International Marketing Review 8,2 18 Received March 1989 Revised August 1989 Revised December 1989 Revised February 1990
Internationa] Marketing Review, Vol. 8 No. 2 1991, pp. 18-30. Š MCB University Press 0265-1335
Culture-specific Marketing Communications: An Analytical Approach Sudhir H. Kale
National University of Singapore, Republic of Singapore It has been long recognised that marketing communications presents one of the greatest operational challenges for an international marketer (Boddewyn, 1981; Colvin et al., 1980; Harris, 1984). A large body of literature attests to the fact that most problems in international marketing communications or promotion arise because of significant cultural differences across countries (Elinder, 1965; Hall, 1960; Ricks, 1983; 1988; Terpstra and David, 1985). Most earlier research on cross-cultural communication has focused on interpersonal communication (cf. Graham, 1983; 1985; Sheth, 1983). The small body of literature that does exist in the area of cross-cultural mass communication has typically focused on a single country (cf. Arroyo, 1982; Elinder, 1962; Peebles and Ryans, 1984). Furthermore, literature that exists in a multi-country environment has thus far failed to provide a generalisable framework through which multi-country cultural differences can be appreciated (Miracle, 1984; Walters, 1986). In order to assess the cultural relevance of marketing communications, multinational firms need a framework with which to conceptualise the national culture of the markets they operate in. Understanding the underlying dimensions of culture should sensitise marketers to the relative effectiveness of various promotional appeals across cultures. Uncovering the latent dimensions that drive culture and behaviour also opens up the possibility of transferring promotional appeals aross countries with similar cultures. Such a framework with which to assess the cultural relevance of marketing communication is especially vital in the current global environment where considerable pressure exists on firms to standardise their promotional appeals across countries and cultures. This article has three objectives: (1) to underscore the relationship between culture and communication; (2) to establish the basis of cross-cultural communication barriers using Hofstede's (1980) cultural dimensions; and (3) to demonstrate how Hofstede's framework can be utilised in incorporating cultural factors in the design of promotional appeals. What is Culture? Defining culture concisely presents unanticipated difficulties since the literature contains a multitude of definitions. Kroeber and Kluckhohn (1952) gathered 164 different definitions of culture ranging in scope from very restrictive to allinclusive. Perhaps the most widely accepted definition of culture is the one proposed by Linton (1945): "A culture is a configuration of learned behaviors and results of behavior whose component parts are shared and transmitted by the members of a particular society.'' In an attempt to bridge the gap between
academic and business perspectives on culture, Terpstra and David (1985) offer Culture-specific the following definition: "Culture is a learned, shared, compelling, interrelated Marketing set of symbols whose meanings provide a set of orientations for members of Communications a society. . ." The set of symbols which individuals assimilate in the acculturation process results in creating in the minds of people a "highly selective screen" allowing some stimuli through but rejecting others (Hall, 1976). These symbols are shared by members belonging to the same culture, and it is this sharing that enables 19 communication between individuals in a given culture. By the same token, it is the lack of shared symbols and experiences which makes cross-cultural communication so difficult. In order to compare and contrast the receptivity to marketing communication across cultures, international marketing practitioners need an appropriate framework or conceptual schemata for comparison. Approaches suggested thus far vary from simple laundry lists of outcomes of cultural differences provided by Bochner (1982) to the highly theoretical framework of Triandis (1972). A review of these and other prior classifications (cf. Hall, 1976; Kluckhohn and Strodtbeck, 1961) suggests that while these approaches offer a useful guide for comparing cultures, they have three main drawbacks. First, most classification approaches are not empirically supported, and have to be taken largely at face value. The second major flaw is that these frameworks classify cultures into different categories but do not easily distinguish the degree of differences between cultures. They allow only the direct comparison of countries, not indirect comparison to some scale so as to facilitate measurement. Finally, many