Search results

Purpose – A considerable body of literature has evolved on the topic of appropriate research methodology for cross-national data collection. Additionally, prior commentaries on cross-national research in the marketing have cited significant deficiencies in this body of research in terms of the theoretical foundations, methods, and analytical techniques used. The purpose of this chapter is to summarize guidelines for conducting cross-national research in marketing and assess the degree to which these rules are being followed.

Design/methodology/approach – The literature on cross-national research methods in marketing studies is first reviewed to identify key issues and methodological guidelines. A content analysis of cross-national studies appearing in 10 major journals in the marketing and advertising field for the period from 2005 to 2010 is conducted to assess whether the guidelines for researchers are being followed. The chapter also explores whether recent research is addressing key deficiencies identified by prior commentaries on this body of research.

Findings –Results are indicative of some promising trends. A wider range of theory bases, methodological techniques, and analytical techniques are being used in cross-national marketing studies. Additionally, methodological guidelines for conceptualizing studies, including following appropriate procedures to ensure equivalence and verifying the existence of cultural differences, are being followed at a higher rate than in the past. Still, some studies do not follow accepted guidelines, and there is a need for a wider range of theory bases and methods to be used.

Research limitations/implications – The study examines only cross-national studies published in 10 journals over a recent six years (2005–2010). As a result, no direct comparison to earlier periods is made.

Originality/value of paper – This chapter outlines key guidelines for conducting cross-national studies in marketing. It also calls attention to the need to follow these guidelines based on the trend toward a majority of studies complying with them. Finally, the chapter calls attention to the need for certain theory bases and methods to be used more frequently.

In business and management, cross-national and cross-cultural comparisons between countries have been a topic of interest for many decades. Not only do firms engage in business in different countries around the world but also within countries. The population has become more diversified over time, making cross-cultural comparisons within country boundaries increasingly relevant. In comparisons across cultural groups, measurement invariance (MI) is a prerequisite; however, in practice, MI is not always attained or even tested. Our study consists of three parts. First, we provide a bibliometric analysis of articles on cross-cultural and cross-national topics in marketing to provide insight into the connections between the articles and the main themes. Second, we code articles to assess whether researchers follow the recommended steps as outlined in the multigroup confirmatory factor analysis (MGCFA) approach. The results indicate that MI testing is incorporated in the toolbox of many empirical researchers in marketing and that articles often report the level of invariance. Yet, most studies find partial invariance, meaning that some items are not comparable across the cultural groups studied. Researchers understand that MI is required, but they often ignore noninvariant items, which may decrease the validity of cross-cultural comparisons made. Third, we analyze the dissemination of MI in the broader literature based on co-citations with Steenkamp and Baumgartner (1998), a widely cited article on MI in the field of marketing. We conclude by noting methodological developments in cross-cultural research to enable addressing noninvariance and providing suggestions to further advance our insight into cross-cultural differences and similarities.

Teamwork has long featured in social science research. Further, with research increasingly “cross-national,” communication becomes more complex, for instance, involving different cultures, languages and modes of communication. Yet, studies examining team communicative processes that can facilitate or constrain collaboration are rare. As a cross-national European team representing varied disciplines, experiences, languages and ethnicities, we undertook to examine our communication processes with the aim to promote better qualitative research practices.

Viewing reflection as a tool for enhancing workplace practices, we undertook a structured reflection. We developed an empirically derived framework about team communication, then used it to analyse our interaction practices and their relative effectiveness.

The results highlighted two under-examined influences, the use of different modes of communication for different purposes and the need for face-to-face communication to address a particularly challenging aspect of research, negotiating a shared coding scheme to analyse diverse cultural and linguistic qualitative data.

The study offers a procedure and concepts that others could use to examine their team communication.

The communicative processes that can constrain and facilitate effective cross-national research team collaboration are rarely examined. The results emphasise the need for careful negotiations around language, epistemologies, cultures and goals from the moment collaboration begins in formulating a project, through applying for grant funds, to when the last paper is published – timely in a context in which such work is increasingly expected.

