The problem with standardizing international market research: A case study from B2B services

• We examine the use of standardized questionnaires in the Japan and U.S. B2B services context.
• Most international research fails to test for cross-cultural equivalence.
• We find out that dimensions of product and service quality lack cross-cultural equivalence.
• We suggest that failing to test for this can lead to erroneous conclusions from the data.

Chinese abstract国际市场研究标准化的问题：关于B2B服务的案例分析跨国公司面临最重要的其中一个问题在于是否要将所有所在国的市场营销方法标准化，还是应根据每个国家的具体情况而调整。为了做出这一决定，跨国公司必须对是否应该遵循各国的文化合适性，还是国与国之间的对等性做出选择。遗憾的是根据最近的调查显示，绝大多数的学术研究并未妥善地解决跨文化对等的问题。本篇文章的主要目的是说明使用标准化、全球性的B2B研究方法的问题。其次是展示如何识别和管理跨文化对等问题。本文所论述的公司是《财富杂志》100强的跨国公司，其在全球100多个国家提供设施管理服务。本文根据美国和日本的客户满意度调查数据对跨文化对等性进行了比较。结果显， 大约一半用于测量产品各种维度以及服务质量的工具，作为推动客户满意度而言缺乏跨文化对等性。言下之意即是必须对完全标准化的全球研究方法提出质疑.

One of the key issues for multinational corporations (MNCs) is whether to standardize their marketing approach across all countries or adapt their practices to fit each country. In order to make this decision, MNCs must determine if their marketing approach is cross-culturally appropriate and equivalent from country to country. Unfortunately, recent research indicates that the vast majority of academic studies do not adequately address the cross-cultural equivalence issue. The primary purpose of this article is to illustrate the problem of using a standardized, global, B2B research approach. The second goal is to show how cross-cultural equivalence can be identified and managed. The firm in this study is a Fortune 100 MNC that provides facilities management services in over 100 countries. This article compares the cross-cultural equivalence of customer satisfaction survey data from the US and from Japan. The results show that about half of the items typically used to measure dimensions of product and service quality as drivers of customer satisfaction lack cross-cultural equivalence. The implication is that the use of a fully standardized approach to global research must be questioned.