Content uploaded by Tamer Baran
Author content
All content in this area was uploaded by Tamer Baran on May 09, 2022
Content may be subject to copyright.
Chapter
A Systematic Review and Research
Agenda on Standardization versus
Adaptation of Brand Elements in
International Markets
Tamer Baran
Abstract
This paper aims to systematically review and critically examine marketing research
on the standardization/adaptation of brand elements and explain its importance,
given its increasing influence internationally. 46 journal articles indexed in Scopus
and Web of Science databases examine with focus on research theme with broad
scope approach, one of the types of literature review. The findings show that there is a
live stream about the standardization/adaptation of brand elements in the marketing
discipline, and contextual, methodological, and thematic diversity. Moreover, the
findings of the review also highlight various literature trends and gaps. Results of the
current review offer deep insights and create an ambitious research agenda that raises
exciting new research questions for researchers. Besides results help to encourage the
development of future theories on international branding.
Keywords: branding, brand elements, standardization, adaptation, systematic review
1. Introduction
In the last few decades, a significant and major change in terms of globalization has
taken place as a result of the liberalization of countries’trade policies, the realization of
regional economic integrations, faster flow of goods compared to previous periods, and
rapid development in logistics and information and communication technologies [1–3].
Companies with different national origins from almost every sector have caused an
increase in the intensity of competition in the globalizing world [4]. Consequently, the
problems related to the design of robust branding strategies to compete effectively and
efficiently in the international market have been the focus of relevant research. Perhaps the
most important reason for this is that the brand is the most valuable asset of a company [5].
For example, BrandZ’s report states Amazon’s brand value is over $415 billion, Apple’s
brand value is over $350 billion, and Microsoft and Google’s brand value are over $320
billion. Moreover, many brands on the list increase their brand values year by year.
The value of a brand is closely linked to the effective use of brand elements. This is
because, through brand elements, companies can create a quality perception, associate
1
their brands with some positive features, and reach a high level of brand recognition
[5]. In addition, the brand can have a respectable identity, personality, and a high
level of awareness and recognition in the consumers’perspectives [6]. These features
will, undoubtedly, give the brand a competitive advantage in the market.
At this point, one of the important issues about branding that international
companies need to address is the standardization/adaptation of brand elements in the
target market [7]. In international branding, the decision regarding the aforemen-
tioned strategies is directly related to the target consumer audience, legal environ-
ment, the transferability of the company’s marketing skills, and the characteristics of
the product [6]. Therefore, international branding is more complicated than local
branding [8], and, for this reason, it is not possible to state that standardization/
adaptation strategies should be preferred over the other.
Due to the importance of the topic, it has become inevitable for both academics
and decision-makers to seek an answer to the question of how to manage brand
elements successfully in international markets [7]. In the literature reviews on the
topic, some authors [9–11] discussed the topic within the framework of international
marketing. On the other hand, in the limited number of systematic literature reviews
on branding, some authors [12, 13] studied brand orientation, while others [14, 15]
focused on brand loyalty. However, studies failed to attach enough importance to the
standardization/adaptation of brand elements. Therefore, the lack of studies on the
standardization/adaptation of brand elements draws attention in the literature.
In this context, the present review aimed to consolidate extant research, establish
links with different literature studies, identify gaps between and within research
streams, and bring together all the components as much as possible. To this end, I
conducted a systematic review of research on brand elements to make suggestions for
further research. At this point, I specifically aimed to highlight, clarify, rationalize,
and interpret the similarities and differences among studies in terms of content and
methodology and draw conclusions about future research directions. Since only a
limited number of systematic reviews have been conducted on the topic, the current
review is expected to make a meaningful and profound contribution to the field.
The paper is organized as follows: the following section provides an overview of
the employed review protocols and the rationale behind them. Next, the results of the
systematic review are presented. Then, both a descriptive and thematic analysis of the
extant literature and show the breadth and depth of the available knowledge are
provided. The review is ended with a discussion of the main gaps in the literature that
were detected and suggestions for future research directions.
2. Methodology
Despite numerous studies on the standardization/adaptation of brand elements in
international marketing literature conducted over the last few decades, no effort has
been made to systematically review these studies findings. The present review aimed
to examine the studies on the topic comprehensively and systematically reveal the
research evidence. In their comprehensive study, [16] categorized review types
according to their characteristics and obtained 14 review types, including the system-
atic literature review (SLR). Accordingly, a SLR is the process of systematically
searching for, evaluating, and synthesizing research evidence, often adhering to
guidelines on the conduct of a review. In this type of review, the subject is handled
carefully and clearly [17, 18].
2
Brand Management
SLRs have some important advantages over other review types. An SLR improves
the quality of the review process and outputs [19], reduces the level of error in the
research and the bias of the researcher [20, 21], increases the validity of the process
since the review process is carried out without leaving any details open to interpreta-
tion [22], allows the researcher to focus on a specific research area [23], and finally,
provides information to the stakeholders in a comprehensive framework [20, 24]. Due
to these superior characteristics, studies employing the SLR method in various
research areas such as blockchain technology [25], preventive medicine [26], and
sustainability [27] have been published in a fairly high number of prestigious journals.
For these reasons, the current review, aiming at a comprehensive, valuable, and
advanced review of the standardization/adaptation of brand elements, employed the
SLR method.
Several approaches have been put forward regarding the stages of a SLR. Tranfield
et al. [21] suggested that the SLR process basically consists of three stages: planning
the review, conducting a review, and reporting and dissemination. The authors also
proposed a total of 10 steps under these three main stages. On the other hand, Khan
et al. [28] discussed the stages of a systematic review under five headings: framing
questions for a review, identifying relevant work, assessing the quality of studies,
summarizing the evidence, and interpreting the findings. Magarey [29] grouped the
stages of an SLR under six headings: formulation of a research question, literature
search, selection of studies to be included in the review, data extraction, analysis and
synthesis, and reporting the results. Vrontis and Christofi [18] employed a 7-step
process consisting of the following steps: question formulation, inclusion criteria,
search strategy, exclusion criteria, selecting relevant studies, further search processes,
and extraction, analysis, and synthesis. One of the most comprehensive definitions of
the process belongs to Okoli and Schabram [30]. The authors defined an 8-step guide
to conducting an SLR: defining the purpose of the literature review, protocol, and
training, searching for the literature, practical screen (inclusion criteria), quality
appraisal (exclusion criteria), data extraction, synthesis of studies, writing the review.
This review employed the 7-step process proposed by Vrontis and Christofi [18].
