The Impact of Host Country Culture on New Brand Performance

Int. J. Mgmt Res. & Bus. Strat. 2013
Fauziah Sheikh Ahmad and Sara Aghaeian, 2013
ISSN 2319-345X www.ijmrbs.com
Vol. 2, No. 2, April 2013
© 2013 IJMRBS. All Rights Reserved
THE IMPACT OF HOST COUNTRY CULTURE
ON NEW BRAND PERFORMANCE
Sara Aghaeian1, Fauziah Sheikh Ahmad1*and Sakineh Rezaei
*Corresponding Author: Fauziah Sheikh Ahmad,  [email protected]
General rise in consumer awareness has led to consumers becoming more aware of the culture
of their country or community. Belonging or ascribing to a certain set of beliefs, values and
customs is an essential part of every human being. In marketing if a brand is able to exhibit
similar attributes, it will gain popularity through growing consumer acceptance, i.e., it will belong
to that particular culture. Until then a brand will be looked upon as an outcast, utilitarian and
transactional in nature. Any brand which remains in conflict with the underlying culture of the
consumers it caters to is bound to fail. The purpose of this paper is to present a review on
evaluations of how the culture of a host country interacts with a new or imported brand from the
perspective of an effort-performance relationship. This paper also identifies, elaborates and
collates the existing literature that exists in previous studies and researches, which focus on the
interplay between the culture and brand. Previous studies have developed a structure of culture
and brand and their effect on the performance of brands. They recommended theories and
suggestions for having a successful and compatible brand perception in a host country. The
study will contribute towards providing a framework for organizations to help them in customizing
the brand perception of their brands with respect of the culture in the cross-national market and
suggest new ways to increase the acceptance of the brand by the consumers.
Keywords: Brand elements, Culture, Cultural dimension
The American Marketing defines the brand as
INTRODUCTION
“A customer experience represented by a
collection of images and ideas; often, it refers to
The Theory of Brand
A lot of previous literature exists for brand as a
concept. These researches have focused
primarily on the meaning of a brand and are
fundamental in nature because this lead to further
crystallization of the concept of brand.
1
a symbol such as a name, logo, slogan, and
design scheme. Brand recognition and other
reactions are created by the accumulation of
experiences with the specific product or service,
both directly relating to its use, and through the
UTM International Business School (UTM IBS), Universiti Tecknologi, Malaysia.
This article can be downloaded from http://www.ijmrbs.com/currentissue.php
129
Int. J. Mgmt Res. & Bus. Strat. 2013
Fauziah Sheikh Ahmad et al., 2013
influence of advertising, design, and media
commentary.”
Figure 1: Comprehensive Picture
of Different Branding Elements
Kotler (2001, p. 188) highlighted that a brand
is “a seller’s promise to deliver a specific set of
features, benefits and services consistent to the
buyers…”
Aaker (1991) defined a brand as “a
distinguishing name and/or symbol (such as logo,
trademark, or package design) intended to identify
the goods or services of either one seller or a
group of sellers, and to differentiate those goods
or services from those of competitors. A brand
thus signals to the customer the source of the
product, and protects both the customer and the
producer from competitors who would attempt
to provide products that appear to be identical.”
Accordingly Weilbacher (1995) put it from the
perspective that “brands provide the basis upon
which consumers can identify and bond with a
product or service or a group of products or
services”. Similarly Kapferer (2004) defined it as
“the total accumulation of all his/her experiences,
and is built at all points of contact with the
customer.”
various sub elements that interact with each other
to result in the brand positioning.
The Concept of Culture
Culture is a system of shared beliefs, values,
customs and symbols that the members of a
society use to cope with their world and with one
another (Gelder, 2003). Culture comprises the
shared values, assumptions, understandings and
goals that are learned from one generation,
imposed by the current generation, and passed
by on to succeeding generations (Deresky, 2003).
Culture can be defined as the “collective
programming of the mind which distinguishes the
members of one category of people from those
of another” (Hofstede, 2001). The programming
manifests itself in the values and beliefs of a
society. Values are the tendency of an individual
to prefer certain states of affairs to others.