classification approaches suffer from lack of comprehensiveness. This lack of a universal, broadly generisable framework within which to visualise national cultures has led one noted authority in international business to conclude that as far as cross-cultural research goes, there are "too many conclusions, not enough conceptualization" (Negandhi, 1974). It is in this context that Hofstede's (1980) framework holds maximum potential for applications in the area of cross-cultural marketing. Hofstede's Cultural Dimensions Geert Hofstede was primarily interested in uncovering differences in work-related values across countries. He administered over 116,000 questionnaires to employees of a multinational corporation operating in 66 countries. Through factor analysis and other statistical methods, empirically he identified four dimensions of culture: individualism, power distance, uncertainty avoidance, and masculinity. These dimensions largely account for cross-cultural differences in people's belief systems and behaviour patterns around the globe. Individualism Individualism (IDV) describes the relationship between an individual and his or her fellow individuals in society. It manifests itself in the way people live together, such as in nuclear families, extended families, or tribes, and has a great variety of value implications. At one end of the spectrum are societies with very loose ties between individuals. Such societies allow a large degree of freedom, and everybody is expected to look after his or her own self-interest
International Marketing Review 8,2
20
and possibly that of the immediate family. Societies of this type exemplify high individualism (high IDV), and display loose integration. At the other end are societies with very strong ties between individuals. Everybody is expected to look after the interests of their in-group and to hold only those opinions and beliefs sanctioned by the in-group, which in turn protects the individual. These "collectivist"(lowIDV) societies show tight integration. Hofstede observes that individualistic countries such as the USA, Great Britain and the Netherlands have more wealth than collectivist countries, such as Colombia, Pakistan and Taiwan. The mid-range contains countries such as Japan, India, Austria and Spain. Power Distance Power distance (PDI) involves the way societies deal with human inequality. People possess unequal physical and intellectual capacities, which some societies allow to grow into inequalities in power and wealth. However, some other societies de-emphasise such inequalities. All societies are unequal, but some are more unequal than others (Hofstede, 1983). In and across organisations, the degree of centralisation of authority and the degree of autocratic leadership reflect the level of power distance. The distribution of power in a society can remain unequal because this satisfies the psychological need for dependence of people without power. According to Hofstede, autocracy will rise to the level permitted by society and organisations, since autocracy exists in the members of society as well as in the leaders. The value systems of the two groups are usually complementary. The Philippines, India and France score relatively high in power distance. Austria, Israel, Denmark and Sweden show relatively low PDI scores, while the United States ranks slightly below midpoint. Combining power distance and individualism reveals some interesting relationships. Collectivist countries always show large power distance, but individualist countries do not necessarily display small power distance. For example, the Latin European countries combine large power distance with high individualism. Other wealthy Western countries combine smaller power distance with high individualism. It is interesting to observe that, in Hofstede's sample, almost all poor countries tend to rate high on both collectivism (low individualism) and power distance. Of the countries Hofstede studied, only Costa Rica combined small power distance with high collectivism (low individualism). Uncertainty Avoidance Uncertainty Avoidance (UAI) reflects how a society deals with uncertainty about the future, a fundamental fact of human existence. At one extreme, weak UAI cultures socialise members to accept and handle uncertainty. People in such cultures tend to accept each day as it comes, take risks rather easily, do not work too hard, and tolerate opinions and behaviour different from their own. Denmark, Sweden and Hong Kong all rated low in UAI. The other extreme — strong UAI societies — fosters the need to try to beat the future, resulting in greater nervousness, aggressiveness, and emotional stress. Belgium, Japan and France ranked relatively high in uncertainty avoidance, while the United States scored somewhat below midpoint.
