* Your assessment is very important for improving the workof artificial intelligence, which forms the content of this project
Download Introduction - Association for Consumer Research
Digital marketing wikipedia , lookup
Aerial advertising wikipedia , lookup
St George (advertisement) wikipedia , lookup
Orange Man (advertisement) wikipedia , lookup
Background music wikipedia , lookup
Product placement wikipedia , lookup
Radio advertisement wikipedia , lookup
Ad blocking wikipedia , lookup
Advertising management wikipedia , lookup
Online advertising wikipedia , lookup
Alcohol advertising wikipedia , lookup
Advertising campaign wikipedia , lookup
Criticism of advertising wikipedia , lookup
Television advertisement wikipedia , lookup
Targeted advertising wikipedia , lookup
Advertising to children wikipedia , lookup
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