Documentos de Académico
Documentos de Profesional
Documentos de Cultura
Ian Phau
Gerard Prendergast Ph.D.
Ian Phau
DBA Candidate, (Paper Presenter)
Henley Management College (UK)
Phone: 65-5676889
Fax: 65-5610289
Email: ianp@pacific.net.sg
Phone: 852-23397570
Fax: 852-23395586
Email: gerard@hkbu.edu.hk
1977
TRACING THE EVOLUTION OF COUNTRY
OF ORIGIN RESEARCH
IN SEARCH OF NEW FRONTIERS
ABSTRACT
This review traces country of origin research for the past three decades whilst
integrating innovative directions for the extension of the construct. Moving into the
21st century, there are some unresolved issues as reflected in the inconclusive
findings presented in the review. Methodological shortcomings are still a major
concern due to the transformation of world markets and consumers changing taste
and habits. These comprise the calls for more rigorous sampling methods and cross-
national validity. Theoretically, the brand and involvement concepts need to be
explored. Licensing activities and the phenomenal rise of counterfeits present new
problems and influences to country of origin. From a strategic standpoint, services
and retailers' views of country of origin are conspicuously deficient. We will present
all these issues under methodological, conceptual and strategic streams of research.
1978
INTRODUCTION
In the light of this, the paper will first present the relevant theoretical background by
first tracing the evolution of country of origin research. Next it will present
integrative directions for research in three streams. They represent both deficient and
elusive areas, which we have classified under methodological, conceptual and
strategic themes. These concerns will contribute significantly to our understanding of
the markets in the 21st century.
Theoretical background
Till date there is no consensual definition for country of origin (Sauer et al, 1991). It
has been referred to “buyers’ opinions regarding the relative qualities of goods and
service produced in various countries (Bilkey 1992, Pg xix). Zhang (1996) defines in
as the information pertaining to where a product is made. Perhaps, Lampert and Jaffe
(1998) offer the most embracing definition. They define it as "the impact which
generalisations and perceptions about a country have on a person's evaluations of the
country's products and brands". Either way, country of origin manifests itself as an
extrinsic cue to provide consumers with a basis for purchase decisions (Bilkey and
Nes, 1982; Cordell, 1992; Erickson et al; 1984; Han 1989). It is a potentially
1979
powerful image variable, which may be used to influence competitive positioning and
success in the global market place.
Early country of origin studies were plagued by mostly single cue models which can
be expected to produce substantially larger country of origin effects than those
employing multiple cues (Lim et al, 1994; Johansson et al, 1985). In truth, the latter
produced either no significant or only minor country of origin effect (Ettenson et al,
1988; Johannson et al, 1985). More recently, studies seem to show otherwise. For
example, Liefeld's (1993) demonstrated that there is little difference between single
and multiple cues. Lim and Darley (1997) found no difference between the two
while the multiple cue shows differential effect in the likelihood of demand
characteristics. These inconclusive findings prompted Lim and Darley (1997) to
suggest that the manager give more credence to studies that employ multi cue ad
format because the magnitude and the significance of country of origin effects in the
single and multi list format studies may be inflated.
Negative biases towards products made in foreign countries are found in a number of
studies (Bruning, 1997; Nagashima 1970; Bannister and Saunters 1978; Morello
1984). The preference for domestic goods tends to be stronger in countries: (1) where
they are developed, (2) where the domestic economy is threatened by foreign goods
(Heslop and Papadopoulas 1993), or (3) where consumers have a strong sense of
patriotism or national pride (Bruning, 1997; Han, 1988, Hadjumarcou et al, 1993;
Lantz and Loeb, 1996). Generally the phenomenon of consumer ethnocentrism is a
reflection of more highly developed countries (Kaynak and Kara, 1998; Kim, 1996;
Tse and Gorn 1993).
1980
Darley (1997) suggest that less developed country producers should try to
compensate the negative country of origin effects by emphasising warranty and or
better price in their advertising. Further, they should also try to acquire a licensing
agreement with a well-known brand. Prior findings by Han (1988) are revisited and
supported here.