Societies create a feeling of security through technology, law and religion. Culture-specific In the inter- and intra-organisational context, these facets manifest themselves Marketing as technology, rules and rituals. Laws, rules and reliance on the opinion of experts Communications protect against the uncertainty of human behaviour, and their proliferation reflects an intolerance of deviant opinion and behaviour. Religions, including secular ideologies, help people tolerate uncertainty by interpreting experiences in terms that transcend personal reality. Strong UAI societies seek or claim absolute truth in religion and science, reject other religions, and oppose the more 21 relativist, empiricist scientific traditions of weak uncertainty avoidance societies. Masculinity Masculinity (MAS) deals with the degree to which societies subscribe to the typical stereotypes associated with males and females. Masculine values stress making money and the pursuit of visible achievements. Such societies admire individual brilliance, and idolise the successful achiever, the superman. These traditional masculine social values permeate the thinking of the entire society, women as well as men. Hofstede's research indicated that within his sample, Japan, Austria, Venezuela and Italy ranked highest in masculinity. In more feminine societies, both men and women exhibit values associated with traditionally feminine roles, such as nurturance and an emphasis on people rather than money. Societal sympathy lies with the underdog, the anti-hero rather than the individually brilliant. Sweden, Norway, The Netherlands and Denmark rank as some of the most feminine societies studied by Hofstede. The United States scored fairly high on the masculinity dimension, placing it near the top one third. Hofstede (1984) identifies several consequences of each of the four dimensions covering society at large. He relates these dimensions to religious, philosophical, and ideological aspects and organisations in different societies. A review of his work uncovers the possibility of applying this framework to the context of marketing communication. Culture and Communication Culture consists of a series of learned responses to recurring situations. These responses are a result of "collective mental programming" and affect all aspects of a marketing transaction. As far back as 1949, Duesenberry observed that all of the activities people engage in are culturally determined, and that nearly all purchases are made either to provide physical comfort or to implement the activities that make up the life of a culture. Culture's impact on marketing seems multi-faceted and ubiquitous. It affects people's tastes, preferences for colours, and attitudes towards product classes. But perhaps culture has its greatest impact on how information is received, stored, retrieved, and used to make decisions (Triandis, 1982). The cultural milieu of a society thus significantly affects the marketing communications process of a firm intending to facilitate the sale of a product or service. In the course of marketing communication, the seller carefully and selectively provides information to influence the buyer favourably towards the seller's offering. Both the content and the style of the seller's communication are culturebased, as are the buyer's processing of information and the resultant decision.
International Marketing Review 8,2 22
From the seller's standpoint, it is important that the buyer's culture be understood so as to make the communication process most effective. This is especially critical in mass selling approaches, such as advertising, where there is no opportunity for the seller to modify their appeal when feedback is received from the buyer. The problem of communicating to people in diverse cultures is one of the greatest creative challenges in marketing communication (Ricks, 1988). This is because cultural factors typically operate below the level of conscious awareness, and are therefore difficult to comprehend (Root, 1987). It is culture that largely determines the way in which various phenomena are perceived. This has led scholars in cross-cultural communication to believe that "culture is communication" (Barnlund, 1989; Hall, 1977). Effective communication demands that there exist a psychological overlap between the sender and the receiver, that is, the sender's perceptual field — his/her map of the world — must be congruent with the perceptual field of the receiver. A message falling outside the receiver's perceptualfieldnot only cannot transmit the sender's intended meaning, but will, in all likelihood, transmit a meaning unintended by the sender. It is in this area that serious marketing blunders have been made, even by companies having decades of experience in multinational marketing (Ricks et al., 1974; Ricks, 1988). The success of a marketer's endeavours to adapt his/her promotional practices to diverse cultures will be greatly enhanced by a framework for cultural classification. Once a marketer has such a conceptual framework with which to assess the cultural domain of a given country, he/she will be able to design and implement a promotional strategy that yields optimum results. A classification system will also enable a marketer to extend promotional strategy from one country to another on the basis of cultural similarity between the two countries. It is in this area that the framework proposed by Hofstede (1980, 1984) has the greatest application. Operationalising Hofstede's Framework Before illustrating how Hofstede's cultural framework can be used in communication practices, a conceptual understanding of how cultural dimensions affect communication seems necessary. Figure 1 illustrates the dynamics of inter-cultural communication. Many of the cross-cultural communication barriers between the seller and the buyer can be explained by differences in their position on the four cultural dimensions identified by Hofstede (1980). A seller should attempt to minimise these cross-cultural communication barriers by understanding the degree of discrepancy between his/her own communication content and style and the buyer's psychologicalfield.Minimising cultural noise in communication is thus a three-step process: (1) ascertain the source's cultural domain; (2) visualise recipients' culture on a predetermined set of dimensions; and (3) design and execute promotional messages such that discrepancy between the source's cultural domain and the recipients' culture are minimised. Hofstede (1980) provides both the questionnaire and the scoring technique used in his research. Using this questionnaire, or a modified version of it, the seller can determine how he/she scores on the four cultural dimensions. This is known as "cultural self-awareness" (Root, 1987). Cultural self-awareness yields an understanding of one's one beliefs, values, attitudes, and behaviour
