You are on page 1of 22

Assessing the Movement Toward, and Identifying the Impediments to, Standardized Print Advertising

Mark F. Toncar Alida Kuhn Ilan Alon

ABSTRACT.This research investigates print advertisements in the United States and Germany to assess the degree of standardization of specific advertising elements. The results are compared to prior investigation by Mueller (1990), to learn whether print ads have become more or less standardized in the two countries. The results suggest that although nearly all elements of print advertisements have become substantially more standardized since the Mueller study, there are very few completely standardized ads. The authors discuss legal, image and cultural factors that contribute to the enduring differences in print ads from the two countries. [Article copies available for a fee from The Haworth
Document Delivery Service: 1-800-HAWORTH. E-mail address: <getinfo@ haworthpressinc.com> Website: <http://www.HaworthPress.com> 2002 by The Haworth Press, Inc. All rights reserved.]

KEYWORDS.Standardized advertising, cross-cultural studies, globalization


Mark F. Toncar is Assistant Professor of Business Administration, Lycoming College, Williamsport PA. Alida Kuhn is a student at Lycoming College, Williamsport, PA. Ilan Alon is Assistant Professor of International Business, State University of New York, Brockport, NY. Address correspondence to: Mark F. Toncar, Department of Business Administration, Lycoming College, Williamsport, PA 17701 (E-mail: toncar@lycoming.edu). The authors would like to express their sincere gratitude to the editor and to the anonymous reviewers for their insightful comments and suggestions on previous versions of this manuscript. Journal of International Consumer Marketing, Vol. 14(4) 2002 2002 by The Haworth Press, Inc. All rights reserved. 91

92

JOURNAL OF INTERNATIONAL CONSUMER MARKETING

INTRODUCTION Globalizationthe trend toward a single, integrated, and interdependent global economy impelled by increases in international capital flows, international travel, cross-border exchange of information and ideas, and trade in goods and serviceshas prompted multinational companies to think of the world as one market and to examine common needs within and across societies. The new global landscape has been shaped by organizational and strategic factors, industry structure, environmental (economic, political, technological, etc.) and nationalistic differences. Drivers of globalization include push factors, such as market saturation, competition, and diminishing profits in domestic markets, as well as pull factors such as the liberalization and privatization of economic systems, the democratization of political systems, and the emergence of multinational regional blocks along with the newly industrialized countries (Alon and McKee 1999). Cost differentials, greater connectivity (fueled to a large extent by the Internet), and emerging global consumer markets have made internationalization easier and more profitable in recent years. Global consumption patterns in emerging nations are converging with those of the West because of global mass media, tourism, immigration, pop culture and the international marketing activities of transnational companies (Ger and Belk 1996). In particular, the youth market is increasingly integrated because its life is set in the context of greater globalization compared to the older generations. A seminal article by Levitt (1983) examined the globalization of markets and its impact on organizations internationalization strategy. Levitt suggested that global commonalities, driven by advances in technology and communications have led to the standardization of products, manufacturing, and institutions of trade and commerce. These arguments have been echoed by Yip (1989, 1997) among others. Proponents of a standardized global approach envisioned an environment in which worldwide consumers with homogenized tastes and lifestyles can be satisfied with a single product and reached with a single message (Mueller 1990): a world in which the relentless pursuit of production efficiency, low cost, and reliable products overwhelms idiosyncratic differences among countries and cultures. Globalization to these individuals is nearly synonymous with modernization, integration, homogenization, westernization/Americanization, progress, efficiency, growth, and opportunities. The globalization of markets has created a multitude of complex socio-economic and policy problems that have led to debates and discussions on the impact of globalization on the welfare of society and on its desirability by the citizenry of the less affluent world (Robertson 1992; Barber 1995; Featherstone 1995; Ger and Belk 1996; Friedman 2000). The newly formed global material

Toncar, Kuhn, and Alon

93

culture has led to social discontent, socioeconomic inequality and polarization, consumer frustrations, stress, and threats to the environment, the working conditions, and living standards in developing countries (Ger and Belk 1996). Also, the new global arena is marked by a plurality of cultures, nationalities, ethnicities, religions, and identities, which have led to particularistic and relativistic interpretations of reality (Robertson 1992). The nexus of globalization, therefore, is a juxtaposition of competing, often opposing, paradigms: traditional versus modern, idealism versus materialism, relativism versus universalism, young versus old, connected versus disconnected, localism versus globalism, the olive tree versus the Lexus, Jihad versus McWorld, heroic life versus everyday life. Firms doing business globally or regionally must ultimately address the globalization issue as it relates to their own marketing strategy. Some, heeding the call of Levitt and others have sought to standardize all aspects of their marketing strategy, with varying degrees of success. However, some business strategists have argued that the physical and cultural differences among peoples of the world are far too deeply ingrained to be swept away by the appeal of low cost products (Douglas and Wind 1987). They cite the enduring difficulties encountered by global organizations trying to implement a standardized marketing strategy including differences in physical stature, values, climate, and political/legal environments. Still others, recognizing the environmental diversity as well as the benefits of a global business strategy, have developed hybridized approaches to market entry, such as franchising and cross border strategic alliances, and international marketing strategies embodying various levels of standardization. Many Japanese businesses, for example, have pursued a strategy of glocalization: global production networks supported by local marketing efforts (Robertson 1992). Yip (1997) found that Japanese companies prefer to globalize their brand, but to localize and adapt distribution and selling. The home-market orientation of companies can lead to various approaches to internationalization. Companies conceptualization of globalization will impact their perceptions of unique global and local market segments with common needs, in which not only are differing degrees of standardization possible, but also each element of the marketing mix can be standardized or customized to varying degrees (Mueller 1996). Balancing the forces of globalization with those of localization, Yip (1992) suggested that managers identify elements that can be successfully standardized through a careful analysis of industry conditions, combined with a cost-benefit analysis and a thorough understanding of the different ways that a globalization strategy can be used. The industry conditions in Yips analysis are represented by four groups of industry globalization drivers,market drivers, cost drivers, government drivers and competitive drivers. These driv-

94

JOURNAL OF INTERNATIONAL CONSUMER MARKETING

ers are uncontrollable conditions that determine the potential for globalization in a marketplace. Within the constraints of the globalization drivers are five global strategy levers,the dimensions of strategy that can be adjusted in terms of the degree of globalization. The five global strategy levers are: market participation, products and services, activity location, marketing and competitive moves. Each lever can be set along a continuum of standardization and customization, although not every aspect of each lever need be identical in terms of the degree of standardization. That is to say, a standardized brand does not dictate a standardized positioning strategy or promotion strategy. This research focuses on the standardization of one element of the marketing strategy, print advertising. Advertising has been characterized as the element of the marketing mix most resistant to standardization (Boddewyn, Soehl and Picard 1986). To be effective, advertising must be consistent with the cultural norms of its viewers. Consumers respond in terms of their culture, its style, feelings, value systems, attitudes, beliefs, and perceptions (Cateora and Graham 1999, p. 481). Yet, there are enormous potential benefits to standardizing an advertising message, in terms of decreased production costs and enhanced brand image consistency. The purpose of this research is to investigate what advertisers are actually doing with regards to their global print advertising strategies and to examine whether the degree of print advertising standardization has changed over the last decade. Based on prior work by Mueller (1990), we look at actual advertisements placed in magazines in the United States and Germany, and assess the degree of standardization evident in the ads. We then compare our results with Muellers, to give some indication of how print advertising practice has changed with regards to the standardization issue. Finally, we move beyond identifying how print ads differ in the two countries to a discussion of why these differences endure. PREVIOUS RESEARCH This research is based largely on Muellers (1990) study that investigated the degree of standardization of advertising message elements among advertisements in the U.S., Germany and Japan. Muellers work was chosen for three reasons. First, we wanted to compare current data with a previous study that was approximately 10 years old. Our rationale was simple; we wanted a comparison with a study that was current enough to be relevant, yet dated enough that changes in advertising practice over time would be discernable. Second, we wanted our analysis to compare two western countries, similar in the degree of economic development and the sophistication of advertising practice. In this respect, Germany represents an excellent choice since it is a

Toncar, Kuhn, and Alon

95

world economic center in its own right, and represents a substantial transnational military, political, social and economic influence. And third, since one of the authors is a native German, Muellers work seemed especially appropriate. Mueller solicited from advertisers and advertising agencies samples of campaigns for U.S. consumer products targeted toward consumers in both the U.S./German and the U.S./Japanese markets for the time period 1985-1987. Included in her analysis were both television and print ads from the three respective countries. Her results suggest: 1. Standardization had not yet taken hold in multinational advertising in the late 1980s. 2. Across both media, product name, packaging and product version were most often standardized. Creative aspects, such as theme, slogan, models and spokespersons used and visual/background scenes, were less likely to be standardized. 3. While some elements are being standardized, specialization of message elements still plays a central role in communicating with foreign audiences (Mueller p. 130). The current investigation uses Muellers work as a baseline, to consider how advertising practice has changed in the intervening years since that study was completed. Through a careful comparative analysis, we will identify message elements that have become substantially more or less standardized since the publication of Muellers research. And although comparisons of replicated research are difficult, a restrained interpretation of the data will provide useful information to practitioners and academics alike. PART ONE: REVISITING THE U.S.-GERMANY ANALYSIS There are important differences between the current study and the Mueller study. First, Mueller considered both print and television ads from Germany, Japan and the Untied States. We consider only print advertisements and only from Germany and the United States. Second, advertisers and agencies provided Muellers advertisements. We chose instead to more carefully control our sample through fieldwork. We chose five magazine titles targeting a variety of audiences. The U.S. magazines chosen were Business Week, Cosmopolitan, Marie Claire, Mens Health and Playboy. German editions of Cosmopolitan, Marie Claire, Mens Health and Playboy were used in the analysis along with Wirtschafts Woche, a German business weekly.

96

JOURNAL OF INTERNATIONAL CONSUMER MARKETING

During the summers of 1998 and 1999, American and German magazines were collected by the authors, one in the U.S., the other in Germany. We identified ads, one page or larger, for products or organizations that appeared in both a German and an American publication. For an ad pair to be included, the ads had to be promoting the same product, or both had to be corporate ads, promoting no specific product. We did not restrict the comparison to ads appearing in the same magazine genre (comparisons between an ad appearing in an U.S. Cosmopolitan and a German Playboy, for example, would have been appropriate). All but four ad pairs consisted of ads that appeared in both German and U.S. magazines of the same genre. This procedure yielded a total of 54 product/company advertisement pairs representing 18 different product categories. The ads and their sources appear in the appendix. One author, a native German fluent in English, translated the German ads. The authors then independently coded the ad pairs for their degree of standardization using the instrument developed by Mueller. Eleven message elements were coded on a scale of 1 to 5 for the degree of standardization. The lower the number, the more standardized the element in the pair of ads. The elements were product packaging, product name, product version, theme, slogan, headline, subhead, body copy, models/spokespersons, visuals/background, and product attributes highlighted. Differences in coding were resolved by discussion. A wide variety of products were featured in the ads. These included perfume, hair colorant, diamond necklace, diamond ring, cigarettes, skin moisturizing cream, motorcycles, cologne, clothing, compact disc recorders, document services, marketing services, telecommunications, insurance, and information technology services, among others. Fourteen of the ad pairs were found in issues of Marie Claire, 14 in Mens Health, 10 in Cosmopolitan, six in Playboy, and six in Business Week-Wirtschafts Woche. The remaining four ad pairs were found in Marie Claire in one country and Mens Health in the other. RESULTS: A CAUTIOUS COMPARISON Tables 1 and 2 summarize the results of our coding, along with Muellers results. A comparison of the studies provides some interesting similarities as well as intriguing differences. The Similarities Overall, there is substantial similarity between the studies in terms of which elements are the most likely to be fully standardized. The four elements most likely to be fully standardized in the Mueller study (product name, packaging,

Toncar, Kuhn, and Alon

97

TABLE 1. Percentage of Print Ads Fully Standardizing Specific Elements


Element Product Name Product Packaging Product Version Theme Slogan Models/Spokespersons Subhead Attributes Highlighted Headline Visuals/Background Body Copy Percent Fully Standardized Current Study 87.0 63.0 63.0 61.1 29.6 51.9 33.3 13.0 48.1 27.8 3.7 Percent Fully Standardized Mueller Study 90.0 23.3 53.3 13.3 3.3 6.6 0.0 6.6 10.0 0.0 0.0

TABLE 2. Degree of Standardization Presented Using Means


Element Product Packaging Product Name Product Version Theme Slogan Headline Subhead Body Copy Models/Spokespersons Visuals/Background Attributes Highlighted Grand Mean
1

Mean Current Study1 1.22 1.24 1.89 2.05 2.00 3.24 2.88 3.86 3.53 3.41 3.08 2.58

Mean Mueller Study2 2.88 1.19 1.81 3.25 4.50 4.19 5.00 4.00 4.38 4.38 3.00 3.51

Difference in Means * 1.66 20.05 20.08 1.21 2.50 0.95 2.13 0.14 0.85 0.97 20.08 1.42

Means based on a 5 point scale ranging from 1 (German element is very similar to U.S. element) to 5 (German element is not similar at all to U.S. element). 2 Mean scores taken from Mueller (1990), Table 2 (page 128), column 3. * Positive scores indicate that the element has become more standardized.

version and advertising theme) were also the most likely to be fully standardized in the current study. Consistent with Muellers results, the product-specific elements of the advertisements remain the most likely to be completely standardized (See Table 1). Product name (87.0%), product packaging (63.0%), and product version (63.0%) were the three elements that were most often fully standardized. This

98

JOURNAL OF INTERNATIONAL CONSUMER MARKETING

is no surprise, since as recognized by Mueller, decisions related to these elements are often made independently of and prior to, advertising decisions. Most of the creative elements least standardized in the Mueller study were also the least standardized in the current study. These include body copy, visuals and background, subheads, slogans and attributes highlighted. Of these, the body copy continues to be the least likely element to be standardized, with only two (3.7%) of the 54 ads having standardized body copy. Turning to a comparison of the degree of standardization, rather than the amount of complete standardization, (See Table 2), our results suggests that, consistent with the Mueller study, product packaging, product name and product version continue to be the most standardized message elements, while visuals/backgrounds, models/spokespersons and body copy remain far less likely to be standardized. Returning to Table 1, the current data suggest a strong movement toward increased standardization of nearly all message elements. Mueller found that only two of the 11 message elements, product name (90%) and product version (53.3%) were completely standardized in more than 25% of the print advertisements. In the current study, that number is nine. In the Mueller study, only five elements out of 11 were completely standardized in 10% or more of the ads. In the current study, that number is 10. In the current study, five of the 11 elements (nearly one-half) were completely standardized in more than 50% of the ads, compared to two in the Mueller study. All of the creative elements are more standardized in the current study. The significance of these observed differences was evaluated using the Wilcoxon signed ranks test which indicated that a significantly larger percentage of advertising elements in the current study were fully standardized (z = 2.85; p = .004). This conclusion is evident from Table 2 as well. The difference in the mean scores of the two studies suggests substantial movement toward standardization in at least seven of the 11 elements. Three are more similar by two scale points or more and seven by at least one scale point. The creative elements are also becoming more standardized. In terms of the magnitude of change in cell means from the Mueller study to the current study, three of the four largest changes were among creative elements. These include the largest change, 2.50 (slogan) and the second largest, 2.13 (subhead). Finally, a comparison of the grand means of columns 2 and 3 of Table 2 is illustrative. The grand mean can be cautiously interpreted as a crude measure of the overall standardization of advertising across all message elements. On a scale of 1 to 5, with lower numbers indicating a greater degree of standardization, Muellers data had grand mean of 3.51. The current study grand mean is 2.58. Using the Wilcoxon signed ranks test, the difference among the two groups is significant (z = 2.40; p = .016), offering support for the proposition