The purpose of this paper is to highlight the difficulties faced during the interview process in a cross-national qualitative comparative case study between Japan and Australia. It discusses the challenges in producing insightful data and preserving the integrity of findings when methodologies are influenced by different cultural and professional environments.

The paper explores literature on cross-national qualitative research in the context of policy research as well as the philosophical and professional differences between Japan and Western countries (like Australia). It reflects on practical examples and strategies used by the researcher during the ethics and interview processes when adapting widely accepted qualitative case study methodology to suit the Japanese cultural and professional environment.

The paper finds that linguistic, cultural, professional and philosophical differences between the countries challenged initial researcher assumptions that comparability between the case study regions would be maintained through the application of accepted methodologies and an “insider” status. It observes that the quest to generate rich and insightful data places the character and capability of the researcher as central in the research process.

This paper provides practical examples and strategies for social science researchers using interview methods in Japan and Australian. It points to a need for further research on the ambiguous and elusive nature of the “insider” paradigm as well as the “comparability” of cross-national qualitative case studies when methodological “flexibility” is used to enrich and preserve the integrity of research findings.

This article presents fieldwork perspectives and research reflexivity gained from the cross-national research team, with the aim of promoting better qualitative research practices in transnational research. It focuses on how the team incorporates diverse cultural perspectives and insider and outsider roles to enhance the research in the data collection process.

This article is drawn from the authors' qualitative research with 25 Japanese retirees in Thailand, addressing cultural challenges encountered by researchers in the cross-national team when conducting field research.

Our findings indicate that researchers with an emic view in the cross-national team who shared nationality and cultural background as the participants facilitated an effective recruitment process and productive collaboration in data gathering. They also served as cultural brokers, tailoring smooth communication during interviews on certain cultures, participant traits and sensitive issues. On the other hand, the outsiders helped the team uncover more transnational issues that the insiders had overlooked. Additionally, combining emic and etic perspectives helps to avoid ethnocentric narratives or purely etic and emic conclusions.

This article addresses a gap in the methodological reflections in transnational research that remains largely overlooked. Our reflection highlights the advantages of cross-national teams, which include researchers from emigration and immigration countries. Their status and roles as insiders and outsiders significantly facilitate a positive impact on the research process and increase the extent of investigating the complex cultural dynamics of transnational practices. The incorporation of emic and etic perspectives is suggested in the methodological approach for transnational migration research.

Recently there has been a significant increase in the number of academic international research teams (AIRTs) which are conducting large scale cross‐national research studies. These efforts hold much potential to advance international comparative research. However, there are a number of issues associated with these studies that rarely occur in other research efforts. The purpose of this manuscript is to articulate a number of these issues which can be categorized into two main groups, research methodology and publishing. Research methodology issues include the comparability and matching of samples, the timing of data collection, and the comparability of research instruments. Publishing issues include manuscript length, the timing of publications, and cross‐cultural authorship issues. It is essential that these issues are addressed if the field is to reap the full benefits of these large cross‐national studies.

There is a growing body of comparative research examining country differences in job satisfaction and its determinants. However, existing research cannot explain similarities in job satisfaction levels across very different countries, nor can it explain the differences between seemingly similar countries. Moreover, there has been no significant research conducted to date that has examined the country-level contextual conditions that are poised to impact worker satisfaction and its determinants. The paper aims to discuss these issues.

In this research, the author address this existing gap in the academic literature on job satisfaction by using non-panel longitudinal data from the International Social Survey Program (Work Orientations I, II, and III: 1989, 1997, and 2005) to examine cross-national differences in job satisfaction and its determinants. The author compare and combine previous international political economy theoretical work and hierarchical linear modeling (HLM) to examine global macro-level variables and their impact on worker satisfaction cross-nationally.

Study results demonstrate that both intrinsic and extrinsic work characteristics strongly impact worker job satisfaction. Furthermore, country by country regression and HLM results suggest that there are important country differences in both the perceived importance of various work characteristics and workers’ self-report experiences with both intrinsic and extrinsic work characteristics.