Culture-specific Marketing Communications
23
patterns. This understanding, in turn, should uncover the link between the seller's culture and its content and style of communication (cf. Sheth, 1983). This applies not only to dyadic interactions such as cross-cultural personal selling and negotiations, but also to situations where a company or institution engages in mass communication with people of other cultures. A seller's position on these dimensions would be shaped not just by his/her national culture but by the business culture and corporate culture as well (cf. Deal and Kennedy, 1982; Terpstra and David, 1985). Hofstede's four dimensions capture the aggregate impact of culture at the national, business, and corporate level. The next step involves determining scores for the country where the communication will be used to influence consumer decision making. Cultural aspects become particularly salient in advertising communications. A consumer exposed to a specific culture becomes committed to that culture's style of thinking, feeling, and responding (Hong et al., 1987). Assessing a typical consumer's cultural domain along the four cultural dimensions is thus the second step in estimating communication effectiveness. Finally, every attempt should be made to minimise the degree of incompatibility between the seller's communication and the buyer's psychologicalfield.Putting this in a mathematical notation, the seller's job is to minimise DSB, which is the psychic distance between the seller's communication and the buyer's psychologicalfield.The degree of incompatibility caused by cultural factors can
International Marketing Review 8,2 24
be measured by performing a dimensional analysis of the cultural domains of the seller and the buyer. We can locate the vectors of the buyer and the seller on the four-dimensional culture-space, and measure the degree of incompatibility as a function of the distance between the seller and the buyer points located in the space. The greater the distance between the seller's score and the buyer's score on each cultural dimension, the greater the overall incompatibility with regard to the cultural empathy in communication. Scores for each dimension can easily be computed using a survey instrument similar to the one used by Hofstede (1980). Presuming the equivalence between Euclidean distance and cultural incompatibility, the degree of incompatibility can be measured as follows: where, DSB = cultural incompatibility between seller and buyer; SDi = seller's score on cultural dimension i; and BDi = buyer's score on dimension i. Having an understanding of the relative position of the sender and the receiver in the communication process on each of the four cultural dimensions should thus indicate where cultural adjustment may be needed. While it is technically possible for both the seller and the buyer to make attempts at bridging the incompatibility, in reality most of this burden will fall on the seller. This is especially true of a seller's mass communication where there exists little opportunity for direct feedback from the buyer. Having some knowledge of the buyer's position on the four-dimensional culture-space should enable the seller to design promotional appeals which are particularly effective in a specific cultural context. The next section discusses the promotional implications of the four cultural dimensions using a real-life illustration. Although the following example looks at aggregate country scores, the same basic logic can be employed at different levels of aggregation, depending on who the sender of the communication is. India and the US Tourist Market India's campaign to promote its tourism industry to a typical American traveller provides a practical application of Hofstede's cultural dimensions. The suitability of this illustration was established by conducting a thorough review of literature on the marketing aspects of international tourism. Special attention was paid to published studies concerning India's marketing efforts. Several brochures, advertisements and promotional leaflets distributed by the government's Los Angeles office were also analysed. Hofstede's (1984) scores for India and the USA on the four cultural dimensions were used to uncover areas where maximum adaptation would be needed. For the purposes of this case study, it was assumed that the seller's (i.e. the Indian Department of Tourism's) scores on the four cultural dimensions were the same as the aggregate scores for India provided by Hofstede (1984). Published research in the area of international tourism seldom looks at tourism from the vantage point of marketing. Furthermore, of the few studies relating tourism to marketing issues, none have endeavoured to assess the cultural factors impacting the promotion of tourism (cf. Crompton, 1979; Dann 1981; Goodrich, 1977; Kale and Weir, 1986). The lack of a cultural orientation in promoting tourism can — at best — result in a poorly designed promotion strategy. At worst, it can potentially offend the
