INTRODUCTION
There is no better way to absorb a foreign culture than the one of living in that
country and to integrate with its inhabitants.
In fact, the experience of going to Turkey has given a big contribution to this
research, since it has well permitted to collect more information than they would
have been collected by staying in the own country.
This empirical research has had the purpose of investigating the Country
Reputation phenomenon by analysing the perception of Turks towards the countries
of Italy, Spain and Finland.
The decision of considering Turkey as the subject of the analysis is due to the
fact that it appears in all the emerging markets in current global economy, because of
the extremely dynamic growth it is having. By adding this to the very different
culture it has if compared to the other three countries analysed, the value of the
obtained results becomes even higher.
In any kind of relationship, reputation and thus the image of a certain partner
play a considerable role in determining whether such connection will be realized or
not. If the first impression has the strongest impact in a relationship, reputation
determines the effective link among the subjects, because it acts before than the
connection starts.
This is one of the reasons which has encouraged to further analyse this
phenomenon. Another one has been the change in international market structure,
where they are currently emerging new economies in such a way that none of the
developed countries can be compared.
As International Marketing study, then it cannot be unconsidered the Country
Reputation as an extremely important asset, in all the possible configurations, as a
stronghold on which the whole marketing strategies must be implemented.
Indeed, according to the previous researches, either the decision of purchasing
foreign products, or selecting a specific country as touristic destination, is influenced
by the constructed opinion towards that nation. Hence, the strategy of building
collaboration with a foreign partner, rather than the one of making a foreign direct
investment, must consider such factor to do not fall into a negative situation.
Obviously, stereotypes are also determined by the own culture, since it acts as
a reading lens which permits to give a shape to other countries’ cultures. This affects
the results and it explains why the general opinion about a monitored country can
change when considering different nations as observers.
Politicians, but even each person who leaves in it, can contribute to improve or
damage the overall Country Reputation, thus they are all responsible for the overall
image.
Under this assumption, it has been built up a model which aims to investigate
eight different hypotheses. From the two classical approaches, which relate the image
Introduction
2 | P a g e
that people have towards foreign products with the attitudes that follow, and the one
between the tourism destination images with the attitudes towards those touristic
places, they have been even proposed some innovative analyses.
The research has tried to verify whether those two images can also have such
an interchangeable impact on people decisions, or rather the Product Country Image
can influence the tourism decisions, while the Tourism Destination Image can
modify the products purchasing decisions.
Moreover, they have been introduced other two variables, and they have been
analysed to understand if and how they impact in this model. As a particular
behaviour, which requires to protect the own country, Ethnocentrism has been
investigated to understand whether it impacts both the two products perspectives
considered in the model. Animosity instead, as a properly cultural characteristic, has
been monitored to verify whether it impacts the tourism area.
Even the choice of considering those three countries, namely Italy, Spain and
Finland, as observers of the research, has its innovative contribution due to the
different international image they seem to have according to the two analysed
perspectives.
Finally, Italy does not even figure as one of the most developed countries in
such literature, thus this kind of research proposes to give a really important
contribution to the overall field of study in this country.
In particular, the research has required to manage a survey within a cluster of
Turks, previously selected, and then to analyse the data with a statistical program, by
constructing some multiple regression analyses.
1.1. The concept of Country Reputation
To understand what is meant when talking about Country Reputation it needs
to think about what is behind this word. Because the relevance of the reputation for
countries is due to the international relations, either referred to the purchase of
products or the direct investments abroad, and the collage of images that foreigners
held about a specific country.
Actually, all the literature connected to the Country Reputation is based on the
development of the country-of-origin (COO) and how it effects the purchasing
decisions of foreign products. Thus, the Country Reputation can be considered as the
reflection of a set of shared public judgments, about a specific country, that improve
or deteriorate over time.
In fact, as for people as for institutions rather than countries, reputation is
linked to the general opinions that the audience have about them, which then turns
into a judgment – positive or negative – and implies consequences in all the relations
they can have.
It results like the sum of single images which have been collected by
stakeholders, although referred to only one or a few sides of the country, that give a
meaning to anything comes – or it has something to do – with it.
Hence, this attribution bases on several factors, from the history to the current
developing situation, and it pours onto all its sub-systems [Golinelli, 2010] in a
bidirectional cycle, since they contribute to build this reputation while it
impersonates them.
Obviously, the way all these sub-systems are given a label depends on a
subjective interpretation of all the transmitted information or personal experiences,
where even the own culture plays an important role.
In this process, in fact, culture preventively acts as a reading lens thus to filter
all the information and to be extremely influential, since it permits people to interpret
everything, related to which also other foreign cultures are paradoxically evaluated.
1
Country Reputation: a theoretical
framework
The Concept of Country Reputation A. Sica
4 | P a g e
To better verify this assumption, it should be thought to the different adjectives
attributed to the countries, although never visited them, just because of other
narratives or what studied before about them.
This very important concept was already pinpointed somehow around the
thirties in last century [Katz D. and Braly K., 1933], when the image of foreign
countries started being closed up in personal stereotypes, yet easily detectable in
recognizing the countries for a distinct aspect of their production, like it represents
themselves – so we have high technology products in Japan, reliable machines in
Germany, design and workmanship in Italy, unfairly cheap productivity in China,
and so on – as demonstrated later by Schooler with his research as well [Schooler
R.D. and Wildt A.R., 1968].
Probably, if the comparative advantages theory of Davide Ricardo (1817)
would have been made in that period, it would also have had an important
consideration about the advantage of the home country. Since it identifies the country
for a certain aspect, which gives it a role in the global market and distinguishes it
from the others.
Thinking this way, it can be seen the reputation like a properly asset for the
whole country, that requires the consideration of both the internal stakeholders and
foreign conditions.
Several are the factors which then play together in constructing this value, such
as the type of consumer who relates to it, the history of that country and what foreign
students have been taught at school, rather than its politics or the given grade for its
reliability level by the international rating agencies.
Indeed, to contextualize this subject to the current period, it is easy to refer for
a clear example to the international rating agencies, which just a few months ago
have downgraded the country of Italy – for two positions – as others in Europe. This
switching from the A to the BBB+ value has caused bad consequences to lots of the
several relations linked with the country.
But everything can change this perception, although unexpectedly for the most,
even the single traveller who goes for a few days in another country can make the
difference for whether a positive or a negative feedback.
Inhabitants with their behaviour, either inside or outside the own country,
contribute to the evaluation, for both the way the treat other people rather than the
properly places.
Economy and Politics are two of the faster factors which can imply changes in
country evaluation in foreign mind, since they are always object of massive
communication. It is not a coincidence in fact that Medias are also mentioned in
many studies about this topic, where it is highlighted how they should contribute to
increase the country evaluation instead of being promoter of bad actions.
The problem is that, although it is easy to bring as positive as negative value to
the Country Reputation with anyone single action, it is proved that bad information –
1
st
Chapter Country Reputation: a theoretical framework
P a g e | 5
causing a bad image – run faster than good ones. Thus it is immediate how Medias,
with their communication, are as responsible for the visibility of the country as
politicians are with their behaviour and the way they approach with other countries.
Because, for example, this can have serious implications on foreign direct
investments (FDI) in the country.
The history and all the past relations between countries are also determining for
the creation of the outside current image. As matter of facts, it is common to
superficially distinguish populations according to their history, like to say that people
who come from a country have such basic (behavioural) attributes whereas people
coming from other countries have some others. Perhaps because, at the end, are the
past events which make current populations’ culture.
Now it should be clear how reputation is responsibility of all the stakeholders
who are acting in that specific country, since everybody can contribute to both
increase and decrease its value in any time. And this is the reason why, for the past
three decades, the country-of-origin effect on external stakeholders’ perceptions and
evaluations has been one of the most widely studied phenomena in the international
business, marketing, and consumer behaviour literatures.
1.2. The theoretical framework of Country Reputation in an
interdisciplinary perspective
Analysing the development in its literature, it can be seen how the Country
Reputation has assumed its importance mostly according to the role that the COO has
manifested during years in consumption choices.
Indeed, it is properly because of the discovering of the COO influence in
consumer behaviour, and all the other relations that the country can have in global
market, that the reputation of a country has become a relevant subject in International
Marketing study.