Hofstede believes that the levels at which
preferences find their balance is culturally
determined. But culture also involves itself in
learned behavior, as individuals grow up and
gradually come to understand what their culture
demands of them. Culture is not just an
abstraction, but also a physical reality
(Johansson, 2000). According to Johansson
(2000), culture is usually defined as the underlying
value framework that guides an individual’s
Branding Elements
The definition of brand as a whole does not suffice
the purpose. Thus it leads to elements of a brand
that make up the brand itself. Sagar et al. (2010)
refer to the following diagram and give a
comprehensive picture of different branding
elements (Figure 1).
According to Sagar et. al., the ultimate output
of the branding elements is the formation of the
positioning of the brand in the consumers mind.
The various elements of the brand are brand
identity, brand personality, brand communication,
brand awareness, brand image and brand
positioning. Thus, a brand is actually formed from
This article can be downloaded from http://www.ijmrbs.com/currentissue.php
130
Int. J. Mgmt Res. & Bus. Strat. 2013
Fauziah Sheikh Ahmad et al., 2013
uniquely understood by even the most prominent
researchers in the field. In line with the social
science theories of the 1950s, Hofstede (2001),
for example, considers ideas and especially their
attached values to be the core of culture. He cites
the definition by Kluckhohn (1951), who says that
“Culture consists of patterned ways of thinking,
feeling and reacting, acquired and transmitted
mainly by symbols, constituting the distinctive
achievements of human groups, including their
embodiments in artifacts; the essential core of
culture consists of traditional ideas and especially
their attached values” (Hofstede, 2001).
behavior. It is reflected in an individual’s perceptions
of observed events and personal interactions, and
the selection of appropriate responses in social
situations. Trompenaars (1994) stated culture
operates within a group, is learned (often through
generations), influences the basic thinking process
of groups of people, and describes common
behaviors and values that groups of people may
exhibit under certain conditions.
Taylor (1874) more than a century defined
culture as “a complex whole which includes
knowledge, beliefs, art, morals, laws, customs
and any other capabilities and habits acquired by
individuals as members of society”. With the
growing opportunities for intercultural interaction
since the 1950s, the world has seen a proliferation
of modern studies on culture. The consensus on
what constitutes the core of culture is still not
The Effect of Culture on the Branding
Elements
The Literature analyzing the linkage between
different aspects the brand and culture has been
tabulated in Table 1.
Table 1: Literature Analyzing the Linkage Between Different Aspects the Brand and Culture
Author and Year
Linkage between Brand and Culture
Nijssen and Van
Herk (2009)
Regardless of a consumer’s perception of the country of origin, he or she will view a cultural brand as a very specific
benefit provider. These cultural brands often focus on consumers in international markets who are presold on such
brands
Cleveland, Laroche Sometimes these cultural brands become sociocultural identity symbols for the target consumers living in different
and Papadopoulos
countries caught between a complex set of forces that include acculturation and nostalgia
2009
Cayla and Arnould
2008
Brands are part of the fabric of popular culture and populate our modern mythology; they must be analysed as cultural
forms, carriers of meaning, and devices structuring thought and experience.
Nijssen and
Douglas (2008)
Adaptation of a Brand in the foreign country depends on the growing awareness and familiarity consumers have about
products and services in other parts of the world and the Cultural aspects prevalent in the host country
Usunnier and
Cestre (2007)
Consumers make stereotypical associations between products and countries based on their perceptions of a country’s
knowhow and reputation. This association is becoming ever more prevalent for brands that represent symbols of a
particular cultural identity given the growing relevance of product ethnicity.
Whitelock and
Fastoso (2007)
Findings provide support for a branding strategy that is more strongly rooted in the target market’s cultural context and
reflect a broader conceptualization of international branding strategy
Hatch and Rubin
(2006)
Brands are “symbols in popular culture with their meanings contingent on particular cultural contexts.”
