Video: My Philosophy on Globalization of Marketing by Theodore Levitt (Standardization)

It seem to me that the author is extremely bias in favour of standardization, and goes to any length to prove that it is the only way forward for companies wishing to sell goods globally. This might be because 1/3 of businesses used national standard in support of international trade and support economic integration of region.

The fact that he is for standardization allows him to overlook valid disadvantages and issues such as:

- Although there may be standardized products which are sold successfully globally, companies will still need to examine how well these products sell as demand and profit levels will differ depending on the country in which the item is being sold, thus where the demand is less there may be certain features in a product that consumers would like to alter in order for them to purchase.
 

- Selling a standard product means that the price of the product will be similar in each country, although depending on the country, disposable income levels will differ, thus a standardized product could limit the number of sales and therefore profits where consumers are unable to purchase a product that has not been adopted to suit income levels, they may not be able to afford it.

 

- Religion and deeply rooted culture will not change, bearing this in mind there will always be need for adaptation. For example, many cultures have traditional dress and foods which have been worn and eaten for decades.
 

Things learnt from the paper

He does open up a new argument and i have learnt some valid points which could open avenues for marketers, as he states that marketers should not sell what they think the customer wants, but instead should sell what they think they would like. If marketers were to instead sell what they thought consumers would like it would indeed be cheaper for them as they would not need to alter products to suit different tastes.

 

This paper allows one to question… is the world being homogenized a good state? or should we globally like the same things and should we retain our culture and different identity?

Deeper reality of this paper highlights the fact that for the sole purpose of profit, multinational companies are willing to prompt nations to sacrifice their national identity, culture and beliefs. Or is it the reverse that for the sake of purchasing the latest technology nations are willing to loose their cultural identity.
 

Theodore also highlights the fact that there may now be less need for marketing departments as Japanese companies operate almost entirely without marketing departments or research of the kind in the western worlds and simply produce things that the western world purchase. He highlights the fact that there may not be a need to research.

 

Author agrees that it would be silly to agree totally to standardization

In the mist of the paper the author confesses in the financial times article that when implementing his ideas he assures that this would be done with common sense. At this point it highlights that indeed the author is aware that as personally earlier stated, his comments are bias in favour of standardization, and have not fully accommodated the disadvantages of such an approach.

With the authors confession in mind the article should be read as he intends, and be used as a tool for the multinational company in highlighting the possible benefits of selling standardized product in some international countries although not taken literally as there are many disadvantages of solely adopting this approach for international markets.

 

At the point that the author confessed that the paper should not be read literally it highlights he is trying to show a different angle of production for multinational corporations, being standardization and illustrate that it may be the way forward in some markets and cheaper where it can be utilised.

 

 Business and Management Student, what do you think about this article? A penny for your opinion.