But it must be specified that the analysis of this phenomenon has been
developing by supporting four paths of literature. In fact, although the first and most
treated study has just been the COO and its link with the country image, they have
been also consolidated other three aspects, i.e. the Destination Management, the
Public Diplomacy and the Corporate Reputation.
As regard to the COO macro-area of research, to better clarify the steps of its
growing, it is suggested to refer to the recent approach taken by Vianelli and
Marzano [Vianelli D. and Marzano F.C., 2012]. Because, by supporting the previous
study of Dinnie (2004), they distinguish two macro-periods in this literature: the first
one from 1965 to 1982, where all researchers were focused on a single-cue approach,
and the second one from 1983 up to now, whereas the analysis started to be based on
a multi-cue approach.
The theoretical framework of Country Reputation in an interdisciplinary perspective A. Sica
6 | P a g e
The difference among these two approaches is related to the decision of
whether to consider the COO in relation with other variables or not.
The single-cue researches, indeed, had the big limit to analyse the control of
the COO on the consumer behaviour in an absolute way, as if it could individually
influence the consumption choices.
Subsequently, going on behalf of this trick, the multi-cue approach had the role
to point out the importance of relating this variable with the others that in the same
time could have changed the foreign consumption decisions. Then, variables like
price of product, its brand equity or the design, have taken root in the COO
researches, and it has begun to be considered in a relative way.
As mentioned before, Schooler (1965) was the first who affirmed this type of
topic. He conducted a pioneering empirical study in which a group of students from
Guatemala were asked to evaluate some products, considering their COO.
What he was able to affirm with that research was that those students
manifested to prefer the domestic products rather than the foreign ones, just because
of the different origin.
This is what Reierson (1966 and 1967) developed as well with his own
researches. But in his studies he also noticed that in particular condition a marketing
strategy could modify that perception.
After a few years Schooler (1969) conducted another important experiment
1
,
with which he demonstrated again how consumers attributed a differential in the
value of a product – positive or negative – just only because (they thought) it was
made in a specific country, despite it was made somewhere else.
Exactly what Gaedeke (1973) found with his research, consisting on the
perception of US made products and the fact that they were judged as higher quality
then products made in various less developed countries. The research underlined how
the country development could be a positive cue for the evaluation of its products.
Other authors, such as Nagashima (1970 and 1977), demonstrated how COO
attitudes could change over time. For example, he was able to affirm how the
development of the relations within specific countries during history, could somehow
let people change idea according to a country, and thus also revaluate its offer. Like
Krishnakumar (1974) and Wang (1978) better underlined with their researches. The
first one within Indian and Taiwanese products, whereas the second one among US
and USSR.
1
That experiment has shown how different groups of people – 236 consumers previously
divided in 6 groups – had evaluated in different ways the same product – created by the same local
producer – just because it had put on different labels, on which were written two different “made in”.
According to what the researcher had observed, those people were showing negative prejudices about
one of those products due to its COO. But it must be said that most of them were willing to change
idea if the price would have been changed as well. This study has demonstrated then how this factor
must not be interpreted like the only one who acts as influencer, since consumers evaluate the offer by
referring to the whole aspects.
1
st
Chapter Country Reputation: a theoretical framework
P a g e | 7
It is clear then, how in those first researches, the point of study was only taken
by the COO perspective, thus to avoid considering all other factors which have been
highlighted in subsequent studies. As also explained by Bilkey and Nes (1982), after
conducted a critical review on many of previous studies.
But it can be even seen how already in latest researches were pointed out some
developments which have introduced the new path of study.
In their recent report, Vianelli and Marzano discuss even other aspects of the
single-cue limits. Particularly, they underline the non-relevance in the utilized
sample for the researches – for the most focused on specific cluster of people
(students) – and the restricted field of analysis. Since the majority of those researches
were made in the USA.
The effect of the improvement through the multi-cue analysis has been that all
the next researches started considering lots of factors, where the COO effect has
become only one of them.
Already with Johansson et al. (1985) the COO started to assume a different
importance. Still having a role in the process of consumption choices, but this time
much resized than before. As something really important, they underlined how a
product can generate different stereotypes according to different associations. And
then they also discovered that the COO seemed to have more importance for the
choices as more as consumers had limited familiarity with products coming from
there.