For the past decade, there is an overwhelming increase in products that are
manufactured in diverse locations around the world and marketed under a single
brand name. Under such circumstances, country of origin is often viewed as a
multidimensional construct involving a hybrid of factors that makes the distinction
between the country of manufacture or assembly and the country of the company’s
home office (Ozsomer and Cavusgil 1991, Johansson and Obermiller 1989). Han and
Tersptra (1988) first introduced the hybrid configurations of “domestically
manufactured, foreign owned; domestically manufactured, foreign parts". Other
hybrid configurations followed such as country of design, country of assembly, parts
supplied by and a host of other perceivable derivatives (Chao 1993; Tse and Gorn,
1993; Ulgado and Lee 1993). As consumers develop more familiarity with the
products, the use of the made-in label begins to diminish. At the same time, as more
countries develop the necessary skills to manufacture the product, the country of
origin of products seems to be of little importance (Sheth 1998). The advent of hybrid
products accentuates the related importance of brand names (Phau and Prendergast,
1998a {in-press}).
Theoretically, Han (1989) posits that the country-product image interface may work
in either as a “halo construct”(country image used to evaluate products about which
people know little) or as a “summary construct” (knowledge about a country’s
products abstracted into the image of the country itself). A halo is an overriding
attitude which colours beliefs and is associated with reduced reliance on cognitive
processing and is well supported by several studies (Erickson et al, 1984; Johansson
et al, 1985). Alternatively, Han (1989) demonstrated that when consumers are not
familiar with a country’s product, a summary construct model operates in which
consumers infer product information into country image, which then influences brand
attitude.
1981
origin and brand are about equally important. More recently, Schaefer (1997) did not
find brand familiarity reducing the importance of the reliance on country of origin. In
fact, the contrary is found to happen especially for respondents with objective product
country knowledge.
Interim Summary
In short, prior research into country of origin has evolved from single cue to multiple
cue studies namely hybrid products. A country of origin cue is indicators of country
image, stereotypes about their country and their products, and is simplifying cues of
information processing. However, moving into the 21st century, there are some
innovative, relevant and pressing issues that have not been resolved. It can be seen
that inconclusive findings are presented in the preceding review. This may be a
methodological shortcoming or the pressing need to relook at some basic issues due
to the transformation of world markets and consumers changing tastes and habits.
These include the calls for more rigorous sampling methods and cross-national
validity. Theoretically, the brand and involvement concept needs to be explored.
Licensing activities and the phenomenon rise of counterfeits present new problems
and influences to country of origin. From a strategic standpoint, services and retailers
view of country of origin are conspicuously deficient. We will present these issues
under methodological, conceptual and strategic streams of research.
Figure 1 proposes the three streams of directions for research. The main issues are
presented in the following respective sections.
Figure 1
1982
Methodological Stream of Research
1983
Conceptual Stream of Research
It can be argued that the role of the country image "of made" be replaced by country
of brand origin as a tool for product evaluation. Since consumers have confidence in
the quality of that brand, the different dimensions of country of origin should not
affect their perception. Similarly, the image of the brand is also restored and will be
consistently evaluated. Also, a brand name of a premium brand elicits a “personality”
that is a marketable cue. Many products and brands send out signals that can be
traced back to their country of origin thus acting as cultural signifiers (White and
Cundiff 1978; Schooler and Sunoo 1969; Schooler and Wildt 1968). That origin cues
are already firmly imprinted within successful brand names. Thus merely
manipulating the different dimensions of the country of origin construct does not
eliminate the effects of these cues. Brand origin however will not change with a
change in manufacturing location. The perceived origin of a brand need not be the
same as the country shown on the “made-in” label. This difference is particularly
relevant in light of the growing trend towards offshore manufacturing by
multinationals. More research needs to be focussed on the usefulness of the construct
of "brand origin" in product evaluation.
