31 Dec Marketing across Cultures: CW2 Assignment Brief
please read MAC CW2 is the task for the needed assignment and the outline needed is in document "outline" and if needed the work of task 1 which has the same topic is uploaded if needed
1
Sensitivity: Internal
Marketing across Cultures: CW2 Assignment Brief
Submission deadline Thursday 13th January 2022 by 23.59 hrs.
Assignment CW2 (70%) – Individual assignment brief An individual 3000 word (+/- 10%) critical, structured business report is required on the key issues contained
within the module, based on an organisation of the student’s choice (Note: such choice must be agreed in
advance with module leader).
The assignment is detailed as follows: Taking the role of an international marketing consultant, commissioned by a company (marketing an organisation’s product or service of your choice), prepare a further business report, based on the findings of the first report, aimed at the organisation’s marketing director with a recommendation for the company’s market entry and marketing strategy in the new international market (of your choice). As this may be the first time your company will be targeting and entering a culturally very different country, your (second) report must include the following:
• Introduction (not included in word count): introduce the project objectives (using the brief above), the organisation and its product or service, the home and host countries/cultures. You need to justify why you have chosen a certain destination country, using the information gathered through the opportunity analysis.
1 Social and Cultural Factors and the Marketing Mix (25%): examine and explain how the social and cultural factors of your target internationalisation country could influence consumer behaviour towards your product or service, together with an evaluation of the strategic implications this may have on the marketing mix. Note: It is imperative that you also consider the elements raised in the cross-cultural analysis of report 1.
Further details: An understanding of the different social-cultural factors that will be encountered in different geographical locations/cultures needs to be identified. This should include social factors such as social class, the role of family etc., and an understanding of the cultural factors that are the “norm” in the particular location selected.
Beliefs, values and customs should be explored and their influence on the construction of the marketing
mix should be identified, e.g. Bikes in UK and China! Issues of language (spoken and silent), motivation,
buying behaviour, the decision making process and acceptable methods of promotion should be highlighted
as areas where the mix may need adaptation. The “cultural framework” (Tepestra Sarathy et al 2006)
should prove very useful in this section; do take into consideration the elements raised in report 1.
The relevance (or not) of Maslow, linked with the buying process and distribution channels, is also important. The principles of standardisation v adaptation require consideration here also. It is important to clearly define the direct benefits of standardisation for firms, such as economies of scale
and efficiencies from the learning curve effect, but also to consider the indirect benefits that come from
2
Sensitivity: Internal
consumer perceptions of the consistency of company image of the firm and the effect of this on the
perceived brand value. The obvious barriers to implementation include market led factors, such as the legal
and cultural differences between countries, but also company factors, such as the integration (or
independence) of the strategies pursued by individual SBUs and competitor led factors, for example, where
a firm is weak in different markets and has to follow different market leaders. In Saudi Arabia, for example,
all advertising is subject to censorship, and regulations prohibit a long list of subject matter.
The good student will seek to identify and recommend differences required in the marketing mix for successful market entry into the host country. Again, if “re-entry” is selected, previous marketing mix and consumer behaviour issues that denied or restricted success should be discussed.
2 Market Entry Strategies (30%): conduct an evaluation of the various international market entry strategy options available to the company, and present a justified recommendation to the company for the market entry strategy that the company should adopt. The recommendation could include brief details of the new marketing mix.
Marking Scheme: A brief assessment of the different types of market entry strategies is needed with an explanation of which (and why) each is appropriate at a particular stage. As a firm reaches globalisation it will require a combination of entry strategies in order to respond to the market, company and environmental factors. Some understanding is needed of the firm’s required level of involvement in each market as this will be linked to the level of control the firm might wish to exert over its activities and the level of risk the organisation is prepared to take. Where it has high levels of investment it must ensure that it is able to maximise its impact and not be reliant on third parties. High levels of involvement have implications in terms of a variety of associated risks.
An explanation of the criteria for choosing a market entry strategy must be the starting point and this will inevitably focus on the need for different levels of market involvement, investment and control over marketing operations in the target market needed to deliver the firm’s objectives. It is worth considering in detail the benefits of certain strategies, such as strategic alliances and joint ventures which are attempts to achieve a balance between control and exposure in challenging market situations where neither partner has all the necessary capability. Again, if the “re-entry” approach is taken, previous market entry strategies should be discussed, with analysis of the failings/limitations that ensued.
3) A marketing strategy for the new country (20%), including considerations regarding product/branding strategy, communication strategy; the candidate could also discuss pricing and distribution strategy, in cases where the complexity of the MES choice grants this discussion. The choice here should be based on the findings of section 1, starting the discussion from the potential strategic implications identified in section 1. The strategies proposed should be chosen in relation to the choices emerged from Section 2 related to the debate standardisation versus adaptation; usually there is some degree of adaptation which are due to the socio-cultural differences highlighted in Section 1. The other factor to consider is the level of control, for example where there is more control from the HQ (i.e. direct export), means a marketing strategy that mirrors the strategy of HQ, on the other extent where there is less control (for ex. in a strategic alliance), more changes are expected in choices of pricing strategy and choices of distribution.
3
Sensitivity: Internal
Further Notes:
A) Please discuss your product/service, market and organisation selection with your tutor, as you are required to stay away from products or services that are already well-established in your chosen target country, e.g. Coke to Canada! because making an inappropriate selection/pairing may ultimately affect your grade! Alternatively your choice of destination market may be selected on the basis that international market entry has previously been affected but with little or no success.
B) The two international markets you choose must be culturally very different – pairings such as UK/US, UK/Australia, UK/Ireland, Germany/Austria, Malaysia/Singapore – are NOT acceptable!
C) This assessment CW2 specifically relates to Learning Outcomes 2 and 3, where Learning Outcomes 2 and 3 are: “on successful completion of the module, students will be able to:
• (Learning Outcome 2) Critically examine how the social and cultural factors of a selected foreign country could influence consumer behaviour towards a particular product or service, and evaluate the strategic implications this may have on the marketing mix.
• (Learning Outcome 3) Critically evaluate the various international market entry strategy options available to the company seeking international expansion to a culturally-different destination, and make justified recommendations for the market entry strategy that the company should adopt.”
D) Further marks are given for:
• Quality and sufficiency of referencing also carries 10% of the available marks
• Finally Presentation quality of your report also carries 10% of the available marks
• See below the marking grid
4
Sensitivity: Internal
MaC CW2 90-100% 80-89% 70-79% 60-69% 50-59% 40-49% 35-39% 5-34% 0-4%
Introduction (not included in word count): to the project (objectives), the organisation and its product or service, the home and host countries/cultures. (5%)
Exception al standard. No errors
Outstanding standard. Trivial errors only
Extremely good standard. Trivial or very minor errors
Very good standard. Minor errors only
A good standard. Some evidence of misunderstan dings
A sound standard. Some significant misunderstandings and errors but satisfactory overall
Marginally unsatisfactory. Not well researched. Ideas unclear and incoherent. Some significant misunderstandings and errors. Marginal fail.
Well below the pass standard. Poorly researched. Ideas confused and incoherent. Serious misunderstandings and errors. Clear fail.
Nothing or hardly anything of merit. NS notation applies if no work submitted
Social and Cultural Factors and the Marketing Mix: examine how the social and cultural factors of your target country could influence consumer behaviour towards your product or service; this should be then integrated with report 1 findings’ to evaluate the strategic implications this may have on the marketing mix (25%)
Exception al standard almost at profession al level. No errors
Outstanding standard. Trivial errors only
Extremely good standard. Trivial or very minor errors
Very good standard. Minor errors only
A good standard. Some evidence of misunderstan dings
A sound standard. Some significant misunderstandings and errors but satisfactory overall
Marginally unsatisfactory. Not well researched. Ideas unclear and incoherent. Some significant misunderstandings and errors. Marginal fail.
Well below the pass standard. Poorly researched. Ideas confused and incoherent. Serious misunderstandings and errors. A clear fail.
Nothing or hardly anything of merit. NS notation applies if no work submitted
Market Entry Strategies: an evaluation of the various international market entry strategy options available to the company, and a justified recommendation to the company for the market entry strategy that the company should adopt (30%)
Exception al standard almost at profession al level. No errors
Outstanding standard. Trivial errors only
Extremely good standard. Trivial or very minor errors
Very good standard. Minor errors only
A good standard. Some evidence of misunderstan dings
A sound standard. Some significant misunderstandings and errors but satisfactory overall
Marginally unsatisfactory. Not well researched. Ideas unclear and incoherent. Some significant misunderstandings and errors. Marginal fail.
Well below the pass standard. Poorly researched. Ideas confused and incoherent. Serious misunderstandings and errors. A clear fail.
Nothing or hardly anything of merit. NS notation applies if no work submitted
Marketing Strategy for the New country: including considerations regarding product/branding strategy, communication strategy; pricing and distribution strategy if applicable (20%)
Exception al standard almost at profession al level. No errors
Outstanding standard. Trivial errors only
Extremely good standard. Trivial or very minor errors
Very good standard. Minor errors only
A good standard. Some evidence of misunderstan dings
A sound standard. Some significant misunderstandings and errors but satisfactory overall
Marginally unsatisfactory. Not well researched. Ideas unclear and incoherent. Some significant misunderstandings and errors. Marginal fail.