Toncar, Kuhn, and Alon

99

that print advertisements in the U.S. and Germany are becoming more standardized. A further test of means suggests that the greatest movement toward standardization has occurred among the creative elements of print ads. A Wilcoxon signed ranks test using only the eight creative elements yielded significant differences among the sample means (4.09 versus 3.01; z = 2.38; p = .017), while a paired sample t-test using only the non-creative elements indicated no significant differences (1.96 versus 1.45; z = 1.30; p = .469). A paired sample t-test was used in this instance because the sample size (n = 3) renders a signed rank test meaningless. However, due to the small sample size, this last analysis is especially sensitive to Type II errors, in which the statistical test may not reveal significant differences when in fact, such differences do exist. DISCUSSION: A CAREFUL INTERPRETATION A cautious interpretation of the data yields important observations regarding how print advertising has evolved since the mid 1980s. The movement toward globalization in the world economy is reflected in the print advertising of the United States and Germany. Most notably, there has been a clear movement toward increased standardization of nearly all elements of print advertising. This is evident in Table 1, which shows that the number of fully standardized message elements has increased in 10 of 11 categories. This is also evident in Table 2, which shows that the degree of standardization of each element has increased in all 11 categories, with seven of the 11 changes a full scale point or more. Finally, a comparison of the grand means of Table 2 also suggests movement toward increased standardization. The greatest movement toward standardization has been among the creative elements, notably the slogan and theme of print ads. There are several explanations for this. First, the non-creative elements were already relatively standardized at the time of Muellers study. Further standardization of these elements may be difficult, as some product adjustments are often necessary to comply with physical or legal requirements in host countries. Second, the emphasis on a standardized theme may be a reflection of advertisers increasingly global viewpoint, in which markets are defined less in geographic terms, and more in terms of the common needs that products satisfy across cultures, countries and continents. This may reflect the concept of pattern advertising; standardizing the what, while customizing the how. Global organizations may seek to develop a uniform, unified theme for their world-wide promotion, yet realize the necessity to modify the message based on social, cultural or legal considerations.

100

JOURNAL OF INTERNATIONAL CONSUMER MARKETING

A third explanation lies in the increasing popularity of Integrated Marketing Communications (IMC). Global marketers are increasingly making use of a variety of media outlets and promotional alternatives, and coordinating these activities for maximum exposure and effectiveness. Consequently, advertisers are developing unified promotional strategies, employing consistent themes, slogans and personalities, across media. This may be viewed essentially as standardization of advertising and promotion across media, rather than across markets. However, the end result is an increased standardization in both media and markets. The More Things Chang e... The data suggests that print advertisements have become more standardized since the mid-1980s. However, that does not imply that continued standardization is inevitable or desirable. In spite of the cost savings associated with standardized advertising, and the value of delivering a consistent worldwide message, only eight of the 54 advertisements (14.8%) in the current study were completely standardized. This compares with two out of 16 (12.5%) ads in the Mueller study. It is an interesting paradox that although most comparisons indicate that print advertising has become more standardized, the percentage of fully standardized ads has remained virtually the same. Certain elements of print ads seem to defy standardization. Body copy, the attributes highlighted and visual and background elements seem particularly resistant to standardization. While it is useful to see that advertising practice has changed since the mid-1980s, it is more useful to learn how and why. The next section of this paper will address these questions through a careful reexamination of the data used in this study. PART TWO: FACTORS THAT INFLUENCE THE STANDARDIZATION OF PRINT ADS In this section, we first investigate whether the type of product advertised influences the degree of print ad standardization. We then look at the tangible differences among ad pairs to learn how, from an execution standpoint, the ad pairs differed. Finally, we consider these differences in terms of the less tangible factors that underlie them. The Influence of Product Type on the Standardization of Print Ads To investigate how product type may influence the decision to standardize specific message elements in this study, we chose to categorize each product

Toncar, Kuhn, and Alon

101

advertised into one of the four quadrants of the FCB (Foote, Cone, Belding) matrix. The FCB matrix categorizes products along two dimensions: the importance of the decision (Involvement) and whether the decision is based on thinking or feeling. Previous research suggests that the FCB matrix can be a useful product classification tool both in the U.S. (Zaichkowsky 1987; Ratchford 1987) and in other countries (Wood 1986). The authors independently classified each product into one of the four quadrants of the FCB matrix. Of the 54 products, 11 were placed in quadrant 1 (high involvement, thinking), 40 in quadrant 2 (high involvement feeling), one in quadrant 3 (low involvement thinking) and two in quadrant 4 (low involvement feeling). Since quadrants 1 and 2 contained over 90% of all products, only these products were considered in our analysis. Analysis of variance was used to investigate the relationship between the FCB quadrant and the standardization of each message element. Four of the 11 elements were significantly related to the FCB quadrant of the advertised product. In all four cases, high involvement feeling products were more standardized than high involvement thinking products. This was true for headlines (1.63 versus 4.30; F(1,46) = 42.55; p = .000), subheads (1.93 versus 3.67; F(1,33) = 7.82; p = .009), theme (1.45 versus 2.55; F(1,49) = 10.02; p = .003), and models/spokespersons (2.00 versus 4.43; F(1,41) = 11.64; p = .001). The use of visuals was also more likely to be standardized for high involvement feeling products than for high involvement thinking products, and this relationship was marginally significant (2.45 versus 3.36; F(1,49) = 2.99; p = .091). Although the sample size is small, and the products are not uniformly distributed among all quadrants of the FCB grid, our results suggest that the type of product may influence the degree of standardization of print advertising for that product. Among high involvement products, those products that are largely emotional purchases appear far more amenable to standardized print advertising than products that are more rational purchases. The Tangible Differences Between U.S. and German Print Ads We began this analysis by identifying all elements of all ad pairs which were scored as either a 4 or a 5, indicating that, for the executional element involved, the ads were highly unstandardized. Thirty-two of the ad pairs contained at least one element that had been scored a 4 or 5. Eighty-eight elements in all were identified. Some ads differed in only one executional element, while others differed in as many as eight. The tangible differences among the executional elements in the ad pairs were considerable and varied. In some cases, the entire tone and message of the ad seemed to be different. In others, only one element, such as the headline