(2)Involvement Construct
Among the factors influencing the impact to country of origin influence, consumer
involvement with the product may be particularly critical. Indeed, involvement has
emerged as one of the most prominent concepts in consumer research. The primary
reason for its importance is because it has been shown to be the main determinant of
how much decision effort an individual will exert when making a purchase (Phau and
Prendergast, 1998b {in-press}; Zaichkowsky 1985). In fact, the review of literature
has uncovered a series of recommendations but prior country of origin researchers.
Graeff (1996) suggests that research could examine the effects of the level of
involvement on the brand image and self image. Rogers (1994) and Schaefer (1997)
both echoed the same thoughts. Specifically, when consumers are highly involved
1984
versus when they are less involved will probably want more information about the
brand than just its image. Further. most country of origin studies has been
concentrating on high involvement products like automobiles and other high
involvement objects (Erickson et al, 1984; Peterson and Jolibert, 1995) but many
products do not elicit high level of consumer involvement. There is no one study that
explicitly compares both levels of involvement.
The involvement construct has been extensively studied outside the perimeters of the
country of origin of influence. We need to understand how involvement and country
of origin concepts influence each other.
1985
Progressively, the growth of hybrid products may have encouraged counterfeit
production bringing about pernicious effects for producers of branded goods (Phau
and Prendergast, 1998). A genuine pair of Reebok sports shoes when tagged with a
country of origin of “Made in Korea” will inevitably raise the suspicion of a
deceptive counterfeit. Consumers are also not educated to differentiate between a
licensed product and a deceptive fake. There are also reports that deceptive
counterfeits of Nike T shirts were purchased by unsuspecting retailers (Forbes, Aug
11, 1997). This prompts a series of uncertainties in terms of consumer’s perception
and purchase intentions of luxury brands (Tom et al, 1998). Specifically some main
issues are raised here:
1986
communicating “hybrid products” to consumers is of both strategic and managerial
concern.
CONCLUDING COMMENTS
After three decades of country of origin studies, the research has certainly grown to
cover the various aspects of this complex construct. This paper suggests several leads
that were not inherent in previous studies but are inevitably pertinent issues that will
challenge us in the next millennium. Therefore, it is highly suggested that the
preceding research areas be further explored conceptually and empirically to
contribute more in-depth understanding of our consumers.
1987
REFERENCES
Alpert, F., Gamins, M., Sakano, T., Ono, Naoto and Graham, J (1997), “Retail Buyer Decisions Making in
Japan: What Sellers Need to Know”, International Business Review, Vol. 6, No 2, 1997
Bhuian, S.N (1997), "Saudi consumers' attitudes towards European, US and Japanese products and
marketing practices" European Journal of Marketing, Vol. 31, No 7, 1997
Bilkey, W.J (1992), Preface in Product-County Images: Impact and Role in International Marketing, Ed by
Papadopoulas N & Heslop, L.A., International Business Press 1992
Birou, L.M and S Fawcett, “International Purchasing: Benefits, Requirements, and Challenges.”
International Journal of Purchasing and Materials Management 29 (Spring 1993) pp 27-37
Bruning, E.R (1997), "Country of Origin, National Loyalty and Product Choice- The case of international
air travel", International Marketing Review, Vol. 14, No 1, 1997 pp 59-74
Chao, P and Rajendran, K.N.(1993), “Consumer Profiles and Perceptions: Country of Origin Effects”
International Marketing Review Vol. 10, No 2 1993 Pg. 22-39
____ (1993), “Partitioning Country of Origin Effects: Consumer Evaluations of a Hybrid Product”, Journal
of International Business Studies Second Quarter (1993), Pg. 291-306
Cordell, Victor V (1992), “Effects of Consumer Preferences for Foreign-Sourced Products”, Journal of
International Business Studies 23(2), Pg. 251-270
Erickson, G.M., Johansson ,J.K., and Chao, Paul (1984), “Image Variables in Multi-attribute Product
Evaluation :Country of Origin Effect”, Journal of Consumer Research 11 (1984) Pg. 694-699
Ettenson, R. and Gaeth. G and Wagner, J (1988), “Evaluating the effect of country of origin and the “Made
in USA” campaign: A Conjoint Approach, Journal of Retailing, Vol. 64. No 1, Spring, Pg. 85-100
Gaedeke, Ralph, “Consumers Attitudes Toward Products “Made In” Developing Countries”, Journal of
Retailing, Vol. 49, No 2, Summer 1973, Pg. 13-24.
