Handel und Internationales Marketing Retailing and International Marketing

Series Editors

Bernhard Swoboda

Universität Trier, Trier, Germany

Thomas Foscht

Karl-Franzens-Universität Graz, Graz, Austria

Hanna Schramm-Klein

Lehrstuhl für Marketing, Universität Siegen, Siegen, Germany

Die Schriftenreihe fördert die Themengebiete Handel und Internationales Marketing. Diese charakterisieren – jedes für sich, aber auch in inhaltlicher Kombination – die Forschungsschwerpunkte der Herausgeber. Beide Themengebiete werden grundsätzlich breit aufgefasst; die Reihe bietet sowohl Dissertationen und Habilitationen als auch Tagungs- und Sammelbänden mit unterschiedlicher inhaltlicher und methodischer Ausrichtung ein Forum. Die inhaltliche Breite ist sowohl im Sinne eines konsumentenorientierten Marketings wie auch einer marktorientierten Unternehmensführung zu verstehen. Neben den Arbeiten, die von den Herausgebern für die Schriftenreihe vorgeschlagen werden, steht die Reihe auch externen wissenschaftlichen Arbeiten offen. Diese können bei den Herausgebern eingereicht und nach einer positiven Begutachtung publiziert werden.

The book series focuses on the fields of Retailing and International Marketing. These two areas represent the research fields of the editors—each of them as a single research area, but also in combination. Both of these research areas are widely understood. Consequently, the series provides a platform for the publication of doctoral theses and habilitations, conference proceedings and edited books, as well as related methodological issues that encompass the focus of the series. The series is broad in the sense that it covers academic works in the area of consumer-oriented marketing as well as the area of marketoriented management. In addition to academic works recommended by the editors, the book series also welcomes other academic contributions. These may be submitted to the editors and will be published in the book series after a positive assessment.

Nele Jacobs

Strategic Orientations and Innovativeness of Multinational Corporations

A Multilevel Investigation of Consumer Perceptions and Behavioral Intentions in a Cross-National Context

Nele Jacobs

Fachbereich IV, Universität Trier, Trier, Germany

Vom Fachbereich IV der Universität Trier zur Verleihung des akademischen Grades Doktor der Wirtschafts- und Sozialwissenschaften (Dr. rer. pol.) genehmigte Dissertation von Nele Franziska Jacobs, M.Sc.

Trier, 2025

Betreuer: Univ.-Prof. Dr. Prof. h.c. Bernhard Swoboda

1. Berichterstatter: Univ.-Prof. Dr. Prof. h.c. Bernhard Swoboda

2. Berichterstatter: Univ.-Prof. Dr. Rolf Weiber

Datum der Disputation: 20.05.2025

ISSN 2626-3327e-ISSN 2626-3335

Handel und Internationales Marketing Retailing and International Marketing

ISBN 978-3-658-49018-8e-ISBN 978-3-658-49019-5

https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-658-49019-5

© The Editor(s) (if applicable) and The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Fachmedien Wiesbaden GmbH, part of Springer Nature 2025

This work is subject to copyright. All rights are solely and exclusively licensed by the Publisher, whether the whole or part of the material is concerned, specifically the rights of translation, reprinting, reuse of illustrations, recitation, broadcasting, reproduction on microfilms or in any other physical way, and transmission or information storage and retrieval, electronic adaptation, computer software, or by similar or dissimilar methodology now known or hereafter developed.

The use of general descriptive names, registered names, trademarks, service marks, etc. in this publication does not imply, even in the absence of a specific statement, that such names are exempt from the relevant protective laws and regulations and therefore free for general use.

The publisher, the authors and the editors are safe to assume that the advice and information in this book are believed to be true and accurate at the date of publication. Neither the publisher nor the authors or the editors give a warranty, expressed or implied, with respect to the material contained herein or for any errors or omissions that may have been made. The publisher remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

This Springer Gabler imprint is published by the registered company Springer Fachmedien Wiesbaden GmbH, part of Springer Nature.

The registered company address is: Abraham-Lincoln-Str. 46, 65189 Wiesbaden, Germany

Foreword

The increasing uniqueness of countries changes the international business environment. Multinational corporations (MNC) are exposed to a variety of such challenges because of the different country contexts in which they operate. This dissertation examines the role of these country differences on particular topics from a consumer perspective: the effects and drivers of perceived firm innovativeness and those of corporate brand ability associations over time. The objective of Dr. Nele Jacobs’ thesis is to gain a deeper knowledge on such issues through three studies:

“The Role of National Institutions in the Effects of Consumers’ Perceived Customer Orientation and Firm Innovativeness”: MNCs force global customer orientation and firm innovativeness. However, little is known about how or why they benefit from perceived customer orientation and firm innovativeness in one country but not in another. Dr Jacobs fills this gap by referring to information processing and institutional theories. She contributes to research by analyzing the roles of country development and national culture in the direct and indirect effects of perceived customer orientation through MNC’s firm innovativeness on consumer product purchase intention across 53 countries. The results show different explained variances of the institutions and varying moderations for the differently strong effects of perceived customer orientation and MNC innovativeness. The findings have direct implications for managers interested in understanding how perceived customer orientation and firm innovativeness interact and attract consumers in different country contexts.

“Effects of National Institutions on Corporate Brand Ability Associations during the Pandemic”. During the COVID-19 pandemic, consumer behavior and brand preferences changed. However, surprisingly little is known about how or why corporate brand associations differ and change across countries during such black swan events, especially for MNCs with a specific expertise and abilities, for example, to offer vaccines. Dr. Jacobs uses institutional theory to fill this gap. She contributes to research by analyzing the roles of national institutions in consumers’ corporate brand ability associations in 20 countries. The findings show generally different roles of regulative, normative, and cultural-cognitive institutions in consumers’ corporate brand ability associations. Those roles changed and varied for Pfizer, as an MNC that offered the first vaccine in Western countries, and its competitors before and during the pandemic. This study initially shows which institutions drive corporate brand ability associations cross-nationally and why the role of each institution changes during a black swan.

The study “How Perceived Stakeholder Orientations Affect Consumers’ Perceived Firm Innovativeness Across Nations“ addresses how consumers’ perceptions of MNCs’ orientations toward key stakeholder groups, such as customers, employees, and society, affect perceptions of firm innovativeness in different countries. Certain stakeholder orientations may be advantageous in one country but not in another. To address this gap, this study leverages information integration theory to analyze how strong perceptions of customer, employee, and society orientations influence firm innovativeness perceptions differently across 22 countries. It further examines how these influences are moderated by country development in an important contingency perspective. Through multilevel structural equation modeling, Dr. Jacobs reveals novel and surprising effects of stakeholder orientations and astonishing variations in more vs. less developed countries. She offers actionable insights for decision-makers aiming to grasp the intricate ways in which communicating stakeholder orientations shape consumer perceptions.

With her work, Dr. Jacobs makes a significant contribution to modern international business and marketing research. All studies have been accepted for publication in reputable Journals. She presents the twenty-second dissertation at my chair for Marketing & Retailing at Trier University. I am very pleased with her work. In addition to her excellent research and teaching, she was moreover involved in book projects, organized all ERASMUS exchange programs of the whole faculty and supported our High Potential Program with various excursions. I therefore thank her for the intensive almost four years in which she was working as a research assistant at my chair. I got to know her as a very productive and always very reliable person, and I wish her warmly all the best for her future career and private life.

Professor Dr. Prof. h.c.Bernhard Swoboda

Trier

May 2025

Acknowledgements

This doctoral thesis was written during my time as a research assistant at the Chair of Marketing and Retailing at the University of Trier. The completion of this thesis gives me the opportunity to look back and express my gratitude to the people who have supported me along the way.

First and foremost, I would like to thank my supervisor Prof. Dr. Prof. h.c. Bernhard Swoboda, for the support and feedback in the development of this thesis. His guidance in researching, replying to reviewers, or preparing our projects for presentation in an academic or practical context have been a tremendous source of personal and professional growth. I am very grateful for the opportunity to attend and actively participate in many national and international conferences in Germany (Tübingen, Siegen), Finland (Espoo), Poland (Warsaw), South Korea (Seoul), and the US (Miami, Nashville). Presenting my work in front of an expert audience was invaluable. I am grateful for the people I have met, the friends I have made, and the fruitful discussions I have had on these occasions.

I would like to thank Prof. Dr. Rolf Weiber, for acting as my second supervisor, and for giving me the opportunity to work as a student research assistant for many years. The work and experience I gained provided a solid foundation on which to build my doctoral work. It was a crucial time for the path I chose, and I am grateful for the trust and support I received at the Chair of Marketing, Innovation, and E-Business.

I would also like to take the opportunity to thank Prof. Dr. Lutz Richter for agreeing to chair the defense committee.

I would like to thank my colleagues at the Chair for Marketing and Retailing, Angelina Klink, Dr. Nils Fränzel, Marius Müller, Adrian Schütz, and Dr. Lukas Zimmer, as well as colleagues from other chairs in the Business, Economics, and Social Sciences departments. Thank you for the many fun and constructive coffee breaks, the productive discussions, and the many laughs we shared. I would also like to thank our secretaries Ursula Fassbender and Gerti Weiß-Meerkamp, for all their support over the years.

Thank you to the student assistants who have helped me with the organization and coordination of the ERASMUS+ program throughout the years, especially Ginan Ali and Tina Herrig. A special thanks goes to the team of the International Office at the University of Trier. Thank you for your always collaborative and pragmatic approach to solving any problems that arose, and for the fun we had together in bringing international studies closer to the students.

Last but not least, I would like to thank my family, friends, and the people closest to my heart. Thank you to my parents, my sisters, my brother and his partner, to my friends and loved ones inside and outside of academia—thank you for your constant support and encouragement.

Trier

May 2025

Nele Jacobs

Summary

Multinational corporations (MNCs) face significant challenges in a dynamic global business environment. In times of economic hardship and increased competition, innovativeness and the demonstration of key abilities are essential to the success and resilience of MNCs. However, it remains unclear whether and how their corporate efforts translate into favorable consumer perceptions and responses across nations. Furthermore, the influence of critical boundary conditions, such as a country’s level of development, institutional frameworks, or national culture, remains underexplored. This doctoral thesis adopts a theory-based approach to examine the interplay between firm’s perceived strategic orientations, innovativeness, special corporate abilites, and consumer responses across nations. It employs multilevel structural equation modeling with cross-level effects and interactions to account for important country-level boundary conditions.

Study 1 investigates the cross-national direct and indirect effects of perceived customer orientation and firm innovativeness on consumers’ product purchase intentions. It further examines the moderating roles of country development and cultural dimensions. Analyzing hierarchical consumer data from 53 countries, this study reveals positive direct and stronger indirect effects on purchase intentions. The country factors differently moderate the effects of perceived customer orientation, while perceptions of firm innovativeness demonstrate consistently strong effects across different national contexts.

Study 2 explores how consumer associations with corporate brand abilities are shaped by national institutions before and during the COVID-19 pandemic. Using hierarchical consumer data from 20 countries, it compares the effects for a pandemic-relevant manufacturer and its competitors. Results show the influence of national institutions weakened significantly during COVID-19 for the focal company and its competitors compared to the pre-pandemic period.

Study 3 examines the cross-national effects of firm’s consumer-perceived orientations toward multiple stakeholder groups on perceptions of firm innovativeness. The analysis incorporates the role of country development as a contextual factor. Drawing on hierarchical consumer data across 22 countries, the study identifies varying degrees of positive effects of stakeholder orientations on perceived innovativeness. The degree of country development moderates these effects in opposing directions, providing a foundation for trade-off decisions.

Overall, this doctoral thesis sheds light on the dynamics and effects of consumer-perceived firm innovativeness and the importance of positive corporate ability associations during crises across nations. It highlights the critical influence of country-specific contextual factors. The insights offer valuable implications for both theory and practice and provide a starting point for future research.

Abbreviations

%

Per Cent

χ²

Chi-Square

AAU

Affective Autonomy

AIC

Akaiki Information Criterion

AVE

Average Variance Extracted

B

Between (Country) Level

b

Unstandardized Coefficient

BIC

Bayesian Information Criterion

CBAA

Corporate Brand Ability Associations

CFA

Confirmatory Factor Analysis

CFI

Comparative Fit Index

CLC

Country-Level Control

CLV

Country-Level Variable

CMV

Common Method Variance

COVID-19

Corona Virus Disease 2019

CR

Corporate Reputation

CSR

Corporate Social Responsibility

e.g.

For Example (lat. Exempli Gratia)

EFI

Economic Freedom Index

EGA

Egalitarianism

EMB

Embeddedness

et al.

And Others (lat. Et Alia)

etc.

And So On (lat. Et Cetera)

EU

European Union

GCI

Global Competitiveness Index

GCR

Global Competitiveness Report

GDP

Gross Domestic Product

GNI

Gross National Income

H

Hypothesis

H

Multilevel Maximal Reliability

HAR

Harmony

HDI

Human Development Index

HIER

Hierarchy

i.e.

That Is (lat. Id Est)

IAU

Intellectual Autonomy

IB

International Business

ICC

Intraclass Correlation Coefficient

ILC

Individual-Level Control

IND

Individualism

LC

Long COVID

MAS

Mastery

MASC

Masculinity

MLR

Robust Maximum Likelihood

MNC

Multinational Corporation

MNU

Multinationales Unternehmen

MSEM

Multilevel Structural Equation Modeling

N

Sample Size

NOR

Normative

p

p-Value

p.

Page

PCO

Perceived Customer Orientation

PFI

Perceived Firm Innovativeness

POD

Power Distance

pp.

Pages

PPI

Product Purchase Intention

REG

Regulative

RMSEA

Root Mean Square Error of Approximation

SPSS

IBM Statistical Package for the Social Sciences

TLI

Tucker-Lewis Index

TV

Television

UK

United Kingdom

USA

United States of America

USD

US Dollar

VHB

Verband der Hochschullehrer:innen für Betriebswirtschaft e.V.

W

Within (Individual) Level

WCY

World Competitiveness Yearbook

WGI

World Governance Indicators

WHO

World Health Organization

α

Multilevel Alpha

Δ

Difference

ω

Multilevel Composite Reliability

List of Figures

Figure 1.​1 Studies on Effects of Perceived Customer Orientation12

Figure 1.​2 National Studies on Effects of Perceived Firm Innovativeness14

Figure 1.​3 National Studies on Effects of Perceived Corporate Brand Innovativeness17

Figure 1.​4 Interntional Studies on Effects of Perceived Firm or Corporate Brand Innovativeness19

Figure 1.​5 Studies on Effects of Perceived Customer Orientation and Firm Innovativeness20

Figure 1.​6 Selected Studies on Effects of Consumer’s Corporate (Brand) Ability Associations22

Figure 1.​7 Selected Studies on Antecedents of Consumer’s Corporate (Brand) Ability Associations24

Figure 1.​8 International Studies on Consumer’s Corporate (Brand) Ability Associations26

Figure 1.​9 Studies on Consumer Behavior Regarding Brands Comparing and Across Countries29

Figure 1.​10 Studies on Further Consumer Behavior Comparing Countries32

Figure 1.​11 Studies on Further Consumer Behavior Across Countries34

Figure 1.​12 National Studies on Antecedents of Perceived Firm or Corporate Brand Innovativeness37

Figure 1.​13 International Studies on Antecedents of Perceived Firm/​Corporate Brand Innovativeness39

Figure 1.​14 Studies on Effects of Perceived Customer Orientation on Firm Innovativeness41

Figure 1.​15 Studies on Effects of Perceived Employee Orientation and Related Constructs43

Figure 1.​16 Selected Studies on Effects of Perceived Society Orientation and Related Constructs45

Figure 2.​1 Literature Review (Consumer Studies)61

Figure 2.​2 Conceptual Framework63

Figure 2.​3 Country Portfolio92

Figure 3.​1 Literature Review on International Studies on Consumer Behavior during COVID-1997

Figure 3.​2 Conceptual Framework99

Figure 3.​3 Country Portfolio126

Figure 4.​1 Literature Review (Consumer Studies)132

Figure 4.​2 Conceptual Framework138

Figure 4.​3 Country Portfolio161

List of Tables

Table 1.​1 The Top 20 Most Innovative Companies in 20232

Table 1.​2 Customer Orientation Index of Selected Innovative Consumer Goods MNCs5

Table 2.​1 Sample Characteristics73

Table 2.​2 Reliability and Validity77

Table 2.​3 Discriminant Validity79

Table 2.​4 Correlations80

Table 2.​5 Multilevel Reliability81

Table 2.​6 Comparison of Factor Scores81

Table 2.​7 Results85

Table 3.​1 Sample Characteristics111

Table 3.​2 Reliability and Validity114

Table 3.​3 Correlations115

Table 3.​4 Multilevel Reliability116

Table 3.​5 Descriptives119

Table 3.​6 Results121

Table 4.​1 Sample Characteristics145

Table 4.​2 Reliability and Validity147

Table 4.​3 Discriminant Validity149

Table 4.​4 Correlations150

Table 4.​5 Multilevel Reliability151

Table 4.​6 Comparison of Factor Scores151

Table 4.​7 Results154

© The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Fachmedien Wiesbaden GmbH, part of Springer Nature 2025

N. JacobsStrategic Orientations and Innovativeness of Multinational CorporationsHandel und Internationales Marketing Retailing and International Marketinghttps://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-658-49019-5_1

1. Introduction

Nele Jacobs1  

(1)

Fachbereich IV, Universität Trier, Trier, Germany

Nele Jacobs

Email: nf.jacobs@outlook.com

1.1 Focus and Relevance

The global business landscape faces increasing challenges, for example due to violent conflicts, uncertain political constellations, environmental impacts, and the resulting multitude of economic crises (United Nations 2025). These developments are forcing multinational corporations (MNCs) to navigate financial and strategic uncertainties in a volatile global environment (Beamish 2025). In the highly competitive and dynamic globalized economy, innovativeness is a key driver of the success and resilience for MNCs (Weiber and Pohl 2016, p. 3). The ability to develop new products and services enables companies not only to respond to dynamic market demands, but also to proactively shape future developments (Keiningham et al. 2024; Rubera and Kirca 2012). Innovativeness secures competitive advantage and unlocks (new) business opportunities by reaching new customers and retaining existing ones, underscoring its fundamental role for long-term success (Chatzoglou and Chatzoudes 2018; Kunz, Schmitt and Meyer 2011).

Multinational consumer goods companies such as Apple, Tesla, and Samsung were ranked among the 50 most innovative companies worldwide in 2023 (see Table 1.1). The ranking, based on a survey of more than 1,000 global innovation executives, is published almost annually and highlights companies that excel in transforming, managing, and driving innovation from an internal management perspective (Boston Consulting Group 2023). Apple, with revenues of 383.29 billion USD in 2023, retained the top position for another consecutive year. The dynamic nature of the market and the companies’ ongoing innovation efforts are reflected in the significant year-over-year changes in rankings. For example, emerging market MNC BYD Co. re-entered the top 50 and immediately secured a position among the top 10 innovative companies, possibly due in part to government support (Hossain 2024). The healthcare MNC Pfizer, which demonstrated its innovative capabilities during the global Corona Virus 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, climbed seven places to secure the eleventh rank (FDA 2021).

Table 1.1

The Top 20 Most Innovative Companies in 2023. (Source: Boston Consulting Group (2023); Annual Reports (2023))

Rank

1-Year Change

Company

Industry

Home Country

Revenue

(Billion USD)

1

−−

Apple

Technology

United States

383.29

2

+3

Tesla

Automotive

United States

96.77

3

−−

Amazon

Consumer and Retail

United States

574.79

4

−−

Alphabet

Technology

United States

307.39

5

−3

Microsoft

Technology

United States

211.92

6

+1

Moderna

Healthcare

United States

6.85

7

−1

Samsung

Technology

United States

194.23

8

−−

Huawei

Technology

China

99.32

9

R

BYD Co.

Automotive

China

84.89

10

−−

Siemens

Industrial Products

Germany

22.40

11

+7

Pfizer

Healthcare

United States

58.50

12

+15

Johnson & Johnson

Healthcare

United States

85.17

13

R

SpaceX

Technology

United States

9.00

14

+1

Nvidia

Technology

United States

26.97

15

R

ExxonMobil

Energy

United States

344.58

16

−5

Meta

Technology

United States

134.90

17

−5

Nike

Consumer and Retail

United States

51.22

18

−8

IBM

Technology

United States

61.86

19

+18

3M

Industrial Products

United States

32.68

20

R

Tata Group

Conglomerate

India

150.00

Note: R = Returnee; not included in 2022, but included in any previous Most Innovative Companies report.

While companies may perform well in rankings based on managerial evaluations, their long-term success depends largely on how they are perceived by consumers (Gustafsson and Ghanbarpour 2024; Weiber and Pohl 2016, p. 43). A critical but underexplored perspective in this context is how consumers perceive a firm’s innovativeness. Although they are related, managerial and consumer perceptions do not always align (Kurtmollaiev, Lervik-Olsen and Andreassen 2022). The misalignment between managers’ and consumers’ perceptions may arise due to different criteria used to evaluate a firm’s innovativeness, information asymmetry resulting from market communication gaps, or varying consumer expectations and comparisons, for example. This underscores the great relevance of exploring the consumer perspective in assessing firm innovativeness. Kunz (2024) argues that a company’s innovativeness should not be assessed solely based on expert opinions or research and development expenditures. Instead, the consumer perspective is important because it determines whether an innovation is perceived as novel and useful, which ultimately leads to positive outcomes for the firm. Research indicates that perceived firm innovativeness has a direct impact on firm’s financial success (Keiningham et al. 2024). Firms that are regarded as innovative by consumers enjoy long-term competitive advantages (van Riel et al. 2021). Consequently, MNCs need to understand consumer perceptions and their effects in this context. This dissertation builds upon this premise and addresses the perceived firm innovativeness of MNCs. Perceived firm innovativeness is defined as consumers’ perceptions of a firm’s enduring capabilities to generate novel, creative, and impactful ideas and solutions for the market (Kunz, Schmitt and Meyer 2011; Kurtmollaiev, Lervik-Olsen and Andreassen 2022).

Many innovative MNCs also stand out for their internationally pursued customer orientation strategies (e.g., Morgan, 2022). Customer orientation, in the form of a commitment to focus on and respond to consumer needs rather than generating offerings from within the firm (Narver and Slater 1990; Vaquero Martín 2021). This is essential for firms to differentiate themselves and create offerings that that deliver substantial value to consumers. For example, customer-oriented firms may use artificial intelligence to automatically identify consumer needs by analyzing large amounts of data generated in real time, and satisfy them with appropriate offers (Morgen 2024). Amazon, for example, ranked third by the Boston Consulting Group (2023) in terms of innovativeness, goes so far as to call itself “customer obsessed” and aims to become the most customer-oriented company in the world (Amazon 2025). Samsung emphasizes the importance of understanding customers as the foundation for collaboratively building a better future (Samsung 2023b). As MNCs focus their resources to survive challenging times, it is critical for them to understand the dynamics behind consumer responses to these perceptions to use resources efficiently and achieve the greatest impact. Although these MNCs pursue internationally standardized strategies, even business decision-makers in different countries perceive their customer orientation differently. An index compiled by Bloomsberg Media in cooperation with the cloud software company Salesforce shows different values for companies in the United States of America (USA), Europe and Asia-Pacific (see Table 1.2). For example, while Apple reaches an Index value of 96/100 in Europe, it is considerably lower in the Asia-Pacific region. This raises the question of whether also consumers’ perceptions of MNCs’ customer orientation vary from country to country.

Table 1.2

Customer Orientation Index of Selected Innovative Consumer Goods MNCs. (Source: Bloomberg Media (2022); Boston Consulting Group (2023); Annual Reports (2023))

Innovation

Rank

Customer Orientation

Index

Company

Industry

Revenue

(Billion USD)

USA

Europe

APAC

1

94.5

96.0

90.8

Apple

Technology

383.29

3

99.5

99.4

79.5

Amazon

Consumer and Retail

574.79

4

89.0

92.0

100.0

Alphabet

Technology

307.39

5

91.5

94.3

97.9

Microsoft

Technology

211.92

7

91.1

94.9

92.8

Samsung

Technology

194.23

Note: Customer Orientation Index values ranging 0–100.

The academic management literature, the shared relevance of innovation and customer orientation has long been established. The pioneer of modern management theory, Peter Drucker, already considered innovation and marketing in the sense of a strict orientation towards the customer as the two basic functions of every company (Drucker 1954, p. 34). Consumer research has mainly analyzed the effects of perceived customer orientation and perceived firm innovativeness in isolation (see Sect. 1.2.2). Most studies have been conducted within a single national context (e.g., Habel et al. 2020; van Riel et al. 2021). However, separate investigations of the two constructs in different countries revealed mixed findings, for example in terms of effects on consumer’ attitudinal loyalty or behavioral intentions. Limited international studies have suggested positive effects of perceived customer orientation or firm innovativeness on consumer behavioral intentions, but the effects varied between countries (e.g., Eisingerich and Rubera 2010, in China and the USA). While such studies highlight the potential influence of country-specific factors like the degree of country development or national culture, they have been unable to analyze these effects in detail. Further research is needed to explore the combined and mediating effects of perceived customer orientation and firm innovativeness on consumer behavioral intentions, as well as how these effects are shaped by critical country-specific factors.

Not only can the impact of perceptions be influenced by country-specific factors, but perceptions themselves may be shaped by the institutional environment in which consumers operate. The institutional framework, comprising regulations, norms, and cultural values, creates specific conditions that influence how consumers evaluate companies. They define what is considered legal, desirable, and valuable within a society (Scott 2014, pp. 57–58). The ongoing prevalence of global crises challenges both firms and consumers. Especially black swan events introduce unprecedented challenges to business and society. These events, while appearing less random in retrospect, are are characterized by their improbability, unpredictability, and profound impact (Taleb 2007, pp. xvii–xviii).

The COVID-19 pandemic represents one of the most extraordinary global black swan events in recent history. Initially identified as a severe respiratory virus disease in Wuhan, China, in December 2019, the virus’s gradual global spread prompted governments worldwide to implement containment measures (World Health Organization 2023). These interventions resulted in severe disruptions to daily life, with widespread lockdowns and persistent warnings significantly altering consumer behavior patterns (Sheth 2020). The pandemic’s impact on businesses was profound and multifaceted as firms faced disrupted supply chains and substantial revenue losses (Cui et al. 2023). Some corporate brands, particularly those reliant on personal interaction, lost relevance in consumers’ lives (Jabeen et al. 2022). Others attracted attention by, for example, producing offerings that experienced high market demand. For example, sportswear company Nike reconfigured its supply chains to produce protective equipment for healthcare workers, including face shields; automotive manufacturer Ford collaborated with 3M and GE Healthcare to produce medical equipment such as respirators and ventilators on its assembly lines (Mazzoni 2020; Zaleski 2024). The healthcare MNC Pfizer leveraged its expertise to develop and deliver the first effective COVID-19 vaccine in Western countries (Pfizer 2020).

Consumers observed these corporate actions and formed mental associations regarding firms’ expertise and ability to produce and deliver specific offerings. These associations, referred to as corporate brand ability associations (CBAA; Brown Brown and Dacin 1997; Yu et al. 2021), include not only perceptions of firm innovativeness but also broader evaluations of product or service quality (Berens, Van Riel and Van Bruggen 2005). While these ability associations are well established in the academic literature (see Sect. 1.2.3.1), there is limited understanding of potential cross-country variations in these associations that may arise from differences in country-specific institutional frameworks. Moreover, as global crises and disasters are expected to become more frequent (Nielsen, Wechtler and Zheng 2023), it becomes relevant for firms to understand whether and how institutional frameworks influence CBAA differently for firms with specific abilities or their competitors during black swan events. This understanding could provide valuable insights into strategic positioning and resilience in volatile and unpredictable contexts.

Scholars have extensively studied consumer behavior during the COVID-19 pandemic within national contexts, while fewer studies have taken an international perspective (see Sect. 1.2.3). Some studies have analyzed effects on consumer-brand interactions and identified differences between countries, but have not provided rationales for the observed effects (e.g., regarding brand-self connection or consumer sentiments, Ahmad et al. 2023; Meena and Kumar 2022). Most studies report inconsistent findings regarding the consequences for brands, focus on a limited number of countries, and neglect the roles of national institutions. Beyond the corporate branding context, limited research examines the influence of country-specific regulations, social norms, or culture on consumer outcomes (see Sect. 1.2.3.3). Some studies have examined cross-national differences in institutional effects (e.g., cultural influences on consumer stockpiling behavior, Ahmadi et al. 2022). A significant knowledge gap remains regarding the impact of national institutions on CBAA during the pandemic.

In addition to external factors, a company’s publicly communicated internal actions can also influence consumers’ perceptions of the firm. Recently, MNCs have been shifting away from a purely profit-driven focus towards a more collabotative and humanistic management approach. By prioritizing the interests and benefits of multiple stakeholders rather than solely those of shareholders, companies aim to achieve sustainable long-term success (Papovsky 2023). Strategic decisions that take into account the needs and expectations of different stakeholders—be they consumers, employees or the society at large—play an important role in shaping public evaluations of firms. Individuals hold more positive evaluations and behavioral intentions toward firms that they perceive to be stakeholder-oriented (Quintelier and Vock 2024).

Firms are increasingly undertaking initiatives to publicly communicate their stakeholder-oriented strategies to diverse audiences, including customers, employees, and society at large. For example, Amazon strives to position itself as the most customer-oriented company in the world. The firm also signals its positive employee management through TV commercials, and demonstrates its commitment to fulfilling societal obligations through social media channels (e.g., Amazon 2020). Similarly, Samsung emphasizes its dedication to understanding and satisfying customer needs, fostering well-being and development of its employees, and considering the broader societal implications of its business operations through multiple communication channels (e.g., Samsung 2023c). This advocacy of stakeholder orientation is believed to play a key role in fostering innovation in and by firms through the engagement with diverse stakeholder groups (Gregoire 2021). However, existing considerations remain focused on the internal management perspective. However, consumers are not only the more relevant decision makers when it comes to a company’s ability to deliver creative, novel, and impactful offerings to the market. It is also essential for MNCs to understand how perceptions of their stakeholder orientation influence consumer evaluations of firm innovativeness and to explore potential variations in these perceptions across different countries.

Research on what causes consumers to perceive firms as innovative is still rare (see Sect. 1.2.4.1). Similarly, while the concept of stakeholder orientation is well established in management research, it is relatively underexplored from the consumer perspective (see Sect. 1.2.4.2). Existing studies have predominantly examined the effects of firms’ perceived customer, employee, and societal orientations in isolation. Only few studies relate the constructs to perceptions of innovativeness (e.g., Meißner, Haurand and Stummer 2017; van Riel et al. 2021). Although some scholars have recognized the value of analyzing consumer evaluations of firms as employers from a consumer perspective, such studies remain scarce (e.g., Maxwell-Smith, White and Loyd 2020). International studies on the effects of stakeholder orientation perceptions, conducted in diverse contexts, suggest that consumers process these perceptions differently in countries at different levels of country development (e.g., Zimmer and Swoboda 2023 across 43 countries). Overall, it remains unclear how a firm’s perceived orientations toward multiple stakeholders simultaneously affect perceptions of the firm’s innovativeness, and how these effects depend on the county context.

In summary, MNCs encounter significant challenges when operating in a dynamic, crisis-prone global environment. These challenges force decisions regarding the strategic orientations that MNCs adopt and how to communicate them effectively to consumers to achieve a competitive advantage. Achieving such an advantage depends on shaping consumer perceptions of the firm’s innovativeness and overall superior corporate abilities. Against this backdrop of highly competitive global markets, this thesis addresses the following questions:

(1)

How does perceived customer orientation affect product purchase intention across nations, both directly and indirectly through perceived firm innovativeness, and whether and how do the degree of country development and national cultural dimensions moderate the direct paths on product purchase intention?

(2)

Whether and how do national institutions affect consumers’ CBAA across countries, and how has the COVID-19 pandemic changed this effect for a pandemic-relevant manufacturer and its competitors?

(3)

How do perceived customer, employee, and society orientations of MNCs cross-nationally affect consumers’ perceptions of firm innovativeness, and how does a country’s degree of development moderate this effect?

Chapters 2, 3, and 4 present three specific empirical studies that were conducted to analyse the research questions above. Extensive literature reviews were conducted in order to derive the respective research gaps. The literature reviews are presented in Sect. 1.2.

1.2 Research Gaps and Literature Review

1.2.1 Overview

The following literature review provides an overview of the literature that has addressed the issues presented in the introduction. To ensure a sound basis, the literature review was limited to academic journals ranked B and above in the VHB-JOURQUAL3 journal quality ranking of the German Academic Association for Business Research (VHB). Few exceptions were made for papers published in C-ranked journals were made. Section 1.2.2. focuses on the first research streams of the perceived customer orientation and innovativeness of MNCs. First, national and international literature that deals only with perceived customer orientation from a consumer perspective is presented (see Sect. 1.2.2.1). Second, Sect. 1.2.2.2 discusses national and international studies on the effects of perceived firm innovativeness. Third, Sect. 1.2.2.3 includes studies that jointly analyze the effects of perceived customer orientation and firm innovativeness. Section 1.2.3 focuses on the second research topic of consumers’ corporate ability associations and behavior during the COVID-19 pandemic. Selected literature on corporate ability associations is first reviewed in Sect. 1.2.3.1. Section 1.2.3.1 focuses on studies that observe consumer behavior regarding brands during the COVID-19 pandemic. Section 1.2.3.3 discusses studies of consumer behavior beyond the focus on brands. Literature on the third stream of research, dealing with perceived stakeholder orientations as antecedents of perceived firm innovativeness, is presented in Sect. 1.2.4. In order to systematize the findings, studies from the emerging research field of perceived firm innovativeness are first presented in Sect. 1.2.4.1, before studies that link perceived stakeholder orientations with perceived firm innovativeness or related constructs are addressed in Sect. 1.2.4.2.

1.2.2 Literature on Effects of Perceived Customer Orientation and Firm Innovativeness

1.2.2.1 Effects of Perceived Customer Orientation

The construct of customer orientation was first conceptualized in management research by Narver and Slater (1990), who viewed it as part of the overarching concept of a firm’s market orientation. The authors define market orientation as an organizational culture that aims to create a sustainable competitive advantage through customer orientation, competitive orientation, and interfunctional coordination. They see market and customer orientation as the most effective way to create superior value for customers, leading to long-term business success (Narver and Slater 1990). From a consumer perspective, researchers have examined the perceived customer orientation of individual employees (i.e., the extent to which employees identify and meet customer needs, e.g., Homburg, Müller and Klarmann 2011) or of firms as a whole (e.g., Walsh and Beatty 2007). This doctoral thesis focuses on the latter and analyzes consumers’ perceptions of a firm’s customer orientation and its effects.

A firm’s perceived customer orientation has only sparingly been analyzed from a consumer point of view, primarily in a national context (see Fig. 1.1). Most studies concentrate on the role of perceived customer orientation in fostering consumer loyalty to a firm or brand. Ha and John (2010) found that perceived customer orientation influences brand loyalty both directly and indirectly in South Korea. Notably, the authors found that the positive effect on brand loyalty is best explained indirectly through perceived quality and satisfaction. Aurier and Séré de Lanauze (2012) confirmed the indirect effect in France, demonstrating that the effect of perceived relationship orientation, as a related form of perceived customer orientation, is mediated by trust and affective commitment toward a brand. They further examined that a positive attitude toward a brand strengthens the link. Valenzuela, Mulki and Jaramillo (2010) were the first to observe effects of perceived customer orientation in an emerging market environment. In their study conducted in Chile, they found that a firm’s perceived customer orientation enhances loyalty indirectly through the perceived value received by customers, but also directly. The perceived ethicality of the firm further strengthened the effects. Ndubisi (2012), on the other hand, merely analyzed and confirmed the indirect effect through satisfaction in their study conducted in Malaysia.

More recently, Hammami, Souiden and Bennour (2021) provided evidence that perceived customer orientation directly increased customer satisfaction with service recovery in Canada. When the firm was perceived as customer-oriented, the negative effects of perceived severity and attribution of the service failure on customers’ recovery satisfaction were significantly reduced. Fuchs and Schreier (2011) examined perceived customer empowerment as a more specific form of perceived customer orientation. They found that when a product is perceived as having been (co-)designed or selected by customers rather than by firm executives (i.e., if the firm actively empowered customers), even non-participating consumers are more likely to exhibit favorable behaviors toward the firm.

Internationally, only Swoboda and Batton (2020) examined the effect of perceived customer orientation as a dimension of a company’s reputation on consumers’ intentional loyalty across 44 nations. They supported the positive relationship, but did not find any moderating influences of the dimensions of national culture or country development.

Figure 1.1

Studies on Effects of Perceived Customer Orientation. (Source: Own Creation)

1.2.2.2 Effects of Perceived Firm Innovativeness

This thesis focuses on consumers’ perceived innovativeness of a firm as a whole or the perceived innovativeness of a corporate brand. These broader constructs, which reflect an enduring and overarching characteristic of a firm or corporate brand, conceptually differ from the perceived innovativeness of individual products or product brands (e.g., Shams, Alpert and Brown 2015).

Most scholars have analyzed perceived firm innovativeness in a single-country context (see Fig. 1.2). While Henard and Dacin (2010) demonstrated that a firm’s reputation for innovativeness enhances consumer loyalty, the prevailing conceptualization of perceived firm innovativeness today was first introduced by Kunz, Schmitt and Meyer (2011). In their study conducted in a developed country, they provide a sound definition of perceived firm innovativeness as “the consumer’s perception of an enduring firm capability that results in novel, creative, and impactful ideas and solutions for the market” (Kunz, Schmitt and Meyer 2011, p. 817), along with a now well-established measurement of the construct. The authors found that such a positive perception increases consumer’s loyalty through functional-cognitive and affective-experiential pathways. In the hospitality context, Jin et al. (2015) were unable to confirm this direct positive effect in the USA, but but did find positive effects on consumers’ brand preference and credibility. However, brand credibility fully mediates the positive effect of perceived restaurant innovativeness on loyalty.