very travellers a country is attempting to attract. It is therefore important that Culture-specific country-specifc marketing programmes be designed in a manner that takes into Marketing account the cultural domain of potential customers. Communications Although India has a lot to offer by way of scenic attractions and monuments, she has not been very successful in attracting American tourists. Statistics show that only 1 per cent of all American travellers vacationing abroad every year visit India (Kale and Weir, 1986). In 1987, for instance, only 135,000 people travelled 25 from the United States to India, representing a minute fraction of the 11.5 million overseas travellers from the United States in that year (Rao et al., 1989). In a recent survey of American youth, it was observed that 91 per cent of respondents felt that the Indian Department of Tourism does not do a good Job of generating tourist traffic to India (Kale and Weir, 1986). Factors such as resource constraints, wrong media strategy, and badly executed creative platforms have been among the flaws of India's tourist promotion strategy cited in earlier literature (Kale and Weir, 1986; Rao et al., 1989). It is also equally likely that the promotional appeals may lack cultural sensitivity with regards to the American marketplace. It should be obvious to everyone that significant cultural differences exist between India and the USA. In the past, it was difficult to understand the precise nature and degree of such differences because of lack of a quantitative framework with which to assess the differences. Hofstede's framework can now be used systematically to comprehend the nature and scope of significant cultural variations between India and the United States. Hofstede (1984) developed an index for each country on each dimension of culture. He also ranked each of the 50 countries on the four dimensions. Table I lists his scores for the two countries of our interest: India and the United States. The Indian and American samples differ considerably along the dimensions of individualism (IDV) and power distance (PDI), while being relatively similar on the dimensions of uncertainty avoidance and masculinity. The Indian Department of Tourism should therefore place particular emphasis on making adaptations in its promotional strategy involving the dimensions of individualism and power distance. Communication adaptation with regard to these two dimensions will go a long way in minimising the psychic distance between India's communication and the prospective American tourist's psychological mind-set. Adaptation on the dimension of individualism requires that in all promotional appeals directed towards an American traveller, the message be addressed to, and made relevant to, the individual. Also, in order to incorporate the lower power distance within the target market, the promotional copy should reflect friendliness and informality. A further exploration of these dimensions offers many other implications for a viable promotional strategy. In a highly individualistic culture such as the USA, autonomy, variety, and pleasure are important cultural values. In a survey of attitudes of American youth towards overseas tour packages, Kale et al. (1987) uncovered that "to do whatever I want whenever I want" was the most important reason cited for vacation travel. Clearly this reason reflects the high level of individualism in American culture. Autonomy can be operationalised by stressing the opportunities to see and explore the vast country at one's own pace. Tour
International Marketing Review 8,2 26
Dimension Individualism CountryIndia United States
Power Distance
Index
Rank
a
b
48 91
30 50
Uncertainty Avoidance
Masculinity
Index
Rank
Index
Rank
Index
Rank
77
42
40
9
56
30
40
16
46
11
62
36
a
Table I. India and USA: Comparative Overview of Cultural Dimensions
To be read: India's score on the index of Individualism was 48. Of the countries studied, India ranked thirtieth on the Individualism criterion. The higher the rank, the more pronounced the level of individualism in the country. b
Source: Hofstede (1984).
operators can capitalise on this inherent need by designing itineraries that allow a lot of free time for the American traveller to explore the country alone. In designing promotional brochures and tour packages for India, the prospective American traveller needs to be assured of adequate free time to relax or explore, ample opportunities for shopping, and the flexibility to select activities that suit his or her mood. The fact that India can cater to these needs should be stressed. An analysis of brochures distributed by the Indian Department of Tourism and those offered by private tour operators indicates that these appeals are largely absent (Kale and Weir, 1986). The desire for variety is another manifestation of a high IDV culture. In catering to this desire, India has a lot to offer. India's ethnic and geographical diversity will allow the traveller the variety which satisfies his or her epistemic needs. Places as yet unexplored should appeal to the adventuresomeness of a high IDV culture. Publicising such locations as possible vacation spots could work to India's advantage. Appeals such as "dare to be different, see India" would probably be quite successful in a culture where being different is considered desirable. The third major attribute of a high IDV culture is pleasure. Brochures targeted towards a pleasure-driven society like the Americans should stress the fun aspect of vacation travel. The Indian Department of Tourism currently uses appeals such as "sun, surf and sand", "the great outdoors", "gourmet's delight", and "fun and festivity" in its brochures. This emphasis on fun and pleasure should continue. With repetition of the pleasure theme through creatively executed copy, it would be possible to convince prospects that India is indeed a fun place to visit. The small-PDI dimension of American culture suggests that all brochures designed for the American market should be written in an informal, friendly style. This informality should also carry over to phone calls received by the Indian government's tourist offices in America, and to personal selling efforts by embassy and tourist office personnel in the USA. Promotional literature should make at least a passing reference to the fact that India is the largest democracy in the world. Democracies are commonly perceived as small PDI institutions, and expressing India's democratic system of government would help bridge the perceived gap in power distance between the two cultures.
