Value network for cross-national marketing management: A framework for analysis and application

J BUSN RES 1993:27:65-83

Value Network for Cross-National Marketing Management: A Framework for Analysis and Application Madhav N. Segal Southern Illinois University at Edwardsville

Uma A. Segal University of Missouri-St.

Louis

Mary Ann Palmer Niemczycki Pragmatic Marketing Research, Inc., St. Louis, Missouri

This article documents the centrality and importance of values in marketing, especially in the context of cross-cultural marketing management. Following an overview of the literature on values research, a synthesis of extant theoretical thought from several disciplines is used to develop a framework for guiding future research. This framework is presented as the Cross-cultural Value Network Paradigm that provides a strong theoretical model capable of identifying and explaining various cultural, subcultural, and crosscultural influences on the personal values of marketing professionals which, in turn, affect their attitudes and behavior. An empirical example illustrates the utility of this paradigm in a cross-cultural research setting.

Introduction Values have a long history as theoretical constructs used by social scientists to explain the behavior of individuals. They have been shown to influence perception, affect problem solving, determine the selection of alternatives, and help coordinate and stabilize behaviors in social systems (Bamberger, 1986). Although management and organizational behavior researchers have made some progress in describing the relationship between personal values and managerial performance, only recently have marketing scholars begun to appreciate the importance of values in the management of the marketing function. One of the fundamental problems limiting research in the area of comparative marketing management appears to be the bewildering variations found in conceptualization

Address correspondence to Madhav N. Segal. Department of Marketing, Box 110.5, Southern Illinois University wardsville, Edwardsville. IL 62026.

Journal of Business Research 27, 65-83 (1993) 0 1993 Elsevier Science Publishing Co.. Inc. 655 Avenue of the Americas, New York. NY 10010

0148-2963/93/$6.00

at Ed-

66

J BUSNRES 1993:27:65-X3

M. N. Segal et al.

and the inconsistent operationalizations of managerial value systems. A general lack of theoretical models and frameworks in the area points to a need for a theoretical paradigm to guide empirical research (Roberts, 1970). This paper develops a Cross-cultural Value Network Paradigm that is capable of identifying and explaining various cultural, subcultural, and cross-cultural influences on the personal values of marketing professionals. An empirical illustration endeavors to demonstrate the utility of this paradigm in a crosscultural context.

Values

and Cross-National

Marketing

Management

Background Increases in international commerce and the rise of multinational enterprises have renewed emphasis on comparative research on managers in different countries (Whitely and England, 1977). This has led to recognition of the need for comparative management approaches in marketing (Boddewyn, 1981; Deshpande and Webster, 1989). Comparative research necessarily focuses on cultural variations, and because values are in inextricable element of culture, they must often be addressed together. A value has been defined as a conception of that which is desirable and which influences choice of modes, means, and ends of action (Kluckhohn, 1962). It is an enduring prescriptive or proscriptive belief regarding a specific mode of behavior or end-state (Rokeach, 1973). Anthropologists have long linked values to cultural patterns (Vinson, Scott, and Lamont, 1977); however, the significance of social and personal values is now also being recognized in the operation of domestic and international business organizations (Munson and McIntyre, 1979). An understanding of the interrelationship among culture, values, and managerial behavior is essential to effective cross-national marketing and the management of the marketing function. Managing employees requires an understanding of both employees’ values and those values inherent in the corporate organizational culture (Kahle, 1986). Managers must understand people’s values to better manage their behavior and to identify, anticipate, and address varying and changing employee expectations (Posner and Munson, 1979). Persons in any business organization are socialized into three separate cultures: the societal (national), the professional (eg, marketing), and the organizational (Terpstra and David, 1985). Problems in cultural miscommunication can readily arise in the management of international personnel as the result of differences in individual values and beliefs instilled during the socialization process. Socialization into a multinational corporate culture must fit within the constructs of the individual’s socialization into the societal culture. Failure to accommodate the cultural heritage of organizational members can lead to employee dissatisfaction and conflict within the organization. Multinational firms seem to have greater difficulty in managing more culturally sensitive areas such as marketing, because they fail to recognize the need to manage intercultural communication (Terpstra and David, 1985). Some of the most serious problems faced by marketing managers in the international sphere are internal to the firm-relating to coordination, organization, and control of the marketing function. These often arise from differences in values and perceptions of appropriate behavior that are held by home office and subsidiary managers. Because marketing is a polycentric function, deeply affected by local factors that provide the primary authority for international marketing decision making, it tends to be

J BUSN RES

Values in Marketing Management

1993:27:65-83

in favor of the host country (Jain, 1987). This is a critical concern in international marketing management, because marketing is extremely susceptible to cultural error. Marketing must develop means for mitigating problems arising from value incongruity and should realize that culture and values represent effective adaptations to a particular environment and that the ,utility of alternative value systems merits consideration. The study of values has been acknowledged as essential to an understanding of the management process and organizational behavior in both domestic and cross-cultural contexts (see Table 1). As Table 1 indicates, little research has been conducted specifically on comparative marketing management, although the need for empirical research on the relationship between organizational culture, cultural values of managers, and effective international marketing management has been well established (Deshpande and Webster, 1989). However, in the field of marketing management, no theoretical framework exists to provide the basis for such research, therefore, we propose a Cross-cultural Value Network Paradigm, based on the synthesis of extant theoretical thought from several related disciplines, such as anthropology and psychology, to guide future empirical research in this area. decentralized

A Cross-Cultural

Value Network Paradigm

Values research to date, both within and outside the field of marketing, has been based on various assumptions about the association between sociocultural factors and values, but extant theoretical formulations have not described the process of value development or explained the relationship between culture and values in a comprehensive manner. Extensive research on this subject revealed the absence of an integrated theoretical framework useful in guiding empirical research. Lacking an integrated framework, the results of most values studies are situation specific and cannot be generalized. Table 1. Overview of Values Research in Business. Management. Conceptual studies Consumer behavior: Vinson and Munson, 1976; Becker and Conner, 1982: Gutman, 1982; Gutman, 1984; Pit& and Woodside. 1984; Prakash, 1984; Kahle, 1986; Reynolds and Gutman, 1988; Homer and Kahle, 1988; Kahle et al., 1986 Management and organizational behavior: England, 1967; England, Agarwal, and Trerise, 1971; Munson and Posner, 1980; Powell, Posner, and Schmidt, 1984

and Marketing*

Methodological

issues/studies

Quantitative measures for values: Rokeach, 1968; England, 1967; Rokeach, 1973; Gordon, 1975, 1976; Hofstede, 1980a, 1980b; Hofstede and Bond, 1988; Kahle, 1983 Validity of instruments: Kelly, Silverman and Cochrane, 1972; Vinson, Munson, and Nakanishi, 1977; Munson and McIntyre, 1979; Reynolds and Jolly, 1980; Bozinoff and Cohen, 1982; Beatty et al.. 1985; Kahle, Beatty, and Homer, 1986

Cross-cultural: England and Lee, 1971; England and Lee, 1973; England, Dhingra, and Agarwal, 1974; England and Lee, 1974; England, 1975; Hofstede, 1976; Hofstede, 1979; Hofstede 1980a, 1980b, and 1984; Hofstede and Bond, 1988; Jackofsky, Slocum, and McQuaid. 1988 *This list is representative of value-based studies and is not intended to be exhaustive.

68

J BUSN RES lYY3:27:6%33

M. N. Segal et al.

Several scholars have discussed multiple levels of enculturation (socialization) that contribute to the development of persona1 values (eg, England, 1967; Terpstra and David, 198.5). Influences stem from national cultural values, regional, social (ethnic and religious), and family values, in addition to those stemming from life experiences. Literature also suggests that persona1 values may well be affected by professional ones that differ from those of the national culture (Hofstede, 1984) in that they may reflect an intemational value-a consequence of increasing globalization. Although there is awareness that enculturation occurs at multiple levels, the process responsible for the formation of persona1 value systems has not been explicitly described. The Cross-cultural Value Network Paradigm (Figure 1) offers a theoretical framework or model capable of identifying and explaining various cultural, subcultural, and cross-cultural influences on the personal values of marketers that affect managerial actions and organizational behavior. Values and Culture. Culture is assumed to be the primary determinant of individual values, attitudes, and behavior; therefore, it is expected that personal value systems of individual marketing professionals will reflect those of their cultural environments (Terpstra and David, 198.5). Culturally determined values that will be shared most widely by citizens of a nation will be those values for which people are conditioned at the national level and that are reinforced and augmented at successive subcultural levels. Consequently, these national values have the greatest impact on personal value systems. A second source of cultural impact on personal values is the business environment that cuts across national boundaries (Tse et al., 1988; Terpstra and David, 1985; Whitely and England, 1977). The business environment is becoming international in scope and serves to condition business professionals with cross-cultural business (professional) values that may differ from those of their national societal value system. These values are reinforced, modified, and augmented at the level of the tirm that develops its own organizational culture as the result of the influence of international business culture, national culture, and the personal value orientation of its founder or CEO (Hofstede, 1984; Jackofsky, Slocum, and McQuaid, 1988). The individual value systems of business professionals should, consequently, reflect the integration of value systems shared at several different levels reflecting major impact by both national societal value systems and crosscultural professional value systems. Values, Attitudes and Behuvior-. It is widely accepted that values play an important role in human behavior (Munson, 1984; Munson and McIntyre, 1979). Behavior can be viewed “. . . as the consequence or manifestation of the individual’s values and attitudes predisposing one to respond in some preferential manner . . ” (Rokeach, 1968, p. 159). Behaviors, attitudes, and values are considered to be cognitively interconnected in a hierarchical network. Although personal values/value systems guide behavior, attitudes are the immediate precursors of behavior. Values can be viewed as abstractions that serve as prototypes from which attitudes and, thus, behaviors develop (Homer and Kahle, 1988). An attitude is actually an organization of several beliefs around a specific object or situation (Munson, 1984; Rokeach, 1968), and within a given situation, influence should flow from abstract values to midrange attitudes to specific behaviors in what is termed the “value-attitude-behavior hierarchy” (Homer and Kahle, 1988). Thus, attitudes toward objects and actions/situations are directly related to, and in fact will determine, behavior in a given situation. The personal value system of an individual, often conceived as being hierarchical, is

J BUSN RES 1993:27:65-83

Values in Marketing Management

REGIONAL SUBCULTURE SOCIAL GROUPS, FAMILY

69

BUSINESS FIRM

Regional & Local Value System

Corporate/Organizational Value System

PERSONAL VALUE SYSTEM r I i I

------c---W Global

Values

1 Domain Specific Values

I i i I

1 Descriptive & Evaluative Beliefs 4

I

I

i’

7 tll $1 Cl Wl El 41 31 1’ z’ 11 g’ MI

L_AE?____~

T I

+

Behavior

1

Figure 1. A Cross-cultural value network paradigm.

composed of a few deep-rooted global values, a small number of domain specific values gained through experience, and numerous descriptive and evaluative beliefs that are the building blocks of attitudes which affect specific decisions. Global values that guide behavior over a wide range of situations and domain-specific values that guide behavior in specific areas such as economics, religion, and social situations are relatively stable and closely tied to normative behavior (Schiffman and Kanuk, 1987). Domain-specific values bridge the gap between closely held, general global values and less closely held, descriptive and evaluative beliefs (Vinson, Scott, and Lamont, 1977). Because behavior cannot be understood or efficiently predicted outside the context of a specific environment, this bridge connects beliefs and values in a hierarchical structure (Vinson, Scott, and Lamont, 1977).

70

J BUSN RES 1993:27:65-83

M. N. Segal et al.

Personality and Value Systems. Personal value systems, personality, and personality traits are interrelated. Values directly impact personality (Rokeach, 1973), and because they apparently affect the same variables (actions, attitudes, beliefs) used to identify personality traits associated with social behavior, they must be a major determinant of the social aspect of personality. Homer and Kahle (1988) view Rokeach’s work (1973) as conceptualizing personality as a system of values. Therefore, it becomes obvious that an individual’s personal value system and personality traits, defined in terms of sets of values, together with the attitudes and behavioral expectations derived from them, are closely related. Implications. The Cross-cultural Value Network Paradigm presented here can be used to describe the influence of culture at several levels on the development of the personal value system of the individual, and the relative impact of each source of influence on personal values and personality traits will depend on the experience of the individual. The goal of research on international marketing management should be to adapt management policies, programs, and structures to the local situation in order to accommodate needs and values of host countries (Deshpande and Webster, 1989). Therefore, there is a need for comparative management studies to examine local cultural differences that affect the success of marketing strategies and to determine what modifications or adaptations are needed for the successful implementation and control of marketing plans. The few empirical studies that have been conducted on comparative marketing management have merely described, rather than explained, differences in culture and values. Hypotheses offered in these studies (eg, Tse et al., 1988) are little more than assumptions about cultural effects on the managers’ behavior. They do not offer a theoretical explanation of the relative effects of the various cultural influences on personal values and behavior. The study of culture’s impact on international marketing management must go beyond the question of whether managerial behavior and organizational performance reflect national or business cultural values and beliefs. It should ask about the relative contribution of the numerous cultural influences that impact the individual at many different levels, and how the interaction of various cultural infuences affects managers’ values and behavior. Our paradigm provides a framework for structuring research that may answer the more complex questions which must be asked if marketers are to truly understand the cultural differences they must negotiate in planning successful strategies. In addition, the paradigm recognizes that cultural influences are dynamic and interactive and, thus, reflect the societal and professional values of the period of interest. A theoretical model such as the Cross-cultural Value Network Paradigm is useful only when operationalized, and such use requires placing this framework in a specific crosscultural context for application to a particular research problem. The following empirical study on the impact of national and business cultures on the values of marketing professionals in India and the United States offers a specitic illustration of the application of one aspect of this paradigm.

The Empirical

Study

Although the majority of studies report differences in values among managers from different countries, there is evidence of cross-cultural similarities that may reflect the influence of a shared business culture and professional value system. Therefore, there is

Values in Marketing Management

J BUSN RES 1993:27:65-83

a need to determine the degree to which the personal values of marketing professionals reflect the societal values of their respective cultures versus a shared professional value system reflecting an emerging global business culture and to define the relationship between national culture, business culture, corporate and personal values, and individual attitudes and behavior. It is important, furthermore, to assess the impact of globalization on the personal value systems of individual marketing professionals to allow crosscultural comparisons of the effects of nation-specific values and of professional values. When national and business values are inconsistent, marketers may experience value conflicts that can result in persona1 feelings of dissatisfaction and that may, in turn, influence organizational performance. The impact of cultural factors on organizational values affect organizational goals that may explain the nature of conflict in marketers’ decision making (England and Lee, 1974). The value differences of marketing managers may be a factor in organizational conflict, especially in the case of multinational firms operating in, and across, diverse cultures (Davis and Rasool, 1988). An understanding of cultural influences on the values of marketing managers that can be expected to affect managerial behavior is essential in planning successful international marketing strategy. Strategic planners must recognize cultural differences in values that require accommodation in implementing and controlling marketing plans. They must also be aware of potential areas of (internal) conflict arising from differences in culture-based values that might adversely affect successful implementation. This study was designed to focus on the personality traits identified in the paradigm to measure the net effects of a network of interconnected components ranging from national culture to individual experience. The aim was to discover if there were measurable variations among the values of marketing managers from different nations (eg, U.S. and India) that reflect the influence of their respective national cultures and to discover if the influence of a common business culture/value system would be evidenced in their values. Although this study does not test all nuances or aspects of the paradigm, it does endeavor to illustrate how to translate abstractions from the paradigm into the specific, or to what is more suitable for measurement. The paradigm can also be an invaluable tool in interpreting the results of the study, in evaluating past research, and in setting the agenda for future research. In this empirical study, the difference between U.S. and Indian cultures was examined in terms of individualism and collectivism. This concept, defined by Hofstede (1980a), has been shown to differentiate national cultures and to affect the behavior of business professionals in different countries. Hofstede’s (1980a) construct indicates that in collectivist societies, cooperation is high, competition is low, and status and position are both ascribed and stable. In contrast, in individualist cultures, competition is high, individualism is valued, and status and position are earned and changeable. Individuals within each society differ in the extent to which they are allocentric, that is, they subordinate their personal goals to those of some collective, or are idiocentric, in that they place their personal goals above those of the collective. It is assumed that individualism and collectivism reflect opposing societal value systems. These, in turn, impact upon individual behavior by influencing the development of the persona1 values of idiocentrism and allocentrism that determine behavior. Hofstede’s (1980a) cross-national study of 40 countries revealed that the United States and the English-speaking countries evidenced high levels of individualism, whereas the Latin American and East Asian countries portrayed low levels of this social value. The

72

J BUSN

RES

M. N. Segal et al.

1993:27:65-83

Chinese Culture Connection (1987), in its search for culture-free dimensions of culture, conducted a similar study on 22 countries from which a similar pattern of intercorrelations emerged. Although earlier research (Chinese Culture Connection, 1987; Hofstede, 1980a; Triandis et al., 1986) suggests that U.S. managers’ values strongly reflect the American cultural orientation toward individualism, results from the Indian samples have been mixed. Whereas data from the Chinese Culture Connection (1987) and Triandis et al. (1986) indicate low levels of individualism in Indian samples, Hofstede (1980a) found a relatively high level of individualism among the Indians he sampled. England’s (1975) work also revealed that several of the operative values of Indian and American managers did not necessarily reflect the expected allocentric and idiocentric personal values. These findings suggest that the values of Indian managers may be influenced strongly by Westem values that have become incorporated into international business culture through globalization. According to Triandis et al. (1988, 1985), originators of the allocentric-idiocentric construct, a match between societal and personal values results in harmony whereas the effects of a mismatch can be bitterness, dysfunction, and disgrace for the nonconformist. This matching of societal, organizational, and personal values, and its implications for the adjustment and effective performance of marketing and other business managers in a cross-cultural context is conceptualized in Figure 2. From this conceptualization, it can be inferred that the success of any international

Figure 2. Matrix of relative adjustment to societal, organizational,

1

SOCIETAL

COLLECI’IVISM

I

Organizational

Collectivism

3 2

ALLOCENTRISM

IDIOCENTRISM

3

Values

Individualism

and personal value orientations.

VALUES

1

INDIVIDUALISM

Organizational

Collectivism

Maximum Harmony

Low Level of Harmony

Moderate lo Good Level of Harmony

Maximum Disharmony/ Alienation

Moderate 10 Good Level of Harmony

Low Level of Harmony

Values

Individualism

Moderate to High Level of Disharmony/ Alienation

a 2 ; Z

Maximum Harmony

Values in Marketing Management marketing strategy is optimized when there is maximum organizational, and personal values.

J BUSN RES 1993:27:65-83

congruence

between

societal,

Purpose This exploratory study sought to determine the extent to which the values of American and Indian marketing professionals reflect the dominant value orientations of their respective national cultures. Because culture is believed to be the primary influence on personal values, and the American culture reinforces individualism and the development of the self, American marketers should evidence personal characteristics that are highly individualistic. Likewise, if the values of Indian marketers are consistent with those of the Indian national culture that espouses collectivism and the subordination of personal values to those of the group, they should be more allocentric. Managers reflecting the value orientations of their own cultures will experience more satisfaction and will indicate higher levels of personal adjustment than managers whose values conflict with those of the dominant society. Although the business culture may have a mediating influence on marketing professionals, the effect of the national culture, which influences the individual at a much earlier stage than does the business culture, was expected to have a more significant impact on the individual’s development of values. Therefore, although the business culture itself is individualistic, it was hypothesized that Indian marketers would be more allocentric than their American counterparts. In essence, despite an awareness that individuals may be influenced by a global business culture, marketers were expected to have values that were generally more consistent with those of their national cultures, if there were conflicts between the values of the profession and those of the national culture. Consequently, neither group was expected to experience much dissatisfaction and it was anticipated that the level of emotional adjustment would be similar for both groups. These assumptions were formulated into the following hypotheses: Hypothesis Hypothesis Hypothesis

Research

1:The values of American marketing professionals are more idiocentric than those of Indian marketing professionals. 2: The values of Indian marketing professionals are more allocentric than those of American marketing professionals. 3: There are no differences in the levels of adjustment of American and Indian marketing professionals.

Methodology

Setting and Sample. The data for this investigation were derived from the administration of the California Psychological Inventory (Gough, 1975) to 56 American (68% male and 32% female) and 106 Indian (76% male and 24% female) business executives with three years of marketing experience who were enrolled in graduate level marketing courses. The American subjects were volunteers from a state university in Illinois, while the Indian volunteers were from a university in South India. The data collection instrument (the California Psychological Inventory, CPI), a self-administered questionnaire that takes approximately one hour to complete, was distributed by research assistants to potential subjects and was collected after completion, at which time they were de-briefed.

74

J BUSN

RES

1993~27 :6X33

M. N. Segal et al.

California Psychological Inventor-y. As described in the Cross-cultural Value Network Paradigm, personality traits associated with social behavior can be considered to be the operationalization of values. Therefore, CPI was selected as an indirect measure of personal (idiocentric vs. allocentric) values comparable to the instruments used by Hofstede (1980a) and England (1967). Although the CPI has long been accepted as a measure of personality, it is a measure that focuses on the social (vs. the biological) aspects of personality-the components of personality that are learned and strongly linked to values. Because the CPI scales describe these components (personality traits) in value-loaded terms, this instrument provides a strong measure of personal values. The CPI is a sophisticated data collection instrument that focuses on characteristics considered important for social living regardless of culture, setting, or circumstance (Cough, 1957, 1975; Guthrie and Lonner, 1986; Levin and Kami, 1970; Megargee, 1972). It has been well tested and shown to be accurate, dependable, and appropriate for a cross-cultural study (Megargee, 1972). Although the CPI was developed in the United States, it was designed, from the start, as an etic instrument that has been validated in many other countries, including India (Cough and Sandhu, 1964). The equivalence of the etic constructs underlying this instrument has been repeatedly demonstrated (Megargee, 1972; Mizushima and DeVos, 1967; Levin and Karni, 1970), and the usefulness of CPI in a cross-cultural setting has also been demonstrated by cross-cultural CPI research (Fong and Peskin, 1969; Gough, 1960, 1964, 1965, 1966, 1968, 1975; Cough, Chun, and Chun, 1968; Gough, DeVos, and Mizushima, 1968; Guthrie and Lonner, 1986; Mason, 1967; Rosenquist and Megargee, 1969. The personality traits of individuals, measured and scored by the CPI for 18 scales, reflect their personal value systems. The majority of the scales used to measure personality traits are related directly to the values/criteria used by Hofstede (1980a, 1980b, 1984). The personality scales appear to be consistent with the concepts of individualism and collectivism and are expected to reflect the idiocentricism and allocentricism of individuals. In fact, based on these values, at least 14 of the 18 personality traits/ personal value orientations measured by the CPI can be a priori classified as being individualistic/ idiocentric or collectivist/allocentric (Table 2). Sense of well being, socialization, and communality cannot be so classified because they were designed not to measure personality traits, but to provide measures of adjustment and provide controls for the instrument. Likewise, femininity cannot be classified because it was designed for the specific purpose of measuring preference for female versus male role-specific behaviors.

Results Table 3 displays summary measures (means and standard deviations) on all 18 value characteristics for both Indian and U.S. subject groups. Tests of significance on differences indicate: (1) there were no significant intergroup differences on the scales of socialization, self control, and femininity; (2) Indian subjects exhibited a significantly higher average score than their U.S. counterparts on the variable of good impression; and (3) the mean scores for the remaining 14 scales were higher for the U.S. subjects. To assess the accuracy of the theoretical categorization of the 18 scales (see Table 2) and to remove the effects of the multicollinearity of scales, a factor analysis was performed. The four factors extracted coincided with the theoretical classification with the exception that the traits classified as intermediate were included in factor 1, the traits

J BUSN RES 1993:27:65-83

Values in Marketing Management Table 2. Congruence Allocenttic

Dimension

between Values and Personality

Individualism/idiocentrism:

Associated Traits*

with Individualist/Idiocentric

Mixed societal/personal

Personality traits: Dominance: ascendence leadership strength

Collectivism/allocentrism:

values

Cultural dimensions: individual success achievement self actualization self respect

vs. Collectivist/

group success achievement of status in group recognition respect of group group harmony Capacity for status: ambition status in social milieu group membership self assurance

Responsibility: responsibility reasonableness values & controls

Social presence: self confidence spontaneity control in social situation

Sociability: sociability participation social interaction self assurance tolerance