3. SLR process
3.1 Question formulation
Although some authors [18, 28, 30] define this stage with different words, the point
on which all authors agree is that the most important step for an SLR, as in all research
in the field of marketing [31–34], is the formulation of the research question. Formu-
lating the research question clearly plays a key role in the success of the research as it
shapes the future stages of the research. While formulating the research question of the
present review, I focused on the standardization/adaptation of brand elements. Follow-
ing Vrontis and Christofi [18] and collaborating with marketing researchers who have
studied on the topic, I formulated the research question: What is the main focus of
studies on the standardization/adaptation of brand elements in the marketing literature?
3.2 Inclusion criteria
Vrontis and Christofi, Dada and Wang and Chung [18, 20, 22] applied three
inclusion criteria to decide which studies to include in their systematic review: (1) to
3
A Systematic Review and Research Agenda on Standardization versus Adaptation of Brand…
DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.103866
determine the search boundaries; (2) to identify the search strings, and; (3) to specify
the search timeframe. In this review, I employed the first two criteria: to determine
the search boundaries and to identify the search strings. Considering the previous
SLRs, some authors [35, 36] conducted the SLR process on a journal basis whereas
many other authors [17–20] conducted their review on a database basis. Since the
database-based process is preferred more in SLRs, the present review followed this
process. In the studies mentioned above, the researchers focused on EBSCOhost
Business Source Complete, ScienceDirect, and Emerald databases but overlooked Web
of Science (WoS) and Scopus databases. For this reason, WoS and Scopus databases
formed the boundaries of this review. Furthermore, following the suggestions put
forward by Kauppi et al. [23], I created a comprehensive list of search terms related to
the research topic. My purpose here was to minimize the possibility of excluding
search terms related to the research topic. As stated above, I did not specify a specific
search timeframe; therefore, I included all the studies on the topic, regardless of when
they were conducted. I did this to eliminate the possibility of excluding important
studies on the topic.
3.3 Search strategy
Khan et al. [28] state that researchers can use at this stage many criteria as research
criteria such as title, abstract, full text, keywords, language, category, words other
than keywords, etc. At this point, the researcher has the freedom to choose data
sources and selection criteria [35]. In this context, the present review used all of the
criteria mentioned above, and the first review was conducted to cover all relevant
studies. I identified the search terms following [7]. These authors found that stan-
dardization and adaptation are stated with different terms in marketing terminology.
Accordingly, some authors [37–40] used the term “standardization,”while others
(e.g., [1, 2, 41–44]) used the term “globalization.”Also, some authors (e.g., [1, 3, 45–
49]) used the term “adaptation,”while some others (e.g., [2, 3, 50, 51]) used the term
“customization.”Apart from these, some authors [48, 52–54] preferred the British
spelling of “standardization”(“standardization”), “globalization”(“globalization”)
[55, 56] and “customization”(“customization”) [52, 57, 58]. In this review, I used all
the terms mentioned above in the database search to minimize the possibility of
missing the studies on the topic.
On the other hand, the brand elements forming this review’s topic were collected
in three groups name, symbol, and slogan by Aaker [5] and Kotler and Keller [59].
Moreover, the symbol element consists of the components of logos, packaging,
human, scenes, and cartoon characters. On the other hand, regarded name, slogan,
symbol, logo, packaging, and character as well as URL and jingle as brand elements
[6]. Kapferer [60] defined brand elements as name, slogan, symbol, logo, packaging,
brand character, and color and sound. In the present review, as brand elements, I used
the keywords of name, slogan, symbol, logo, packaging, and character, on which the
above-mentioned authors agree, to identify the studies on brand elements. Thus, not
only did I cover the studies on the topic at a maximum level but also determined the
boundaries of the review.
Accordingly, I formulated the following search formula: (brand) AND (name OR
slogan OR symbol OR logo OR packag* OR character) AND (standardi* OR globali*
OR adaptation OR customi*). My first search with the inclusion criteria yielded a total
of 1571 (Scopus, 577; WoS, 494) articles in databases.
4
Brand Management
3.4 Exclusion criteria
The sample of related studies that emerged after the first search was in need of a
new appraisal to further clarify the most relevant studies. In this context, I followed
the suggestions of various authors. First of all, although the field of the current review
was business, the first sample contained articles from many different fields (e.g.,
environmental science, dermatology, pharmaceutical science, civil engineering, etc.).
For this reason, following Khan et al.’s [28] suggestions, I selected the category of
business. Next, following advanced SLR studies [35, 61], I selected full-text articles.
Thus, I was able to exclude non-academic studies such as reviews, conference papers,
book chapters, and books. As a result of the second exclusion, I noticed that there
were articles in languages other than English (e.g., French, Russian, Chinese, Spanish,
Portuguese, etc.). Therefore, in the third exclusion step, I excluded non-English arti-
cles. I did this for two reasons: Firstly, I do not know the mentioned languages, and
secondly, and more importantly, I wanted to focus on a common scientific knowledge
base represented by the majority of prestigious scientific journals [23]. Thus, I
accessed a total of 208 articles (Scopus, 131; WoS, 77), including duplicate records. As
a result of the detection and removal of duplicate records, the two databases yielded a
total of 173 articles on my research topic.
Figure 1.
Research process.
5
A Systematic Review and Research Agenda on Standardization versus Adaptation of Brand…
DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.103866
3.5 Identifying relevant studies
I completed carefully the inclusion and exclusion processes described above. Next,
adhering to the processes of Nolan and Garawan [62], I first examined the titles and
then the abstracts of the new list that emerged. At this point, I preferred not to comply
with very strict rules. In other words, without stipulating a condition such that the titles
of the studies fully or partially fit the research question of this review, I tried to identify
the studies that would help explain the topic as much as possible. I excluded the studies
that were not related to both standardization/adaptation and brand elements. By doing
so, I aimed to include articles that would contribute to developing an insight into the
standardization/adaptation of brand elements, even though they focused on other
topics. Subsequently, I started the full-text review process. The full-text review process
yielded a total of 37 articles that I deemed appropriate to be included in the review.
Afterthisstage,Icarefullyexaminedallselected studies reference lists and tried to
identify major relevant studies that I had failed to include in the review. Cross-referencing
helped me to retrieve nine more articles, thus increasing the number of studies to 46.
Figure 1 demonstrates the research process steps of the current review detailed above.
The remainder of the paper focuses on mapping the field by making use of the
descriptive and thematic analysis obtained from the final list resulting from the systematic
review and reporting the findings in an integrative framework. In the analysis stage, Gaur
and Kumar’s[35]“focus on research theme with broad scope”approach, one of the types
of literature review, was used. Accordingly, the findings of selected articles reviewed by
two academics with Ph.D. degrees in marketing were presented.
4. Findings
4.1 Descriptive findings
The analysis of the existing literature on standardization/adaptation in interna-
tional branding contributed to the determination of the focus of the relevant studies
and the gaps in the literature and the development of suggestions for future research
directions. This section reports the publication outlets from which the data were
collected, fields of research, year of publication, the type of articles published, author’s
characteristics, and industrial analysis of the reviewed papers to provide a preliminary
map of the existing literature and identify possible gaps that need further research.
