• International Commerce and Information Review
• /
• v.16 no.2
• /
• pp.297-318
• /
• 2014

The study has try to analyze firm-level marketing strategy for making inroads into United Arab Emirate(UAE) in the Middle East Rrgion. Korea's pharmaceutical medicine industry can overcome that growth limit by strategically advancing into the world market even the its market share is slight as of 2013. The results of Marketing Mix strategies to enter the UAE pharmaceutical medicine market are as follows: STP strategy and Marketing Mix strategy based on the findings of this study, the practical implications of the following. First of all, domestic pharmaceutical industries in Korea due to the domestic market, growth in the various institutional devices have limits on the expansion. On the other hand, supports the Government's active policy of UAE health care industry is booming. UAE Government medical facilities and health care in the health care industry in 2010 to improve the level of 80 billion dollars of investment. The UAE's medical sector is equipped with independent regulatory regime by the Emirates. The UAE is a foreign worker influx has been showing a high population growth rate, over the last 30 years, UAE resident population has increased about 7 times. The UAE Government to improve the quality of medical services, the private sector and the public to encourage the signing of partnership (PPP) can also be found in the regulation of foreign direct investment. The results of this study would play a role in analyzing a marketing strategy to make inroads into UAE pharmaceutical medicine market.

• Journal of Global Scholars of Marketing Science
• /
• v.20 no.2
• /
• pp.135-148
• /
• 2010

Arab boycotts of Danish products, Australian boycotts of French products and Chinese consumer aversion toward Japanese products are all examples of how adverse actions at the country level might impact consumers' behavior. The animosity literature has examined how consumers react to the adverse actions of other countries, and how such animosity impacts consumers' attitudes and preferences for products from the transgressing country. For example, Chinese consumers are less likely to buy Japanese products because of Japanese atrocities during World War II and the unjust economic dealings of the Japanese (Klein, Ettenson and Morris 1998). The marketing literature, however, has not examined how consumers react to adverse actions committed by their own country against other countries, and whether such actions affect their attitudes towards purchasing products that originated from the adversely affected country. The social psychology literature argues that consumers will experience a feeling called collective guilt, in response to such adverse actions. Collective guilt stems from the distress experienced by group members when they accept that their group is responsible for actions that have harmed another group (Branscombe, Slugoski, and Kappenn 2004). Examples include Americans feeling guilty about the atrocities committed by the U.S. military at Abu Ghraib prison (Iyer, Schamder and Lickel 2007), and the Dutch about their occupation of Indonesia in the past (Doosje et al. 1998). The primary aim of this study is to examine consumers' perceptions of adverse actions by members of one's own country against another country and whether such perceptions affected their attitudes towards products originating from the country transgressed against. More specifically, one objective of this study is to examine the perceptual antecedents of collective guilt, an emotional reaction to adverse actions performed by members of one's country against another country. Another objective is to examine the impact of collective guilt on consumers' perceptions of, and preference for, products originating from the country transgressed against by the consumers' own country. If collective guilt emerges as a significant predictor, companies originating from countries that have been transgressed against might be able to capitalize on such unfortunate events. This research utilizes the animosity model introduced by Klein, Ettenson and Morris (1998) and later expanded on by Klein (2002). Klein finds that U.S. consumers harbor animosity toward the Japanese. This animosity is experienced in response to events that occurred during World War II (i.e., the bombing of Pearl Harbor) and more recently the perceived economic threat from Japan. Thus this study argues that the events of Word War II (i.e., bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki) might lead U.S. consumers to experience collective guilt. A series of three hypotheses were introduced. The first hypothesis deals with the antecedents of collective guilt. Previous research argues that collective guilt is experienced when consumers perceive that the harm following a transgression is illegitimate and that the country from which the transgressors originate should be responsible for the adverse actions. (Wohl, Branscombe, and Klar 2006). Therefore the following hypothesis was offered: H1a. Higher levels of perceived illegitimacy for the harm committed will result in higher levels of collective guilt. H1b. Higher levels of responsibility will be positively associated with higher levels of collective guilt. The second and third hypotheses deal with the impact of collective guilt on the preferences for Japanese products. Klein (2002) found that higher levels of animosity toward Japan resulted in a lower preference for a Japanese product relative to a South Korean product but not a lower preference for a Japanese product relative to a U.S. product. These results therefore indicate that the experience of collective guilt will lead to a higher preference for a Japanese product if consumers are contemplating a choice that inv olves a decision to buy Japanese versus South Korean product but not if the choice involves a decision to buy a Japanese versus a U.S. product. H2. Collective guilt will be positively related to the preference for a Japanese product over a South Korean product, but will not be related to the preference for a Japanese product over a U.S. product. H3. Collective guilt will be positively related to the preference for a Japanese product over a South Korean product, holding constant product judgments and animosity. An experiment was conducted to test the hypotheses. The illegitimacy of the harm and responsibility were manipulated by exposing respondents to a description of adverse events occurring during World War II. Data were collected using an online consumer panel in the United States. Subjects were randomly assigned to either the low levels of responsibility and illegitimacy condition (n=259) or the high levels of responsibility and illigitemacy (n=268) condition. Latent Variable Structural Equation Modeling (LVSEM) was used to test the hypothesized relationships. The first hypothesis is supported as both the illegitimacy of the harm and responsibility assigned to the Americans for the harm committed against the Japanese during WWII have a positive impact on collective guilt. The second hypothesis is also supported as collective guilt is positively related to preference for a Japanese product over a South Korean product but is not related to preference for a Japanese product over a U.S. product. Finally there is support for the third hypothesis, since collective guilt is positively related to the preference for a Japanese product over a South Korean product while controlling for the effect of product judgments about Japanese products and animosity. The results of these studies lead to several conclusions. First, the illegitimacy of harm and responsibility can be manipulated and that they are antecedents of collective guilt. Second, collective guilt has an impact on a consumers' decision when they face a choice set that includes a product from the country that was the target of the adverse action and a product from another foreign country. This impact however disappears from a consumers' decision when they face a choice set that includes a product from the country that was the target of the adverse action and a domestic product. This result suggests that collective guilt might be a viable factor for company originating from the country transgressed against if its competitors are foreign but not if they are local.

