This study examines how leading corporations standardize their regional sites from the integrated marketing communication (IMC) perspective. In terms of standardizing targeting strategies, data show that many leading brands view the online audiences as one mass. Customers and media are the two most targeted and standardized stakeholders for all brands and in each of the product categories (i.e. non-durable goods, durable goods, and service). This study also reveals that financial communities/investors, communities, and channel members are the other three most targeted and standardized stakeholders, even though their rankings are somewhat different across the product categories. Employees, government regulators, and special-interest groups are seldom targeted through corporate websites. In terms of standardizing promotional disciplines on the web, advertising is the most standardized, followed by customer relations, direct marketing, public relations, and sales promotions for all brands and each product category. As a whole, service brands have the highest standardization mean, while durable goods rank second and non-durable goods are last. The three product categories do not significantly differ in terms of the standardization of promotional tactics. A Web Standardization Model is developed to be compatible and comparable to Moriarty and Duncan's Standardization Model. Keywords: cross-nationalintegrated marketing communication (IMC)promotionstandardizationtargetingweb Acknowledgements This research was supported with research grants from the National Science Council of Taiwan (ROC). Notes 1. Industry wide, Kitchen and Li (Citation2005) found that 83% of advertising and 70% of PR agencies in China offered IMC services to the clients even though agency respondents admitted that they lacked knowledge and expertise across different marketing communication functions. Relatively few clients requested integrated services because they may not understand or be convinced of the benefit of IMC. Similarly, many advertising agencies in Taiwan offered multi-functioning services (Liu Citation2001). Agencies in Taiwan also ranked the client's lack of knowledge on IMC as the top barrier for IMC and their own lack of IMC expertise was the third (Liu Citation2001). Different from China, however, the client's request for IMC services was considered the biggest drive for agencies to adapt IMC concepts (Liu Citation2001). Liu (Citation2001) also found that few corporations relied on agencies to develop and implement their online promotional activities in Taiwan. Patti et al. (Citation2005) analyzed IMC syllabi and found that only five IMC courses were offered in China and 13 were offered in Taiwan. Considering the size of the student population and geographical area, Taiwan offered significantly more IMC courses compared with China. Nonetheless, Kitchen and Li's (Citation2005) observation suggested that formal education was not the single contributor to the increasing knowledge of IMC. Don Schultz's visit to China generated widespread media coverage and enhanced people's interest and knowledge about this new concept. Similarly, in Taiwan, an increasing number of trade and popular magazine articles discuss IMC from 1998 to the present. 2. Gillette, Merrill Lynch, Budweiser, JP Morgan, Kellogg's, Gap, UBS, Harley-Davidson, Heinz, Gucci, Nintendo, Wrigley's, Colgate, Danone, Kraft, Rolex, Zara, Hertz, Hennessy, Smirnoff, Johnson and Johnson, Moet & Chandon, Prada, Bulgari, and Armani. 3. Microsoft, IBM, Intel, Cisco, Oracle, Google, Siemens, Accenture, Philips, Volkswagen, Kodak, Chanel, Adidas, Motorola, Reuters, BP, Porsche, Audi, Cartier, Shell, and LG.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Yuhmiin Chang (2009) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: