentsu.com).
Japan is an Eastern country that prides itself on traditions that are very different from
those of the United States and Western culture. Japan is traditionally a high-context country.
7
High-context cultures are less interested in the clear and specific portion of the message and are
more interested in the presentation than the content. A low-context culture is just the opposite:
they find more use in explicit messages than the presentation (Gudykunst and Nishida 1986).
Hall (1976) states, “the United States is toward the low end, slightly above the German, Swiss,
and Scandinavian cultures. Most Asian cultures (e.g., Japanese, Chinese, and Korean), on the
other hand, fall at the high-context end of the continuum.” This cultural contrast makes
standardization harder, so finding a form of standardization that can work between these two
countries can be more challenging. These differences make forms of standardization easier to
identify. Additionally, the traditional advertising techniques vary greatly between Japan and the
United States (Mueller 1991).
On the other hand, Hong, Muderrisoglu and Zinkhan (1987) found that Japan’s cultural
context has a great influence on its advertising techniques since “communication is so closely
tied to cultural norms.” This type of influence could make standardization attempts more
difficult. Graham, Kamins and Oetomo (1993) make a similar point, that unlike Western
advertising, “Japanese advertisers tend to use [more] symbolism and emotional appeals.” Japan’s
high-context nature makes the emotional approach easier for advertising. Graham et al go on to
add that “indirectness, subtlety, and symbolism have always been important in Japanese culture.”
According to Hong, Muderrisoglu and Zinkhan (1987), one example of this is that Japanese
advertising will “stress status symbols in contrast to American ads which place more emphasis
on individual determinism.”
Mueller (1992) found that Japan and other high-context cultures are more inclined to use
a “soft-sell” approach in their advertising. The soft-sell approach focuses not on the product
features and benefits, but instead on mood creation. The overall tone of the advertisement is
8
discreet and suggestive, as opposed to direct communication. The soft-sell approach is most
consistent with the cultural values of high-context Japan. However, globalization is making
different forms of advertising more common in Japan, including the hard-sell technique which
works to establish the superiority of a product through comparisons (Mueller 1992).
Harris and Attour (2003) questioned if researchers should study absolute standardization,
or modified versions of standardization. Wei and Jiang (2005) discussed the difference between
creative strategy and execution. They defined creative strategy as the “guiding principle that
specifies the general nature and character of the messages to be designed” while the execution is
the copy, visuals, picture selection, general layout, etc. In other words, the creative strategy is the
theme, or the brand image that the company wants to project and the execution is the way they
choose to develop and present the theme to the audience.
Wei and Jiang (2005) concluded that the creative strategy can be standardized, but the
execution is more often adapted to the environment it is presented in. They also found that the
language of the text and the models used in advertisements are very rarely standardized and more
often utilize the local market where the advertisement will be presented.
Involvement and Standardization
Involvement can be defined as “a person’s perceived relevance of the object based on
their inherent needs, values, and interests” (Zaichkowsky 1985). When consumers are involved
with a product, they will be more involved with its advertising, and pay more attention to text on
the subject (Tsai and Tsai 2006; Patterson 1993).
Researchers have raised the question of whether involvement is mainly cognitive or
affective. This focuses on the thought and emotion that goes into product purchases. Buying a
9
washing machine is a cognitive purchase, but jewelry is an emotionally driven purchase
(Cochran 2004). Researchers such as Laurent and Kapferer (1985) and Putrevu and Lord (1994)
proposed the creation of four categories for each type of involvement, instead of just two. A
product can be emotional/high-involvement (affective), cognitive/high-involvement
(informative), emotional/low-involvement (satisfaction), or cognitive/low-involvement (habitual)
purchases. This means that involvement can be high-cognitive and high-emotion, high-cognitive
and low-emotion, low-cognitive and high-emotion, or low-cognitive and low-emotion (Putrevu
and Lord 1994).
Our first objective is to examine if there is a difference in advertising standardization
between emotional high-involvement and cognitive high-involvement products, i.e., does the
degree of standardization vary by level of cognition. While it has been suggested that advertising
for high-involvement product tends to be more standardized and differences in standardization
have been noted across product categories, most such efforts have compared the difference
between high and low-involvement products (cf. Mueller 1991). Less attention has been paid to
differences in standardization across various categories of high-involvement products such as
those between high-involvement products that are more utilitarian versus those that are hedonic
in nature.
