Chapter 22. Marketing Through Reconciliation: Global Brand, Local Touch
Fons Trompenaars and Peter Woolliams
Marketing professionals are becoming increasingly aware of the need to take account of culture when working in diverse markets. The issues of branding for different cultures and how to develop a marketing strategy for the global market are current fundamental questions for us all. Based on our recent research with Dr. Charles Hampden-Turner, we can now offer a new and effective proven methodology that addresses these challenges.
Let us first note that fundamental mistakes are still being made even at the most basic level of cultural differences, originating, for example, simply from language. When General Motors introduced the Chevy Nova, it hadn't checked that no va means "no go" in Spanish. Red, representing danger in Western cultures, can send different messages about a product to the Chinese, for whom it can represent success. Similarly, the color yellow in marketing promotions may be offensive to Arabs, yet may convey freshness and summer to Western cultures.
More important than these overt aspects of culture are differences that derive from the subtly different meanings given by different cultures to apparently the same things. For instance, U.S. Americans may purchase a Sony Discman, because it enables them to "listen to their favorite music without being disturbed by others." The Japanese may purchase the same product in order to "listen to their favorite music without disturbing others." The product may be technically identical, but the purchasing motive is different because of the different meanings and priorities given to oneself and other's privacy. Kodak introduced an advertising campaign based on capturing "memories" in the physical form of photographs. In contrast, for European cultures, "memory" is a much more sentimental construct and may be tainted if represented in the explicit format of a photograph that omits the higher levels of the experience. Procter and Gamble successfully developed a new generation of highly absorbent Pampers with the unique selling point that they could be changed less frequently. This approach failed in Japan, where frequent changing of diapers/nappies is perceived as fundamental to keeping baby clean.
Our new marketing paradigm is based on the three R's: recognize, respect, and reconciliation.
- Recognize: While we can easily recognize explicit cultural differences, we may not be aware of these implicit cultural differences. This explains why cultural due diligence is often absent from management agendas and many of the classic marketing models, such as Porter. Thus, the first step is to recognize that there are cultural differences.
- Respect: Different orientations are not right or wrong; they are different. It is too easy to be judgmental about people and societies that give different meanings to their world than we do. Thus, the next step is to respect these differences and accept customers' rights to interpret the world (and our products and marketing efforts) in the way they choose.
- Reconciliation: Because of these different worldviews, we have two seemingly opposing views of the contrasting cultures: those of the seller and those of the buyer. The task of the marketer is to reconcile these seemingly opposing differences.
We can categorize the different dilemmas that arise in each of several dimensions based on our earlier research on cultural differences.[1] These dilemmas include
- universal or particular?
- individualism or communitarianism?
- specific or diffuse?
- neutral or affective?
- achievement or ascription?
- internal or external control?
- time: sequential or synchronic?
Universal or Particular?
Do we follow a single global approach or particularize to each market? The dominant dilemma originating from this dimension is the global–local dichotomy (see Figure 22.1). The question is, Shall we have one standardized approach (identical product range and associated identical marketing support) or shall we go for a local approach (different products and local-based marketing in each destination)? In other words, are our customers best served by becoming nearly globally universal and alike, or by becoming more influenced by particular national or local cultures?
Figure 22.1. The global–local dilemma.
The answer lies in transnational specialization. Here we reconcile the seemingly opposing extremes. We integrate best practice and satisfy customer needs by learning from the diversity of adopting, adapting, and combining the best.
McDonalds successfully achieved this integration by branding the Big Mac universally across the globe. The big M represents the universal corporate identity with standard furnishings and fittings in all their restaurants. Yet, in the Middle East, the Big Mac is a veggie-burger, and it is served with rice rather than fries in the Asiatic. Even smaller local variations are promoted, such as the croquet variant in the Netherlands.
Heineken alters the temperature at which its beer is served to follow local tastes, but also positions its same product differently in different markets—to reflect the different meaning that drinkers ascribe to the product. In Europe, it is sold as "Beer, as meant to be drunk." In the Caribbean, it is positioned as "cosmopolitan." The (almost identical) TV advertisements for each island show the same shots of Paris, London, and Tokyo (to represent the global branding of Heineken), but with an easily recognizable island-specific building or monument to locate the global brand in the local context.
In some situations, the marketing strength derives from the universal world branding. Thus, Coca-Cola is Coca-Cola everywhere and represents the American dream, although ingredient details on the can or bottle may be in a local language. Similarly, British Airways sells safe, reliable, quintessential Englishness, supported by local agents in the destinations it serves.
Individualism or Communitarianism?
This second dimension also gives rise to a number of key dilemmas. Is marketing concerned with satisfying individual customer needs and preferences, or is the focus on creating a trend or fashion that is adopted by the group? Individuals then purchase to show that they have joined the group by following the shared trend.
From the customers' perspective, do we relate to others by discovering what each one of us individually wants, or do we place ahead of this some shared concept to which we can identify and feel part of?
Simply rejecting the other viewpoint or adopting it as a compromise will not yield the best market return. In our new marketing paradigm, we can follow the same logic for each dimension by starting from one extreme but integrating with the needs of the other.
Although marketing to an individualistic culture might see the individual as an end, marketing benefits from a collective arrangement as the means to achieve that end. Conversely, marketing to a communitarian culture sees the group as the target market, yet can use feedback and suggested improvements from individuals. The marketing relationship should be seen as circular. The decision to focus on one end is arbitrary.
Microsoft Windows and its associated office products software offer the benefits of a group approach. Documents can be shared and exchanged because they adhere to common file formats. Yet, individuals can tailor the configuration of their system to satisfy individual preferences, such as the screen zoom-level to meet their individual eyesight capabilities.
Jaguar and Mercedes owner-drivers take pride in being members of their fellow club of drivers of prestige cars (belonging to their peer group). However, when they insert their individual key in the lock of their own car, the seats and driving mirror configure to their own preference, even though someone else may have altered these settings.
At the metalevel, we see how Richard Branson has successfully reconciled the personalities of David and Goliath in the branding of Virgin. He successfully creates public sympathy in favor of the wronged individual confronting the collective assailant (the establishment).
Specific or Diffuse?
What is the degree of involvement of the customer? Do we see the customer as a "punter," someone from whom we can make a fast buck, or is a customer a series of relationships over time? Do we need a relationship first, before he or she becomes customer, or do we easily do business from which a relationship may or not follow?
In our work with British Airways and American Airlines, we can examine how they define their relationship with their customers differently. It is typically American to emphasize "core competencies" and "shareholder value." In contrast, British Airways (and Cathy Pacific) emphasize service: hot breakfasts, champagne, and the like. In a "one-world" alliance, it may appear that the options are limited to the following:
- Serve the "cattle" with Coke and pretzels.
- Serve hot breakfast, champagne, and add in-flight massage and shoeshine (and go bankrupt in the process).
- Compromise and sell the "hot pretzel," thus upsetting (and losing) customers.
Marketing through reconciliation is more than this. It is the craft of defining those specific areas to provide a more personal service and thereby deepen the relationship. Jan Carlson of SAS calls this the "moment of truth." The future success of an alliance depends on one particular reconciliation: the competency of the marketing team to identify those circumstances in which specific moments can be used to deepen the relationship. A single brief 30 second interaction that a passenger has with a member of the cabin crew staff on a long haul flight, can influence their whole perception of the service provided and therefore their decision to stay loyal to the same airline or not. Such brief interactions are 'moments of truth'.
Neutral or Affective?
What part does the display and role of emotion play and/or is the display of emotion controlled? Typically, reason and emotion are linked or combined. When customers express satisfaction (or dissatisfaction), they are trying to find confirmation in their thoughts and feelings—and trying to show they have the same response as others. ("I have the same view of this product or service as you"). Customers whose responses are neutral are seeking an indirect response.
Michael Porter said that Germans don't know what marketing is about. In his American conception, marketing is about showing (overtly) the qualities and features of your product without inhibition. Germans might see this as bragging and the sort of tactics expected from second-hand car dealers. The way you express positive things in Germany needs to be subtler. As Tom Peters said in Atlanta in 1999, "It's cool to be emotional nowadays."
Achievement or Ascription?
Does the customer want a functional product that achieves the utilitarian purpose, or is he or she buying status? You can tell time from a $1 LED digital watch as well as with a $10,000 Rolex Oyster. But, a Rolex Oyster is not simply a watch. It is a symbolic representation of status.
All societies give certain members higher status than others, signaling that unusual attention should be focused on those persons, the products they own and display, and the services they consume.
In achievement-oriented cultures, the emphasis is on performance. In ascribed status cultures, such as Asia, status is ascribed to products that naturally evoke admiration from others, such as high technology and jewelry. The status is less concerned with the functional capabilities of the product.
We can see this dilemma in action between the achieved and ascribed status in the profit-oriented versus nonprofit status of BUPA and reconciled successfully by Val Gooding. Should she set a goal of a 25 percent profit to shareholders to compete on the stock exchange, or make enough return to serve the sick and the weak? To care about people you serve is a precursor to success and you must ascribe status to them. The provident status of BUPA reconciles the need to achieve business growth with providing primary healthcare. Care for your employees through a strong successful business base, and they pass that care to the clients (patients).
Internal or External Control?
Are we stimulated by an inner drive or do we adapt to external events beyond our control? The issue here is to connect the internally controlled culture of technology push (sell what we can make) with the externally controlled world of market pull (make what we can sell).
Nobody will deny the great knowledge and inventiveness of Philips in its technologies and the quality of its marketing. The problem is that these two major areas didn't seem to connect. The push of the technology needs to help you decide what markets you want to be pulled by, and the pull of the market needs to help you know what technologies to push.
Time: Sequential or Synchronic?
Do we view time as sequential or synchronic? In sequential cultures, time is an objective measure of passing increments. The faster you can act and get to the market, the more effective will be your competitiveness. In contrast, synchronous cultures like doing things "just-in-time," so present ideas converge on the future. The better your timing, the more competitive you will be.
Keeping traditional products that made your name in the first place can jeopardize the creation of new products. Karel Vuursteen of Heineken successfully integrated the (past) traditions of the Heineken family with the future needs of the company, and the traditions of the Heineken product with the need for (future) innovation—for example, in the area of specialty beers. Process innovation sought new methods of creating the same result (traditional product), while product innovation allowed new drinks from scratch without involving Heineken's premium product in the experiments.
Summary
Our new marketing paradigm requires a mindset that reconciles these continuing dilemmas. It is the result of linking learning efforts across each dimension with the contrasting viewpoint.
The new concepts described here are explored further in the new book 21 Leaders for the 21st Century.[2]