O'Reilly (2005)
Brands are “symbolic articulators of production and consumption” that are not only managerially but also socially
constructed, thus making them a cultural phenomenon.
Holt (2004)
Another set of brands from emerging economies (representing products such as cultural tourism, ethnic food, music,
movies, entertainment, and information media) serves as a means of individual and collective expression and represents
symbols of a particular cultural identity: cultural brands
McCracken (1986)
A brand obtains its meanings through a three-step meaning transfer process: from cultural elements in the social world,
to consumer goods, to the individual consumer.
Diderot (1964)
Cultural brand represents not only a specific product but also a whole host of products or brands that are tied together
in a manner similar to the Diderot effect: social phenomenon related to the creation of a culturally defined group
around a set of consumer goods that are considered culturally complementary in relation to one another
This article can be downloaded from http://www.ijmrbs.com/currentissue.php
131
Int. J. Mgmt Res. & Bus. Strat. 2013
Fauziah Sheikh Ahmad et al., 2013
CULTURAL DIMENSIONS
Hofstede (1980), (1984) and (2001)
According to appropriate definition and
understanding of culture, most social scientists
have long recognized the complexity and
multidimensionality of the concept. For this
reason, most of them try to describe cultures.
Each cross-cultural researcher present cultural
difference by using different cultural dimensions.
At present, there are at least six models of
national cultures that continue to be widely cited
and utilized in the organizational research
literature. These include models proposed by
Kluckhohn and Strodtbek (1961), Hofstede (1980),
(1984) and (2001), Schwartz (1992) and (1994),
Hall (1976) and (1981), Trompenaars and
Hampden-Turner (1994) and (1998), and House
(2004) and his GLOBE associates (Table 2).
Each model highlights different aspects of
societal beliefs, norms, and/or values and, as
such, convergence across the models has been
seen as being very limited. Despite the
differences, all of the above mentioned studies
started their search for the dimensions by
identifying and focusing on more or less equal
societal dilemmas which, although framed a bit
differently in each research.
Dutch management researcher Geert Hofstede
(1980) and (2001) advanced the most widely
used model of cultural differences in the
organizations literature. His model was derived
from a study of employees from various countries
working for major multinational corporation and
was based on the assumption that different
cultures can be distinguished was based on
differences in what they value. That is, some
cultures place a high value on equality among
individuals, while others place a high value on
hierarchies or power distances between people.
Likewise, some cultures value certainty in
everyday life and have difficulty coping with
unanticipated events, while others have a greater
tolerance for ambiguity and seem to relish
change. Taken together, Hofstede argues that it
is possible to gain considerable insight into
organized behavior across cultures based on
these value dimensions. Initially, Hofstede
asserted that cultures could be distinguished
along four dimensions, but later added a fifth
dimension based on his research with Michael
Bond (1991). The final five dimensions are
illustrated in Table 3.
Table 2: Summary of Cultural Dimensions and Definitions
Hofstede
1980, 1983, 2001
“Collective programming of the mind which distinguishes the members of one category of
people from those of another”.
Hall
1976, 1981
“The way of life of a people, the sum of their learned behavior patterns, attitudes and
material things.”
Kluckhohn and
Strodtbeck
1961
“Culture consists of patterned ways of thinking, feeling and reacting, acquired and
transmitted mainly by symbols, constituting the distinctive achievements of human groups,
including their embodiments in artifacts; the essential core of culture consists of
traditional ideas and especially their attached values”.
Trompenaars
and Turner
1998
“Culture operates within a group, is learned (often through generations),
influences the basic thinking process of groups of people, and describes common
behaviors and values that groups of people may exhibit under certain conditions.”
Schwartz
1992, 1994
“Individual values as desirable, trans situational goals, varying in importance that serve as
guiding principles in people’s lives.”
House
2004
“The ability of an individual to influence, motivates, and enables others to contribute
toward the effectiveness and success of the organizations of which they are members".