Self control: self control controls freedom from self-centeredness

Self acceptance: self independence

Intellectual efficiency: intellectual pursuits

Good impression: others’ impression modesty

Tolerance: openness flexibility non-judgmental attitudes

Psychological mindedness: understanding tenacity practicality

Achievement via conformity: achievement structure/organization learning/academia

social beliefs/

of self

Achievement via independence: independence creativity self actualization Flexibility: flexibility *Values are derived from CPI scales

associated with individualism. The decision to pool the data for factor analysis was based on the discovery of similar underlying factor structures for both sub-samples. Furthermore, the results of this factor analysis indicate consistency with other studies (Megargee, 1972) suggesting the validity of the factors extracted. The varimax criterion of orthogonal rotation was selected to provide the simplest factor structure solution. Table 4 presents the rotated factor matrix and relevant statistics. Using the eigen-value one and percentage of variance criteria resulted in a decision to retain any factor accounting for more than 6% of the total variance in the variable set. Consequently, this decision led to a fourfactor solution that accounted for 71.4% of the matrix variance. Factor loading patterns helped in uncovering the underlying dimensions, and their tentative factor labels are as follow: Factor 1: Idiocentrism (There are ten values in this clustering, orientation toward meeting personal goals.)

generally

indicating

an

76

J BUSN RES

M. N. Segal et al.

1993:27:65-X3

Table 3. Means

and Standard

Deviations

of Independent

Variables

by Group Type

Grouptype India (n = 106)

U.S.A. (n = 56)

Variables

Mean

SD

MeaJl

SD

Dominance (DO)* Capacity for status (CS)* Sociability (SY)* Social presence (SP)* Self-acceptance (SA)* Sense of well-being (WB)* Responsibility (RE)* Socialization (SO) Self-control (SC) Tolerance (TOO)* Good impression (GI)* Communality (CM)* Achievement via conformance (AC)* Achievement via independence (AI)* Intellectual efficiency (IE)* Psychological mindedness (PY)* Flexibility (FX)* Femininity (FE)

24.22 IS.38 21.58 29.58 Il.97 27.14 24.33 32.20 25.00 I s.02 17.93 20.13 21.99 13.92 29.43 8.75 5.87 17.70

6. I8 4.97 5.1s 5.77 3.88 7.70 4.84 6.78 6.6 I 4.90 5.32 5.1 I 5.11 4.18 6.53 3.18 4.51 3.12

28. I6 18.57 24.77 35.73 23.18 33.20 26.43 33.61 25.54 19.79 IS.57 24.86 26.50 19.64 35.63 I I .s7 9.89 17.93

5.94 4.22 4.44 5.97 9.16 5.40 4.89 4.1s 6.58 4.46 5.08 3.55 4.27 4.46 5.13 2.40 3.59 4.09

*Difference\

m group means of thew variables are sigmficant at p < O.Wl

Factor 2: Allocentrism (There are four positively loaded values indicative of responsibility to others.) Factor 3: Adjustment (The three values in this group generally indicate the tendency to reflect consistency with dominant social values regardless of the orientation.) Factor 4: Femininiv (This dimension contains a single positively loaded variable indicating nurturance and sensitivity.) In addition to achieving the objectives of parsimony and data reduction and substantive interpretation of underlying value constructs, the factor analysis also enabled the identification of key independent variables with the highest loading on each of the four factors. Following the suggestion of Hair, Anderson, and Tatham (1987), those variables with the highest loadings for each factor were selected as surrogate variables for particular factor dimensions and were subsequently used to examine intergroup differences. The model and methodology used to test intergroup differences was the two-group discriminant analysis. In this study, the Indian and American groups exhibited the necessary characteristics for discriminant analysis because they were non-arbitrary, distinct, and non-overlapping. In addition, individuals’ personal value profiles are the composite of several personality characteristics that can be examined simultaneously. Both these conditions justify the use of discriminant analysis for this research effort. Tables 5 and 6 display results from the discriminant analysis. While the overall discriminant function is statistically significant 0, < .05), the results can be evaluated further by investigating the ability of the discriminant function to actually classify the sample respondents. Therefore, the classification rate (Table 5) provides further evidence for the discriminant power of the model, and the classification results reported in the table in-

J BUSN RES 1993:27:65-83

Values in Marketing Management

77

Table 4. Factor Analysis of Performance Variables: Rotated Factor Matrix Structure and

Relevant Statistics Factors Variables

ldiocentric

Dominance Capacity for status Sociability Social presence Self-acceptance Tolerance Achievement via independence Intellectual efficiency Psychological mindedness Flexibility Responsibility Self-control Good impression Achievement conformance Sense of well-being Socialization Communality Femininity

0.79 0.75 0.86 0.64 0.64 0.66 0.62 0.57 0.67 0.22 a.01 0.04 0.35 -0.45 ~.04 0.22 0.09 1.94 44.10

Allocentric

Adjustment

Femininity

0.35 0.12 0.06 a.10 0.57 0.43 0.33 0.5 I -0.05 0.62 0.87 0.81 0.59 0.3 I 0.3 I -0.05 0.16

0.42 0.09 0.21 0.17 0.18 0.17 0.24 0.56 0.01 -0.06 0.37 0.19 0.03 0.47 0.69 0.83 0.87 0.10

a.24 0.01 -0.17 -0.15 0.06 0.18 0.25 0.03 0.02 0.46 0.24 0.18 -0.10 0.03 -0.04 0.10 0.07 0.84

0.61 0.75 0.65 0.80 0.46 0.80 0.74 0.8 1 0.60 0.66 0.63 0.82 0.68 0.70 0.79 0.80 0.82 0.75

2.23 12.40

1.57 8.70

I.10 6.10

12.84 71.40

0.58

Eigen value % of variance

0.15

Communality

*Factor loadings for the measures chosen for each construct are shown in bold face

dicate that the percent correctly classified by the discriminant function is reasonably high (80.25%) and is statistically different from the maximum and simple chance prediction at the 0.01 level. The discriminant analysis results for the individual variables are detailed in Table 4. To assess the factors that distinguish most between the two groups, discriminant loadings and F statistics were examined. According to these, the four variables (dimensions), in descending order of importance, are: (1) idiocentrism; (2) adjustment; (3) allocentrism; and (4) femininity. However, only the first two dimensions are statistically significant (p < .OOl) discriminators between the two groups; the null hypothesis of no mean differences between the Indian and American groups is rejected for the variables of idiocentrism and adjustment. The overall discriminant analysis results support the general contention that the Indian and American subjects are significantly different, especially with respect to the underlying value dimensions of idiocentrism (self-orientation) and

Table 5. Discriminant Analysis Results Dimension

India

U.S.A.