Well below the pass standard. Poorly researched. Ideas confused and incoherent. Serious misunderstandings and errors. A clear fail.
Nothing or hardly anything of merit. NS notation applies if no work submitted
References and Presentation quality (20%)
Exception al standard almost at profession al level. No errors
Outstanding standard. Trivial errors only
Extremely good standard. Trivial or very minor errors
Very good standard. Minor errors only
A good standard. Some evidence of misunderstan dings
A sound standard. Some significant misunderstandings and errors but satisfactory overall
Marginally unsatisfactory. Not well researched. Ideas unclear and incoherent.
Well below the pass standard. Poorly researched. Ideas confused and incoherent.
Nothing or hardly anything of merit.
5
Sensitivity: Internal
,
Outline:
Introduction
o Introduce company and both your countries
o Introduce cw2 objectives
Part I:
o Overview of cultures
o Cultural framework of France (language, education, attitude, religoun, values, aesthetics , material culture)
o Cultural framework of Egypt (language, education, attitude, religous, values, aesthetics , material culture)
o Mention hierarchy of needs (where to put Sephora on the hierchy of needs and explain why)
o Influence of cultural differences on the marketing mix ( how the difference of cultures of france and Egypt (collectivest) will affect the marketing mix.
o Standardize or adapt ( Sephora )
Part II
o Review of market entry strategies
Which is appropriate to Choose for company
o ABC countries (for Egypt only), level of involvement (Egypt only) (address as risk assessment control, cost, and
involvement)
Part III
o Apply marketing strategy
o Product (SWYG, SWAG, GLOB) and communication strategy
Conclusion
o Summarize ( relative summary)
,
Marketing Across Cultures
Student Name:
Amr Mohamed
Date:
11/18/2021
Contents INTRODUCTION 3 PART 2: Hofstede and Lewis theory 4 Part 3: Justification of cross cultural analysis approach 6 References: 8 Appendix 10 Hofstede’s 6 cultures dimensions 10 Lewis model elements: 10
INTRODUCTION
It’s a necessity to understand the cultural differences as it may have a significant influence for new business opportunities (Why Cultural Differences in Business Matter, 2021). In order for any new company to implement its tactics or strategies, they would have to cast around for new cultural differences in new diverse markets they are recently ingoing (Marzena, 2021). Settling advantages and the disadvantages of cultural differences in contrast with the companies’ home strategies increases the possibility of having a successful execution of new business opportunities. Understating the culture your business is moving in is more important than the business itself. (Marzena, 2021)
The assignment focuses on cross culture analysis between Egypt and France and I will be introducing Sephora the French company to Egypt. Firstly, Sephora is a French worldwide chain of personal upkeep and exquisiteness stores. It was established in 1970 via Dominique Mandonnaud and preserved by LVMH Moet Hennessy Louis Vuitton (2021) . Remarkably, the name Sephora originates and stems from the Greek word sephos, meaning beauty, and Zipporah, the wife of Moses in the book of Exodus (Schwanke, 2021). Sephora is mainly from France but it participates in a dominant beauty existence in many countries around the world (Schwanke, 2021). However, Sephora has been able to achieve such a reputation because of its incomparable collection of prestigious products in every class, impartial provision from beauty professionals, cooperative shopping atmosphere. Sephora also partakes an online website that initially made a start in the U.S in 1999 where its customers can enjoy the experience of engaging with the beauty community (Schwanke, 2021). Moreover, the launching of Sephora stores in Egypt is essential because there is not any beauty store in Egypt that covers all the brands and products. This fact will give Sephora stores an advantage in the Egyptian market. (Egypt Cosmetic Market Size, Share & Demand | Research Report 2026, 2021)
PART 2: Hofstede and Lewis theory
Due to new business expansion and new technological factors, cultures around the world are now being linked together (Why Cultural Differences in Business Matter, 2021) . Enterprises are going global, which means that managers of today's era may have to deal with many different cultural backgrounds (Why Cultural Differences in Business Matter, 2021). However, this fact may seem enlightening to new career opportunities but regularly managers miscarry to foresee how cultural backgrounds affect employees’ performances and intelligence.