More recently, van Riel et al. (2021) demonstrated that, in their Norwegian sample that perceived firm innovativeness increased relative restaurant attractiveness, which in turn increased consumer satisfaction and loyalty. This positive effect on relative firm attractiveness was replicated by Kurtmollaiev, Lervik-Olsen and Andreassen (2022) for a Norwegian sample across industries. Previously, Kim et al. (2015) had already observed the relationship between perceived firm and product innovativeness and customer value and satisfaction. In their study set in South Korea, the authors found a direct positive effect on the perceived innovativeness of a firm’s products, as well as an indirect positive effect on customer satisfaction through perceived increased expectation, partnership, transaction, and relationship value. In addition to the various customer values, Shin and Larson (2020) found in their study conducted in the USA that perceived firm innovativeness also increases consumers’ perceived excitement about a firm. This is consistent with the findings of Rubera and Kirca (2017) and Marín-García, Gil-Saura and Ruiz-Molina (2021), who found that perceived firm innovativeness increases firm value in the manufacturing and service industries, as well as store image and consequently store equity in food retail industry.

Several scholars have found links between perceived firm innovativeness and consumer behavior or behavioral intentions. For example, in the Taiwanese service context, perceived firm innovativeness was found to increase customer participation and citizenship behavior, both directly and indirectly through increased engagement (Yen, Teng and Tzeng 2020). Lin (2019) extended these findings by also observing a positive relationship with patronage intentions in the retail sector. Schulz and Voelckner (2020) examined how perceived firm innovativeness explains the inverted U-shaped relationship between the share of user-designed products and consumer purchase intentions in Germany. In a developing market context, Upadhye, Das and Varshneya (2019) found that firm’s perceived innovativeness, along with trust, increases consumers’ purchase intentions and the firm’s perceived corporate social responsibility (CSR) in India.

Figure 1.2

National Studies on Effects of Perceived Firm Innovativeness. (Source: Own Creation)

Perceived corporate brand innovativeness refers to brand innovativeness at the corporate level and is often addressed and conceptualized synonymously with firm innovativeness. For example, Chang, Ko and Leite (2016) drew on the conceptualization by Kunz, Schmitt and Meyer (2011) to analyze how perceived brand leadership, consisting of the brand’s innovativeness among the further characteristics of brand quality, value, and popularity, affects consumers’ word-of-mouth recommendations. In their USA-based study set in the luxury brand context, the authors found no significant influence. This is contradicted by Wong and Haque (2022), who in their study in Bangladesh found that perceived brand innovativeness increases consumers’ word-of-mouth and purchase intentions both directly and indirectly through brand love and trust. Francioni et al. (2021) went even further. In their cross-industry study in Italy, the authors demonstrated how perceived brand innovativeness increases brand addiction.

Boisvert and Ashill (2011) published the first study in this line of research, examining the effect of perceived innovativeness of a financial services brand in Canada. Their results revealed that the perceived innovativeness of a line extension positively affects consumers’ attitudes and thus indirectly influences their adoption intentions. However, Hetet, Ackermann and Mathieu (2020) were unable to replicate this positive effect on consumer attitudes. Their study of a French electricity meter brand showed that the perceived brand innovativeness prior to a product launch only indirectly influences consumer attitudes toward a new product through the perceived product newness.

Numerous scholars have explored the influence of perceived brand innovativeness on consumers’ purchase intentions. Shams, Brown and Alpert (2017) supported the findings of Boisvert and Ashill (2011). In their study of smartphone brands in Australia, the authors demonstrated that perceived brand innovativeness directly and indirectly increases consumers’ purchase intentions through enhancing brand credibility. Similarly, in Taiwan, Wu and Ho (2014) found that this positive effect is partially mediated by the brand’s perceived quality. Fazal-e-Hasan et al. (2019) extended these insights in their study in the Australian retail context. The authors showed how perceived brand innovativeness indirectly influences also consumer’s repurchase intentions by increasing their hope of achieving their goals and subsequently enhancing their overall satisfaction.

The second prominent research stream delves into the impact of perceived brand innovativeness on consumer loyalty. Pappu and Quester (2016) analyzed how the perceived innovativeness of television and smartphone brands affects consumer loyalty in Australia. The authors found that perceptions of innovativeness do not directly increase concsumer loyalty; instead, the effect is fully positively mediated by the perception of the brand’s quality. In contrast, Leckie, Nyadzayo and Johnson (2018) examined the effects in the Australian service industry and found positive indirect as well as direct effects of service brand innovativeness through increased brand engagement. In the emerging market context of China, Lin, Lobo and Leckie (2019) found that the innovativeness of popular green brands increased brand loyalty directly and indirectly through perceived value (see Fig. 1.3).

Figure 1.3

National Studies on Effects of Perceived Corporate Brand Innovativeness. (Source: Own Creation)

Fewer scholars have observed the effects of perceived firm or corporate brand innovativeness in an international context (see Fig. 1.4). Hubert et al. (2017) analyzed how perceived brand innovativeness, triggered by the innovativeness of a flagship product, affects purchase intention. The authors found a positive effect in Austria and Germany, which was even stronger for brand-typical flagship products that were more expensive. Kassemeier, Haumann and Güntürkün (2022) observed how perceived firm innovativeness, along with other company characteristic such as quality and price, creates satisfied customers who can identify with a company. While perceived firm innovativeness directly increased satisfaction, customer-company identification was only indirectly strengthened. The indirect increase through satisfaction was reinforced by customers with a stronger need to differentiate themselves from others in their social context. The authors did not find any differences in the effects between Germany and the USA.

Falkenreck and Wagner (2011) also examined the effect of perceived firm innovativeness on satisfaction in their study comparing Finland, Germany, Spain, and Russia. They found significant differences in how perceived firm innovativeness affected satisfaction, customer value for money, and corporate reputation between the countries. Hofstede’s national cultural dimension of uncertainty avoidance mitigated the influence of perceived firm innovativeness on corporate reputation, but could not explain the remaining differences found. Kim (2016) examined how perceived firm innovativeness influences consumer attitudes in nine countries in the Asia-Pacific, Middle East and Africa, and Europe regions. A firm’s perceived innovativeness for new products increased consumers’ attitudes toward the products and, in turn, their acceptance intentions. The effects varied in strength, with the strongest effects being found in Europe and the weakest in the Asia-Pacific region. However, the author did not provide any rationales for the differences found.

Figure 1.4

Interntional Studies on Effects of Perceived Firm or Corporate Brand Innovativeness. (Source: Own Creation)

1.2.2.3 Joint Effects of Perceived Customer Orientation and Firm Innovativeness

Only three studies could be identified that combine the effects of perceived customer orientation and perceived firm innovativeness (see Fig. 1.5). In a national context, Meißner, Haurand and Stummer (2017) conducted the only empirical study that observed the serial effect of both constructs. The authors found that perceived customer empowerment, as a distinct form of perceived customer orientation, incraesed consumers’ perceived innovation ability of a brand. This led to a higher willingness to recommend, prefer, and purchase the brand’s products.

Internationally, Vaquero Martín (2021) supported the notion that perceived customer participation in product development enhances consumers’ intentions toward a firm through their perceived customer orientation. However, the communication of customer involvement did not affect consumers’ perceived firm innovativeness. Nevertheless, perceived firm innovativeness increased consumers’ recommendation and purchase intentions as well as their willingness to pay higher prices more strongly than perceived customer orientation did. This finding was consistent when comparing Germany and the United Kingdom (UK). Eisingerich and Rubera (2010) had previously provided evidence that the effects of perceived customer orientation and perceived firm innovativeness differ between countries. In their study, the authors found that perceived customer orientation increased customers’ brand commitment more strongly in the UK, while the effect of perceived firm innovativeness was stronger in China. Furthermore, they found that the national cultural dimensions of individualism vs. collectivism, power distance, and short-term vs. long-term orientation moderated the effects of perceived customer orientation and perceived firm innovativeness differently.

Figure 1.5

Studies on Effects of Perceived Customer Orientation and Firm Innovativeness. (Source: Own Creation)

1.2.3 Literature on Corporate Ability Associations and Consumer Perceptions, Intentions, and Behavior during COVID-19

1.2.3.1 Consumer Studies on Corporate (Brand) Ability Associations

Brown and Dacin (1997) introduced the most well-known and widely used conceptualization of what consumers know about a company, referred to as consumers’ corporate associations. The authors distinguished two distinct types of cognitive associations that consumers may hold about a firm: those related to the company’s expertise in producing and delivering specific outputs (i.e., corporate ability) and those associated with its activities concerning perceived social responsibility (i.e., CSR).

This thesis aims to explore how effects on consumer associations with a company that produced and delivered a pandemic-relevant product evolved over the course of the COVID-19 pandemic. Accordingly, the literature and subsequent elaborations focus specifically on consumer associations with corporate abilities. While Johnson, Lee and Ashoori (2018) found that consumers with prior consumption experience place greater value on a company’s CSR efforts, corporate ability associations are generally considered the more critical association. Positive corporate ability associations can compensate for weak CSR associations, while the reverse is not possible (Berens, van Riel and Van Rekom 2007). Furthermore, corporate ability associations have been shown to exert a stronger halo effect on overall perceptions of a firm than CSR associations (Madden, Roth and Dillon 2012).

Consumers’ ability associations with a firm or its corporate brand constitute a strategic asset. These associations serve as important signals through which companies establish favorable cognitive links in consumers’ minds, ultimately contributing to their competitive advantage. A substantial body of research discusses the positive impact of favorable corporate ability associations on consumer attitudes and behavioral intentions (see Fig. 1.6).

The impact on consumer loyalty has been particularly widely discussed. For example, Fatma, Khan and Rahman (2016) investigated consumers in the Indian retail banking sector and found that corporate ability associations enhance consumer loyalty by strengthening their identification with the corporate brand. Crespo and Inacio (2019) analyzed consumer responses to global brands in Portugal and similarly concluded that corporate ability associationsfoster brand loyalty by enhancing consumers’ identification with the corporate brand. In a study in the Pakistani banking context, Raza et al. (2020) further demonstrated that corporate ability associations, along with increased trust and brand identification, mediate the positive effect of CSR associations on consumer loyalty.

Another stream of research has established a link between positive corporate ability associations and increased consumer purchase intention. For example, Chen et al. (2018) found that strong corporate ability associations enhanced consumers’ purchase intention by improving company and product evaluations for a convenience food company in the USA. Similarly, Yu et al. (2021) demonstrated that corporate ability associations positively influenced purchase intention by fostering greater consumer trust in an organic food context in China. Chang and Lu (2019) further found that favorable corporate ability associations not only increased consumer satisfaction, commitment, and loyalty but also reduced ethically questionable consumer behavior in the Taiwanese retail sector.

Figure 1.6

Selected Studies on Effects of Consumer’s Corporate (Brand) Ability Associations. (Source: Own Creation)

Less research has explored the factors that shape consumers’ associations with corporate (brand) abilities (see Fig. 1.7). For example, Crespo and Inacio (2019), found that consumers’ CSR associations reinforce favorable associations with a (corporate) brand’s ability to produce and deliver offerings. Extending these findings, Teng (2020) showed that, in addition to favorable CSR associations, consumers’ perceptions of product quality reinforce consumers’ associations with the firm’s abilities. Johnson, Lee and Ashoori (2018) reached a similar conclusion, finding that consumers who prioritize product attributes over experiential factors when making purchase decisions rely on corporate ability over CSR associations. Kim, Park and Kim (2019) examined the effectiveness of corporate communication tailored to corporate ability or CSR. Their findings suggest that such communication effectively fosters the corresponding consumer associations; however, they influence consumer responses differently depending on the type of product. Specifically, corporate ability associations were found to have the strongest impact on consumer responses for consumable goods, as well as on supportive communication intentions for durable goods.

Figure 1.7

Selected Studies on Antecedents of Consumer’s Corporate (Brand) Ability Associations. (Source: Own Creation)

Not surprisingly, existing research on consumer associations with corporate (brand) ability has focused primarily on their antecedents and outcomes under stable conditions, without considering the impact of swan events such as a global pandemic. Only a limited number of studies have examined these associations in an international context, partially accounting for country-specific factors (see Fig. 1.8). Walsh and Bartikowski (2013) investigated the relationship between consumers’ corporate associations and customer loyalty. They found that corporate ability associations influence consumers’ word-of-mouth intentions, satisfaction, and loyalty more strongly in the USA than in Germany. While the authors vaguely attribute these differences to cultural factors, it remains problematic to draw such conclusions from a comparison of only two countries that differ in many aspects. Moon, Lee and Oh (2015) analyzed how national culture moderates the influence of CBAA on brand loyalty through consumer-corporate connections. Their study, which compared the USA and South Korea, found that corporate ability associations enhance brand loyalty via both personal and social self-concept connections, though the strength of these effects varies between the two countries. The authors attribute these differences to varying degrees of individualism and collectivism. Baghi and Gabrielli (2019) explored how corporate crises, related to corporate abilities or CSR, affect consumers’ purchase and word-of-mouth intentions. Their findings indicate that crises related to corporate abilities elicit weaker negative emotional responses than those related to CSR, resulting in a smaller decrease in purchasing and less negative word-of-mouth intentions. Furthermore, a comparison of Italian and Filipino consumers further suggests that these effects are more pronounced in less culturally individualistic cultures. Contini et al. (2019) examined the impact of corporate associations on corporate reputation in five countries. Their findings confirm that corporate ability associations are shaped by perceptions of CSR and directly influence corporate reputation in all observed countries. According to the authors, the strength of these relationships varies, due to country-specific tendencies in individualism or collectivism.

Other studies have found differences in corporate ability associations and their effects between countries, without explicitly discussing possible reasons for such variations. For example, Marquina and Morales (2012) analyzed how corporate brand associations influenced consumers’ intentions to engage in socially responsible consumption in Spain and Peru. While respondents in both countries were willing to pay a price premium for attributes related to a corporate brand’s ability, Peruvian respondents showed a greater willingness than their Spanish counterparts. Feldman and Vasquez‐Parraga (2013) examined the impact of corporate association attributes on consumers’ social responses in the USA and Peru. Their findings suggest that corporate ability attributes were more effective in eliciting social responses among Peruvian consumers, while CSR attributes had a stronger impact on social responses among U.S. consumers. Madden, Roth and Dillon (2012) explored how corporate ability and CSR associations contribute to a brand’s global impression through a halo effect. They found that corporate ability associations are more likely to create a favorable halo. Their study found that corporate ability associations are more likely to create a favorable halo. However, while respondents from China and the USA exhibited a stronger halo effect in their evaluations, evaluations from Argentina and Spain were more directly linked to specific attribute-based associations.

Figure 1.8

International Studies on Consumer’s Corporate (Brand) Ability Associations. (Source: Own Creation)

1.2.3.2 International Consumer Studies Regarding Brands

In order to understand how the pandemic affected consumers’ associations with and behavioral intentions toward brands and their corporate abilities, a comprehensive literature review was conducted. From an early stage in the COVID-19 pandemic, researchers have extensively studied consumer behavior mostly in single-country analyses. As a description of the extensive single-country research is beyond the scope of this doctoral thesis, the following literature review focuses on studies that analyze consumers and brands by comparing few or across multiple countries.

Scholars have observed negative consumer sentiment related to the COVID-19 pandemic in many contexts (see Fig. 1.9). Meena and Kumar (2022) evaluated consumer posts on the social media website Twitter (now: X) about online food delivery companies in India and the USA. Their findings indicate that consumers expressed negative sentiments regarding, for example, perceived consumer responsibility, the financial impact on consumers, or the perceived negative impact of these delivery services. In addition, the authors identified differences between Indian and US-American consumers in the most frequently discussed topics. Ozuem et al. (2021) examined millennial consumers’ reactions to fashion brands’ service failures during the pandemic in the UK, Ireland and France. Their study revealed that while consumers with high brand attachment were willing to navigate the crisis situation, those with low brand attachement were less inclined to seek a solution with the brand. Instead, these consumers were more attracted to monetary benefits, for example. In the only cross-national study, Dineva et al. (2023) found a high incidence of consumer-to-consumer conflict in secondary data from online brand communities. For example, brand attacks and dissatisfaction emerged as common sources of conflict, which brands attempted to mitigate through various moderation strategies.

Other researchers have als observed positive effects. Özsomer et al. (2022) showed that targeted advertising of brands with a high perceived pandemic fit encouraged socially responsible health behaviors among consumers through increased brand credibility. The authors further found that in Turkey, men were less likely to engage in such behaviors than women, whereas no such differences were observed in the USA. Park et al. (2022) found that consumers’ improved attitudes toward authentically advertised brands during the high threat of COVID-19 could be attributed to their attempts to reduce the uncertainty they experienced. This effect was more pronounced for consumers with higher childhood socioeconomic status, but remained stable across current socioeconomic status groups and between the UK and the USA. Similarly, Verlegh et al. (2021) showed that higher levels of worry and perceived loss due to the pandemic increased consumers’ tendency to connect with a brand, especially when the brand expressed support for pandemic-related fears. Ahmad et al. (2023) found a similar effect specifically for retail brands. Their study, which observed consumers in the USA and China, found that retailers’ charitable contributions increased consumers’ perceptions of intrinsically motivated CSR, which in turn strengthened their brand-self connection. Notably, this study was the only one to consider national culture in its analysis.

Figure 1.9

Studies on Consumer Behavior Regarding Brands Comparing and Across Countries. (Source: Own Creation)

1.2.3.3 International Consumer Studies Beyond Brands

Researchers have also studied consumer behavior beyond focusing on brands (see Fig. 1.10). Some scholars incorporated aspects that account for Scott’s (1995; 2014) organizational institutionalism in terms of regulative, normative, or cultural-cognitive institutions (see Sect. 1.3.2) into their analyses.

In their comparative study of the USA, Greece, and Italy, Davvetas, Ulqinaku and Abi (2022) examined how the perceived impact of the pandemic on a country affected consumer trust and compliance with regulatory advice. The authors found that when a country was more severely affected by the pandemic, consumers were more likely to blame and distrust their governments, which subsequently reduced their compliance with crisis mitigating regulatory advice. Increased trust in national institutions was associated with increased subjective well-being among consumers, even though severe pandemic impacts negatively affected their well-being. Dzandu (2023) examined the effectiveness of government mitigation mechanisms, specifically the successful implementation of a contact tracing app to monitor potential COVID-19 contagion. The study found that the implementation of the app increased public trust in government actions, leading to higher adoption rates of the app across the observed countries. Prentice et al. (2021) analyzed the influence of various external factors on consumers’ engagement in panic buying behavior. They found that government regulatory actions, such as prevention measures or support, and similar actions by firms, were associated with consumer (dis-)engagement in panic buying. However, the nature and direction of these effects varied when comparing Australia, India, China, Vietnam, and Indonesia.

Prentice et al. (2021) found that consumers’ social groups also affected their panic buying through the transmitted social norms and behaviors. These social pressures were particularly strong in India and Indonesia compared to the other countries studied. Danatzis and Möller-Herm (2023) investigated how frontline employee involvement affects consumer-to-consumer misbehavior, such as refusing to wear a face mask, in the service context. The authors found that such misbehavior occurs even under the supervision of frontline employees, is more contagious when it is perceived as less serious, and is most effectively mitigated by personalized interventions directed at the perpetrator. Interestingly, the contagion effect is not mediated by a change in the prevalent social norms toward the misbehavior. Sakib et al. (2023) examined how social trust affects consumers’ perceived trust in normative compliance with COVID-19 guidelines within the ride-sharing industry in Bangladesh and the USA. The authors found that social trust increased consumers’ trust in the platform’s, driver’s, and other riders’ compliance with COVID-19 guidelines. This, in turn, increased their intention to use the ride-sharing services in the USA but not in Bangladesh. In Bangladesh, however, fear of the disease amplified the positive effect of social trust on trust towards the ride-sharing services, which was not observed in the USA. Trust in God, arguably another aspect of a country’s normative framework, did not have a significant effect in either country.

Two studies included the role of national culture in their analyses. Cho, Guo and Torelli (2022) examined whether the national cultural dimension of collectivism (vs. individualism) influenced the spread of the virus by comparing Hong Kong and the USA. They found a lower spread of COVID-19 in the more highly collectivistic country Hong Kong compared to the more individualistic US. In addition, there was a higher expectation to engage in preventive behaviors and a greater likelihood to be vaccinated against the virus. Pantano et al. (2021) extended these findings by analyzing how the COVID-19 pandemic affected consumers’ new and enduring behavioral intentions. The authors analyzed posts on the social media website Twitter (now: X) in the UK, Italy, and Spain. The study revealed that consumers in the UK, a more individualistic country, were more concerned with restoring self-fulfilling activities, while consumers in Spain, a more collectivistic country, were more focused on restoring social activities was. Furthermore, consumers in the more uncertainty-avoidant Spain expressed a stronger desire to return to old habits, while those in the less uncertainty-avoidant UK indicated that they would maintain new behaviors adopted during the pandemic. However, as both studies only compared specific countries, it remains difficult to attribute these differences directly to cultural factors.

Figure 1.10

Studies on Further Consumer Behavior Comparing Countries. (Source: Own Creation)

Across countries, consumer studies during COVID-19 rarely included national institutions in terms of prevailing regulations, norms, or national culture in their frameworks (see Fig. 1.11). Liu, Shahab and Hoque (2022) analyzed the impact of a country’s regulative legal and governance systems on public consumer trust in the government across 178 countries. Their results indicated that public perceptions of government response measures increased consumer trust in the government, with variations observed across different legal systems. Orlandi, Febo and Perdichizzi (2022) examined the influence of religiosity on the acceptance of innovative technologies, specifically the COVID-19 vaccine, in 22 countries. They found that highly religious countries generally exhibited lower vaccination rates. However, when leaders of the major religious groups openly endorsed the COVID-19 vaccine, vaccination rates increased.

Two studies were able to analyze the role of Hofstede’s national cultural dimensions. Dheer, Egri and Treviño (2021) investigated differences in the spread of the virus across 107 countries. Their findings indicated that countries characterized by higher levels of individualism and uncertainty avoidance, but lower levels of power distance and masculinity, experienced faster virus spread. Cultural collectivism and power distance amplified the negative effect of government stringency on COVID-10 growth. The authors tested and confirm the stability of their results when applying different cultural value approaches, such as that of Schwartz (1994). Ahmadi et al. (2022) examined differences in consumer stockpiling behavior across 54 countries. They found that stockpiling was more pronounced in countries characterized by higher levels of individualism and uncertainty avoidance, lower levels of indulgence, and with a shorter-term orientation.

Figure 1.11

Studies on Further Consumer Behavior Across Countries. (Source: Own Creation)

1.2.4 Literature on Antecedents of Perceived Firm Innovativeness and Effects of Stakeholder Orientations

1.2.4.1 Antecedents of Perceived Firm Innovativeness

While the most dominant concept of perceived firm innovativeness was introduced over a decade ago by Kunz, Schmitt and Meyer (2011), scholars have only recently begun to analyze the antecedents of such perceptions. As a result, existing studies are somewhat scattered in their focus and context, with fragmented findings, and mostly limited to single countries (see Fig. 1.12).

Most studies are found in various service contexts. For example, in one of the earliest studies, Jin et al. (2015) examined the antecedents of perceived innovativeness in fine dining restaurants in the USA. They found that the perceived innovativeness of the food and environmental quality, as well as the price fairness of the restaurant positively influenced perceptions of the overall innovativeness of the restaurant. In contrast, Huaman-Ramirez, Albert and Merunka (2019) explored how global fast food brands could improve their corporate brand innovativeness through perceived brand globalness in France. The authors found a generally positive effect, which was however attenuated by consumers’ ethnocentristic tendencies. In a study based in the USA, Shin and Larson (2020) observed that restaurants that responded humorously to complaints in online reviews were perceived as more innovative and therefore cooler. However, the effect only held when the humorous response matched the tone of the complaint; otherwise, the effect was reversed. McLeay et al. (2021) investigated the use of service robots and found that they generally increased consumers’ perceptions of the service provider’s innovativeness. However, this increase was weaker for humanoid frontline service robots than for self-service machines.

Fewer studies address the antecedents of perceived firm innovativeness outside of the service context. For example, Jung et al. (2022) examined how updated product launches by automotive or technology brands in the USA affected consumers’ perceived innovativeness. While these updates increased perceived innovativeness, the authors also found that they decreased the purchase intentions of current owners. Wielgos, Homburg and Kuehnl (2021) demonstrated that successful digital business transformation not only improved customer relationship performance across industries, but also increased perceived innovativeness. In a Norwegian study, Kurtmollaiev, Lervik-Olsen and Andreassen (2022) discovered that introducing new value propositions to customers, changing the way customers can realize value, and redesigning customer relationships all increased their perceptions of firm innovativeness. Conversely, redesigning the physical or virtual spaces in which customers interact with the firm was found to diminish these perceptions.

Figure 1.12

National Studies on Antecedents of Perceived Firm or Corporate Brand Innovativeness. (Source: Own Creation)

International studies examining the antecedents of perceived firm or corporate brand innovativeness are scarce (see Fig. 1.13). Hubert et al. (2017) examined how the innovativeness of a firm’s flagship product influences its corporate brand innovativeness and consumer purchase intentions. The authors found that presenting an innovative product as a flagship product is essential for increasing the perceived corporate brand innovativeness. The effect depends on the product’s typicality and price of the product, while no differences in these effects were observed between Austria and Germany. Hagtvedt (2011) compared the effect of incomplete logos on consumers’ perceptions of firm attributes, including innovativeness, in Canada, the USA, and one Western European country. He found that while incomplete logos reduce a firm’s trustworthiness, they increase perceived innovativeness by making the firm appear more interesting. Like Hubert et al. (2017), also Hagtvedt (2011) did not identify any differences in effects between the countries studied. The only study that goes beyond country comparisons is Kim (2016), who analyzed the antecedents and effects of perceived firm innovativeness in nine countries in three regions. The author included two product characteristics, changes in consumer consumption patterns, and word-of-mouth as drivers of perceived firm innovativeness. While the effects varied in strength and significance across the regions, possible explanations for the differences were not discussed.

Figure 1.13

International Studies on Antecedents of Perceived Firm/Corporate Brand Innovativeness. (Source: Own Creation)

1.2.4.2 Effects of Perceived Stakeholder Orientations

The concept of (perceived) stakeholder orientation is grounded in Freeman’s (1984; 2010) stakeholder theory framework. Stakeholder theory was developed to account for the phenomenon that firms operate in complex environments composed of shareholders (i.e., financiers who are financially invested in the well-being of a company), and further stakeholders (i.e., customers, employees, society at large, or suppliers, who are affected by a company’s actions but are not financially invested in the company’s well-being). While the concept is established and has been broadly analyzed in management studies, the perceived stakeholder orientation of firms from a consumer perspective has been largely absent from research.

This doctoral thesis analyzes how a firm’s perceived orientation toward three key stakeholder groups affects the firm’s perceived innovativeness: the firm’s customers, employees, and society at large. These are defined as the most relevant stakeholder groups from a consumer perspective, as firms are more likely to publicly communicate their actions in this regard and can therefore be adequately assessed by consumers. A company’s orientation toward financiers or suppliers, on the other hand, may only be visible to a more specific group of people. While this approach is novel to research on perceived firm innovativeness, there is a limited number of studies that have examined the effects of firms’ perceived customer or society orientations, or related constructs, on innovativeness separately.

Three studies analyzed how specific customer orientation activities influence a firm’s perceived innovativeness (see Fig. 1.14). Schreier, Fuchs and Dahl (2012) argued that perceived customer empowerment, that is, involving customers in the value creation process by allowing them to select and/or create offerings, is the most direct form of customer orientation. They found that this activity increases perceived firm innovativeness because of the sheer number of ideas generated, the diversity of perspectives within customer communities, the alignment with consumer needs, and the creative freedom that consumers enjoy compared to firm employees. Meißner Meißner, Haurand and Stummer (2017) extended these findings by demonstrating that such customer orientation activities also increase the perceived firm innovativeness among consumer who were not directly involved in the value creation process. In a study conducted in Germany and UK, Vaquero Martín (2021) highlighted the value of perceived consumer participation in new product development as a customer orientation activity. However, and in contrast to the studies mentioned above, the author did not find a significant effect of this activity on consumers’ perceptions of firm innovativeness.

Figure 1.14

Studies on Effects of Perceived Customer Orientation on Firm Innovativeness. (Source: Own Creation)

Management research has established a promising link between firm’s organizational culture or employer branding, for example, and firm’s innovation capabilities (e.g., Biswas and Suar 2016; Suifan 2021). However, the literature on consumer perceptions of firms’ orientation toward their employees is very limited. To date, no consumer study has investigated a firm’s perceived employee orientation in the context of innovativeness. Therefore, the following literature review examines studies on constructs related to a firm’s perceived employee orientation in other contexts (see Fig. 1.15). These studies, along with compelling insights from management research, provide valuable perspectives on why such perceptions may influence other consumer perceptions, such as a firm’s perceived innovativeness.

In their study conducted in the Polish telecommunications industry, Rybaczewska, Sparks and Sułkowski (2020) showed that the image of a company as an employer, although not always explicitly recognized as relevant, plays a significant implicit role in consumers’ decision-making. This perceived company image was found to be similarly important or even more meaningful than other marketing activities. As Maxwell-Smith, White and Loyd (2020) found, the way a firm treats its employees matters to consumers, even if they do not know those employees. Specifically, when consumers perceived even unfamiliar employees were treated unfavorably, they developed more negative brand attitudes. In support of this, Wolter et al. (2019) showed that employee satisfaction, as an apparent result of how companies treat their employees, affects consumers even without direct contact between employees and customers.

A limited number of studies have examined firm’s perceived employee orientation as consumers’ perceptions of firms as good employers in an international context. Gidaković and Zabkar (2022) found that perceiving a firm as a good employer leads to positive warmth impressions among consumers, but does not significantly affect their perceptions of the firm’s competence. Their study, conducted across industries in the UK and the USA, did not examine potential differences between the two countries. Swoboda and Batton (2020) examined the role of consumer perceptions of a firm as a good employer as a dimension of corporate reputation and its impact on consumer loyalty in 44 countries. Although they accounted for the degree of country development and national culture, the authors did not find that the effect depended on the country context. In contrast, Ruiz, García and Revilla (2016) compared the impact of firms’ employer branding from a consumer perspective on corporate reputation in the UK and Spain. In contrast to the aforementioned studies, they found that a firm’s image as a good employer drove its perceived reputation more strongly among consumers in the UK than in Spain. However, the authors did not explore possible reasons for these different effects.

Figure 1.15

Studies on Effects of Perceived Employee Orientation and Related Constructs. (Source: Own Creation)

Consumer’s perceptions of a firm’s society orientation have been studied extensively over the past decade, often under the umbrella of CSR. Building on Brown and Dacin (1997)’s categorization of consumers’ corporate associations into corporate ability and CSR associations, much research has focused on contrasting the effects of consumers’ associations with firm’s CSR versus its abilities (see also Sect. 1.2.3.1). However, very few studies have examined how a firm’s society orientation may affect its abilities, including, by definition, its innovativeness (see Fig. 1.16).

In a study conducted in Portugal, Crespo and Inacio (2019) investigated how consumers’ corporate associations affect consumer loyalty. They found that associations with social responsibility actually increased consumer’s perceptions of a firm’s innovation abilities. Teng (2020) corroborated these findings by showing that consumers’ perceptions of firm abilities positively mediated the effect of CSR on purchase intention in Taiwan. In an international context, Contini et al. (2019) compared the influence of social responsibility and ability associations on corporate reputation in four countries. Similarly, they found that consumers’ associations with a firm’s society orientation directly increased their perceptions of the firm’s innovative abilities. Interestingly, this effect on corporate reputation was partially mediated in Brazil, China, and South Africa, but fully mediated in Russia and India, suggesting cross-national differences in the effect on innovativeness perceptions. Bartikowski and Berens (2021) examined the impact of positively framed CSR communication on firm attitudes and purchase intentions through ability associations in France and the USA. However, the authors could not find any evidence that consumers’ firm ability associations, including perceptions of innovativeness, were influenced by CSR communication.

Only two studies could be identified that have analyzed firm’s society orientation and innovativeness according to Kunz, Schmitt and Meyer (2011), both in the Norwegian context. Set in the service industry context, van Riel et al. (2021) found that in the restaurant industry, a firm’s perceived social and environmental sustainability, along with consumers’ responsible consumption, increased perceptions of innovativeness. Similarly, Jørgensen, Pedersen and Skard (2022) observed that sustainability improvements in the food retailing, electronics, and telecommunications industries increased perceptions of the firms’ innovativeness. The more comprehensive these sustainability improvements were, the more innovative a firm was perceived to be.

Figure 1.16

Selected Studies on Effects of Perceived Society Orientation and Related Constructs. (Source: Own Creation)

1.2.5 General Research Objectives

The literature reviews discussed above reveal ongoing debates in international marketing and management research. The topics of firms’ perceived innovativeness, abilities, and strategic orientations have not received sufficient attention to date. This gap persists both generally and especially during challenging times, such as global black swan events like the COVID-19 pandemic. Essential questions remain unanswered.

The first research gap addressed in this doctoral thesis concerns the benefits MNCs can derive from consumer-perceived customer orientation and firm innovativeness. While a potential link between these two constructs has been explored in management studies and seems relevant from real-world observations, it has been largely overlooked in consumer research. This is a notable gap as consumers’ perceptions have long been recognized as essential to firm success, even more so than managers’ perceptions (e.g., Habel et al. 2020; Kurtmollaiev, Lervik-Olsen and Andreassen 2022; Rust, Lemon and Zeithaml 2004). One study has examined the indirect influence of specific customer orientation activities via perceived firm innovativeness on consumers’ purchase intentions, but only in one country and with inconclusive results regarding overall customer orientation (Meißner, Haurand and Stummer 2017). Moreover, studies analyzing perceived customer orientation and firm innovativeness independently have primarily been conducted in single-country contexts with partially inconclusive results in more versus less developed countries. For instance, while Ha and John (2010) found a direct positive link of perceived customer orientation on loyalty in a developed country, Ndubisi (2012) questioned the direct effect in an emerging country context. Similarly, Chang, Ko and Leite (2016) and Wong and Haque (2022) reached different conclusions regarding the role of perceived innovativeness on consumer intentions. Among the few internationally conducted studies, contradictory findings also exist concerning the role of national cultural dimensions. While Eisingerich and Rubera (2010) found that national culture affects the relationships with customer intentions, Swoboda and Batton (2020) and Vaquero Martín (2021) could not support the role of national culture for either construct, respectively. However, scholars call for the analysis of perceived customer orientation and firm innovativeness across nations to obtain more generalizable insights (e.g., Eisingerich and Rubera 2010; Kurtmollaiev, Lervik-Olsen and Andreassen 2022). Especially the analysis across differently developed markets and on the impact of national culture across nations are highly encouraged (e.g., Falkenreck and Wagner 2011; Rubera and Kirca 2017). Therefore, Study 1 aims to respond to these calls by analyzing the direct and indirect paths of perceived customer orientation via perceived firm innovativeness on consumers’ intention to purchase a product from an MNC. Additionally, the study takes into account the moderating roles of the degree of country development and national cultural dimensions.

The second research gap identified in this thesis addresses the potential benefits MNCs can reap from strong corporate ability associations in disruptive times, such as global black swan events. Although corporate (brand) ability associations have previously been explored in consumer research, their examination in an international context remains limited. International studies suggest that consumers’ corporate (brand) ability associations may be influenced by a country’s national institutional environment (e.g., Baghi and Gabrielli 2019). However, existing research has primarily focused consumer associations during relatively stable times, without the impact of strong external factors. This is an interesting gap, as consumer associations formed during crises like black swan events may be more advantageous and enduring for companies than those established in quiet times (He and Harris 2020). Consumer behavior was extensively studied during the COVID-19 pandemic, particularly in national contexts. While some studies examined the pandemic’s impact on consumer behavior and intentions towards brands, the findings were diverse. For example, Meena and Kumar (2022) identified negative consumer sentiments in the online food delivery context. Verlegh et al. (2021), on the other hand, demonstrated how brands could gain in relevance and increase consumers’ brand-self connection. This raises the question of how the pandemic may have influenced consumers’ brand associations both positively and negatively. Internationally, only Ahmad et al. (2023) explored the role of culture as a national institution in their country-comparison study. Other research has investigated the impact of national institutions on consumer behavior beyond a sole brand focus. For example, Dheer, Egri and Treviño (2021) linked national culture to consumer behavior leading to the spread of the COVID-19 virus; Orlandi, Febo and Perdichizzi (2022) examined how country-level religiosity, a source of prevailing norms in a country, affected consumer acceptance of the COVID-19 vaccine as an innovative product; and Liu, Shahab and Hoque (2022) investigated the role of legal and governance systems in fostering consumer trust. However, it remains unclear how national institutions have influenced consumer associations with MNCs’ corporate brand abilities during the pandemic. Therefore, Study 2 aims to address these gaps by analyzing how national regulative, normative, and cultural-cognitive institutions affect consumers’ CBAA across countries, both generally and during the pandemic. Additionally, it aims to clarify how the COVID-19 pandemic altered this influence of national institutions on consumers’ CBAA for a pandemic-relevant manufacturer and its competitors.

The third research gap targeted in this dissertation concerns the antecedents of consumer perceptions of firm innovativeness. While the benefits of firms being perceived as innovative are receiving increasing attention, the factors that drive such perceptions remain under-researched. A limited number of studies have examined these antecedents, but often peripherally and without a clear focus (e.g., perceived product innovativeness, Hubert et al. 2017, or humorous responses to consumer complaints, Shin and Larson 2020). As a result, previous findings in this area are fragmented and lack structure. Some research has examined the impact of firms’ orientations towards individual stakeholders on perceptions of innovativeness. For example, Meißner, Haurand and Stummer (2017) investigated how perceived customer orientation activities influence a firm’s perceived innovation ability, while van Riel et al. (2021) analyzed the effects of firms’ social and environmental sustainability on their perceived innovativeness. The effect of perceived customer orientation remains controversial, as previous studies have produced conflicting findings. For example, Meißner, Haurand and Stummer (2017) identified a direct effect of perceived customer orientation activities, whereas Vaquero Martín (2021) found no such effect. Although management research strongly suggests an effect of other stakeholder orientations on innovativeness perceptions, there has been no analysis of firms’ orientation towards other key stakeholder groups, such as employees, in the context of perceived innovativeness. Moreover, existing studies have typically been conducted either in single, highly developed countries (e.g., in the USA or Norway) or through comparison of highly developed countries (e.g., Germany vs. Great Britain). Study 1 presents the first initial cross-national study focusing solely on the effect of perceived customer orientation on innovativeness, highlighting the importance of cross-national analysis. Also research on firms’ society orientation suggests that effects may vary between or across countries (e.g., Marquina and Morales 2012, on consumers’ firm ability perceptions, or Zimmer and Swoboda 2023, on behavioral intentions). However, it remains unclear how a firm’s orientation towards its stakeholders affects perceived firm innovativeness across nations. Scholars have called for a stakeholder-oriented approach to analyzing the nature of perceived firm innovativeness, as well as for studies across nations (e.g., Jørgensen, Pedersen and Skard 2022; Kurtmollaiev, Lervik-Olsen and Andreassen 2022; van Riel et al. 2021). In response to these calls, Study 3 investigates how firms’ perceived orientations towards these stakeholder groups affects their perceived innovativeness, including role of country development as a promising explanation for country differences.