This article can be downloaded from http://www.ijmrbs.com/currentissue.php
132
Int. J. Mgmt Res. & Bus. Strat. 2013
Fauziah Sheikh Ahmad et al., 2013
Table 3: Hofstede’s Cultural Dimensions
Cultural Dimensions
Scale Anchors
Power Distance: Beliefs about
the appropriate distribution of
power in society
Low Power Distance: belief that effective leaders do
not need to have substantial amounts of power
compared to their subordinates. Examples: Austria,
Israel, Denmark, Ireland, Norway, Sweden
High Power Distance: Belief that people In positions
of authority should have considerable power
compared to their subordinates. Examples:
Malaysia, Mexico, Saudi Arabia
Uncertainty
Avoidance:
Degree of uncertainty that can
be tolerated and its impact on
rule making.
Low Uncertainty Avoidance: Tolerance for
ambiguity; little need for rules to constrain
uncertainty. Examples: Singapore, Jamaica,
Denmark, Sweden, and UK.
High Uncertainty Avoidance: Intolerance for
ambiguity; need for many rules to constrain
uncertainty. Examples: Greece, Portugal, Uruguay,
Japan, France and Spain.
Individualism-Collectivism:
Relative importance
of
individual vs. group interests.
Collectivism: Group interests generally take
precedence over individual interests. Example: Japan,
Korea, Indonesia, Pakistan, and Latin America.
M as cu li ni ty - Fe mi ni ni ty :
Assertiveness vs. Passivity;
material possessions vs. quality
of life.
Individualism: Individual interests generally take
precedence over group interests. Examples:
Australia, UK, Netherlands, Italy, and
Scandinavia.
Masculinity: Values material possessions, money, and
the pursuit of personal goals. Examples: Japan,
Austria, Italy, Switzerland, and Mexico.
Femininity: Values strong social relevance, quality
of life, and the welfare of others. Examples: Sweden,
Norway, Netherlands, Costa Rica
Long-term vs. Short-term
Orientation: Outlook on
work, life, and relationships.
Short-term Orientation: Past and present
orientation. Values traditions’ and social obligations.
Examples: Pakistan, Nigeria, Russia
Long-term Orientation: Future orientation,
values dedication, hard work, and thrift.
Examples: China, Korea, Japan, and Brazil.
At present, there are at least six models of
national cultures that continue to be widely cited
and utilized in the organizational research
literature. These include models proposed by
Kluckhohn and Strodtbek (1961), Hofstede (1980),
(1984) and (2001), Schwartz (1992) and (1994),
Hall (1976) and (1981), Trompenaars and
Hampden-Turner (1994) and (1998), and House
(2004) and his GLOBE associates. Each model
highlights different aspects of societal beliefs,
norms, and/or values and, as such, convergence
across the models has been seen as being very
limited. Despite the differences, all of the above
mentioned studies started their search for the
dimensions by identifying and focusing on more
or less equal societal dilemmas which, although
The proposed conceptual framework is based on
a presupposition that customs/symbols, values
and beliefs are backwards for culture of foreign
country and the later (culture of foreign country)
predict branding identity and financial
performance. The model synthesizes theories
from previous research particularly from
disciplines of marketing, branding and culture to
present a more holistic perspective of the issue.
Figure 2: The Proposed Conceptual
Framework, BPPI (Brand Performance
and Purchase Intention)
framed a bit differently in each research.
CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORK
The conceptual framework for Global BC which
covers related constructs of customs/symbols,
values, beliefs, culture of foreign country, brand
identity, customer decision making and brand
financial performance is explained in Figure 2.
This article can be downloaded from http://www.ijmrbs.com/currentissue.php
133
Int. J. Mgmt Res. & Bus. Strat. 2013
Fauziah Sheikh Ahmad et al., 2013
CONCLUSION
Advertising, Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence
Erlbaum Associates.
In the current scenario where global brands are
looking to reach out to developing countries to
market their brands, it becomes important to shed
light on how the culture of developing countries
is going to play a role. Therefore in further
research we will add the existing information and
knowledge by searching the customer purchase
intention. Furthermore, the study would also list
the different procedures and practices currently
applied to organizations help to adapt their brands
to foreign culture. It also quantifies the relationship
between the cultural dimension and brand
performance in the countries where we will select
for our study.