4.2 Studies by year of publication, type of paper, and methods
According to Table 1, which outlines the studies by year of publications, there has
been an increase in studies on standardization/adaptation in branding since the 2000s.
Studies on the topic reached a peak in 2015 (n = 4). Although the topic started to be
studied by academics more than 30 years ago, the number of studies has been
increasing recently. The number of studies on standardization/adaptation in branding
has increased significantly in the second decade compared to the previous decade
(30% increase compared to the first decade). Moreover, approximately 30% of the
studies have been carried out in the last five years. This indicates that researchers
interest in the topic has increased over the years, and the research area has evolved.
The review yielded that the listed articles were published in a wide range of journals.
The studies were mainly (46%, n = 21) published in marketing journals, followed by
6
Brand Management
Years
JPBM
JTIB
IJEBR
IMR
JBM
JoBM
JIBS
EJM
JM
IBR
JAPC
JBR
JIntM
MSQ
SB
GBER
IJA
SS
JIM
MRR
MS
IJRM
BJM
JBIM
IJM
JMC
SD
JCM
Total
1989 1 1
1994 1 1
1997 11
2001 1 1
2002 1113
2004 1 12
2005 1 1 13
2007 1 1 1 3
2008 1 1 2
2009 2 13
2010 1 1 1 3
2011 1 1 1 3
2012 1 1
2013 112
2014 1 11 3
2015 2 1 14
2016 1 1
2017 1 1 13
2018 1 1
2019 1 1 1 3
2020 1 12
7
A Systematic Review and Research Agenda on Standardization versus Adaptation of Brand…
DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.103866
Years
JPBM
JTIB
IJEBR
IMR
JBM
JoBM
JIBS
EJM
JM
IBR
JAPC
JBR
JIntM
MSQ
SB
GBER
IJA
SS
JIM
MRR
MS
IJRM
BJM
JBIM
IJM
JMC
SD
JCM
Total
611531132112111121111211121146
Notes: JPBM, Journal of Product and Brand Management; JTIB, Journal of Teaching in International Business; IJEBR, International Journal of E-Business Research; IMR, International
Marketing Review; JBM, Journal of Brand Management; JoBM, Journal of Bank Marketing; JIBS, Journal of International Business Studies; EJM, European Journal of Marketing; JM, Journal of
Marketing; IBR, International Business Review; JAPC, Journal of Asian Pacific Communication; JBR, Journal of Business Research; JIntM, Journal of Interactive Marketing; MSQ, Managing
Service Quality; SB, Service Business; GBER, Global Business and Economic Review; IJA, International Journal of Advertising; SS, Social Semiotics JIM, Journal of International Marketing; MRR,
Management Research Review; MS, Marketing Science; IJRM, International Journal of Research in Marketing; BJM, Baltic Journal of Management; JBIM, Journal of Business and Industrial
Marketing; IJM, International Journal of Marketing; JMC, Journal of Marketing Communications; SD, Strategic Direction; JCM, Journal of Consumer Marketing.
1
Till the end of June 2020.
Table 1.
Distrbution of studies by years and journals.
1
8
Brand Management
brand-related journals (20%, n = 9). Seven studies (15%) were published in journals
on general business, and others (20%, n = 9) were published in journals focused on
different fields. The journal with the highest number of published studies on the topic
(13%, n = 6) was the Journal of Product and Brand Management, followed by Inter-
national Marketing Review (11%, n = 5).
4.3 Studies by the number of authors and authorship origin
As can be inferred from Table 2 indicating the number of authors of the studies,
the studies with a single author constituted the least number (15%, n = 7). In other
words, most of the studies were conducted by more than one author, and the highest
number (33%, n = 15) belonged to the studies conducted by three authors. Moreover,
the majority of the studies (63%, n = 29) were conducted by researchers from the
same country. The lowest rate (9%, n = 4) among the studies that included informa-
tion about the authorship origin belonged to those published by academics from three
different countries.
As regards the authorship origin, authors from the USA were in the first place (n =
19), followed by Australia (n = 14), Spain (n = 8), and China (n = 7) (Figure 2). In
addition, considering the regions from which author contributions come from, the
majority of authors (46%, n = 47) come from Europe, followed by America (21%, n =
22), Asia (18%, n = 19), and Australia (15%, n = 15).
4.4 Studies by geographic coverage
According to Figure 3, where the studies are presented in terms of geographic
coverage, most of the studies (30%, n = 14) are based in more than one country. As
can be inferred from the figure, the geographic coverage is narrow in studies based in
a single country. Most of the studies based in a single country were conducted in
China (24%, n = 11), followed by the USA (4%) and Pakistan (4%), with two studies
each. Studies based in a single country focused on five countries (11%), both from
Europe and Asia each. On the other hand, Australia was examined in only one study
(2%), while the African continent was completely ignored. In fact, none of the studies
Authors’characteristics Number %
Number of authors
1715
21328
31533
4 and more 11 24
Number of countries
12963
21124
349
No info 2 4
Table 2.
Authors’information of studies.
9
A Systematic Review and Research Agenda on Standardization versus Adaptation of Brand…
DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.103866
focused on Central Asia and the Middle East. Finally, eight studies (17%) included no
information about their geographic coverage.
4.5 Thematic analysis
As part of SLR, thematic analysis develops an integrative perspective on the
focus of relevant research [17]. In this context, in this review, following Aakers
approach [5], three themes, namely name, symbol, and slogan, related to international
branding, were determined. Since some authors [5, 60] divide the symbol into three
sub-themes, namely, logo, packaging, and character, this review also considered
these three sub-themes, thus increasing the number of elements to five. Appendix A
presents the studied articles according to their themes. As can be inferred from the
table, a majority of the studies focus on the brand name, followed by studies on
Figure 2.
Origins of studies’authors.
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
16
Figure 3.
Geographical coverage of the studies.
10
Brand Management
multiple brand elements. On the other hand, none of the reviewed studies focuses
solely on the slogan.
Appendix B describes the sectors on which the studies are focused. 30% of the
reviewed articles contain no information regarding the studied sector due to either
their nature (conceptual study, literature review, etc.) or failure to specify the topic.
On the other hand, those that mention the studied sector mostly focus on more than
one sector (28%, n = 13). Besides, those that focused on a single sector were mostly
(11%, n = 5) conducted in the context of consumer goods.
Following this, the review on each of these themes revolved around the main
research focus of the reviewed articles. Findings of the current study show that studies
on the topic mostly deal with consumer behavior towards different brand elements.