In order to advance scholarly knowledge on these important issues, the three studies of this thesis were designed to address the following key research objectives:

Analyzing the direct and indirect impact of perceived customer orientation via perceived innovativeness of MNCs on consumers’ product purchase intention across nations, and the moderating role of selected country-specific context factors.

Investigating the influence of cross-national institutional differences on consumers’ CBAA of relevant MNCs compared to major competitors before and during a black swan, i.e., the global COVID-19 health crisis.

Examining the anteceding effects of MNCs’ perceived orientations towards selected stakeholder groups, i.e., their customers, employees, and the society, for consumers’ perceived firm innovativeness and the moderation of chosen country context.

Each of these research objectives is addressed in depth in a separate study in this doctoral thesis. Each study, presented in Chaps. 2 through 4, aims to examine specific research questions related to the above research objectives. Finally, Chap. 5 provides a summary of each study’s findings, a general discussion, as well as theoretical and empirical implications. The next section elaborates on the structure and contribution of each study.

1.3 Structure and Contribution of the Studies

1.3.1 Cross-National Effects of Perceived Customer Orientation and Firm Innovativeness

MNCs have realized that they can benefit from being perceived as orienting their activities on consumers’ specific needs or as creating impactful and creative market trends (e.g., Kunz, Schmitt and Meyer 2011; Vaquero Martín 2021). Many MNCs that are perceived as the most customer-centric can also be found in rankings labeling them as the most innovative companies in the world (e.g., Boston Consulting Group 2023; Morgan 2022). They have understood that consumers’ perceptions on these issues can lead to desired reactions and refer to various consumer insights when implementing their approaches (e.g., Adidas 2022; Inditex 2022). However, such insights are usually generated in few selected countries. Whether those perceptions of being customer-oriented and innovative are equally beneficial across different countries or dependent on the country context remains unknown. Consequently, this study observes the direct and indirect effects of perceived customer orientation via firm innovativeness on consumers’ product purchase intention (i.e., the likelihood that consumers will buy products of an MNC in the future, van der Lans, van Everdingen and Melnyk 2016) across nations. Furthermore, the conditioning effects of two important country factors, the degree of country development and national cultural dimensions, are analyzed.

The motivation for Study 1 arises from a lack of knowledge regarding the joint effects of perceived customer orientation and firm innovativeness across nations. Research has largely focused on analyzing either perceived customer orientation or perceived firm innovativeness. Only one study exists that observed the effect of both constructs, however, in a single-country setting (Meißner, Haurand and Stummer 2017). Managers can benefit from understanding the joint effects of perceived customer orientation and innovativeness of their MNCs for consumers’ behavioral intentions. However, existing studies on either construct suggest that the respective perceptions influence consumers differently in emerging than in developed countries (e.g., Habel et al. 2020 vs. Valenzuela, Mulki and Jaramillo 2010; Jin et al. 2015 vs. Yen, Teng and Tzeng 2020), or in countries that differ based on their national culture (e.g., Eisingerich and Rubera 2010). Consequently, it may be beneficial for managers to keep country-specific factors in mind when implementing their approaches towards their customer or innovation orientation.

Study 1 therefore analyzes the following two research questions:

How does perceived customer orientation affect product purchase intention directly and indirectly through perceived firm innovativeness across nations?

Whether and how do the degree of country development and national cultural dimensions moderate these effects?

To answer these research questions, the conceptual framework of Study 1 draws on information processing theory and the institutional economics perspective of institutional theory (Bettman 1970; North 1990). The perceived customer orientation and firm innovativeness of an MNC directly and indirectly affect consumers’ product purchase intention. National institutions, i.e., the degree of country development and national cultural dimensions, are expected to strengthen or weaken the direct effects of both constructs on product purchase intention. Information processing theory assumes that information cues are processed cognitively in decision-making situations (Bettman 1970, Newell, Shaw and Simon 1958). Cognitive processing depends on the access or encoding of information cues, their further processing in memory, and a relevance evaluation in a decision-making situation (Holbrook and Hirschman 1982). In the context of Study 1, customer orientation and firm innovativeness perceptions represent information cues that can have a direct effect on consumers’ product purchase intention if the respective information cues are accessed (perceived) and evaluated as relevant in decision-making. Perceived customer orientation can also indirectly affect the intention to buy a product if the cognitive processing in consumers’ minds activates the retrieval of more product-relevant perceptions of the firm’s innovativeness. Information processing theory further suggests that the information processing sequences vary based on consumers’ socialization, i.e., the existing national institutions in place. According to institutional theory, institutions constitute the rules that guide the actions of individuals in a society (North 1990). Institutional economics proposes a distinction between formal and informal institutions. Formal institutions, such as the degree of country development, are the explicitly defined rules, while informal institutions, such as the national culture, comprise the abstract values in a society (North 1990, p. 4). Country-specific formal and informal institutions may affect the access, processing, and relevance evaluations of information cues by consumers and thereby strengthen or weaken the effects of perceived customer orientation or firm innovativeness for their product purchase intention.

Empirically, the study is based on a hierarchically structured data sample of 43,597 consumer evaluations in 53 countries from an MNC operating in the health, skin, and beauty care industry, among others. The MNC manages its approach towards its customer and innovation orientation centrally. To ensure sample comparability, several screening criteria were used and respondents’ familiarity with the MNC was confirmed. Multilevel structural equation modeling (MSEM) with cross-level interactions is used to analyze the direct and indirect effects of perceived customer orientation on product purchase intention via perceived firm innovativeness across nations, as well as the moderating roles of the degree of country development and national cultural dimensions (e.g., Hox, Moerbeek and van de Schoot 2018). A sample of relevant competitor evaluations is analyzed for stability reasons.

The results of Study 1 contribute to the application of information processing theory and reveal positive direct effects of perceived customer orientation and perceived firm innovativeness on consumers’ product purchase intention, as well as a positive indirect effect of perceived customer orientation via perceived firm innovativeness. Across nations, MNCs can benefit from being perceived as customer-oriented, and even more from being perceived as innovative. Furthermore, the results show that the degree of country development and national cultural dimensions moderate the effects of perceived customer orientation differently, while the effects of perceived firm innovativeness is not affected. Whereas an increasing degree of country development reinforces the positive influence of perceived customer orientation, higher levels of cultural embeddedness and hierarchy weaken these effects. Calculations on a competitor sample largely support the results. Study 1 thereby provides novel theoretical implications and a country portfolio that offers managers tangible recommendations for action.

1.3.2 Effects of National Institutions on Corporate Ability Associations

When the global COVID-19 pandemic shook the world in 2020, some companies’ value propositions were hit harder than others (e.g., Donthu and Gustafsson 2020). Many companies realigned themselves to contribute to the fight against the pandemic (e.g., Das et al. 2021a). As a result, despite all the setbacks caused by the difficult times, some companies and brands were able to demonstrate their corporate abilities to produce and deliver relevant products. Also consumers found themselves in an unprecedented environment that disrupted their lives and led to great uncertainty (e.g., Campbell et al. 2020), with the national institutional framework in place unable to provide stability in daily life. However, in how far the effect of existing national institutions on consumers’ associations with brands and their abilities changed remains unknown. Therefore, this study analyzes whether and how a country’s regulative, normative, and cultural-cognitive institutions generally affect consumers’ CBAA, and in how far this effect was changed during the COVID-19 pandemic.

The motivation for Study 2 originates from the lack of knowledge about the impact of national institutions for corporate ability associations, as well as respective effects over time in the context of the COVID-19 pandemic as a black swan. Studies on consumer behavior during the pandemic showed how brands benefitted or lost during COVID-19 (e.g., Meena and Kumar 2022; Ozuem et al. 2021). International studies that looked at brands mostly examined effects in a country comparison and without rationales for the differences found (e.g., Ahmad et al. 2023; Meena and Kumar 2022). Only one study investigated consumer behavior related to brands across nations using secondary data (Dineva et al. 2023). Studies that did not focus on brands observed the role of national institutions (e.g., government policies for trust, Davvetas, Ulqinaku and Abi 2022; norms for compliance, Danatzis and Möller-Herm 2023; or national culture for pandemic spread, Cho, Guo and Torelli 2022). However, the impact of the national institutional context for an MNCs corporate brand associations in general, and especially on the associations of an MNC that is directly relevant in such a black swan event, are crucial for managers to understand the impact on their firm.

Study 2 thus aims to analyze two research questions:

Do national institutions affect consumers’ CBAA across countries, and if so, how?

How has the COVID-19 pandemic changed this influence of national institutions on consumers’ CBAA for a pandemic-relevant manufacturer and its competitors?

To answer these research questions, Study 2 resorts to signaling theory, complemented by the organizational institutionalism approach of institutional theory (Spence 1973; Scott 2014). A country’s regulative, normative, and cultural-cognitive institutions directly influence consumers’ associations with a corporate brand’s ability. Signaling theory states that signals are used to convey credible information in order to reduce information asymmetries between transaction parties (Spence 1973). The strength of an information signal depends on the extent to which it is perceived, weighed as important, and matches the receiver’s expectations (Connelly et al. 2011). Corporate ability is an important signal that firms use, and a decisive information cue for consumers (e.g., Brown and Dacin 1997). The strength of a signal is further conditional to the signaling environment (e.g., Erdem, Swait and Valenzuela 2006). Study 2 refers to institutional theory to account for said signaling environment, which is not specified in signaling theory itself. Institutions, as the symbolic framework that guides behavior and provides structure in a society, may influence consumers’ formation of specific associations (Orr and Scott 2008). Organizational institutionalism distinguishes between regulative (i.e., rules, laws that monitor conformity and sanction violations), normative (i.e., conventions, codes of conduct), and cultural-cognitive institutions (i.e., shared beliefs and values in a national culture; Scott 2014, pp. 59–67). These institutions provide a country-specific context that may affect the perception, importance evaluation, and alignment with expectations of information cues, thus supporting or inhibiting the formation of specific CBAA.

The empirical analysis in Study 2 is based on a sample of 10,527 consumer evaluations in 2019 and 11,834 evaluations in 2021, i.e., before and during the COVID-19 pandemic. The hierarchically structured data resulted from the cooperation with an MNC globally operating in the health industry. The MNC conducts annual cross-national surveys regarding its own assessment and that of its main competitors, including the COVID-19 vaccine manufacturer Pfizer. Thus, 20 countries were selected in which data on Pfizer was available in 2019 and 2021. To ensure sample comparability, various screening criteria were applied and consumers had to indicate their general familiarity with the MNC. Study 2 applies MSEM with cross-level interactions to analyze the direct effects of regulative, normative, and cultural-cognitive institutions on consumers’ CBAA, as well as a multigroup comparison approach to identify differences between the two time points (Hox, Moerbeek and van de Schoot 2018; Keil et al. 2000).

The results of Study 2 underline the applicability of signaling and institutional theory and show negative general effects of regulative and normative institutions on consumers’ CBAA, while embeddedness as a cultural-cognitive institution evokes a positive general effect. Hence, in (relatively) calm times, strongly defined regulative and normative institutions make it more difficult for MNCs to create beneficial ability associations among consumers. Cultural-cognitive institutions also have a strong impact on these ability associations as well, while embeddedness as a specific cultural dimension encourages their formation. Furthermore, the results show that the effects of the national institutions was significantly weaker during than before the pandemic for Pfizer as a directly pandemic-relevant manufacturer, but also for Pfizer’s competitors in the same strategic group. Given these observations, Study 2 provides interesting substantial new theoretical implications and offers concrete suggestions for management practice.

1.3.3 Cross-National Antecedents of Perceived Firm Innovativeness

MNCs are increasingly adopting a collaborative, humanistic management approach that emphasizes recognizing and integrating the interests of their stakeholders (e.g., Papovsky 2023). These companies have come to understand the value of focusing on more than just shareholders and actively communicate their stakeholder-oriented strategies to consumers (e.g., Samsung 2023a; Unilever 2023a). They have also acknowledged the potential of this approach to drive innovation within their firm (e.g., Gregoire 2021). However, the extent to which consumers’ perceptions of these stakeholder orientations influence their perceived innovativeness, recognized as a key source of competitive advantage, remains unclear, particularly internationally (Kunz, Schmitt and Meyer 2011). Therefore, this study refers to the conceptual framework of stakeholder theory to investigate whether and how firms’ orientations towards their customers, employees, and society at large affect consumers’ perceptions of firm innovativeness across nations (Freeman et al. 2010). Additionally, the study explores the role of country development as an important host country context for consumer perceptions and innovation (e.g., Gürhan-Canli, Hayran and Sarial-Abi 2016).

The motivation for Study 3 arises from the insufficient understanding of the factors influencing consumers’ perceptions of firms’ innovativeness across countries. While the potential benefits of these perceptions have been demonstrated, research on their antecedents is limited, fragmented, and predominantly focused on highly developed countries. Although fragmented research exists on the effects of individual customer or societal orientations, these studies are generally limited to single-country contexts. Managers can benefit from understanding the simultaneous effects of perceived customer, employee, and society orientations on perceived innovativeness across countries. Perceived customer and society orientations have previously been examined individually in innovativeness studies within single-country contexts. Building on compelling findings from management research on innovation and consumer perception studies in other domains, the study introduces perceived employee orientation into the consumer context of firm innovativeness for the first time (e.g., Maxwell-Smith, White and Loyd 2020; Suifan 2021). Moreover, existing studies show conflicting findings regarding the effects of individual stakeholder orientations in general or in different countries (e.g., Meißner, Haurand and Stummer 2017 vs. Vaquero Martín 2021; Marquina and Morales 2012). Therefore, managers should consider country-specific contextual factors when implementing their stakeholder orientation strategies.

Study 3 therefore analyzes the following two research questions:

How do the perceived customer, employee, and society orientations of MNCs cross-nationally impact consumers’ perceptions of firm innovativeness?

Does a country’s degree of development moderate this impact, and if so, how?

To address these research questions, Study 3 uses information integration theory as its cognitive-theoretical foundation (Anderson 1971). The theory describes how individuals develop attitudes and perceptions based on new information cues. Information integration theory proposes a series of interlocking concepts, such as the observability of information cues, their general interpretation, and possible further integration into broader impressions of a firm (e.g., Carlson and White 2008; Fink et al. 2020). In the context of study 3, consumers’ perceptions of an MNC’s customer, employee, and society orientations represent information cues that are cognitively evaluated simultaneously to form an overall impression of the MNC’s innovativeness. Each information cue is characterized by its general importance (i.e., weight) and relevance to a specific firm perception (i.e., valence), while these characteristics affect its interpretation and integration into a broader firm impression. Previous insights suggest that these characteristics may be subject to various moderating factors, such as the consumer’s environmental context (e.g., Carlson and White 2008; Roy et al. 2019). Study 3 examines a country’s degree of development as important contextual factor studied that may influence the weight of valence of information cues (e.g., Gürhan-Canli, Hayran and Sarial-Abi 2016).

Empirically, Study 3 utilizes a hierarchically structured dataset consisting of 18,067 consumer evaluations in 22 countries of an MNC active in the healthcare and beauty industry. The MNC employs a centrally controlled, standardized strategy towards its stakeholder and innovation orientations. Prior to data collection, respondents’ familiarity with the MNC was confirmed, and the sample quality was ensured through several methodological measures. MSEM is applied to analyze the paths of perceived customer, employee, and society orientations on consumer-perceived firm innovativeness (e.g., Hox, Moerbeek and van de Schoot 2018). Additionally, the moderating influence of a country’s degree of development on these relationships is examined using cross-level interactions. A sample of relevant competitor evaluations is analyzed for stability reasons.

The findings of Study 3 support the application of information integration theory by demonstrating the positive effects of perceived customer, employee, and society orientations on consumers’ perceptions of firm innovativeness, albeit to varying degrees. Across nations, MNCs derive the greatest benefit from being perceived as customer-oriented by consumers. Perceived employee and society orientations contribute equally to perceived innovativeness, with their combined effects being as strong as that of perceived customer orientation. Furthermore, the degree of country development offers additional insights into strategic trade-off. In more developed countries, the influence of perceived customer and employee orientations on innovativeness is more pronounced, whereas in less developed countries, perceived societal orientation has a stronger impact. Similar patterns are observed in a competitor sample. Study 3 offers important theoretical implications and actionable recommendations for managers, which are visualized in a country portfolio based on the results.

1.4 Further Remarks

The remainder of this dissertation is structured as follows. To answer the presented research questions, the thesis presents three separate empirical studies that focus on consumers’ perceptions of MNCs’ abilities and strategic orientations and resulting behavioral intentions. The studies introducted in Chaps. 2, 3, and 4 share the following structure:

Introduction

Theory and Hypotheses, including conceptualizations, the applied theory/theories, and hypothesis developments

Empirical Study, including the sample design, measurements, method(s), results, and stability checks

Discussion, including implications and contributions to theory and practice

Limitations and Further Research

Chapter 5 summarizes the results of the studies to address the overarching research objectives. An outlook on future research directions concludes the thesis.

© The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Fachmedien Wiesbaden GmbH, part of Springer Nature 2025

N. JacobsStrategic Orientations and Innovativeness of Multinational CorporationsHandel und Internationales Marketing Retailing and International Marketinghttps://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-658-49019-5_2

2. Study 1: The Role of National Institutions in the Effects of Consumers’ Perceived Customer Orientation and Firm Innovativeness

Nele Jacobs1  

(1)

Fachbereich IV, Universität Trier, Trier, Germany

Nele Jacobs

Email: nf.jacobs@outlook.com

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at https://​doi.​org/​10.​1007/​978-3-658-49019-5_​2.

This study was published as: Jacobs, N & Swoboda, B. (2023). The role of national institutions in the effects of consumers’ perceived customer orientation and firm innovativeness, International Business Review, 32(5), 102172 (see also Sect. G.2 in the electronic supplementary material).

2.1 Introduction

Perceived customer orientation (i.e., perception of a firm’s focus on customers and on satisfying their needs, Dean 2007; Vaquero Martín 2021; Walsh, Beatty and Shiu 2009) and perceived firm innovativeness (i.e., perception of firm activities that result in novel, creative, and impactful offers for markets, Kunz, Schmitt and Meyer 2011; Kassemeier, Haumann and Güntürkün 2022; Kim et al. 2015) are important sources of competitive advantage. Consumers consider both in purchase situations; both affect firm performance (Eisingerich and Rubera 2010; Jean, Sinkovics and Kim 2017), and firm’s customer orientation is known to reinforce firm innovativeness (Jean, Sinkovics and Kim 2017; Kibbeling, van der Bij and van Weele 2013). MNCs, such as Zara, acknowledge the effects of perceived customer orientation and innovativeness by referring to consumer insights (Inditex 2022). However, respective perceptions of an MNC may be valuable for consumer decisions in one country but not in another. Adidas examines differences in consumer perceptions in selected countries to identify consumer-driven opportunities and innovative approaches (Adidas 2022, p. 83, 88). However, MNCs can go further, including country differences to exhaust such insights across nations. This study analyzes whether and how national institutions impact the effects of perceived customer orientation and innovativeness on product purchase intentions across 53 countries (the likelihood that consumers will buy products of an MNC in the future, van der Lans, van Everdingen and Melnyk 2016). We contribute to research by examining country development and dimensions of national culture as important moderators in the research field.

Prior consumer studies have mostly analyzed the effects of either perceived customer orientation or perceived innovativeness on consumer responses such as purchase intentions (see Fig. 2.1).¹ National studies indicate contradictions in developed and emerging countries (e.g., indirect vs. direct effects of perceived customer orientation in Germany vs. Chile, Habel et al. 2020; Valenzuela, Mulki and Jaramillo 2010, or of perceived firm innovativeness in the USA vs. China, Jin et al. 2015; Yen, Teng and Tzeng 2020). Few international studies show country differences when also observing emerging countries rather than only developed ones (Falkenreck and Wagner 2011; Hubert et al. 2017; Kassemeier, Haumann and Güntürkün 2022; Kim 2016). A research gap exists regarding the joint effect of perceived customer orientation and firm innovativeness. Only Meißner, Haurand and Stummer (2017) conceptualize effects of perceived customer orientation in terms of specific customer empowerment activities regarding firm innovativeness and purchase intentions. However, they study different extents of joint value creation between customers and firms and find direct effects for only one of four activities, for one of two firms, and only in the USA. In contrast, Eisingerich and Rubera (2010) show stronger effects of perceived firm customer orientation in China and of perceived firm innovativeness in the UK without linking both constructs. They assume, but cannot test, cultural differences as possible reason for the differences found, while further studies do not support this assumption (Vaquero Martín 2021 found no difference between Germany and UK; Swoboda and Batton 2020 no role of cultural dimensions for customer orientation across 44 nations).

In summary, we see research gaps and a considerable number of contradictory insights in the literature, which we address by analyzing two research questions: How does perceived customer orientation affect product purchase intention, both directly and indirectly, through perceived firm innovativeness across nations? Whether and how do the degree of country development and national cultural dimensions moderate these effects? The study thereby offers two important research contributions.

Figure 2.1

Literature Review (Consumer Studies). (Source: Own Creation)

First, analyzing cross-national effects of perceived customer orientation through perceived firm innovativeness contributes to our knowledge. We respond to calls for cross-national analysis (Eisingerich and Rubera 2010; Meißner, Haurand and Stummer 2017). Our arguments align with national studies and meta-analyses that show firms’ perceived customer orientation encourages firm innovativeness by adequately catering to consumers’ needs (Kirca, Jayachandran and Bearden 2005; Meißner, Haurand and Stummer 2017). This connection is novel in cross-national research. Only one study shows mixed results for a similar conceptualization (empowerment) but is limited to the USA. Understanding the cross-national influence of perceived customer orientation on product purchase intention and the role of perceived firm innovativeness therein, as suggested in management studies (e.g., Jean, Sinkovics and Kim 2017, Kirca, Jayachandran and Bearden 2005), is crucial for assessing its applicability from a consumer perspective. This is particularly interesting for MNCs serving consumers globally (e.g., Eisingerich and Rubera 2010; Meißner, Haurand and Stummer 2017). We also contribute to research by applying the more general information processing theory. This theory provides a novel and advantageous cognitive basis for explaining the focal effects, inserts new theoretical rationales in this research stream, and fits ex-post survey designs. Consumers process both information cues differently in product purchase situations (Bettman 1970; Gürhan-Canli, Sarial-Abi and Hayran 2018).

Second, we contribute to research by providing new insights into the roles of the degree of country development and cultural dimensions that have not yet been studied as continuous moderators. Scholars call for respective analysis (e.g., Ha and John 2010; Rubera and Kirca 2017). However, information processing theory posits only a context dependence of cognitive processes. We additionally employ institutional theory as an appropriate approach to explain the cross-national differences that information processing theory does not account for. Institutions are known to affect consumer cognition differently (Beckert 2010; Camacho, De Jong and Stremersch 2014; Swoboda and Batton 2020). Novel theoretical explanations for a moderation of the degree of country development contribute to respective contradictory observations in emerging vs. developed countries. Country development is an important institution for MNCs, as certain strongly economically growing emerging markets gain importance (Gürhan-Canli, Sarial-Abi and Hayran 2018; Rubera and Kirca 2017). We also develop theoretical rationales for the role of cultural dimensions, which scholars have previously assumed or studied with contradictory results. Different cultural approaches have their own merits. We follow the approach of Schwartz (1994), as it is theory-based, treats culture psychologically and is superior when analyzing consumer cognitive processing of MNC cues (De Mooij 2017; Swoboda and Batton 2019). Theoretically, the degree of country development or national cultural dimensions may reinforce or diminish consumers’ access, processing, or relevance of information cues. MSEM can show the explained variances of each moderator. On that basis, a portfolio illustrates countries or country groups in which the effects of both constructs are reinforced (or diminished) most. This insight is valuable, for example, to managers in corporate headquarters who coordinate customer interests globally to assess how and why respective activities are more important sources of competitive advantage.

This study proceeds as follows: Based on theoretical conceptualizations, we derive and test hypotheses with 43,597 consumer evaluations from 53 countries and then discuss our contributions.

2.2 Theory and Hypotheses

We propose a framework in which country development and the dimensions of national culture, as important national institutions, moderate the effects of perceived firms’ customer orientation and innovativeness on product purchase intention (see Fig. 2.2).

Figure 2.2

Conceptual Framework. (Source: Own Creation)

2.2.1 Perceived Customer Orientation and Firm Innovativeness

Management research conceptualizes customer orientation as firms’ focus on their target buyers, as firms’ dominant dimension in their market orientation by Narver and Slater (1990; Deshpandé, Farley and Webster 1993; Wang, Zhao and Voss 2016) and as a driver of customer responses, firm performance, and profitability (Feng et al. 2019; Kirca, Jayachandran and Bearden 2005). Similarly, firms’ innovativeness (Deshpandé, Farley and Webster 1993; Rubera and Kirca 2012) affects their market position or performance (Rubera and Kirca 2012; Jean, Sinkovics and Kim 2017; Ozkaya et al. 2015). Moreover, firms’ customer orientation is conceptually an important driver of firm innovativeness, for which satisfying existing or anticipating future consumer needs, information gathering, and a customer-centric organization or employees are reasons (Jean, Sinkovics and Kim 2017; Kibbeling, van der Bij and van Weele 2013; Kirca, Jayachandran and Bearden 2005; Wang, Zhao and Voss 2016).

Consumer research conceptualizes perceived customer orientation in terms of consumers’ perceptions of a firm’s focus on customer needs, or, more specifically, regarding firm activities such as empowerment, branding, or customer involvement in product development (Aurier and Séré de Lanauze 2012; Fuchs and Schreier 2011; Vaquero Martín 2021). Perceived firm innovativeness is an evaluation of firms’ novel, creative, and impactful ideas and solutions, in contrast to perceived product or brand innovativeness and novelty, for example (Pappu and Quester 2016; Rubera, Ordanini and Griffith 2011). Conceptualizations of customer orientation effects are either indirect or direct (e.g., Habel et al. 2020; Swoboda and Batton 2020); those of firm innovativeness are often directed at firm attractiveness, quality, consumer intention, or loyalty (Kassemeier, Haumann and Güntürkün 2022; Kurtmollaiev, Lervik-Olsen and Andreassen 2022; van Riel et al. 2021). Two studies conceptualize both these general constructs as unconnected independent variables (Eisingerich and Rubera 2010; Vaquero Martín 2021), while one conceptualizes specific customer empowerment effects on perceived innovativeness (Meißner, Haurand and Stummer 2017).

These studies adopt different theories: exchange theory assumes that consumers reciprocate partners that contribute to a relationship; inference theory assumes varying levels of information availability on specific attributes; and a framework where empowerment activities change perceived firm innovativeness for various reasons. We propose an approach based on a more general, cognitive theory. Both perceptual constructs represent information cues that are cognitively processed in decision situations. Information processing theory offers a stringent rationale for the general effects of perceived customer orientation and firm innovativeness (Bettman 1970; Newell, Shaw and Simon 1958): it proposes processing sequences such as selective access/perception or encoding of cues, their further processing/retrieval in memory, and a relevance evaluation for rationally bounded decisions (Hansen 2005; Holbrook and Hirschman 1982). Information processing theory thus offers an appropriate cognitive-theoretical basis for the indirect relationship between perceived customer orientation and product purchase intention via perceived firm innovativeness (Tybout, Calder and Sternthal 1981). Consequently, perceived customer orientation can be accessed to a greater (lesser) degree than firm innovativeness, can be more (less) difficult to further process in memory, as it is more (less) abstract and complex information, and can be more (less) relevant in product purchase decisions (Bettman, Luce and Payne 1998; Ferguson and Mohan 2020; Habel et al. 2020). More abstract information, if encoded, likely causes retrieval of further firm information (Bettman 1979; Gürhan-Canli, Sarial-Abi and Hayran 2018; Hansen 2005). This could be perceived firm innovativeness, which is more object-relevant (Roy 2018; Tybout, Calder and Sternthal 1981) and directly relatable to product decisions (Hetet, Ackermann and Mathieu 2020; van Riel et al. 2021). Information processing theory states that the amount or sequence of information processing varies due to socialization or culture (e.g., Gürhan-Canli, Sarial-Abi and Hayran 2018; Shaw 1990). However, it does not specify such contexts. We thus refer to institutional theory as a complementary approach.

2.2.2 Institutional Theory

Institutional theory provides an appropriate and widely established conceptualization regarding country differences in national institutions (e.g., Deephouse, Newburry and Soleimani 2016; Griffith, Lee and Yalcinkaya 2023). It is a useful overarching theory that accounts for country differences in consumers’ information processing. Institutions represent the rules of the game that govern the actions of individuals in a society (North 1990, p. 3). We refer to the institutional economics perspective, as it conceptualizes the institutions in this study (Kostova et al. 2020). Formal institutions, such as country development, represent explicit rules, structures, or outcomes in a society, while informal institutions, such as national culture, represent abstract codes or values that provide meaning in everyday life (North 1990, p. 4). Both affect consumers’ perceptions or MNCs’ performance (El Ghoul, Guedhami and Kim 2017; Kraft and Bausch 2018). We conceptualize their moderation of perceived customer orientation and firm innovativeness effects, as we are interested in how they change the salient cognitive effects on product purchase intentions.

We follow the prevailing conceptualization of a country’s development, referring to its economic, social, and human condition (Blut and Wang 2020; Çilingirtürk and Koçak 2018). This institution influences firm activity or performance and consumer evaluation or response (El Ghoul, Guedhami and Kim 2017; Gürhan-Canli, Sarial-Abi and Hayran 2018; Kraft and Bausch 2018; Swoboda and Batton 2020). It affects consumers’ information processing (Beckert 2010; Sheth 2011). For example, perceived customer orientation and firm innovativeness may be more important in more (vs. less) developed countries, where consumers more often access respective information and value it as more relevant (Gürhan-Canli, Hayran and Sarial-Abi 2016). Despite their mixed findings, scholars have not yet theorized the respective mechanisms for perceived customer orientation or firm innovativeness.

National culture represents a set of beliefs, roles, and values that are shared in a society (Triandis 1995, p. 6). It affects firm activity or performance (Kraft and Bausch 2018; Shao, Kwok and Guedhami 2010; Tihanyi, Griffith and Russell 2005) and consumer perception or intention (Camacho, De Jong and Stremersch 2014; Griffith, Lee and Yalcinkaya 2022; Rubera, Ordanini and Griffith 2011). We refer to the theory-based cultural value approach of Schwartz (1994), which is more comprehensive and less research context-dependent than other approaches (e.g., Berry, Guillén and Zhou 2010; Rubera, Ordanini and Griffith 2011). It differentiates embeddedness, hierarchy, mastery, and opposite dimensions and explains most variance in cross-national studies on MNC reputation, for example (Schwartz 2014, p. 548; Swoboda and Batton 2019). Respective cultural values variously influence consumers’ information processing (Beckert 2010; Gürhan-Canli, Sarial-Abi and Hayran 2018; Shaw 1990). For example, perceived customer orientation may not align with consumers’ values in more embedded societies (e.g., De Mooij 2017; Schwartz 1999). However, scholars present inconclusive results on the moderation of national cultural dimensions (e.g., Eisingerich and Rubera 2010; Swoboda and Batton 2020).

Next, the hypotheses are derived. We construct the three theoretical information processing mechanisms on an individual level, complemented by institutional theory mechanisms on a country-level.

2.2.3 Hypothesis Development

According to information processing theory, both generally perceived customer orientation and firm innovativeness can directly affect consumers’ product purchase intention if they are cognitively processed in a decision situation, i.e., encoded, retrieved, and judged as relevant (Bettman 1970; Hansen 2005; Tybout, Calder and Sternthal 1981). An information cue can directly affect behavior intentions if it is strongly perceived (i.e., encoded and retrieved) and judged to be relevant in a decision situation (e.g., Holbrook and Hirschman 1982). It may also indirectly affect intention by activating the retrieval of further information in memory that is more directly relevant to the decision (e.g., Tybout, Calder and Sternthal 1981). Empirically, however, scholars remain inconclusive on the effects of both constructs (e.g., for customer orientation Aurier and Séré de Lanauze 2012; Habel et al. 2020; Ndubisi 2012; for firm innovativeness Francioni et al. 2021; Jin et al. 2015; Kim 2016). We assume direct effects of perceived customer orientation and firm innovativeness. Moreover, we theorize dependencies between the constructs and differences in these effects.

Perceived customer orientation increases firm innovativeness perceptions for various reasons. This relationship is useful and profitable from a management research and practice view (Jean, Sinkovics and Kim 2017; Kibbeling, van der Bij and van Weele 2013). MNCs such as Unilever apply a consumer-oriented approach to drive innovativeness (Unilever 2021). Consumers associate customer-oriented firms with higher innovativeness, as they are less constrained in innovation or have access to more ideas and sources (Meißner, Haurand and Stummer 2017; Vaquero Martín 2021). Customer orientation comprises more abstract and experience-based information. Its processing activates further firm-related cues (Tybout, Calder and Sternthal 1981). This activation supports the retrieval of further product purchase-related information, such as firm innovativeness (Bettman 1979; Roy 2018).

The indirect (vs. direct) effect of perceived customer orientation is stronger, as is the direct effect of perceived firm innovativeness (vs. customer orientation), for at least two reasons. Customer orientation is more difficult to communicate and encode for consumers (Habel et al. 2020; Swoboda and Batton 2020). This hampers its processing and direct effects. Moreover, in product purchasing decisions, firm innovativeness is a more relevant cue (Kunz, Schmitt and Meyer 2011; Tybout, Calder and Sternthal 1981). It is more easily processed because it more likely enables customers to reach a decision (Fazal-e-Hasan et al. 2019; Gürhan-Canli, Hayran and Sarial-Abi 2016). In consumer product purchase behavior, attributes of tangible goods are still a major reference, in contrast to firms that purchase products and related customer-oriented services (Ha and John 2010).

We propose the following hypothesis:

H1.

(a) Perceived customer orientation and (b) firm innovativeness have a positive direct effect on product purchase intention, while (c) perceived customer orientation has a stronger indirect (vs. direct) effect on product purchase intention through perceived firm innovativeness.

The degree of country development has been shown to affect consumers’ evaluations or perceptions (e.g., Blut and Wang 2020; Swoboda and Batton 2020). We expect the degree of country development to positively moderate the effects of perceived customer orientation and firm innovativeness, as it affects consumers’ cognitions and information processing (Beckert 2010; Bettman 1970; Gürhan-Canli, Sarial-Abi and Hayran 2018).

In more developed countries, perceived customer orientation likely affects purchase intention, as MNCs are often founded in these countries, which fosters the perception of customer orientation cues through improved access and encourages information processing (Habel et al. 2020; Hansen 2005). It can be a relevant cue for consumers who differentiate MNCs in strong competition (Gürhan-Canli, Hayran and Sarial-Abi 2016; Gupta, Pansari and Kumar 2018; Ozkaya et al. 2015). In less developed countries, consumers have limited resources, are constrained, or historically less exposed to MNCs and access less information (Gupta, Pansari and Kumar 2018; Sheth 2011). Although MNCs are seen as global icons, they base judgments primarily on brand or product cues (Ferguson and Mohan 2020; Özsomer 2012). Firms’ customer orientation has a weaker direct effect on their intention or behavior (Ndubisi 2012; Swoboda and Batton 2020).

According to information processing theory, a greater access to and easier processing of customer orientation information by consumers in more developed countries more likely activates further information stored in memory (Bettman 1979; Tybout, Calder and Sternthal 1981). Perceived customer orientation strongly activates firm innovativeness perception (e.g., Schreier, Fuchs and Dahl 2012). Firm innovativeness itself is also a relevant and strong cue in consumers’ product purchase decisions in those countries that most strongly emphasize advantages of innovative offers (Gürhan-Canli, Hayran and Sarial-Abi 2016; Upadhye, Das and Varshneya 2019). For consumers in less developed countries, firm innovativeness is less strongly retrieved in memory or activated (Pappu and Quester 2016; Sheth 2011). While it can be relevant for purchase intention, consumers may experience a gap between judgments and behavior (Gupta, Pansari and Kumar 2018).

We hypothesize the following:

H2.

An increasing degree of country development positively moderates (a) the direct effect of perceived customer orientation and (b) its indirect effect on product purchase intention through firm innovativeness.

Among the cultural value dimensions, embeddedness treats “people […] as entities embedded in the collectivity” (Schwartz 2014, pp. 551–552). It affects MNC evaluations or behavioral intentions (Camacho, De Jong and Stremersch 2014; Griffith, Lee and Yalcinkaya 2022; Rubera, Ordanini and Griffith 2011). However, its moderation was assumed but not shown (Eisingerich and Rubera 2010; Swoboda and Batton 2020). As it strongly affects information processing, we expect a negative moderation.

Individuals in more embedded societies value conformance with group norms and blend in with society, while those in less embedded societies follow individual values (Schwartz 1999; 2014, p. 551). Perceived customer orientation addresses the needs and concern of individual customers, which fits the values of less embedded societies (Schwartz 1999; Vaquero Martín 2021). It is accessed, encoded, and processed as highly relevant information for individual values (Gupta, Pansari and Kumar 2018; Hansen 2005). It may guide consumers toward individual fulfillment, facilitating the relevance of processed cues (Fuchs and Schreier 2011; Ndubisi 2012). More embedded societies are less receptive to customer orientation cues, as they do not fit their major values. Other valuable symbols of group belonging are more likely to be perceived and processed instead (Gürhan-Canli, Sarial-Abi and Hayran 2018).