In time, a great deal of studies has been made to assess different cultural issues and to combine them together in anticipation of a certain outcome solution. In 1980, Hofstede’s cultural dimensions, which was constructed on ranking cultures into 6 different categories in order to be able to identify cultural backgrounds to function based on them (The Hofstede model, 2021). The dimensions consist of power distance, individualism, masculinity, uncertainty avoidance, time orientation, and indulgence. (for explanations in the appendix) (The Hofstede model, 2021) Moreover, the prodigious dimensions of Hofstede’s were applied by Sondergaard on 61 replications focusing on validating his work. The results were respectable, most of the duplications were identical, and a partial percentage corresponded to his work. Even from the point of view of individualism, which wasn’t a flawless match, the researcher clarified that cultures will regulate over time (Hofstede's Cultural Dimensions: – Understanding Different Countries, 2021). When companies start to expand and become internationalized, more conflicts arise. Businesses then were in much need of guidance and dependability on reliable studies and research. Hofstede’s dimensions were in a position to satisfy requests therefore, companies started surviving which demonstrates it is revolutionary. (Hofstede's Cultural Dimensions: – Understanding Different Countries, 2021)
Despite being successful, people believe that only 6 dimensions aren’t enough to compete with numerous cultural background issues. Hofstede himself believes that his work must be further supplemented with new dimensions. What's more, Hofstede’s theory combines the entire population as a whole regardless of the different regions and several traditional backgrounds (CRITICISM OF HOFSTEDE, 2021) . The process led to doubts of its effectiveness due to several different characteristics of people answering the survey; that would then affect the entire country. (CRITICISM OF HOFSTEDE, 2021)
Secondly, Lewis's model was created by the researcher Richards D. Lewis. The basis of his research focused on data collection. The researcher gathered data from 150,000 online surveys, 50,000 administrators over 65 nationalities in order to reach a precise diagram (The Lewis Model – Dimensions of Behaviour | Cross Culture, 2021). However, after long research and questioners, he settled on dividing them into 3 groups of people. The divergent groups are linear active, multi-active, and reactive. (for meanings in the appendix) (The Lewis Model – Dimensions of Behaviour | Cross Culture, 2021). Even though the dividends might be dissimilar but they comprehend a small percentage of similarities. Anyhow, people criticized the model uttering that it has no scientific foundation by blaming it to be more of general research that’s unreliable for businesses to depend on . Basically, it's believed to be more of general research that focuses on the basis of how different cultures may react to different situations. The research should be assisting in foreseeing issues between communities in the sector of communication. (The Lewis Model – Dimensions of Behaviour | Cross Culture, 2021) Though, it’s impossible to be 100% accurate due to different factors an individual may face during different days that could deeply affect his decision-making and behaviors. However, the diagram could positively support understanding how different businesses favor cultures; long or short-term-oriented cultures. (2021)
Lastly, Hofstede’s and Lewis’s diagrams are similar but for the application of one of them, I choose Hofstede. It’s more clear that Hofstede is the best applicant since after experimenting the replications of the 6 diagrams were more accurate and some of them were typical to his research. New business opportunities can rely more on the 6 diagram theory. On the other hand, the criticism for Lewis is model is vast and some believe it’s not reliable enough because of how many different factors can affect the results. (Country Comparison – Hofstede Insights, 2021)
Part 3: Justification of cross cultural analysis approach
As Sephora is a brand that is loved and known by many people, it is an advantage to have a Sephora in Egypt because throughout different countries it is the number one leading makeup and skincare brand (2021). As Sephora is also skincare inclusive it provides a chance for people in Egypt to have both aspects of makeup and skincare in one place instead of having to order the products they need online. Ordering online works, but people prefer to have physical stores to choose the products to their liking with the aid of the employees. With the allowance of Sephora having all the makeup brands in one place, expansion of the store increases profits as well as the number of customers. Seeing as France is a modern country, bringing that aspect of modernism to Egypt (a country that continues to develop), Sephora will increase the chance of having a partnership between these two countries as the same brands will be available for customers.