India inherited from the British etiquettes which could be characterised as, Culture-specific "extremely formal and impersonal" by small PDI societies. These need to be Marketing substituted by "informal and friendly", especially in situations involving face- Communications to-face contact. The exhibition of co-operation, personal warmth, friendliness, and amiability by government personnel in matters such as issuing visas, supplying information, and encouraging inquiries concerning India, would go a long way in reducing the PDI gap between the two cultures. 27 The other two dimensions, uncertainty avoidance and masculinity, should not result in major communication barriers. If, however, one really wants to finetune the promotional strategy, minor adaptations along these two dimensions would be desirable. The United States exhibits a somewhat higher level of masculinity and uncertainty avoidance than India. Emphasising the rugged and mountainous landscape of India and the opportunities for outdoors activities would mesh well with a masculine society. Given the higher level of uncertainty avoidance of Americans, they need to be assured of their safety, security and comfort if they were to visit India. With major adjustments along the IDV and PDI dimensions, minor modifications with regard to the MAS and UAI differences, and backed by an appropriate media strategy, India should be able to attract a larger share of the American tourist market. Limitations Researchers such as Redding (1987) and Riddle (1986) contend that Hofstede's dimensions of culture implicitly incorporate other classification systems and that, at least for now, his is the only framework that shows maximum promise. The parsimony and intuitive appeal of this classification system renders successful application easier in comparison with the more theoretical approaches of cultural classification (cf. Triandis, 1972). However, some researchers have expressed their doubts regarding the adequacy and comprehensiveness of these dimensions in accounting for the way cultures differ. Cross-cultural psychologists like Triandis (1982) suspect that these dimensions represent only a fraction of the list of dimensions needed to completely explain culture. Given such mixed reviews, it would be advantageous to replicate Hofstede's 1980 research using a larger number of questions spanning several contexts. Hofstede's (1980) questionnaire revolved almost exclusively around work-related values. With a questionnaire in a broader domain, it is entirely feasible that a few more underlying cultural dimensions might emerge. Thus it is in the interest of both researchers and practitioners that an augmented classification system be developed using Hofstede's research as a convenient starting point. Additionally, researchers should test the validity and reliability of the scores Hofstede reports on individual countries. Researchers like Triandis (1982) have wondered whether the country profiles identified by Hofstede are stable. Hofstede used only 63 questions and surveyed employees of a single multinational company operating in 66 countries. It is therefore likely that his scores for individual countries may have been impacted by factors such as the homogenising effects of industrial culture, modern education, and the fact that the respondents
International Marketing Review 8,2 28
have been through the personnel departments of the same multinational corporation (Triandis, 1982). The generalisations we can draw from Hofstede's massive study are thus limited by these considerations. Furthermore, depending on the target market involved, the aggregate score for a country may vary significantly from the score generated for a specific segment of interest (cf. Kale and Sudharshan, 1987). If the segment(s) of interest is large enough or profitable enough, it would be advantageous for a multinational marketer to generate segmentwise cultural profiles. It may thus be concluded that not all information needed for adaptations in communication can be generated from one framework. Compared to previous approaches, however, utilising Hofstede's schemata for cross-cultural communications research may offer significantly greater utility. Implications Cultural sensitivity and cultural adaptation have tremendous potential to increase the effectiveness of cross-cultural marketing communication. Having developed a solid understanding of Hofstede's cultural framework, an international marketer would be in a position to identify groups of countries where similar promotional appeals can work (cf. Kale and McIntyre, 1988). The dual objectives of achieving high economies of scale in advertising as well as maintaining a reasonably high level of accuracy and effectiveness of marketing communications in each national market can thus be achieved. Once Hofstede's framework has been refined and validated, it could be utilised