In less embedded societies, activation of firm innovativeness cues by customer orientation perception is likely because of individuals’ broadminded habits, appreciation of novelty, or a drive to express their beliefs (Eisingerich and Rubera 2010; Schwartz 2014, p. 551). These individuals are receptive to accessing firm innovativeness perceptions and appreciate firms that change markets and improve people’s lives (Griffith, Lee and Yalcinkaya 2022; Hansen 2005). In contrast, individuals in more embedded societies may hinder innovation as they cherish tradition, oppose novel things, and are less likely receptive to access innovativeness cues (Talay et al. 2019). Such consumers seek help from their larger support networks rather than process innovation cues in decision making (Eisingerich and Rubera 2010). However, perceived firm innovativeness may benefit society, suiting more embedded societies’ values (e.g., in health or environmental protection; De Mooij 2017; Falkenreck and Wagner 2011; Upadhye, Das and Varshneya 2019).

We carefully propose the following:

H3.

An increasing degree of embeddedness negatively moderates (a) the direct effect of perceived customer orientation and (b) its indirect effect on product purchase intention through firm innovativeness.

Hierarchy refers to the degree to which the unequal distribution of power and authority is accepted by a society (Schwartz 2014, pp. 551–552). This dimension has been shown to affect consumer perceptions or intentions (Camacho, De Jong and Stremersch 2014; Griffith, Lee and Yalcinkaya 2022; Rubera, Ordanini and Griffith 2011). We are the first to study the contextual role of hierarchy in our context and assume a negative moderation.

Individuals in more hierarchical societies expect explicit order and accept their assigned position; in opposite societies, individuals value social justice and equality (Schwartz 1999). In less hierarchical societies, individuals want to feel seen and valued by MNCs, thus, they more easily access customer orientation cues (Schwartz 1999; Swoboda and Batton 2020). Congruence with their cultural values may facilitate the processing of acquired information and render it more relevant in purchasing situations (Gürhan-Canli, Sarial-Abi and Hayran 2018; Hansen 2005). In more hierarchical societies, consumers may perceive MNCs as authorities or value their competence (Camacho, De Jong and Stremersch 2014). However, they do not expect to be the focus, as is suggested by customer orientation, and thus process respective information less (Habel et al. 2020; Holbrook and Hirschman 1982).

In less hierarchical societies, activation of firm innovativeness cues theoretically more likely occurs due to easier customer orientation processing (Tybout, Calder and Sternthal 1981). Firm innovativeness perceptions likely differentiate competing MNCs in consumers’ minds (Kunz, Schmitt and Meyer 2011; Kurtmollaiev, Lervik-Olsen and Andreassen 2022). Innovation cues are more relevant in purchasing situations (Kim et al. 2015). In more hierarchical societies, incongruence between customer orientation and cultural values theoretically hampers the activation of firm innovativeness cues (Bettman 1979). Consumers perceive MNCs as superior and with market-changing power, but innovativeness thoughts may be less strongly accessed in purchasing situations as consumers do not strive for any associated advancement (Fazal-e-Hasan et al. 2019; Gupta, Pansari and Kumar 2018). However, consumers may consider innovativeness in a decision situation if they see it as relevant to stabilizing their own position in society (Rubera, Ordanini and Griffith 2011).

We hypothesize the following:

H4.

An increasing degree of hierarchy negatively moderates (a) the direct effect of perceived customer orientation and (b) its indirect effect on product purchase intention through firm innovativeness.

Mastery reflects people’s preference for changing their environment to attain group or individual goals (Schwartz 2014, p. 552). Research has shown its role in consumer behavior (e.g., Shao, Kwok and Guedhami 2010; Swoboda and Batton 2020) but not within our context. We assume a positive moderation.

Individuals in high-mastery societies are independent and strive for advancement in pursuit of their goals; in low-mastery societies, individuals strive to fit in and protect their environment (Schwartz 1999). In high-mastery societies, individuals cherish unique and sophisticated offerings to reach their goals (Shao, Kwok and Guedhami 2010). Firms’ customer orientation is an easily accessed and relevant cue as it is congruent with cultural values and conveys, for example, that consumers have a certain influence over firms’ offerings (Camacho, De Jong and Stremersch 2014; Gürhan-Canli, Sarial-Abi and Hayran 2018). In low-mastery societies, individuals seek to fit into their environment, which likely discourages their access to customer orientation cues (Hansen 2005; Schwartz 1999). They do not strive to express themselves through their purchases and thus judge customer orientation cues as less relevant (Fuchs and Schreier 2011; De Mooij 2017).

In high-mastery societies, customer orientation perceptions likely activate object-relevant firm innovativeness thoughts in consumers’ minds (Gürhan-Canli, Sarial-Abi and Hayran 2018). Firm innovativeness is a relevant cue as firms perceived as innovative are associated with leaders changing established markets and catering to consumers’ endeavors (Kassemeier, Haumann and Güntürkün 2022). Consumers tend to exploit new opportunities in their pursuit of individual goals, which renders firm innovativeness relevant in a decision situation (Kurtmollaiev, Lervik-Olsen and Andreassen 2022). In low-mastery societies, shared values that discourage change-inducing efforts likely hinder consumers’ access to firm innovativeness thoughts (Schwartz 2014, p. 552). Consumers here have been shown to be less likely to buy innovative offerings; thus, firm innovativeness cues are less relevant (De Mooij 2017). However, this may differ if respective offerings cater to shared group goals (Schwartz 1999).

We propose the following:

H5.

An increasing degree of mastery positively moderates (a) the direct effect of perceived customer orientation and (b) its indirect effect on product purchase intention through firm innovativeness.

2.3 Empirical Study

2.3.1 Sample

The data derive from a long-term cooperation with a German MNC offering, for example, nonprescription drugs, skin, and beauty care products globally. The MNC uses a standardized, centrally managed approach toward its customer and innovation orientation. The corporate center annually conducts surveys in many countries regarding their perceptions of the MNC. This study was conducted in 53 countries selected due to their importance for the MNC and by questioning up to 1,000 respondents in each country.² We and a research agency conducted qualitative and quantitative pretests. First, similar items provided by several scholars for both constructs were pretested by us within two consumer focus groups (N = 7–8 respondents). Participants’ difficulty understanding some items led to few item adjustments. Second, data for the pretests in the eight most important countries for the MNC was collected by the agency (panel of N = 250 each, quota sample). These led to further item adjustments to obtain satisfactory results regarding hierarchy of effects, face validity, construct equivalence, reliability, and validity for the final measurements across nations.

In the main study, the agency collected the data simultaneously in all countries using a cross-national internet panel approach and a network of partner agencies, referring to quota selection requirements in every country (66% average participation rate). The agency was briefed and controlled panel quality by preventing false respondents, instructional manipulation checks, and straight-lining or random clicking (Abbey and Meloy 2017). Text-appealing strategies were used to highlight the public benefit of participating, and bonus points were offered (Pedersen and Nielsen 2016). Screening criteria were used to select the respondents in each country. Quota sampling regarding age and sex distributions was applied based on information provided by the national registration offices. For various reasons, the sample was restricted to the urban population between 18 and 65 (55) years in developed (emerging) countries (Özsomer 2012; Mandler, Bartsch and Han 2021). In each country, only respondents with higher education/profession levels and above-average incomes were included in the sample to increase sample comparability across nations. Initially, the respondents had to indicate their (un)prompted awareness of the MNC (based on a five-point Likert-type scale, 1 = I do not know the MNC to 5 = I know the MNC very well). Only the respondents with at least general knowledge (= 2) were included in the survey, leading to 45,651 evaluations. After eliminating outliers based on the Mahalanobis distance, 43,597 respondents remained. The sample is not representative, as ex-post comparisons with official numbers showed (see Table 2.1). Tests for univariate and multivariate normality indicated non-normally distributed data. A maximum likelihood estimator with robust standard errors (MLR) was used to test the hypotheses (Maydeu-Olivares 2017).

Table 2.1

Sample Characteristics. (Source: Own Creation)

Sex (%)

Age Groups (years, %)

N

Male

Female

18–25

26–35

36–45

46–55

56–65

Argentina

921

49.8

50.2

17.7

26.6

22.0

18.2

15.4

Australia

869

49.9

50.1

11.7

22.0

23.6

20.0

22.7

Austria

911

50.3

49.7

13.5

20.0

22.0

23.8

20.7

Belgium

904

50.8

49.2

15.2

17.4

23.6

24.3

19.6

Brazil

931

51.1

48.9

36.8

28.4

20.8

14.0

.0

Canada

858

49.3

50.7

20.3

21.2

22.1

16.7

19.7

Chile

903

47.8

52.2

12.4

32.0

46.2

9.4

.0

China

837

51.9

48.1

28.3

31.7

23.7

16.4

.0

Colombia

967

50.4

49.6

22.6

24.3

22.2

18.6

12.2

Costa Rica

936

53.2

46.8

21.4

40.2

25.3

13.1

0.0

Croatia

887

48.8

51.2

7.2

27.1

49.4

16.3

0.0

Czech Republic

676

55.0

45.0

10.5

19.7

23.7

21.3

24.9

Denmark

733

54.4

45.6

13.4

20.1

21.3

20.9

24.4

Egypt

498

70.3

29.7

31.7

25.9

29.5

12.9

.0

Finland

897

48.3

51.7

18.1

19.0

20.4

19.3

23.3

France

889

49.0

51.0

18.3

21.7

20.7

13.6

25.6

Germany

952

50.1

49.4

17.1

17.9

24.7

23.3

17.0

Greece

910

43.5

56.5

13.5

32.4

29.9

18.9

5.3

Hungary

867

49.4

50.6

12.7

19.8

25.1

19.1

23.2

India

848

52.0

48.0

24.5

26.9

22.1

26.5

.0

Indonesia

944

52.3

47.7

17.1

28.7

26.9

19.1

8.3

Ireland

746

49.2

50.8

10.6

25.5

23.1

22.5

18.4

Italy

961

48.9

51.1

14.0

22.3

22.8

21.4

19.5

Japan

551

52.5

47.5

11.8

15.4

21.2

22.5

29.0

South Korea

715

49.0

51.0

6.7

16.9

24.8

30.5

21.1

Malaysia

750

54.5

45.5

16.7

28.0

26.4

21.1

7.9

Mexico

969

48.1

51.9

32.7

28.3

23.0

16.0

.0

Morocco

352

55.1

44.9

28.1

35.2

25.3

11.4

.0

Netherlands

859

48.0

52.0

13.4

18.7

23.9

23.4

20.6

New Zealand

712

48.0

52.0

16.9

16.6

24.0

23.7

18.8

Norway

595

56.3

43.7

12.1

19.3

22.0

22.2

24.4

Philippines

906

49.2

50.8

19.1

32.0

23.3

15.8

9.8

Poland

935

49.7

50.3

18.5

23.6

18.9

21.7

17.2

Portugal

948

48.3

51.7

7.9

28.0

47.9

16.2

0.0

Romania

908

40.5

59.5

17.6

25.3

25.3

21.6

10.1

Russia

908

52.4

47.6

22.2

25.1

26.0

26.7

.0

Kingdom of Saudi Arabia

576

53.8

46.2

25.5

31.6

29.7

13.2

.0

Singapore

842

71.0

29.0

11.9

26.7

27.3

24.5

9.6

Slovakia

772

52.4

47.6

12.4

22.5

23.6

19.8

21.6

Slovenia

859

53.1

46.9

12.7

21.4

22.7

22.2

21.0

South Africa

786

50.3

49.7

25.3

25.8

20.4

28.5

.0

Spain

964

49.4

50.6

14.2

23.3

24.9

20.7

16.8

Sweden

590

53.2

46.8

18.3

16.8

21.4

19.5

24.1

Switzerland

899

50.7

49.3

10.7

18.6

23.2

27.8

19.7

Taiwan

786

51.8

48.2

11.1

28.0

33.0

28.0

.0

Thailand

885

50.8

49.2

18.3

28.6

27.7

25.4

.0

Turkey

924

48.7

51.3

17.3

33.8

27.7

21.2

.0

Ukraine

823

66.7

33.3

18.6

30.3

25.3

25.9

.0

United Arab Emirates

672

52.0

48.0

19.5

42.7

29.6

8.2

.0

UK

748

50.4

49.6

15.2

22.5

24.3

18.7

19.3

USA

906

50.2

49.8

13.8

20.5

24.3

24.5

16.9

Venezuela

929

50.2

49.8

13.7

37.0

41.3

8.0

.0

Vietnam

683

55.5

44.5

18.0

29.0

29.4

15.7

7.9

Total

43,597

51.1

48.9

17.0

25.4

26.1

20.0

11.5

2.3.2 Measurement

Individual-level variables were measured on a five-point Likert-type scale (1 = strongly disagree to 5 = strongly agree, see Table 2.2). Perceived customer orientation was conceptualized using four items following Dean (2007; Walsh, Beatty and Shiu 2009; Narver and Slater 1990). Three items adapted from Kurtmollaiev et al. (2022; Kunz, Schmitt and Meyer 2011; van Riel et al. 2021) were used to measure perceived firm innovativeness. For consumer product purchase intention, three items were used, following Maxham and Netemeyer (2002) and van der Lans, van Everdingen and Melnyk (2016). A commercial translation agency applied parallel blind translation-back-translation with translation reviews. To maximize construct equivalence, minor item adjustments such as cultural rephrasing were made (Yang, Floyd and Tanner Jr 2019).

At the country-level, the degree of country development was measured by the Human Development Index (HDI, Blut and Wang 2020; Çilingirtürk and Koçak 2018). The index was used measuring three dimensions (life expectancy, education, gross national income (GNI), UNDP 2018). We tested the more economic but in consumer studies less often used Global Competitiveness Index (GCI) and Gross Domestic Product (GDP) in stability checks. The cultural dimensions of embeddedness, hierarchy, and mastery were measured referring to the most recent data by Professor Schwartz. We controlled for the remaining dimensions in each model and tested opposite dimensions in stability checks (i.e., autonomy, egalitarianism, harmony).³

On the individual-level, we controlled for sex (0 = male; 1 = female), age, and brand familiarity (measured by one item, “How familiar are you with [MNC] and its products?”, Mandler, Bartsch and Han 2021; Steenkamp, Batra and Alden 2003). Controls may affect whether consumers process certain information in their minds or view it as relevant (Bae, Jo and Lee 2021; van der Lans, van Everdingen and Melnyk 2016). We controlled for the number of respondents per country, as unequal numbers could affect the results (Hox, Moerbeek and van de Schoot 2018, p. 215). In each cultural model, we controlled for the remaining two cultural dimensions, as they have been shown to influence consumers’ behavioral intentions (e.g., De Mooij 2017).

As consumers are nested in countries, the requirements for MSEM were tested. Calculating the intraclass correlation coefficients (ICCs), which were estimated within a null model without predictor variables, showed that multilevel modeling is highly adequate (Hox, Moerbeek and van de Schoot 2018, pp. 4–13). 15.6% of the variance in product purchase intention could be attributed to country differences.

Tests for reliability and validity as well as correlations yielded satisfactory results (Backhaus et al. 2023, pp. 390–391; Hair et al. 2018, pp. 675–676; Zhou, Yang and Hui 2010, see Tables 2.2, 2.3 and 2.4). AVE values supported convergent validity (Bagozzi and Yi 1988; Fornell and Larcker 1981). Tests for discriminant validity indicate that the constructs are distinct from each other (Fornell and Larcker 1981); the correlations underline this distinction (Zhou, Yang and Hui 2010). We additionally performed the test of Anderson and Gerbing (1988, see Sect. G.3.1 in the electronic supplementary material).

Multilevel reliability was confirmed (respective values exceeded the threshold of .8, Geldhof, Preacher and Zyphur 2014, see Table 2.5). After comparing the validity coefficients of the factor score procedures (see Table 2.6), regression scores were used for customer orientation and innovativeness to reduce model complexity (Kline 2015, pp. 127–129).

Table 2.2

Reliability and Validity. (Source: Own Creation)

Item

MV/Std.

FL

KMO

ItTC

α

CR

AVE

λ

How do you as a consumer perceive [MNCs] customer orientation?

Perceived Customer Orientation

[MNC] is always concerned and committed to its customers.

3.56/1.04

.869

.858

.826

.924

.926

.759

.813

[MNC] understands and takes customer needs seriously.

3.51/1.04

.893

.846

.892

[MNC] has the aim to always satisfy its customers.

3.46/1.00

.897

.849

.887

[MNC] has employees who are concerned about customer needs.

3.49/.93

.815

.780

.882

How do you as a consumer evaluate [MNCs] innovativeness?

Perceived Firm Innovativeness

[MNC] is a creative leader in research and technology.

3.74/1.00

.820

.742

.751

.878

.878

.706

.868

[MNC] change the markets and improves people’s quality of life through its new products.

3.69/1.04

.833

.760

.800

[MNC] is a pioneer in developing innovative products.

3.78/.99

.870

.785

.850

How do you assess your purchase behavior at the [MNC] in the future?

Product Purchase Intention

In the future, I intend to use products from [MNC].

3.69/1.12

.913

.771

.875

.942

.942

.844

.912

I will consider products from [MNC] for my next purchase over others.

3.65/1.11

.910

.873

.926

I will definitely buy products from [MNC], they are one of my favorites.

3.65/1.14

.931

.888

.915

Note: α=Cronbach’s Alpha (≥.8); AVE=Average Variance Extracted (>.5); CR=Composite Reliability (≥.6); FL=Factor Loadings (EFA; >.5); ItTC=Item-to-Total Correlation (≥.5); KMO=Kaiser‒Meyer‒Olkin Criterion (≥.6); λ=Factor Loadings (CFA; >.5); MV=Mean Value; Std.=Standard Deviation.

Table 2.3

Discriminant Validity. (Source: Own Creation)

Constructs

Perceived Customer Orientation

Perceived Firm

Innovativeness

Product Purchase

Intention

AVE

.759

.706

.844

Perceived Customer Orientation

.759

–

–

–

Perceived Firm Innovativeness

.706

.376

–

–

Product Purchase Intention

.844

.360

.608

–

Goodness of fit statistics: CFI= .992; TLI = .988; RMSEA = .041; SRMR = .013; χ2 = 280,499.334; df = 45.

Note: AVE = Average Variance Extracted (>.5); CFI = Comparative Fit Index (>.95); RMSEA = Root Mean Squared Error of Approximation (<.05); SRMR = Standardized Root Mean Residual (<.08); TLI = Tucker Lewis Index (>.95); values in italics represent squared correlations between constructs.

Table 2.4

Correlations. (Source: Own Creation)

* p<.05; ** p<.01; *** p<.001; ns = not significant.

Note: BF = Brand Familiarity; CD = Country Development; CPC = Consumers per Country; EMB = Embeddedness; HIER = Hierarchy; MAS = Mastery; PCO = Perceived Customer Orientation; PFI = Perceived Firm Innovativeness; PPI = Product Purchase Intention.

Table 2.5

Multilevel Reliability. (Source: Own Creation)

Alpha

Composite Reliability

Maximal Reliability

αW

αB

ωW

ωB

HW

HB

Perceived Customer Orientation

.914

.992

.916

.994

.919

.998

Perceived Firm Innovativeness

.865

.984

.866

.985

.869

.988

Product Purchase Intention

.932

.997

.932

.997

.933

.998

Note: α = Alpha (≥.8); ω = Composite Reliability (≥.8); H = Maximal Reliability (≥.8); W = Within (Individual) Level; B = Between (Country) Level.

Table 2.6

Comparison of Factor Scores. (Source: Own Creation)

Regression Scores Validity Coefficients

Item Parceling Validity Coefficients

Perceived Customer Orientation

.959

.817

Perceived Firm Innovativeness

.906

.823

Common method variance (CMV) was ex-ante addressed by an appropriate questionnaire design and by ensuring confidentiality, for example. Ex-post, a single-factor test showed significantly lower fit values than the proposed model (∆χ2(35) = 39,581.063, p < .001). The marker variable technique was performed with occupation as a theoretically unrelated marker variable (Lindell and Whitney 2001). It revealed no significant changes in correlations; the method variances were less than 2.0% (Williams, Hartman and Cavazotte 2010). CMV seems not to be an issue in this study (see Sect. G.3.2 in the electronic supplementary material).

Endogeneity tests were conducted to reveal potential bias from omitted variables (Zaefarian et al. 2017). The MNC’s employee orientation was selected as a theoretically related instrumental variable for customer orientation (one item, Janz and Prasarnphanich 2003). After ensuring its strength using an F-test, an efficient model was calculated (Hox, Moerbeek and van de Schoot 2018, p. 61). The model comparison did not show any significant changes in the effects of customer orientation (Hausman 1978). Customer orientation is exogenous (see Sect. G.3.3 in the electronic supplementary material).

Full scalar invariance was achieved between every country (Steenkamp and Baumgartner 1998; see Sect. G.3.4 in the electronic supplementary material). Multilevel measurement invariance was tested following the procedure of Jak, Oort and Dolan (2013), which is applicable to a large number of groups. All factor loadings were considered equal across levels. Cluster bias is not a problem in this study.

2.3.3 Method

To test the hypotheses, MSEM was performed in Mplus 8.8. We chose a covariance-based approach because we conceptualized a reflective measurement model, the widely established approach to multilevel modeling (e.g., Davidov et al. 2012, Heinberg et al. 2020; Sarstedt et al. 2016; Weiber and Sarstedt 2021, pp. 432–433). MSEM is highly suitable for large samples across nations, for modeling moderated mediation across levels; it simultaneously considers interactions between individual- and country-level variables and shows variances within and between countries (Hox, Moerbeek and van de Schoot 2018, pp. 212–214, 271–274; Preacher, Zyphur and Zhang 2010, 2016). As sample sizes increase, estimates and standard errors become more accurate. However, p-values show statistical significance without providing information on the magnitude of the effects. Mplus offers only b-values; thus, we additionally calculate effect sizes (Khalilzadeh and Tasci 2017; Marsh et al. 2009), but the explained country-level variances demonstrate the relative importance of each moderator. Due to model complexity and conceptually explainable correlations between country development and two cultural dimensions, the moderators are not tested simultaneously (Kline 2015, pp. 127–128).

The moderated mediation analysis was based on calculating random intercept and slope models (Hox, Moerbeek and van de Schoot 2018, pp. 64–65; Preacher, Zhang and Zyphur 2016; Zhao, Lynch Jr and Chen 2010). AIC and BIC were calculated to assess model fit. A baseline model including only individual-level control variables was calculated. Perceived customer orientation and firm innovativeness were added as predictor variables. Due to model complexity, the independent variables and all moderators were grand mean centered (Ryu 2015). The level-one models are as follows:

PFIij=β0j+β2jPCOij+rij

(2.1)

PPIij=β0j+β3jPFIij+βILCILCij+rij

(2.2)

PPIij=β0j+β1jPCOij+β3jPFIij+βILCILCij+rij

(2.3)

where i indicates the consumers in a country, and j displays the countries. PPIij represents consumer i’s product purchase intention in country j. PCOij and PFIij represent consumer i’s perceived customer orientation and firm innovativeness in country j. ILCij denotes control variables at individual-level. The first-level intercept β0j of each individual equation and the individual-level slopes β1j, β2j and β3j are allowed to vary across countries. rij represents the individual-level error term of each equation.

Then, a second baseline model was calculated to include three country-level controls as well as country-level moderator variables to predict variation in the β coefficients:

β0j=γ00+γ01CLVj+γ02CLCj+u0j

(2.4)

β1j=γ10+γ11CLVj+u1j

(2.5)

β2j=γ20+u2j

(2.6)

β3j=γ30+γ31CLVj+u3j

(2.7)

where γ₀₀ denotes the country-level intercept of product purchase intention and γ₁₀ and γ₂₀ the intercepts of the country-level random slope of perceived customer orientation and firm innovativeness. CLVj displays the country-level moderators (degree of country development, embeddedness, hierarchy, mastery), and uqj (q = 0,4) are country-level residual variances. CLCj denotes the country-level control variables (number of consumers per country, remaining cultural dimensions). For each moderator, a separate model was calculated to predict variations in β coefficients. The following comprises equations (2.1–2.7) and shows the multilevel moderated mediation with cross-level interactions:

PPIij=γ00+γ01CLVj+γ10PCOij+γ11CLVjPCOij+γ20PCOij+γ30PFIij+γ31CLVvPFIij+error

(2.8)

2.3.4 Results

The results of the hypothesis tests are shown in Table 2.7. The model fit indexes, such as TLI and CFI, are satisfactory.

Perceived customer orientation directly and positively affects product purchase intention (b = .276, p < .001). Furthermore, perceived customer orientation positively affects product purchase intention indirectly through perceived firm innovativeness (b = .405, p < .001). Hypotheses H1a-b are supported. The indirect effect is significantly stronger than the direct effect (b = .130, p < .001), supporting H1c, and perceived firm innovativeness generally affects consumer intentions more strongly. The effects explain 53.3% of individual-level variance, irrespective of country differences.

An increasing degree of country development increases the direct effect of perceived customer orientation (bPCO×CD→PPI = .474, p < .001), supporting H2a. However, H2b is rejected due to a nonsignificant moderation of country development (bPFI×CD→PPI = −.041, p > .05). The moderator explains 50% of country-level variance. Importantly, the strong effects of perceived firm innovativeness remain stable. We discuss this nonsignificant result in the discussion section.

The degree of embeddedness negatively moderates the direct effect of perceived customer orientation (bPCO×EMB→PPI = −.132, p < .001), in support of H3a. The indirect effect through firm innovativeness is not significantly moderated (bPFI×EMB→PPI = .018, p > .05); thus, H3b is rejected. Hierarchy negatively moderates the direct effect but not the effect through innovativeness (bCO×HIER→PPI = −.049, p < .05; bPFI×HIER→PPI = −.013, p > .05), thus H4a is supported, and H4b is not. Mastery shows no significant moderation at all, thus H5a and H5b are rejected (bPCO×MAS→PPI = .099, p > .05; bPFI×MAS→PPI = −.077, p > .05). Embeddedness and hierarchy account for 56% of country-level variance, while embeddedness elicits the stronger effect. We discuss the insights in the discussion section.

Individual-level covariates sex, age, and brand familiarity have significant and expected effects. The country-level covariates are mostly nonsignificant.

2.3.5 Stability Checks

For stability reasons, a random split-half test was used to ensure the robustness of the results (with satisfactory values for multilevel reliability for both groups, Geldhof, Preacher and Zyphur 2014, see Sect. G.3.5 in the electronic supplementary material). Both the direct effect of perceived customer orientation on consumer product purchase intention and the indirect effect through perceived firm innovativeness remained stable for both samples. Additionally, alternative models were tested (see Sect. G.3.6 in the electronic supplementary material).

Table 2.7

Results. (Source: Own Creation)

* p<.05; ** p<.01; *** p<.001; ns = not significant; b = Unstandardized Coefficients.

Note: BF = Brand Familiarity; CD = Country Development; CPC = Consumer per Country; EMB = Embeddedness; HIER = Hierarchy; MAS = Mastery; PCO = Perceived Customer Orientation; PFI = Perceived Firm Innovativeness; PPI = Product Purchase Intention.

First, effects and moderations of perceived customer orientation and firm innovativeness as two independent variables were tested. The effects are significant: perceived customer orientation was moderated by most moderators (bPCO×HDI→PPI = .526, p < .001; bPCO×EMB→PPI = −.134, p < .001; bPCO×HIER→PPI = −.052, p < .05; bCO×MAS→PPI = .078, p > .05), while perceived innovativeness was not (bPFI×HDI→PPI = −.059, p > .05; bPFI×EMB→PPI = .018, p > .05; bPFI×HIER→PPI = −.012, p > .05; bPFI×MAS→PPI = −.071, p > .05).

Second, the moderating effects of more economically oriented country development measures were tested. The results for GCI are in line with those for HDI (bPCO×GCI→PPI = .005, p < .001; bPFI×GCI→PPI = −.002, p > .05).

The results for GDP are partly in line with those for HDI (bPCO×GDP→PPI = .013, p > .05; bPFI×GDP→PPI = −.007, p > .05). However, GDP explains only 6.3% of country-level variance and is more volatile over time (Çilingirtürk and Koçak 2018).

Third, the moderating effects of the opposing dimensions of embeddedness, hierarchy, and mastery were tested. Individuals pursuing their own beliefs and thoughts (intellectual) or feelings and emotions (affective) characterize highly autonomous societies (Schwartz 2014, p. 551). The dimensions show opposite signs for perceived customer orientation (bPCO×AAU→PPI = .091, p < .001; bPCO×IAU→PPI = .113, p < .001); moderations of perceived firm innovativeness are nonsignificant (bPFI×AAU→PPI = −.007, p > .05; bPFI×IAU→PPI = −.016, p > .05). Similar opposite signs emerge for egalitarianism (defined as the degree to which individuals recognize others as moral equals sharing basic interests; Schwartz 2014, p. 551): bPCO×EGA→PPI = .130, p < .001 and bPFI×EGA→PPI = .031, p > .05. The opposite dimension of nonsignificant mastery (harmony, referring to individuals’ preference for fitting into rather than changing their environment, Schwartz 2014, p. 552) shows surprisingly significant effects for perceived customer orientation (bPCO×HAR→PPI = .079, p < .01), not for perceived firm innovativeness (bPFI×HAR→PPI = −.004, p > .05). However, we do not further explore this stability insight.

Fourth, we tested all moderators for the perceived customer orientation-innovativeness relationship. The degree of country development shows a significant moderation (bPCO×HDI→PFI = .217, p < .05), but cultural dimensions do not (bPCO×EMB→PFI = −.008, p > .05; bPCO×HIER→PFI = −.008, p > .05; bPCO×MAS→PFI = −.050, p > .05). We discuss this insight in the discussion section.

Fifth, we tested Hofstede’s dimensions of individualism, power distance, and masculinity, which can very generally be seen to relate to the dimensions of Schwartz (Swoboda and Batton 2019). The test shows the expected moderations; only masculinity is nonsignificant (bPCO×IND→PPI = .001, p < .01; bPFI×IND→PPI = .000, p > .05; bPCO×POD→PPI = −.001, p < .05; bPFI×POD→PPI = .000, p > .05; bPCO×MASC→PPI = .000, p > .05; bPFI×MASC→PPI = .000, p > .05). This supports our results.

Sixth, we tested our model with a sample comprising three competitors of our focal MNC in each country. As mentioned in the sample section, the corporate center of our focal MNC annually conducts panel surveys regarding its own evaluation in many countries. Additionally, evaluations of different major competitors in each country are included in the survey. Competitors in each country are selected due to their importance for the focal MNC based on competitive strength and membership in a similar strategic group. We confirmed their activity in the same industry to obtain a kind of control group. Significant effects of perceived customer orientation on product purchase intention and through perceived firm innovativeness emerge (b = .236, p < .001 and b = .397, p < .001). The direct effect is moderated by all institutions except mastery (bPCO×CD→PPI = .398, p < .001; bPCO×EMB→PPI = −.079, p < .001; bPCO×HIER→PPI = −.048, p < .01; bPCO×MAS→PPI = .018, p > .05), while the moderations of the indirect effect remain nonsignificant (bPFI×CD→PPI = −.029, p > .05; bPFI×EMB→PPI = −.004, p > .05; bPFI×HIER→PPI = −.004, p > .05; bPFI×MAS→PPI = −.009, p > .05). Our results appear stable beyond a single MNC.

2.4 Discussion

2.4.1 Overview

Scholars have recommended that research on perceived customer orientation and firm innovativeness should extend beyond single- or few-country studies (Eisingerich and Rubera 2010; Meißner, Haurand and Stummer 2017). We acted upon these recommendations and examined cross-national differences in respective effects and the important role of country contexts referring to institutional theory. This is an important issue because the perception that a firm’s focus is on customers and satisfying their needs, as well as firm activities resulting in novel, creative, and impactful offers for markets, might be beneficial for MNCs in one country but not in another. We found different effects of perceived customer orientation and innovativeness as well as different explained country-level variances in moderations. We address these below in greater detail.

2.4.2 Contribution to Theory

Regarding our first research question, we examined consumers’ intentional behavior dependence on information processing of customer orientation and innovativeness perceptions of MNCs across nations. By providing theoretical rationales based on information processing theory, we contribute to the mostly national research on either perceived customer orientation or perceived firm innovativeness. This study supports the direct relevance of conceptualizations of customer orientation for behavior (e.g., Hammami, Souiden and Bennour 2021; Valenzuela, Mulki and Jaramillo 2010) but also their indirect relevance (e.g., Habel et al. 2020; Ndubisi 2012). We notably extend these conceptualizations and clarify inconclusive insights; the indirect (vs. direct) effect of perceived customer orientation is significantly stronger cross-nationally, as is the direct effect of perceived innovativeness (vs. customer orientation). Studies have thus far provided inconclusive insights in developed and emerging countries (Pappu and Quester 2016; Wu and Ho 2014). This study also extends the framework of Meißner, Haurand and Stummer (2017), who theorize the effects of more specific consumer empowerment activities through perceived firm innovativeness but observe them only in the USA among one of four activities. We theorize more general perceptions of firms’ customer orientation and innovativeness across nations. Both have been studied by Eisingerich and Rubera (2010) and Vaquero Martín (2021) as unconnected independent variables, revealing mixed effects in China and the UK, for example. Thus, we offer novel rationales and insights for the dependent effects of both constructs. These are important for understanding the abovementioned effects cross-nationally from a consumer perspective. However, we cannot infer which of the three theoretical mechanisms dominate in each hypothesis; scholars should deepen our insights and examine the effects of each mechanism in experiments, for example (e.g., Hansen 2005).

Regarding our second research question, we have examined the cross-national roles of important national institutions, as contextual factors in the information processing of consumers’ customer orientation and innovativeness perceptions of MNCs (Ha and John 2010). We respond to calls for respective analysis (e.g.,Rubera and Kirca 2017), address the mixed results in studies in developed vs. emerging countries, and clarify the mixed assumptions regarding the role of national cultural dimensions in prior studies (Falkenreck and Wagner 2011; Kim 2016; Swoboda and Batton 2020). We contribute to research by theorizing and supporting these moderations and by showing their explained country-level variance. Including country development and national cultural dimensions as continuous moderators is important, enabling us to gain further insights into the moderating roles of both country-level factors and to draw conclusions about countries that are not directly considered in our study.

However, the roles of both national institutions emerge only for the direct effects of perceived customer orientation; they are nonsignificant for perceived firm innovativeness. These findings are contrary to possible assumptions based on a general interest in the roles of national contexts in perceived firm innovativeness (e.g., Falkenreck and Wagner 2011). However, they are consistent with recent efforts to examine more complex relationships among national contexts and firm activities that result in novel and impactful offers for markets for firm performance (Jean, Sinkovics and Kim 2017; Ozkaya et al. 2015). We also address the mixed results on perceived firm innovativeness that show (Eisingerich and Rubera 2010; Falkenreck and Wagner 2011) or refute (Kassemeier, Haumann and Güntürkün 2022; Vaquero Martín 2021) country differences. Firm innovativeness is accessed and retrieved in memory, rendering it relevant for rationally bounded decisions, independent of national contexts. One reason for the insignificant moderation of country development could be that consumers perceive innovative firms as a source of advancement in their country’s development through offerings that are more efficient and of higher quality (Wu and Ho 2014). Perceived firm innovativeness may also affect consumer intentions in more embedded and hierarchical societies if it matches respective values, such as supporting society’s well-being, stabilizing expected hierarchical positions, or catering to shared goals (Rubera, Ordanini and Griffith 2011; Schwartz 1999). However, stability tests show that the customer orientation-innovativeness link is moderated by the degree of country development. Accessed customer orientation cues stimulate the retrieval of further information such as firm innovativeness in memory as more relevant information for product purchases in more developed countries (Roy 2018; Tybout, Calder and Sternthal 1981). These rationales of information processing theory have been underscored, but their particular mechanisms need further research in light of our moderators, as do further cross-national moderations of innovativeness.

Moreover, we contribute to research by specifying the role of country contexts in perceived customer orientation effects. The degree of country development is a strong multiplier for consumers’ processing of perceived customer orientation, directly and through firm innovativeness information (Bettman 1970; Gürhan-Canli, Hayran and Sarial-Abi 2016). We contribute to international research by conceptualizing country development for the first time and by clarifying inconclusive assumptions. The insights are important because of the growing importance of economically growing emerging markets for MNCs (e.g., Rubera and Kirca 2017). In contrast, culture, especially embeddedness and hierarchy, may diminish those effects. The role of national cultural dimensions has been assumed in the past, mostly as an exclusively important institution, but not tested. We add to the few empirical studies that provide mixed insights concerning cultural differences in their focal countries (Eisingerich and Rubera 2010; Swoboda and Batton 2020; Vaquero Martín 2021). Importantly, our findings indicate that the degree of the cultural dimensions embeddedness and hierarchy explain slightly more country-level variance than country development. However, no significant moderation effect could be found for mastery. Providing theoretical rationales and examining the moderating roles of all national cultural dimensions is important because we show that every dimension must be considered independently. Previous research has observed only a few dimensions of national culture (e.g., Eisingerich and Rubera 2010 referring to culture but studying only three, Falkenreck and Wagner 2011 only one out of five of Hofstede’s cultural dimensions). We demonstrate that the other dimensions should not be overlooked. Since some dimensions have a significant effect while others do not, it is not possible to make assumptions on national culture as a single factor. Our study thus aligns with research suggesting that embeddedness corresponds to the most important national cultural dimension in cross-national consumer research (e.g., De Mooij 2017; Gupta, Pansari and Kumar 2018; Swoboda and Batton 2020). Country-level institutions are worth studying in research on consumers’ perceived customer orientation of MNCs.

2.4.3 Practical Relevance

For managers at headquarters coordinating, for example, MNCs’ customer interests worldwide, this study underlines the benefits of firms’ perceived customer orientation and innovativeness. Studying both effects cross-nationally is valuable for gaining knowledge on the major pathway to product purchase intention and on the important role of country contexts (e.g., Meißner, Haurand and Stummer 2017).