Graeff, T.R (1996), “Using promotional messages to manage the effects of brand and self-image on brand
evaluations” Journal of Consumer Marketing, Vol. 13(3) No 3, 1996 Pg 4-18
Hadijimarcou, J., Hu, M.Y., Bruning, E.R (1993), "Assessing the dimensionality and reliability of
outgroup-specific versions of the CETSCALE", in Cravens, D.W and Dickson, P, R (Eds) AMA Educators
Proceedings, Chicago, IL.
Han (1989), “Country Image: Halo or summary Construct?” Journal of Marketing Research, 26(May) Pg.
222-229
____ (1988), “The Role of Consumer Patriotism in the Choice of Domestic versus Foreign Products”,
Journal of Advertising Research, June/July Pg. 25-32
1988
____ and Terpstra, V.(1988),”Country of Origin Effects for Uni-national and Bi-National Products”,
Journal of International Business Studies, Summer
Hoecklin, L.A (1994), "Managing Cultural Differences for Competitive Advantage", The Economist
Intelligence Unit Special Report No 656.
Iyer, G. R and Kalita, J, K (1997), "The Impact of Country of Origin and Country of Manufacture Cues on
Consumer Perceptions of Quality and Value", Journal of Global Marketing, Vol. 11(1) 1997
Jalilian, H (1996) "Foreign Investment Location in Less Developed Countries: A Theoretical Framework"
Journal of Economic Studies, Vol.23, No 4,1996, pp18-30.
Janda, S and Rao, C.P.(1997), "The Effect of Country of origin Related Stereotypes and Personal Beliefs
on Production Evaluation", Psychology and Marketing Vol. 14(7): 689-702 (Oct 1997)
Johansson, J.K, Douglas, S.P. and Nonaka, I (1985) “Assessing the Impact of Country of Origin on Product
Evaluations” Journal of Marketing Research, Vol. 22, November, Pg. 388-96
Lampert, S.I and Jaffe, E.D (1998) "A Dynamic Approach to Country of Origin Effect", European Journal
of Marketing Vol. 32 No 1/2, 1998 pp 61-78
Lantz, G and Loeb, S (1996), "Country of origin and Ethnocentrism: An Analysis of Canada and
American Preferences Using Social Identity Theory" Advances in Consumer Research, Vol. 23, 1996 pp
374-379
Levitt, T(1983) “The Globalisation of Markets” Harvard Business Review, May/Jun 1983, Pg. 92-102
Lim. J.S., Darley, W.K., Summers, J.O (1994) “An Assessment of Country of Origin under alternative
Presentation Formats” Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, Vol. 22,No 3 Pg 274-282
Liu, H & McGoldrick, P.J (1996), “International Retail Sourcing, Trend, Nature and Process; Vol. 4, No 4,
1996 pp 9-33
Maronick, T.J. (1995) “An empirical investigation of Consumer perceptions of “Made In USA” claims”
International Marketing Review Vol. 12 No 3, 1995 Pg `15-30
McGoldrick, P. J (1998), "Spatial and Temporal; Shifts in the Development of International Retail
Images", Journal of Business Research 42, 189-196 (1998)
Min. H and W.P Galle, “International Purchasing Strategies of Multinational US Firms,, International
Journal of Purchasing and Materials Management 27 (Summer 1991) pp 9-18
Morello, G (1984). The "made in" issue: A comparative research on the image of domestic and foreign
products. European Research, 12 (Jan) 5-21
Nagashima, Akira (1970). A comparison of Japanese and US Attitudes toward foreign products. Journal of
Marketing, 34 (January): 68-74
1989
______(1977) A comparative product "made-in" image surveys among Japanese businessmen. Journal of
Marketing, 41 (Jul) 95-100
Nasif, E G., Al-Daeal, H., Ebrahimi, B and Thibodeaux, M (1991), "Methodological Problems in Cross-
cultural Research: An Updated Review" Management International Review Vol. 31, 1991/1 pp 79-91
Ohmae, K (1992), “Managing in a Borderless World”, Harvard Business Review, May-June 1992.
