Analysis Of Standardization Verses Adaptation

psychoanalysis Of normalization Verses Adaptation sphericization seems to have become the phenomenon that no unrivalled can escape form whether its a small rail line or a big unrivalled. It counterbalance seems to have huge effectuate on our life style. Schaeffer 2003. As defined by Wild et al. (2005, p.6) globalisation is the row toward greater economic, cultural, political, and expert interdependence among national institutions and economies. This reflects that globalization is a phenomenon that encompasses non only military controles but also other factors making up the society Daniels et al. 2007 cumulus 2007. The modern economic landscape has globalization as cardinal of its prominent feature Anthony Pecotich and Steven hospital ward 2007. It is proposed that in coming succession it bequeath be the foreign commercialises that will play the main function for growth of most of the firms Douglas B. Holt, John A. Quelch, and Earl L. Taylor 2004. And this phenomeno n, that seems to have great advert on us all, makes the bases for novel market systems (Craig and Douglas 1996 Ghauri and Cateora 2006). This system makes markets so interdependent that the motion of firm is evaluated on a global rather than national base. (Porter 1986 Ulrike de Brentani, Elko J. Kleinschmidt, and So ren Salomo 2010) . orbiculateization brings with it some(prenominal) purposes to be do, one of which is the calibration or reading of motley aspects of marketing mix (Chung 2003 Walters 1986 -zsomer et al. 1991). A firm when entering a new market can make the choice of either modifying the produce referred to as adaptation or making no change in the product referred to as standardisation (Roger J. Calantone, S. unexciting Cavusgil, Jeffrey B. Schmidt, and Geon-Cheol Shin 2004). A strong noise exists amongst the scholars favoring normalisation in contrast to those esteeming adaptation. (Theodosiou and Leonidou 2003 Ryans et al. 2003)Literature criticismT he disputation over supremacy of adaptation versus standardization runs back for more(prenominal) than one-half a century with Elinder (1961) and Roostal (1963) being pioneer contributors, with their main focus on corporate advertising functions, with the notion of standardization in advertisement which was base on the argument that marketing principles largely remain the same ubiquitously. supranational marketing was first discussed from a wider viewpoint by Bartels (1968) who argued in favor of standardization strategy. Buzzell (1968) spoke of standardization as the standardization of the 4Ps of marketing mix, to wit product, price, place and promotion, crossways b dos. Levitt (1983) proposed this standardization of product worldwide to be one of a key success factor for firms when dismissal global. On the other hatful researchers also train that standardization is an oversimplification which is not effectively operative and true for marketing concepts ( Douglas and Cra ig 1986 Douglas and overturn 1987). These and many other researches bought into blaze the scholarly debate over supremacy of standardization verses adaptation, which is still on-going (Cavusgil et al. 1993 Johnson and Arunthanes 1995 Lages 2000 Shoham 1999 Theodosiou and Katsikeas 2001).The possibleness of economies of plate is considered to be of fundamental importance to the advocates of standardization, as it is argued that standardization brings with it economies of scale and this result in reduction of cost and maximization of profits. (Porter 1985 Porter 1980 Ryans et al. 2003 Shoham and Albaum 1994). parsimoniousness of scale is also accepted to be one of the most probable outcomes of standardization (Buzzell 1968 Douglas and Craig 1986 Levitt 1983 Theodosiou and Leonidou 2003 Yip 1995 -zsomer and Simonin 2004)The advocates of adaptation, on the other hand, question the impact of economies of scale. As Douglas and Wind (1987) claim that distribution cost is more importan t than production cost. knock-down(prenominal) arguments questioning economies of scales influence on promotion have also been demonstrate (Douglas and Craig 1986 Onkvisit and Shaw 1987). Theodosiou and Leonidou ( 2003) take the discussion further by proposing that the central motive of organizations is semipermanent profits which could be achieved through adaptation rather than standardization. nurture inclination that as low price nodes ar habitually not disgrace loyal (Keller 2003 Wind 1986) this raises a big question mark for the firms espousing standardization in the long run (Douglas and Wind 1987 Wind 1986). withal other argument in favor of standardization is the intensification in homogenized take of global customers resulting in an increasing number of similar market segments across countries. This increased in globalization of customers is believed to be made possible by the development of