شناخت اثرات همگرایی نهادی چند سطحی بر بخش های بازار بین المللی و استراتژی بازاریابی جهانی
|کد مقاله||سال انتشار||تعداد صفحات مقاله انگلیسی||ترجمه فارسی|
|2886||2010||9 صفحه PDF||سفارش دهید|
نسخه انگلیسی مقاله همین الان قابل دانلود است.
هزینه ترجمه مقاله بر اساس تعداد کلمات مقاله انگلیسی محاسبه می شود.
این مقاله تقریباً شامل 6920 کلمه می باشد.
هزینه ترجمه مقاله توسط مترجمان با تجربه، طبق جدول زیر محاسبه می شود:
- تولید محتوا با مقالات ISI برای سایت یا وبلاگ شما
- تولید محتوا با مقالات ISI برای کتاب شما
- تولید محتوا با مقالات ISI برای نشریه یا رسانه شما
پیشنهاد می کنیم کیفیت محتوای سایت خود را با استفاده از منابع علمی، افزایش دهید.
Publisher : Elsevier - Science Direct (الزویر - ساینس دایرکت)
Journal : Journal of World Business, Volume 45, Issue 1, January 2010, Pages 59–67
Dynamic changes in the global marketplace have increased opportunities for marketing strategy standardization due to the convergence of cross-national market segments. An oversimplified understanding of the complexities of this convergence could lead to ineffective global marketing strategy execution. This study develops a multi-level institutional approach to address level-based convergence effects necessary to understanding market segment convergence and its influence on global marketing strategy. A model of influential level effects on global marketing strategy is developed having implications for global marketing academics and practitioners.
The development of global marketing strategy has been the subject of intense academic debate and research for decades (cf., Baalbaki and Malhotra, 1993, Baalbaki and Malhotra, 1995, Katsikeas et al., 2006, Ryans et al., 2008, Sanchez-Peinado et al., 2007 and Sousa and Bradley, 2008). Central to this debate is the extent to which marketing strategy elements, e.g., elements of the marketing mix, can be transferred effectively across countries (e.g., Baalbaki and Malhotra, 1993, Baalbaki and Malhotra, 1995, Jain, 1989, Katsikeas et al., 2006, Okazaki et al., 2007, Onkvisit and Shaw, 1987, Onkvisit and Shaw, 1999, Ozsomer and Prussia, 2000, Sanchez-Peinado et al., 2007, Seggie and Griffith, 2008, Shoham et al., 2008, Solberg, 2000 and Taylor and Okazaki, 2006). Underlying this debate has been the weighting of the effectiveness gains of local market adaptation against the potential economic benefits obtainable through standardization in cross-national segments (Katsikeas et al., 2006, Ozsomer and Prussia, 2000, Ryans et al., 2003 and Sousa and Bradley, 2008). This has become increasingly complex given the movement toward globalization at multiple levels and the increasing dynamism of markets and their effects on market segments (Ghemawat, 2003, Luo, 2007 and Okazaki et al., 2007). The issue of market segments and market segmentation has received increased attention in the literature due to globalization (Steenkamp & Ter Hofstede, 2002). A wide variety of segmentation bases and methods have been used by scholars investigating this important area (e.g., Askegaard and Madsen, 1998, Bolton and Myers, 2003, Day et al., 1988 and Steenkamp and Ter Hofstede, 2002). Wedel and Kamakura (1999) note that the goal of market segmentation is to identify those individuals who exhibit similar behaviors and therefore will react uniformly to marketing stimuli. While market segments have often been viewed as having clearly defined boarders within a nation-state, the movement toward integrated markets due to globalization has created the need for conceptualizing market segments in new ways (Ghemawat, 2003 and Okazaki et al., 2007). For example, as Ghemawat (2003) notes, market integration creates opportunities for firm strategies to stretch across national boundaries in a semi-globalization approach. While the issue of global marketing strategy employment is well formulated, limited research has employed a strong theoretical foundation for its understanding (Lages et al., 2008 and Morgan et al., 2004). The extant literature has done little to incorporate the theoretical complexity of the environment to provide academic or practitioner actionability, an action called for by Katsikeas et al. (2006). The purpose of this study is to contribute to the literature by specifically addressing these limitations (i.e., lack of theoretical foundation and complexity of the environment) in the literature by employing institutional economics to examine the factors influencing the changes in cross-national market segments and adaptation appropriateness of a firm's global marketing strategy as the firm operates across countries. Institutional economics is used to understand the appropriateness of global marketing strategy elements. This will provide academics and practitioners with a better understanding of how to adapt and standardize their marketing strategy. Institutional economics is discussed first, explicating the dimensionality of institutions. Next, the multi-level nature of institutions in which firms operate, and the dynamic nature of these elements are addressed. This sets the foundation for market segment convergence. Next, we discuss the complexity of global marketing strategy, both as discussed in the literature (i.e., the complex nature of each marketing mix element) as well as executed within the marketplace. Implications for academics and practitioners are then discussed setting forth a foundation for actionability.
