Group Membership Salience and the Ethical Aspects of. Globally Integrated Marketing Communications

Transcription

1 Group Membership Salience and the Ethical Aspects of Globally Integrated Marketing Communications Andreas F. Grein Stephen J. Gould Zicklin School of Business Baruch College, the City University of New York May 2004 Keywords: ethics, group membership salience, international marketing strategy

2 Group Membership Salience and the Ethical Aspects of Globally Integrated Marketing Communications Globally integrated marketing communications (GIMC) are strategically integrated and coordinated across countries to reflect a message and brand / corporate image, across all marketing activities and locations where these activities are taking place (Grein and Gould, 1996; Gould et al., 1999; Sheth and Parvatiyar, 2001; Kitchen and Schultz, 2003). Ethical behavior and ethical values must likewise be coordinated from an overall corporate view. They must be integrated in marketing strategies and communicated like any other element of marketing while being salient to local cultures and stakeholders. This paper will examine the impact of group membership salience on ethics, and the way in which ethics is incorporated in globally integrated marketing communications. Understanding how people will behave in corporate settings and formulate or follow corporate codes of conduct is a topic fraught with difficult theoretical and practical issues. Individuals are embedded in layers of identity, which problematizes determination of the particular ethics invoked. An individual is embedded in at least three levels of identity, cultural (including aspects of national identity, i.e., norms, values, customs and material artifacts associated with being part of a nation-state, along with globalized identity, i.e., adopting various norms, values, customs, and material artifacts from nations and cultures other than one s own), social (including subcultural membership), and personal (for a review of these levels see Lamont and Molnar, 2002). We refer to the composite of these three levels as everyday identity, since they would apply to everyone, regardless of age, country, employment status, etc. At the same time, there is a parallel overall corporate identity which affects managers, employees and agents of corporations. Corporate identity comprises three levels which mirror everyday identity. Firm identity reflects identification with, membership in, or affiliation with the corporation, regardless of the role an individual plays in it. Group identity reflects work groups, both formal (e.g., one s department or division) and informal (e.g., office allies and friends). Individual identity in the corporate dimension 1

3 would include one s formal position and one s relationships with others. There are also other sources of ethics such as standards in a given discipline like marketing, which will impact corporate social identity in particular. Likewise, one must consider industry standards, and the standards of agents in the extracorporate network, i.e., any agent, distributor, supplier, etc., that acts on behalf of the firm. International firms must cope with a wide variety of cultures and situations, and because of this have difficulty determining what is appropriate global ethical conduct (Donaldson, 1996). The concept of group membership salience (GMS) plays an important role in determining perceptions of correct or ethical behavior in different situations. Salience theory postulates that actors can be motivated in a situation by the mere presence or absence of certain trait cues (McGuire and Padawer-Singer, 1976). Situational factors, however, paradoxically reflect relatively longstanding traits, characteristics and dispositional tendencies. For example, a group of all men (being a man is a longstanding characteristic of a person) will act quite differently than one in which women are present. The mixed gender group makes gender cues salient. Salience may involve many cues for individuals, including personal, social and cultural identities. Culture seems to be particularly relevant in terms of GMS (Briley and Wyer, 2002). Cultural salience means that one s culture is a part of one s identity but that because of its situational or contingent aspect, it may become particularly salient or relevant only at certain times. It is essential to remember the role of GMS when developing a model of identity. When personal, social and corporate identity are crossed in a model with the three corporate levels of identity, including the distinction between home country and foreign market values and concerns, they form a cube which can be used as a framework for formulating, implementing and investigating ethical marketing strategies and communications (Figure 1). This model also incorporates the influence of discipline-specific, industry and the extra-corporate network s standards. When the topic of corporate codes of conduct is invoked, it is necessary to consider what levels and types of identity and related ethical standards have been cued and 2

