Marketing across Cultures: A Critical Evaluation and Comparison
Verified
Added on 2023/01/18
|8
|2102
|48
AI Summary
This report discusses the techniques of cross-cultural marketing and compares the cross culture of India and UK using the Hofstede model. It also explores the relevance of cross culture in marketing and its impact on consumer behavior.
Contribute Materials
Your contribution can guide someone’s learning journey. Share your
documents today.
Marketing across Cultures (CW1) 1
Secure Best Marks with AI Grader
Need help grading? Try our AI Grader for instant feedback on your assignments.
Table of Contents INTRODUCTION...........................................................................................................................3 CRITICAL EVALUATION............................................................................................................3 COMPARISON...............................................................................................................................4 RELEVANCE AND CONCLUSION.............................................................................................6 REFERENCES................................................................................................................................8 2
INTRODUCTION Every country cross culture differs in one or another way. Businesses market their products and services in countries by analysing people culture, ethics, etc. It allows them to determine cultural diversity (de Mooij and Beniflah,2017). Cross culture marketing is concept of comparing country culture from others across boundaries. It understands about culture of people and how marketing can be done. This report will discuss techniques such as Hofstede, Hall and hall and Wills in cultural diversity. Also, it will compare cross culture of India and UK with Hofstede model. Moreover, relevance of cross culture will be described. CRITICAL EVALUATION For a business it is essential to market products and services in different countries by considering their culture. This is because every country culture is different. It depends on their religiousbeliefandsocialnorms.Fromvarioustechniqueculturalissuesareidentified. Moreover, each model helps in identifying different elements of culture and society. There are various approaches and models used by business to analyse cross culture. It gives insight to determine their behaviour and how it influence on marketing. The models are described below :- Hofstede model –this framework is used to identify cross cultural dimension. It shows effect of society culture on people values (De Mooij, 2015). Also, it contains four dimensions on basis of which culture is determined that are individualism, collectivism, uncertainty and power distance. Through this, it is easy to differentiate between masculinity and femininity power.It is model that aids to represent the culture independent preference for one state over another that distinguish from each other. Therefore, country scores on type dimension is relative. Human and simultaneously all are unique. In other words that can be stated that culture can be used meaningfully with the help of comparison. Hall and Hall –this model was developed by Edward T hall in which he stated different cultural factors. Basically, he divided in into two that is high and low context factors which is explained below :- Low context- here, people take elements for granted. High context- it this the elements help people to understand rules. Time 3
Monochronic time- it means doing one thing at time. in this western approach is followed which include proper planning and preparing schedule. Here, time management discipline is followed. Monochronic people are incline to be low context. Polychronic time– this culture is included human interaction is valued which lead to less concern. The native Americans possess this type of culture. In addition, polychronic people are incline to be high context (Hoppner, Griffith and White, 2015). Space– here, it is related to space and relationship. The space is referred as body space, home space, etc. People require space in all areas. For example –In US people need large space as compared to Japan. High territoriality –it means some people require more space as they are concern about ownership. This can be in any terms such as personal space. Also, some people need big house, parking space, etc. Usually, people of high territoriality are incline to be low context. Low territoriality –In this people require less personal space as boundaries are not important to them. The ownership is shared with other. Such people tend to be high context. Wills In this cultural model the dimensions are learning which define relationship between high and low context of culture with acceptance of new products. Contras Therefore, there is difference between above models that state how cross culture is identified. It has been critiqued that Hall argued that issues in cross culture can be identified through differences. It can be observed by comparing how information is viewed by society. Whereas Hofstede said that culture is determined by identifying behaviour and values that exists in society. This is because it is derived from six dimension (Lombardo, Behand Guerrero, 2019). On contrary Hall focused on low and high context factors. He includes factors like time and space. But Wills only defined relationship between high and low context. He did not define those contexts. Thus, there is difference in all three models of cultural dimensions. COMPARISON In order to identify cross culture of countries such as India and UK, Hofstede model was applied. So, from that it is analysed that :- (Hofstede model,2016) 4
Paraphrase This Document
Need a fresh take? Get an instant paraphrase of this document with our AI Paraphraser