By using the Hofstede 2010 theory, breaking down the marketing aspect linked with the psychological aspect, using a social media campaign implying that they are expanding to Egypt from France can create a sense of attachment to Sephora, thus allowing the brand to meet its customers’ needs that those other existing brands in Egypt were not fulfilling (Sondergaard, 1994; Steenkamp, 2001). Linking back to Part 2 above, talking about the cultural aspects as well as the conservative aspect, it allows majority of the different cultural backgrounds in Egypt to be more educated when it comes to different makeup brands. Even though they are educated now it allows them to create a broader sense of awareness of other brands that may be presented to them, i.e., those that they are unfamiliar with. This may also give a chance to employees working for other makeup stores in Egypt to be presented with the same opportunities as those in France. This can be linked back to the economic aspect that Hofstede’s theory provides, i.e., the dimension of power distance states that power is distributed unequally within a country to less powerful members of organisations (Country Comparison, 2021). Through economically creating more job opportunities for people in Egypt, it allows for individualism as in Hofstede’s theory (Kale and Barnes, 1992). Currently, Egypt is a collectivistic society (80), as Sephora moves from France – an individualistic society – there is a better chance for individuals to gain interdependence and thus have more jobs available. In addition to that, since France is an individualistic society, expanding Sephora from there to Egypt can also be challenging due to the vast cultural differences, mainly the beliefs. For example, the Egyptian culture can tend to be more conservative and therefore for an individual to work for Sephora it can be considered offensive as the family of an employee has to take responsibility for their actions in such societies. On the other hand, the expansion can continue to infuse and influence the marketing mix such as providing the people in Egypt with services, e.g., free makeup trials, as well as the use of promotions. Once a Sephora has been opened in Egypt, it gives customers the chance to feel the products before purchasing as compared to when they ordered online.
The move from France allows the customers to give feedback and recommend more products. The reason this is beneficial is because even though the Sephora in France is fully equipped and the country itself is developed, it lets the two countries collaborate and work as one to better each other in their weak points. This can be linked to Hofstede’s dimension of uncertainty avoidance. As seen in Hofstede’s Insights, (Country Comparison, 2021), the uncertainty avoidance for Egypt (80) and France (86) is close, now with the opening of Sephora and sharing thoughts and communicating with one another regarding new prospects uncertainty avoidance for both countries can reduce as they will automatically disregard their previous beliefs. Furthermore, using Hofstede’s theory to explain the expansion has proven to be quite thorough and comprehensive (Smith et al., 1996).
References:
· Hofstede Insights. 2021. Country Comparison – Hofstede Insights. [online] Available at: <https://www.hofstede-insights.com/country-comparison/egypt,france/> [Accessed 18 November 2021].
· Kale S, Barnes J. Understanding the domain of cross-national buyer-seller interactions. J Int Bus Stud 1992;23(1):101.
· Smith P, Dugan S, Trompenaars F. National culture and the values of organizational employees — a dimensional analysis across 43 nations. J Cross-Cult Psychol 1996;27(2):231–64.
· Sondergaard M. Research note: Hofstede's consequences: a study of reviews, citations and replications. Organ Stud 1994;15(3):447–56.
· Marzena, A., 2021. [online] Econstor.eu. Available at: <https://www.econstor.eu/bitstream/10419/229732/1/cerem-v1-i2-335.pdf> [Accessed 18 November 2021].
· 2021. [online] Available at: <https://craft.co/sephora> [Accessed 14 November 2021].
· Schwanke, C., 2021. [online] Makeup.lovetoknow.com. Available at: <https://makeup.lovetoknow.com/cosmetics-brands/what-is-history-sephora> [Accessed 14 November 2021].
· Allied Market Research. 2021. Egypt Cosmetic Market Size, Share & Demand | Research Report 2026. [online] Available at: <https://www.alliedmarketresearch.com/egypt-cosmetic-market> [Accessed 14 November 2021].
· Taylor & Francis. 2021. The Hofstede model. [online] Available at: <https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.2501/s026504870920104x> [Accessed 16 November 2021].
· Day Translations Blog. 2021. Why Cultural Differences in Business Matter. [online] Available at: <https://www.daytranslations.com/blog/culture-nuance-business/> [Accessed 16 November 2021].
· Mindtools.com. 2021. Hofstede's Cultural Dimensions: – Understanding Different Countries. [online] Available at: <https://www.mindtools.com/pages/article/newLDR_66.htm> [Accessed 16 November 2021].
· Crossculture.com. 2021. The Lewis Model – Dimensions of Behaviour | Cross Culture. [online] Available at: <https://www.crossculture.com/the-lewis-model-dimensions-of-behaviour/> [Accessed 18 November 2021].
· Jogsc.com. 2021. [online] Available at: <http://www.jogsc.com/pdf/2018/2/theanalysis.pdf> [Accessed 18 November 2021].
Appendix
Source: Mindtools.com. 2021. Hofstede's Cultural Dimensions: – Understanding Different Countries. [online] Available at: <https://www.mindtools.com/pages/article/newLDR_66.htm> [Accessed 16 November 2021].
Hofstede’s 6 cultures dimensions
· Individualism: The scale of reach of one individual to other people. A high scale of an individual culture means that each individual is more responsible for himself and mostly their family. As for a collective culture is when people become more responsible for each other and is usually in superior societies.
· Power Distance: Is when lower class population accep