• Korean Security Journal
• /
• no.28
• /
• pp.153-179
• /
• 2011

Korea has been a victim of State supporting terrorism by North Korea even before international society realize the terrorism threats because of 9.11 in US. However, state supporting terrorism against South Korea by North Korea went along with East/West Cold War System by US and the Soviet Union. It is because socialism that Kim Il-sung who established a separate government in North Korea with the political, economic, social and military support of the Soviet Union selected as his political ideology justifies terrorism as the tool to complete the proletariat revolution. North Korea's state supporting terrorism is being operated systematically and efficiently by military of North Korea. It gives big worries to international society not only by performing terrorism against Korea but also by dispatching terrorists and exporting terrorism strategies to the third world countries. In this situation, terrorism against Korea has met a new transition point at 9${\cdot}$11 in US. As South Korea is confronting North Korea and the war has not ended but suspended, the alliance between US and Korea is more important than anything else. Because of this Korea decided to support the anti-terrorism wars against Afghanistan and Iraq of US and other western countries and send military force there. The preface of the anti-terrorism war has begun as such. On October 7, 2001, US and UK started to attack Afghanistan and Taleban government in Afghanistan was dethroned on December 7, 2001. US and western countries started a war against Iraq on March 20, 2003. On April 9, 2003 Baghdad, the capital of Iraq fell, and Saddam Hussein al-Majid al-Awja government was expelled. During the process, the terrorism threat against South Korea has expanded to Arab terrorists and terrorism organizations as well as North Korea. Consequently, although Korean government, scholars and working level public servants made discussions and tried to seek countermeasures, the damages are extending. Accordingly, terrorism against Korean companies in overseas after 9${\cdot}$11 were analyzed focusing on Nation, Region, Victimology, and Weapons used for the attacks. Especially, the trend of terrorism against the Korean companies in overseas was discussed by classifying them chronologically such as initiation and termination of anti-terrorism wars against Afghanistan and Iraq, and from the execution of Iraqi President, Saddam Hussein al-Majid al-Awja to December 2010. Through this, possible terrorism incidents after the execution of Osama bin Laden, the leader of Al-Qaeda, on May 2, 2011 were projected and proposals were made for the countermeasures.