F

Loading

Coefficient

Idiocentric Allocentric Adjustment Femininity

29.58 25.00 20.13 17.70

35.73 25.54 24.86 17.93

40.62* 0.24 38.13* 0.16

0.76 0.06 0.74 0.05

0.12 PO.17 0.14 0.39 -7.01

*Indicates significant at < .OOl level.

Standardized coefficients 0.69 ~0.11 0.64 0.14

78

J BUSN RES 1993:27:6S-83

M. N. Segal et al.

Table 6. Classitication Matrix of Predicted Group Memberships Predicted group membership* India Actual group membership

U.S.A.

Frequency

%

Frequency

%

83 9

78.3 16.1

23 47

21.7 83.9

India U.S.A.

Total 106 56

*Predicted membership IS based on the derived discriminant function. Note: The total correct prediction = 130; the percentage correct predictions = 80.25 (130/l62). This slgnilicantly differs from the maximum chance predIctIon at 0.01 level. Centroids of groups in reduced apace: India: -0.48: U.S.A.: 0.90.

adjustment. Interestingly, these variables.

Discussion

Americans

rated higher than their Indian counterparts

on both

and Implications

Analysis of the data revealed that whereas the American subjects were, in fact, more idiocentric than their Indian counterparts, there was no significant difference between the American and Indian samples in allocentrism. Thus Hypothesis 1 was supported, while Hypothesis 2 was rejected. The value systems of American marketing professionals apparently reflect the more individualistic value orientation of American culture. However, the Indian subjects exhibited value systems that were no more allocentric than those of American subjects. Indian marketing professionals evidently are less influenced by national Indian values and culture, and subscribe to values that are less collectivistic than those of Indian society, in general, suggesting that their values are influenced less by their national culture than are the values of American marketers. Although not as idiocentric as Americans, the Indian subjects’ level of allocentrism may be more similar to that of American marketing professionals than to that of the collectivist Indian culture because of the impact of a common business value orientation resulting from globalization. The hypothesis pertaining to adjustment (Hypothesis 3) was rejected. There was a significant difference in the level of adjustment exhibited by U.S. and Indian subjects. Higher American scores on the dimension of adjustment should have been expected, because the more idiocentrist values of the American subjects conformed to the individualistic orientation of U.S. culture. The relatively lower adjustment scores of Indian subjects is consistent with the evidence that their values do not strongly reflect Indian collectivist values and, thus, they may be somewhat alienated from traditional Indian culture. This possibility must be considered in planning, and steps must be taken to mitigate any adverse effect on the management of the marketing function. The implication for marketing is that managers, operating in a society different from their own, must be cognizant of the general social value orientation of that particular society. Satisfaction and success for individual marketing managers and the business organization as a whole depends on the ability to recognize and accommodate the often conflicting value systems that impact individual motivation and behavior within the organization and, thus, organizational performance. For example, an idiocentrist individual in a collectivist (national, business, or corporate) culture may experience frustration and alienation, and/or create disharmony. It is necessary to consider, not only the dominant value system of the national culture, but also the influence of values associated with

Values in Marketing Management

.I BUSN RES 199X:27:65-83

79

business culture and the corporate culture of the firm, as well as personal value systems of the marketing professionals involved. Inconsistency at any level requires managerial attention and remediation to insure effective organizational performance. The results of this empirical example demonstrated observable differences and similarities in the value systems of American and Indian marketing professionals. As suggested by the hierarchical Cross-cultural Value Network Paradigm, culture-based value systems at the level of the national and the professional environments may be the primary influences on the personal value systems of business professionals, but these may not account for all of the variation observed. The power of this paradigm is that it describes a network of interconnected components at various levels of influence from national and professional cultures to individual experience that impact values of the individual. It is at the level of personality traits within the described paradigm that the present study endeavored to identify the current, underlying primary value orientation of marketing professionals in a cross-cultural setting. Whereas this was a necessary first step in the operationalization of this paradigm, in that it assessed the net effect of various cultural influences, future research may need to focus on the measurement and the independent impact of the contributing factors of national, regional, professional, and corporate cultures.

Concluding

Comments

Most previous studies on values, including empirically based research, have not gone far beyond simple bivariate predictions. The example presented here illustrates an application of one aspect of the Cross-cultural Value Network Paradigm in a specific cross-cultural setting. This model accounts for the effects of both national and professional value systems on the individual. The theoretical enrichment made possible by this approach can help researchers and cross-cultural marketing managers to focus on viable strategies for international business exchanges. For instance, strategic planning and implementation of market plans may require a recognition that colleagues in host countries are affected not only by their national value system, but by those of the profession and, thus, they may not be accurate reflectors of the normative values of the culture and may themselves encounter problems in communication with members of the society at large. As the scope of international business continues to increase with advances in technology, transportation, trade, and intercultural exchanges, it becomes imperative that to succeed in the international arena, American businesses must consciously make strides to understand and accommodate the differing cultures and values of their host countries. Multinational firms need to become more proficient at managing more culturally sensitive tasks such as marketing (Terpstra and David, 1985). Cultural and value differences among national subsidiaries easily lead to conflicts over corporate policies. Such conflicts are more likely to occur in marketing and personnel where cultural diversity is exaggerated (Hofstede and Bond, 1988). Given the serious implications of cultural differences, it is encouraging that marketing scholars have begun to recognize the importance of values in the management of the marketing function, especially in a cross-national context.

The authors gratefully acknowledge ern Illinois University-Edwardsville.

partial financial support of our research from the Graduate

School, South-

80

J BUSN RES 1993:27:65-83

M. N. Segal et al.

References Bamberger, Ingolf, Values and Strategic Behavior. ManagementInternational Rev. 26 (1986): 5769. Beatty, Sharon, Kahle, Lynn, Homer, Pamela, and Misra, Shekhar, Alternative Measurement Approaches to Consumer Values: The List of Values and the Rokeach Value Survey. Psycho/. Marketing. 2(3) (1985): 18 I-200. Becker, Boris V., and Connor, Patrick E., The Influence of Personal Values on Attitude and Store Choice Behavior, in An Assessment of Marketing Thought and Practice. Bruce .I. Walker, ed., American Marketing Association, Chicago. 1982. Boddewyn, Jean J., Comparative Marketing: The First Twenty-Five ness Studies. 12 (Spring-Summer 1981): 6169.

Years. J. International

Busi-

Bozinoff, Lome, and Cohen, Robert, The Effects of Personal Values and Usage Situations on Product Attribute Importance, in An Assessment of Marketing Thought and Practice. Bruce J. Walker, ed., American Marketing Association, Chicago, 1982. Chinese Culture Connection, Chinese Values and the Search for Culture-Free ture. J. Cross-Cultural Psycho/. 18 (1987): 143-164.

Dimensions

of Cul-

Davis, H. J., and Rasool, S. A., Values Research and Managerial Behavior: Implications for Devising Culturally Consistent Managerial Styles. Management International Rev. 28 (1988): 1l20. Deshpande, Rohit, and Webster, Fredrick E., Jr., Organizational Culture and Marketing: the Research Agenda. J. Marketing. 53 (January 1989): 3-15. England, George W., Personal Value Systems (March 1967): 53-68.

of American

Defining

Managers. Acad. Management

England, George W., The Manager and His Values: An International lishing Company, Cambridge, MA. 1975.

Perspective,

./. 10

Ballinger Pub-

England, George W., Agarwal, Naresh C., and Trerise, Robert E., Union Leaders and Managers: A Comparison of Value Systems. Indu.striul Relations. IO (1971): 21 l-226. England, George W., and Lee, Raymond, The Relationship Between Managerial Values and Managerial Success in the United States, Japan, India, and Austraha. .I. Applied Psycho/. 59(4) (1974): 411419. England, George W., and Lee, Raymond, Organization Size as an Influence on Perceived Organizational Goals: A Comparative Study Among American, Japanese, and Korean Managers. Organizational Behavior and Human Performance. 9 (1973): 48-58. England, George W., and Lee, Raymond, Organizational Goals and Expected Behavior Among American, Japanese, and Korean Managers-A Comparative Study. Acad. Management J. 14 (1971): 425438. England, George W., Dhingra, O.P., and Agarwal, Naresh C., The Manager and the Man: A CrossCulrural Study of Personal Values, Comparative Administration Research Institute Series No. 8, Kent, OH: Graduate School of Business Administration, Kent State University. 1974. Fong, S., and Peskin, H., Sex-Role Strain and Personality America. J. Ahnorm. Psychol. 74 (1969): 5633567. Gordon, L.V., The Measurement 1975.

of Interpersonal

Gordon, L.V., Sun~ey of Interpersonal Chicago. 1976. Gdugh, Harrison

G., Caiijbrnia Alto, CA. 1957.

Cough, Harrison G., Cross-Cultural (1960): 5 l&5 I I (abstr.).

of China-Born

Values, Science Research Associates,

Vulues-Revised

Psychological

Adjustment

Manuul,

Science

Inventory Manual, Consulting

Studies of the Socialization

Continuum.

Research

Students in Chicago. Associates,

Psychologists, Am. Psychologist.

Palo 15

J BUSN

Values in Marketing Management

Appl. Psychol.

48(3)

(1964): 191-196. Gough, Harrison G., Cross-Cultural Reports. 17 (1965): 379-387.

Validation of a Measure of Asocial Behavior. Psychological

Gough, Harrison G., A Cross-Cultural 30(2) (1966): 136-141.

Analysis of the CPI-Femininity

Scale. J. Consulring Psychol.

Gough, Harrison G., Cross-Cultural Studies of Socialization, in Cross-Cultural Approaches to the Study of Delinquency. S.D. Peizer (Chm.). Symposium presented at the American Psychological Association, San Francisco, September 1968. Gough, Harrison G., California Psychological Alto, CA. 1975.

Inventory,

Consulting Psychologists

Press, Inc., Palo

Gough, Harrison G., Chun, K., and Chun, Y.E., Validation of the CPI Femininity Psychological

Reports.

22 (1968):

Scale in Korea.

143-146.

Gough, Harrison G., DeVos, G., and Mizushima, K., Japanese Validation of the CPI Social Maturity Index. Psychological Reports. 22 (1968): 143-146. Gough,

Harrison

J. Ahnorm.

G., and Sandhu,

Psychol. 68 (1964):

H.S., Validation

of the CPI Socialization

Scale in India.

544-547.

Guthrie, George M., and Lonner, Walter J., Assessment of Personality and Psychopathology, in Field Methods in Cross-Cultural Research. Walter J. Lohner and John W. Berry, eds., Sage Publications, Beverly Hills, CA. 1986, vol. 8, pp. 231-264. Gutman, Jonathan, J. Marketing

A Means-End

46(2)

(1982):

Chain Model Based on Consumer

Categorization

Gutman, Jonathan, Analyzing Consumer Orientations Toward Chain Analysis. PsychoI. Marketing. l(34) (1984): 2343.

Beverages

Through

Hair, Joseph F., Jr., Anderson, Ralph E., and Tatham, Ronald L., Multivariate Macmillan Publishing Company, New York. 1987. Hofstede, Geert, Nationality 148-155.

Processes.

6&72.

and Espoused

Values of Managers. J. Appl. Psycho/.

Means-End

Data Analysis,

61(2) (1976):

Hofstede, Geert, Humanization

of Work: The Role of Values in a Third Industrial Revolution, in Europe. Cary L. Cooper and Enid MumPress, Westport, CT. 1979, pp. 18-37.

The Quality of Working Life in Western and Eastern

ford, eds., Greenwood Hofstede, Geert, Culture’s

Consequences,

Sage, Beverly Hills. 1980a.

Hofstede, Geert, Motivation, Organizational

Leadership, and Organization: Do American Theories Apply Abroad? Dynamics. 9(l) (Summer 1980b): 42263.

Hofstede, Geert, The Quality of Life Concept. Acad. Management

Rev. 9 (1984):

389-398.

Hofstede, Geert, and Bond, Michael H., The Confucius Connection: From Cultural Roots to Economic Growth. Organizational Dynamics. 16 (Spring 1988): 5-21. Homer, Pamela, and Kahle, Lynn, A Structural Equation Test of the Value-Attitude-Behavior Hierarchy. J. Personality and Social Psychol. 54(4) (1988): 638-646. Jackofsky, Ellen F., Slocum, John W., and McQuaid, Sara J., Cultural Values and the CEO: Alluring Companies? Acad. Management Exec. 2( I ) (1988): 39-49. Jain, Subhash C., International

Marketing Management,

Kahle, Lynn, ed., Social Values and Social Change: York. 1983.

PWS-Kent Publishing, Boston, MA. 1987.

Adaptation

to Life in America,

Praeger, New

Kahle, Lynn, The Nine Nations of North America and the Value Basis of Geographic tion. J. Marketing. 50 (April 1986): 3747.

