American Journal of Scientific Research ISSN 1450-223X Issue 7 (2010), pp.36-51 EuroJournals Publishing, Inc. 2010 http://www.eurojournals.com/ajsr.

htm

Global Brands Conceptualization: A Perspective from the Malaysian Consumers

Jenny Marisa Lim Genting INTI International College E-mail: jennylds360@yahoo.com Lawrence Arokiasamy Universiti Tunku Abdul Rahman E-mail: lawrence@utar.edu.my M Krishna Moorthy Universiti Tunku Abdul Rahman E-mail:krishnam@utar.edu.my Abstract This paper reflects on the need for global brands in Malaysia taking into consideration the consumer perceptions. It tries to establish that Malaysia has not adequately addressed the core knowledge needs of the consumer perceptions which relate to global brands. This is necessitated by the consumer of origin, quality signals, value perceptions and corporate social responsibility in most global brands. This paper argues that the nation lacks the critical knowledge of consumer perceptions on the global brands. It concludes that the task of developing a proper marketing strategies to boost the global brands that will tackle the factors restricting the adaptation of global brands in Malaysia. Being a multi-ethnic country understanding the consumer perceptions towards global brands can harness the marketing strategies.

Keywords: Consumer, perception, global brands.

Introduction
In current global market, companies are composed by competitors, regardless of industry. The increasing demand of the global brands is a recognized feature of most nations. In Malaysia, this norm is no exception. In vision 2020 to be fully developed and industrialized nation by the year 2020, and people more concern on global brands to represent the identity and image of the individual. The Malaysian economy is expected to expand faster in 2008, with real gross domestic product (GDP) growth project at between 6% and 6.5 %. Inflation is projected to remain low, as output growth is below potential level (Malaysian Economic Report 2007/ 2008). The inflation rate has been curbed by the government and has maintained a dearth to influence the purchasing rate of the customers. According to the Malaysian Economic Report (2007/2008), the Malaysian economy has demonstrated strong resilience in face of external uncertainties. It is expected to remain strong despite the slowing of the global economy in 2005. Economic growth continues to be broad based with all

Global Brands Conceptualization: A Perspective from the Malaysian Consumers

37

sectors registering higher output. Growth will continue to be driven by the services and manufacturing sectors and by global economic growth prospects. It is expected that the Malaysian consumer spending pattern will rise considerably in the next few years, making the already thriving Malaysian market for consumer and industrial goods even more promising. The ASEAN free trade agreement is already heralding welcome competition in some areas, including Malaysia's significant auto market. Malaysias consumer lifestyle has been evolving and changing due to the rising affluence and education levels. High profile international retailers and the global mass media have also played a hand in shaping consumer buying behaviors. Malaysians are becoming more affluent, sophisticated and cosmopolitan. They have moved on from the simple need for sustenance to key leisure themes like health, beauty, lifestyle and fitness. (Malaysian Household Expenditure Survey Report, 1998/99) Since the emergence of foreign owned hypermarkets, Malaysians who live in urban areas have become accustomed to shopping for groceries at hypermarkets and supermarkets. Meanwhile rural people continue to purchase from traditional grocers, convenience stores and mini-marts. Malaysians also have a strong shopping spend most of their money at hypermarkets, followed by supermarkets and traditional grocery stores. The high income group has a household income of more than MYR3, 500 per month. According to Consumer Malaysia Info Site (2008), Malaysian consumers are becoming more knowledgeable and discerning, and are not easily influenced by advertisements and promotions. They are price conscious, but at the same time desire brand quality. With the growing affluence and changing lifestyle, consumers are becoming more demanding; not only of the quality of goods but also the services they receive. According to a study by Murphy (2007) brand loyalty in Malaysia is becoming more important as only 44% of Malaysian across the lower, middle and higher income groups, in both urban as well as rural areas, do not have the time to shop and are thus satisfied by buying the brands they trust. Continue findings discovered that more than half (55%) of the young Malaysians aged 25 to 34 seek quality above any other consideration when purchasing goods and they did not mind paying extra for it. This can be attributed to a growing domestic economy and more people could afford to care about quality. Taking this drive for quality a step further, 25% of the Malaysians from the middle and higher income groups living in urban market centers said that they would prefer to buy designer goods and well-known brands. Perhaps more surprising is that more men than women were likely to be influenced by designer goods and well-known brands and not by the traditional image of the brand-wise shopper at all. The literature-based paper begins by defining the research problem, defining the concept of brand and global brands, and reviewing the current literatures. In the final develop the model and conclude the significance of global brands in businesses.

Research Problem
This study attempts to relate on the various variables and dimensions that make up the global brands preferences and issues from the Malaysian consumers perceptions and mindsets. While national reputations for products vary from country to country the consumers and their attitudes or behaviours are a very important factor to be considered. Consumers generalize their attitudes and opinions across products from a given country, based on their familiarity and background with the country, and their own personal experiences of product attributes such as technological superiority, product quality, value for money and credibility of country-of origin of a brand. Quality signal, social values and esteems and corporate social responsibility are some of the relatives important global brands dimensions that will influence the consumer perceptions and purchasing behaviours. Peter Drucker viewed the underlying Principles of Consumer Behaviour as the purpose of business was to create consumers. The job of creating customers will be easy when they know what the consumer wants to buy and adapting to the consumers motivation and, behaviour is not an option. It is

38

Jenny Marisa Lim, Lawrence Arokiasamy and M Krishna Moorthy

an absolute necessity for the competitive survival (Drucker, cited in Peter and Olson, 2005). The world is the marketplace for the business people. Global consumers can be reached easily with global brands or products that are being promoted through local media. Consumer has the right, and the individuals are motivated towards more consumption, acquisition and upward mobility. Therefore, it is expected that the market segment of Malaysian consumers to measure the relative important dimensions of the world associated global brands characteristics that influence the consumers purchasing decisions via the quality signal, social and esteem values and corporate social responsibility. This research helps to identify some relative important dimension of global brands on consumers when they make purchasing decisions and evaluation. As consumers all over the world associate global brands with the four characteristics, i.e., the country of origin, quality signals, social and esteem values and corporate social responsibility. Definition of Brand and Global Brand There are many other brand/branding definitions and descriptions that focus on the methods used to achieve differentiation and to emphasize the benefits the consumers derive from purchasing brands. Despite, the many offering definitions of what branding and a brand is, there is a general agreement in the marketing literature that the brand is more than a name given to a product. It embodies a whole set of physical and social psychological attributes and beliefs (Simoes and Dibb, 2001). Brands mean different things to different consumers. While brand management may strive to communicate a specific and consistent image to the market, consumers may develop different perceptions of the brand, also depending on their relationship-intensity with the brand. Brand management and research may be well advised to acknowledge the relationship between knowledge, attitude and behavior (Koll and Wallpach, 2009). According to Kotabe and Helsen (1988), a global brand is one that is available in many nations and, though it may differ from one country to another, the localized versions have a common goal and a similar identity. In another words, global brands carry one brand name and/or logo. A global brand can carry one name or logo and thus be recognized worldwide, however the product may not be of the same standard at all (Kotabe and Helsen, 1988). An example is Knorr soups and sauces. The package with the brand name and logo (of Knorr) was found in supermarkets around the world and it provides the global brand images, and yet the contents follow the local taste, (Business Week, 2000). Kotler and Dubois (1994) stated that Marlboro is an urban brand which appeals to the universal human desire for freedom and space, which has been missed especially by the urban dwellers that typically lack freedom and physical space. Marlboro is positioned around the word as an urban brand and its Marlboro man symbolizes freedom and space. The term global brand has been used to refer to brands where at least 20 percent of the product is sold outside their home country or region (Johansson, 2000). A strong global brand acts as an ambassador when companies enter new markets of offer new product, (Business Week, 2000). It also helps to guide corporate strategy decision by indicating which new ideas fit within the brand concept and which do not (Lamb, et. al, 2005). According to Yum Brand Incs Annual Report (2005), Yum Brands (formerly Tricon Global Restaurants), which owns Pizza Hut, KFC, and Taco Bell is a good example of a company that has developed a strong global brand. Yum believes that it has to adapt its restaurant to local tastes and different cultural and political climates. In Japan, for instance, KFC sells tempura crispy strips. In northern England, KFC focuses on gravy and potatoes, while in Thailand it offers rice with soy or sweet chilies sauce. In China, the company recruits employees who balance an understanding of the Chinese mind set with Western business training. Significance of the Study The result of this study can help the international marketers to strategies on the attributes that differentiate the brand from the others and to strengthen the relationship with their customers, and also to ensure future earnings and to identify the major challenges of global branding. An understanding of

Global Brands Conceptualization: A Perspective from the Malaysian Consumers

39

how culture influences consumer behaviour will be beneficial for both the manager and the consumer researchers, as it can provide a global view of the interaction of culture and consumer behaviour. As brands go global companies need to win the trust of consumers on many more fronts at higher levels, the greater the potential influence of a corporation. Therefore, this study emphasizes on the global views and the importance of brand ethic and corporate social responsibility in the consumers eyes in this era. Marketing Managers should also take note of the fact that they should focus on creating and communicating quality rather than the status and prestige advantages of global brands. Lastly, existing research on country of origin has contributed substantial knowledge of the consumer attitudes in various countries towards foreign products or brands and the corresponding marketing strategies (Sohail, 2005). However, empirical research on the attitude of consumer in developing countries towards foreign brands or global brands and associate marketing practises is rather limited. Therefore, this study can fill the gap and few implications can be drawn from this research on the country of origin effects and some other relative importance on the global brand dimensions of the consumers in the developing country like Malaysia. Literature Review Some relatives important dimension of global brands consumers when they make purchasing decisions and evaluation. As consumers all over the world associate global brands with four characteristics via the country of origin (COO), quality signals, global myth, social responsibility (CSR). Country of Origin (COO) Some global brands are strongly associated with their country of origin (Roellig, 2001). Indeed, in certain categories this is part of the essence of the brand. Automobiles are the most obvious example. The German cultural psyche is embodied in Mercedes Benz, Porches, and BMW. According to Han, et.al., (1999), the emphasis of COO research is on buying the products made in the home nation or where the products are made. Thus the globalization of world markets implies a research focus on global or international brands spanning countries and cultures. Global brands may be produced in a number of locations so that manufacturers can take advantages of lower costs and / or greater access to foreign markets. According to Pecotish (2007), the notion of the COO as an overall image across product classes may be contrasted with the possibility of a more limited application to a particular product class. Further, he explained that the interplay between COO, branding and quality has not been fully enumerated. COO and any linked brand names have been shown to have both broad and specific effects on the consumer behaviour (Agbonifoh and Elimimian, 1999). More knowledgeable and expert consumers may use brand name and COO in a conditional fashion whiles less knowledgeable consumers are considered to use this information in a more general manner. Country of Origin as a Cue There are many parallels between the conclusion drawn from research in the broader consumer behaviour context and those specifically concerned with the COO (Coulter et al., 2003). Some researchers confounded that elements of country image as broad, global concept and its application in the specific product class situation and has, consequently, failed to clearly demonstrate its importance as a cue in the decision making process (Peterson and Jolibert, 1995). Therefore, it is necessary to explicate and differentiate the various conceptualizations of the country image and its interaction with the other cues. The country of origin image (COI) may also be considered as a part of stereotyping or classifying process that helps to simplify judgments when information is lacking or when there is an overload of information. The research on country image as broad, global concept has resulted with the following conclusions:

40

Jenny Marisa Lim, Lawrence Arokiasamy and M Krishna Moorthy

That there exist an overall preferences for domestic goods and services; That foreign countries may be ordered in terms of their overall expected competence in producing products and services; and That the images of countries are multi-dimensional (Hong etal., 2002, Kotabe et al., 2005). Pecotish (2007) reveals the evidence that consumer form an overall hierarchy of countries based on the general global image considerations. It is critical that the basis of this order be clearly delineated before research investigations. He further states that the first element that consumers use in the global image evaluation is domestic preferences. The theoretical foundation for domestic preference may be found in patriotism or more formally in ethnocentrism (Pecotish and Rosenthal, 2001). Consumers may favour domestic goods for many reasons including familiarity, and because of the belief that it helps the economy and provide jobs as well as demonstrate a preference for domestic products. Given the postulated domestic preference, the remaining issue involves the image of nondomestic nations. Research supports for the notion that the hierarchy of foreign countries in terms of consumer response variables exist. Developed countries such a Japan, Germany and the USA are associated with high quality products whereas newly developing nations such as Korea, China and the Philippines are associated with poorer quality products. Countries with the lowest reputation are those where the consumers know very little, for example, the Eastern European countries (Audhesh et al., 2003; Hong et al., 2002; Pecotish and Rosenthal, 2001). Indeed, research suggests that the reputation of an unknown may be lower than that of even developing countries (Pecotish et al., 1996). According to Papadopulos and Heslop, (1993,) the narrower conceptualization of country/product image deals with the referent image which consumers are assumed to conjure up when exposed to information about where a product was made, assembled, designed or conceived. Pecotish (2007), asserts that its measurement, therefore, must be anchored to the referent product class, and thus form the basis for a critical comparison which emanates from the existence of countries that may possess a poor overall image but nonetheless have a good reputation for the production of a particular class of products. It can therefore be concluded that the study of COO as an image has shown broad ordering effects to occur, while the study of COO as country/product image has shown these effects to be more specific or limited to referent product class associated with the country. Table 2.2 illustrates the recent studies on the consumer attitudes towards the products attributes and country of origin perceptions.
Table 2.2: Recent Studies on Country-of Origin Effects Outside the USA.
Findings Consumer had more positive evaluation of products from USA, Bhuian (1997) Saudi Arabia Japan, Germany, Italy, the UK and France. Johansson et al. Country-of-origin and risk attitudes influenced product Russia (1994) evaluation. Country - of -origin affects quality perception but not price Ettenson (1993) Taiwan estimates and stores prestige have no effect Country - of -origin has differential influence, brand name Roth and Romeo Russia, Poland, Hungary plays a lesser role and interaction of country-of-origin and (1992) brand name has a minor role. The Netherlands, France, Western and eastern consumers have strong and positive Papadopoulous et al. Germany, Greece, Hungary, attitudes about Japanese products. Western products are not (1990) Canada, and the UK viewed the same way. A western products origin has a substantial positive effect on Ger et al. (1993) Romania, Turkey brand attitudes Chinese consumers willingness to buy Japanese products is Klien et al. (1998) The People Republic of China affected by the economies and military rivalry between the two nations. Adapted from: Buhian (1997), Saudi consumers attitudes towards European, US and Japanese products and marketing practices, European Journal of Marketing, Vol.31. 7, pp: 467 786. Study Country

Global Brands Conceptualization: A Perspective from the Malaysian Consumers

41

Physical Quality Physical or objective quality (an intrinsic cue) refers to measurable and verifiable superiority on some predetermined ideal standard (Zeithaml, 1988). Research evidence suggests that objective quality rather than extrinsic cues such as price and brand name have the largest impact on the perception of quality . On the other hand, while many studies exclude price as a factor, this is unlikely to constitute a problem because COO is not signalled through price (Thakor and Kohli, 1996). Few consumers are likely to believe, for instance, that every product coming out of Japan is high priced. Given that brand and COO are extrinsic cues it is anticipated that their effects will also be influenced by quality differences in a multi- cue context. As Harris et al., (1994) considered that a crucial issue in COO research had to do with the extent to which consumers are willing to make sacrifice and accept the inferior quality for patriotic reasons. In this regards, the most acceptable position, is that, when physical or objective quality is hard to assess or the product is based on fashion or style, extrinsic cues, such as, COO becomes important (Han, 1989). The critical issue thus concerns with the consumers expertise in the evaluation of quality differences. The response to COO as cue will depend on the extent to which the consumers are able to evaluate the quality and are willing to make sacrifices for their country. Consumer Ethnocentrism Ellliot and Cameron (1994) defined that the country of origin effect, also known as the made in concept, has been broadly defined as the positive or negative influence that a products country of broadly manufacture that may have on the consumers decision processes or subsequent behaviour. Recent research has linked the country of origin effects to the levels of consumer ethnocentrism. Consumer ethnocentrism is defined as the beliefs held by the consumers about the appropriateness, indeed morality of purchasing foreign-made products in place of locally made products (Shimp and Sharma, 1987. Continue described that consumer ethnocentrism focuses on the responsibility and morality of purchasing foreign-made products and loyalty of consumers to products manufactured in their home country. According to Kasper (1999), variables like socioeconomics, demographic and regional economic factors have been found to act as moderator variables in the study o consumer ethnocentric tendencies. The CETSCALE was designed to measure the consumers ethnocentrism in order to better understand, explain and predict consumers behaviour tendencies of them and favourably evaluate the domestic products when compared with imported products (Hult and Keillor, 1994). A series of homological validity test conducted by these authors indicated that consumer ethnocentrism is moderately predictive of consumers belief, attitudes, purchase intentions, and intentions, and ultimate purchases. The strength, intensity and magnitude of consumer ethnocentrism vary from culture/country to culture/country. Consumer ethnocentrism proposes that nationalistic emotions affect the attitudes about products and purchase intentions. Kala (2002) viewed that in particular, consumer ethnocentrism implies that purchasing imported products is wrong as it is not only because it is unpatriotic, but also because it is harmful to the economy and will result in loss of jobs in industries. It was also indicated that the concept of consumer ethnocentrism might improve the understanding of how consumers and corporate buyers compare domestic with foreign-made products and how and for what reasons their judgments may be subjected to the various forms of bias and error. Highly Ethnocentric consumers are probably most prone to biased judgement by being more inclined to adopt the positive aspects of domestic products and to discount the virtues of foreign made products (Kasper, 1999). The CETSCALE was designed to measure the consumer ethnocentrism in order to better understand, explain and predict the consumers behaviour tendencies of them and favourably to evaluate the domestic products when compared with imported products (Hult and Keillor, 1994).