Second, we examine if advertisements with pictures are more likely to be standardized
than advertisements with text. Again, prior research (cf. Mueller 1991) suggests that television
(visual medium) has greater standardization than print (textual medium). However, less is
known about differences in standardization across various types (visual versus textual
advertising) of print advertising. While research in consumer behavior suggests that recall and
attitude influence is greater for advertising with pictures (cf. Mitchell and Olson 1981; Unnava
10
and Burnkrant 1991) little is known about whether this element has an influence on advertising
standardization. Backhaus, Muhlfeld, and Van Doom (2001) suggest that the visual aspect has
the greatest influence on consumer perceptions of advertising similarity.
To address this gap in our knowledge, this exploratory study examines the following
research questions:
RQ1: Does advertising standardization of high-involvement products vary by level of cognition?
RQ2: Are advertisements with text more or less likely to be standardized?
METHODOLOGY
To study our research questions, we used the content analysis methodology. This
technique is widely used in the global standardization context (cf. Mueller 1991; Harris and
Attour 2003; Whitelock and Chung 1989). Since our study focuses on different types of highinvolvement products, we selected three high-emotion/low-cognition product categories: jewelry,
apparel (clothing and shoes), and accessories (purses and other accessories). The jewelry
category excludes watches, which are included in the high-cognition section. Highemotion/high-cognition focuses on the following three product categories: electronics, watches
and automobiles. Watches are not included in the jewelry section because they provide more
function than traditional jewelry and therefore more cognitive thought is put into the purchase of
a watch. All categories other than jewelry are considered to be gender-neutral since they are
targeted at both men and women.
Figure 1
Product Categories by Emotion and Cognition Levels
11
E
M
O
T
I
O
N
H
I
G
H
Jewelry
Apparel
Accessories
Automobiles
Electronics
Watches
L
O
W
LOW
HIGH
COGNITION
Magazine choices
High-involvement products are typically advertised in men’s and women’s fashion
magazines, magazines catering towards businesspeople, and other high-end magazines. With
regard to magazine selection, the goal was to select popular titles typically known to contain
advertisements for products typically considered high in involvement. We selected popular,
widely circulated titles from both countries. From the United States we selected three women’s
magazines Cosmopolitan, Elle, and Vogue, two business magazines Forbes and Fortune, two
men’s magazines GQ, and Men’s Health, and the cultural magazine Vanity Fair. Drawing from a
variety of magazines allowed us to sample a wider variety of products. From Japan we selected
two high-end women’s magazines Ginza and Glitter, and additionally Elle Japan. We selected
four men’s magazines Huge, Goethe, Leon, and Sense and the business magazine Forbes Japan.
The Japanese magazines were picked by recommendation from the librarian of the Japanese
12
Studies Department of a leading American University. An American National with a degree in
Japanese Linguistics currently working in Japan translated the text for all the ads that were
analyzed.
We analyzed print ads published in these magazines during one single calendar month.
All the magazines are from the same month so that the creative strategies should still be the same
if the companies standardize. Advertising campaigns can change, so all the advertisements are
from the same month and year to avoid this issue.
Coding
We used a modified version of the coding scheme developed by Harris and Attour (2003)
(See Appendices A and B). We have developed a second coding scheme to allow for the
advertisements that do not have text. An advertisement is scored on the picture scale when it has
no text on the advertisement other than the name of the company and a slogan. Any additional
text would cause the advertisement to be classified under the text category.
This coding scheme is based on a 100-point scoring system where a score of 100
indicates total standardization. As the advertisement changes across countries, points are
deducted from the overall score to find the level of standardization of each advertisement. The
scoring is divided into “Picture”, “Text”, and “Other” changes to make up the 100 total points.
For all categories, if there is no change in the advertisement for the category, or if a category
does not apply (for example, if there is no subtext, model/spokesperson, etc) then no points will
be deducted from the standardization score. A score of 100 indicates perfect standardization. As
can be seen from the appendices, within each category, there are several sub-categories. For
example, the “Picture” category is divided into three sub-categories: “Visual Background”,
13
“Model(s)/Spokesperson”, and “Modifications”. Each sub-category then has two or more choices
that have a given amount of points.
For example, the “Model(s)/Spokesperson” category deducts 10 points if a local model is
substituted for the original model and if the Model(s)/Spokesperson is completely different 20
points are deducted. A local model substitution subtracts fewer points because in this case the
model is represented in the same way, but the only difference is the locality of the model. When
the Model(s)/Spokesperson is different, there is a major change. For example, there is now a
model when there wasn’t one before, or there is no longer a Model/Spokesperson in the
advertisement. This changes the perception of the ad more than the substitution of a local model
so it is worth more points.