Managers see that consumers’ perceptions of an MNC’s focus on customers and satisfying customer needs are directly and indirectly advantageous. Perceptions of firm activities that result in novel or creative offers to markets represent the main path for consumer information processes and behavior across nations. Respective activities are more important sources of competitive advantage.

Country environment is of paramount importance for understanding reinforcing and diminishing information processing contexts. Perceived firm innovativeness is effective regardless of context. Customer orientation effects are moderated by country development and national cultural dimensions, in opposite directions, requiring tradeoff decisions. A country portfolio with embeddedness, as the most impactful cultural dimension, illustrates this, with direct implications for MNC (Fig. 2.3). This is important as managers may need to focus on only few dimensions due to limited resources. We extend and clarify the results obtained in single countries with findings contradicting our observations (e.g., a negative moderation of individualism, Eisingerich and Rubera 2010, of uncertainty avoidance, Falkenreck and Wagner 2011). Our study supports other assumptions in single studies conducted in, e.g., the USA (Meißner, Haurand and Stummer 2017), South Korea (Ha and John 2010), or Chile (Valenzuela, Mulki and Jaramillo 2010), concerning their position in the portfolio, thereby extending their single-country perspectives.

Field I: Customer orientation has the strongest direct effect in countries with higher levels of development and lower levels of embeddedness. Individuals strive to evolve uniquely to fulfill their own ideas, which may reinforce perceived customer orientation effects (Schwartz 2014, p. 551). In Western European and North American countries, MNCs profit most from customer-oriented activities.

Field II: Country development enhances, and embeddedness reduces, this effect. We carefully recommend customer orientation activities because their effects are reinforced in higher development countries (e.g., Hong Kong, Israel); careful assessment is required in high embeddedness countries (e.g., Saudi Arabia, United Arab Emirates).

Field III: Lower country development diminishes, and lower embeddedness reinforces, this effect. Because of the opposite rationale of Field II, and since only a few countries are located here (e.g., Brazil, Portugal), we recommend careful customer orientation activities.

Field IV: The effect is diminished by the degrees of country development and by embeddedness. Perceived customer orientation is less relevant. Alternative activities to attract consumers are recommended.

The portfolio shows where MNCs should invest in customer-oriented activities or transfer established successful ones from other countries. MNCs may also estimate respective effects before entering new countries by referring to the countries’ levels of country development and embeddedness.

Figure 2.3

Country Portfolio. (Source: Own Creation)

2.5 Limitations and Further Research

This study has certain limitations that suggest future research directions.

Although we carefully collected specific data, database expansion can enable further conclusions, for example, by analyzing different customer orientation, innovation activities, or industries (e.g., Rubera and Kirca 2017). Our cross-national design improves external validity, while future studies may place emphasis on country-specific designs or internal validity. This study includes more developed than emerging countries. In a balanced sample, perhaps a weaker direct and indirect effect of perceived customer orientation on product purchase intention may emerge. Moreover, a longitudinal study design would account for changes in perceptions over time (Ndubisi 2012; Yen, Teng and Tzeng 2020).

Measuring purchases objectively is an obvious but difficult to realize goal in 53 counties. For various reasons, we measured perceived customer orientation as one construct, whereas differentiating affective from cognitive orientations (Aurier and Séré de Lanauze 2012; Ndubisi 2012) and customer centricity from empowerment activities (Habel et al. 2020; Meißner, Haurand and Stummer 2017) can provide finer-grained insights. Perceived firm innovativeness can also be measured by differentiating affect from cognition or their respective effects (Kunz, Schmitt and Meyer 2011). Finally, qualitative research allows for the development of emic, country-specific measures, which may enhance construct equivalence assessment (Ford et al. 2018). Due to the high number of countries surveyed and the resulting need for item comparability, we use slightly modified, imposed etic scales (Yang, Floyd and Tanner Jr 2019).

Regarding our conceptual framework, scholars may study further independent variables in addition to customer orientation (e.g., self-relevance, Eisingerich and Rubera 2010) and antecedents of perceived customer orientation, which help to steer its effects (e.g., information reliability, Ndubisi 2012). Perceived customer orientation can be mediated by further constructs, which should be studied in parallel with firm innovativeness, as can the strong direct effect of firm innovativeness (e.g., customer value, quality, Valenzuela, Mulki and Jaramillo 2010; van Riel et al. 2021). Comparing consumer and firm customer orientation perceptions offers further theoretical inspiration (Habel et al. 2020). Finally, further contextual factors are of interest (ethnocentrism, MNC origin, etc., Gürhan-Canli, Sarial-Abi and Hayran 2018).

2.6 Conclusions

This study finds that while country development and two dimensions of national culture strongly explain the cross-national effects in perceived customer orientation, the stronger effects of perceived firm innovativeness do not depend on these contexts. We thereby offer a theoretical complement to past research, which has only assumed a role for national institutions. We look forward to further research linking institutions and consumer perceptions of customer orientation and innovativeness.

Footnotes

1

Following Gaur and Kumar (2018), a systematic literature review was performed in over 50 journals according to Harzing’s recent journal quality list, focusing on empirical studies published in 2010 or later with cross-citation of the most-often-cited studies. The keywords used were (perceived) customer orientation, market orientation, innovativeness, and innovation orientation.

2

We develop the surveys for the MNC and obtained access to the resulting data for research purposes in return. However, due to confidentiality, we cannot name the MNC or its product brands, but it has been ranked among the 50 most innovative firms in the world (Boston Consulting Group 2018) and among the top 5 most innovative firms active in Germany (in a 2023 survey of 3,700 innovation experts and in a 2022 survey referring to patent registrations not quoted for confidentiality reasons).

3

As the United Nations Development Program and Schwartz’s cultural values data do not offer values for all countries in our data set, we have replaced data from a few countries with data from the nearest neighboring country (following Steenkamp and Geyskens 2006). Taiwan was replaced by China. We estimated the models without Taiwan with stable results (see Table G.9 in the electronic supplementary material) but did consider the country in the study due to complexity and model identification reasons. Missing cultural data for Morocco, Saudi Arabia, United Arab Emirates, and Vietnam were replaced by data from Senegal, Oman, and Thailand. We estimated models without including those countries with stable results (see Table G.11 in the electronic supplementary material). For model complexity and identification reasons, the countries remained in the study.

© The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Fachmedien Wiesbaden GmbH, part of Springer Nature 2025

N. JacobsStrategic Orientations and Innovativeness of Multinational CorporationsHandel und Internationales Marketing Retailing and International Marketinghttps://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-658-49019-5_3

3. Study 2: Effects of National Institutions on Corporate Brand Ability Associations during the Pandemic

Nele Jacobs1  

(1)

Fachbereich IV, Universität Trier, Trier, Germany

Nele Jacobs

Email: nf.jacobs@outlook.com

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at https://​doi.​org/​10.​1007/​978-3-658-49019-5_​3.

This study was published as: Jacobs, N. & Swoboda, B. (2024). Effects of National Institutions on Corporate Brand Ability Associations during the Pandemic. Management International Review, 64(2), 129–163 (see also Section G.2 in the electronic supplementary material).

3.1 Introduction

The coronavirus pandemic has affected people’s lives and consumers’ behavior in many ways. Some corporate brands lost importance, and others gained attention, e.g., through offers that suddenly became necessary (Das et al. 2021a; Jabeen et al. 2022). Firms, such as Pfizer, have signaled their expertise and ability to produce and deliver specific offers, such as the first potent vaccine against the virus in Western countries (FDA 2020; Pfizer 2020).¹ The resulting so-defined CBAA, stored in the memory of target groups, are beneficial in many ways (Brown and Dacin 1997): improving performance, employee actions, or consumer preferences (Berens, Van Riel and Van Bruggen 2005; Matarazzo, Resciniti and Simonetti 2020; Tsai et al. 2015).

However, whether consumers’ CBAA differs across countries or changes for firms with specific abilities or competitors during a black swan event is unclear. Such events are improbable, unpredictable, but highly impactful disruptions, which appear less random in hindsight than they factually were (MacKay and Chia 2013; Taleb 2007, pp. xvii–xviii). This gap is not surprising, as most corporate brand studies focus on few countries, quiet times, and one point in time (e.g., Matarazzo, Resciniti and Simonetti 2020; Walsh and Bartikowski 2013). We assume that national institutions matter for consumers’ CBAA in general and more before than during the pandemic. We contribute to literature by developing institutional-theoretical reasons for the determining role of national institutions and hierarchically testing their explained variances.

Scholars have broadly studied consumer behavior during the pandemic (e.g., nationally showing opposite effects of increasing brand trust or hate in the pandemic, Jian et al. 2020; Jabeen et al. 2022).² Fewer international studies exist (see Fig. 3.1). Seven studies focus on brands by comparing 2–3 countries. Some show how brands have won or lost during the pandemic (e.g., through perceived pandemic fit, attachment, or anxieties, Ahmad et al. 2023; Özsomer et al. 2022; Ozuem et al. 2021; Verlegh et al. 2021). Others study vaccinations, delivery sentiments, or advertising (Chan and Saqib 2021; Meena and Kumar 2022; Park et al. 2022). Ahmad et al. (2023) and Meena and Kumar (2022) show country differences but without rationales for them. Neither does the only study in many countries (consumer conflict and brands, Dineva et al. 2023). Thus, most studies show contradictory consequences for brands, compare few countries at one point in time, and do not theorize the roles of national institutions. Seven further studies on consumer behavior in a few countries assume such roles (e.g., national culture for pandemic spread, Cho, Guo and Torelli 2022; Pantano et al. 2021, government actions for trust, Davvetas, Ulqinaku and Abi 2022; Dzandu 2023; Prentice et al. 2021, norms for compliance, Danatzis and Möller-Herm 2023; Sakib et al. 2023). Across nations, four studies examine national institutions (e.g., culture for pandemic spread, Ahmadi et al. 2022; Dheer, Egri and Treviño 2021, government actions for trust, Liu, Shahab and Hoque 2022, or religiosity for vaccination, Orlandi, Febo and Perdichizzi 2022). However, we know little regarding national institutions’ impacts on consumer CBAA during the pandemic.

Figure 3.1

Literature Review on International Studies on Consumer Behavior during COVID-19. (Source: Own Creation)

In summary, one gap in our knowledge is the absence of theoretical reasons developed to explain for cross-national differences in CBAA in general, as will show in Sect. 1.​2.​2, and during the pandemic. These are important for research and innovative MNCs, especially during black swan events (He and Harris 2020; Matarazzo, Resciniti and Simonetti 2020; Tsai et al. 2015). Despite COVID-19 studies, scholars and practitioners know little about the respective changing effects of national institutions on CBAA or corporate brands across nations. Because of its importance, scholars have called for such research (e.g., Ahmadi et al. 2022; Jabeen et al. 2022; Mukherjee et al. 2021).

We address the research gaps by analyzing two research questions. First, do national institutions affect consumers’ CBAA across countries, and if so, how? Second, how has the COVID-19 pandemic changed this influence of national institutions on consumers’ CBAA for a pandemic-relevant manufacturer and its competitors? We offer two contributions.

First, insights into the effects of national institutions on CBAA across countries foster new, important knowledge from the consumer perspective. Institutions are known to be relevant for consumer perceptions (e.g., of reputation, image, Leonidou et al. 2022; Swoboda, Puchert and Morschett 2016). Corporate ability represents a specific kind of firm expertise and is seen as a highly purchase-relevant signal (Brown and Dacin 1997; Walsh and Bartikowski 2013). However, signaling theory does not explain country differences in consumers’ CBBA. We provide novel rationales by employing institutional theory to complement signaling theory. Regulative, normative, and cultural-cognitive institutions are prevalent in IB research and guide MNCs’ social credibility and acceptance (i.e., external legitimacy, Kostova et al. 2020; Scott 2014, pp. 55–74). We contribute to IB and CBAA research by developing respective theoretical mechanisms and testing them.

Second, we contribute to IB research by theorizing the changing role of national institutions in consumers’ CBAA during a black swan event. Scholars have studied institutional changes (e.g., regulations, culture on entry modes, performance, Beugelsdijk et al. 2018, Puck, Holtbrügge and Mohr 2009). In contrast, we study changes in consumers’ consciousness and thus changed roles of objectively mostly stable country-level institutions on individual-level associations. Black swan events change individual behavior (Donthu and Gustafsson 2020) and likely the relevance of institutions from the consumer perspective. Those events have mostly been linked with negative consequences (e.g., individual distrust of regulations, supply chain risks, Davvetas, Ulqinaku and Abi 2022; Lin 2020), while we newly theorize a more favorable response to MNCs’ important signals and weaker influence of institutions on CBBA (e.g., Nielsen, Wechtler and Zheng 2023; Wenzel, Stanske and Lieberman 2021). Insights into whether regulative, normative, or cultural-cognitive cross-national differences have become less important from a consumer viewpoint are valuable to managers who coordinate consumer interest globally, as CBAA formed in times of crisis is beneficial in the long term (He and Harris 2020). Explained variances in MSEM reveal this empirically.

3.2 Theory and Hypotheses

We propose a framework in which objectively mostly stable national institutions determine consumers’ CBAA (see Fig. 3.2). We conceptualize the prevalent institutional pillars in IB research (Kostova et al. 2020) and their relative effects at two points in time, 2019 (t₀, pre-crisis) and 2021 (t₁, mid-crisis).

Figure 3.2

Conceptual Framework. (Source: Own Creation)

3.2.1 Conceptual Differentiation

CBAA represents consumers’ evaluation of a firm’s expertise and ability to produce and deliver high-quality and innovative offerings (based on external information or memory, Brown and Dacin 1997; Berens, van Riel and Van Rekom 2007; Gürhan-Canli and Batra 2004). Scholars have consistently referred to the conceptualization by Brown and Dacin (1997). However, research has mostly revolved around three types of important corporate brand associations: CBAA, CSR, and corporate reputation (CR). We must therefore briefly differentiate them conceptually.

CSR reflects evaluations of how well a firm meets its stakeholders’ expectations and societal obligations by engaging in voluntary activities (Berens, van Riel and Van Rekom 2007; Brown and Dacin 1997). It has been studied together with CBAA (e.g., Bartikowski and Berens 2021; Khan and Kamal 2021). However, the latter focuses on quality and innovation, which more strongly and more directly shape consumer responses toward a firm (Contini et al. 2019; Gürhan-Canli and Batra 2004; Walsh and Bartikowski 2013). CBAA can compensate for CSR effects but is not compensated by CSR (Berens, van Riel and Van Rekom 2007).

Perceived CR represents broad consumer evaluations of firms’ customer orientation, responsibility, product range quality, good employer status, and financial strength (in a customer-based CR scale, Walsh and Beatty 2007; for alternatives, see Sarstedt, Wilczynski and Melewar 2013). Those dimensions are integrated into an overall value or holistic level of esteem that stakeholders have for a firm (e.g., Deephouse, Newburry and Soleimani 2016), and studies seldom examine individual CR dimensions. Thus, CBAA is more specific and may be a mediator but not part of CR (Contini et al. 2019; Khan and Kamal 2021).

3.2.2 Past Cross-National Research on CBAA

We conceptually focus on CBAA, i.e., the ability of a firm to deliver specific offers from the consumer perspective (Brown and Dacin 1997). Conceptually, these associations develop as consumers perceive a firm’s focus on its expertise, innovativeness and superior processing, its industry leadership, or through prior experience with a company, word-of-mouth, or media communication (Berens, van Riel and Van Rekom 2007; Brexendorf and Keller 2017; Brown and Dacin 1997). Empirically, various aspects were shown to drive high levels of CBAA. Scholars address corporate brand knowledge, firms’ publicity or ability communication, and the (quality of) offered products, for example (Berens, Van Riel and Van Bruggen 2005; Einwiller et al. 2006; Kim, Park and Kim 2019; Teng 2020). In the context of black swan events, firms with specific abilities especially provide offerings that may directly alleviate the event’s impact. During the COVID-19 pandemic of the Ebola fever epidemic, this may have been the introduction of a vaccine to reduce the risk of a (severe) contraction of the disease (e.g., Altmann and Boyton 2022). Regarding natural catastrophes, Walmart used its specific abilities in logistics to promptly provide free food and supplies after hurricane Katrina in 2005 (e.g., Oh and Oetzel 2022).

However, prior international consumer studies only compare 2–4 countries to show that CBAA affects attitudes or behavior, such as purchase intentions or loyalty (see Sect. G.4.1 in the electronic supplementary material). Not all show country differences, and while five studies assume that national culture is a possible reason for the country differences, only two hypothesize but cannot truly test it (Baghi and Gabrielli 2019; Contini et al. 2019; Madden, Roth and Dillon 2012; Marquina and Morales 2012; Moon, Lee and Oh 2015; Walsh and Bartikowski 2013). Further institutions are not discussed. However, they often see corporate ability as important firm signal and decisive information cue for consumers (Brown and Dacin 1997; Contini et al. 2019).

3.2.3 Signaling Theory

According to signaling theory, signals transfer credible information to reduce information asymmetries between transaction parties (Spence 1973). The firm’s signal strength depends on the extent to which it is perceived by individuals, is weighed as important, or matches expectations (Connelly et al. 2011). If weak signals such as weaker (vs. stronger) CBAA are not perceived, consumers fail to notice and are unable to reduce their information asymmetry or make decisions based on respective associations (e.g., Erdem, Swait and Valenzuela 2006; Tsai et al. 2015). The associations might also not be important for decision-making, for example, if consumers can base their decision on alternative information than that regarding the MNC (such as universally enforced quality standards or established conventions, e.g., Connelly et al. 2011). Finally, if the CBAA does not match consumers’ expectations in a decision situation, it may not be accessed as helpful information for decision-making (e.g., Matarazzo, Resciniti and Simonetti 2020; Walsh and Bartikowski 2013).

Studies mention the role of the environment for a signal’s strength, but the theory does not specify such environments (e.g., Erdem, Swait and Valenzuela 2006; Vasudeva, Nachum and Say 2018). Thus, internationally, signaling theory needs to be complemented by institutional theory, especially to determine cross-national differences in institutional signaling environments (e.g., Deephouse, Newburry and Soleimani 2016; Leonidou et al. 2022; Swoboda, Puchert and Morschett 2016). Institutional theory provides conceptualizations of country differences and thereby accounts for the signaling environment of MNCs (e.g., Connelly et al. 2011; Griffith, Lee and Yalcinkaya 2023; Vasudeva, Nachum and Say 2018).

3.2.4 Institutional Theory

We ground our conceptualization in organizational institutionalism, as it is the original basis in IB research that views institutions as social constructs (Kostova et al. 2020). Accordingly, institutions are “symbolic frameworks that provide guidelines for behavior, and lend stability, regularity, and meaning to social life” (Orr and Scott 2008). They include the patterns that individuals share in a society, and MNCs must act according to the institutions in place to overcome liability of foreignness and be legitimized, for example (Beckert 2010; Scott 2014, pp. 71–74). The regulative, normative, and cultural-cognitive pillars define what is legal, perceived as desirable, and valuable in a country (Scott 2014, pp. 57–58). Both the interactions of individuals in a host country’s society and between MNCs and this society are influenced by these pillars, as both are part of a country’s institutional framework (Kostova et al. 2020; Yang et al. 2021). We study institutional differences between consumers’ home countries (in contrast to MNCs’ home country institutions or institutional distances that are less relevant or common in international consumer studies, e.g., Swoboda et al. 2017). Respective differences in foreign countries affect the signaling mechanisms by which firms’ corporate brand ability cues are cross-nationally perceived by consumers, weighed as important, or match their expectations of an MNCs’ abilities in memory. For example, rules and normative expectations may hamper consumers’ perception, as the required stronger adaptation of MNCs likely makes distinguishable CBAA more difficult (e.g., Ang, Benischke and Doh 2015; Khan, Lew and Park 2015). Shared cultural-cognitive values may influence how meaningful and important specific CBAAs are for consumers in a society (e.g., Contini et al. 2019).

These mechanisms are affected by black swan events (e.g., Oh and Oetzel 2022). We theorize that national institutions still affect firms’ signaling mechanisms and thereby consumers’ CBAA, but more weakly during than before the COVID-19 pandemic as a black swan event, for at least two reasons.

First, COVID-19 changed prevailing conditions and goals in a society, such as saving lives. The relevance of national institutions for consumer associations may differ to quiet times (Das et al. 2021a; Oh and Oetzel 2022). Changed expectations for MNCs to conform to suddenly less applicable societal institutions are a possible reason (i.e., institutional voids, as established institutions cannot facilitate consumers’ activities anymore, Khanna and Palepu 1997). This may hold especially for MNCs with a unique ability to offer key products in the pandemic, such as vaccines. Established norms, for example regarding medical trials and in general, lost importance to consumers due to the importance of mitigating the pandemic impact in a timely manner (e.g., Krammer 2020).

Second, COVID-19 changed consumers’ associations of MNCs with specific abilities due to their actions. Increased perceived individual uncertainty or control loss supports corporate brands’ function of confidence building and respective CBAA (Beck, Rahinel and Bleier 2020; Campbell et al. 2020). Moreover, MNCs with specific abilities may contribute to countries’ institutional development. COVID-19 vaccine manufacturers and distributors such as Pfizer or Moderna might be perceived favorably due to their actions and thus may be less dependent on the institutions and related consumer expectations in place (e.g., Donthu and Gustafsson 2020).

Both mechanisms may especially benefit firms with specific abilities, in contrast to competitors without comparable expertise. Next, our theoretical rationales for the effects of each institution on CBAA in general are derived, followed by rationales for changes during the pandemic.

3.2.5 Hypothesis on Regulative Institutions

Regulative institutions constitute the rules and laws in a country, monitor conformity, and sanction violations (Scott 2014, pp. 59–64). They delineate what is legally permitted, rewarded, or punished and are often conceptualized in terms of political stability, governmental effectiveness, or rule of law, referring to the second most common World Governance Indicators (WGI) vs. the more often used GCR (Kostova et al. 2020). We focus on WGI because it includes civil and human rights aspects that are important in a pandemic (Dheer, Egri and Treviño 2021; Liu, Shahab and Hoque 2022).

Studies broadly show regulative institutions’ role in firm performance, strategy, or responsibility (e.g., Ang, Benischke and Doh 2015; Chao and Kumar 2010; Zhang, Zhang and Chang 2021). In contrast, consumer studies are limited to regulative moderations of CR or CSR effects or mediations of perceived institutions (e.g., Chen et al. 2020; Leonidou et al. 2022; Yang et al. 2021; Zimmer and Swoboda 2023). Accordingly, the relevant effects on CBAA have not been studied thus far.

We theorize that increased regulative institutions reduce CBAA because of two mechanisms. First, higher national regulations in a country force MNCs to adhere to local rules in their engagements (Ang, Benischke and Doh 2015). They ensure that MNCs disclose their activities, which individuals translate as legitimate, into associations (Beckert 2010). However, even with specific abilities, it can be difficult for MNCs to differentiate themselves competitively (Kirca, Bearden and Roth 2011; Martin, Johnson and French 2011). In contrast, weaker regulations can facilitate the signaling of specific abilities (Khan, Lew and Park 2015). Decreasing the liabilities of foreignness is likely, as are increasing beneficial associations as a global brand (Denk, Kaufmann and Roesch 2012; Özsomer 2012; Swoboda and Sinning 2020). Moreover, individuals themselves conform to regulations (Scott 2014, p. 62). They expect MNCs to act in a compliant manner and have higher levels of knowledge in more regulated countries, where they are exposed to rules (Ang, Benischke and Doh 2015; Chao and Kumar 2010). Such expectations, embedded in regulations, are challenging for MNCs (e.g., Deephouse, Newburry and Soleimani 2016). This is likely less distinctive in less institutionally regulated countries.

Second, in societies with stable and democratic environments, consumers trust in and rely on their government for protection; in contrasting societies, their need for security increases (e.g. Steenkamp and Geyskens 2006). Additionally, weaker political structures are accompanied by nonfunctional consumer redress mechanisms (institutional voids, Khanna and Palepu 1997). An absence of regulations to ensure the correct behavior of MNCs makes trustful ability cues important (Puffer, McCarthy and Boisot 2010). Individuals value how MNCs with special abilities and actions contribute to their country’s progress, shape standards, and contribute to regulative development (Khan, Lew and Park 2015; Miller et al. 2022). In contrast, in higher-regulated countries, it is easier to organize interest groups that may pose challenges to MNCs.

Based on these theoretical considerations, we propose the following:

H1a.

Increasing regulative institutions have a negative effect on consumers’ CBAA across nations.

Few studies on COVID-19 address changed governmental rules and their changed perceptions by individuals, with consequences for trust or panic behavior (e.g., Dzandu 2023; Prentice et al. 2021). We argue along our two theoretical mechanisms: changed relevance of regulations for consumer, thus changing legitimization pressures or expectations, and changed associations of MNCs with specific abilities due to their confidence or contribution. We theorize that the pandemic reduced the negative effect of regulative institutions, especially for strong CBAA, for two major reasons.

First, MNCs with unique corporate abilities have gained attention amid COVID-19. Consumers consider those MNCs more legitimate, also in more highly regulated societies or in competition, and adapt their expectations (Deephouse, Newburry and Soleimani 2016). Expectations are affected by, e.g., medical approval laws or procedures, and supplemented by evaluations that suggest that approved vaccines, for example, are rare, unique, or legitimate (Prentice et al. 2021). Both add to the evaluation of the stability or rules of a government that gain importance in consumers’ everyday lives and reduce the role of traditional regulative institutions. This may render CBAA more relevant also in highly as well as weakly regulated societies.

Second, in the pandemic, MNCs’ specific abilities to offer relevant products help fill certain regulative voids and may contribute to regulative institutional development (Miller et al. 2022). The association of such MNCs differs from that of their competitors, as the former restore consumers’ sense of control. Consumers associate their respective abilities with strong brands that reduce their felt uncertainties during the pandemic (e.g., Das et al. 2021a; Verlegh et al. 2021). This may hold for both highly and weakly regulated societies, thus reducing the negative effect of high regulative institutions on CBAA.

We argue the following:

H1b.

The negative effect of increasing regulative institutions on consumers’ CBAA across nations is stronger before than during the pandemic.

3.2.6 Hypothesis on Normative Institutions

Normative institutions refer to norms, conventions, or codes of conduct (Scott 2014, pp. 64–66). They can act as imposing constraints or reinforce social behavior toward other members of a society in highly normative countries. Research has predominantly conceptualized normative institutions based on the Global Competitiveness Report (GCR, Chao and Kumar 2010; Kostova et al. 2020; Yao et al. 2022). We also do this, as GCR includes relevant aspects of firm behavior that guide cognitive processes of individuals and expectations toward MNCs, also during COVID-19 (Beckert 2010; Whelan and Hingston 2022). MNCs thus aim to be legitimized and meet societal expectations.

Studies consider the role of normative institutions for market entry, exchange partners, or performance (e.g., Ang, Benischke and Doh 2015; Zhang, Zhang and Chang 2021). Consumer studies have analyzed differences in normative institutions as part of the country context and determinants of consumer brand evaluations (e.g., Gaganis et al. 2021; Khan, Lew and Park 2015; Yang et al. 2021) but not of CBAA.

We theorize that increased normative institutions reduce CBAA for two reasons. First, in societies with more normative institutions, firms conform to the established norms to gain legitimacy, which is difficult since societal norms are rarely clear or externalized (e.g., Martin, Johnson and French 2011; Kostova et al. 2020). MNCs therefore need local experience to conform to behavioral conventions, for example. In contrast, if fewer norms exist, consumer expectations toward MNCs’ behaviors are less pronounced. This decreases MNCs’ risk of falling short of expectations and potential perceptions of their outsidership (Denk, Kaufmann and Roesch 2012; Gaganis et al. 2021). Individuals may be more open to firms with specific abilities or innovations (Chen et al. 2009), while more specified norms are more likely to impede innovative behavior (Bruton, Ahlstrom and Li 2010). As public opinion regarding desirable codes of conduct is less precisely defined, MNCs’ legitimation is facilitated (Chao and Kumar 2010).

Second, in societies with more normative institutions, individuals have confidence in those norms or conventions regarding their judgments (e.g., Steenkamp and Geyskens 2006). They may expect that firms follow norms to legitimize their societal position and are thus less likely to engage in CBAA based on them. In opposite societies, this sense of certainty is reduced. More uncertain environments make specific CBAA more important (e.g., for consumers’ confidence, Beck, Rahinel and Bleier 2020; Khan, Lew and Park 2015). These abilities may enhance consumers’ confidence in MNCs and elicit a halo effect, linking qualitatively valuable and innovative offers to morally correct behaviors (Kirca, Bearden and Roth 2011).

We hypothesize the following:

H2a.

Increasing normative institutions have a negative effect on consumers’ CBAA across nations.

The changed effects of normative institutions are seldom analyzed, in general or linked to black swan events. For example, COVID-19 studies discuss the effect of norms on consumer behavior (e.g., Orlandi, Febo and Perdichizzi 2022; Sakib et al. 2023). We expect a reduced effect of normative institutions.

One reason comprises the prevailing conditions and goals in societies during the pandemic, which changed the perception of established norms and reduced societal pressures on MNCs with specific abilities. Even in high-normative societies, unique offers encourage external legitimacy (Gürhan-Canli and Batra 2004; Martin, Johnson and French 2011). While individuals conform to societal norms, experience with a pandemic is limited, and expectations regarding MNCs with specific abilities to adapt are reduced (Beckert 2010; Campbell et al. 2020). As consumers grew hopeful with MNCs offering, e.g., a vaccine to fight the pandemic, they likely put more emphasis on the firm’s organizational legitimacy (Yang et al. 2021). Firms’ innovation ability and identity may have caused powerful associations, rendering previous normative expectations less important and CBAA more important in both more and less normative societies.

Another reason regards how the disruption affected individuals’ signal perceptions or associations of MNCs with specific abilities. As the pandemic increased insecurity (Das et al. 2021a), firms, especially those with specific abilities, reduced uncertainty in a society even beyond the confidence building of brands in uncertain times (Beck, Rahinel and Bleier 2020; Puffer, McCarthy and Boisot 2010; Yao et al. 2022). Firms with specific abilities linked to the concerns of black swan events may have helped restore consumers’ routines and security by shaping societal expectations, beliefs, and norms in more and less normative societies (Campbell et al. 2020; Gürhan-Canli and Batra 2004; Kirca, Bearden and Roth 2011; Miller et al. 2022).

We hypothesize the following:

H2b.

The negative effect of increasing normative institutions on consumers’ CBAA across nations is stronger before than during the pandemic.

3.2.7 Hypothesis on Cultural-Cognitive Institutions

Cultural-cognitive institutions involve national culture, i.e., the shared beliefs, roles, and values that form and give meaning to everyday life (Scott 2014, pp. 59–67). While different cultural approaches have their merits, we follow that of Schwartz (1994). This approach is theory-based, defines values psychologically, is cross-nationally stable, and explains most country-level variance in corporate brand research (Swoboda and Batton 2019; De Mooij 2017). It is also more comprehensive and less research context-dependent than other approaches (e.g., Berry, Guillén and Zhou 2010). Its dimensions of embeddedness, hierarchy, and mastery (versus autonomy, egalitarianism, and harmony) are interdependent.

Scholars have broadly analyzed the role of culture in corporations and brands. Studies using consumers as the unit of analysis mostly compare a few countries and assume cultural moderations of CBAA or CSR effects (e.g., Moon, Lee and Oh 2015; Walsh and Bartikowski 2013; Zimmer and Swoboda 2023). Few studies have analyzed culture a continuous determinant of CR (e.g., Deephouse, Newburry and Soleimani 2016; Swoboda and Batton 2019). Its effects on CBAA are unexplored. We theoretically focus on embeddedness for several reasons: Embeddedness reflects the structures between individuals and groups in a society (Schwartz 2014, p. 551) and represents an important factor for the spread of COVID-19, for example (Cho, Guo and Torelli 2022; Dheer, Egri and Treviño 2021). Embeddedness depicts important symbols of cultures, is theoretically the most important cultural dimension, empirically explains most variance, and corresponds to the most often examined cultural dimension in corporate brand research (Gupta, Pansari and Kumar 2018; Swoboda and Batton 2019). The remaining dimensions are tested in stability checks.

We theorize that increased embeddedness strengthens CBAA. Generally, individuals from more embedded societies appreciate unity, common goals, and their society’s well-being. They exhibit more information-seeking behavior and have broader brand knowledge (Schwartz 1994, p. 104). Individuals appreciate cooperative endeavors that benefit their entire society and thus consider MNCs legitimized opportunities for collaboration, unity, and the achievement of shared aims. When MNCs often incorporate practices that benefit stakeholders, such associations increase (Swoboda and Batton 2019). In contrast, individuals from less embedded societies have independent ideas, value the right to pursue their own intellectual directions or feelings, and exhibit more individual behavior (Schwartz 2014, p. 551; De Mooij 2017). They exhibit more variety-seeking behavior, disregard ability signals, and have fewer associations, perceiving MNCs to restrict their ability to control their activities (Deephouse, Newburry and Soleimani 2016; Erdem, Swait and Valenzuela 2006).

As high-quality offerings enhance societal development (Gupta, Pansari and Kumar 2018; Schwartz 2014, p. 551), they likely contribute to CBAA in more embedded societies. In addition to relying on traditions, embedded societies are open to innovations and global brands if they enable individuals to ensure family security and build social relationships (De Mooij 2017). Global corporate brands are associated with confidence, e.g., high functional benefits improve group interest and psychological confidence in building social relationships (Gupta, Pansari and Kumar 2018; Swoboda and Sinning 2021). This is different in less embedded societies.

We argue:

H3a.

Increasing embeddedness has a positive effect on consumers’ CBAA across nations.

Changed effects of cultural-cognitive institutions over time are seldom addressed in the literature. COVID-19 studies have observed the role of culture in virus spreading and consumer behavior (Cho, Guo and Torelli 2022; Pantano et al. 2021); cross-nationally, only two secondary data studies exist (Ahmadi et al. 2022; Dheer, Egri and Treviño 2021). We expect a weaker influence on consumers’ CBAA.

COVID-19 affected the value of social welfare among societies with higher embeddedness. However, in addition to being concerned with the well-being of their society, consumers’ self-concerns increased (Das et al. 2021a). MNCs with specific abilities, such as offering vaccines, were more likely to meet the expectations of consumers from both cultures with higher and lower embeddedness. Individuals became more likely to be preoccupied with health concerns, either for their community or themselves (Cho, Guo and Torelli 2022). Offers that immediately combatted the pandemic both supported societies’ well-being and restored individual freedoms (Dheer, Egri and Treviño 2021). Reduced risks of outsidership or higher legitimacy in both cultures could more easily be achieved (Denk, Kaufmann and Roesch 2012).

While the pandemic created uncertainty and anxiety among consumers from higher and lower embedded cultures, such cultures differed in the aspects of life where individuals felt uncertainty the most (Das et al. 2021a; Pantano et al. 2021). Consumers in highly embedded cultures likely sought to defend against the perceived threat to their culture’s well-being. In less embedded countries, consumers were presumably concerned about regaining a sense of control over their individual freedom (Pantano et al. 2021). Strong brands with specific abilities provided a sense of safety and reduced the pandemic’s impact on individuals’ lives (Park et al. 2022; Verlegh et al. 2021). It is reasonable that consumers from higher and lower embedded societies formed more beneficial CBAA (Verlegh et al. 2021).

We propose the following:

H3b.

The positive effect of increasing embeddedness on consumers’ CBAA across nations is stronger before than during the pandemic.

3.3 Empirical Study

3.3.1 Sample

Our data were obtained via long-term cooperation with a German MNC globally active in the health industry. The MNC annually conducts panel surveys regarding its own evaluation and that of four different major competitors in many countries, with up to 1,000 respondents per country. The countries and competitors in each country are chosen based on their importance to the MNC. We developed the surveys and received the data for scientific purposes. During the COVID-19 pandemic, we asked for competitor data for 2019 and 2021, which were available in 22 and 26 countries, respectively. We selected the countries included in the surveys for which data on Pfizer, as one competitor, was available.³ Twenty countries were available, while in two (six) countries, no data on Pfizer existed (e.g., Hungary, India, Vietnam). We also considered three further competitors surveyed in each country who did not provide a pandemic-relevant product after confirming their activity in the health industry. This procedure created a control group that we address in our stability checks.

We and a marketing research agency performed qualitative and quantitative pretests. The CBAA scale by Berens, Van Riel and Van Bruggen (2005) and the questionnaire design were pretested with two consumer focus groups and quantitatively tested in six important countries for the German MNC (N = 900 each, quota sample). These pretests yielded enhanced construct equivalence after smaller semantic adjustments and omitting an item in the CBAA scale due to a lack of independency.

For the main study, we used a repeated cross-sectional survey design, which is common in studies related to healthcare or social sciences, for example. Different individuals are examined using an identical research method at two points in time to allow the analysis of changes and trends in behavior at the aggregate level (e.g., Farndale et al. 2017; Stockemer 2019, pp. 32–33). The data were collected using a cross-national panel (66% and 64% average participation rate in 2019 and 2021). The agency controlled for data and panel quality. Text-appealing strategies were used, and minor rewards were offered (e.g., Pedersen and Nielsen 2016). Respondents in each country were randomly selected based on quota sampling and age and sex data from national registration offices. For various reasons (e.g., cross-national comparability, experience with MNCs, Özsomer 2012), urban respondents between 18 and 65 years old with higher levels of education and above-average incomes were chosen. They were initially asked about their awareness of and experience with the relevant MNCs in their country. To reduce possible biases, such as top-of-mind selection, the two firms that the respondent had at least general experience with were randomly selected for evaluation (mostly the German MNC and one competitor). This procedure led to 10,686 and 12,021 evaluations in both years. After eliminating Mahalanobis distance-based outliers (N = 159, N = 187), 10,527 (11,834) respondents remained in the 2019 (2021) sample (see Table 3.1; Kline 2015, pp. 72–73). As tests indicated nonnormally distributed data, we used an MLR estimator (Hox, Moerbeek and van de Schoot 2018, p. 66).