42

Jenny Marisa Lim, Lawrence Arokiasamy and M Krishna Moorthy

Brand Origin Brand origin is the place, region or country to which the brand is perceived to belong by its target consumers (Thakor and Kohli, 1996). This may differ from the location where products carrying the brand name are manufactured, or are perceived by consumers to be manufactured. According to Thakor and Kohli, (1996), the definition seeks to exclude from its purview cases where a brand occasionally shows its users in settings such as snowy country scene or a beach, but not clearly enough or consistently enough to allow the consumers to make an inference about the brand being from a particular place. The definition is stated in terms of consumer perceptions since the outcomes of interest to marketers are those which are within the power of the consumer to dispense, namely purchase of one brand or another. Hence, the actual place the brand originates from is almost irrelevant, even if it were possible in an era where corporations have dispersed their function across national boundaries to identify such a place. Consumer perceptions may differ from reality because of ignorance, lack of salience of origin information for a particular brand, or deliberate obfuscation by companies concerned about the consumer reactions to an unfavourable origin. It is also believed that in some cases, the consumers may know full well where a branded product is manufactured but still not consider that location to be the brand origin. For example, a Honda manufactured in the US may still be thought of as a Japanese car, albeit one made in a Midwestern US plant.
Figure 2.5: Brand Origin and Related Concepts

Brand Image

Product attributes

Brand Personality

Consumer Benefits

Brand demographics Origin Age Gender Social class

Brand traits Extraversion/ intraversion Agreeableness Conscientiousness

Source: Thakor, M. V. and Kohli, C. S. (1996). Brand origin: conceptualization and review, Journal of Consumer Marketing. Vol. 13, No. 3, pp. 29.

Thakor and Kohli (1996) recognized that the origin may be far more salient for some brands than others, in that some brands may not have an especially distinct personality and / or may rely on appeals founded on other bases than origin (e.g. Compaq, Nutrasweet and Weight Watches). Instances of brands which rely on origin bases appeal were found in categories as diverse as beer (Guinness, Lowenbrau, Corona), soap (Irish, Spring), car (Porsche ads showing German engineers working on the

Global Brands Conceptualization: A Perspective from the Malaysian Consumers

43

cars), perfume (name like Yves St Laurent signal Frenchness), ice cream (the Pillsbury-owned brand name Haagen-Dazs suggests Scandinavia). Quality Signals According to Zeithaml, (1988), perceived quality is defined as a consumers evaluation of a brands overall excellence based on intrinsic (e.g.: performance, durability) and extrinsic cues (e.g., brand name, warranty). Thus, quality was defined as judgment about the overall excellence or superiority of a product or services. Reputation was defined as the prestige or status of a brand, as perceived by the consumer, based on the brand image. It is similar to attitudinal judgment. Rao and Monroe (1989) agreed that brand name is a key indicator of quality and foreign brands generally help enhance a brands perceived quality. Hence, consumer rely more on internal and intrinsic quality cues to evaluate their perceptions of foreign brand quality. Price and quality play an important role in brand choice, since they are often central to the consumers judgments and decisions, influencing their attitudes toward a brand and their purchasing behaviours (Loroche, et.al., 2001). For instance, consumers may choose a brand that would compare favourably in what they pay for and what they get categories. Numerous researchers have studied the effects of price on product choices however, Kalyanaram and Winer (1995) have shown that consumers use reference prices when they make decisions. Lacoche & Toffoli, (1999) stated that for most brands, consumers believe that price and quality are correlated. Consumers with positive price quality perceptions, for example, are more likely to associate price with high quality in the consideration set. Similarly, in the reject set, those with negative price- quality perceptions have less chance of buying a product with a higher price. Evidence shows that net utility, determined by the price and quality of a specific brand, can be important in influencing the consumers brand choices (Lichenstein et al. 1993). Rao and Monroe (1989) asserted that the consumers perceived the quality of a brand to be more rewarding when its consumption is of relatively low social display value and when the product is purchased and consumed in private. Brand associated with high quality make the most inroads among consumers around the world (Yu, 2003). If a brand is perceived to be global, that creates value in the mind of consumer and most of the value creation is from the fact the consumers ascribed products that are global to be of good quality, (Yu, 2003). According to Batra and Kresge cited in (Yu, 2003) a second pathway is through the prestige that companies a global brand. However, quality dominates, represented more than 90% of the increased desirability of global brands among the 247 Americans and 370 Koreans surveyed in their surveys. Thus, prestige can be transient as when global brands are seemed as novel, and they may have high prestige, but when that novelty goes away, the prestige goes down. Prestige is a phenomenon that certain segments, like young people, tune into, but may be less significant for the vast market (Batra and Kresge (2000) cite in (Yu, 2003). Consumers watch the fierce battles that transnational companies wage over quality and are impressed by the victors. According to Holt et, al, (2004), A focus group participant in Russia told them: The more people who buy (a) brandthe better quality it is. A Spanish consumer agreed: I like [global] brands because they usually offer more quality and better guarantees than other products. Perception often serves as a rational for global brands to charge premiums. Global brands are expensive, but the price is reasonable when you think of the quality, Pointed a Thai participant. Holt et, al, (2004) mentioned that the consumers also believe that transnational companies compete by trying to develop new product and through breakthrough technologies so as to be faster than their rivals. Global brands are very dynamic, and are always upgrading themselves. Global brands are more exciting because they come up with new products all the time, whereas you know what youll get with local ones. Thats a significant shift. The authors viewed that until recently, the consumers perceptions about quality for value and technology prowess were tied to the nations from which the products originated. Made in the USA was once important, so were Japanese quality and Italian design in some industries.

