Clarity是一个英国珠宝品牌，其产品在英国制造，其原材料来自世界各地，例如，其钻石来自泰国。现在，Clarity已准备好将美国作为其品牌国际化的目标国家。作者使用Hofstede的文化维度理论来分析美国是否适合Clarity的目标市场（Hofstede，2001）。从权力距离的角度来看，英国和美国都属于权力指数较低的国家（Johnson et al。，2015）。考虑到避免不确定性，两国人民不太愿意躲避不确定性并倾向于创新（Lesch，Rau和Choi，2016）。从个人主义/集体主义的角度来看，两国人民追求的是个人价值观，而不是追求集体价值观。两国人民都主张表达自己的观点，维护自己的合法权益，同时维护个人生活隐私。两国人都喜欢追求个性化的生活方式（Johnson et al。，2015）。从男性气质/女性气质的角度来看，两种文化都以男性气质为特征，他们不怕竞争，他们渴望事业和学业成功，他们愿意努力使事情变得更好（Marcén，Molina和Morales，2017）。从长期/短期取向的角度来看，两国人民更关注现在的感受，他们不会过分担心未来（Shahzad，Xiu和Shahbaz，2017）。从以上分析可以看出，英国和美国的文化基本相同，在美国实施国际品牌战略，Clarity不会遇到太多的文化差异问题。
Clarity is a British jewelry brand whose products are made in the UK and its raw materials are supplied from all over the world, for example, its diamonds are from Thailand. Clarity is now ready to take the United States as a target country for its brand internationalization. The author use Hofstede's cultural dimensions theory to analyze whether the United States an appropriate target market for Clarity (Hofstede, 2001). From the perspective of power distance, both the United Kingdom and the United States belong to countries with lower power indexes (Johnson et al., 2015). Considering uncertainty avoidance, peoples of the two countries are less willing to evade uncertainty and prefer innovation (Lesch, Rau and Choi, 2016). From an individualism/collectivism perspective, people of both countries pursue individual values more that their pursuit of collective values. People in both countries advocate expressing their views and safeguarding their legitimate rights and interests, while maintaining personal privacy in life. People of both countries like to pursue a personalized lifestyle (Johnson et al., 2015). Judging from masculinity / femininity perspective, both cultures are characterized by masculinity, they are not afraid of competition and they are hungry for career and academic success, they are willing to work hard to make things better (Marcén, Molina and Morales, 2017). From the perspective of long-term / short-term orientation, people in both countries are more concerned about the present feelings and they will not worry too much about the future (Shahzad, Xiu and Shahbaz, 2017). From the above analysis it can be seen that the United Kingdom and the United States is basically the same in their cultures, to implement international brand strategy in the United States, Clarity will not encounter too many problems of cultural differences.
2. Benefits that Clarity’s international brand strategy in the United States will bring
The United States is the most important market in the world (Johnson et al., 2015). What the benefits that Clarity's choice of the US as a target market will bring for the value creation of the Clarity brand? The author is based on COMET model to analyze the benefits (Steenkamp, 2017). From the customer preference point of view, the U.S. consumer has a higher degree of acceptance of foreign products and there is no xenophobic tendency (Lesch, Rau and Choi, 2016). The spending power of the U.S. consumers is relatively strong, they are more receptive to good quality and creative products (Marcén, Molina and Morales, 2017). In terms of organizational benefits, the United States is the most important market with the most discerning consumers and the most powerful competitors in the world (Shahzad, Xiu and Shahbaz, 2017), if Clarity can be successfully accepted by consumers in the U.S., it is very important to establish Clarity's global competitiveness and corporate identity. From the marketing benefits point of view, the U.S. media has global influence, which helps to promote Clarity's global exposure. From economics scale point of view, the United States is still the world's largest economy and the GDP growth rate is still among the advanced countries in the world (Shahzad, Xiu and Shahbaz, 2017). At the same time, the United States is still the most industrialized country in the world. Clarity's most raw materials can be guaranteed in the United States. Finally, considering from transnational innovation, cultures from all over the world converge in the U.S., where designers from all over the world exchange ideas to bring innovative inspiration to Clarity's designers, and American consumers love personalized disruptive innovations, this also gives Clarity’s design personnel more design power.
3. Five Forces Model analysis
From the point of view of its existing rivalry, despite there are formidable competitors in the U.S. market, there has not yet been a pure British jewelry brand in the market (Quach and Thaichon, 2017). In terms of bargaining power of suppliers, the order amount is not high, so the bargaining power is low. From the perspective of bargaining power of buyers, consumers are less able to bargain for such products due to the lack of pure British accessories. Considering from threat of new entrants, products from Japan, France and other countries have their characteristics (Koo and Im, 2017), but these are largely different from Clarity’s product design style, so they are less attractive for consumers who like British style. Judging from threat of substitutes, other manufacturers who produce British style products have less experienced designers than what Clarity have, and by contrast, what Clarity produces has the most British style. 4. International brand strategy for Clarity
It can be seen from the above analysis that as a British brand, Clarity’s brand culture and image are relatively more easily to be welcomed by consumers in the United States than its rivals of other countries. Thus Clarity can use standardization strategy, its brand image, symbol, slogan, marketing mix, etc. should be consistent in the U.S. as that of in the UK. Clarity also can use some adapted strategies aiming at American consumers, including: for American consumers, it provides some new packaging, hires advertising stars that American consumers are familiar with, adjusts the price of the product based on American consumers’ spending power, and so on.
References
Lesch, M. F., Rau, P. P. and Choi, Y. S. (2016). Effects of culture (China vs. US) and task on perceived hazard: Evidence from product ratings, label ratings, and product to label matching. Applied Ergonomics, 52(1), 43-53.
Hofstede, G. (2001). Culture’s consequences: comparing values, behaviors, institutions, and organizations across nations (2nd ed). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
Johnson, W. G. et al. (2015). Perceptions of overweight in US and global cultures. Eating Behaviors, 17(4), 125-129.
Koo, J. and Im, H. (2017). Going up or down? Effects of power deprivation on luxury consumption. Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, 11(2), 102-121.
Marcén, M., Molina, J. A. and Morales, M. (2017). The effect of culture on the fertility decisions of immigrant women in the United States. Economic Modelling, 11(2), 305-311.
Quach, S. and Thaichon, P. (2017). From connoisseur luxury to mass luxury: Value co-creation and co-destruction in the online environment. Journal of Business Research, 81(12), 163-172.
Shahzad, F., Xiu, G. Y. and Shahbaz, M. (2017). Organizational culture and innovation performance in Pakistan's software industry. Technology in Society, 51(11), 66-73.
Steenkamp, J. B. (2017). The COMET framework: how global brands create value. In: Global Brand Strategy. Palgrave Macmillan, London.
EG1hao