For example, some studies [63–65] aimed to determine the effect of the brand name
on consumer behaviors, while others [66] sought to determine the effect of the
packaging on consumer behaviors. On the other hand, the most studied topic is
standardization and adaptation in branding. At this point, some researchers [67]
focused solely on standardization in branding, while others [68, 69] focused solely on
adaptation. In addition, some of the studies on the field discussed the topic more
specifically and dealt only with the standardization or adaptation of brand elements.
For example, Alashban et al. [70] and Okazaki [71] examined the standardization of
the brand name, whereas Barnes et al. [72], Usunier, and Shaner [73] studied the
adaptation of the brand name. Khan et al. [74] investigated the standardization of
symbols, another brand element, while Khan et al. [75] studied the adaptation of the
packaging. The analysis also yielded cross-cultural studies, one of the important topics
of international branding. In this context, some authors [76, 77] dealt with the topic
from a broader perspective, while others [78] investigated it in the context of pack-
aging, which is one of the brand elements. Furthermore, some studies [79, 80] tried to
reveal the relationship between brand elements and the country of origin in the
context of consumer behaviors.
On the other hand, it was found that some issues related to the topic were not
addressed in the reviewed studies. For example, the effects of positioning in interna-
tional branding [81], and branding on firm performance [82] were each the topic of
only one study.
4.6 Gaps for future research directions
This section is devoted to the gaps thought to guide future research (in terms of
theory, methodology, authorship, and scope) in hopes of helping future studies. I
believe that these research gaps will provide fruitful research avenues for further
research.
4.6.1 Theory
As a result of the present review, several issues emerged in terms of theory. First of
all, though some authors have contributed to the field using several theories (brand
name standardization/adaptation, consumer behavior, etc.), some issues related to
international branding still lack a clear theoretical basis. Our finding is similar to and
supports previous studies in other fields (e.g., [83–85]. Therefore, I suggest that
academics studying the standardization/adaptation of brand elements should focus on
studies that are blended with other disciplines such as sociology, psychology, etc.,
11
A Systematic Review and Research Agenda on Standardization versus Adaptation of Brand…
DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.103866
where the ideas and theories in these disciplines are used more, and they should try to
present a wider perspective.
Second, the reviewed studies give little coverage to Aaker’s [5] brand equity and
Keller’s [6] brand elements, which are generally accepted in the literature. Brand
loyalty and perceived quality concepts were encountered in a few studies [5], whereas
brand elements were almost never encountered [6]. Therefore, it is recommended
that future research focus on brand association, brand awareness, brand identity,
brand personality, brand recognition, and brand recall.
Third, when the suggestions for future research were evaluated in terms of litera-
ture themes, it was found that the studies focused on a certain theme, as was seen in
previous reviews [83]. A significant portion of the studies [63–65, 68, 69, 72, 86] was
found to focus on the brand name while those on symbols were found to focus on the
packaging [74, 78, 87]. Our findings reveal that the literature still needs studies on
slogans, logos, and characters. Therefore, I anticipate that studies on standardization/
adaptation related to these elements, which will be supported by different theories,
will attract significant attention.
Additionally, our findings showed that the standardization/adaptation of brand
elements in international marketing concentrates especially on China in terms of
cultural theory but fails to notice different cultures. For this reason, it is
recommended that scholars who are interested in the topic carry out studies to reveal
the perspectives of consumers from different cultures.
4.6.2 Methodology
The results of the current review highlight the obvious insufficiency of qualitative
research on the topic. It is probable that the main reason for this insufficiency is the
difficulties in analyzing the data obtained through the qualitative research design.
However, information obtained through various approaches is needed to reach more
in-depth information about standardization/adaptation in branding, which is
predicted to make important contributions to the field. Identifying the antecedents
and successors of the complex structures of the topic and adding them to the existing
knowledge base and valid research methods require significantly more qualitative
inquiry.
4.6.3 Authorship
The findings of the review may lead to the interpretation that South American and
African authors have made no contributions to the field. It is obvious that studies to be
carried out by South American and African writers in their own regions or in other
regions with international cooperation will enrich the field.
As stated above, researchers from the USA and Australia make up more than
half of the total authors. Therefore, I recommend that researchers from other
countries conduct research and enrich the field. Moreover, it was found that co-
authorship was not at a sufficient level in the reviewed studies, and most of the
studies were carried out by academics from the same country. For this reason, this
finding presented an important opportunity for international authors on the topic.
In this context, I believe that studies to be carried out by researchers from different
cultures and different continents or regions will make significant contributions to
the field.
12
Brand Management
4.6.4 Context
Industrial focus: First, most of the reviewed articles clearly support the literature on
the manufacturing industry. Therefore, there is an obvious need for studies that can
reveal more findings related to the service sector to generalize the results of the
reviewed studies. Second, although there has been an increase in the number of
studies focusing on more than one sector, studies comparing different sectors will
always maintain their importance in every period. This is because cross-sectorial
differences are subject to inconsistencies between the findings of studied sectors and
those of other sectors [17]. Therefore, conducting research to compare sectors that
have not been studied in the literature is an important opportunity that the present
review offers researchers. Third, the studies on the topic conducted so far have
focused on consumer goods. Hence, examining a wide variety of industry contexts
and a better understanding of the relationships between models through analysis at
the sectoral level are expected to enrich the literature.
Geographical scope: Undoubtedly, one of the important factors that make a theory
robust is the test of applicability in the context of different geography and develop-
ment levels and the comparability of findings. In this direction, developing economies
cover a wide variety of countries in terms of both their geographical locations and
development levels. Considering our findings in this context, the researchers, who
planned to address the standardization/adaptation of brand elements at a single coun-
try level, focused on the USA and Australia but overlooked developing economies
such as Brazil, Russia, and India, which are defined as BRIC. It was seen that the
country among the developing economies that received the most focus was China.
Similarly, regarding MINT countries, no studies focused on Mexico, Indonesia, and
Nigeria, whereas only one study was conducted in the context of Turkey. The findings
of the present review revealed that future research to be conducted in these countries
would fill an important gap in the literature.
One of the most important points in international branding is cultural influences
and consumers reactions in different cultures to the standardization/adaptation of
brand elements [76, 77]. When our findings are considered from a cultural perspec-
tive, China attracts the most attention in the studies. This is acceptable from a cultural
perspective as China hosts one of the worlds most interesting cultures. However, apart
from China, it was seen that India, the Middle East, the African continent, and
Northern European countries such as Sweden and Norway failed to attract enough
attention. Although the highest number of studies in the geographic context belongs
to the studies comparing countries, the fact that these studies did not focus suffi-
ciently on the above-mentioned cultures stands as an important opportunity for
researchers who want to enrich the literature. Doing so will also help companies find
an answer to the question of what kind of strategy they should implement in different
cultures.