Table 3.1

Sample Characteristics. (Source: Own Creation)

2019

2021

Argentina

517

Greece

612

Argentina

546

Greece

657

Australia

542

Japan

648

Australia

531

Japan

586

Austria

523

Mexico

587

Austria

518

Mexico

603

Belgium

499

Poland

637

Belgium

633

Poland

677

Brazil

510

Russia

469

Brazil

546

Russia

502

Canada

582

Slovakia

454

Canada

710

Slovakia

594

China

535

South Africa

516

China

520

South Africa

628

Czech Republic

387

Ukraine

355

Czech Republic

609

Ukraine

557

France

506

UK

604

France

552

UK

629

Germany

476

USA

568

Germany

629

USA

607

Total Respondents

10,527

Total Respondents

11,834

Note: Pfizer’s vaccine introduced or prepared to be introduced (China, Russia).

3.3.2 Measurements

Individual-level items were measured on a five-point Likert-type scale (1 = strongly disagree to 5 = strongly agree, see Table 3.2). CBAA were measured using four items based on the scale established by Berens et al. (2005; Bartikowski and Berens 2021; Khan and Kamal 2021). A commercial translation agency applied parallel blind translation-back-translation. Minor item adjustments, such as cultural rephrasing, were made to maximize construct equivalence (Watkins 2010).

At the country level, we used prevailing measures from IB research and included alternative measures in our stability checks. Regulatory institutions were measured using the established six dimensions of WGI (Kostova et al. 2020; Ang, Benischke and Doh 2015). Data for 2019 and 2021 were obtained from the World Bank (2022b). Because we assume institutions to be objectively stable in the short term, we calculated the mean value over both years (following Brockman, Rui and Zou 2013; Scott 2014, pp. 159–160) and show results for 2019 and 2021 in stability checks. Three alternatives are tested in the stability checks. Normative institutions were measured using the established six dimensions from the GCR, following Kostova et al. (2020; Chao and Kumar 2010). They were retrieved from the World Economic Forum (2019), as data for 2021 was not available. Two alternatives are tested in the stability checks. Finally, we measured the cultural dimension of embeddedness, referring to the most recent data provided by Professor Schwartz (2008), as well as all opposite and further dimensions in our stability checks. The data is appropriate due to the approach’s theoretical foundation and as national cultural change occurs over generations rather than few years (e.g., Schwartz 1994, p. 96, 2014, p. 550).

We controlled for sex (0 = male; 1 = female), age, and perceived corporate brand globalness at the individual level (“To me, this is a global company brand”). While sex and age were shown to affect CBAA, globalness is an important predictor for global corporate brands (Özsomer 2012; Tsai et al. 2015; Swoboda and Sinning 2020). At the country level, we controlled the number of respondents in each country to prevent unequal numbers from affecting our results (Hox, Moerbeek and van de Schoot 2018, p. 215).

As consumers are nested within countries, we tested requirements for MSEM. ICCs show that 15.3% (11.9%) of the differences in CBAA in 2019 (2021) are attributed to country differences. MSEM is highly appropriate (Hox, Moerbeek and van de Schoot 2018, pp. 4–6). Reliability and validity tests and correlations yielded satisfactory results (see Table 3.2 and 3.3). Multilevel reliability was confirmed by multilevel alpha, composite, and maximal reliability (over the threshold of .8, Table 3.4). Since we study one dependent variable, neither CMV nor possible endogeneity are an issue; institutions are not closely theoretically related to consumers’ CBAA (Lindell and Whitney 2001).

Measurement invariance tests ensured that parameters were measured equally across groups. Full scalar invariance was achieved cross-nationally (see Sect. G.4.2 in the electronic supplementary material). Multilevel measurement invariance was tested comparing each country (Jak, Oort and Dolan 2013). All factor loadings proved equal across levels; cluster bias is not a problem in this study.

3.3.3 Method

We use MSEM in Mplus 8.8 because it accounts for nested data structure by considering cross-level effects between variables at the individual and country levels and allows the modeling of latent constructs (e.g., Weiber and Sarstedt 2021, pp. 415–419; pp. 432–433). The relative importance of higher-level variables is revealed by the amount of higher-level variance accounted for (showing the importance of each institution, Hox, Moerbeek and van de Schoot 2018, pp. 57–59).

We computed means as outcomes models because they analyze meanvalue differences in the outcome variables on the individual level through country-level variables. The level-one equation for CBAA is as follows:

CBAAij=β0j+βcontrols·controlsij+rij

(3.1)

Decomposition of CBAA in the country average (β0j) plus individual deviation from this average (rij) was performed, where i denotes consumers, j indicates countries, CBAAij marks consumer i’s CBAA, and controlsij includes individual-level control variables. At the country level, differences in CBAA mean values are explained by the independent variables of the institutional dimensions. The level-two equation is as follows:

β0j=γ00+γ01CIVj+u0j

(3.2)

CIVj represents the regulative, normative, and cultural-cognitive institutions at the country level. u0j serves as an error term, i.e., parts of the countries’ CBAA β0j that cannot be explained through each country-level variable.

Separate models were computed for the institutions (all institutions being too complex for only 20 clusters, Hox, Moerbeek and van de Schoot 2018, p. 18). The changes between time points were tested by statistically comparing the path coefficients of structural models following the multigroup analysis approach by Keil et al. (2000; Heidenreich et al. 2015). We calculated a single-level moderation analysis in SPSS with the year of analysis as a moderator (0–1 variable) for stability checks.

Table 3.2

Reliability and Validity. (Source: Own Creation)

2019

2021

Item

FL

KMO

ItTC

α

CR

AVE

λ

FL

KMO

ItTC

α

CR

AVE

λ

CBAA

[The company] offers high-quality products and services.

.887

.838

.854

.898

.908

.713

.892

.854

.835

.835

.887

.907

.710

.859

[…] develops innovative products and services.

.873

.870

.875

.842

.858

.845

[…] improves people’s quality of life through its products.

.816

.893

.812

.814

.874

.810

[…] employs talented people in comparison with competitors.

.762

.858

.758

.780

.851

.776

Note: α = Cronbach’s Alpha (≥.8); AVE = Average Variance Extracted (>.5); CR = Composite Reliability (≥.6); ItTC = Item-to-Total Correlation (≥.5); FL = Factor Loadings (EFA; >.5); KMO = Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin Criterion (≥.6); λ = Factor Loadings (CFA; >.5); CBAA = Corporate Brand Ability Associations.

Table 3.3

Correlations. (Source: Own Creation)

* p  <  .05; ** p  <  .01; *** p  <  .001; ns = not significant.

Note: CBAA = Corporate Brand Ability Associations; CPC = Consumers Per Cluster; EMB = Embeddedness; NOR = Normative Institutions; PBG = Perceived Corporate Brand Globalness; REG = Regulative Institutions.

Table 3.4

Multilevel Reliability. (Source: Own Creation)

2019

2021

Alpha

αW

.892

.887

αB

.974

.976

Composite Reliability

ωW

.893

.887

ωB

.989

.980

Maximal Reliability

HW

.903

.892

HB

1.000

.992

Note: α = Alpha (≥.8); ω = Composite Reliability (≥.8); H = Maximal Reliability (≥.8); W = Within (Individual) Level; B = Between (Country) Level.

3.3.4 Results

We present interesting additional descriptive findings first, followed by the hypothesis tests.

There were interesting results regarding the cross-national changes in Pfizer’s CBAA and awareness (measured as 1 = “I do not know the MNC” to 5 = “I know the MNC very well”) before and during the pandemic, based on mean value comparisons and frequencies of top 2 boxes (values 4 and 5 on our scale, see Table 3.5). The mean values of Pfizer’s CBAA rose significantly by +.18 (most items +.20 to +.23), and those of awareness by +.17. While these increases seem moderate, the top 2 boxes show that in just two years, Pfizer’s CBAA increased by up to +10.7% and the awareness by +5.3%. Both observations outperformed those of the competitors, as addressed in the stability checks.

The results for the hypothesis tests are shown in Table 3.6. National institutions were theorized to affect consumers’ CBAA. We find that the degree of regulative institutions negatively affects consumers’ CBAA at both points in time (b₀ = −.381, p₀ < .001; b₁ = −.200, p₁ = < .001). Similarly, the degree of normative institutions has negative effects (b₀ = −.550, p₀ < .001; b₁ = −.230, p₁ = < .01). H1a and H2a are supported. The degree of embeddedness strengthens consumers’ CBAA at both time points, supporting H3a (b₀ = 1.070, p₀ < .001; b₁ = .480, p₁ < .001). Regulative and cultural-cognitive institutions account for the highest share of explained country-level variance in both years (62.9% and 65.0%, 68.6% and 52.5%). Normative institutions explain 46.0% and 32.5% of the country-level variance. The results for the competitors—addressed in the stability checks—support the hypotheses.

We further expected the effect of institutions on consumers’ CBAA to decrease during the pandemic. Our results show that the negative effect of regulative institutions significantly decreased in 2021 compared to 2019 (b = −.181, pDiff. < .05), supporting H1b. In support of H2b, the negative effect of the degree of normative institutions significantly decreased (b = −.320, pDiff. < .05). Finally, H3b is supported as the effect of embeddedness decreases over time (b = −.590, pDiff. < .01). As mentioned, regulative and cultural-cognitive institutions have the highest explained country-level variance in both years. The explained variance for culture decreases by −16.1% and for normative institutions by −13.5%, while it remains mostly stable for regulative institutions. The results for competitors are discussed next.

Among the covariates, perceived brand globalness is significant in both years. Pfizer’s CBAA benefit from this stronger perception. Sex and age are insignificant in 2019 and significant in 2021. Women (vs. men) and older (vs. younger) people valued CBAA during the pandemic. Women are more health-conscious, and older people are more at risk for a severe course of the disease (e.g., Hesham, Riadh and Sihem 2021). The country-level control is insignificant.

3.3.5 Stability Checks

To test the stability of our results, we calculated a single-level moderation analysis in SPSS (see Sect. G.4.3 in the electronic supplementary material). The results underline changes between the years reported. Moreover, random split-half tests were used. They show stable effects of all institutions and respective changes of effects on CBAA in split samples for both years (see Sect. G.4.4 in the electronic supplementary material).

Alternative models were tested with further measures and further time points of national institutions with both mean values and distinct values for 2019 and 2021. First, we used the GCR (six items), the World Competitiveness Yearbook (WCY, seven items), and Economic Freedom Index (EFI, ten items) as alternative measures for regulative institutions, which we assume to be less relevant in the pandemic for associations of MNCs with specific abilities (Kostova et al. 2020; see Sect. G.4.5 in the electronic supplementary material). The tests support our hypothesized negative CBAA link and decreases in the effect of regulative institutions over time, at least at a minor significance level (GCRREG: b₀ = −.279, p₀ < .01 vs. b₁ = −.115, p₁ < .05, pDIFF < .10; WCYREG: b₀ = −.178, p₀ < .01 vs. b₁ = −.053, p₁ > .10, pDIFF > .10; EFI: b₀ = −.024, p₀ < .01 vs. b₁ = −.010, p₁ < .10, pDiff < .10). However, the alternative measures explain less country-level variance.

Second, we tested less-often applied measures of WCY (four items, as one dimension was not available for both years) and the GCI as alternatives for normative institutions (Kostova et al. 2020). The tests are stable as well (WCYNOR: b₀ = −.152, p₀ < .01 vs. b₁ = −.055, p₁ < .10, pDiff < .10; GCI: b₀ = −.031, p₀ < .01 vs. b₁ = −.011, p₁ > .05, pDiff < .10), with less explained country-level variance.

Third, the effects of the opposing dimensions of embeddedness were tested, i.e., affective autonomy (AAU) and intellectual autonomy (IAU, see Sect. G.4.5 in the electronic supplementary material). The results support the effects of embeddedness (both dimensions have negative effects: AAU: b₀ = −.561, p₀ < .001 vs. b₁ = −.263, p₁ < .01, pDiff < .05; IAU: b₀ = −.917, p₀ < .001 vs. b₁ = −.479, p₁ < .001, pDiff < .05). AAU explains less country-level variance than IAU, which tends to support our cognitive theorizing.

Table 3.5

Descriptives. (Source: Own Creation)

2019

2021

Item

MV/Std.

Top2-boxes

MV/Std.

Top2-boxes

Difference

MV

t-value

p

Difference

Top2-boxes

CBAA

3.59/.89

39.8%

3.77/.90

48.6%

+.18

−14.644

***

+8.8%

The company […] offers high-quality products and services.

3.68/1.01

56.6%

3.73/1.02

58.7%

+.05

−3.612

***

+2.1%

[…] develops innovative products and services.

3.64/.99

54.1%

3.84/1.00

62.6%

+.20

−14.706

***

+8.5%

[…] improves people’s quality of life through its products.

3.50/1.05

49.1%

3.73/1.07

59.8%

+.23

−16.359

***

+10.7%

[…] employs talented people in comparison with competitors.

3.53/.99

48.9%

3.76/1.04

59.3%

+.23

−16.403

***

+10.4%

Corporate Brand Awareness

2.84/1.15

26.2%

3.01/1.14

31.5%

+.17

−11.243

***

+5.3%

* p < .05; ** p < .01; *** p < .001; ns = not significant.

Note: MV = Mean Value; Std. = Standard Deviation; Top2 Boxes = Percentage of Respondents on 4 = agree/well known and 5 = strongly agree/very well known. CBAA = Corporate Brand Ability Associations

Table 3.6

Results. (Source: Own Creation)

* p < .05; ** p < .01; *** p < .001; ns = not significant; b = Unstandardized Coefficients; Standardized effects are shown in brackets.

Note: CBAA = Corporate Brand Ability Associations.

Fourth, we tested the two further dimensions of Schwartz (1994). The effects of hierarchy are significant and decrease significantly over time (b₀ = −.469, p₀ < .01 vs. b₁ = −.285, p₁ < .001, pDiff < .05). Only 27–30% of the country-level variance is explained, much lower than that explained by embeddedness. Mastery shows significant effects, but its decreases over time emerge only by tendency, and the explained country-level variance is marginal (5–10%, b₀ = −.094, p₀ < .01 vs. b₁ = −.077, p₁ < .001, pDiff > .05). This supports our choice of embeddedness for the hypothesis derivation.

Moreover, we carried out the same tests as in the main study on Pfizer’s competitors (see Sect. G.4.6 in the electronic supplementary material). The descriptive mean values changed between both time points by only −.04 to +.11 (significant due to a larger sample). The increase in the top 2 boxes is weaker than that for Pfizer (ability −1.1% to +5.0%; awareness +2.4%). However, the observations for the competitors are positive as well. The effects of all institutions are lower than in the case of Pfizer, but almost all are significant. Thus, H1-3a and our theoretical rationales are supported beyond one firm. Comparing the years, the effect changes are lower for competitors—significant for regulative institutions (b = −.100, pDiff < .01) and embeddedness (b = −.297, pDiff < .01), not for normative institutions. We discuss this interesting insight.

Finally, we controlled for the extent to which the timing of vaccine introduction in the countries affected our results, but no further important insights emerged (see Sect. G.4.7 in the electronic supplementary material).

3.4 Discussion

3.4.1 Overview

Scholars have recommended that IB research on corporate brands and especially pandemic consequences should extend beyond single-country studies (e.g., Ahmadi et al. 2022; Matarazzo, Resciniti and Simonetti 2020; Mukherjee et al. 2021). We acted upon these recommendations and examined institutional effects on cross-national consumer associations of firms’ ability to produce and deliver high-quality and innovative offerings and their changes referring to institutional theory (Brown and Dacin 1997). This is an important issue because CBAA is important for MNCs, affects consumer loyalty or firms performance, and is subject to changes due to a black swan event (Moon, Lee and Oh 2015; Tsai et al. 2015). We found that CBAA is affected differently (in strength and sign) by regulative, normative, and cultural-cognitive institutions and that such effects changed during the pandemic. Next, we provide a broader contribution from our study for black swan events in general.

3.4.2 Contribution to Theory

Regarding our first research question, we have examined cross-national differences in the influence of the pillars of prevalent organizational institutionalism on CBAA. We contribute to IB research, particularly that on regulative and cultural-cognitive institutions, as regulations and embeddedness explain most of the variance in CBAA in 2019.

Increasing regulations reduce MNC consumers’ CBAA across nations: people in countries with lower regulations value firms’ quality and innovation abilities more. This finding is contrary to what might be assumed based on a general interest in the positive aspects of regulative institutions (e.g., Puffer, McCarthy and Boisot 2010). However, it is consistent with recent efforts to examine the more complex relationships among regulations and firm profitability or strategy (e.g., Chao and Kumar 2010; Kirca, Bearden and Roth 2011). Research may further focus the effects of each of the holistically analyzed WGI dimensions. Individual dimensions are known to decrease CR effects, for example (Swoboda, Puchert and Morschett 2016). We also contribute to research on normative institutions by revealing that increasing norms decrease perceptions of MNCs’ abilities. Research has shown negative effects of norms (Gaganis et al. 2021; Yang et al. 2021) but has not linked this informal institution to CBAA. We find that norms explain less country-level variance. We also contribute to research on national culture, which is assumed to be relevant in studies on CBAA or COVID-19 (e.g., Ahmadi et al. 2022; Moon, Lee and Oh 2015). Our findings show that increasing embeddedness of societies is linked to a greater esteem for MNCs’ abilities to offer specific products, consistent with our hypothesis that people from these cultures are comfortable with innovations that secure their society’s well-being (De Mooij 2017). Alternative cultural dimensions explain less country-level variance. This underscores the need for future research on the relationships of regulative and cultural-cognitive institutions (Kostova et al. 2020; Mukherjee et al. 2021).

Moreover, we contribute to IB and CBAA research by proposing new theoretical mechanisms for the effect of institutions on CBAA across nations from a consumer perspective: liabilities of foreignness and stakeholder interactions (Ang, Benischke and Doh 2015; Denk, Kaufmann and Roesch 2012); expectations in countries (Chao and Kumar 2010; Gaganis et al. 2021); institutional voids and uncertainty (Khanna and Palepu 1997; Khan, Lew and Park 2015); and innovative MNCs’ contribution to institutions with their actions (Miller et al. 2022). Future research could investigate each mechanism. This is particularly interesting as our findings are stable for competitors without specific abilities and for the time points before and during a black swan event.

Regarding our second research question on changing effects of institutions before and during the pandemic, we contribute to IB research and that on black swan events such as COVID-19 by offering initial insights into the increase in CBAA and the decreased role of institutions in consumer CBAA during such an event. This emerges for MNCs with unique abilities and actions, but the role of national institutions also decreases for consumers’ CBAA of competitors.

We contribute to IB research on national institutions by observing reduced effects of regulative, normative, and cultural-cognitive institutions on CBAA. The diminishing effects of regulative and normative institutions on CBAA are significantly reduced during a black swan event, making CBAA stronger across nations. People in countries with lower levels of regulations or norms still valued Pfizer’s abilities, but people in countries with higher respective institutions valued such abilities more during the pandemic. The amplifying effects of embeddedness for CBAA decreased, suggesting that people in less embedded societies valued Pfizer’s ability to offer a vaccine more than before the pandemic. Weaker country-level variances are advantageous because they increase inde-pendence from national institutions, particularly for MNCs with specific abilities, but also competitors during a black swan event. This extends predominantly negative views on the consequences of black swan events for MNCs (e.g., Donthu and Gustafsson 2020; Lin 2020; Wenzel, Stanske and Lieberman 2021).

We contribute to the black swan literature by developing two theoretical mechanisms for changes in individuals’ consciousness and the changing effects of mostly objectively stable institutions during such an event (e.g., Nielsen, Wechtler and Zheng 2023, in contrast to research on changing institutions or their development, e.g., Beckert 2010; Puck, Holtbrügge and Mohr 2009). First, black swan events change prevailing goals in individual behavior and the relevance of institutions (Das et al. 2021a; Oh and Oetzel 2022), resulting in changed liabilities of foreignness effects, consumer interactions with MNCs with unique offerings, or expectations (e.g., Denk, Kaufmann and Roesch 2012). This finding links to research on individual legitimacy assessments. Second, black swan events change consumers’ associations with MNCs with specific offerings, such as confidence building in light of institutional voids or MNCs’ contributions to national institutions (Beck, Rahinel and Bleier 2020; Deephouse, Newburry and Soleimani 2016; Miller et al. 2022). Our descriptive observation of a sharp increase in the corporate ability evaluations of an MNC that provided a directly pandemic-relevant product is interesting. These evaluations increased less among competitors who did not produce comparable COVID-19-relevant offers. This result indicates a strong role of the confidence-building mechanism in the case of our focal company. Future research may explore which mechanism works to what extent.

Finally, we contribute to research on CBAA. We examined the cross-national role of institutions in CBAA for the first time, extending assumptions in country comparison studies (e.g., Baghi and Gabrielli 2019; Matarazzo, Resciniti and Simonetti 2020). Our theorizing at the country level suggests that the relevant comparison group for studying changes in CBAA may be organizations and other societal sectors within a country, not only competitors. Our theoretical mechanisms apply to competitors as well. They likely benefit from Pfizer’s favorable ability, which should be analyzed further. The weaker reduction in the effects of regulations and embeddedness indicates that CBAA spills over to other firms in its industry. This may be logical considering past research (e.g., on contagion effects or cross-industry information, Shi, Wajda and Aguilera 2022) but needs more elaboration.

In summary, we observe COVID-19 as a black swan event and a particular MNC, which limits the generalizability of some of our findings to similar events (i.e., health hazards of global scope with severe consequences; Cortez and Johnston 2020; MacKay and Chia 2013). However, we believe that our fundamental implications are transferable to other black swan events where firms with specific abilities may contribute to alleviate the event’s impact; spillover effects within an industry may benefit related competitors (e.g., Shi, Wajda and Aguilera 2022). Nevertheless, future research should aim to replicate our study.

3.4.3 Practical Relevance

Our study contributes to management practice. Managers need to recognize that consumers’ CBAA is driven not only by firm characteristics but also by firms’ optimal fit with their environment (Moon, Lee and Oh 2015). Despite a prime role in ability formation, producing high-quality and innovative products may not be enough to guarantee favorable CBAA in a society abroad, as the public tends to have higher and changing expectations of firms. For example, for host countries with lower embeddedness, managers should expect to address the expectations of local stakeholder groups more thoroughly.

For managers centrally coordinating MNCs’ customer interests worldwide, knowledge of the most favorable countries, from a consumer viewpoint, can be a source of competitive advantage. However, MNCs with specific abilities face tradeoffs; increasing cross-national regulative institutions diminish CBAA, while embeddedness reinforces them. A country portfolio with both institutions provides valuable practical advice for a countries or groups of countries (see Fig. 3.3). The strongest (weakest) CBAA emerges in countries with low (high) levels of regulative institutions and high (low) levels of embeddedness (Fields I and IV). Tradeoff decisions are required in countries in Fields II and III.

Figure 3.3

Country Portfolio. (Source: Own Creation)

MNCs may benefit from unique abilities during black swan events such as COVID-19 (facilitating MNCs’ resilience, e.g., Guedhami et al. 2023). A lower or generally decreased influence of national institutions on consumers’ CBAA enables a heavier focus on internal or other adjustment drivers for managing CBAA. Importantly, MNCs can benefit from the consumer preferences formed in times of crisis in the long term, as such preferences are more valuable than those formed in quiet times (He and Harris 2020). For example, they may use beneficial CBAA to address consumers with other product brands beyond a vaccine or may aim to transfer advantageous corporate associations to new products over time (e.g., Swoboda and Sinning 2021). However, such MNCs should be aware that competitors may also gain advantages.

3.5 Limitations and Further Research

This study has certain limitations that suggest future research directions.

Although we carefully used a specific sample, database expansion would allow for further conclusions, e.g., analyzing additional industries or (smaller) firms. This study includes few emerging countries; with a balanced sample, stronger effects of institutions on CBAA can be expected. Our cross-national design improves external validity, but studies may place emphasis on internal validity. Using data on identical individuals in both waves in a longitudinal rather than repeated cross-sectional design would be beneficial to understand individual opinions or behavior. Scholars should use longitudinal data before and after a crisis and examine the pandemic’s long-term effects (Das et al. 2021a).

The additional competitor sample was selected based on the competitive environment in each country, i.e., we matched competitors in a country at both time points, not cross-nationally, to ensure sample comparability (e.g., Lee and Green 1991; Panagopoulos, Menguc and Mullins 2023). Our results allow for general implications for MNCs in a strategic group that did not provide crisis-relevant offers across time points; we cannot make assertions on specific competitors or identical samples across nations.

Regarding the measures and method, we chose a common conceptualization of CBAA. Researchers may study further conceptualizations of brand associations that mostly represent a more holistic view (e.g., Buil, De Chernatony and Martínez 2013). Qualitative research allows emic, country-specific measures to be developed, which may enhance construct equivalence assessment. Due to the high number of countries surveyed and resulting need for item comparability, we use a modified imposed etic scale (Yang, Floyd and Tanner Jr 2019). Additional to our reasoned choice of institutions, other ones would enable further insights as well as institutional distances (Kostova et al. 2020; Swoboda et al. 2017). Other cultural approaches also offer a promising field of research, e.g., Hofstede’s updated measures or elements of national culture (e.g., Sasaki and Yoshikawa 2014). Finally, we controlled for important variables but could not include firm or other societal factors beyond COVID-19.

In addition to our conceptual modeling of the effects of national institutions on CBAA, a moderation of the institutions on the effects of CBAA on outcomes, such as consumer loyalty, would be interesting (Matarazzo, Resciniti and Simonetti 2020; Moon, Lee and Oh 2015). This is theoretically questionable for pharmaceutic offers and methodologically challenging, as are studies on further antecedents or effects of MNCs’ CBAA, since CBAA may determine loyalty directly or indirectly by streng-thening product brand images, for example (Swoboda and Sinning 2021). Such image transfers could not be captured in this study.

3.6 Conclusions

While the COVID-19 pandemic changed consumers’ brand preferences and behavior, little is known about how or why corporate brand associations differ and change across countries during such black swan events. We have therefore analyzed the roles of national institutions in consumers’ CBAA for a pandemic-relevant MNC, assessing consumer evaluations in 20 countries over time and applying MSEM and multigroup analysis. We find that regulative institutions, followed by cultural embeddedness, most strongly explain the cross-national general differences in CBAA. This influence decreased during the COVID-19 pandemic, for a crisis-relevant manufacturer more strongly than for competitors. We thereby offer a theoretical complement to past research, which has shown differences in cor-porate associations as signals, by applying institutional theory as a complement to signaling theory. We look forward to further research linking national institutions and corporate associations and their changes during black swan events.

Footnotes

1

The coronavirus (COVID-19) pandemic is a global pandemic caused by severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2). The virus was first identified in an outbreak in the Chinese city of Wuhan in December 2019. Symptoms range from undetectable to deadly, but commonly include fever, dry cough, and fatigue. Attempts to contain the virus failed, allowing its gradual spread worldwide. In March 2020, the World Health Organization declared the outbreak a pandemic. In December 2020, the first COVID-19 vaccine received emergency use authorization by the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA 2020). In May 2023, the WHO announced the end of the COVID-19 global health emergency (Lenharo 2023). However, the immense health impact persisted as billions of infected worldwide were expected to develop Long-COVID (LC) or post-COVID conditions (i.e., post-accute and long-term health effects of a COVID-19 infection such as breathlessness, muscle pain, or brain fog, e.g., Davis et al. 2023; Yang and Tebbutt 2023). Researchers found evidence that vaccinations may reduce the severity and duration of LC symptoms (e.g., Al-Aly 2023; Taylor 2023). Ongoing research on COVID-19 vaccines is attempting to limit severe infection from virus variants (e.g., Grant et al. 2023).

2

Following Gaur and Kumar (2018), we conducted a systematic literature review of 29 major journals (following Harzing’s journal quality list) for the keywords COVID-19, pandemic, brand, consumer behavior, institutions, and using cross-citations.

3

We focus our main study on Pfizer, as the company’s vaccine was the first COVID-19 vaccine to receive emergency use authorization from the Food and Drug Administration. The vaccine was developed, manufactured, and delivered in collaboration with the German biotechnology company BioNTech. Pfizer generated a total revenue of 81 billion USD in 2021 and held a market share or 12.5% in the healthcare market (Pfizer 2022).

© The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Fachmedien Wiesbaden GmbH, part of Springer Nature 2025

N. JacobsStrategic Orientations and Innovativeness of Multinational CorporationsHandel und Internationales Marketing Retailing and International Marketinghttps://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-658-49019-5_4

4. Study 3: How Perceived Stakeholder Orientations Affect Consumers’ Perceived Firm Innovativeness Across Nations

Nele Jacobs1  

(1)

Fachbereich IV, Universität Trier, Trier, Germany

Nele Jacobs

Email: nf.jacobs@outlook.com

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at https://​doi.​org/​10.​1007/​978-3-658-49019-5_​4.

This study was published as: Jacobs, N. & Swoboda, B. (2025). How Perceived Stakeholder Orientations Affect Consumers’ Perceived Firm Innovativeness Across Nations. Journal of Business Research, 189, 115125 (see also Sect. G.2 in the electronic supplementary material).

4.1 Introduction

Perceived firm innovativeness (i.e., perceptions that firm actions result in novel, creative, and impactful market offerings, Kassemeier, Haumann and Güntürkün 2022; van Riel et al. 2021) is a known source of competitive advantage for attracting consumers (e.g., Ghanbarpour and Gustafsson 2022; Schulz and Voelckner 2020). However, MNCs increasingly apply a more collaborative and humanistic management approach, committing to recognizing and integrating stakeholder interests to drive innovation (Gregoire 2021; Papovsky 2023). Among the 50 most innovative firms, those such as Samsung (2023a) and Unilever (2023a) communicate their commitment to understanding and meeting customer needs, emphasizing employee well-being and development, and prioritizing the impact of business activities on society at large, among others, through their websites, in reports, advertising and social media.¹ For example, Unilever communicates its efforts regarding gender equality or anti-discrimination with respect to its employees on Instagram or LinkedIn. However, these and other innovative MNCs should evaluate how consumer responses and the relevance of stakeholder orientations for perceived innovativeness might vary across countries. This is important because consumers easily observe MNCs’ attention to and inclusion of the interests of their customers, employees, and society. However, they may associate these efforts with firm innovativeness in some countries but not in others. This study refers to stakeholder theory and analyzes whether and how firms’ orientations toward these stakeholder groups cross-nationally affect consumers’ perceptions of firm innovativeness. The moderating role of country development is analyzed as the dominant host country contingency in studies on perceived innovativeness effects (e.g., Jacobs and Swoboda 2023).

Management studies have shown links between stakeholder orientations and firm innovativeness (e.g., Flammer and Kacperczyk 2016; Jiang et al. 2020). Consumer research has scarcely analyzed the antecedents of firm innovativeness perceptions (see Fig. 4.1).² National studies have revealed antecedents such as perceived customer orientation, social responsibility, or values (e.g., Jørgensen, Pedersen and Skard 2022; Kurtmollaiev, Lervik-Olsen and Andreassen 2022; Zhang and Jeong 2023). However, national studies have been conducted only in developed countries, such as the USA or Norway, limiting generalizability to less developed countries. Only five international studies could be identified. Three international studies have compared two or few developed countries by analyzing perceived customer orientation, product innovativeness, or logo interestingness for firm innovativeness (Hagtvedt 2011; Hubert et al. 2017; Vaquero Martín 2021). Surprisingly, customer orientation had no effect (Vaquero Martín 2021). In contrast, and across many nations, Jacobs and Swoboda (2023) have shown perceived customer orientation’s effects on firm innovativeness perceptions, whereas Kim (2016) has shown that product characteristics are drivers. Both cross-national studies have indicated an important moderating role of country development but lack theoretical rationales for such a role in the antecedents studied.

In summary, research on what drives consumers’ perceptions of firm innovativeness is limited, partly contradictory, and highlights important research gaps (Kurtmollaiev, Lervik-Olsen and Andreassen 2022; van Riel et al. 2021). Scholars’ call for closure and understanding how firms’ perceived orientations toward customers, employees, and society simultaneously influence firm innovativeness across nations or are affected by country development, is central for assessing their relative impact from a consumer perspective. This is particularly important for MNCs that serve a global consumer base and seek to harness the competitive benefits of perceived firm innovativeness (Ghanbarpour and Gustafsson 2022; Kassemeier, Haumann and Güntürkün 2022). Theoretically, the humanistic management approach facilitates MNCs’ access to important information (Jiang et al. 2020), and consumers may perceive that such MNCs have a more meaningful basis for realizing impactful ideas and solutions. We propose two research questions: How do the perceived customer, employee, and society orientations of MNCs cross-nationally impact consumers’ perceptions of firm innovativeness? Does a country’s degree of development moderate this impact, and if so, how? We aim to contribute in two ways to the literature.

Figure 4.1

Literature Review (Consumer Studies). (Source: Own Creation)

We respond to calls for research into what drives consumer perceptions of firms’ innovativeness and integrate previous findings into the overarching humanistic management approach of MNCs (e.g., Brexendorf and Keller 2017; Kurtmollaiev, Lervik-Olsen and Andreassen 2022). Referring to stakeholder theory, we contribute to the literature by including perceived customer, employee, and society orientations in our analysis, as information on these firm orientations is easily observable by consumers. We depart from the currently fragmented approach that ignores the interplay between perceived stakeholder group orientations, thereby offering a narrow, imprecise understanding of how they affect firm innovativeness perceptions. Studies show that firms’ orientations to provide value specifically to these stakeholders affect their perceived innovativeness. However, most studies focus on one or two orientations, are partly contradictory, or are limited to developed countries. Including perceptions of a firm’s employee orientation as a source of perceived innovativeness is completely new to consumer research, as is integrating perceived orientations toward multiple stakeholder groups across nations (suggested only in management studies, e.g., Flammer and Kacperczyk 2016; Suifan 2021). By applying information integration theory, we provide new theoretical rationales to explain the effects. This theory offers a promising basis for explaining the integration of novel information and, thereby, the formation of individual consumer perceptions of firm innovativeness (Anderson 1971; Fink et al. 2020). MSEM provides insights into the differential strength of the orientations tested simultaneously.

We expand our knowledge by offering important contingency perspectives on how country development serves as a continuous moderator. Scholars have indicated the relevance of this context, but calls for such research have thus far essentially been left unanswered (e.g., Jin et al. 2015). MNCs increasingly exploit market opportunities in economically growing emerging markets, rendering country development a substantial factor (Heinberg et al. 2020; Sheth 2011). Initial theoretical rationales regarding the impact of country development as a continuous moderator contribute to our understanding of the effects of perceived stakeholder orientation on perceived firm innovativeness in developed and emerging countries. Theoretically, the degree of country development may reinforce or attenuate individuals’ access to, importance of, or relevance for innovativeness of information cues. MSEM shows its importance through explained variance and reveals which perceived stakeholder orientation effects are strengthened (or weakened), to surprising extents. A country portfolio displays in which countries the effects are reinforced or attenuated most. Moreover, the role of other country context factors, such as national culture, is shown in stability checks.

Decisions-makers in corporate headquarters coordinating respective activities internationally, for example, can benefit from our findings to see how and why their stakeholder-oriented efforts may shape a relevant source of (sustainable) competitive advantage from the consumer perspective.

4.2 Conceptualization and Hypotheses

4.2.1 Perceived Stakeholder Orientation and Firm Innovativeness

Management research conceptualizes stakeholder orientation in terms of the extent to which management pays attention to and integrates the interests of multiple individuals or groups who are affected by firm actions in financial or nonfinancial terms (e.g., Bettinazzi and Feldman 2021; Flammer and Kacperczyk 2016). This is fundamentally grounded in the concept of stakeholder theory, which was developed to account for the highly complex environment of firms in which they must consider the interaction of many stakeholders to be successful and acknowledge that business and ethical decisions are inherently linked (Freeman et al. 2010, pp. 5, 63). When considering key stakeholders, scholars mainly study customers, employees, society, suppliers, and financiers (e.g., Bettinazzi and Feldman 2021; Bettinazzi and Zollo 2022; Freeman et al. 2010, p. 9). Firms’ stakeholder orientations have become increasingly important in research and practice because they affect, e.g., firm performance, profitability, or innovation (e.g., Bettinazzi and Zollo 2022; Flammer and Kacperczyk 2016; Shin, Lee and Bansal 2022).

Consumer research conceptualizes stakeholder orientation either as a collective term or focuses mostly on consumers. Those studies on antecedents of innovativeness consider only perceived customer or society orientations individually (e.g., Goswami and Bhaduri 2023; Jørgensen, Pedersen and Skard 2022; Quintelier and Vock 2024; Vaquero Martín 2021). In contrast, we conceptualize a firm’s perceived stakeholder orientation as consumers’ perception that a firm pays attention to and incorporates the interests of three specific stakeholder groups in its decision-making: customers, employees, and society. Information cues about firms’ orientations toward these specific stakeholder groups are easily observable by consumers and have been shown to influence consumer perceptions and behavior (Luger, Hofer and Floh 2022; Maxwell-Smith, White and Loyd 2020; Meißner, Haurand and Stummer 2017). In contrast, firms’ orientation toward financiers or suppliers is less observable, or observable only to a select group of customers (i.e., those who are particularly interested in an MNC; e.g., Goswami and Bhaduri 2023). Perceived customer orientation refers to perceptions of MNCs pinpointing customer needs (e.g., Dean 2007; Vaquero Martín 2021); perceived employee orientation refers to perceptions of firms’ policies, strategies, and attitudes regarding the management and treatment of employees (e.g., Gidaković and Zabkar 2022; Rybaczewska, Sparks and Sułkowski 2020); and perceived society orientation includes perceptions of firms’ commitment to fulfilling societal obligations (e.g., Lacey, Kennett-Hensel and Manolis 2015; Zimmer and Swoboda 2023). We conceptualize perceived firm innovativeness as the assessment of a firm as providing novel, creative, and impactful ideas and solutions for the market (Kunz, Schmitt and Meyer 2011). This differs conceptually from brand or product innovativeness perceptions, for example, which refer to the novelty of individual products or brands (e.g., Hubert et al. 2017). It also differs from the widespread management concept of organizational innovativeness in that it does not include perceptions of the innovativeness of firms’ processes or strategies, of which consumers have no genuine knowledge (Wang and Ahmed 2004). Firms strive to be perceived as innovative because it allows them to increase their attractiveness, customer satisfaction, or intentions (e.g., Kassemeier, Haumann and Güntürkün 2022; Kurtmollaiev, Lervik-Olsen and Andreassen 2022; Zhang and Jeong 2023). Individual stakeholder orientations have been linked to firm innovativeness (i.e., only perceived customer or society orientation separately and individually, e.g., Jacobs and Swoboda 2023; van Riel et al. 2021). However, the simultaneous examination of their importance from a consumer perspective across nations is still missing.