From this assumption, as also Han (1989) clearly defined, were developed
other two new concepts in this literature, or rather the halo effect and the summary
construct effect.
The difference among these two effects is that the first one refers to the
situation when consumers do not have prior experiences with any products coming
from that particular country. Hence, they use their stereotype about the COO to grade
the entire value of the offer.
Of course this presumes that the country image is based on whatever
knowledge or stereotypes that each consumer has about these countries, including
their level of economic, political and social development.
Instead, the second effect acts when consumers already have prior experiences
with the offer coming from a specific country, thus they just confirm or modify their
beliefs depending on the new experiences.
The results of these researches highlighted even more the importance of
stereotyping, exactly what Hooley et al. (1988) did in those years, and how it can
change through time.
In fact, they identified that the stereotyping process depends on whether the
homogeneity or the difference between the culture of analysed countries, rather than
the patriotism of their inhabitants.
The theoretical framework of Country Reputation in an interdisciplinary perspective A. Sica
8 | P a g e
They also confirmed what Nagashima discovered a few years before, that
national stereotype changes over time, depending on either the possible experiences
people can have or the information they can take about a specific country.
Straddling the late eighties and the early nineties, researchers were just
confirming the previous issues, while were laid the basis for the current theory about
this subject.
Important contributions came from Papadopoulos and Heslop [Heslop L.A. and
Papadopoulos N., 1993], who were the first to spurring the creation a properly model
for this phenomenon.
Even according to their opinion, the COO effect is the result of a constantly
improving flow of information. A process which starts from the general overall COO
image and that is already set by the individual characteristics.
Then this image can be influenced by external variables, or rather everything is
related to that specific country, to finally be compared with the other COO images,
and to be evaluated and improved from time to time
2
.
It is referring to these new perspectives that has been developing the new COO
theory, such a result of several factors that can modify the consumer behaviour.
Again Heslop and Papadopoulos (2003) provided an extremely important
contribution. They suggested a multi-attribute model to investigate consumers’
attitudes towards domestic and foreign products.
The analysis was considering many variables together. Both individual
tendencies and feelings were compared with own experiences, to understand which
would have more influenced the purchasing decision. Hence, consumers’ familiarity
with products and their beliefs were linked to their ethnocentric tendencies and their
affective feelings about the various origins.
The current theory, in fact, demonstrates how different conditions in
demography, familiarity with either products or specific brands, consumer
2
Although during those studies the COO effect was generally treated as to be significantly less
important as a determinant choice compared with other cues, Elliot and Cameron (1994) observed that
under equal conditions a home-made product had a positive influence on consumer choice. The same
was externalized by Knight (1999), who specified that consumers appear to prefer domestically
manufactured goods whereas compared imported goods, and they are often willing to pay a higher
price for them. In the same year, Verlege and Steenkampf (1999) identified that tripartition about the
COO effect, namely cognitive, affective and normative. In the first branch of study the COO is used
for the product quality evaluation, according to the past experiences and the information which have
contributed to form the cognitive link. The second set of studies considers COO as an affective
mechanism that links the product to symbolic and emotional benefits, including social status, then
independently from the cognitive sphere. The third and last category represents a normative process
that relates COO to individual actions which are guided by personal norms, such as the ones that
animosity rather than ethnocentrism or patriotism can create referring to the products coming from a
particular country. Despite the brief explanation, these aspects will be investigated again in next
section, when referring to the consumer behaviour in International Marketing strategies.
1
st
Chapter Country Reputation: a theoretical framework
P a g e | 9
involvement, country industrialization, and other conditions, can reveal as
determinant factors for the choice.
Because of the massive improvement in this study, in following years Samiee
et al. (2005) tried to demonstrate whether consumers are really able to recognize the
origin of a number of branded products. And in their study they showed how
consumers effectively have modest knowledge about the brands origin, when they
enter in contact with a product.
Ahmed and Astous (2007) instead, explained how consumers generally make
their evaluation by basing just on a few cues.