Based on the above comments, an important gap that emerged as a result of the
review is the tendency to focus on relatively few regions and countries. Over-focusing
on contexts such as China, the US, and Europe can lead to false generalizations about
other contexts, about which I still know very little. The extant literature obviously
reveals invaluable information on the topic. However, studies in geographic areas such
as Brazil, Russia, India, Mexico, Indonesia, Nigeria, Turkey, and even Japan, which
have been researched in only a small number of studies, are likely to reveal new
theoretical developments and novel insights into the topic. Moreover, the field
deserves to be enriched in the context of these regions. In this context, to expand the
13
A Systematic Review and Research Agenda on Standardization versus Adaptation of Brand…
DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.103866
geographic coverage of the field, I recommend reaching out to academics or industry
stakeholders from countries where research is planned, who are likely to have a
deeper contextual understanding and can assist scholars in accessing data that is often
difficult to retrieve in such countries.
5. Conclusion and limitations
5.1 Theoretical contributions
First of all, the current review is the first systematic review of studies on the
standardization/adaptation of brand elements in the field of international marketing.
In this regard, the review has the potential to substantially enrich and expand the
literature on the standardization/adaptation of brand elements. Further, systematic
approaches to the topic are still very limited. As emphasized by some scholars (e.g.
[88]), systematic reviews contribute to resolving definitional ambiguities and
outlining the scope of the topic, offer an integrated, synthesized overview of the
current state of knowledge, identify inconsistencies in prior findings and potential
explanations, appraise extant methodological approaches with unique insights, pre-
sent conceptual frameworks related to previous research, and describe existing gaps
and future research directions. Similarly, this review mapped research on the stan-
dardization/adaptation of brand elements, structured results from the extant litera-
ture, and provided unique and general insights that allowed for an easier and better
understanding of the relevant literature.
Secondly, the present systematic review made a substantial contribution to the
identification of theoretical synthesis and development opportunities on the topic.
Moreover, given that the strength of using the systematic review approach is to
provide a solid evidence basis for future research directions, I hope that researchers
interested in this topic will use this work as a basis for further expanding the research
on the standardization/adaptation of brand elements.
Thirdly, the results of this review highlight a number of knowledge gaps to be
filled by future research regarding the following purposes: developing a stronger
theoretical basis on the topic, achieving a better contextual positioning, and adapting
methodologies that are more exploratory in nature. These arguments can lay the
groundwork for the emergence of research that can make significant contributions to
the development of the field because the gaps highlighted in the literature reveal the
issues overlooked in previous studies on the standardization/adaptation of brand
elements. Such an analysis can at least provide a more holistic understanding of the
nature of research on standardization/adaptation of brand elements and encourage
conceptual expansion and empirical research in a field of review that may have more
theoretical and practical relevance than ever before.
5.2 Contributions to practice
Besides significant insights on theory, our findings also make important contribu-
tions to practice. Most importantly, our review contributes to determining appropri-
ate strategies in the context of the standardization/adaptation process of brand
elements in geographical, cultural, etc. For example, should decision-makers prefer
standardization by using the brand image in different cultures, such as the Far East,
Middle East, Europe, USA, etc., or should they prefer adaptation by considering
14
Brand Management
differences in different geographies? Moreover, what strategies to be used for con-
sumers of countries with different levels of development will provide more benefits to
the company? Decision-makers can determine the best strategy by considering the
findings of this review.
In conclusion, I hope that, with this review, researchers can be encouraged work-
ing and planning to work in the field to appreciate the rich data of previous research.
Through the relevant structures that I uncovered using the process in the review, I
think it would be beneficial for new ideas to benefit from the present review.
5.3 Limitations
As with all studies, this review has a number of limitations, which should be
considered when examining the findings. First of all, since the focus of this review was
previous research on the standardization/adaptation of brand elements, I did not
provide detailed recommendations linking the elements, which would be the logical
next step. Second, this review covered studies indexed in certain databases: Web of
Science and Scopus databases, which seemed to have been overlooked in previous
reviews, were reviewed. Although I tried to eliminate this problem as much as possi-
ble by thoroughly examining the reference lists in the articles included in the review, I
may have still failed to observe studies indexed in databases outside of these data-
bases. Third, I used certain keywords to identify the studies to be examined. Doing so
may have potentially led us to miss some relevant research. Nevertheless, I believe
that our rigorous systematic review process reduces the likelihood that the studies that
were unintentionally left out contain information that would critically change our
results. Finally, I carried out the analysis process only thematically, in line with Gaur
and Kumar’s [35] classification. Moreover, our approach was carried out in light of one
of the thematic classifications. This, in turn, inevitably resulted in the failure to
evaluate some of the information in the studied studies.
A. Research themes of reviewed papers
Themes Papers n %
Theme 1: Name Alashban et al. [70], Baptista [89], Barnes et al. [72], Chan [68],
Cheng and Yeung [63], Chiang [76], Dawar and Parker [90], Dong
and Holmes [91], Fetscherin et al. [64], Francis et al. [86], Gao et al.
[65], Jiang [92], Kuehl and Mantau [93], Miranda and Konya [94],
Ranchhod et al. [79], Rosen et al. [69], Samiee et al. [80], Sang and
Zhang [95], Timmor and Zif [96], Usunier and Shaner [73]
21 46
Theme 2: Slogan ——0
Theme 3:
Symbol
3a: Character Hofer [82], Zhou et al. [97] 2 4
3b: Logo Torres et al. [98] 1 2
3c: Package Celhay et al. [78], Horská et al. [87], Khan et al. [66], Khan et al. [74,
75]
511
Theme 4: Multiple
elements
Agrawal et al. [99], De Meulenaer et al. [100], Erdogmus et al. [77],
He and Lu Wang [67] Jiménez-Asenjo and Filipescu [101], Jeong et al.
[102], Jorda´-Albin~ana et al. [103], Kadirov et al. [104], Okazaki [71],
Paliwoda and Slater [53], Punyatoya et al. [105], Schuh [106],
Steenkamp and Geyskens [107].
13 28
15
A Systematic Review and Research Agenda on Standardization versus Adaptation of Brand…
DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.103866
B. Industrial analysis of studies
Industry Study(ies)
Automotive Fetscherin et al. [64], Kuehnl and Mantau [93]
Banking Cheng and Yeung [63], Ranchhod et al. [79]
Consumer
goods
Agrawal et al. [99], Dawar and Parker [90], Jorda´-Albin~ana et al. [103], Schuh [106],
Steenkamp and Geyskens [107]
Cosmetic Barnes et al. [72]
Food Horská et al. [87], Khan et al. [74, 75]
Luxury
retailing
Liu et al. [108]
Media Chiang [76].