Segmenta-

Kahle, Lynn, Beatty, Sharon, and Homer, Pamela, Alternative Measurement Approaches to Consumer Values: The List of Values (LOV) and the Values and Life Styles (VALS). J. Consumer Res. 13 (1986):

405409.

82

J BUSN

RES

M. N. Segal et al.

lYY3:27:65-83

Kelly, Karen, Silverman, Bernie I., and Cochrane, Raymond, Value Survey. J. Exp. Res. Personality. 6 (1972): 84-87.

Social Desirability

and the Rokeach

Kluckhohn, Clyde, Values and Value Orientations in the Theory of Action, in Toward a General Theory of Action. Talcott Parsons and Edward A. Shils, eds., Harper and Row, New York. 1962. Levin, Joseph, and Kami, Eliezer S., Demonstration of Cross-Cultural Invariance of the California Psychological Inventory in America and Israel by the Guttman-Lingoes Smallest Space Analysis. J. Cross-Cultural Psychology. I (1970): 253-260. Mason, E.P., Comparisons of Personality Characteristics Indian, Mexican, and Caucasian Ethnic Backgrounds. Megargee, Edwin, The California Psychological San Francisco. 1972.

of Junior High Students from American J. Social Psycho/. 73 (1967): 145-155.

Inventory Handbook. Jersey-Bass

Inc. Publishers,

Mizushima, Keiichi, and De Vos, George, An Application of the California Psychological tory in a Study of Japanese Delinquency. J. Social Psychol. 7 1 ( 1967): 45-5 I.

Inven-

Munson, J. Michael, Personal Values: Considerations on Their Measurement and Application to Five Areas of Research Inquiry, in Personal Values and Consumer Psychology. Robert E. Pitts, Jr., and Arch G. Woodside, eds., Lexington Books, Lexington, MA. 1984. Munson, J. Michael, and McIntyre, Shelby H., Developing Practical Procedures for the Measurement of Personal Values in Cross-Cultural Marketing. J. Marketing Res. 16(February 1979): 48-52. Munson, J. Michael, and Posner, Barry Z., Concurrent Validation of Two Value Inventories in Predicting Job Classification and Success for Organizational Personnel. J. Appl. Psychol. 65(5) (1980): 536542. Pitts, Robert E., Jr., and Woodside, Arch Cl., Personal Values and Market Segmentation: Applying the Value Construct, in Personal Values and Consumer Psychology. Robert E. Pitts and Arch G. Woodside, eds., D.C. Heath and Company, Lexington MA. 1984. Posner, Barry Z., and Munson, J. Michael, The Importance of Values in Understanding zational Behavior. Human Resource Management. 18 (Fall 1979): 9-14.

Organi-

Powell, Gary N., Posner, Barry Z., and Schmidt, Warren H., Sex Effects on Managerial Systems. Human Relations. 37 (November 1984): 909-921.

Value

Prakash, Ved, Personal Values and Product Expectations, in Personal Values and Consumer Psychology. Robert E. Pitts and Arch G. Woodside. eds., D.C. Heath and Company, Lexington, MA. 1984. Reynolds, Thomas J, and Gutman, Jonathan, Laddering Theory, Method, Analysis, tation. J. Ad\,ertising Res. 28( 1) (February-March 1988): 1 l-3 I.

and Interpre-

Reynolds, Thomas J., and Jolly, James P., Measuring Personal Values: An Evaluation native Methods. J. Marketing Research 17 (November 1980): 531-536.

of Alter-

Roberts, Karlene H., On Looking at an Elephant. Psychol. Bull. 74(5) (1970): 327-350. Rokeach, Milton, Beliefs, Attitudes. and Values, The Free Press, New York. 1968. Rokeach, Milton, The Nature of Human Values, The Free Press, New York. 1973. Rosenquist, C.M., and Megargee, Austin. 1969.

E.I.. Delinquency

in Three Cultures, University

Schiffman, Leon, and Kanuk, Leslie, Consumer Behavior 3rd ed., Prentice-Hall Cliffs, NJ. 1987.

of Texas Press, Inc., Engelwood

Terpstra, Vem, and David, Kenneth, The Cultural Environment of International Business, 2nd ed., South-Western Publishing Company, Dallas. 1985. Triandis, Harry C., Bontempo, R., Villareal, M., Asai, M., and Lucca, N.. Individualism Collectivism: Cross-Cultural Perspectives on Self-Ingroup Relationships. J. Personality Social Psycho/. 54(2) (1988): 323-338.

and and

Values in Marketing Management

JBUSNRES 1993:27:65-83

Triandis, H.C., Bontempo, R., Betacourt, H., Bond, M., Leung, K., Brenes, A., Georgas, J., Hui, C.H., Marin, G., Setiadi, B., Sinha, J.R.P., Verma, J., Spangenbert, J., Touzard, M., and de Moutmollin, G., The Measurement of the Etic Aspects of Individualism and Collectivism Across Cultures. Aust. J. Psychol. 38 (1986): 257-267. Triandis, Harry C., Leung, K., Villareal, M.J., and Clark, F.L., Allocentric Versus Idiocentric Tendencies: Convergent and Discriminant Validation. /. Res. Personality. 19(1985): 395-415. Tse, David K., Lee, Kam-hon, Vertinsky, Ilan, and Wehrung, Donald A., Does Culture Matter? A Cross-Cultural Study of Executives’ Choice, Decisiveness, and Risk Adjustment in International Marketing. J. Marketing. 52 (October 1988): 81-95. Vinson, Donald E., and Munson, J. Michael, Personal Values: An Approach to Market Segmentation, in Marketing: 1776-1976 and Beyond. K.L. Bemhardt, ed., American Marketing Association, Chicago. 1976. Vinson, Donald E., Munson, J. Michael, and Nakanishi, Masao, An Investigation of the Rokeach Value Survey of Consumer Research Applications, in Advances in Consumer Research. W.O. Perreault, ed., Proceedings of Association for Consumer Research. 1977. Vinson, Donald E., Scott, Jerome E., and Lamont, Lawrence M., The Role of Personal Values in Marketing and Consumer Behavior. J. Marketing. 41(2) (April 1977): 44-50. Whitely, William, and England, George W., Managerial Values as a Reflection of Culture and the Process of Industrialization. Acad. Management J. 20 (September 1977): 439453.