102

JOURNAL OF INTERNATIONAL CONSUMER MARKETING

was altered. Visual differences often included the use of different models or background. Copy differences related to the length of copy and the type of information contained in the copy. We observed the following general differences between the U.S. and German ads. 1. The German ads contained more text, and supplied more information than the U.S. ads. 2. The German ads focused on tangible product features and the benefits of the features, often including detailed explanations. The U.S. ads were more general and often provided vague and intangible benefits, as well as less information. 3. The German ads stressed functionality, quality and satisfaction. The same U.S. ads focused on self-gratification and used more emotional appeals. 4. U.S. ads stressed individual accomplishment and freedom as values worthy of reward. These appeals were not evident in German ads. The results suggest that the German ads were generally more objective and informational than the U.S. ads, providing detailed information about tangible features and functions of the products. These conclusions, while interesting, do not provide any insight as to why these differences endure. But a careful examination of each executional difference does yield informative insights. Underlying Factors The results of the content analysis suggest that there are three factors that account for most of the differences in the executional elements of U.S. and German print ads. These factors are: (1) Legal, (2) Image, and (3) Cultural. Each is described below. 1. Legal Factors. There are legal issues that require print ads to be altered. These can be divided into two categories; direct and indirect legal factors. Direct legal factors include regulations that control the creative content of a print ad. These include regulations and prohibitions that an advertiser is subject to in one country but not in another. For example, while comparative advertising is widely used in the U.S., and encouraged by the Federal Trade Commission, the practice is illegal in Germany. This would no doubt impact the creative execution of a German print ad of a U.S.-based advertiser accustomed to utilizing this message tactic in the U.S. This was not an issue in this study, however. None of the U.S. ads used in our analysis used comparative advertising. Germanys regulation regarding promotion and advertising is a mixture of judicial rules and voluntary guidelines developed by various industry associations. The law against unfair competition in Germany allows competitors to bring suit if advertising violates good manners (U.S. Department of State,

Toncar, Kuhn, and Alon

103

1999). Consequently, advertisers tend to make more factual and less dramatic claims regarding their products. Indirect legal factors refer to legal issues peripheral to the ad, but relevant to the product in the ad. For example, ad pair number 12, for Kawasaki Motorcycles, contained substantially different appeals in the two ads. The U.S. ad focused primarily on the product, and the feeling that ownership of the product will give the user. Product features are mixed in with rich, vivid descriptions. The ad ends with the headline, let the good times roll. The German ad also utilizes evocative imagery. The solid cruiser. Freedom. It awakes drivers instincts. But the ad copy is largely devoted to explaining that potential owners need not obtain a 1" license to drive it, and that anyone who received an automobile driving license before April 1, 1980 can simply drive it without any special licensing. In Germany, specific licenses are required to operate motorcycles of different sizes (1, 1a, 1b, 3). This, coupled with the fact that these driving licenses are quite expensive, relative to a U.S. driving license, make this information important to include in a German print ad for the Kawasaki. The differences between the ads in this ad pair are at least in part due to different motorcycle licensing and regulation practices in the respective countries. Legal issues will continue to be an important consideration for advertisers considering standardized messages. However, as the European Union continues toward increased political unification, the issue should become less relevant for pan-European advertising strategies. The European Commission issued a Green Paper in May, 1996 outlining the Commissions plan to establish a coherent policy for all forms of commercial communication, including direct marketing, advertising, sales promotion, public relations and sponsorship. The Commission believed that regulatory differences in member countries inhibited the development of a truly open internal market. The Internal Market Council of the European Union adopted most of the proposals of the Green Paper in May, 1998. Subsequent actions have resulted in limited progress however. The EC Expert Group on commercial communications has met several times but thus far has only considered issues of price discounting and premiums. While a European advertising policy may emerge, it has not yet done so (EASA 2000). 2. Image Factors. Products that have a consistent image across countries are more amenable to standardized advertising. However, many products, though popular in a variety of countries, do not have a consistent image, and are purchased to satisfy different needs in different countries. A case in point is ad pair number 13, for Harley Davidson Motorcycles. In the United States, Harley Davidson has a powerful meaning. It is freedom, rebellion, individualism. The last American cowboys are Harley owners. For many, Harley Davidson is not just a brand, it is a way of life. This image taps into a specific market in the