4 are salient. Misspecification of the appropriate or salient level can render the formulation and implementation of codes of conduct a meaningless and possibly counterproductive exercise. Currently, multinational firms codes of conduct, and their relationship to marketing programs and strategies, have a number of weaknesses. Sethi (2003) describes the weaknesses of codes of conduct as, 1. Codes are presented as public statements of lofty corporate intent and purpose, but are short on specific content. 2. Codes are not taken seriously, even within the company, by either managers or employees. Code compliance is not integrated into the organization s reward structure and operating procedures. 3. Codes lack effective and meaningful monitoring procedures as to verification and public disclosure of a corporation s compliance with the code provisions. (p. 82) Sethi describes the concept of a legitimacy gap, arguing that firms have avoided addressing public concerns and instead, highlight positive contributions which may have little or no connection to public concerns. The failures of codes and the legitimacy gap result, in part, from a failure to address issues of GMS in designing and implementing these codes. Firms might give up on addressing public concerns because there are so many different stakeholders and their demands are so varied. Indeed, in the case of Shell and the Brent Spar oil rig, the firm felt that its more scientific approach to the disposal of the Brent Spar would be persuasive with stakeholders (Grein and Gould, 1996). In fact, the public never bought these arguments, and Shell might have concluded from this experience that stakeholders expectations are fickle and unrealistic. In fact, GMS could have triggered a different public response than what Shell expected based on its rational and scientific solution to the problem. Addressing the first criticism of codes above, a firm might be tempted to write a lofty statement of intent while in effect giving up on addressing complex societal expectations. The second criticism needs to be expanded to the firm s extra-corporate network, i.e., suppliers, agents, distributors, etc. Sethi (2003) shows that Nike s extensive outsourcing of production does not preclude it from criticism directed at sweatshop conditions in independently-owned manufacturing facilities. Having 3

5 extended this criticism to the extra-corporate network, as well as employees, we would again argue that a lack of GMS might lead to an attitude where codes are not taken seriously. If firms fail to recognize GMS at the level of the extra-corporate network, they will not be able to integrate codes of conduct and rewards for appropriate behavior effectively. Monitoring and disclosure of compliance information, the third criticism noted above, may be seriously compromised by issues of GMS. Monitoring could raise difficulties such as how often does a positive action have to occur in order for it to be successfully implemented? When firms claim to have little or no power over independent players in their network, should they be absolved of responsibility for the actions of these network partners? The same argument would apply for disclosure. In the field of accounting, influences from the local environment have had a clear impact on the development of disclosure standards (Arpan and Radebaugh, 1985). Influences include educational (e.g., literacy and attitudes towards math), cultural (conservatism, secrecy, attitudes towards business and accounting), legal, political and economic (such as inflation) factors. These influences also lead to differences in social responsibility and social accounting disclosure. To be effective, codes of conduct need to recognize and be implemented in ways that reflect GMS-related issues in disclosure. The following research propositions have been developed: P1: Firms pursuing GIMC will have better performance if ethics and codes reinforce global marketing strategies and are globally coordinated across markets. P2: Firm-wide codes will be viewed more positively and generate greater compliance if issues of GMS have been addressed. P3: The greater the diversity of markets, the more issues of GMS will have an effect on codes and global marketing programs. P4: Firm-wide codes will be viewed more positively and generate greater compliance from the extracorporate network if issues of GMS have been addressed. 4

6 An initial examination of four prominent codes of conduct (the UN Global Compact, the OECD Guidelines for Multinational Enterprises, and the codes of Nike and Mattel) reveals that relatively little attention is being paid to marketing issues, and in these four codes there is no mention of the need for these codes to reinforce globally integrated marketing communications (P1). There is a recognition of the difficulties of responding to GMS (Nike) and likewise some effort to do so by Mattel (P2). Nike highlights the difficulty caused by diversity but again only Mattel appears to have explicitly incorporated some mechanism for addressing GMS (P3). Finally, both Nike and Mattel have explicitly tried to enforce codes of conduct on independent contractors, suggesting that these firms have made some progress with respect to P4. However, codes need to be applied beyond suppliers or vendors to include the entire extracorporate network, i.e., agents, distributors, advertising agencies, etc. This paper will expand the analysis of codes to further develop the model and begin testing the research propositions. By incorporating the GMS perspective in global marketing strategies (GIMC in particular), it will focus attention on the need for all stakeholders to be part of the process. Without this focus, it will be difficult to develop and effectively implement codes of conduct that have more than symbolic meaning. Firms need to ensure that their marketing behavior, and that of their agents, reflects the principles they value and that the company s and brand s images will be protected and enhanced. This will be a huge challenge in the years to come, as stakeholders become more sophisticated, information becomes more widely available, and simultaneously, firms with increasingly global activities will be forced to make more choices about behaviors in situations that they do not fully understand. The four propositions above, and the broader implications of salience, ethics and globally integrated marketing communications, comprise a promising area of research with the potential for developing both the theory of international business and strong managerial implications. 5