44

Jenny Marisa Lim, Lawrence Arokiasamy and M Krishna Moorthy

Thus, the authors deduced that the measures for the country-of origin in their study as a basis for comparison and they found that, while they are still important, they are only one third as strong as the perceptions driven by a brands globalness. (Holt et, al., 2004). Most companies established in the past, e.g. Ivory or Coca cola, managed to establish their strong global brand in the consumers mind and became one of the market leaders in their own market segments. Brand in the high technology segment followed the rules. As a result, names like Hewlett Packard, Sony, Toshiba, IBM or Apple are well known and the products those companies manufactured enjoy a high perception of quality and reliability (Hamann et, al., 2007). Value Perceptions Zeithaml, (1988) reported that quality, price (monetary or non-monetary), reputation and how the product or service makes one feel (emotional response) were dimensions related to perceived value. This is similarly to the Profit of Impact marketing Strategies (PMS) study which establishes conceptual value as a relationship between quality and price (Buzzell and Gale, 1987) They ascertained that competitive success is obtained through perceived relative value of the total package of products and services that influence consumer behaviour. Perceived value has been defined as the consumers overall assessment of the utility of a product based on perceptions of what is received and what is given (Zeithaml, 1988). In other words, value is what the consumer gets for what they give and when accessing value, consumer is more likely to be externally oriented. Kimimani and Baumgartner, (2000) cited in (Buzzell and Gale, 1987) identified that consumers are more likely to rely on external or extrinsic information to evaluate a brands value. Benedict et. al. (2001) identified that perceived limited supply of products enhances a consumers perceived value and preference for the brand. Historically, it has been argued that perceptions of value were hard to be quantified, (Simon, 1998). Zeithaml (1988) describes that, Quality and value are not well differentiated from each other and from similar construct such as perceived worth and utility. Perceived value was revealed from the literature as the emotional response or the joy received from the brand. Emotional response was defined as a descriptive judgement regarding the pleasure that a brand attributes give the purchaser. Today consumption is not only a way to satisfy a functional need. Now, consumers buy offers as these are fashionable, used by their communities or provide entertainment (Thiriot, 2006). Some success like I pod is a typical example of this new kind of consumption. This product is not only a music player but also a symbol of liberty, pleasure, entertainment. One speaks of consumer perceived value, which is a subjective concept that is built through the interaction between the consumer and an offer of a given context (Holbrook, 1999). Engel et al., (1995) views that it depends on a lot of parameters: product features, consumer knowledge, consumer functional expectations (e.g being able to access Internet), consumer culture and motivations. Some other social processes also modify values like imitation and culture. Thiriot, (2006) concluded that the product valuation is a judgment process. He asserted that without a decision, it doesnt lead to a choice or to an action. According to Quelch (1999), certain consumers perceive a value added when an international or global brand is attached to emotionally involving or aspirational products. For example, a car is a highly involving purchase. The car category therefore offers an opportunity for global brands to add value in the minds of some consumers. The country of origin itself may be an indicator of performance superiority, as in the case of French perfumes. For many global brands, consumers value the country of origin; paradoxically, the country of origin is therefore a factor in making them global. Thus Coca cola, Mc Donalds and Marlboro cigarettes are all very much associated with securing a piece of American lifestyle or American entertainment culture and as a result often find there is an association between the brand itself, the loyalty to the brand and the fact that the brand is embedded in a particular national culture. Consumers associate countries with expertise in particular products: French perfumes; Japanese consumer electronics, American movies, computers and mass market packaged goods; German cars and sausages.

Global Brands Conceptualization: A Perspective from the Malaysian Consumers

45

These association are globally - shared. Readers Digest reports that international brands, and national brands that are old and trusted (Reader Digest, 2001) have communicated a consistent message to their audiences. They are viewed as national brands in individual markets (Mooji, 2001). Examples are Nivea and Colgate. Mercedes is trusted most in cultures of large power distance, where social-status needs are relatively important, such as Belgium, Poland, Russia and Spain. Opel and Toyota, brand with low social status value, are more trusted in countries that score low on power distance, such as Netherlands and Norway. Social and Esteem Value Perceptions The researcher found that it simply didnt matter to consumers whether the global brands they brought were American. To be sure, many people said they cared. A French panelist called American brands imperialistic threats that undermine French culture. A German told the researcher that Americans want to impose their way on everybody. However the rhetoric belied the reality. When they were influenced the products American roots, it was discovered that the impact was negligible (Holt et, al, 2004). The survey conducted by Holt et, al, (2004) concluded the finding that anti American sentiment in many nations was rising because of the Iraq war. Most of the consumers were like the South African who candidly said, I hate the country, but I love their products. A Filipino confessed: I used to go on anti- American rallies when I was a student but I never thought about the [American] brands of clothes or shoes I wore!. We arent concerned with how American governs itself, and an Indian said. What we look for is quality of their products. Since peoples concerns with U.S. foreign policy have little impact on brand preferences, American companies should manage brands just as their rivals form other countries do. OCass and Frost (2002) identified that product symbolism is what the product means to consumers and the feelings they experienced in purchasing and using it, such as, arousal, excitement or pressure. It also refers to the image that a particular item evokes in the minds of consumers. Leiss et al. (1986) describe products as symbols, with connected feelings and meanings which define what is valued by the consumer and he believed that consumers evaluate a brands image in terms of symbolic meaning. A brand processes symbolic properties which are used by individuals to convey meaning on three levels: broad cultural; group level through shared social meanings; and individual level through self-concepts (OCass and Frost, 2002). The concept of status consumption is one where consumers are driven by the desire for status in their lives and crave status symbols (Goldsmith et al., 1996). He assert that one important motivating force that influences a wide range of consumer behaviour is the desire to gain status or social prestige from the acquisition and consumption of goods. This notion is consistent with McCraken (1988), who acknowledge that ownership of specific products or brands, as well as their particular mode of consumption, may denote status. Eastman et al. (1993) said inherently that the more a consumer seeks status, the more he or she engages in behaviours, such as the consumption of status symbols, which increase their status. For example, it has been said that Owning the latest styles of clothing is one of the most common ways consumers have of gaining prestige among their peers (Goldsmith et al., 1996). For the consumer, status is essentially the concept of possessions defining success, and the notion of having made it society (Langer, 1997). OCass and Frost (2002) briefed that the display of wealth has essentially become an important social symbol, whereby evidence of affluence provides greater likelihood of ascending the social status hierarchy and there is the potential for consumers to prefer using status products that symbolically represent a prestigious (self-image) position within the status stratum. To the consumer, a brand identifies the source of the product, which in turn, assigns responsibility to the product maker, and provides a promise or bond with the maker of the product (Lassar et al., 1995). In addition, brands reduce the consumer research costs (Landes and Posner, 1987). McNeal and Zerren (1981) explain on the consumers perceived level of risks, and the signals of quality of the product. The brand therefore, becomes the purveyor of advantages to the consumer, in terms of both economic and symbolic value. As Gelder comments, the real value of a brand thus lies in