7. Brandt Marty and Grant Johnson (1997),
“Power Branding: Building Technology
Brands for Competitive Advantage”,
International Data Group Thought
Leadership Series, San Francisco, CA.
8. Brannen J (2006), “Cultures of
Intergenerational Transmission in Fourgeneration Families,” Sociological Review,
pp. 134-154.
9. Brannen J, Moss P and Mooney A (2004),
“Working and Caring Over the Twentieth
Century: Change and Continuity in FourGeneration Families Business and
Management Collection”.
REFERENCES
1.
Aaker D A (1992), “Managing the Most
Important Asset: Brand Equity”, Planning
Review, Vol. 20, August, pp. 56-58.
2.
Aaker D A (1991), Managing Brand Equity,
The Free Press, New York.
10. Buchholz R A (1977), “The Belief Structure
of Managers Relative to Work Concepts
Measured By A Factor Analytical Model,”
Personnel Psychology, Vol. 30, pp. 567-587.
11.
Chen C C, Chen X P and Meindl J R (1998),
“How Can Cooperation be Forstered: The
Cultural Effects of Individualism and
Collectivism,” Academy of Management
Review, Vol. 23, No. 2, pp. 285-304.
3.
Aaker D A (1996), Building Strong Brands,
The Free Press, New York.
4.
Pankania A, Lee N and Hooley G (2007),
“Within-Country Ethnic Differences and
Product Positioning: a Comparison of the
Perceptions of Two British Sub-Cultures”,
Journal of Strategic Marketing, Vol. 15, Nos.
2/3, pp. 121-138.
12. Corbin Juliet and Strauss Anselm (1990),
“Grounded Theory Research: Procedures,
Canons, and Evaluative Criteria”, Qualitative
Sociology, Vol. 13(t), pp. 3-21.
5.
Baker W, Hutchinson J W, Moore D et al.
(1986), “Brand Familiarity and Advertising:
Effects on the Evoked Set and Brand
Preference”, Advances in Consumer
Research, Vol. 13, pp. 636-642.
13. De Chernatony L and Dall’Olmo Riley F
(1998), “Defining a ‘Brand’: Beyond the
Literature with Experts’ Interpretation,”
Journal of Marketing Management, Vol. 14,
No. 5, pp. 417-43.
6.
Biel A (1993), Converting Image into Equity,
Paper Presented in Brand Equity and
14. Deresky H (2003), International
Management-Managing Across Borders
This article can be downloaded from http://www.ijmrbs.com/currentissue.php
134
Int. J. Mgmt Res. & Bus. Strat. 2013
Fauziah Sheikh Ahmad et al., 2013
and Cultures, 4 th Edition, New Jersey:
Prentice Hall.
22. Geletkanycz M A (1997), “The Salience of
15. Diderot Denis (1964), “Regrets on Parting
Cultural Values on Top Executive
with My Old Dressing Gown”, in Rameau’s
Nephew and Other Works by Denis Diderot,
Jacques Barzun and Ralph H. Bowen,
Management Journal, Vol. 18, No. 8, pp.
‘Culture consequences’: the Effects of
Commitment to the Status Que,” Strategic
615-634.
trans. New York: Bobbs-Merrill, pp. 309-317.
23. Gerd Nonneman (2007), “Political Reform
16. Dorfman P W and Howell J P (1988),
“Dimensions of National Culture and
Effective Leadership Patterns:Hofstede
Revisited”, Advances in International
Comparative Management, Vol. 3, pp. 127150.
in the Gulf Monarchies: Form Liberalization
to Democratization? A Comparative
Perspective’, in Anoushiravan Ehteshami
and Steven Wright”, Reform in the Middle
East Oil Monarchies, pp. 3-45.
24. Gilmore F (1997), “Introduction: Brand
Championship”, in F Gilmore (Ed.), Brand
Warriors: Corporate Leaders Share their
17. Edwin J Nijssen and Hester van Herk (2009),
“Conjoining International Marketing and
Relationship Marketing: Exploring
Consumers’ Cross-Border Service
Relationships,” Journal of International
Marketing,
American
Marketing
Association, Vol. 17, No. 1, pp. 91-115.
Winning Strategies, pp. 1-24, London:
Harper Collins Business.
25. Glaser B G. and A L Strauss (1967), “The
Discovery of Grounded Theory: Strategies
for Qualitative Research”, Aldine, New York.
18. Edwin J Nijssen and Susan P Douglas.
(2008), “Consumer World Mindedness,
Social-Mindedness, and Store Image,”
Journal of International Marketing, American
Marketing Association, Vol. 16, No. 3, pp.
84-107.
26. Golson M A and Rossow G L (1997), “The
Delphi Process in Marketing Decision
Making”, Journal of Marketing Research,
Vol, Vlll , pp. 443-8.
27. Hall E T (1976), Beyond Culture, New York:
Doubleday.
19. Fournier S (1998), “Consumers and Their
28. Hall E T (1981), Beyond Culture, Reissue
Brands: Developing Relationship Theory in
Consumer Research,” Journal of
Consumer Research, Vol. 24, March, pp.
of Vol. 1976, New York: Anchor Books.
29. Hamel J, Dufour S and Fortin D (1993),
343-373.
“Case study methods”, In Qualitative
Research Methods (Series 32), Newbury
Park, CA: Sage.
20. Frith K T and Mueller B (2003), Advertising
and Societies, Peterlang C (2002, 2006),
New York.
30. Hampden-Turner C and Trompenaars F
(1994), The Seven Cultures of Capitalism,
21. Gelder Sicco Van. (2003), Global Brand
Strategy, Kogan Page Limited.
New York: Judy Piatkus (Publishers) Ltd.
This article can be downloaded from http://www.ijmrbs.com/currentissue.php
135
Int. J. Mgmt Res. & Bus. Strat. 2013
Fauziah Sheikh Ahmad et al., 2013
31. Harris E and de Chernatony L (2001),
“Corporate Branding and Corporate Brand
Performance,” European Journal of
Marketing, Vol. 35, Nos. 3/4, pp. 441-456.
37. Hofstede G (2001), Cultures Consequences,
2nd Edition, Vol. 11, Thousand Oaks: CA:
Sage.
38. Hof stede
G
(1980),
Culture’s
Consequences: International Differences in
Work Related Values, Newbury Park, CA:
Sage Publications.
32. Hatch Mary Jo and James Rubin (2006),
“The Hermeneutics of Branding,” Journal of
Brand Management, Vol. 14, Nos. 1/2, pp.
40–59.
39. Hofstede G (2001), “Comparing Behaviors
Across Nations-some Suggestions to
Levine and Norenzayon,” Cross-Cultural
Psychology Bulletin, Vol. 35, No. 3, pp. 2729.
33. Herling R W, Weinberger L and Harris L
(2000), “Case Study Research: Defined for
Application in the Field of HRD”, St. Paul:
University of Minnesota, Human Resource
Development Research Center.
40. Holt D B (2002), “Why do Brands Cause
Trouble? A Dialectical Theory of Consumer
Culture and Branding,” Journal of
Consumer Research, Vol. 29, No. June, pp.
70-90.
34. Hiscock J (2001), “Most Trusted Brands,”
Marketing, Vol. 3, March, pp. 32-33.
35. Hofstede G (1984), “The Cultural Relativity
of the Quality of Life Concept,” Academy of
Management Review, 9(3), 389-398.
41. Holt Douglas B (2004), How Brands
Become Icons: The Principles of Cultural
Branding, Boston: Harvard Business School
Press.
36. Hofstede G (1991), Cultures and
Organizations: Software of the Mind,
London: McGraw-Hill.
This article can be downloaded from http://www.ijmrbs.com/currentissue.php
136