Standardization versus adaptation of marketing mix in international markets: A systematic literature review

Abstract

This study examined standardization versus adaptation of marketing mix in international markets. It was carried out to explore the scholarly arguments for both standardization versus adaptation of marketing mix in international markets. It also explored the position of extant scholars on the choice between standardization versus adaptation of marketing mix in international markets. The study adopted systematic literature review methodology. The population of the study comprised 4,128 relevant articles obtained from five credible research databases. The article selection procedure was facilitated by a set of inclusion-exclusion criteria and the PRISMA framework. This resulted in the inclusion of 79 relevant articles published between 2017-2023 for the review. The articles were reviewed using in-depth content analysis method. The first finding of the study revealed that the major scholarly arguments for standardization can be grouped into 16 categories, including: economies of scale and cost efficiency; global brand image and recognition; among others. It was also found that the major scholarly arguments for adaptation can be grouped into 13 categories, including: cultural differences; legal and regulatory environment; among others. The last finding is that majority of extant scholars proposed a hybrid approach (glocalization), which combines elements of both standardization and adaptation to create a strategy that is globally consistent yet locally relevant. Therefore, the study advises international marketers to conduct comprehensive market research before adopting a glocalization strategy. This entails understanding local consumer behaviours, preferences, cultural nuances, and economic conditions in order to craft marketing campaigns that align with local culture, values, and traditions of the target market.