46

Jenny Marisa Lim, Lawrence Arokiasamy and M Krishna Moorthy

it ability to persuade and please the consumers. This does not necessarily mean that the best product or service (in technical sense) will always win over the consumers, but rather that the knowledge of what consumers need, how they behave, what they think, how they perceived the value and how they reason and decide defined such outcomes. Thus, the consumers perceptions of quality and values lead to the satisfaction which inevitably leads to their intent to repurchase (Lassar et al., 1995). Consumer perceived value to be higher and be more likely to repurchase in the future (IBID). Most literature have shown social status and values as being an important determinant of brand perceptions for American consumers (Dodds and Monroe, 1985; Petroshius and Monroe, 1987; Johansson and Nebenzahl, 1987), French, Australian and Swiss consumers (Chadraba and Czepiec, 1993). Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) Corporate Social responsibility in marketing covers a diverse range of issues such as consumerism, environmentalism, regulation, political and social marketing (Carrigan and Attala (2001). Titus and Bradfors (1996) argued that possessing the consumer sophistication is no guarantee that the consumer actually participates in wise or ethical buying practices. Mascarenhas (1995) asserts that marketers are encouraged to behave in an ethical manner because information about a firms ethical behaviours is thought to influence the products sales and consumers image of the company. There are those committed ethical consumers who seek out environmentally-friendly product, and boycott those firms which are perceived as being unethical. Other consumers possess the same amount of information in terms of ethical and unethical marketing conduct, however this does not lead them to boycott offenders, nor reward ethical firms (Carrigan and Attala, 2001). Folkes and Kamins (1999) reported that although consumers have social responsible attitudes, only 20 per cent had actually purchased something in the last year as the product was associated with a good cause. Boulstridge and Carrigan, (2000) defined that what seems to be emerging is that although the consumer expresses willingness to make ethical purchases linked to good reputation, the reality is that social responsible attitudes is not the most dominant criteria in their purchase decision. Recent surveys from Corporate Edge revealed that 57 per cent of their sample said that they would stop buying a brand if they knew that child labour had been employed, and 21 per cent supported action against companies which they perceived as unethical (Roger, 1998). Dragon International (1991), study has highlighted some important issues in the ethical purchase of consumers. Their studies suggested that consumers were interested in ethical behaviour beyond those issues that directly impacted on them, and would be more discriminating in their purchases if they were given more information about ethical and social responsible activities. Even though consumers had not been actively linking their purchases with social responsibility, there was interest in the link (Carrigan and Attala, 2001). Consumers were more likely to support the positive actions than punish the unethical actions; boycotting was unlikely to be named if the product was one they relied on (Folkes and Kamins, 1999). Within the past year, over half who had bought a product recommended a company on the basis of its ethical reputation. This corresponds with the earlier research by Forte and Lamont (1998) who felt that consumers are increasingly making purchases on the basis of a firms role in society, and Cone and Rope study cited in (Simon, 1995) found that 85 percent of the respondents had a positive image of a company that supported something they cared about. A total of 15 percent of respondents in the same study stated that they would be more likely to pay more for a product or service associated with a cause important to them. Creyer and Ross (1997) also identified that a companys level of ethical behaviour is an important consideration during the purchase decision; in the USA, consumers expect ethical behaviour from companies and they were willing to pay higher prices and reward ethical behaviour. Creyer and Ross (1997) also did discover that the consumers would still buy products from unethical firms, however only at a lower price the cost of poor ethics.

Global Brands Conceptualization: A Perspective from the Malaysian Consumers

47

Consumer Boycotts and Consumer Values According to some research, negative information regarding Corporate Social Responsible issues tends to weigh heavier than positive (Sen and Bhattacharya, 2001) which imply that consumers are aware of unethical policies and activities that would boycott brands/companies partaking in such activities. People recognise that global companies wield extraordinary influence, i.e., both positive and negative on the societys well being. The consumers expect firms to address the social problems linked to what they sell and how they conduct the business. In fact, the consumer votes with their check books if they feel that the transnational companies arent acting as stewards of public health, worker rights, and environment. Simon (1995) comments that as infamous case have filled the airwaves Nestles infantformula sales in Africa since in the 1980s, Union Carbides Bhopal gas tragedy in 1984, the Exxon Valdez spill in 1989, the outcry over Shells plan to sink its Brent Spar oil rig and the protests at its Nigerian facilities in 1995 people have become convinced that global brands have a special duty to tackle social issues. Klien (2000) claims that some Germany consumers still havent forgiven Shell for what they did with that oil rig. Another consumer from Australia argued that, Mc Donald paid back locally, but it is their duty. They are making so much money, they should be giving back. Gaski (1999) stated that the play field isnt level; the consumer dont demand the local companies to tackle global warming, but they expect multinational giants like BP and Shell to do so. Gaski (1999) asserts that people may turn a blind eye when local companies take advantages of employees, but they wont stand for transnational players like Nike and Polo adopting similar practices. Such expectations are a practice in developing countries like China and India as they are in developed countries in Europe. Carrigan and Attala (2001) claimed that there are those who argue that consumer activism is on the increase, particularly in view of the recent consumer boycotts against petrol retailers in the UK, as well as boycotts of French products during BSE crises and the ongoing global Nestle boycott over infant formula marketing practices. Klien (2000) mentioned that there were evidence that companies suffered commercially from boycotts; Shell were estimated to have lost between 20 percent to 50 percent of their sales during the Brent Spar boycott and the Nestle boycott is said to have cost the firm $40 million (Nelson-Horchler, 1984). The power of the consumer boycotts is increasing, with more buyers refusing to buy a branded product or a class of products to achieve some socially responsible outcome (Gelb,1995). Mason (2000) reported that 44 percent of the British public had boycotted a product for ethical reasons for 12 months. A study by Boulstridge and Carrigan (2000) found that most consumers agreed that social responsibility was not an important consideration in their purchasing behaviour; even with the knowledge about unethical activity, some consumers still brought products from the offending company. Others argued that the lack of information did mean that social responsibility was not high on their purchasing agenda. The respondents said that if they liked and regularly bought a product they would find it hard to boycott over unethical behaviour (Boulstridge and Carrigan, 2000). Boulstridge and Carrigan (2000), and Ulrich and Sarasin (1995) viewed that perhaps it is not that the consumers do not care but rather they care more about price, quality and value, brand familiarity than corporate ethics. Research Framework The framework indicates the four variables that effect consumer perceptions as the main tool in investigating global brands. The variables include the country of origin (COO), quality signals, value perceptions, corporate social responsibility (CSR) in the research study. These variables are some of the
relatives important global dimension that will influence on the consumer perception and purchasing behavior in the markets and businesses.

