论文写作 The International Market Scenarios Of Expanding Organisations
Schwartz’s Value Inventory:
Shalom Schwartz’s approach towards the value inventory was a contrasting one. He worked out the Schwartz Value Inventory (svi) in order to figure out the cultural discrepancies in various societies. Schwartz (1992, 1994), instead of noting the favored outcomes, inquired about how the respondents felt about 57 different values. The responses were analyzed to see which ones of these people think were the “guiding principles of life”. Schwartz’s theory was based on individual level analysis in contrast to other theories like the one propounded by Hofstede. This theory, therefore, embarks on a different route from other cultural theories. It can be said with certainty that Schwartz’s theory renders a more refined analysis than other theories like Hofstede theory which does not make a distinction between the individual level and the cultural level. The theory characteristically draws a differentiation between value types and value dimensions.
Also, making the theory more reliable, Schwartz based his theory on data collected from people spread over 63 countries. A total of 10 distinct value types were derived. At an individual level analysis, these value types were power, achievement, hedonism, stimulation, self-direction, universalism, benevolence, tradition, conformity and security. In the following paragraph an attempt has been made to explain in brief what Schwartz aimed to explain through these value types.
Various Individual value types by themselves represented one distinct value and jointly represented a “joint idea”. Values falling under the category of the power value type symbolize those individuals who lay more importance on status or stature in society and/or influence over resources and people. As it is clearly evident, this analysis is more individual analysis than a group one. People laying more importance on success and appreciation are the ones who would have a high ranking in the achievement dimension. Pleasure and self-gratification id represented by the value type of Hedonism.. Again it is somewhat similar to individualism. It can be seen that a few value types coincide with the ones put forth by Hofstede. We can see that a number of value types match with the same dimension of Hofstede’s theory. Benevolence value type represents inclination towards others’ welfare and Universalism value type embodies regard for social justice and forbearance. Value type tradition represents regard for customs and traditions while Conformity value type represents compliance. Security, which is the last value type represents protection and accord in society and for oneself (Schwartz, 2001).
In addition to the above ten value types, Schwartz had put forth a few more important cultural value types. These were
Similarities and discrepancies in the theories:
Although both Hofstede and Schwartz put forth their theories with the same aim, it cannot be said that both the theories are the same. To point out the differences between the two theories, there are several important discrepancies that can be observed between the two. Firstly, it is very apparent that Schwartz has made both individual level and cultural level analysis while Hofstede, like many other theorists has not made the distinction between the two. This point of difference is the most evident one between the two theories. Secondly, While Hofstede has put forth only five dimensions for cultural analysis, Schwartz, making his theory much more qualitative, went much further and put forth seventeen dimensions. This renders Schwartz’s theory as a more apt one for in-depth analysis into the area in question. Also, while Hofstede’s used data collected only from IBM employees for basing his theory, Schwartz’s theory was based on responses to overall 57 core vales from all its respondents and the results were then analyzed in order to formulate a theory. Although both Hofstede and Schwartz attempted to differentiate between value types and value dimensions, Schwartz gained an upper hand in this respect as the distinction was much more clearer in his theory. Pointing out the similarities between the two theories, it can be said that one value dimension i.e. egalitarian commitment versus hierarchy of Schwartz’s theory is comparable with individualism/collectivism of Hofstede’s theory.
Market Segmentation & The Theories:
In order for an organization to be successful in its ventures, Market Segmentation and targeting are crucial activities. In the present international market scenario where numerous firms are going global and expanding into new places, they need to segment their markets very carefully which means that the market is split into smaller and convenient units. The practice of market segmentation helps organizations a great deal in understanding the needs and demands of their markets in a more comprehensive way. Understanding their customer’s needs and acting accordingly would translate into the organization getting a fair market share which in turn helps the organization gain a standing in the market against other firms. These facts clearly indicate the crucial role played by market segmentation activity. In the following paragraph we shall see how the Hofstede’s and Schwartz’s help in segmenting markets.
First, let us take up Hofstede’s theory and see how it helps to understand markets and segment them. The markets can be analyzed by giving them points on each of the five dimensions mentioned in the theory. The markets having an inclination towards one of the opposing dimensions is then concluded to have that value .When Hofstede’s theory was used to analyze the United Kingdom, it was found that the country’s culture was less of a collective one and more of an individualistic one. After the values are attributed, they are given meanings and conclusions are drawn. For example, being a society which values individualism more than collectivism, it is understood that the people give more value to individual status and standing rather than the happiness of the larger group. Hence, the decision is taken by the organization to provide services and goods which enhance the self esteem and power of the individuals in the society. If that is not viable then the customer, at the least, is given the feeling of independence to promote a sense of belonging for the product or service offered. As Hofstede’s theory provides a comprehensive and simple analysis of the market’s values it becomes very easy for the organization to take decisions about the market. In the following paragraph we will see if and how chart’s theory can be used.
The most striking feature of Schwartz theory is that it has both cultural and individual level analysis and both of these can be used as an effective tool for analyzing and segmenting markets. The cultural dimension, on one hand, can be used on a broader scale to understand and analyze the culture of the market by giving points on each value type. Subsequently, the market can then be divided further into more convenient units and then the individual level analysis can be used in the area to find out the individual perceptions. As a final step, both the cultural and individual analysis can merged to find out a more refined value orientation of the area. This finer analysis would go a long way in helping the organization make more fruitful conclusion about the market.
Having understood in detail what the premises of both the theories are and process of analyzing used in both theories, I personally find the Hofstede theory to be more pragmatic having stated that it has a more broader concept. In other words, it is much more closer to what an organization would demand for understanding its markets. Schwartz’s theory makes the process much more complicated. It requires the organization to analyze the market twice and then merge the results of both analysis to finally get a picture of the market values. This is a very cumbersome process consuming additional time and cost. Moreover, more stress is laid on the individual level analysis and can instead be used as a tool to analyze behavior. A better way to analyze the markets would then be to get a picture of value inclinations of the market on the five dimensions put forth by Hofstede and then in the next stage conduct an individual analysis using Schwartz’s theory. Although doing so may result may result in increased expenses o both time and resources, organizations requiring a finer analysis of their market may use this method.
论文写作 The International Market Scenarios Of Expanding Organisations