7 Author bios and contact information: Andreas F. Grein is an Associate Professor of Marketing and International Business at Baruch College, The City University of New York. He has worked in personnel recruitment and the pharmaceutical industry as well as extensively with graduate programs in the Zicklin School of Business. He received his BBA from the University of New Brunswick (Canada), MIBS from the University of South Carolina and his Ph.D. from New York University. Currently, his research interests cover marketing strategies in the automobile industry, international advertising, the changing patterns of national competitiveness, and ethics in international marketing. He has published in the Journal of International Business Studies, the Journal of International Marketing, the Journal of Advertising Research, the Journal of Current Issues and Research in Advertising, the Journal of Marketing Communications, the International Journal of Advertising, Thunderbird International Business Review, The International Executive, and Global Outlook. Stephen J. Gould is Professor of Marketing at Baruch College, The City University of New York. Dr. Gould has previously published in Psychological Review, Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Business Research, Journal of Advertising, Journal of Advertising Research, Psychology and Marketing, Journal of Current Issues and Research in Advertising, Journal of Marketing Communications, European Journal of Marketing, American Journal of Preventive Medicine, Journal of Business Ethics, Journal of Public Policy and Marketing, The Elgar Companion to Consumer Research and Economic Psychology, and Research in Consumer Behavior, among others. His research, consulting and teaching interests span consumer research, technology, marketing communications, and cross-cultural research. Currently, he is investigating issues of ethics and corporate responsibility, self and introspection in consumer behavior, e- commerce, technology use, software piracy, Integrated Marketing Communications (IMC) and Globally Integrated Marketing Communications (GIMC), product placement and qualitative research methods. 6

8 References: Arpan, J.S. and Radebaugh, L.H. (1985) International Accounting and Multinational Enterprises, Wiley and Sons: New York. Briley, D.A. and Wyer, Jr., R.S. (2002) The Effect of Group Membership Salience on the Avoidance of Negative Outcomes: Implications for Social and Consumer Decisions, Journal of Consumer Research, 29(3): Donaldson, T. (1996) Values in Tension: Ethics Away from Home, Harvard Business Review, 74(5): Gould, S.J., Lerman, D.B. and Grein, A.F. (1999) Agency Perspectives and Practices on Global IMC, Journal of Advertising Research, 39(1): Grein, A.F. and Gould, S.J. (1996) Globally Integrated Marketing Communications, Journal of Marketing Communications, 2(3): Kitchen, P.J. and Schultz, D.E. (2003) Integrated Corporate and Product Brand Communication (1), Advances in Competitiveness Research, 11(1): Lamont, M. and Molnár, V. (2002) The Study of Boundaries in the Social Sciences, Annual Review of Sociology, 28: McGuire, W.J. and Padawer-Singer, A. (1976) Trait Salience in the Spontaneous Self-Concept, Journal of Personality & Social Psychology, 33(6):

9 Sethi, S.P. (2003) Setting Global Standards: Guidelines for Creating Codes of Conduct in Multinational Corporations, Wiley: Hoboken, New Jersey. Sheth, J.N. and Parvatiyar, A. (2001) The Antecedents and Consequences of Integrated Global Marketing, International Marketing Review, 18(1):

10 Figure 1 Levels of identity functional discipline industry Corporate identity firm group foreign individual personal social cultural home extra-corporate network Everyday identity 9