104

JOURNAL OF INTERNATIONAL CONSUMER MARKETING

U.S., individuals who hold strong values, and identify Harley Davidson strongly with those values. This image is exemplified by headlines such as My older brother has a Harley. Mom told me his name is Dave. In Germany, however, the Harley Davidson brand image is quite different. Harley Davidson means prestige, the best that a motorcycle can get. A superior quality American product. It is no surprise then that the U.S. and German Harley Davidson ads are markedly different. Unlike the U.S. ad, which celebrates the rebellious, renegade individuality, the German ad emphasizes the prestige and uniqueness of owning a Harley Davidson, and seems to suggest to readers that they not let their lives slip away without owning one. When a product has a consistent image across countries, and can be considered a regional or world brand, standardized advertising may be appropriate. But when a product means different things in different countries, buying motives are more complex and less uniform. Standardization in these conditions seems an ineffective strategy. However, it is also important to recognize the role that advertising plays in creating product meanings, not just reinforcing them. One objective of a global advertising strategy may be to develop a consistent product meaning across multiple cultures and countries. This is a nontrivial matter because product attributes and benefits are viewed through cultural filters that give multiple meanings to material goods across cultures. 3. Cultural Factors. Many differences between German and U.S. print advertising copy can be traced to enduring differences in German and American culture. These differences manifest themselves as either surface characteristics, such as cultural artifacts and traditions, or as underlying dimensions of culture. Differences in traditions often result in different advertising tactics. Differences in the courtship rituals in the U.S. and Germany are evident in ad pair 6, for a DeBeers diamond ring. In the U.S. it is customary for a couple to complete an often prolonged engagement, prior to marriage. A cultural artifact of this engagement period is the engagement ring; a diamond ring which is expected to cost the equivalent of two months of the suitors salary. This cultural tradition is well understood in the U.S. and the diamond ring holds special significance in American culture. In Germany, however, it is unusual for couples to become formally engaged prior to marriage, and if they do, this bond is generally signified with a simple ring, similar to an American wedding band. A diamond ring does not have the symbolic value in Germany that it does in the U.S. This is reflected in the product advertising. The U.S. ad features the ring as the central element of the ad. The ad copy is emotional, evocative and self-centered. The German ad is wordy, very informative and stresses the quality and value of the investment. The focus of the advertisement is a smiling, beautiful woman, who happens to be wearing a diamond ring. Artifacts and traditions are an outgrowth of culture. And when one exam-

Toncar, Kuhn, and Alon

105

ines the fundamental differences in U.S. and German culture, it seems clear that culture can explain many of the enduring differences in print advertising between the countries. Hofstede (1980) suggests that cultures vary along four basic dimensions. These dimensions are: individualism/collectivism, power distance, uncertainty avoidance and sex role differentiation. And although Hofstedes work is based upon research conducted using only IBM employees in a variety of countries, it has been widely used in prior research to investigate cultural issues. Table 3 summarizes the scores of both the U.S. and Germany for the four dimensions. As indicated in Table 3, the U.S. and Germany are quite similar along the dimensions of power distance and sex role differentiation. However, the values for the dimensions of individualism/collectivism and uncertainty avoidance are substantially different for the two countries. U.S. culture is more individualist than Germany, as well as more tolerant of uncertainty. If enduring cultural differences contribute to enduring advertising execution differences, these differences should be evident along these two dimensions. The content analysis suggests that this is, in fact, the case. German ads tend to be more wordy, contain more factual claims, and discuss product features and benefits far more than American ads. An example of this is ad pair 20, for Microsoft. The U.S. ad emphasizes empowerment in both the text and the visuals, and is very brief, making no specific claims. The German ad is wordier, and tells a story, metaphorically related to a series of photographs in the ad. The story is long, straightforward, and rational. This speaks directly to the increased uncertainty avoidance of German culture. The German ads generally contained more information and presented the information in a relatively straightforward way. A second example, which speaks directly to the increased uncertaintyavoidance of German culture, is ad pair 18, for Siebel Service Systems. The U.S. ad features the Chairman of Siebels, and is vague, stressing generalities such as, We do whatever it takes and we are here to serve our customers. The German ad, though identical in many respects to the American ad, features the Chief Financial Officer of Compaq, offering a testimonial. The ad copy is much more specific and informational, addressing a specific problem with
TABLE 3. Hofstede Dimension Scores
Dimension Power Distance Individualism Sex Role Differentiation Uncertainty Avoidance U.S. 40 91 62 46 Germany 35 67 66 65

106

JOURNAL OF INTERNATIONAL CONSUMER MARKETING

comments such as, powerful computer-telephone integration, and Rapid Application Deployment Method. This ad pair is particularly striking in that it obviously is a standardized advertising layout, but with some execution components substantially altered. Still another example is ad pair 22, for Zurich Insurance. The U.S ad is vague, offers no specific benefits, is non-informational, and uses minimal text. The German ad, however, is stark and specific, addressing a relevant problem in a rational a straightforward manner. When one claim or benefit is central to a German ad, it is likely to be a tangible, believable benefit. The same U.S. ad is likely to emphasize general, intangible benefits. An excellent example of this can be found in ad pair 4 for Diors Eau de Dolce Vita perfume. The German and American ads are identical, with the exception of the headline. The German headline read, A Touch of Freshness, a product benefit that is closely tied to a tangible feature of the product. In other words, the scent of the product (a product feature), will result in a specific benefit, a feeling of freshness. The U.S. ad headline reads, Sheer Happiness, a benefit that is far less specific and cannot be specifically related to a single product feature. Differences in the individualism/collectivism dimension are also evident in the ad pairs. In ad pair 11 for Marlboro cigarettes, the U.S. ad features an American cowboy, putting his faithful horse to rest for the evening. The tone of the ad is solitary, featuring a rugged individualist. The German ad features five seemingly American cowboys communing over a campfire at sundown in the wide-open spaces of the American West. This ad pair is particularly interesting in light of the writings of Karl May (1842-1912), one of the most widely read German writers. May often wrote tales of adventures set in the American West, often with heroes of German descent. The use of the cowboy setting in the German ad is better understood within the context of the popularity of Mays writing. Another example can found in ad pair 5, for a DeBeers diamond necklace. The German ad features a smiling beautiful woman, clearly the focus of the ad. The woman is wearing a diamond necklace. The ad communicates happiness, gratitude, and love. The American ad has a very different theme. The necklace is not only the central focus of the ad, all else is a background blur. Instead of happiness, the motive seems to be self-gratification, and is evident in the body copy, which asks, rhetorically, Isnt it time you owned one? This ad, in particular, seems to embody the inherent materialism of American culture. SUMMARY, PART TWO Part two of this study identified several important factors that appear to influence the standardization of print advertising. First, using the FCB grid, we

Toncar, Kuhn, and Alon

107

demonstrate that the product may influence the decision and ability to standardize at least some elements of print advertising. Although the analysis was limited to high involvement products, our results suggest that standardization of print ad elements is more widespread for products that represent emotional buying decisions as opposed to more rational product decisions. We also identify three underlying factors that account for much of the differences in the executional elements of print ads in the U.S. and Germany. These include direct and indirect legal factors, image factors and cultural factors. Differences in the legal environment of the two countries, or of the advertised products image affect the efficacy of standardizing a promotional message. In addition, it seems clear that many advertisers continue to adjust their print advertising in response to enduring cultural distinctions between U.S. and German consumers. DISCUSSION This investigation had two objectives. The first was to assess how far the standardization of print advertising in the U.S. and Germany has progressed since the mid-1980s. We demonstrate that in contrast to Muellers conclusion of a decade ago, standardization of print messages has taken hold in multinational advertising. By all measures, the individual elements of print advertising have become more standardized, indicating that advertisers are increasingly able to take advantage of production and creative efficiencies, and are successfully presenting a uniform product and company image across borders. Increases in globalization between Europe and North America, in general, and between Germany and the U.S., in particular, have brought the consumer base of these regions and countries closer together. In 1998, U.S. direct foreign investment position in Germany was $43 billion, while Germanys investment in the U.S. accounted for about $95 billion (U.S. Department of State, 2001). While Germany is an economic pole in Europe, the U.S. is a growth center in North America. Most of the world trade flows occur between the richest countries in North America, Europe and Asia. This global triangular trade pattern has allowed consumer tastes and preferences to converge in these regions, permitting a greater increase in the standardization of products and promotional material. Germany is among the top 10 trading partners of the U.S. both in terms of imports and exports. Table 4 provides additional statistics about the two countries. While GDP per capita is a traditional measure of economic development, it is also the most important factor in determining trade flows between countries (Linder 1961). Similarities in the economic structure of Germany and the U.S. have stimulated increases in trade and investment between the two coun-

108

JOURNAL OF INTERNATIONAL CONSUMER MARKETING TABLE 4. A Comparison of Germany and the United States
Germany United States of America 28,789 1 46% 228 5.78 24

Per capita GDP (1997) GNP rank Female labor participation Daily Newspaper per thousand Population per yearly tourist Trade share of GDP

25,468 3 42% 317 5.19 46

Statistics were compiled by the authors from the U.S. Department of State (2001), the World Development Report (1999), and the United Nations web site: http://www.un.org/pubs/cyberschoolbus/infonation/e_infonation.htm

tries. We propose that this economic globalization is a major factor contributing to increases in standardization between U.S.-based and German-based advertising over the last decade. Although our results suggest that globalization of consumer tastes is taking place between Germany and the U.S., we also demonstrate that complete standardization remains an elusive goal, if it is a goal at all. Cultural, linguistic, and legal factors have contributed to differences in advertising execution. It is unlikely that advertising messages will ever be completely standardized. This is because the effectiveness of many advertisements rests on specific linguistic tactics that are difficult or impossible to effectively translate. Figures of speech, such as metaphors, hyperbole and alliteration are widely used in U.S. advertising. McQuarrie and Mick (1992) found that 86% of 154 full page print ads used a figure of speech in the headline or subheadlines, and Leigh (1994) found that nearly 75% of a sample of 2,468 print ads used at least one figure of speech in the headline alone. While it may be possible to literally translate the words used in an advertisement from one language and culture to the next, it is not possible to translate the word play, subtle nuances and multiple meanings often associated with advertisements. For example, Nut n Honey is impossible to effectively translate into most languages and preserve the double meaning, and arguably, the effectiveness of the message. The second objective was to identify factors that affect the standardization decision. Toward that end, we provide evidence that the product category appears to be an important consideration. In addition, the study suggests that advertisers continue to recognize and respond to important legal, image, and cultural issues that either encourage or require them to modify their message. This research makes an important contribution to our understanding of global advertising practice. It is clear that at least in the case of the U.S. and Germany, print advertising has become far more standardized since the publication of the Mueller study in 1990. It is equally clear, however, that enduring differences,

Toncar, Kuhn, and Alon

109

even between two western nations, still necessitate the customization of at least some aspect of most print advertisements. LIMITATIONS For this research to make a contribution to our understanding of the issue of standardized advertising, it is important to understand and acknowledge the limitations imposed by the research design. First, this investigation was narrow in scope, examining only 54 pairs of advertisements appearing in five magazines in two Western nations. Time and resource constraints, along with the desire to closely replicate Muellers work, account for this limitation. The narrow scope, along with the small sample size, pose valid questions concerning whether these results are representative of U.S.-German print ads in general, and whether these results can be extended outside the U.S. and Germany to address the standardization issue in other countries. Second, the sampling method we chose was designed to provide a variety of ad pairs targeted toward different audiences. We believe we were successful in accomplishing this objective. However, it is important to recognize that we arbitrarily chose five pairs of magazines from which to draw our sample. We do not claim that our sample is representative of magazine advertisements in the United States and Germany. We did, however, successfully obtain advertisements for a variety of products targeted to several different consumer segments. Third, care must be taken when comparing studies that involve the subjective coding of data. We cannot know whether the coding procedure in the current study is truly comparable with the procedure used by Mueller. Differences in the magnitude of individual elements cannot be meaningfully compared across studies. While we do demonstrate that there appears to be a substantially higher degree of standardization of message elements, these differences may be due to coding procedures, and may not reflect movement toward standardization. This limitation is mitigated by two factors. First, the similarities of the studies, in terms of the percentage of ads that are fully standardized, and in the relative standardization of product versus creative elements, does provide some face validity. Second, although coding issues are a legitimate concern relating to the information contained in Table 2, there are no such concerns relating to the information contained in Table 1. This is because Table 1 summarizes only advertising elements that are completely standardized. Individuals coding the standardization of advertising elements would be far more likely to recognize and consistently code identical objects as being identical objects. And only those elements judged to be identical are included in the Table. Consequently, the data in Table 1 is directly comparable across the two studies. And