4.2.2 Information Integration Theory

Consumer studies on the antecedents of perceived firm innovativeness have adopted various theories, such as information processing, signaling, and social identity theory (e.g., Choi, Ahn and Kim 2020; Schulz and Voelckner 2020). In this study, we base our theoretical reasoning on information integration theory.

Information integration theory offers a stringent cognitive-theoretical foundation that describes how individuals form attitudes and perceptions on the basis of new information cues (Anderson 1971). Consumers’ perceived customer, employee, and society orientations represent information cues that are cognitively evaluated simultaneously to form an impression of an MNC. Information integration theory proposes a series of interlocking concepts, such as the observability of information cues, their interpretation, and further integration into broader perceptions or impressions of a firm (Carlson and White 2008; Fink et al. 2020). Thus, consumers can be more/less receptive to perceiving firms’ customer, employee, or society orientations, information cues about these orientations can be differently evaluated in the interpretation, or they can be more/less well integrated into the perception of firm innovativeness (Anderson 1971). The theory particularly proposes that an information cue is characterized by its weight (i.e., how important it is generally to a consumer) and valence (i.e., how relevant it is for the formation of a specific perception), which are relied upon in its interpretation and further integration (e.g., Carlson and White 2008; Sung, Kim and Choi 2021). Research suggests that the weight and valence of information cues are influenced by certain moderating factors (Fink et al. 2020; Roy et al. 2019). We argue that the degree of country development, an important contextual factor, affects the weight or valence of information cues (Gürhan-Canli, Hayran and Sarial-Abi 2016; Sheth 2011).

Country development is conceptualized in reference to prevalent national economic, social, and humanitarian conditions (e.g., Bagdadli et al. 2021; Blut and Wang 2020). A country’s degree of development affects MNC activities or performance, consumer evaluations or reactions (e.g., Gürhan-Canli, Sarial-Abi and Hayran 2018; Heinberg et al. 2020; Li et al. 2018), and it likely affects the weight or valence of perceived stakeholder orientations for perceptions of firm innovativeness. For example, perceived customer or employee orientations may be more important and relevant information for the formation of perceived innovativeness in more (vs. less) developed countries, where respective information cues are favorable or relevant sources for differentiation (e.g., Gidaković and Zabkar 2022; Vaquero Martín 2021). Perceived customer or society orientations could also be more important and relevant information in less (vs. more) developed countries, where respective firms may help alleviate individual or societal pressures due to a poorer educational or financial situation (e.g., Contini et al. 2020; Ndubisi 2012).

Figure 4.2 illustrates our conceptual framework. Next, we resort to information integration mechanisms to theoretically derive our hypotheses at the individual- and country-level.

Figure 4.2

Conceptual Framework. (Source: Own Creation)

4.2.3 Hypothesis Development

As stated by information integration theory, the perceptions of MNCs’ customer, employee, and society orientations by consumers affect their perceptions of firm innovativeness if the respective information cues are cognitively integrated, that is, by being strongly received (observed), favorably evaluated (interpreted), and judged to be relevant for the formation of specific innovativeness perceptions (e.g., Carlson and White 2008; Sung, Kim and Choi 2021).

Studies have demonstrated the benefits and usefulness of customer orientation for firm innovation (e.g., Tuominen et al. 2023). Consumer research has revealed the role of perceived customer orientation in consumer attitudes or intentions (e.g., Schulz and Voelckner 2020; Habel et al. 2020). With respect to firm innovativeness, however, scholars provide ambiguous insights into the anteceding effect of perceived customer orientation in developed countries (Jacobs and Swoboda 2023; Meißner, Haurand and Stummer 2017; Vaquero Martín 2021). We apply theoretical mechanisms and assume that perceived customer orientation increases perceptions of firm innovativeness across nations for the following reasons.

Since MNCs that strive to understand and satisfy their customers seek to engage with them, their customer focus is easily observable to consumers (e.g., Habel et al. 2020; Jacobs and Swoboda 2023). These MNCs have access to a large and diverse source of insights and information because they can draw on the varied perspectives of a vast consumer base rather than relying solely on internal input. This may be perceived as being close to consumers’ own personal needs, as the insights rely on fellow consumers (e.g., Vaquero Martín 2021; Meißner, Haurand and Stummer 2017). This is why more customer-oriented MNCs that focus their efforts on specific customer requirements are likely evaluated more positively than less customer-oriented MNCs that focus on developing offerings from within (e.g., Schulz and Voelckner 2020). Consumers may further associate more customer-oriented firms with having access to more diverse ideas and resources, which enables more creative offerings (e.g., Meißner, Haurand and Stummer 2017). These firms may also be perceived as less restricted in their operations, as providing the structure and openness to meet the diverse needs of customers and less burdened by rigid constraints, enabling the creation of perceived novel offers (e.g., Schreier, Fuchs and Dahl 2012). Furthermore, efforts based on specific information tailored to customer needs are likely perceived as impactful (e.g., Vaquero Martín 2021). Therefore, corresponding information cues are likely judged as relevant for innovativeness, which facilitates their integration into firm innovativeness perceptions (e.g., Carlson and White 2008; Kunz, Schmitt and Meyer 2011). While the arguments sound natural, some studies could not find a direct effect of customer orientation activities on perceived firm innovativeness (e.g., Vaquero Martín 2021).

Therefore, we argue:

H1.

Across nations, consumers’ perceived customer orientation of a firm has a positive direct effect on perceived firm innovativeness.

Management studies have examined how a firm’s image as employer drives innovation (e.g., Biswas and Suar 2016; Suifan 2021). Consumer studies have observed effects of firms’ treatment of their employees on consumers’ attitudes and intentions (e.g., Gidaković and Zabkar 2022; Rybaczewska, Sparks and Sułkowski 2020) but not on perceived firm innovativeness. We refer to information integration theory and expect firms’ perceived employee orientation to increase their perceived innovativeness across nations.

MNCs that implement a specific employee orientation in their business communicate this through various sources (e.g., Gidaković and Zabkar 2022; Maxwell-Smith, White and Loyd 2020). For example, MNCs such as Google or Unilever promote their employee orientation to a wide audience, including consumers, on their social media channels (e.g., Instagram, LinkedIn). Amazon (2020) promotes it through TV commercials or via YouTube. Since this type of orientation goes beyond an MNC’s core offerings, consumers are likely to observe such messages as distinguishing MNCs (Rybaczewska, Sparks and Sułkowski 2020; Theurer et al. 2018). Firms’ publicly communicated orientation toward their employees implies that they strive to provide a positive working environment (Gidaković and Zabkar 2022; Li et al. 2021b). Consumers’ perceptions that a firm treats and fosters its employees well might evoke positive reactions, leading to a favorable interpretation of respective information that distinguishes a firm from less employee-oriented competitors (Maxwell-Smith, White and Loyd 2020; Wolter et al. 2019). Moreover, more employee-oriented firms create a nurturing, supportive environment where consumers might assume that employees feel more supported and valued, thereby increasing employee effectiveness and creativity (e.g., Theurer et al. 2018). Consumers may believe that firms empowering their employees provide them with the autonomy to explore new ideas and think beyond standard practices, enabling the development of novel offerings for markets compared to less employee-oriented firms (e.g., Suifan 2021). Higher levels of employee engagement or motivation due to a supportive environment may enable them to produce more impactful out-of-the-box offerings that address unmet needs (e.g., Li et al. 2021b). This renders employee orientation a relevant information cue for perceptions of firm innovativeness.

Therefore, we propose the following:

H2.

Across nations, consumers’ perceived employee orientation of a firm has a positive direct effect on perceived firm innovativeness.

A firm’s society orientation has been shown to affect firms’ innovation capacity levels or performance, for example (e.g., Anzola-Román, Garcia-Marco and Zouaghi 2024; Garcia-Piqueres and Garcia-Ramos 2022). In consumer research, van Riel et al. (2021) and Jørgensen, Pedersen and Skard (2022) linked firms’ social and environmental sustainability to perceived firm innovativeness in only one country. We assume that firms’ perceived society orientation increases their perceived innovativeness across nations because of consumers’ cognitive information integration.

Consumers observe how firms strive to fulfill their societal obligations through a variety of corporate communications and use this information to form perceptions or intentions (e.g., Lacey, Kennett-Hensel and Manolis 2015; Zimmer and Swoboda 2023). For example, Unilever (2023b) partners with social media influencers to promote its efforts toward and encourage sustainable living (e.g., reducing food and plastic waste). Samsung (2023c) promotes activities such as using recycled materials to reduce its societal impact, conserve natural resources, and promote sustainable practices, for example, through social media or its website. Since firms’ efforts to contribute to the well-being of society and the environment indicate that they are contributing beyond their core value creation processes to solve problems that affect society universally, consumers generally evaluate these efforts more positively than less society-oriented firms (e.g., Baskentli et al. 2019; Eisingerich, MacInnis and Park 2023). Moreover, consumers may use information about firms’ society orientation as a clue for its ability to maintain its market position (e.g., Iglesias et al. 2019; van Riel et al. 2021). They may assume that a more society-oriented firm will exist in the long term and fulfill its tasks more effectively and creatively than less society-oriented competitors (e.g., Jung, Kim and Kim 2020). Firms that invest considerable time and effort in addressing societal issues are likely perceived as capable of producing offerings with a greater positive societal impact (e.g., Lacey, Kennett-Hensel and Manolis 2015). The differentiating power of a strong focus on social responsibility may give firms the appearance of being able to create novel offerings, for example through perceived adaptability or creative problem-solving approaches (e.g., Jørgensen, Pedersen and Skard 2022). Therefore, information about firms’ society orientation is likely considered relevant for and integrated into the perception of innovativeness.

We hypothesize:

H3.

Across nations, consumers’ perceived society orientation of a firm has a positive direct effect on perceived firm innovativeness.

Country development affects consumers’ perceptions or intentions (Heinberg et al. 2020; Zimmer and Swoboda 2023). Initial research shows its moderation of perceived firm innovativeness effects, but a moderating effect on respective antecedents has thus far only been suggested (Jacobs and Swoboda 2023). According to information integration theory, contextual factors may affect the weight and valence that individuals assign to an information cue, thereby moderating the cognitive interpretation and integration of an information cue that may affect a firm’s innovativeness perception (Fink et al. 2020; Roy et al. 2019). Thus, we argue that country development influences the impacts of perceived customer, employee, and society orientation on perceived firm innovativeness.

For perceived customer orientation, we expect a positive influence of the degree of country development. In more developed countries, markets are more saturated, which is why the perceived customer orientation of a firm is likely weighed as a more important information cue for consumers to differentiate between firms (e.g., Habel et al. 2020; Jacobs and Swoboda 2023). Consumers in these countries have more disposable resources, enabling them to focus on their higher-order needs for self-actualization and individual fulfillment (Blut and Wang 2020; Sheth 2011). Therefore, consumers assess firms’ efforts to cater to the individual needs of their customers as more relevant for perceiving offers as novel or impactful for the market (e.g., Kassemeier, Haumann and Güntürkün 2022). In contrast, consumers in less developed countries have relatively fewer available resources and are more likely to pursue their primary needs (e.g., Blut and Wang 2020; Sheth 2011). This requires, by tendency, less individual focus by firms, and consumers rely more strongly on product-related than firm information (e.g., Heinberg et al. 2020). Thus, they are likely to evaluate firms’ customer orientations as less important. Greater faith in MNCs’ capabilities may render perceived customer orientation less relevant for innovativeness perceptions in these countries (e.g., Schulz and Voelckner 2020; Sheth 2011).

We hypothesize:

H4a.

Increasing country development reinforces the impact of perceived customer orientation on perceived firm innovativeness.

For the perceived employee orientation effect, we expect a positive moderation. In more developed countries, people are likely to pursue their self-actualization needs in terms of employment. Even if consumers are not themselves employees of a firm, they are likely to empathize with firms’ employees (e.g., Maxwell-Smith, White and Loyd 2020; Rybaczewska, Sparks and Sułkowski 2020). They expect employees to be treated according to certain standards. Therefore, MNCs’ employee orientation is generally considered an important information cue. Moreover, consumers are likely to associate firms that adopt this orientation toward their employees’ well-being with increased market responsiveness (e.g., Gidaković and Zabkar 2022; Li et al. 2021b). Since consumers in these countries likely anticipate such firms to foster their employees and create an environment where creativity can flourish, firms’ employee orientation is a relevant cue for innovativeness perceptions (e.g., Rybaczewska, Sparks and Sułkowski 2020; Wolter et al. 2019). In contrast, the importance of information about firms’ exceptional employee treatment and support might be reduced in less developed countries because of individuals’ lower capacity to focus on self-actualization needs (e.g., Bagdadli et al. 2021; Li et al. 2021b). Employees are likely regarded as executors rather than initiators of novel and creative offerings, which is why a firm’s employee orientation is relatively less relevant for perceived innovativeness.

Therefore, we propose the following:

H4b.

Increasing country development reinforces the impact of perceived employee orientation on perceived firm innovativeness.

For the perceived society orientation effect, we expect a negative moderating role of country development. In more developed countries, information about firm actions on societal and environmental issues is ubiquitous (e.g., Zimmer and Swoboda 2023). Consumers may experience habituation or information overload due to the high exposure. Therefore, they may exhibit an overall lower absorption of respective information or a loss of sensitivity and subsequent lower importance evaluation (e.g., Becker-Olsen et al. 2011; Foscht, Lin and Eisingerich 2018). Consumers are also often more privileged and do not have to deal directly with the consequences of societal or environmental issues because of better education, financial situations, or sociopolitical stability (e.g., Contini et al. 2020; Sheth 2011). Thus, information about an MNC’s orientation toward societal problems may be weighed as less important. Saturated competitive markets make it more difficult for firms to differentiate themselves from competitors through a society orientation (e.g., Luger, Hofer and Floh 2022; Gürhan-Canli, Hayran and Sarial-Abi 2016). Firms’ perceived society orientation is, therefore, less relevant for consumers in the formation of perceptions of firm innovativeness. In contrast, information about a firm’s society orientation is less historically ubiquitous and more distinctive for individuals in less developed countries. This is why information observability or importance evaluation may be enhanced (e.g., Becker-Olsen et al. 2011; Zimmer and Swoboda 2023). Individuals are generally more immediately affected by societal and environmental obstacles due to already poorer resources or infrastructure, for example (e.g., Bagdadli et al. 2021; Çilingirtürk and Koçak 2018). Therefore, firms’ engagement in addressing societal issues and reducing their impact on society is more closely related to consumers’ safety needs (e.g., personal safety, resources, health), and respective information is more important (Godefroit-Winkel, Schill and Diop-Sall 2022; Marquina and Morales 2012). Because these efforts serve to differentiate between firms and may lead to consumers’ perceptions that a firm aims to provide novel and creative offers of greater market impact, information on firms’ society orientations is more relevant for perceived firm innovativeness (Li et al. 2018; van Riel et al. 2021).

We propose:

H4c.

Increasing country development attenuates the impact of perceived society orientation on perceived firm innovativeness.

4.3 Empirical Study

4.3.1 Sample

To answer our research questions and test our hypotheses, we collected our data as part of a continuing collaboration with an MNC. The German firm conducts annual consumer surveys on how itself and its major competitors are perceived in multiple countries. In return for assisting in survey preparation, we receive the data for research purposes. The MNC globally offers prescription-free drugs, skin, and beauty care and pursues a standardized, centrally controlled approach to its stakeholder and innovation orientation. The study was conducted in 22 countries selected for their relevance for the MNC, with as many as 1,000 respondents per country. The data was collected by a research agency. Qualitative and quantitative pretests were performed in collaboration. Comparable items for the constructs were pretested in consumer groups (N = 8 and N = 7). Small item changes were made for better comprehension. The data were further pretested in eight key countries for the MNC (applying quota sampling and panels of N = 250), showing satisfying results regarding construct equivalence after item adjustments, and verifying the validity and reliability of the measures.

The agency gathered the main study data in all 22 countries simultaneously with an internet panel approach, using quota selection in each country (average participation: 67%). Panel quality was verified by avoiding false respondents, random clicking behavior, and instructional manipulation checks. The public benefit of participation was highlighted using text appeal strategies and bonuses. The respondents in each country were selected based on certain screening criteria. Quota sampling was used, and individuals were selected according to selected criteria (referring to sex and age based on national registration authorities’ information in each country). The respondents were limited to urban populations aged 18–65 (55) years in developed (developing) countries to ensure comparability (Mandler, Bartsch and Han 2021) as well as higher education levels, and had to indicate at least general knowledge of the surveyed firms.

This led to 18,249 evaluations. Eliminating Mahalanobis distance-based outliers left 18,067 respondents. Ex-post comparisons with official numbers revealed that the data are not representative (see Table 4.1). Tests showed a nonnormal distribution. Therefore, the hypotheses were tested by applying a maximum likelihood estimator with robust standard errors (Maydeu-Olivares 2017).

Table 4.1

Sample Characteristics. (Source: Own Creation)

N

N

Argentina

925

Italy

948

Australia

734

Japan

618

Austria

916

Kenya

731

Belgium

840

Mexico

954

Brazil

903

Netherlands

852

Canada

792

Poland

909

China

828

Slovakia

725

Czech Republic

662

South Africa

686

France

851

Spain

962

Germany

947

UK

595

India

821

USA

868

Total

18,067

4.3.2 Measurement

At the individual level, five-point Likert-type scales were used (5 = strongly agree to 1 = strongly disagree). Perceived customer orientation was adapted from Dean (2007; Walsh, Beatty and Shiu 2009; Narver and Slater 1990; Table 4.2). Perceived employee orientation was captured following Walsh et al. (2009; Gidaković and Zabkar 2022). Perceived society orientation was conceptualized as adapted from Iglesias et al. (2019; Zimmer and Swoboda 2023). Perceived firm innovativeness was measured as adapted from Kunz et al. (2011; van Riel et al. 2021; Kurtmollaiev, Lervik-Olsen and Andreassen 2022). A commercial agency performed translation-back-translation (parallel blind and translation checks), and minor item adjustments ensured construct equivalence (Jain et al. 2019).

A country’s degree of development was captured at the country level via the most recent HDI data (Blut and Wang 2020; Çilingirtürk and Koçak 2018). The HDI comprises the dimensions of GNI, life expectancy, and education (United Nations Development Programme 2021). We test the moderating effects of the individual HDI dimensions, the GDP and GCI, and national culture as another important context factor in international research in stability checks.

Age, gender (1/0 = female/male), and familiarity (“How familiar are you with [MNC] and its products?”, Mandler, Bartsch and Han 2021) were controlled. These factors may affect consumers’ information integration and perception formation (e.g., van Riel et al. 2021). The number of surveyed individuals by country was controlled to avoid uneven numbers from affecting the results (Hox, Moerbeek and van de Schoot 2018, p. 215).

Because consumers are nested within countries, we tested the premises for MSEM. Intraclass correlation showed that 16.3% of the variance in perceived firm innovativeness can be assigned to national differences. Multilevel modeling is therefore necessary (Hox, Moerbeek and van de Schoot 2018, pp. 4–13).

Reliability and validity tests and correlations produced satisfactory results (e.g., Backhaus et al. 2023, pp. 390–391; Hair et al. 2018, pp. 675–676, see Tables 4.2, 4.3, 4.4 and 4.5). Discriminant validity tests and correlations verified the constructs’ distinctiveness (Fornell and Larcker 1981; Zhou, Yang and Hui 2010). Multilevel reliability was confirmed (Geldhof, Preacher and Zyphur 2014). We used regression scores after weighing validity coefficients of factor score procedures to reduce the complexity of the model (see Table 4.6).

Table 4.2

Reliability and Validity. (Source: Own Creation)

Item

MV/Std.

FL

KMO

ItTC

α

CR

AVE

λ

How do you as a consumer perceive [MNCs] orientation towards its customers?

Perceived

Customer

Orientation

[MNC] is always concerned and committed to its customers.

3.44/1.144

.872

.858

.824

.919

.920

.741

.868

[MNC] understands and takes customer needs seriously.

3.40/1.085

.849

.805

.853

[MNC] has the aim to always satisfy its customers.

3.53/1.119

.876

.828

.873

[MNC] has employees who are concerned about customer needs.

3.56/1.127

.845

.801

.849

How do you as a consumer perceive [MNCs] orientation towards its employees?

Perceived

Employee

Orientation

[MNC] looks like a good place to work for.

3.61/1.130

.813

.737

.743

.874

.875

.699

.839

[MNC] seems to empower employees so they can bring in their full potential.

3.51/1.080

.878

.785

.855

[MNC] seems to treat its people well.

3.47/1.075

.815

.744

.813

How do you as a consumer perceive [MNCs] orientation towards the society?

Perceived

Society

Orientation

[MNC] offers products that are safe for people and the environment.

3.34/1.183

.769

.849

.729

.906

.907

.710

.799

[MNC] acts in an ethically correct manner.

3.28/1.183

.868

.811

.870

[MNC] appears to support good causes.

3.28/1.170

.849

.795

.848

[MNC] seems to be environmentally responsible.

3.18/1.199

.877

.817

.852

How do you as a consumer evaluate [MNCs] innovativeness?

Perceived

Firm

Innovativeness

[MNC] is a creative leader in research and technology.

3.62/1.091

.836

.737

.749

.864

.863

.679

.808

[MNC] changes the markets and improves people’s quality of life through its products.

3.60/1.124

.829

.744

.862

[MNC] is a pioneer in developing innovative products.

3.54/1.070

.807

.729

.796

Note: α = Cronbach’s Alpha (≥.8); AVE = Average Variance Extracted (>.5); CR = Composite Reliability (≥.6); FL = Factor Loadings (EFA; >.5); ItTC = Item-to-Total Correlation (≥.5); KMO = Kaiser‒Meyer‒Olkin Criterion (≥.6); λ = Factor Loadings (CFA; >.5); MV = Mean Value; Std. = Standard Deviation.

Table 4.3

Discriminant Validity. (Source: Own Creation)

Constructs

Perceived Customer Orientation

Perceived Employee Orientation

Perceived Society Orientation

Perceived Firm

Innovativeness

AVE

.741

.699

.710

.679

Perceived Customer

Orientation

.741

–

Perceived Employee

Orientation

.699

.456

–

Perceived Society

Orientation

.710

.570

.448

–

Perceived Firm

Innovativeness

.679

.598

.442

.500

–

Goodness of fit statistics: CFI = .981; TLI = .976; RMSEA = .043; SRMR = .020; χ2 = 127,294.486; df = 91.

Note: AVE = Average Variance Extracted (>.50); CFI = Comparative Fit Index (>.95); RMSEA = Root Mean Squared Error of Approximation (<.08); SRMR = Standardized Root Mean Residual (<.08); TLI = Tucker Lewis Index (>.95); values in italics represent squared correlations between constructs.

Table 4.4

Correlations. (Source: Own Creation)

*p < .05; **p < .01; ***p < .001; ns = not significant.

Table 4.5

Multilevel Reliability. (Source: Own Creation)

Alpha

Composite Reliability

Maximal Reliability

αw

αB

ωW

ωB

HW

HB

Perceived Customer Orientation

.910

.995

.910

.995

.911

.999

Perceived Employee Orientation

.858

.985

.858

.989

.865

.990

Perceived Society Orientation

.890

.993

.892

.994

.898

.997

Perceived Firm Innovativeness

.848

.993

.849

.993

.850

.996

Note: α = Alpha (≥.8); ω = Composite Reliability (≥.8); H = Maximal Reliability (≥.8); W = Within(Individual) Level; B = Between(Country) Level.

Table 4.6

Comparison of Factor Scores. (Source: Own Creation)

Regression Scores Validity Coefficients

Item Parceling Validity Coefficients

Perceived Customer Orientation

.920

1.009

Perceived Employee Orientation

.880

.958

Perceived Society Orientation

.912

1.094

CMV was addressed variously in advance. A single-factor test ex post produced worse fit values than the proposed model. The marker variable technique showed no significant correlation changes (using the theoretically unrelated marker variable occupation; Lindell and Whitney 2001; Williams, Hartman and Cavazotte 2010). The yielded variances were less than 2.0%, suggesting that common method variance is not an issue (see Sect. G.5.1 in the electronic supplementary material).

Possible biases from omitted variables by endogeneity were addressed by applying the instrumental variable approach (Hill et al. 2021). An instrumental variable was chosen for each independent variable (i.e., perceived customer orientation: top management emphasis, Kirca, Jayachandran and Bearden 2005; perceived employee orientation: perceived organizational prestige, Biswas and Suar 2016; perceived society orientation: economic responsibility, Luger, Hofer and Floh 2022). We ensured the instrumental variables’ prediction strength via F-tests and calculated a consistent model (Hox, Moerbeek and van de Schoot 2018, p. 61). A comparison between consistent and efficient models revealed no significant differences in the effects of the perceived stakeholder orientations (Hausman 1978). The risk of endogeneity is reduced (see Sect. G.5.2 in the electronic supplementary material).

To assure equally measured parameters across groups, full scalar invariances were shown between countries (see Sect. G.5.3 in the electronic supplementary material). We examined multilevel measurement invariance following Jak, Oort and Dolan (2013). Factor loadings at all levels were considered equal. Thus, cluster bias is not an issue.

4.3.3 Method

We apply MSEM (with Mplus 8.10) to test our hypotheses. This covariance-based approach is very appropriate for large cross-national samples, as it simultaneously calculates the interactions of variables at the country and individual levels, exposes variances within and between countries, and specifies latent variables and moderators (Hox, Moerbeek and van de Schoot 2018, pp. 212–214, 271–274; Preacher, Zhang and Zyphur 2016). We also calculated effect sizes because Mplus offers only b-values (e.g., Khalilzadeh and Tasci 2017). The relative importance of the context factors is shown by the explained country-level variance.

Stepwise random models were computed, beginning with baseline models with individual-level controls and then including all individual-level variables. We included the BIC and AIC values to evaluate model fit. Model complexity requires the grand mean centering of all independent and moderator variables to facilitate interpretation of the interactions (Ryu 2015). The level-one model reads:

PFIij=β0j+β1jPCOij+β2jPEOij+β3jPSOij+βILCILCij+rij

(4.1)

with i = consumers, j = countries; PFIij, PCOij, PEOij, and PSOij = consumer i’s perceived firm innovativeness, customer, employee, and society orientation. ILCij = individual-level control variables; and rij = individual-level error term. The β0j first-level intercept and β1j–3j individual-level slopes were allowed to vary cross-nationally.

The level-two models account for differences between countries and predict variation in the β coefficients using moderating variables as predictors:

β0j=γ00+γ01CLVj+γ02CLCj+uoj

(4.2)

βqj=γq0+γq1CLVj++uqj

(4.3)

with γ₀₀ = country-level intercept of firm innovativeness; γq0 (q = 1, 3) = country-level random slope intercepts of customer, employee, and society orientation; CLVj = country-level moderator; uqj (q = 0, 3) = country-level residual variances; CLCj = country-level control. The following equation consolidates equations (11–13):

PFIij=γ00+γ01CLVj+γ10PCOij+γ11CLVjPCOij+γ20PEOij+γ21CLVjPEOij+γ30PSOij+γ31CLVjPSOij+γILCILCij+γCLCCLCij+error

(4.4)

4.3.4 Results

Table 4.7 summarizes the results by showing unstandardized coefficients (only available in random intercept and slope models, Hox, Moerbeek and van de Schoot 2018, pp. 17–18), effect sizes (Marsh et al. 2009), and satisfactory model fit values.

Table 4.7

Results. (Source: Own Creation)

***p < .001; **p < .01; *p < .05; ns = not significant. Effects sizes are shown in brackets.

Note: CD = Country Development; PCO = Perceived Customer Orientation; PEO = Perceived Employee Orientation; PFI = Perceived Firm Innovativeness; PSO = Perceived Society Orientation.

We find that customer orientation perceptions increase perceived firm innovativeness (b = .497, p < .001). Similarly, perceived employee and society orientations positively affect firm innovativeness perceptions (b = .173, p < .001; b = .190; p < .001). H1–H3 are supported. The effects explain 82.6% of the individual-level variance in perceived firm innovativeness across nations, regardless of the country context. The effect of perceived customer orientation is the strongest, those of perceived employee and society orientation are comparably strong and, together, as strong as that of customer orientation.

The degree of country development reinforces the positive impacts of perceived customer and employee orientation on perceived firm innovativeness (bPCOxCD→PFI = .182, p < .001; bPEOxCD→PFI = .294, p < .01), in line with H4a-b. Confirming H4c, the positive effect of perceived society orientation is attenuated (bPSOxCD→PFI = −.383, p < .01). Overall, the degree of country development accounts for 74.7% of the country-level variance. The effect of perceived society orientation is moderated most strongly, followed by the perceived employee orientation effect. The moderation effect of perceived customer orientation is the weakest.

Among our controls, familiarity and age are significant as expected, as is the country-level control.

4.3.5 Stability Checks

Alternative models confirm our observations and provide additional insights for this research field. A random split-half test underlines the robustness of the effects and moderations among both samples (Geldhof, Preacher and Zyphur 2014, see Sect. G.5.4 in the electronic supplementary material). Additionally, several alternate models were tested.

We tested the moderation of HDI dimensions, i.e., GNI, education level, and life expectancy, to obtain more detailed insight into the moderation (see Sect. G.5.5 in the electronic supplementary material). Surprisingly, increasing GNI does not significantly moderate the effects of either stakeholder orientation on firm innovativeness perceptions. Education level and life expectancy moderate the effects in the expected directions. Education level accounts for slightly more country-level variance (61.4% vs. 60.2%).

We tested the moderation of more economically oriented measures for country development. Consistent with our first stability check, GDP does not moderate the effects of either stakeholder orientation. GCI positively moderates the effect of perceived employee orientation, while moderations of perceived customer and society orientations are not significant.

We tested the moderation of national cultural dimensions. National culture is an important contextual factor but appears less relevant in innovativeness research thus far (Jacobs and Swoboda 2023). We apply Schwartz’s cultural approach because it has been found to be superior to other approaches when consumer cognitions are analyzed. It distinguishes embeddedness, hierarchy, mastery, and opposite dimensions (Schwartz 2014, p. 548). We found different moderations. Embeddedness (i.e., a society’s structures between groups and individuals) diminishes the effects of perceived customer and employee orientation while strengthening the effect of perceived society orientation on perceived innovativeness. Hierarchy (i.e., the extent of acceptance of disparate authority and power allocations in a society) exerts a similar moderation. Mastery (i.e., the extent to which individuals prefer changing their environment to achieve individual or group goals) diminishes the impact of customer orientation and strengthens that of perceived society orientation, but not of perceived employee orientation. The dimensions explain 24% (mastery) to 61% (embeddedness) of the country-level variance. The opposite dimensions moderate the effects mostly as expected.

We tested the effects and moderation of a model in which perceived customer orientation mediates the impacts of employee and society orientations on firm innovativeness. Theoretically, consumer perceptions that a firm exhibits exceptional policies, strategies, and attitudes toward the management and treatment of its employees and is highly engaged in meeting societal obligations might increase perceptions that the firm also strives to meet customer needs, driving perceived firm innovativeness. The baseline effects were significant and stable: perceived employee and society orientations affected customer orientation and firm innovativeness indirectly. The direct impacts of perceived employee and society orientations were moderated by country development, the impact of perceived customer orientation was not. The marginally higher explained individual-level variance (Δ + .6%) indicates that the mediation model does not explain the antecedent relationships substantially better than our proposed model does. At 66.7%, country development accounts for less country-level variance.

We validated our insights on a sample of the three strongest competitors of the MNC in every country chosen by the MNC based on their competitiveness and operations in the same industries. The competitors are MNCs but differ in each country. Consistent with our results, we found significant impacts of perceived stakeholder orientations on firm innovativeness and consistent moderations (accounting for 68.3% of country-level variance). Our insights are supported beyond our specific MNC.

4.4 Discussion

Researchers have advocated expanding analysis on what influences individuals’ perceptions of firm innovativeness beyond single-country studies (e.g., Brexendorf and Keller 2017; Kurtmollaiev, Lervik-Olsen and Andreassen 2022). Drawing upon the overarching stakeholder theory framework and information integration theory, we followed these recommendations and analyzed how MNCs’ perceived customer, employee, and society orientations affect consumer perceptions of MNCs’ innovativeness. We found that the three perceived stakeholder orientations differently affect consumers’ perceived firm innovativeness, providing different implications for researchers and managers. We also found that country development moderates these effects differently: perceived customer and employee orientations are reinforced, the latter even more strongly, whereas perceived society orientation is diminished, becoming an important lever in less developed countries. We carefully draw theoretical and practical implications.

4.4.1 Contribution to Theory

This study contributes to research on the antecedents of perceived firm innovativeness, which is known to be a strong source of competitive advantage for MNCs, while respective drivers from a consumer view have been under-researched (e.g., Kurtmollaiev, Lervik-Olsen and Andreassen 2022). This study shows that the humanistic management approach of innovative MNCs, as constituted in stakeholder theory, works: All stakeholder orientations strengthen innovativeness perceptions, albeit differently (e.g., Freeman et al. 2010, pp. 3–6; Goswami and Bhaduri 2023). By providing theoretical rationales on the basis of information integration theory, we confirm national studies on how a firm’s orientation toward either customers (e.g., Meißner, Haurand and Stummer 2017) or society (e.g., Jørgensen, Pedersen and Skard 2022) affects innovativeness perceptions also across nations. We notably expand these studies by including a firm’s employee orientation as another important source of innovativeness perceptions, which is consistent with management studies but new to consumer research (e.g., Suifan 2021). We extend studies in one or two countries by showing a dominance of customer orientation and an important role of employee and society orientations, which differ cross-nationally. Testing for a mediating role of perceived customer orientation underscored the fit of the direct effects model. Our results also proved to be valid beyond our focal firm. We further contribute to the research streams of each of the three stakeholder orientations.

Prior studies have shown how firms’ perceived customer orientation increases consumers’ innovativeness perceptions (e.g., Jacobs and Swoboda 2023; Meißner, Haurand and Stummer 2017). We confirm these findings yet also expand what was shown in developed countries and only assumed cross-nationally by theoretically integrating perceived customer orientation into the broader framework of the humanistic management of stakeholder orientations, and by providing empirical insights across nations. Our findings also contradict studies that could not find effects of customer orientation activities on perceived innovativeness when comparing two countries (e.g., Vaquero Martín 2021). Customer orientation is cross-nationally most strongly interpreted and integrated into firm innovativeness perceptions.

Firms’ orientation toward their employees has thus far been neglected as an antecedent of perceived innovativeness (affecting consumer attitudes in the service context, for example; Maxwell-Smith, White and Loyd 2020; Rybaczewska, Sparks and Sułkowski 2020; Wolter et al. 2019). We expand this research and show how perceived employee orientation drives perceived firm innovativeness across nations. This insight even contradicts developed country-comparing research that shows that employer perceptions affect firm impressions of warmth but not competences (e.g., Gidaković and Zabkar 2022). Surprisingly, perceived employee orientation is as strong as perceived society orientation, despite the latter having received much more academic attention. This finding has interesting implications for managers below.

We further extend consumer research on firms’ perceived society orientation. Studies have connected firms’ society orientation in terms of social and environmental sustainability with increased perceived innovativeness in Norway (Jørgensen, Pedersen and Skard 2022; van Riel et al. 2021). We confirm these findings cross-nationally. However, perceived society orientation drives innovativeness perceptions to a modest extent. This is surprising considering the great effort many MNCs put into fulfilling societal obligations (Anzola-Román, Garcia-Marco and Zouaghi 2024; Luger, Hofer and Floh 2022). However, in line with our argumentation, consumers may grow habituated to MNCs’ social responsibilities, decreasing their general importance and relevance for perceptions of firms to create novel and creative offers even across nations.

Concerning our second research aim, we show that a country’s degree of development is the major contextual factor in consumers’ perceptions of innovativeness across nations (explaining most country-level variance). This contributes to calls for consideration of country contexts and novel theoretical rationales (e.g., Jørgensen, Pedersen and Skard 2022; van Riel et al. 2021). We expand the predominantly national research on firms’ stakeholder orientations by highlighting the importance of the country context for their effects on innovativeness perceptions. This study contributes to the application of information integration theory and emphasizes the relevance of theoretical mechanisms that are amplified or attenuated by country development (e.g., Carlson and White 2008). Our stability checks show that national culture (e.g., embeddedness, hierarchy) also moderates the effects of perceived stakeholder orientations, albeit more weakly, which constitutes a promising area for further research.

A country’s degree of development is a strong multiplier of consumers’ integration of information about firms’ customer orientation into innovativeness perceptions, and even more strongly so for firms’ employee orientation. This expands conceptual assumptions with theoretical explanations for the interpretation and integration of information about MNCs’ respective stakeholder orientations (Jacobs and Swoboda 2023; Ruiz, García and Revilla 2016). We also contradict studies that could not find moderating effects of perceived customer or employee orientation on consumer intentions (e.g., Swoboda and Batton 2020). Consumers in more developed countries evaluate and integrate MNCs’ focus on consumer needs and employee treatment more positively, whereas the same information drives firms innovativeness perceptions less strongly in less developed countries (Bagdadli et al. 2021; Blut and Wang 2020).

The effect of perceived society orientation on perceived innovativeness is attenuated by degree of country development. This is interesting, as these findings contradict previous findings on consumers’ behavioral intentions and firms’ major actions found in management studies (e.g., Li et al. 2018). However, our results support conceptual assumptions about consumers’ habits and expectations in cross-national contexts (e.g., Bagdadli et al. 2021; Contini et al. 2020). Consumers in less developed countries evaluate MNCs that commit to fulfilling societal obligations more positively and associate them more closely with being innovative, whereas MNCs benefit less from such perceptions in more developed countries.