48

Jenny Marisa Lim, Lawrence Arokiasamy and M Krishna Moorthy

Figure 1: The variables that effect consumer perceptions on global brands
INDEPENDENT VARIABLE

Country of Origin

Quality Signals CONSUMER PERCEPTIONS ON GLOBAL BRANDS

Value perceptions Corporate Social Responsibility

Conclusion
This article has set a context and rationale for further research on the importance of the country of origin perceptions, quality signals, social and esteem values and corporate social responsibility values in shaping the Malaysian consumers brand perceptions. Consumer in Malaysia is more powerful in the millennium era, and this trend will continue into the next century. They have better knowledge, greater curiosity, more discriminating and they exercise their rights to choose more carefully and ruthlessly than ever before. As global brands go global they need to win the trust of consumers on many more front at higher levels. Different cultural context have the symbolic meaning attached to brands which tend to vary across cultures. Meeting consumers need is the fundamental goal of markets. International marketing manager must understand the consumer needs; vary considerably with the social economic and cultural differences among the consumer market. In the absence of the other product information, the country of origin of a product affects the consumers evaluation of the product or service. Along with other extrinsic cues such as brand name and warranty, COO information is used by the consumer to reduce the inherent uncertainty associated with the purchase of product. Therefore, the international marketers must understand perceptions as they relate to the product category in their target country markets. A brand needs to be evaluated not just by the economic or financial criteria but also by the moral one. Like any other long-term relationship, a brand must be developed and maintain on basis of trust. International marketer should create and communicate quality rather than the status and peoples desire for status and audience by creating a distinct brand image that aligns with their markets self images and need for status. Developing the right mix of elements such a as creating symbolic meanings relevant to their status conscious target market. Communication efforts should accentuate value expressive appeals, concepts such as status, luxury, prestige and the like, rather than simply focusing on the brands utilitarian function. In order to attract consumer s to buy their brands, international marketer should focus not only on improving the performance and net utility of their brands, but also on taking account the strategies of competing global brands in the international market place. Consumers value, which reflects social influences and environment, should affect the needs to be fulfilled through purchase and consumption decisions and therefore consumption behavior. In addition, the consumers value in Asian markets seem to changing more quickly than before, because

Global Brands Conceptualization: A Perspective from the Malaysian Consumers

49

of the sweeping influence of globalization in every aspect of the consumers life in the developing countries. In today's challenging economy, brand perceptions play an important role in consumer purchasing decisions (Business News & Technology News, Dec 2008).Continuously updating of studies for understanding changing consumer needs in each market should be conducted.

References
[1] [2] Anon , 2008. Business News & Technology News. Retrieved 18th September2009, from http://biz.the star.com.my/news/story/esp?file=/2009/business/3607004. Agbonifoh, B. A. and Elimimian, J. U. (1999). Attitudes of developing Countries Towards Country of Origin Products in an Era of Multiple Brands, Journal of International Consumer Marketing. Vol. 11, No. 4, p. 97. Amine, L.S. (1996), The Need for Moral Champions in Global Marketing:, European Journal of Marketing. Vol. 30 No.5, pp: 9-12. Benedict, I., Batra, R., Alden, D.L., (2003). How Perceived Brand Globalness Creates Brand Value, Journal of International Business Studies, No.34, pp: 53 65. Bhuian, S. N (1997). Saudi consumers Attitudes Towards European, US and Japanese Products and Marketing Practices, European Journal of Marketing, Vol. 31.7, pp. 467 486. Boulstridge, E. and Carrigan, M. (2000), Do consumers Really Care about Corporate Responsibility? Highlighting the Attitude-Behaviour Gap, Journal of Communication Management. Vol.4, pp.355 68. Chhan, M. Hard to Break Loyalties in Malaysia. Retrieved 18th November 2007, from http://www.marketing-interactive.com/news/1783 Carrigan, M., Attala. Ahmad (2001). The Myth of the Ethical Consumer Do Ethics Matter in Purchase Behaviour?, Journal of Consumer Marketing, Vol. 18, No. 7, pp. 560-577. Creyer, E.H. and Ross, W.T.(1997), The Influence of Firm Behaviour on Purchase Intention: Do Consumers Really Care About Business Ethics? Journal of Consumer Marketing, Vol.14 No. 6, pp.421 433. Dodds, W.B. Monroe, K.B. (1985), The Effect of Brand and Price Information on Subjective Product Evaluation (p.85-90), In Hirschman E. Holbrook, M. (Eds). Advances in Consumer Research, 12, Provo, Utah: Association of Consumer Research. Dragon International (1991), Corporate Reputation: Does the Consumer Care? Dragon International, Dragon. Elliott, G. and Cameron, R (1994). Consumer Perception of Product Quality and the Country of Origin Effect, Journal of International Marketing, Vol. 2, pp. 49-62. Ettenson, R., J. Wagner and G. Gaeth (1988), Evaluating the Effect of Country-of Origin and Made in the USA Campaign: A Conjoint Approach, Journal of Retailing, vol. 64, no.1, pp.85 100. Forks, V.S. and Kamins, M.A. (1999). Effects of Information About Firms Ethical and Unethical Actions on Consumer Attitudes, Journal of Consumer Psychology, Vol.8 No. 3, pp. 243 59. Forte, M. and Lamont, B.T. (1998). The Bottom Line Effects of Greening: Implications of Environment Awareness, Academy of Management, Vol.12, No.1, pp.89-90 Gaski, J.F (1999), Does Marketing Ethics Really has Anything to Say? A critical Inventory of the Literature, Journal of Business Ethics, Vol.18 No.3, pp.315 334. Gelb, B.D. (1995), More Boycotts Ahead? Some Implications, Business Horizons, Vol.38 No.2, pp.70-77. Han, C.M. (1999), Country Image: Halo or Summary Construct, Journal of Marketing Research, 26, pp: 222 229.