They identified that, for example, consumers evaluate the COOs on the basis of
their manufacturing (Country of Design and Country of Assembly) and product
technology (Technological simple and Technological complex) dimensions. Thus
they demonstrated how people can categorize a country for a critical success factor,
although improperly.
This is a very important point, which combined with the previous researches of
Heslop and Papadopoulos clarifies how the COO effect is not the same for each
country, since it bases on subjective feelings as well.
Once pointed out this concept, part of the new literature has been separating
within two branches. They both focus on the personal association (country of
association), without care about the real product origin. But, while one side points at
the functional behaviour, the other side emphasizes the emotional sphere of foreign
consumers (Dimitrovic e Vida, 2010).
This is what Andehn and Berg (2011) have identified as “deconstruction-
strategy” and “association-strategy”.
Within these two types of study, the second one has been more developed.
Because researchers have understood that, at the end, this emotional association acts
on the consumer behaviour even before than the relation starts.
Especially in nowadays global market consumers do not buy a product just for
its performance quality – which still is necessary – but they make it part of their
selves, and they see in its brand the extension of the firm’s value (Saviano M.L.,
2010). They need to feel like to share as the same values as the firm does, and this is
why they mostly care about the values of the organization, its culture, and what the
brand let them feel (brand equity).
This is the reason why in recent years several studies, like the one of Thakor
and Kohli (1996), or the one of Andehn and Berg (2011), have been digging the
associations about the country where consumers think a product comes from (place
of origin).
As matter of fact, albeit all these developments, the review of studies devoted
to the COO has not found a whole shared view within all authors. There is always
someone who gives more value to some facets rather than others.
The theoretical framework of Country Reputation in an interdisciplinary perspective A. Sica
10 | P a g e
What is certain though is that this subject requires the construction of a
common model, which Roth and Diamantopoulos (2009) have conducted to the
country-image.
This new perspective has given the possibility to create a real path which better
permits to explain this topic, by going from the country image until to the Country
Reputation [Mainolfi G., 2010], as will be clearly shown in next section.
But, as mentioned before, the Country Reputation researches are not only
focused on the COO perception and the country image. Even though this type of
researches is the most discussed in this work, studies have been developing also in
other three fields.
In this sense, the second stream of study is the Destination Management,
connected to the tourism sector.
Franch and Martini (2002) gave their definition about it, as a process of
strategic and operative decisions aimed at define, promote and commercialize the
tourism product.
The thing is that, contrariwise not so many years ago, the concept of tourism is
not just related to a country given natural resources, but it has been exploding in
different ways.
Nowadays, there are more and more several types of touristic activities and, as
Etienne and Binns (2002) have highlighted, countries are asked to revising their
single territories strategies.
If each country has its own characteristics, it must be recognized that within the
single regions and cities there are such particular traditions, which contribute to
create a certain identity. Territories are then responsible to act as real enterprises,
which should individually compete in the global market (Cercola, 1999). Strategies
are vital to implement a strong message about a specific place, where everybody is
responsible, and thus contribute to the overall Country Reputation.
In fact, referring to the definition by Kotler et al. (1993), “[…] place image is
a sum of belief and impressions that people have of a place. Images represent a
simplification of a large number of associations and pieces of information connected
with the place”.
What has spurred Kotler to emphasize the word “place” is the fact that people
now have more information than a few years ago, and they base their choices on the
construction of the personal country image, as regarding the single strategies.
Assuming the vital-systemic approach (Valdani and Ancarani, 2000; Rullani,
2002; Golinelli C.M., 2004), the place regain its importance and it becomes such a
space, where the set of knowledge and competences make it as a critical success
factor for the whole country.
Something that just a few researchers have underlined, and which is really
important, is that even this sector deals with the people identification, as the
willingness to belong at that specific place.
1
st
Chapter Country Reputation: a theoretical framework
P a g e | 11
This has been promoting, even in this field of study, the importance of a
properly branding strategy (Anholt, 2010).
It can be easily understood then how Country Reputation determines the
success of the tourism marketing strategies in the global market, while the marketing
strategies also contribute to form the Country Reputation.
Indeed, there are some cases where the type of organized tourism determines a
properly kind of reputation, as for the case of the sexual tourism in Thailand –
although it is now expanding in many other countries in Eastern Europe – rather than
the safaris in Africa.