نتیجه گیری انگلیسی
The purpose of this study was to employ institutional economics to examine the factors influencing changes in market segments having implications for a firm's global marketing strategy. Calls in the literature for more theoretically founded investigations of global marketing strategy have resulted in theoretical development and application at the internal firm level (e.g., Lages et al., 2008 and Morgan et al., 2004). However, as the issue of the appropriateness of global marketing strategy effectiveness has been found to be derived from issue of fit (e.g., Katsikeas et al., 2006), the need for theoretical treatment of context becomes important. Institutional economics presents a manner in which a better understanding of the issue of global market segment convergence can be investigated. Wedel and Kamakura (1999) note that the goal of market segmentation is to identify those individuals who exhibit similar behaviors and therefore will react uniformly to marketing stimuli. Nowhere is this homogeneity more probable than when institutions converge. However, this study cautions managers not to oversimplify the environment but rather to think about institutions along multiple levels, each having a different influence on global marketing strategy elements and unique convergence rates. For example, the expansion of the European Union from 15 members to 27 members may have provided for a movement toward convergence on specific legal matters setting forth the parameters for commercial transactions, and hence leading to standardization of certain elements of a firm's global marketing strategy. However, making the assumption that the market can be viewed as a unified market culturally would be a mistake. We caution managers against the simplification of institutional environments into the least common denominator. Institutional economics provides us with a complex set of criteria to understand the influencing factors of our environment. Only through detailed investigation can greater insights be gained. Furthermore, our model is dynamic in nature. People have for too long employed a static view of institutional markets in the investigation of global marketing activities. The importance of time and change need to be incorporated into our managerial decision models if a strong theoretical framework that can provide practitioner with guidance can be developed. Harvey, Kiessling, and Richey (2008) call for managers to use time as reference criteria. Akin to this approach is understanding time in the perspective of convergence. Convergence does not occur overnight. Even when laws are changed, therefore designating a specific date in which the operating environment has changed, the implementation and enforcement of said laws may have a considerable time lag. For example, although China has entered the World Trade Organization, its adherence to WTO policies and its enforcement of these policies have yet to be fully fulfilled as the writing of this work. Thus, strong market research is needed to identify when market segments have adjusted to institutional changes. The manner of measuring dynamic institutional convergence would be a fruitful area of study. Furthermore, the decomposition of dynamic institutional elements has significant implications for those studying global marketing strategy. Performance enhancement is only achievable when marketing strategy fits the environmental context. However, their employment of a macro-level global marketing strategy adaptation/standardization construct subjugates the fundamental elements of marketing strategy, within each of the four marketing mix elements, therefore not allowing detailed insights necessary for the practicing manager. We contend, much as Ryans et al. (2008) and Griffith et al. (2003) have done, that scholars should focus on the elements of each aspect of the marketing mix when investigating the standardization or adaptation of global marketing strategy to provide more detailed insights into the dimensions where standardization benefits may be gained. For, as Dawar and Parker's (1994) universality of cue utilization across markets advanced our understanding of where gains could be made, only through the analysis of the individual elements of the marketing mix elements will academics forward an agenda that provides strong managerial guidance.