transportation technologies (Levitt 1983). It is argued that the technolo gical advancement results in augmented customer mobility producing global customers with homogenous needs (Cavusgil et al. 2008 Douglas and Wind 1987 Keegan et al. 1987 Theodosiou and Katsikeas 2001). These global customers are even prepared to sacrifice other features of product in order to make grow alike(p) product of high quality and low price (Levitt 1983). And this trend of customers choice is claimed to be the understanding for many products to have universal specifications (Cavusgil et al. 2008). The companies going for standardization influence their suppliers to offer standardized products and this reflect why business to business organizations have to go for standardization (Buzzell 1968 Douglas and Wind 1987 Yip 1989). Similarly Ohmae (1985) discusses the Triad in order to elaborate homogenisation of customers. Triad, which encompasses the European Union, unify States and Japan, seems to be filled with customers having large number of correspondences in their psychog raphic and demographic characteristics and this assemblage of customers is open to globally vigorous companies (Ohmae 1985 Theodosiou and Katsikeas 2001).Beca consumption of the increasing number of these internationally labor consumers with similar needs in terms of product and service features, several global customer segments ,based on behavior rather than religious or political margins, are proposed, by researchers, to be pleased with standardized offerings (Armstrong and Kotler 2007 Cavusgil et al. 2008 Hassan et al. 2003 Hassan and cheat 2005).Whereas Wiechmann and Pringle (1979) claim that there is always friction betwixt home and phalanx markets, this friction could be between the company and its foreign distributor or foreign customer and / or even between home solid ground and host country offices. This friction is result of different environmental discrepancies between the two markets. It is suggested that adaption can help minimize this friction resulting in come apart performance (Shoham 2002 Shoham and Albaum 1994).Another frequently mentioned justification to why international companies should fall out standardization is the technological advancement in communications and information (Buzzell 1968 Jainist 1989 Terpstra and Sarathy 2000 Zou and Cavusgil 2002). there are several channels on television addressable to customers globally via cable and satellites (Elinder 1965 Jobber 2007). In addition to this, international availableness of English language print media can be traced back to decades (Terpstra and Sarathy 2000). to a fault internet has also developed into a vibrant marketing contrivance worldwide (Chaffey et al. 2006 Mohammed et al. 2003). All this presents a global market for standardized advertisement. And it backs Levitts (1983) claim that people would want things promoted on these new technologies. These marketing tools enable and demand the use of standardized marketing strategies (Theodosiou and Leonidou 2003 Zou an d Cavusgil 2002). However, it is also argued that new technology brings with it more flexibility which favor adaptation and a firm can use this to have advantage over its competitors (Douglas and Craig 1986 Douglas and Wind 1987 Shoham 1999).Fairly allied with the homogenization of customers and market segments, mentioned earlier, is the proliferation in regional economic amalgamation, taking place globally. The past times few years have seen an extraordinary spread of regional slyness arrangements. With the most noticeable regional economic amalgamations, till date, to be the pairing American exonerate Trade Agreement (NAFTA) and European Union (EU). It is argued that standardized strategies are most likely to be booming in these areas (Cavusgil et al. 2008 Hill 2007 Theodosiou and Katsikeas 2001 Wild et al. 2005). As these agreements aim to remove trade barriers this intern still internationalization of firms which brings with itself globalization of customers in these integr ated regions (Hill 2007 Wild et al. 2005).Where on one had we find claims in favor of standardization On the other hand Friedman (2000) debates that standardization whitethorn work for limited number of product. Adding on to this claim are Douglas and Craig (1986) litigating that there is no evidence available to support the standardization view. Many scholars have debated that there exists a fairly large residue between the foreign markets and for this reason the marketing strategies should be adjusted consort to the specifications of individual foreign market (Cavusgil et al. 2008 Cavusgil et al. 1993 Czinkota and Ronkainen 2007 Shoham 1995 Terpstra and Sarathy 2000 Theodosiou and Leonidou 2003). Different arguments have been given in favor of adaption some highlighting the variances in the distribution channels (Daniels et al. 2007), objet dart