Standard vs. local(refer to book pg no.407)
Attitudes towards advertising in general are important to assess as they have been shown to influence attitudes toward advertisements, brands and purchase intent. Businesses need to have a presence everywhere and yet limited resources only allow for some markets to receive funding for customized material (Rogowski 2004). Thus, from a financial perspective, some degree of standardization is always desirable. Over the past decade, marketers have recognized that it really is not about an either or strategy regarding standardization and localization. It is more about degree and decisions will vary by product category, consumer preferences, the market environment and so on. In 2003, McDonald’s launched the “I’m Lovin’ It” campaign. It was the company’s first global marketing campaign made in 12 languages and airing in more than 110 countries (MacArthur 2003). The intent of the campaign was to create a consistent global brand image, while also allowing for local cultures to be represented. Achieving the local flare was undertaken by creating new packaging with pictures of people from around the world as well as providing for local and regional promotional efforts. The issue, in other words, is whether a company should follow strategy of geo-centrism or polycentrism. The question is whether all the markets should be regarded as a single homogeneous market that can be successfully tapped with a globally standardization marketing or whether there should be specifically designed strategy for each of the distinctive market. 2.
Multinational standardization would mean the offering of identical product line at identical prices through identical distribution systems, supported by identical promotional programs, in several different countries. At the other extreme, completely localized marketing strategies would contain no common elements whatsoever. Obviously neither of these extremes is feasible or desirable and in practical marketing these terms are not used in the literal sense. In many cases, the issue boils down to what extent localization or standardization is appropriate. In a number of cases, what is appropriate is neither localization nor globalization but regionalization. The world is becoming a common market place in which people no matter where they live desire the same products and lifestyle. Global companies must forget the idiosyncratic difference between countries and cultures and instead concentrate on satisfying universal drives 3.
The crux of the standardization debate used to be "Should multinational advertising be standardized or localized?" Today the question is "In what situations and to what extent should multinational advertising be standardized?" The reasons for standardizing are often compelling. 4.
The choice between adapting or standardising your communication ought to be looked at on a case by case basis. Even if you have the same objectives in all your target markets, it is very probable that it is necessary to alter the advertising according to cultural, social, and economic features of these markets, as well as the motivations of your target clients. Deciding to adopt a standardised or adapted advertising strategy will result in a balance between the advantages of a single campaign, and those of a specific campaign for each market.
In reality, companies often adopt a strategy incorporating these two extremes, the difficulty arising when deciding to what degree each will be enforced.
The different aspects which could be subject to standardisation or adaptation are the following : the objectives of the campaign ;the target market ;the choice of media ; 5.
The globalizing nature of the world economy has been evident since at least 20 years ago, when Levitt (1983) called for global marketing strategies. During the time period since then, there has been enormous growth in global advertising, which is used in an attempt to influence largely middle-class...
Please join StudyMode to read the full document