Power distance It refers to the individual in society are not equal. This means less powerful members of society expect that there is unequal distribution of power. Thus, India score is 77 in this where UK score is 35. It can be evaluated that in India there is unequal distribution of power. Here, employees expect to be directed by Boss. Moreover, the communication flows from top to bottom. Individualism It refers to degree of interdependence in society by members. Here, India score is 48 whereas UK score is 89. So, it is stated that Indian society consist of both individualist and collectivist traits (Nonis, 2017). In collectivist people action is influenced by family, friends, etc. In UK there exists only individualist trait in people among society. (De Mooij, 2015). Masculinity In this there are two things that is Masculine and feminine. Masculine indicate that society is driven by competition and success while feminine means society care for others and quality of life. Therefore, India score is 56 and UK is 66. Hence, Indian culture is masculine where religious philosophies are followed and people focus on success and achievement. Likewise, in UK as well society is driven by competition. 5
Uncertainty index The uncertainty index means that the future is not known by society. The member of society feels threatened by any uncertain event and try to avoid it. India score is 40 where UK is 35. Indian society do not settle into rules as it is said that nothing is impossible in India. People are not driven to take action or initiatives. (De Mooij, 2015). Long term orientation It means how society tries to link past goals with present and future. In this goal is categorised differently it is known as normative society. In this both country score is 51 which is intermediate. Indian believe on concept of Karma. Furthermore, the people have high tolerance in the world. often Hinduism is considered as major religion of nation. Indulgence Indulgence means the extent to which people control their desires and impulses. The weak control is called indulgence and strong is called restraint. Here, India score is low that is 49 as compared to UK that is 69 (Rajaand Agrawal, 2017). This means Indian society have tendency of pessimism. The people do not focus on spending leisure time and are restricted by social norms. But in UK people likes to spend leisure time and are not bounded by social norms. However, it is analysed there are several similarities between all three models. It is found that in all focus is on how culture is defined in terms of high and low context. This mean perspective taken is to find out gap between cultural dimensions. Moreover, it state that how people accept change in society.(De Mooij, 2015). RELEVANCE AND CONCLUSION The cultural models are significant in analysing cross culture among countries. Its relevancy in 21stcentury is that it gives insight about what type of culture is followed. Beside this, companies are able to market products in culture ways. However, cultural diversity and challenges are identified. It enables in developing strategies. Moreover, businesses are able to identify that how culture impact on marketing of products. Thus, behaviour of people is determined. In addition, company find out barriers like cultural, language, etc. Apart from it, when business overcome cultural barriers, they are able to gain competitive advantage. For example- in UK and India religion is major difference, thus it plays vital role in how people 6
perceive company marketing. Other than it, through marketing communication barriers are identified and overcome. (De Mooij, 2015). However, in 21stcentury marketing is highly influenced with culture. This is because people behaviour changes with values, ethics, beliefs, etc. Thus, cultural model are used in marketing various aspects of culture is considered. Also, by understanding people review a relationship is developed (Salzberger,Sinkovicsand Holzmüller,2015).It can be done through marketing. For that various strategies can be used to deliver right content to people. Hence, these models sre highly relevant in 21stcentury as it helps in understanding people behavior in context of marketing. CONCLUSION From report it is concluded that there Hofstede dimension is framework used to compare cross culture. By comparing India and UK culture it is stated that Indian culture emphasis on religious views and norms. The power distance score is high than UK which means unequal distribution of power. Also, in UK people are not interdependent on society. Moreover, India is masculine as compared to UK. Besides, in long term orientation both countries score is equal. Indian people are restricted by social norms. There are various approaches and models used by business to analyse cross culture like Hofstede, Hall and Hall, Wills, etc. It gives insight to determine their behaviour and how it influence on marketing. In 21stcentury relevance of these models is it helps in analyzing relationship between marketing and how it impacts on culture of people. 7
Secure Best Marks with AI Grader
Need help grading? Try our AI Grader for instant feedback on your assignments.
REFERENCES Books and journals de Mooij, M. and Beniflah, J., 2017. Measuring cross-cultural differences of ethnic groups within nations: Convergence or divergence of cultural values? The case of the United States.Journal of International Consumer Marketing,29(1), pp.2-10. De Mooij, M., 2015. Cross-cultural research in international marketing: clearing up some of the confusion.International Marketing Review,32(6), pp.646-662. Hoppner, J.J., Griffith, D.A. and White, R.C., 2015. Reciprocity in relationship marketing: A cross-cultural examination of the effects of equivalence and immediacy on relationship quality and satisfaction with performance.Journal of International Marketing,23(4), pp.64-83. Lombardo, R., Beh, E.J. and Guerrero, L., 2019. Analysis of three-way non-symmetrical association of food concepts in cross-cultural marketing.Quality & Quantity,53(5), pp.2323-2337. Nonis, S.A., 2017. GLOBAL AND CROSS-CULTURAL MARKETING.THE ASSOCIATION OF COLLEGIATE MARKETING EDUCATORS LITTLE ROCK, AR MARCH 9-10, 2017, p.40. Raja, S. and Agrawal, R., 2017. Cross-Cultural validation of the perceived brand greenness scale. InCreating Marketing Magic and Innovative Future Marketing Trends(pp. 1169-1183). Springer, Cham. Salzberger, T., Sinkovics, R. and Holzmüller, H., 2015. Problems of equivalence in cross- cultural marketing research. InProceedings of the 1997 Academy of Marketing Science (AMS) Annual Conference(pp. 74-78). Springer, Cham. Online Hofstede model, 2016. [online] Available through : <https://www.hofstede-insights.com/country- comparison/> 8