others highlighting the differences in national preferences (Cavusgil et al. 2008 Wind 1986). Such statements have been made by the ad vocates of adaptation in an effort to claim adaptation to be a discontinue strategy. And it has been testified that even the giant scores, like Coca dope and McDonalds, incur numerous adaptation strategies in accordance to their foreign markets (Czinkota and Ronkainen 2007)Analysis and resultPutting it in a nutshell we may say that technological advancement, homogenization of customers worldwide and economic integration pushes organizations to adapt standardization in order to prosper (Buzzell 1968 Cavusgil et al. 1993 Levitt 1983 Sustar 2005). However, on the other hand adaptation proponents are of the view that not only there exist significant differences between customers form different countries but also the technological encroachment in production may even cause eradication to the economies of scale argument. Further proposing that even if it doesnt completely remove the effect of economies of scale it will down the effect to minimal level hence, making adaptation a better suited strategy in the times to come.Although standardization and adaptation are two viewpoints that contradict each other, it is difficult to claim supremacy of one over the other. Both standardization and adaptation have their benefits, yet that does not imply that a strategy useable for one organization in some specific market will prove to be useful for the same organization in another market or may be for a different organization in the same market. There are number of factors that may influence the decision of adaptation of standardisation or Adaptation (Jain 1989). Massive work has been done in order to identify and chock down a list of different factors influencing the decision of selecting adaptation or standardization, in a very general demeanor ( Johnson and Arunthanes 1995 Lages and Montgomery 2004 Lee and Griffith 2004 Theodosiou and Katsikeas 2001). Furthermore, -zsomer et al. (1991) has done a more systematic mull over of these influencing factors. . Cavusgil and Zou (1994) came up with a further simplified description of the aspects that need to be taken into account when making the decision of choosing to move towards standardization or adaptation. This orderly arrangement has been used by number of academics ( Katsikeas et al. 2006 Michell et al. 1998 -zsomer and Simonin 2004).Managerial implicationsAs through the discussion it is clear that both standardization and adaption have their pros and corns and along with a number of other factors influencing the decision of choosing the accurate strategy that will be successful in a detail condition for an organization. For this reason when an organizations decides to go global, their Managers must not think of supremacy of standardization over adaptation or vice versa, rather they need to understand the market they are going in and should also understand their organization along with all the influencing factors in order to decide which strategy, Adaptation or Standardization, would atomic nu mber 82 the organization towards their major goal of being successful, when responding to the process of globalization.LimitationsThe above look at tries to give deeper understanding about the continued under debate egress of standardization verses adaptation. However, due to shortage of time and resources there might be some areas not covered in this paper. Never the less it adds to the lively body of whapledge and further research could be done in order to understand the phenomenon of standardization and adaptation so as to know which strategy will suit in what kind of conditions, for a particular organization, in order to make the organization not only successful nationwide but also across the globe.AAnthony Pecotich and Steven Ward 2007Anthony Pecotich and Steven Ward 2007 international branding, country of origin and expertise An experimental evaluationArmstrong and Kotler 2007Armstrong, Gary and Philip Kotler (2007), merchandising An Introduction (9 ed.). Upper weight do wn River, NJ Pearson Education Inc.BBartels 1968Bartels, Robert (1968), ar Domestic and internationalist merchandising Dissimilar? daybook of marting, 32 (3), 56-61.Buzzell 1968Buzzell, Robert (1968), burn you standardise multinational marketing? Harvard ancestry Review, 46 (6), 102-13.CCraig and Douglas 1996Craig, C Samuel and Susan P Douglas (1996), Developing Strategies for Global Markets An Evolutionary Perspective, Colombia journal of creative activity tune, 31 (1), 70-81.Chung 2003Chung, Henry F L (2003), International Standardization Strategies The Experiences of Australian and newly Zealand Firms Operating in the Greater China Markets, Journal of International market, 11 (3), 48-82.Cavusgil et al. 1993Cavusgil, S unexciting, Shaoming Zou, and G M Naidu (1993), return and