To get a clearer picture in the HLM analysis as to the full impact of these various country-contextual impacts on differences in perceived job characteristics and worker satisfaction, future research needs to examine a greater number and wider variety of countries, while exploring other theoretically relevant country-level variables that may help to explore country-level differences from these various cross-national theoretical frameworks. Additionally, a more diverse and greater number of participating countries would also potentially help in achieving levels of significance in the level-2 covariates in the HLM models.

Due to the fact the worker job satisfaction impacts firm performance and various measures of worker well-being, firms (regardless of economic sector or private/public status) need to be cognizant of these differences and unique challenges and work to tailor management philosophy and policy to create a unique work atmosphere that will benefit the interests of both the employer and the employee, as well as society at large.

While the nature of work has changed dramatically in the post-war era in response to economic shifts and an increasingly global economy, particularly over the past two decades, this paper examines the previously unexamined country-level contextual and global macro-historical variables driving differences in work quality and perceived worker satisfaction.

The aim of this paper is to propose an approach to international market segmentation that identifies meaningful cross‐national consumer segments, which focuses on airline passengers in the NAFTA market.

A conjoint analysis is used to evaluate consumers' preferences for six flight attributes: price, in‐flight service, number of stops before destination, on‐time performance, frequent flyer programme, and country of airline. A cluster analysis based on the relative importance scores of each of the six flights attributes then identifies five segments that prioritize similar product attributes within each country.

A representative sample of 4,787 airline passengers from the three countries reveal that price is the most important attribute for consumers from the USA and Canada, while on‐time performance is the most important attribute for Mexican consumers. A cluster analysis identifies five segments that prioritize similar product attributes within each country. It is also found that there are five cross‐national consumer segments in the NAFTA market that are homogeneous in terms of consumer preferences but heterogeneous in terms of relative group size and demographic variables.

The study is based on a purposive sample, which limits the ability to generalize to the whole population with any known degree of precision.

The research produces practical operational information on each segment that is translatable into strategy, specifically in terms of positioning, promotion, and targeting of the airline service.

The paper sheds light on the nature of cross‐national segmentation in the NAFTA air passengers market and the resulting cross‐national segmentation will be highly relevant for international marketing management.

The purpose of this research is to investigate the drivers and inhibitors of clinical usefulness of handheld wireless technology in healthcare domain in Australia and India. Because of cultural differences in these two countries the paper also attempts to show how a cross‐national study of this nature can be carefully designed and undertaken to produce useful results.

A mixed‐method research design was used in this study. First, qualitative approach was used to develop the list of drivers and inhibitors in Australia and India via interviews and a research model was developed. This was then followed by a quantitative approach where questionnaire was developed and distributed to 300 health professionals each in both Australia and India. The collected data were analysed using a combination of optimal scaling and partial least square (PLS) techniques.

The result of the study was very interesting. The PLS application to the raw data did not support any of the hypotheses. As the study was cross‐national optimal scaling procedure were used to standardize the data and then PLS used again. It was then revealed that for Australia inhibitors significantly influence the clinical usefulness of handheld wireless technology while the drivers do not. However, for India the drivers significantly influence the clinical usefulness but the inhibitors do not. Possible reasons for such contrasting results are highlighted in the paper.

The sample size although appropriate for the tools used was a bit on the low side. The study did not follow up with representative respondents from Australia and India to get a deeper understanding of the results.

This study is original in the way the research model was developed from ground up. Our approach can be used for similar research. The study also makes original contribution in terms of designing an appropriate research approach for cross‐national study and how various data analyses tools can be used effective for meaningful outcomes.

This chapter discusses the main challenges in higher education comparative research, focusing on cross-national forms of comparison and presenting examples from European research. The first part stresses the importance of constructing concepts which can travel across countries. This part identifies the different vertical levels of comparison involved in higher education cross-national research, discussing how the need for exploring general patterns in higher education (e.g. globalisation and Europeanisation) is confronted with the importance of taking into account the diversity within the particular cases (e.g. institutional and individual experiences). The second part focuses on the equivalence of meaning in large-N (in particular, the Eurostudent and REFLEX datasets) and small-N studies, identifying the respective limits of the two forms of comparison. The chapter contends that comparative research in higher education could benefit from more collaboration between small-N qualitative comparativists and experts of large-N studies used in European policy-making.