110

JOURNAL OF INTERNATIONAL CONSUMER MARKETING

given the consistent results presented in Tables 1 and 2, we are confident that the effects of coding differences are inconsequential. Fourth, it is important to recognize that we used one German judge and one American judge in our analysis. The German judge translated all of the German ads into English before any ad comparisons were made. While we are completely confident that the German ads were accurately translated, research involving language translation is always problematic. Therefore it is prudent to recognize the potentially important limitation of accurate translation. Fifth, a very specific limitation related to the data in Table 1 must be pointed out. Muellers data includes both Germany and Japan, along with the U.S. Conceivably, the standardization scores are lower than in our study because of the inclusion of Japan, a more culturally dissimilar country. However, the data in Table 2, which is quite consistent with Table 1, contains only U.S. and German advertising information. Finally, it is important to note that this research does not address the effectiveness of the advertisements in the two countries. Our purpose was to assess, quantitatively, if there has been movement toward increased standardization of specific advertisements, and to interpret, qualitatively, why the differences that we observed, might endure. We do not suggest that either standardized or non-standardized advertisements are more or less effective. REFERENCES
Alon, Ilan, and David L. McKee (1999), Towards a Macroenvironmental Model of International Franchising, Multinational Business Review, 7 (1), 76-82. Barber, Benjamin (1995), Jihad vs. McWorld, Times Books, New York. Boddewyn, J. J. Robin Soehl and Jacques Picard (1986), Standardization in International Marketing: Is Ted Levitt in Fact Right? Business Horizons, Nov./Dec., p. 69-75 Cateora, Philip R. and John L. Graham (1999) International Marketing, 10th edition, Irwin/McGraw-Hill, Boston. Douglas, Susan P. and Yoram Wind (1987), The Myth of Globalization, Columbia Journal of World Business, 22 (Winter), p. 19-29. European Advertising Standards Alliance (EASA) (2000), http://www.easa-alliance. org/ (retrieved November 15, 2000). Featherstone, Mike (1995), Undoing Culture: Globalization, Postmodernism and Identity, Sage Publications, London. Friedman, Thomas L. (2000), The Lexus and the Oliver Tree (Newly Updated and Expanded Edition), Anchor Books, New York. Ger, Guliz and Russell W. Belk (1996), Id Like to Buy the World a Coke: Consumptionscapes of the Less Affluent World, Journal of Consumer Policy, 19, 271-304. Hofstede, Geert (1980), Cultures Consequences: International Differences in Work related Values, Sage Publications, Beverly Hills, CA.

Toncar, Kuhn, and Alon

111

Leigh, James H. (1994), The Use of Figures of Speech in Print Ad Headlines, Journal of Advertising, 23 (June), 17-34. Levitt, Theodore (1983), The Globalization of Markets, Harvard Business Review, May/June, p. 92-102. Linder, S. B. (1961), An Essay in Trade Transformation, New York: John Wiley and Sons. McQuarrie, Edward F. and David Glen Mick (1996), Figures of Rhetoric in Advertising Language, Journal of Consumer Research, 22 (March), 424-438. Mueller, Barbara (1996), International Advertising: Communicating Across Cultures, Wadsworth, Belmont, CA. ______ (1990), Degrees of Globalization: An Analysis of the Standardization of Message Elements in Multinational Advertising, Current Issues and Research and Issues in Advertising (12), Numbers 1 & 2, James H. Leigh and Claude R. Martin Jr. eds. University of Michigan. Ratchford, Brian T. (1987), New Insights About the FCB Grid, Journal of Advertising Research, 27 (4), 24-38. Robertson, Roland (1992), Globalization: Social Theory and Global Culture, Sage Publications, London. U.S. Department of State (2001), Country Commercial Guide: Germany, http://www. state.gov/www/about_state/business/com_guides/2001/index.html (retrieved December 14, 2000). Wood, Wally (1986), Tools of the Trade, Marketing and Media Decisions, (May), 152-155. World Development Report (1999), Knowledge for Development, Washington D.C.: World Bank. Yip, George S. (1989), Global Strategy . . . In a World of Nations? Sloan Management Review (Fall), 29-42. Yip, George S. (1992), Total Global Strategy, Prentice Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ. Yip, George S. (1997), Patterns and Determinants of Global Marketing, Journal of Marketing Management, (January), 153-165. Zaichkowsky, Judith Lynn (1987), Emotional Aspects of Product Involvement, Advances in Consumer Research, 14, M. Wallendorf and P.F. Anderson, eds., Ann Arbor, MI: Association for Consumer Research, 32-35.

SUBMITTED: July 2000 FIRST REVISION: September 2000 SECOND REVISION: November 2000 ACCEPTED: January 2001

You might also like