Promotion Adaptation in export Ventures An a posteriori Investigation, Journal of International descent Studies, 34 (3), 479- 506.Cavusgil et al. 2008Cavusgil, S Tamer, Gary Knight, and John R Riesenberger (2008), International Business system, Management, and the new-made Realities. Upper turn on River, NJ Pearson Education.Chaffey et al. 2006Chaffey, Dave, Fiona Ellis-Chadwick, Kevin Johnston, and Richard Mayer (2006), Internet merchandising dodge, Implementation and Practice (3 ed.). Harlow Pearson Education Ltd.Czinkota and Ronkainen 2007Czinkota, Michael R and Ilkka A Ronkainen (2007), International selling (8 ed.). Mason, OH Thompson Higher Education.Cavusgil and Zou 1994Cavusgil, S Tamer and Shaoming Zou (1994), Marketing dodging-Performance Relationship An investigation of the Empirical Link in Export Market Ventures, Journal of Marketing, 58 (1), 1-21.DDouglas and Craig 1986Douglas, Susan P and Samuel P Craig (1986), Global Marketing Myopia, Journal of Marketing Management, 2 (2), 155-69.Douglas and Wind 1987Douglas, Susan P and Yoram Wind (1987), The legend of Globalization, Colombia Journal of World Business, 22 (4), 19-29.Daniels et al. 2007Daniels, John D, Lee H Radebaugh, and Daniel P Sullivan (2007), International Business Environments and Operations (11 ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ Pearson assimilator Hall.Douglas B. Holt, John A. Quelch, and Earl L. Taylor 2004Douglas B. Holt, John A. Quelch, and Earl L. Taylor 2004. How global brands competeDaniels et al. 2007Daniels, John D, Lee H Radebaugh, and Daniel P Sullivan (2007), International Business Environments and Operations (11 ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ Pearson Prentice Hall.EElinder 1961Elinder, Erik (1961), How international can advertising be? International Advertiser, 2 (December), 12-16.Elinder 1965Elinder, Erik (1965), How International Can European Advertising Be? Journal of Marketing, 29 (2), 7-11.FFriedman 2000Friedman, Thomas L (2000), The Lexus and the Olive Tree arrangement Globalization. refreshed York, NY Anchor Books.GGhauri and Cateora 2006Ghauri, Pervez and Philip Cateora (2006), International Marketing (2 ed.). Berkshire McGraw-HillEducation.HHassan et a l. 2003Hassan, salah S, Stephen imposture, and Wael Kortam (2003), Understanding the new bases for global market partitioning, Journal of Consumer Marketing, 20 (5), 446-62.Hassan and Craft 2005Hassan, Salah S and Stephen H Craft (2005), Linking global market segmentation decisions with strategic positioning options, Journal of Consumer Marketing, 22 (2), 81-89.Hill 2007Hill, Charles W L (2007), International Business Competing in the Global Marketplace (6th International ed.). New York, NY McGraw-Hill/Irwin.JJain 1989Jain, Subhash C (1989), Standardization of International Marketing Strategy Some look for Hypotheses, Journal of Marketing, 53 (1), 70-79.Johnson and Arunthanes 1995Johnson, Jean L and Wiboon Arunthanes (1995), holy man and actual product adaptation in US exporting firms Market-related determinants and impact on performance, International Marketing Review, 12 (3), 31-46.Jobber 2007Jobber, David (2007), Principles and Practice of Marketing (5 ed.). Maidenhead McGra w-Hill Education.KKeller 2003Keller, Kevin Lane (2003), Strategic Brand Management building, measuring, and managing brand equity (2 ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ Prentice Hall Inc.Keegan et al. 1987Keegan, rabbit warren J, Richard R Sill, and John S Hill (1987), take outability and Adaptability of Products and Promotion Themes in transnational Marketing MNCs in LCDs, Journal of Global Marketing, 1 (1/2), 85-104.Katsikeas et al. 2006Katsikeas, Constantine S, Saeed Samiee, and Marios Theodosiou (2006), Strategy twin and Performance Consequences of International Marketing Standardization, Strategic Management Journal, 27 (9), 867-90.LLevitt (1983)Levitt, Theodore (1983), The Globalization of markets, Harvard Business Review, 61 (3), 92-102.Lages 2000Lages, Luis Felipe (2000), A Conceptual Framework of the Determinants of Export Performance Reorganizing Key Variables and Shifting Contingencies in Export Marketing, Journal of Global Marketing, 13 (3), 29-51.Lages and Montgomery 2004La ges, Luis Felipe and David B Montgomery (2004), Export performance as an antecedent of export commitment and marketing strategy adaptation, European Journal of Marketing, 28 (9), 1186-214.Lee and Griffith 2004Lee, Chol and David A Griffith (2004), The marketing strategy-performance relationship in an export-driven growth economy A Korean illustration, International Marketing Review, 21 (3), 321-34.MMohammed et al. 2003Mohammed, Rafi A, Robert J Fisher, Bernard J Jaworski, and Gordon J Paddison (2003), Internet Marketing Building utility in a Networked Economy (2 ed.). New York, NY McGraw-Hill.Michell et al. 1998Michell, Paul, James Lynch, and Obaid Alabdali (1998), New perspectives on marketing mix computer programme standardisation, International Business Review, 7 (6), 617-34.OOnkvisit and Shaw 1987Onkvisit, Sak and John J Shaw (1987), Standardized International Advertising A Review and Critical Evaluation of the Theoretical and Empirical Evidence, Columbia Journal of World Bus iness, 22 (3), 43-55.Ohmae 1985Ohmae, Kenichi (1985), Triad Power The Coming Shape of Global Competition. New York, NY The Free Press.