Mining Baptista [89]
Mixed De Meulenaer et al. [100], Dong and Holmes [91], Freeman et al. [109], He and Wang [77],
Hofer [82], Jeong et al. [102], Jiang [92], Khan et al. [66], Khan et al. [74, 75], Okzaki [71],
Rosen [69], Timmor and Zif [96], Torres et al. [98]
Movie Gao et al. [65]
No
information
Akaka and Alden [81], Alashban et al. [70], Chan [68], Erdogmus et al. [67], Francis et al.
[86], Kadirov et al. [104], Miceli et al. [110], Miranda and Konya [94], Paliwoda and Slater
[53], Punyatoya et al. [105], Samiee et al. [80], Sang and Zhang [95], Usunier and Shaner
[73], Zhou et al. [97]
Wine Celhay et al. [78], Jiménez-Asenjo and Filipescu [101]
Author details
Tamer Baran
Pamukkale University, Denizli, Turkey
*Address all correspondence to: tbaran@pau.edu.tr
© 2022 The Author(s). Licensee IntechOpen. This chapter is distributed under the terms
of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/
by/3.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium,
provided the original work is properly cited.
16
Brand Management
References
[1] Czinkota MR, Ronkainen IA. Global
Marketing. Orlando: Dryden Press; 1996
[2] Hollensen S. Global Marketing a
Decision-oriented Approach. 3rd ed.
Madrid: Prentice Hall; 2004
[3] Terpstra V, Sarathy R. International
Marketing. Orlando: The Dryden Press;
1994
[4] Craig SC, Douglas SP. Developing
strategies for global markets: An
evolutionary perspective. Columbia
Journal of World Business. 1996;31:70-81
[5] Aaker DA. Managing Brand Equity:
Capitalizing on the Value of a Brand
Name. New York: Free Press; 1991
[6] Keller KL. Strategic Brand
Management: Building, Measuring, and
Managing Brand Equity. Upper Saddle
River, New Jersey: Person Education;
2013
[7] Medina JF, Duffy MF.
Standardization vs globalization: A new
perspective of brand strategies. Journal
of Product & Brand Management. 1998;7
(3):223-243
[8] Onkvisit S, Shaw JJ. The international
dimension of branding: Strategic
considerations and decisions.
International Marketing Review. 1989;6
(3):22-34
[9] Ryans JK, Griffith DA, White DS.
Standardization/adaptation of
international marketing strategy.
International Marketing Review. 2003;
20(6):588-603
[10] Schmid S, Kotulla T. 50 years of
research on international
standardization and adaptation—From a
systematic literature analysis to a
theoretical framework. International
Business Review. 2011;20(5):491-507
[11] Theodosiou M, Leonidou LC.
Standardization versus adaptation of
international marketing strategy: An
integrative assessment of the empirical
research. International Business Review.
2003;12(2):141-171
[12] Anees-ur-Rehman M, Wong HY,
Hossain M. The progression of brand
orientation literature in twenty years:
A systematic literature review. Journal
of Brand Management. 2016;23(6):
612-630
[13] Sepulcri LMCB, Mainardes EW,
Marchiori DM. Brand orientation: A
systematic literature review and research
agenda. Spanish Journal of Marketing-
ESIC. 2020;24(1):97-114. DOI: 10.1108/
SJME-06-2019-0035
[14] Górska-Warsewicz H, Kulykovets O.
Hotel brand loyalty—A systematic
literature review. Sustainability. 2020;12
(12):4810
[15] Osuna Ramírez SA, Veloutsou C,
Morgan-Thomas A. A systematic
literature review of brand commitment:
Definitions, perspectives and
dimensions. Athens Journal of Business
and Economics. 2017;3(3):305-332
[16] Grant MJ, Booth A. A typology of
reviews: An analysis of 14 review types
and associated methodologies. Health
Information & Libraries Journal. 2009;
26(2):91-108
[17] Christofi M, Leonidou E, Vrontis D.
Marketing research on mergers and
acquisitions: A systematic review and
future directions. International
Marketing Review. 2017;34(5):629-651
17
A Systematic Review and Research Agenda on Standardization versus Adaptation of Brand…
DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.103866
[18] Vrontis D, Christofi M. R&D
internationalization and innovation: A
systematic review, integrative
framework and future research
directions. Journal of Business Research.
2021;128:812-823
[19] Leonidou E, Christofi M, Vrontis D,
Thrassou A. An integrative framework
of stakeholder engagement for
innovation management and
entrepreneurship development. Journal
of Business Research. 2020;119:245-258
[20] Dada O. A model of entrepreneurial
autonomy in franchised outlets: A
systematic review of the empirical
evidence. International Journal of
Management Reviews. 2018;20(2):
206-226
[21] Tranfield D, Denyer D, Smart P.
Towards a methodology for developing
evidenceinformed management
knowledge by means of systematic
review. British Journal of Management.
2003;14(3):207-222
[22] Wang CL, Chugh H. Entrepreneurial
learning: Past research and future
challenges. International Journal of
Management Reviews. 2014;16(1):24-61
[23] Kauppi K, Salmi A, You W. Sourcing
from Africa: A systematic review and a
research agenda. International Journal of
Management Reviews. 2018;20(2):
627-650
[24] Nofal AM, Nicolaou N, Symeonidou
N, Shane S. Biology and management: A
review, critique, and research agenda.
Journal of Management. 2018;44(1):7-31
[25] Yli-Huumo J, Ko D, Choi S, Park S,
Smolander K. Where is current research
on blockchain technology? —a
systematic review. PloS One. 2016;
11(10):e0163477
[26] Glasser AM, Collins L, Pearson JL,
Abudayyeh H, Niaura RS, Abrams DB, et
al. Overview of electronic nicotine
delivery systems: A systematic review.
American Journal of Preventive
Medicine. 2017;52(2):e33-e66
[27] Adams R, Jeanrenaud S, Bessant J,
Denyer D, Overy P. Sustainability-
oriented innovation: A systematic
review. International Journal of
Management Reviews. 2016;18(2):
180-205
[28] Khan KS, Kunz R, Kleijnen J, Antes
G. Five steps to conducting a systematic
review. Journal of the Royal Society of
Medicine. 2003;96(3):118-121
[29] Magarey JM. Elements of a
systematic review. International Journal
of Nursing Practice. 2001;7(6):376-382
[30] Okoli C, Schabram K. A guide to
conducting a systematic literature
review of information systems research.
Sprouts: Working Papers on.
Information Systems. 2010;10(26):1-50
[31] Aaker DA, Kumar V, Day GS.
Marketing Research. Vol. 9. Danvers:
Wiley; 2007
[32] Churchill GA, Brown TJ, Suter TA.
Basic Marketing Research. Orlando:
Dreyden Press; 1996
[33] Hair JF Jr, Anderson RE, Tatham RL,
William C. Multivariate Data Analysis
with Readings. New Jersey: Prentice
Hall; 1995
[34] Malhotra KN. Marketing Research.