in a number of marketing and international business applications. On the practical side, one logical application would be the recruitment and cultural training of managers assigned to various overseas subsidiaries. This framework should also prove useful to further understand the domain of cross-cultural negotiation. Multinational companies could train their negotiators to understand the cultural facets of their counterparts better, and thus minimise cultural blunders during their interactions. Other applications could include areas of product design, technology transfer, and overseas distribution strategies, all of which have a critical cultural component in their success or failure. Explaining and understanding variations in interactions between members of a distribution channel in different countries would be an application of this framework on the theoretical side. For instance, it would be interesting to test how interrelationships between behavioural constructs such as power and influence would vary as one moves from small to large PDI cultures. On the normative side, this framework has implications in areas such as a culturally compatible public policy for marketing and economic development. Conclusion This article has looked at the relationship between culture and marketing communications. Specifically, it was argued that Hofstede's four dimensions of culture can be systematically used to diagnose and bridge culture gaps between a seller and a buyer (or a group of buyers) engaged in cross-cultural communication. Using the Indian tourism industry and the American consumer as an example, a practical application of Hofstede's framework in the area of cross-cultural comunication was provided.
While Hofstede's framework makes intuitive as well as empirical sense, it Culture-specific may suffer from the drawbacks attributable to a non-representative sample and Marketing a restricted context. It is therefore imperative that more empirical research Communications be conducted to validate both the dimensions and the country scores that Hofstede reports. With creative adaptation and careful application, this framework has the potential to enhance significantly our understanding of the impact of culture on marketing exchanges. 29 References Arroyo, R. (1982), "Levi Conquers Japan with Hero Worship", Advertising Age, 13 December, M-24. Barnlund, D.C. (1989), Communicative Styles of Japanese and Americans: Images and Realities, Wadsworth Publishing Company, Belmont, CA. Bochner, S. (1982), Cultures in Contact, Pergamon Press, Oxford. Boddewyn, J.J. (1981), "The Global Spread of Advertising Regulations'', MSU Business Topics, Spring, pp. 6-13. Colvin, M., Heeler, R. and Thorpe, J. (1980), "Developing International Advertising Strategy", Journal of Marketing, Vol. 44, Fall, pp. 73-9. Crompton, J.L. (1979), "Motivations for Pleasure Vacation", Annals of Tourism Research, Vol. 6, October-December, pp. 408-24. Dann, G.M.S. (1981), "Tourist Motivation: An Appraisal", Annals of Tourism Research, Vol. 8 No. 2, pp. 187-219. Deal, T.E. and Kennedy, A.A. (1982), Corporate Cultures, Addison-Wesley, Reading, MA. Elinder, E. (1962), "International Advertisers Must Devise Universal Ads, Dump Separate National Ones, Swedish Ad Man Avers", Advertising Age, 27 November, p. 91. Elinder, E. (1965), "How International Can European Advertising Be?", Journal of Marketing, Vol. 29, April, pp. 7-11. Goodrich, J.N. (1977), "Benefit Bundle Analysis: An Empirical Study of International Travelers", Journal of Travel Research, Vol. 16, Fall, pp. 6-9. Graham, J.L. (1983), "Brazilian, Japanese and American Business Negotiations", Journal of International Business Studies, Vol. 14, Spring/Summer, pp. 47-61. Graham, J.L. (1985), "Cross-Cultural Marketing Negotiations: A Laboratory Experiment", Marketing Science, Vol. 4 No.2, pp. 130-46. Hall, E.T. (1960), "The Silent Language in Overseas Business", Harvard Business Review, Vol. 38, May-June, pp. 93-6. Hall, E.T. (1976), "Cultures Collide", Psychology Today, July, pp. 66-7. Hall, E.T. (1977), Beyond Culture, Anchor Books, Garden City, NY. Harris, G. (1984), "The Globalization of Advertising", International Journal ofAdvertising, Vol. 3 pp. 223-34. Hofstede, G. (1980), "Motivation, Leadership and Organization: Do American Theories Apply Abroad?", Organizational Dynamics, Vol. 9, Summer, pp. 42-63. Hofstede, G. (1983), "The Cultural Relativity of Organizational Practices and Theories", Journal of International Business Studies, Vol. 14, Fall, pp. 75-89. Hofstede, G. (1984), Culture's Consequences: International Differences in Work-Related Values, Sage Publications, Beverly Hills, CA. Hong, J.W., Muderrisoglu, A.M. and Zinkhan, G.M. (1987), "Cultural Differences and Advertising Expansion: A Comparative Content Analysis of Japanese and US Magazine Advertising", Journal of Advertising Research, Vol. 16 No. 1, pp. 55-62, 68.