[3] [4] [5] [6]

[7] [8] [9]

[10]

[11] [12] [13]

[14]

[15] [16] [17] [18]

50 [19]

Jenny Marisa Lim, Lawrence Arokiasamy and M Krishna Moorthy Johansson, Johny K. Susan. P. Douglas and Ikujiro Nonaka (1985). Assessing the Impact of Country of Origin on Product Evaluations: A new Methodological Perspective, Journal of Marketing Research, vol. XXII (November), pp.388 396. Johansson, J.K. and Nebenzahl, I.D, (1987), Country-of-Origin, Social Norms, and Behavioural Intentions (p.67-79), In Cavusgil, S.T. (Ed), Advances in International Marketing, 2. Greenwich, Connecticut: Jai Press Inc. Kojima, S. (1994). Psychological Approach to Consumer Buying Decisions: Analysis of the Psychological Purse and Psychology of Price, Japanese Psychological Research, 36, pp.1019. Koll ,O.and Wallpach, O.S, 2009One brand perception? Or many? The heterogeneity of intrabrand knowledge. Journal of Product & Brand Management, pp: 338345. Langer, J. (1997), What Consumers Wish Brand Managers Knew, Journal of Advertising Research, Vol.37 No.6, pp. 60-65. Leiss, W., Kline, S., Jhally, S. (1986), Social Communication in Advertising. Methuen, Toronto. Landes, W.M. and Posner, R.A (1987), Trademark Law: An Economic Perspective, Journal of Economic, Vol. 30, pp. 265 309. Laroche, M., & Toffoli, R. (1999). Strategic Brand Evaluations among Fast-Food Franchises: A Test of Two Frameworks. Journal of Business Research, 45, pp: 221 233. Lassar, W., Mittal, B.et al. (1995), Measuring Customer-Based Brand Equity, Journal of Consumer Marketing, Vol.12 No.4, pp.11 19. Malaysian Household Expenditure Survey Report 1998/99, Department of Statistics, Malaysia. Malaysian Statistics Department, http://www.statistics.gov.my (2004). Mascarenhas, O.A.J. (1975), Exonerating Unethical Marketing Behaviours: A Diagnostic Framework, Journal of Marketing, Vol. 59, pp.43 - 57. McCraken, G. (1988), Culture and Consumption, Indiana University Press, Bloomington and Indianapolis, IN. McNeal, J.U. and Zerren, L.M. (1981), Brand Name Selection for Consumer Products, MSU Business Topics. Vol.29 No.2, pp. 35 39. Mooji, D.M., (2001). Convergence and Divergence in Consumer Behaviour. Consequences for Global Marketing and Advertising Doctoral Dissertation. Pamplona, May 2001. Nelson-Horchler, J. (1984), Fighting a Boycott: Image Rebuilding, Swiss style, Week, Vol. 220, pp: 54 56. OCass, A. and Frost. H., (2002). Status Brands: Examining the Effects of Non-ProductRelated Brand Associations on Status and Conspicuous Consumption Journal of Product & Brand Management, Vol 11, Number 2 2002, pp. 67 68. Pecotich, A. and Ward, S. (2007). Global Branding, Country of Origin and Expertise: An Experimental Evaluation. International Marketing Review, Vol. 24, No. 3, pp. 271-296. Peter, J. P. and Olson, J. C. (1998). Consumer Behaviour and Marketing Strategy. Boston: McGraw-Hill. Petroshius, S.M. and Monroe, K.B. (1987), Effect of Product-line Pricing Characteristic on Product Evaluation, Journal of Marketing Research, 7 (November, pp: 552 528. Quelch., J., (1999), Global Brands: Taking Stock, Business Strategy Review, 1999, Volume 10 Issue 1, pp 1-14 Readers Digest, (2001). European Trusted Brands. Rogers, D. (1998), Ethical Tactics Arouse Public Doubt, Marketing, 6 August, pp. 12 14. Shimp, T. A. and Sharma, S. (1987). Consumer Ethnocentrism: Construction and Validation of the Set scale. Journal of Marketing Research, Vol. 24, pp. 280-313. Simon, F.L. (1995), Global Corporate Philanthropy, as Strategic Framework, International Marketing Review, Vol12 No. 14, pp.20-37.

[20]

[21]

[22] [23] [24] [25] [26] [27] [28] [29] [30] [31] [32] [33] [34] [35]

[36] [37] [38] [39] [40] [41] [42] [43]

Global Brands Conceptualization: A Perspective from the Malaysian Consumers [44] [45] [46]

51

[47] [48] [49] [50] [51]

Thakor, M. V. and Kohli, C. S. (1996). Brand Origin: Conceptualization and Review, Journal of Consumer Marketing. Vol. 13, No. 3, pp. 27-42. Titus, P.A. and Bradford, J.L. (1996), Reflections on Consumer Sophistication and Its Impact on Ethical Business Practice, Journal of Consumer Affair, Vol.30. No.1, pp.170-195. Sen, S., Bhattacharya, C.B. (2001), Does Doing Good Always Lead to Doing Better? Consumer Reactions to Corporate Social Responsibility, Journal of Marketing Research, Vol.38 No.2, pp. 225 43. Simoes, Claudia and Dibb, Sally (2001). Rethinking the Brand Concept: New Brand Orientation, http: // www.emerald-library.com Ulrich, P. and Sarasin, C. (1995), Facing Public Interest: The Ethical Challenge to Business Policy and Corporate Communications, Kluwer Academic Publications, London. Yu.L., (2003). The Global Brand Advantage, MIT Sloan Management Review, Spring 2003, Vol. 44, No. 3, pp: 13. Zaltman, G., & Wallendorf, M. (1979). Consumer Behaviour: Basic Findings and Management Implications. New York: John Willey. Zeithaml, V. (1988). Consumer Perceptions of Price, Quality and Value: A Means-End Model and Synthesis of Evidence, Journal of Marketing. Vol. 52, pp. 2-22.