New Jersey: Pearson Education; 2004
[35] Gaur A, Kumar M. A systematic
approach to conducting review studies:
An assessment of content analysis in 25
years of IB research. Journal of World
Business. 2018;53(2):280-289
18
Brand Management
[36] Hulland J, Baumgartner H, Smith
KM. Marketing survey research best
practices: Evidence and
recommendations from a review of
JAMS articles. Journal of the Academy of
Marketing Science. 2018;46(1):92-108
[37] Kotler P. Global standardization –
courting danger. Journal of Consumer
Marketing. 1986;3:13-15
[38] Sheth J. Global markets or global
competition. Journal of Consumer
Marketing. 1986;3(2):9-26
[39] Vrontis D, Thrassou A. Adaptation
vs. standardization in international
marketing–the country-of-origin effect.
Innovative Marketing. 2007;3(4):7-20
[40] Wind Y. The myth of globalization.
Journal of Consumer Marketing. 1986;
3(2):23-26
[41] Davidson W, Harrigan R. Key
decisions in international marketing:
Introducing new products abroad.
Columbia Journal of World Business.
1977;12(4):15-23
[42] Hamel G, Prahalad C. Do you really
have a global strategy? Harvard Business
Review. 1985;63:139-148
[43] Levitt T. The globalization of
markets. Harvard Business Review. 1983;
61(3):92-102
[44] Ohmae K. Managing in a borderless
world. Harvard Business Review. 1989;
67(3):152-161
[45] Cavusgil S, Zou S, Naidu G. Product
and promotion adaptation in export
ventures: An empirical investigation.
Journal of International Business Studies.
1993;24(3):479-506
[46] Jolson MA. Canned adaptiveness: A
new direction for modern salesmanship.
Business Horizons 1989;32(1):7-13
[47] Ronstadt R, Kramer R. Getting the
most out of innovation abroad. Harvard
Business Review. 1982;60(2):94-99
[48] Vrontis D. Integrating adaptation
and standardisation in international
marketing: The AdaptStand modelling
process. Journal of Marketing
Management. 2003;19(3–4):283-305
[49] Sepulcri SD, Thrassou A,
Lamprianou I. International marketing
adaptation versus standardisation of
multinational companies. International
Marketing Review. 2009;26(4/5):477-
500
[50] Krubasik E. Customize your product
development. Harvard Business Review.
1988;66(6):46-52
[51] Wingo W. Products that cater to
foreign tastes. Design News. 1991;47
(13):90-94
[52] Sundbo J. The service economy:
Standardisation or customisation?
Service Industries Journal. 2002;22(4):
93-116
[53] Paliwoda SJ, Slater S. Globalisation
through the kaleidoscope. International
Marketing Review. 2009;26(4/5):373-383
[54] Soufani K, Vrontis D, Poutziouris P.
Private equity for small firms: A
conceptual model of adaptation versus
standardisation strategy. International
Journal of Entrepreneurship & Small
Business. 2006;3(3):498-515
[55] Baker MJ. Globalisation versus
differentiation as international
marketing strategies. Journal of
Marketing Management. 1985;1(1-2):
145-155
[56] Fan Y. The globalisation of Chinese
brands. Marketing Intelligence &
Planning. 2006;24(4):365-379
19
A Systematic Review and Research Agenda on Standardization versus Adaptation of Brand…
DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.103866
[57] Alford D, Sackett P, Nelder G. Mass
customisation—an automotive
perspective. International Journal of
production economics. 2000;65(1):
99-110
[58] Spring M, Dalrymple JF. Product
customisation and manufacturing
strategy. International Journal of
Operations & Production Management.
2000
[59] Kotler P, Keller KL. Marketing
Management. 12th ed. Upper Saddle
River, New Jersey: Pearson Prentice Hall;
2006
[60] Kapferer JN. The New Strategic
Brand Management: Creating and
Sustaining Brand Equity Long Term.
London: Kogan Page Publishers; 1997
[61] Klang D, Wallnöfer M, Hacklin F.
The business model paradox: A
systematic review and exploration of
antecedents. International Journal of
Management Reviews. 2014;16(4):
454-478
[62] Nolan CT, Garavan TN. Human
resource development in SMEs: A
systematic review of the literature.
International Journal of Management
Reviews. 2016;18(1):85-107
[63] Cheng TCE, Yeung WH. An
empirical study of the impact of brand
name on personal customers’adoption of
Internet banking in Hong Kong.
International Journal of E-Business
Research (IJEBR). 2010;6(1):32-51
[64] Fetscherin M, Diamantopoulos A,
Chan A, Abbott R. How are brand names
of Chinese companies perceived by
Americans? Journal of Product & Brand
Management. 2015;24(2):110-123
[65] Gao J, Seki T, Kawakami K.
Comparison of adherence, persistence,
and clinical outcome of generic and
brand-name statin users: A retrospective
cohort study using the Japanese claims
database. Journal of Cardiology. 2021;
77(5):545-551
[66] Khan H, Lee R, Lockshin L.
Localising the packaging of foreign food
brands: A case of Muslim consumers in
Pakistan. Journal of Product & Brand
Management. 2015;24(4):386-398
[67] Erdogmus IE, Bodur M, Yilmaz C.
International strategies of emerging
market firms: Standardization in brand
management revisited. European Journal
of Marketing. 2010;44(9–10):1410-1436
[68] Chan AK. Localization in
international branding: A longitudinal
comparison of the Chinese names of
foreign brands in Hong Kong between
1987–1988 and 1994–1995. Journal of
Marketing Communications. 1997;3(2):
127-137
[69] Rosen BN, Boddewyn JJ, Louis EA.
U.S. Brands Abroad: An empirical study
of global branding. International
Marketing Review. 1989;6(1):5-17
[70] Alashban AA, Hayes LA, Zinkhan
GM, Balazs AL. International brand-
name standardization/adaptation:
Antecedents and consequences. Journal
of International Marketing. 2002;10(3):
22-48
[71] Okazaki S. Searching the web for
global brands: How American brands
standardise their web sites in Europe.
European Journal of Marketing. 2005;
39(1/2):87-109
[72] Barnes BR, Kitchen PJ, Spickett-
Jones G, Yu Q. Investigating the impact
of international cosmetics advertising in
China. International Journal of
Advertising. 2004;23(3):361-387
20
Brand Management
[73] Usunier JC, Shaner J. Using linguistics
for creating better international brand
names. Journal of Marketing
Communications. 2002;8(4):211-228
[74] Khan H, Lee R, Lockshin L. The
effects of packaging localisation of
Western brands in non-Western
emerging markets. Journal of Product &
Brand Management. 2017a;26(6):589-
599
[75] Khan H, Lockshin L, Lee R, Corsi A.