International Marketing Review 8,2 30
Kale, S.H. and McIntyre, R.P. (1988), "Segmenting the European Market: A Cultural Perspective", in Marketing Cooperation with Europe, Institute of Marketing and Management, New Delhi, India, pp. N1-N14. Kale, S.H., McIntyre, R.P. and Weir, K.M. (1987), "Marketing Overseas Tour Packages to the Youth Segment: An Empirical Analysis'', Journal of Travel Research,Vol.26, Spring, pp. 20-4. Kale, S.H. and Weir, K.M. (1986), "Marketing Third World Countries to the Western Traveler: The Case of India", Journal of Travel Research, Vol. 25, Fall, pp. 2-7. Kale, S.H. and Sudharshan, D. (1987), "A Strategic Approach to International Segmentation", International Marketing Review, Vol. 4, Spring, pp. 60-70. Kluckhohn, F.R. and Strodtbeck, F.L. (1961), Variations in Value Orientations, Greenwood Press, Westport, CT. Kroeber, A.L. and Kluckhohn, F.R. (1952), Culture: A Critical Review of Concepts and Definitions, Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA. Linton, R. (1945), The Cultural Background ofPersonality, Appleton-Century-Crofts, New York. Miracle, G.E. (1984), "An Assessment of Progress in Research on International Advertising", in Lee, J.H. and Martin, C.R. (Eds.), Current Issues & Research in Advertising, Vol. 2, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI, pp. 135-66. Negandhi, A.R. (1974), "Cross-Cultural Management Studies: Too Many Conclusions, Not Enough Conceptualization", Management International Review, Vol. 14 No. 6, pp. 59-65. Peebles, D.M. and Ryans, J.K. (1984), Management ofInternational Advertising, Allyn and Bacon, Newton, MA. Rao, S.R., Thomas, E.G. and Javalgi, R.G. (1989), "A Strategic Marketing Approach to Developing India's Tourist Potential", in Singh, J. (Ed.) World Marketing Scene in the 90s, Institute of Marketing and Management, New Delhi, India. Redding, S.G. (1987), "Research on Asian Cultures and Management: Some Epistemological Issues", Asia Pacific Journal of Management, Vol. 5, September, pp. 89-96. Ricks, D.A. (1983), Big Business Blunders: Mistakes in Multinational Marketing, Dow JonesIrwin, Homewood, IL. Ricks, D.A. (1988), "International Business Blunders: An Update", Business and Economic Review, Vol. 34, January-February-March, pp. 11-14. Ricks, D.A., Fu, M. and Arpan, J. (1974), International Business Blunders, Grid, Columbus, OH. Riddle, D.I. (1986), Service Led Growth: The Role of the Service Sector in World Development, Praeger, New York. Root, F.R. (1987) Entry Strategies for International Markets, Lexington Books, Lexington, MA. Sheth, J.N. (1983), "Cross Cultural Influences on the Buyer-Seller Interaction/Negotiation Process", Asia Pacific Journal of Management, Vol. 1, September, pp. 46-55. Terpstra, V. and David, K. (1985), The Cultural Environment of International Business, 2nd ed., Southwestern Publishing Co., Cincinnati, OH. Triandis, H.C. (1972), The Analysis of Subjective Culture, Wiley, New York. Triandis, H.C. (1982), "Review of Culture's Consequences: International Differences in WorkRelated Values", Human Organization, pp. 86-90. Walters, P.G.P. (1986), "International Marketing Policy: A Discussion of the Standardization Construct and Its Relevance for Corporate Policy", Journal of International Business Studies, Vol. 17, Summer, pp. 55-69.