-zsomer et al. (1991)-zsomer, Aysegul, Muzzafer Bodur, and S Tamer Cavusgil (1991), Marketing Standardisation by Multinationals in an Emerging Market, European Journal of Marketing, 25 (12), 50-61.-zsomer and Simonin 2004-zsomer, Aysegul and Bernard L Simonin (2004), Marketing program standardization A cross country exploration, International Journal of Research in Marketing, 21 (4), 397-419.PPorter 1986Porter, M.E. (1986). Changing Patterns of International Competition. calcium Management Review 289-40 (Winter).Porter 1985Porter, Michael E (1985), Competititve Advantage. New York, NY Free Press.Porter 1980Porter, Michael E (1980), Competitive Strategy. New York, NY Free Press.RRoger J. Calantone, S. Tamer Cavusgil, Jeffrey B. Schmidt, and Geon-Cheol Shin 2004.Roger J. Calantone, S. Tamer Cavusgil, Jeffrey B. Schmidt, and Geon-Cheol Shin 2004 Internat ionalization and the Dynamics of Product Adaptation- An Empirical InvestigationRyans et al. 2003Ryans, John K, David A Griffith, and D Steven White (2003), Standardization/adaptation of international marketing strategy Necessary conditions for the advancement of knowledge, International Marketing Review, 20 (6), 588-603.Roostal 1963Roostal, Ilmar (1963), Standardization of Advertising for Western Europe, Journal of Marketing, 27 (4), 15-20.SSchaeffer 2003Schaeffer, Robert K (2003), Understanding Globalization The Social Consequences of Political, Economic, and Environmental Change (2 ed.). Lanham, MD Rowman Littlefield Publishers, Inc.Shoham 1999Shoham, Aviv (1999), Bounded Rationality, Planning, Standardization of International Strategy and Export Performance A structural Model Examination, Journal of International Marketing, 7 (2), 24-50.Shoham and Albaum 1994Shoham, Aviv and Gerald Albaum (1994), The Effects of Transfer of Marketing Methods on Export Performance an Empirical Exa mination, International Business Review, 3 (3), 219-41.Shoham 2002Shoham, Aviv (2002), Standardization of International Strategy and Export Performance A Meta-Analysis, Journal of Global Marketing, 16 (1/2), 97-120.Shoham 1995Shoham, Aviv (1995), Global Marketing Standardization, Journal of Global Marketing, 9 (1/2), 91-119.Sustar 2005Sustar, Rozana (2005), Standardization of Marketing Mix A Study of Slovenian Firms, Management, 10 (2), 73-88.TTheodosiou and Katsikeas 2001Theodosiou, Marios and Constantine S Katsikeas (2001), Factors Influencing the Degree of International Pricing Strategy Standardization of Multinational Corporations, Journal of International Marketing, 9 (3), 1-18.Theodosiou and Leonidou 2003Theodosiou, Marios and Leonidas C Leonidou (2003), Standardization versus adaptation of international marketing strategy an integrative assessment of the trial-and-error research, International Business Review, 12 (2), 141-71.Terpstra and Sarathy 2000Terpstra, Vern and Ravi S arathy (2000), International Marketing (8 ed.). Chicago, IL Dryden Press.UUlrike de Brentani, Elko J. Kleinschmidt, and So ren Salomo 2010Ulrike de Brentani, Elko J. Kleinschmidt, and So ren Salomo 2010 Success in Global New Product Development Impact of Strategy and the Behavioral Environment of the FirmWWild et al. (2005, p.6)Wild, John J, Kenneth L Wild, and Jerry C Y Han (2005), International Business The Challenges of Globalization (3 ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ Prentice HallWalters 1986Walters, shot G P (1986), International Marketing Policy A backchat of the Standardization Construct and its Relevance for Corporate Policy, Journal of International Business Studies, 17 (2), 55-69.Wiechmann and Pringle 1979Wiechmann, Ulrich E and Lewis G Pringle (1979), Problems that Plague Multinational Marketers,Harvard Business Review, 57 (4), 118-24.Wind 1986Wind, Yoram (1986), The Myth of Globalization, Journal of Consumer Marketing, 3 (2), 23-26.Wild et al. 2005.Wild, John J, Kenneth L Wild, and Jerry C Y Han (2005), International Business The Challenges of Globalization (3 ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ Prentice Hall.YYip 1995Yip, George S (1995), Total Global Strategy. Upper Saddle River, NJ Prentice-Hall.Yip 1989Yip, George S (1989), Global Strategy. In a World of Nations? Sloan Management Review, 31 (1), 29-41.ZZou and Cavusgil 2002Zou, Shaoming and S Tamer Cavusgil (2002), The GMS A Broad Conceptualization on Global Marketing Strategy and its Effect on Firm Performance, Journal of Marketing, 66 (4), 40-56.