When is it necessary to localise product
packaging? Journal of Consumer
Marketing. 2017b;34(5):373-383
[76] Chiang SY. Interformative meaning
of signs: Brand naming and globalization
in China. Social Semiotics. 2009;19(3):
329-344
[77] He J, Wang CL. How global brands
incorporating local cultural elements
increase consumer purchase likelihood:
An empirical study in China.
International Marketing Review. 2017;34
(4):463-479
[78] Celhay F, Cheng P, Masson J, Li W.
Package graphic design and
communication across cultures: An
investigation of Chinese consumers
interpretation of imported wine labels.
International Journal of Research in
Marketing. 2020;37(1):108-128
[79] Ranchhod A, Gurău C, Marandi E.
Brand names and global positioning.
Marketing Intelligence & Planning.
2011;29(4):353-365
[80] Samiee S, Shimp TA, Sharma S.
Brand origin recognition accuracy: Its
antecedents and consumers’cognitive
limitations. Journal of International
Business Studies. 2005;36(4):379-397
[81] Akaka MA, Alden DL. Global brand
positioning and perceptions:
International advertising and global
consumer culture. International Journal
of Advertising. 2010;29(1):37-56
[82] Hofer KM. International brand
promotion standardization and
performance. Management Research
Review. 2015;38(7):685-702
[83] Gumparthi VP, Patra S. The
phenomenon of brand love: A systematic
literature review. Journal of Relationship
Marketing. 2020;19(2):93-132
[84] Plumeyer A, Kottemann P, Böger D,
Decker R. Measuring brand image: A
systematic review, practical guidance,
and future research directions. Review of
Managerial Science. 2019;13(2):227-265
[85] Plumeyer A, Kottemann P, Böger D,
Decker R. Measuring brand image: A
systematic review, practical guidance,
and future research directions. Review of
Managerial Science. 2019;13(2):227-265
[86] Francis JN, Lam JP, Walls J.
Executive insights: The impact of
linguistic differences on international
brand name standardization: A
comparison of English and Chinese
brand names of fortune-500 companies.
Journal of International Marketing.
2002;10(1):98-116
[87] HorskáE,UbreziovaI,KekäleT.
Product adaptation in processes of
internationalization: Case of the Slovak
food-processing companies. Baltic Journal
of Management. 2007;2(3):319-333
[88] Palmatier RW, Crecelius AT. The
“first principles”of marketing strategy.
AMS Review. 2019;9(1):5-26
[89] Baptista CS. Product importance and
complexity as determinants of
adaptation processes in business
relationships. Journal of Business &
Industrial Marketing. 2014;29(1):75-87
21
A Systematic Review and Research Agenda on Standardization versus Adaptation of Brand…
DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.103866
[90] Dawar N, Parker P. Marketing
universals: Consumers’use of brand
name, price, physical appearance, and
retailer reputation as signals of product
quality. Journal of Marketing. 1994;
58(2):81-95
[91] Dong LC, Helms MM. Brand
name translation model: A case
analysis of US brands in China.
Journal of Brand Management. 2001;
9(2):99-115
[92] Jiang P. The role of brand name in
customization decisions: a search vs
experience perspective. Journal of
Product & Brand Management. 2004;
13(2):73-83
[93] Kuehnl C, Mantau A. Same sound,
same preference? Investigating sound
symbolism effects in international brand
names. International Journal of Research
in Marketing. 2013;30(4):417-420
[94] Miranda MJ, Kónya L.
Customisation: Moving customers away
from the dull conformity of brand
loyalty. Managing Service Quality:
An International Journal. 2007;17(4):
449-467
[95] Sang J, Zhang G. Communication
across languages and cultures: A
perspective of brand name translation
from English to Chinese. Journal of Asian
Pacific Communication. 2008;18(2):
225-246
[96] Timmor Y, Zif J. Exporting under
private labels: Conditions and
influencing factors. Global Business and
Economics Review. 2008;10(1):35-57
[97] Zhou L, Poon P, Wang H.
Consumers' reactions to global versus
local advertising appeals: A test of
culturally incongruent images in China.
Journal of Business Research. 2015;
68(3):561-568
[98] Torres A, César Machado J, Vacas de
Carvalho L, van de Velden M, Costa P.
Same design, same response?
Investigating natural designs in
international logos. Journal of Product &
Brand Management. 2019;28(3):317-329
[99] Agrawal J, Grimm P, Kamath S,
Foscht T. A cross‐country study of
signals of brand quality. Journal of
Product & Brand Management. 2011;
20(5):333-342
[100] De Meulenaer S, De Dens N,
Pelsmacker P. Which cues cause
consumers to perceive brands as more
global? A conjoint analysis. International
Marketing Review. 2015;32(6):606-626
[101] Jiménez-Asenjo N, Filipescu DA.
Cheers in China! International marketing
strategies of Spanish wine exporters.
International Business Review. 2019;
28(4):647-659
[102] Jeong I, Lee JH, Kim E.
Determinants of brand localization in
international markets. Service Business.
2019;13(1):75-100
[103] Jordá‐Albiñana B, Ampuero‐
Canellas O, Vila N, Rojas‐Sola JI. Brand
identity documentation: A cross‐national
examination of identity standards
manuals. International Marketing
Review. 2009;26(2):172-197
[104] Kadirov D, BardakcıA, Kantar M.
The impact of linguistic proximity and
diglossia on brand name and slogan
extension tendencies in the Turkish,
Russian and Arabic contexts. Journal of
Brand Management. 2018;25(2):147-159
[105] Punyatoya P, Sadh A, Mishra SK.
Role of brand globalness in consumer
evaluation of new product branding
strategy. Journal of Brand Management.
2014;21(2):171-188
22
Brand Management
[106] Schuh A. “Brand strategies of
Western MNCs as drivers of
globalization in Central and Eastern
Europe”, European Journal of
Marketing. 2007;41(¾):274-291.
[107] Steenkamp JBE, Geyskens I.
Manufacturer and retailer strategies to
impact store brand share: Global
integration, local adaptation, and
worldwide learning. Marketing Science.
2014;33(1):6-26
[108] Liu S, Perry P, Moore C, Warnaby
G. The standardization-localization
dilemma of brand communications for
luxury fashion retailers'
internationalization into China. Journal
of Business Research. 2016;69(1):
357-364
[109] Freeman I, Knight P, Butt I. A tri-
country marketing project–Preparing
students for the realities of a global
marketplace. Journal of Teaching in
International Business. 2011;22(4):
277-299
[110] Miceli G, Raimondo MA, Farace S.
Customer attitude and dispositions
towards customized products: The
interaction between customization
model and brand. Journal of Interactive
Marketing. 2013;27(3):209-225
23
A Systematic Review and Research Agenda on Standardization versus Adaptation of Brand…
DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.103866