Papadopoulas, N, Heslop, L.A and Bamossy, J (1990), “ National Stereotypes and Product Evaluations in a
Socialist Country”, International Marketing Review, Vol. 7, 1990. Pg. 32-47
Peterson, R.A and Jolibert A.J.P (1995), " A Meta-Analysis of Country of origin effects" Journal of
International Business Studies, 26 (4th quarter) pp 883-900
Phau, I and Prendergast, G (1998) "Counterfeit Products: Riding the Waves into the New Millennium"
Rome/Italy, July 17-21, 1998, Business & Economics Society International Conference 1998, Pg 142
Phau, I and Prendergast, G (1998a {In-Press})"Will Country of Origin be Relegated to Obscurity in the
Global Reality?" Globalisation of Business Conference, Gazimagusa, North Cyprus 19-21 Nov 1998
Phau, I and Prendergast, G (1998b {In-Press}), "How Useful is Product Involvement Classification?: A
Tale of Three Cities" Globalisation of Business
Gazimagusa, North Cyprus 19-21 Nov 1998
Roger, T.M. (1992), “The Effects of Country of origin on Consumer Product Evaluations,” PhD
Dissertation, University of South Carolina
Samiee, S (1994), "Customer Evaluation of Products in a Global Market" Journal of International Business
Studies 3rd Quarter 1994
Sauer, P.L., Young, M.A. and Unnava, H.R. (1991), “An experimental investigation of the processes
behind the country-of-origin effect”, Journal of International Consumer Marketing, Vol. 3 No. 2, pp. 29-59.
Schooler, R D & Sunoo, D.H (1969). "Consumer perception of international products: Regional Vs
national labelling. Social Science Quarterly, 50 (March) 886-90
1990
Schooler, R.D and Wildt, A.R (1968). "Elasticity of product bias" Journal of Marketing Research, 6
(February): 78-81
Schweiger, G., Otter, T & Strebinger, A (1997) "The influence of country of origin and brand on product
evaluation and the limitations thereof for location decisions" CEMS Business Review 2; 5-26 1997
Sheth, Jagdish (1998), "Reflections of International Marketing: In search of new paradigms", Keynote
address of Marketing Exchange Colloquium, Vienna Austria July 23-25, 1998.
Staniland, M (1998), "The Vanishing National Airline?" European Business Journal Vol. 10, Issue 2
Quarterly 1998
Steenkamp, J.E.M and Baumgartner, H (1998), :Assessing Measurement Invariance in Cross National
Consumer Research" Journal of Consumer Research, Vol. 25 June 1998
Tom, G., Garibaldi, B., Zeng, Y., Pilcher, J. (1998), "Consumer Demand for Counterfeit Goods",
Psychology and Marketing, Vol. 15 (5) Pg 405-421 (August).
Tse, D.K and Gorn, G.J (1993) “ An Experiment on the Salience of Country of Origin in the Era of Global
Brands” Journal of International Marketing Vol. 1 No 1, Pg. 57-76
White, P.D & Cundiff, E.W (1978) "Assessing the quality of industrial products. Journal of Marketing, 42
(January): 80-85
Witkowski, T.H. and Kellner, J (1998) "Convergent, Contrasting and Country-Specific Attitudes toward
Television Advertising in Germany and the United States" Journal of Business Research 42, 167-174
(1998)
Zaichkowsky, J.L (1985).,”Measuring the involvement construct” Journal of Consumer Research Vol.12
Dec 1985
Zhang, Yong (1996) "Chinese Consumers' Evaluation of Foreign Products: the Influence of Culture,
Product Types and Product Presentation Format", European Journal of Marketing Vol. 30, No 12, 1996, pp
50-68
1991