In the same time, just as Andehn and Berg has told in their study, there are a
few cases where a single region, rather than a specific city, can determine such a
strong reputation and create its own tourism field.
To contextualize this concept in the Destination Management study, can be
taken the case of Morocco for the homosexual tourism, and the recognition of
Casablanca as for these kinds of operations.
But, in the same time, it is easy refer to Amsterdam for drugs and prostitution,
despite Holland is generally recognized to be a quiet and also business place. Or to
Dubai and Abu Dhabi for their elite tourism, albeit all around there are such poverty
places and disasters.
Of course, like these, there are plenty of other cases that can be mentioned, as
for the Oktoberfest in Munich or the youth parties in Palma de Mallorca.
All those examples represent how sometimes such a reputation can be either
source of success or catastrophic for the whole country, according to the situation.
The third stream of research is the Public diplomacy. The significance of this
subject in Country Reputation study is due to the fact that it represents the part who
gives the directions. Indeed, the way policy makers act in the domestic space rather
than abroad strongly impacts on foreign decisions about the country.
Even though the shorthand definition of Melissen J. would be extremely
immediate to convey the essence of what Public Diplomacy really is, it can be used
the given definition by a recent British report. Because it more formally defines it as
a work that aims at influencing in a positive way the perceptions of individuals and
organizations abroad, respect of the possible relations.
In fact, the role of this subject is the one to influencing other people’s opinions
and attitudes, as instrumentalization of the soft power.
Credibility is then a crucial resource and an important source of influence,
obviously in both good and bad ways. Because it depends on the capability of
maintaining promises and takes preannounced actions. Apologizes are not enough,
since the actions remain.
It needs to think about those countries where the politics is very repressive,
such as the ones in the southern part of the world, or the ones in Middle East.
The theoretical framework of Country Reputation in an interdisciplinary perspective A. Sica
12 | P a g e
Generally enterprises are less inclined at investing there, as people are more reticent
to buying products which are made in those places.
Indeed, despite the previous trend – according to which corporations used to
invest in those countries with a very low level of human rights, just to take advantage
of the low cost of labour – currently they noticed that people pay more attention on
such things before than buying a product. And China is a clear example of this
process, as it is also happening in some part of Africa and India.
The tourism sector as well, although the beautiful places, often suffers for the
bad diplomacy, especially when rebellions are made by the inhabitants and they are
transmitted all over the world, since it is a clear symptom of bad policy, or at least
displeasure in that population.
To be more close to the country of Italy, it can be thought about the recent
diplomacy situation and all the bad reputation it had brought to the whole activities
in the country, either domestic or with foreign actors.
Politicians are the ones who can easily relate with foreign countries, due to
both the power and the instruments they have, thus it can be though that they are like
the ones who should control the overall Country Reputation.
Moreover, they are even object of massive communication all around the
world, and then their actions more quickly spread consequences in foreign
stereotyping.
Hence, in quality of deputy abroad, Public diplomacy can definitely build the
culture of the all country in foreigners’ mind, and this justifies the several searches of
this field of study.
The forth area of research is the one which analyses the Corporate Reputation.
The difference with the streams introduced above is that this one does not
totally depend on the Country Reputation. Unlike the politics and the tourism fields
indeed, enterprises have their own reputation which can even precede the country’s
one.
As matter of facts, this field of study has many similarities with the Country
Reputation phenomenon. Both of them refer to the value externally perceived, which
can reveal as either a critical success factor or a failure, on which they must be
implemented some corrective strategies.
But approaching as for a hierarchical perspective, it is possible to attribute to
the country’s a greater importance, though they also have such a bidirectional
relation.
The role of reputation in business field has taken a strategic role so that all
firms, of all shape and size, have started giving it attention more and more [Griffin
A., 2008].
Nowadays, reputation is the key factor that gives to the firms the opportunity to
reach the whole market, especially with the new type of consumer. Having the best
product – in terms of performance – is not enough to sell anymore, because if they do
Ricevi informazioni sui nostri servizi, sulle offerte e non perdere news e consigli su università e lavoro.