Many of the high-emotion/low-cognition advertisements did not include text other than
the name of the brand that is being advertised. For this reason, the Harris and Attour coding
system was modified to allow for more points in the “Picture” and “Other” sections (see
Appendix E). This modified coding scheme is similar to the one created by Harris and Attour,
however more detail has been added to some of the sections. For example, the
“Model(s)/Spokesperson” category now has three sub-categories: “Local” (10 points), “Different
Person (Not Local)” (14 points), and “Different Number of Models” (15 points). This section is
worth a maximum of 29 points, because you can have different, non local models (14 points) and
a different total number of models (15 points) or any combination of the three sub-categories.
“Modifications” is still divided into “Minor” changes (10 points) and “Major” changes (15
points). Overall, the “Picture” category is worth a total of 64 points.
RESULTS
14
Breakdown
After reviewing all of the advertisements published in these 15 magazines during one
calendar month we found there were 81 matches. A match is created when a brand is advertised
in both countries. For example, if there is one advertisement for Tag Heuer in one of the
American magazines and one advertisement for Tag Heuer in a Japanese magazine, there is a
match. 32 of these advertisement matches fell into the high-cognition category, while 49 were
low-cognition. 52 of the matching advertisement pairs were scored using the “Picture” coding
scheme, while the remaining 29 fell into the “Text” category. There were a total of 47 brands
represented including: Citizen, Dolce & Gabbana, Louis Vuttion, Prada, and Volkswagen. To
ensure inter-coder reliability, an undergraduate student unconnected with the study was trained
on the rules of the coding scheme and analyzed 13 matching advertisement pairs. All of the
standardization scores, but one, matched the researcher’s scores exactly and the one discrepancy
was created to a difference in interpretation of “different size” and “plus or minus one page”
which caused a difference in score by two points which does not effect the data in any
statistically significant way. This made us confident of the reliability of the coding scheme. It is
important to emphasize that one strength of the Harris and Attour model is that it minimizes
individual judgement of the coders (Harris and Attour 2003).
High-cognition vs. low-cognition
The mean standardization score of the high-cognition advertisements was 38.37,
compared with 73.04 for advertisements of low-cognition products. Remember, a score of 100
indicates perfect standardization. In other words, a low-cognition advertisement is almost twice
15
as likely to be standardized than one for high-cognition products. A t-test indicates that the
differences between these means are significant. The resulting t-value was 6.38 with a p-value of
less than .001. This indicates that low-cognition advertisements are more likely to be
standardized than high-cognition advertisements.
Picture vs. Text
Text advertisements have a mean standardization score of 32.10. Advertisements with no
text, other than the brand name, have a mean standardization score of 73.04. A -test has
determined that these results are significantly different. The resulting t-value was 8.12 with a pvalue of less than .001. This indicates that picture advertisements are more likely to be
standardized than advertisements that utilize text.
CONCLUSION AND IMPLICATIONS
The issue of global advertising standardization has been one of great and continuing
interest to researchers. While researchers have long focused on the differences in standardization
between high-involvement and low-involvement products, there has been limited attention paid
to differences in standardization approaches within either of these categories. This is rather
surprising given that consumer involvement with a product category has been seen to be of great
relevance to the development of advertising strategy (Laurent and Kapferer 1985). Involvement
has been seen as affecting both the purchase decision-making process as well as the processing
of communication messages. Our research demonstrates that within the category of high-
16
involvement products, low-cognition product advertising is significantly more likely to be
standardized. While a content analysis study does not allow us to explore why such differences
exists between low and high-cognition high-involvement products, we would conjecture that the
differential processing of information and different psychological meanings of the two products
might be contributors (cf. Friedman 1986).
Second, we find that picture ads tend to be more standardized than text ads. Mueller
(1991) found that television advertising tends to be more standardized than print advertising. She
conjectured that the economics of television advertising production made it more worthwhile to
standardize it than print advertising which was less costly to produce. We offer an alternate
reasoning that the visual elements are easier to standardize as compared to the textual elements.
Thus, not only does the visual element of advertising aid recall and have greater influence on
attitudes (cf. Mitchell and Olson 1981; Unnava and Burnkrant 1991), it is also easier to
standardize.
This exploratory study only compared two countries, the United States and Japan, which
can make the results difficult to generalize to other countries. Additionally, we only used 81
advertisements all published during one month. While the results appear strong, a longer time
horizon and larger number of ads could have strengthened our findings. Our coding scheme
lumped together creative strategy and execution. It would be interesting to see if differences
exist in terms of standardization of strategy versus execution. The majority of the brands and
product categories analyzed here are gender-neutral with the exception of jewelry.
However, these limitations notwithstanding, this research shows a direct connection
between product involvement (high versus low-cognition) and standardization, advertisement
type (picture or text) and standardization. In general (between the United States and Japan), the
17
lower the cognition level involved in the purchase of a product, and the more picture based an
advertisement, the more likely it is for print advertisements to be standardized.
18
APPENDIX A Coding Scheme When Text is Present
Variable
Possible Choices
Visual Bac kground (Max:20)
Local
Different
Local
Different
Minor
Major
Points
Picture
Model(s)/Spokesperson (Max:10)
Modifications (Max:10)
Text
TOTAL POSSIBLE POINTS
Headline (Max:10)
Subhead (Max:6)
Body Text (copy) (Max:10)
Slogan (Max:6)
Other
40
Same language/different meaning
Translated/same meaning
Completely different
Same language/different meaning
Translated/same meaning
Completely different
Same language/different meaning
Translated/same meaning
Completely different
Same language/different meaning
Translated/same meaning
Completely different
TOTAL POSSIBLE POINTS
General Layout (Max:10)
Product portrayal (Max:6)
Product packaging (Max:6)
Advertisement Color (Max:3)
Advertisement Size (Max:3)
10
20
5
10
5
10
3
6
10
2
3
6
3
6
10
2
3
6
32
Minor differences
Major differences
Difference in size
Difference in number
Replaced by local
Other differences (minor)
Other differences (major)
Difference in size
Difference in number
Replaced by local
Other differences (minor)
Other differences (major)
Color vs Black/White
Different color
As original +/- extra section
Different size
TOTAL POSSIBLE POINTS
Note: Total score = sum of the total points from all segments.
Degree of standardization = 100 - total score
Based on the model used by Harris and Attour (2003)
5
10
1
1
2
1
2
1
1
2
1
2
1
3
3
1
28
19
APPENDIX B
Coding Scheme When No Text is Present (Other than brand name)
Variable
Possible Choices
Visual Background (Max:20)
Local
Different but not local
10
20
Model(s)/Spokesperson (Max: 29)
Local
Different person (not local)
Different number of models
10
14
15
Modifications (Max:15)
Minor
Major
10
15
Points
Picture
TOTAL POSSIBLE POINTS
64
Other
General Layout (Max:10)
Minor differences
Major differences
Product portrayal (Max:20)
Difference in size
Difference in number
Replaced by local
Other differences (minor)
Other differences (major)
4
4
6
2
6
Advertisement Color (Max:3)
Color vs Black/White
Different color
3
2
Advertisement Size (Max:3)
As original +/- extra section
Different size
3
1
TOTAL POSSIBLE POINTS
5
10
36
Note: Total score = sum of the total points from all segments.
Degree of standardization = 100 - total score
Based on the model used by Harris and Attour (2003)
20
REFERENCES
Backhaus, Klaus, Katrin Muhfeld, and Jenny Van Doom (2001), “Consumer Perspectives on
standardization in International Advertising: A Student Sample,” Journal of Advertising
Research, 41 (5), 53-61.
Boddewyn, J.J., R. Soehl , and J. Picard (1986), “Standardization in International Marketing: Is
Ted Levitt in fact right?” Business Horizons, 29, 69-75.
Cochran, Lucy. (2004), “Product Involvement and Humour in Advertising: An Australian
Empirical Study”, Journal of Asia Pacific Marketing, Vol. 3 No. 1, pp. 68-88.
Czinkota, M. and I. Ronkainen (2007), International Marketing, 8th edition.ThomsonSouthwestern Publishers.
Davis, Scott. (2007), (Only the Strongest CMO’s Will Survive”, Advertising Age, Vol. 78 No. 5,
pp. 14.
Dentsu. (2005), “Overview of Advertising Expenditures in Japan for 2005”, available at
http://www.dentsu.com/marketing/pdf/expenditures_2005.pdf (Accessed February 17th,
2007).
Friedman, R (1987), “Psychological Meaning of Products: A Simplification of the
Standardization vs. Adaptation Debate,” Columbia Journal of World Business,
(Summer), 97-104.
Graham, John, Michael Kamins, and Djoko Oetomo (1993), “Content Analysis of German and
Japanese Advertising in Print Media from Indonesia, Spain, and the United States”,
Journal of Advertising, Vol. 22 No. 2, pp. 5-15.
Gudykunst, William and Tsukasa Nishida (1986), “Attributional Confidence in Low- and HighContext Cultures,” Human Communication Research, Vol. 12 No. 4, pp. 525-549.
Hall, Edward (1976). Beyond Culture. New York: Doubleday. Page 79.
Harris, Greg and Suleiman Attour (2003), “The International Advertising Practices of
Multinational Companies: A Content Analysis Study”, European Journal of Marketing,
Vol. 37 No. 1/2, pp. 154-168.
Hong, Jae, Aydin Muderrisoglu, and George Zinkhan (1987), “Cultural Differences and
Advertising Expression: A Comparative Content Analysis of Japanese and U.S.
Magazine Advertising”, Journal of Advertising, Vol. 16 No. 1, pp. 55-62.
Hsu, Tsuen-Ho and Monle Lee (2003), “The Refinement of Measuring Consumer Involvement An Empirical Study”, Competitiveness Review, Vol. 13 No. 1, pp. 56-65.
21
Johnson, Bradley. (2006), “Its Been a Good Five Years-Unless You’re in Media”, Advertising
Age (Midwest Region Edition), Vol. 77 No. 50, pp. 16.
Kripalani, V.H., M. Laroche, and R.Y. Darmon (1988), “Role of headquarters control by
multinationals in International Advertising Decisions,” International Journal of
Advertising, 7, 323-333.
Lasswell, Mark. (2004), “Lost in Translation: Time and Again, Product Names in Foreign Lands
Have Come Back to Haunt Even the Most Brilliant of Marketers”, Business 2.0, Vol. 5
No. 7, pp. 68-70.
Laurent, G. and Jean-Noel Kapferer (1985), “Measuring Consumer Involvement Profiles,”
Journal of Marketing Research, 22 (February), 41-53.
Levitt, Theodore. (1983), “The Globalization of Markets”, The Harvard Business Review, Vol.
61No. 3, pp. 92
Macleod, Colin. (2004), “Adspend in G7 Countries”, International Journal of Advertising, Vol.
23 No. 4, pp. 534.
Mueller, Barbara. (1991), “Multinational Advertising - Factors Influencing the Standardization v.
Specialized Approach”, International Marketing Review, Vol. 8 No. 1, pp. 7-18.
Mueller, Barbara (1991b), “An Analysis of Information Content in Standardized vs. Specialized
Multinational Advertisements,” 22 (1), 23-39.
Mueller, Barbara. (1992), “Standardization vs. Specialization: An Examination of
Westernization in Japanese Advertising”, Journal of Advertising Research, Vol. 32 No. 1,
pp. 15-24.
Nelson, Michelle R. and Hye-Jin Paek (2007), “A Content Analysis of Advertising in a Global
Magazine Across Seven Countries,” International Marketing Review, 24 (1), 64-86.
Patterson, Paul. (1993), “Expectations and Product Performance as Determinants of Satisfaction
for a High-Involvement Purchase”, Psychology & Marketing, Vol. 10 No. 5, pp. 449-465.
Putrevu, Sanjay and Kenneth Lord (1994), “Comparative and Noncomparative Advertising:
Attitudinal Effects under Cognitive and Affective Involvement Conditions”, Journal of
Advertising, Vol. 23 No. 2, pp. 77-90.
Unnava, H. Rao and Robert E. Burnkrant (1991), “An Imagery-Processing View of the Role of
Pictures in Print,” Journal of Marketing Research, 28 (2), 226-231.
22
Wei, Ran and Jing Jiang (2005), “Exploring Culture’s Influence on Standardization Dynamics of
Creative Strategy and Execution in International Advertising”, Journalism and Mass
Communication Quarterly, Vol. 82 No. 4, pp. 838-856.
Whitelock, J. and D. Chung (1989), “Cross-Cultural Advertising: An Empirical Study,”
International Journal of Advertising, 8 (3), 291-311.
World Fact Book (2007), Washington D.C., Central Intelligence Agency
Zaichkowsky, Judith. (1985), “Measuring the Involvement Construct in Marketing”, Journal of
Consumer Research, Vol. 12 No. 3, pp. 341-352.
23