4.4.2 Practical Relevance

Carefully managed customer, employee, and society orientations help those firms be perceived as innovative by consumers. Nevertheless, this perception is not easily reached across nations. However, unnoticed effect differences of stakeholder orientations in general and in more or less developed countries may lead to misinterpretation of innovativeness studies, short conclusions, or ineffective investments in activities and communications addressing customers. A collaborative, humanistic management approach pays off, and MNCs see how and why it influences customer-perceived firm innovativeness (which strongly affects purchase outcomes across nations, e.g., Jacobs and Swoboda 2023).

A doubly strong relationship between customer (vs. other) orientation and perceived firm innovativeness indicates the strongest lever from the consumer view. MNCs can particularly leverage the benefits of customer orientation activities and communication (importantly, e.g., customer services or empowerment and corporate or digital communication; Acar and Puntoni 2016; Fuchs and Schreier 2011; Palazón et al. 2022). However, they may face challenges due to competitors’ similar focus. We recommend taking employee and society orientations into account, as both increase innovativeness perceptions and, together, are as strong as customer orientation. MNCs must overcome frequent silos of consumer information or organizational processes in independently operating customer, human resources, and sustainability departments, for example (Neill and Jiang 2017). Careful management of consumer evaluations of stakeholder orientations and consistent communications are recommended and superior to focusing on single orientations (Carlson and White 2008; Freeman et al. 2010, pp. 4–6).

Similar implications result in distinct country contexts. Managers should leverage firm innovativeness perceptions through activities and communication of all customer, employee, and society orientations, but country development reinforces and diminishes respective effects in opposite directions. This limits the insights from studies in single countries or comparing only few countries, which managers should carefully evaluate. Strategically, evaluating a country portfolio allows for important conclusions (see Fig. 4.3). MNCs’ headquarters, for example, need to understand respective tradeoffs.

In countries with higher levels of development (e.g., Switzerland, Australia), strong perceived customer orientation and increasing employee orientation are promising levers for a firm’s innovativeness perceptions. Here, individuals appreciate MNCs’ efforts that enabled them to fulfill their self-fulfillment needs privately and professionally (e.g., Maxwell-Smith, White and Loyd 2020).

In countries with lower degrees of development (e.g., Kenya, Thailand), the effect of perceived society orientation is strengthened, whereas those of customer and employee orientations are strongly weakened. Here, individuals interpret societal efforts favorably and evaluate MNCs’ resulting activities as most creative and impactful (e.g., Marquina and Morales 2012).

Figure 4.3

Country Portfolio. (Source: Own Creation)

These implications are not opportunities for all firms, as consumers’ prior perceptions affect current evaluations (Jacobs and Swoboda 2023). Competitive advantages arise for MNCs with favorable prior stakeholder orientations. MNCs with less nuanced orientations toward only one stakeholder group, for example, miss out on such opportunities. They need careful strategic considerations of how to overcome these competitive disadvantages. A targeted interaction with consumers to identify their demands, develop respective management skills and activities, and communicate them on webpages, reports or social media are tangible suggestions (e.g., Kissel and Büttgen 2015; Seele and Lock 2015).

4.5 Limitations and Further Research

Certain limitations of this study provide guidance for research.

Our data were diligently collected, but expanding the database would allow scholars to draw further conclusions regarding smaller, start-ups of firms or those with lower market penetration, for example (e.g., Kurtmollaiev, Lervik-Olsen and Andreassen 2022). Our stability checks using a competitor sample validate our findings beyond our individual MNC, but examining other industries, a more balanced sample of emerging/developed countries, or further data beyond our study would be interesting.

We captured stakeholder orientations as unidimensional constructs for numerous reasons. Regarding perceived customer and employee orientation, distinguishing between affective and cognitive orientations or capturing specific activities for each orientation could provide refined insights (e.g., Ndubisi 2012; Rybaczewska, Sparks and Sułkowski 2020; Vaquero Martín 2021). Comparing the effects of perceived orientations toward further stakeholders could be interesting (e.g., financiers, suppliers; Quintelier and Vock 2024). A qualitative approach enables country-specific emic scales to be developed, which will improve construct equivalence (e.g., Jain et al. 2019). However, given the large number of countries studied and the required item comparability, we applied pretested etic scales.

By extending our modeling, research can include behavioral outcomes such as customer engagement or word-of-mouth behavior (e.g., Meißner, Haurand and Stummer 2017), which is challenging in MSEM due to model complexity. A comparison of consumer and firm perceptions of firms’ stakeholder orientations would be an interesting area for obtaining theoretical and actionable insights (e.g., Rybaczewska, Sparks and Sułkowski 2020). Although the direct and mediated relationships tested are meaningful, analyzing further mediations or reciprocal relationships of stakeholder orientations could be insightful (e.g., Gidaković and Zabkar 2022). Research can examine further moderators (e.g., national institutions, country-of-origin; Huaman-Ramirez, Albert and Merunka 2019; Jacobs and Swoboda 2023). Our stability checks show that national culture (e.g., embeddedness, hierarchy) also moderates the effects of perceived stakeholder orientations, albeit more weakly, which constitutes a promising area for further research.

4.6 Conclusions

This study finds that a firm’s customer-perceived customer, employee, and society orientation drive innovativeness perceptions. The degree of country development strongly explains cross-national effects of the antecedents and moderates their effects in different degrees and direc-tions. Applying information integration theory, we offer a theoretical complement to past research on antecedents of perceived firm innovativeness, which is fragmented and overlooks the role of country context. We look forward to further international research on innovativeness perceptions.

Footnotes

1

We systematically reviewed the corporate websites of the 50 most innovative firms in 2023 (Boston Consulting Group 2023) for statements regarding their strategic orientation on providing value especially for customers, employees, or society. While some firms explicitly presented how they pay attention to and integrate the needs of these stakeholder groups, others mentioned only some or none of these stakeholder groups.

2

We conducted a systematic literature review in over 50 journals according to Harzing’s recent journal quality list following Gaur and Kumar (2018), using the keywords (perceived) firm innovativeness, innovativeness, innovation orientation, stakeholder orientation, customer orientation, employee orientation, good employer, employer image, society orientation, social responsibility. We focused on empirical studies published in 2010 or later with cross-citation of the most-often-cited studies.

© The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Fachmedien Wiesbaden GmbH, part of Springer Nature 2025

N. JacobsStrategic Orientations and Innovativeness of Multinational CorporationsHandel und Internationales Marketing Retailing and International Marketinghttps://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-658-49019-5_5

5. Final Remarks

Nele Jacobs1  

(1)

Fachbereich IV, Universität Trier, Trier, Germany

Nele Jacobs

Email: nf.jacobs@outlook.com

5.1 Discussion and Conclusions

5.1.1 Core Results

In the highly competitive global business landscape, innovativeness constitutes a key factor for the success and resilience of MNCs. Consumers’ perceptions play a particularly important role, as they are the ones who ultimately judge the novelty and usefulness of the results of firms’ activities. This doctoral thesis examines the effects and antecedents of consumer perceptions of firm innovativeness. Moreover, it investigates how firms can benefit from being associated with special corporate abilities, even and especially in times of global crisis. By examining these challenges across countries, it provides fine-grained results.

The literature review in Sect. 1.​2.​2 highlights the positive outcomes associated with perceptions of firms’ customer orientation and innovativeness in terms of consumer attitudes or intentions. However, it also revealed important gaps in the existing research, as well as a considerable number of contradictory results. Almost all studies have focused exclusively on either perceived customer orientation or firm innovativeness. Scholars have found inconclusive evidence regarding the effects of both constructs (e.g., direct vs. only indirect effects of perceived customer orientation, Ha and John 2010; Habel et al. 2020, or of perceived firm innovativeness, Lin, Lobo and Leckie 2019; Pappu and Quester 2016). Inconsistencies also emerge when comparing studies conducted in emerging or developed countries, or across different international contexts (e.g., the effects of perceived innovativeness in Bangladesh vs. the USA, Wong and Haque 2022; Chang, Ko and Leite 2016, or the moderating role of national culture in country comparison or cross-national studies, Eisingerich and Rubera 2010; Swoboda and Batton 2020). Despite the clear theoretical and practical relevance of studying the sequential effect of perceived customer orientation through firm innovativeness, empirical analysis remains scarce. The only existing study was conducted in a single-country context, neglecting the influence of important contextual factors despite promising suggestions from national studies (Meißner, Haurand and Stummer 2017).

Section 1.​2.​3 revealed valuable insights that scholars have generated on consumer behavior during the COVID-19 pandemic. Due to the abundance of studies conducted in single-country contexts, the literature review focused on international studies that examined consumer perceptions, intentions, and behaviors regarding brands or involved national institutions during the pandemic. While research specifically addressing brands was limited, the available studies highlighted how brands either gained or lost consumer favor during the pandemic (e.g., through increased consumer attachment or anxieties, Ozuem et al. 2021; Verlegh et al. 2021). These studies also indicated that the effects varied between countries (e.g., Ahmad et al. 2023; Meena and Kumar 2022). However, they did not examine the impact on companies or (corporate) brands based on brand abilities, nor did they provide rationales for the observed country differences. Research on consumer behavior beyond the branding context has provided insights into the impact of regulative, normative, and cultural-cognitive institutions (e.g., in terms of government policies, compliance norms, or national culture, Danatzis and Möller-Herm 2023; Davvetas, Ulqinaku and Abi 2022; Dheer, Egri and Treviño 2021). Overall, however, researchers have overlooked the impact of national institutions on consumers’ perceptions of corporate brands, as well as any potential changes in these perceptions as a result of the pandemic.

The literature review in Sect. 1.​2.​4 observed the antecedents of consumer perceptions of firm innovativeness and the effects of perceived customer, employee, and society orientations. Scholarly insights into the drivers of consumers’ firm innovativeness perceptions are limited, with studies being conducted in diverse and fragmented contexts. Most of this research was limited to single-country observations in highly developed countries (e.g., Kurtmollaiev, Lervik-Olsen and Andreassen 2022; van Riel et al. 2021). Only few studies examine firm’s perceived strategic orientation towards customers and the society as different stakeholder groups as antecedents of firm innovativeness (e.g., Jørgensen, Pedersen and Skard 2022; Meißner, Haurand and Stummer 2017). However, some studies reached divergend conclusions about whether such effects exist or not. While initial research explored consumer reactions to firms with a perceived employee orientation, this remains absent in the context of perceived firm innovativeness. Also the moderating role of important national contextual factors is seldom considered in the mostly single-country research conducted almost exclusively in Western countries.

In summary, various research gaps regarding MNCs’ strategic orientations from consumer perspective, their interplay and effects on consumers’ behavioral intentions remained unanswered.This doctoral thesis addressed the following key research questions to fill the identified gaps:

(1)

How does perceived customer orientation affect product purchase intention, both directly and indirectly, through perceived firm innovativeness across nations, and whether and how do the degree of country development and national cultural dimensions moderate the direct paths on product purchase intention?

(2)

Whether and how do national institutions affect consumers’ CBAA across countries, and how has the COVID-19 pandemic changed this effect for a pandemic-relevant manufacturer and its competitors?

(3)

How do perceived customer, employee, and society orientations of MNCs cross-nationally affect consumers’ perceptions of firm innovativeness, and how does a country’s degree of development moderate this effect?

To answer these key research questions, three separate studies were conducted using hierarchical consumer evaluations across numerous countries. Drawing on empirical insights gained from multilevel structural equation modeling, including cross-level interactions in Studies 1 and 3, this dissertation offers novel and valuable insights that are synthesized below.

Study 1 addresses the first key research question by exploring both the direct and indirect paths of perceived customer orientation and firm innovativeness on consumers’ behavioral intentions, while accounting for variations due to country-specific contextual factors. The results indicate that MNCs can gain both direct and indirect advantages from being perceived as customer-oriented. The effect on product purchase intention is further amplified by enhancing consumers’ perceptions of the firm’s innovativeness. When consumers perceive a firm as prioritizing their specific needs, they are more likely to feel acknowledged, fostering greater confidence that the company’s products will deliver value (e.g., Habel et al. 2020; Ndubisi 2012). A strong customer focus also leads to higher consumer evaluations of the firm’s ability to develop truly novel and impactful products that meet both consumer and market needs (e.g., Kunz, Schmitt and Meyer 2011; Meißner, Haurand and Stummer 2017). Notably, the indirect path via perceptions of innovativeness is stronger across nations, as such perceptions are more closely related to the actual product that consumers intend to purchase (e.g., Ferguson and Mohan 2020).

Study 1 examines the role of country development and national cultural dimensions as relevant contingency factors that shape the impact of consumers’ evaluations of a firm’s customer orientation on their intentions to purchase the firm’s products. Interestingly, the perceived innovativeness of a firm strongly enhances such product purchase intentions regardless of the country context, rendering it a valuable consumer evaluation for firms across nations. The higher the degree of country development, the stronger the direct relevance of perceived customer orientation for consumers’ product purchase intentions. Consumers use such evaluations as easily accessible information to differentiate firms in highly competitive developed markets (e.g., Gürhan-Canli, Hayran and Sarial-Abi 2016). In these countries, consumers possess the resources and cognitive capacity to select MNCs based on their focus on individual needs. In less developed countries, consumers rely more on the image of MNCs as global icons and value firm evaluations even if they are perceived to be less focused on the specific needs of individual consumers (e.g., Ndubisi 2012). Among the three national cultural dimensions analyzed, only embeddedness and hierarchy moderate the perceived customer orientation path, while the impact of cultural mastery is statistically insignificant. In less embedded countries, consumers place greater value on perceived customer orientation as they seek to fulfill personal goals through products tailored to their needs (e.g., Fuchs and Schreier 2011; Vaquero Martín 2021). Similarly, in less hierarchical societies, consumers expect even large MNCs to treat them as equals, which increases the importance of a firm’s attention to individual consumer needs. Firms that are perceived as customer-oriented make consumers feel valued, thereby increasing their intention to engage with and support respective firms (e.g., Habel et al. 2020; Swoboda and Batton 2020). Although only by tendency, the results underscore the assumption that consumers in societies characterized by a high cultural mastery tend to appreciate the sophisticated offerings provided by customer-oriented firms (e.g., Camacho, De Jong and Stremersch 2014). Overall, national cultural dimensions are identified as stronger contingency factors, accounting for over 56% of country-level variance in consumer product purchase intentions, compared to 50% attributed to the degree of country development. Stability checks support the robustness of the results, also beyond the focal firm.

Study 2 addresses the second key research question by studying the impact of national regulative, normative, and cultural-cognitive institutions on consumers’ CBAA before and during the COVID-19 pandemic. The findings show that in stable, “normal” times, consumers’ CBAA are strongly shaped by these institutional factors. In countries with stronger regulative frameworks, consumers place their trust in governmental actions to ensure that MNCs meet reliable standards. Strongly established local regulations can limit the actions of MNCs, which reduces their opportunities for competitive differentiation and thereby results in lower consumer CBAA (e.g., Ang, Benischke and Doh 2015). in less regulated countries, MNCs enjoy greater flexibility in their operations and may even play a role in advancing the regulatory environment, which can enhance consumers’ CBAA (e.g., Miller et al. 2022). Similarly, a higher number of established normative institutions makes it more challenging for MNCs to navigate consumer expectations, as firms are expected to comply to the implicit, often ambiguous social norms. This raises the risk that firms fall short of existing expectations, harming their CBAA among consumers (e.g., Denk, Kaufmann and Roesch 2012; Gaganis et al. 2021). In societies with less structured normative frameworks, consumers develop stronger CBAA as a way to compensate for the lack of institutional security (e.g., Beck, Rahinel and Bleier 2020). Study 2 conceptualizes cultural-cognitive institutions using the most common national cultural dimension of embeddedness. In more embedded societies, consumers form stronger CBAA due to their propensity for more thorough information searches and lower variety-seeking behavior (e.g., Deephouse, Newburry and Soleimani 2016; Swoboda and Batton 2019). Consumers’ greater appreciation for innovative offerings that contribute to societal well-being make CBAA especially useful in decision situations (e.g., De Mooij 2017). Cultural embeddedness accounts for the largest part of country-level variation in consumer CBAA (67%), followed by regulative institutions (63%) and normative institutions (46%). However, theoretically plausible correlations between the institutions prevented the simultaneous testing of the effects.

The results of Study 2 further demonstrate that during the COVID-19 pandemic as a black swan event, not only did the corporate brand awareness of a pandemic-relevant MNC increase, but also the influence of national institutions on consumers’ CBAA diminished. Even in more strongly regulated countries, MNCs that played a key role in mitigating the effects of the pandemic received significant attention due to their specific abilities. Consumers adjusted their expectations towards these MNCs, which provided a sense of control in times when previously established regulations were no longer effective (e.g., Miller et al. 2022; Prentice et al. 2021). This contributed to the development of strong CBAA among consumers, even in highly regulated environments. MNCs that offered unique solutions during the black swan event, such as a highly effective vaccine, strengthened their external legitimacy, even in countries with stringent social norms that are difficult to navigate in “quiet” times. The pressure exerted by pre-existing social norms was reduced, as consumers perceived pandemic-relevant MNCs as capable of restoring their behavioral routines and sense of security (e.g., Campbell et al. 2020; Das et al. 2021a). This led to stronger CBAA among consumers. Also cultural embeddedness, which prior to the pandemic had strongly influenced CBAA, lost its relative impact. In societies where communal well-being was traditionally prioritized, concerns about individual health and well-being became more prominent. MNCs that contributed to both societal well-being and the restoration of individual freedoms achieved strong CBAA in both highly and less culturally embedded countries (e.g., Cho, Guo and Torelli 2022; Park et al. 2022). In addition to a significant reduction in the effect coefficients, also the explanatory power of normative and cultural-cognitive institutions for consumer CBAA at the country level decreased by 14% and 16%, respectively.

The third key research question was addressed in Study 3. In Study 3, firms’ consumer-perceived stakeholder orientations are considered as antecedents of firm innovativeness, along with the degree of country development as an important country-specific boundary condition. The findings show that consumers’ perceptions of a firm’s customer, employee, and society orientations positively influence their perceptions of firm innovativeness across nations. Customer-oriented firms are perceived as having greater access to diverse ideas and resources and being less constrained, leading to more innovative offerings and enhancing the firms’ reputation for innovativeness in line with Study 1 (e.g., Meißner, Haurand and Stummer 2017; Vaquero Martín 2021). Employee-oriented firms are seen as creating a supportive environment that empowers employees to explore new ideas, fostering creativity and generating more innovative and impactful offerings (e.g., Li et al. 2021b; Theurer et al. 2018). Society-oriented firms are perceived as more capable of maintaining market positions and producing innovative, impactful offerings due to their focus on societal issues and long-term sustainability (e.g., Jørgensen, Pedersen and Skard 2022; van Riel et al. 2021). The simultaneous consideration of the three stakeholder orientations identifies customer orientation as having the strongest influence, while employee and society orientations contribute similarly to shaping perceptions of firm innovativeness.

Consistent with the insights drawn from the stability checks in Study 1, the degree of country development changes these antecedent effects on perceived firm innovativeness. In more developed countries, consumers prioritize customer orientation as they focus on higher-order needs such as self-actualization and individual fulfillment. This strengthens the path from perceived customer orientation to firm innovativeness as compared to less developed countries, where consumers evaluate firms based on more product-related information (e.g., Blut and Wang 2020; Heinberg et al. 2020). The effect of perceived employee orientation is also more pronounced in more developed countries, where consumers place greater relevance on employee treatment and associate employee-oriented firms with greater market responsiveness and creativity (e.g., Bagdadli et al. 2021; Gidaković and Zabkar 2022). However, the effect of perceived society orientation is stronger in less developed countries, where consumers are more directly affected by societal and environmental challenges. Firms’ efforts to address these issues resonate with consumers’ safety needs, making society orientation a critical factor for market differentiation and consumers’ firm innovativeness perceptions (e.g., Godefroit-Winkel, Schill and Diop-Sall 2022; Li et al. 2018).

5.1.2 Theoretical Implications

This doctoral thesis provides valuable contributions to both the existing research on firm abilities and innovativeness, as well as to theory.

Study 1 advances our understanding of how firms can leverage their customer orientation and firm innovativeness strategies across countries. The findings validate the use of information integration theory to explain how perceived customer orientation increases consumers’ product purchase intention both directly and indirectly through perceived firm innovativeness (e.g., Bettman 1970; Tybout, Calder and Sternthal 1981). Consumers either directly use information about a firm’s customer orientation in their decision-making process or further process it, leading to an increased perception of firm innovativeness, which in turn strengthens their product purchase intentions. This study addresses calls for cross-national analysis of the combined effects of the two consumer perceptions, contributing to greater generalizability across countries (e.g., Meißner, Haurand and Stummer 2017). Moreover, the findings clarify previous inconclusive studies by supporting both the direct as well as the indirect relevance of perceived customer orientation (e.g., Hammami, Souiden and Bennour 2021, who found a direct effect, vs. Habel et al. 2020, who found an exclusively indirect path to consumer outcomes). Nevertheless, the results indicate that the indirect pathway is in fact the stronger one, leading to important critical conclusions about the interdependent effects of customer orientation and firm innovativeness perceptions.

Study 1 contributes IB research by responding to calls for the inclusion of contextual moderations in the analysis (e.g., Rubera and Kirca 2017). Notably, the findings reveal that consumers’ perceptions of a firm’s innovativeness enhance their product purchase intentions regardless of the country context. While prior studies have offered conflicting insights, the results support the notion that a country’s prevailing national institutional framework affects consumers’ cognitive information processing mechanisms with respect to perceptions of customer orientation (e.g., Gürhan-Canli, Sarial-Abi and Hayran 2018). The degree of a country’s development strengthens the retrieval and enhances the relevance evaluation of customer orientation perceptions, thereby increasing their relevance for consumers’ purchase intention. This offers an explanation for discrepancies in effects found in single-country studies in emerging or developed countries (e.g., Aurier and Séré de Lanauze 2012 vs. Valenzuela, Mulki and Jaramillo 2010). Additionally, the study seeks to clarify ambiguous findings of previous research on the moderating role of national cultural value dimensions in shaping the effects of perceived customer orientation (e.g., Eisingerich and Rubera 2010 vs. Swoboda and Batton 2020). The results of Study 1 indicate that cultural embeddedness and hierarchy reduce the positive impact of perceived customer orientation on purchase intention (Schwartz 1994). These findings support the presumption that national cultural values significantly influence consumers’ cognitive information processing (e.g., Gürhan-Canli, Sarial-Abi and Hayran 2018).

Study 2 advances the research on how the regulative, normative, and cultural-cognitive institutional frameworks, as part of the country-specific context, directly affect consumers’ associations with corporate brand ability, including but going beyond the firm’s innovativeness (e.g., Berens, van Riel and Van Rekom 2007). CBAA serve as highly relevant signals for purchase decisions (Brown and Dacin 1997). The findings highlight the applicability of institutional theory in describing the signaling environment that shapes the signal’s observability, importance evaluation, or expectation fit (e.g., Griffith, Lee and Yalcinkaya 2023). The study thus addresses the limited understanding of corporate ability associations beyond single-country contexts and provides insights into differences in these consumer associations across different national settings. Stronger regulative and normative regulations diminish respective associations. In countries with well-established legal systems and shared behavioral norms, consumers are less reliant on specific firm signal and more dependent on on their well-structured environment. Cultural embeddedness, as a key cultural dimension, increases the importance and expectation fit of strong corporate ability associations. The high amount of country variance explained by the cultural dimension aligns with previous international research that has assumed such a role (e.g., Baghi and Gabrielli 2019). Especially consumers in highly embedded countries appreciate the benefits to their society’s well-being that firms with strong ability signals provide (Schwartz 1994).

Study 2 further offers novel insights into how this effect of national institutions on consumers’ associations of corporate brand abilities evolved during a black swan event, specifically the COVID-19 pandemic (Taleb 2007). This extends research on institutional change by examining shifts in consumer consciousness, thus the changing roles of objectively largely stable national institutions (e.g., Donthu and Gustafsson 2020). It further contributes to consumer studies in the context of COVID-19 by conducting a large-scale primary data analysis of how the pandemic affected consumer cognitions. During the pandemic, consumers’ associations with corporate brand abilities were significantly less strongly influenced by regulative, normative, and cultural-cognitive institutions compared to before the pandemic. Extending studies highlighting the negative consequences of the pandemic, the results show how a pandemic-relevant MNC and its competitors could benefit from strengthened consumer associations were less dependent on the country context (e.g., Wenzel, Stanske and Lieberman 2021). The theoretical mechanisms developed to explain how and why consumer consciousness shifted in response to the global pandemic offer important insights for black swan events. Such profound disruptions change the prevailing goals of individuals and thereby the role of institutions that cannot adapt quickly enough. Moreover, these events increase consumers’ appreciation of MNCs with specific abilities to mitigate the severe effects of black swan events.

The important contribution of Study 3 lies in its insights into how firm’s orientation towards three key stakeholder groups—customers, employees, and society—affects consumers’ perceptions of the firm’s innovativeness across nations. The study responds to calls for research on the antecedents of consumer perceptions of firm innovativeness, a perception that has been identified as a crucial source for competitive advantage also in Study 1. The results confirm the applicability of information integration theory in explaining how consumers interpret and integrate specific perceived information cues into broader perceptions of a firm (Anderson 1971). Consumers recognize a firm’s signals regarding its orientation towards customer, employee, and society, value them as important and, most importantly, as relevant for firm’s innovativeness. By integrating the limited existing research into the broader framework of stakeholder theory across nations, the study provides comprehensive insights into the driving role of multiple stakeholder orientations in shaping perceptions of firm innovativeness (e.g., Meißner, Haurand and Stummer 2017; van Riel et al. 2021). It further extends consumer research by highlighting the largely overlooked benefits of consumers’ positive evaluations of a firm’s employee orientation. While customer orientation perceptions are shown to be the strongest driver of firm innovativeness perceptions, the somewhat weaker perceptions of employee and society orientations together exert an equally strong influence across countries.

Furthermore, Study 3 enriches the literature by responding to calls for research on the relevance of the country context in shaping the anteceding effects on perceived firm innovativeness (e.g., Jin et al. 2015). This is an important gap, as most studies on the determinants of perceived firm innovativeness focus on highly developed Western countries, thereby neglecting potential variations in the effects in other country contexts. While Study 1 already suggested a relevance of the degree of country development in stability checks, this study provides sound theoretical justification for its influence on consumers’ cognitive information integration processes (e.g., Gürhan-Canli, Hayran and Sarial-Abi 2016). As the degree of country development increases, perceptions of customer and employee orientation become more important to consumers and more relevant for firm innovativeness assessments. This is consistent with the indications in Study 1 and with limited insights from studies on firms perceived as good employers. However, it also challenges the insights provided by research on the impact of such orientations on consumer intentions (e.g., Swoboda and Batton 2020). The perceived society orientation of a firm, on the other hand, plays a more important and relevant role for innovativeness perceptions in less developed countries. Although this insight contradicts findings in management research and studies on consumers’ behavioral intentions, it aligns with recent considerations about consumer habits and expectations in these contexts (e.g., Contini et al. 2020).

In summary, this dissertation addresses multiple research calls and fills important gaps, thereby contributing to the highly relevant research topic of firm’s abilities and innovativeness. Based on robust theoretical arguments, it advances the understanding of how consumers form perceptions of firm innovativeness based on perceived strategic orientations, how these perceptions influence consumers’ purchase intentions, and how consumer associations about a firm’s abilities are most pronounced in countries with a weak institutional context. Firms can benefit even from respective perceptions in times of black swan events. Importantly, this thesis demonstrates that MNCs must consider important boundary conditions at the country level when developing their international strategic orientations, in order to effectively leverage strong perceptions of innovativeness.

5.1.3 Managerial Implications

The deliberate management of firms’ strategic orientations and innovativeness strategies across nations is a highly relevant topic for managers. The studies presented in this dissertation offer important managerial implications that are synthesized and integrated into broader insights for practice. Managers responsible for coordinating the interests of consumers globally can benefit considerably from the following recommendations.

Study 1 encourages managers to cultivate the perception that their firm’s activities result in novel, creative, and impactful offers for the markets, as this perception globally increases consumers’ intentions to purchase from the company. One way to foster such positive consumer assessments is by convincingly prioritizing customer needs and focusing on their satisfaction. Customer orientation activities like effectively monitoring consumer needs or including consumers in value creation processes are beneficial (e.g., Habel et al. 2020; Meißner, Haurand and Stummer 2017). While this perception also directly increases consumers’ purchase intentions, managers must also consider the degree of country development and national culture to fully capitalize on such perceptions in different countries. Study 1 highlights that the degree of country development and cultural embeddedness and hierarchy serve as the most influential factors in shaping these outcomes. To account for the limited resources often available to managers, the study recommends focusing on country development and cultural embeddedness due to the immense impact of this dimension found in consumer research (e.g., Swoboda and Batton 2019). By understanding the mindsets and expectations of consumers in countries at different stages of development, firms can maximize the benefits of customer-oriented initiatives, especially in highly competitive developed markets. The strongest effects are observed in Western European countries, like Germany or Switzerland. At the same time, managers should be aware that in cultures where the collective well-being is prioritized over the pursuit of individual autonomy, the effectiveness of these efforts is diminished. Given that the cultural factor exerts a stronger influence, managers must carefully evaluate their customer orientation strategies in countries that rank high in both development and cultural embeddedness.

Study 2 examines the conditions under which consumers form specific associations about a firm’s special expertise and abilities. Firms can leverage these assumptions about their abilities to produce and deliver specific offers in multiple ways (e.g., Brown and Dacin 1997). It is essential for global managers to understand the contexts in which such perceptions are particularly advantageous. In general, managers can most effectively foster these consumer associations in countries where formal regulations or shared behavioral norms are less rigid. In these countries, managers should invest in effectively communicating how the firm’s high-quality, innovative products and services can improve consumers’ lives (e.g., Contini et al. 2019). Moreover, in highly embedded societies, consumers are susceptible to these associations that reflect a firm’s ability to contribute to societal well-being. Strong CBAA could be observed in, for example, Middle Eastern countries. When resources are limited, the study recommends focusing on the most influential formal regulations and cultural embeddedness. Importantly, Study 2 highlights how MNCs can benefit from strong ability associations during black swan events. In such crises, there associations become less dependent on institutional frameworks when MNCs can mitigate the impact of the event with their products or services, as demonstrated by Pfizer’s role in distributing the first COVID-19 vaccine in Western countries. This capability strengthens the resilience of MNCs during challenging times. When external factors excert less influence on these consumer cognitions, managers can concentrate on internal firm factors to enhance consumers’ CBAA. Even MNCs that operate in the same industry but lack the ability to produce such products or services can benefit from favorable consumer associations, as long as they are perceived to be similar to the more capable competitors. Thus, although the benefit for these firms is smaller, it remains worthwile. This insight is crucial for managers, as these favorable consumer associations tend to be more valuable than those formed during periods of stability (He and Harris 2020).

Study 3 sheds light on how firms can foster consumer perceptions of firm innovativeness, a valuable source of competitive advantage (e.g., Kunz 2024). Study 1 showed that such perceptions increase consumers’ product purchase intentions regardless of the country environment, underscoring their value for globally active firms. To cultivate these perceptions, firms should focus on understanding and meeting customer needs, promoting employee well-being and development, and prioritizing the societal impact of their business activities. Strong customer orientation, identified as the most influential driver across nations, provides a solid foundation for fostering perceptions of innovativeness. This can be achieved through effective customer service strategies or activities like empowering customers in value creation, best communicated through corporate communications or digital channels (e.g., Fuchs and Schreier 2011; Palazón et al. 2022). However, while customer orientation is a powerful lever from a consumer perspective, it may become increasingly difficult to differentiate from competitors who are likely to be pursuing similar strategies. This is where the favorable consumer perceptions that result from firm’s strong orientation towards its employees and the society at large across nations can provide a remedy. Managers need to ensure a cohesive communication strategy that aligns these strategic orientations, which are often managed by different organizational departments (e.g., Neill and Jiang 2017). Study 3 further provides insights into which strategic orientation best complements a strong customer orientation in different country contexts. Specifically, in highly developed countries like Switzerland or Australia, an increased emphasis on fostering employees and communicating this effectively to a broad consumer base enhances perceptions of innovativeness (e.g., Kissel and Büttgen 2015). Conversely, in emerging countries like Kenya or Thailand, addressing societal pressures and effectively communicating these efforts more strongly complements a customer-oriented strategy. Ultimately, firms that adopt a multi-stakeholder approach in their global activities are best positioned to capitalize on the competitive advantages associated with enhanced perceptions of firm innovativeness.

In conclusion, this doctoral thesis offers valuable managerial implications for MNCs regarding their strategic orientations and perceived innovativeness. Managers can look to firms like Samsung or Unilever as examples of how cultivating strong consumer perceptions of strategic stakeholder orientations contributes to being perceived as innovative, in addition to being ranked among the world’s most innovative companies (see Sect. 1.1, Boston Consulting Group 2023; Samsung 2023a; Unilever 2023a). To succeed in increasingly competitive markets, firms need to go beyond relying solely on managers’ assessments of the effectiveness of their stakeholder orientations or firm innovativeness. Consumers, who ultimately determine a firm’s success, and their perceptions are equally, if not more important, as they can differ from managers’ evaluations (e.g., Kunz 2024). Consumers’ assessment of a firms’ abilities, if substantively relevant, can even create a powerful buffer in times of global crisis, as demonstrated by Pfizer and its competitors during the COVID-19 pandemic. Managers can learn from firms like Adidas or Inditex, which strategically monitor and leverage consumer perceptions of their customer orientation, for example (Adidas 2022; Inditex 2022). However, globally operating firms must account for variations in consumer perceptions and behavioral intentions due to country-specific contextual facors. Institutional frameworks, including a country’s degree of social, economic, and humanitarian development or national cultural value dimensions, are important factors that influence consumers’ cognitions and needs. Managers are therefore strongly advised to take these contextual factors into account when designing their firms’ strategic orientations to better align with consumer expectations across nations.

5.2 Limitations and Further Research

This doctoral thesis has yielded significant findings and generated several implications of both theoretical and practical relevance. Nonetheless, it is not without its limitations, which provide a foundation for future research. The limitations and potential research avenues for each study have been addressed in their respective sections. The following section synthesizes and examines these limitations within the broader context of the thesis. They are organized according to the database, measurement, conceptual framework, theory, and methodology.

First, although specific data was carefully collected, expanding the database across all three studies would improve the generalizability of the findings and allow for more robust conclusions. Future research could benefit from examining firms of varying sizes or across different industries, while this may introduce to methodological challenges by introducing further levels of analysis (e.g., Hox, Moerbeek and van de Schoot 2018, pp. 19–23). The results of each study have been validated beyond the focal MNC through competitor samples, which however do not include the same competitors in each country. This approach allows for careful conclusions about the observed industry, but using matched competitor samples across countries could provide more comprehensive inferences about each MNC. Although the consciously collected consumer samples were not restricted to customers of the focal MNC, it cannot be ruled out that the data contain biases. The samples of all three studies included more developed than emerging countries. Analyzing the outlined relationships using more balanced samples including also less and least developed countries could expand the generalizability of the findings presented in this thesis (e.g., van Riel et al. 2021). Studies 1 and 3 relied on cross-sectional study designs that show correlations but are unable to establish causality. Study 3 employs a repeated cross-sectional design that partially mitigates this limitation by offering insights into general trends within the samples. However, due to the complexity of data collection, it was not feasible to track the same individuals over time. A longitudinal study design could offer a deeper understanding of how individual consumers’ perceptions, as well as how the influence of country-level factors on those perceptions and subsequent behavioral intentions evolve over time (e.g., Gidaković and Zabkar 2022; Yen, Teng and Tzeng 2020). Moreover, exploring whether and for how long the effects of a black swan event persist, or analyzing different corporate coping strategies after the event and their impacts on consumers, would be highly valuable. Given that such events may happen again, this seems particularly relevant for future research (e.g., Das et al. 2021a).

Second, certain measurement issueas should be addressed in future research. Due to the large number of countries examined, a more general approach to construct equivalence was taken using translation/back-translation. Etic scales with previously established reliability and validity were applied with minor local adaptations (e.g., Ford et al. 2018). Country-specific, emic measures could capture subtle differences in item meanings across nations, though this would require a qualitative research approach (e.g., Jain et al. 2019). Studies 1 and 3 employed a broad, unidimensional conceptualization of consumer perceptions. Further refinement of these concepts may be achieved by distinguishing between the cognitive and affective components of perceptions related to firm orientations or innovativeness (e.g., Kunz, Schmitt and Meyer 2011). A further subdivision of the firm’s society orientation into social, economic, and environmental responsibility could produce more nuanced results (e.g., Luger, Hofer and Floh 2022). Additionally, analyzing specific activities related to firms’ customer, employee, or society orientations activities could provide actionable insights for firms. The frameworks of Studies 1 and 2 incorporated Schwartz’ (1994) approach to national culture. Although this approach remains widely accepted, despite the age of the data, and cultural values are believed to change only over generations, future research should seek to develop updated measures for country-level cultural values (e.g., Taras, Steel and Kirkman 2012). Furthermore, Study 1 is limited in that purchase intention was only captured through interviews. While analyzing objective purchasing behavior is a challenging approach across nations, future studies may gain additional insights from including alternative intention-based measures (e.g., willingness to pay, Vaquero Martín 2021).

Third, the conceptual frameworks of the three studies presented in this thesis could be expanded in several promising directions. One potential extension of Studies 1 and 3 would be to explore the factors that influence firms’ perceived strategic orientations. Given that perceived customer orientation was identified as the strongest driver of perceived firm innovativeness in Study 3, investigating how these perceptions are formed presents a compelling avenue for future research (e.g., Ndubisi 2012). Furthermore, a deeper understanding of consumer perceptions of firms as employers seems relevant, especially given its growing importance in more developed countries. This aspect has been largely overlooked in previous research from a consumer perspective and warrants further investigation. Another interesting avenue for future research lies in examining the antecedent role of country-level factors on perceptions of firm innovativeness. Although Study 3 explored the potential mediating role of perceived customer orientation in alternative models, future studies could investigate mediations of the relationship between perceived customer orientation and firm innovativeness (e.g., customer satisfaction or perceived value, Valenzuela, Mulki and Jaramillo 2010). Scholars have suggested that consumers’ perceptions of firm’s strategic orientations differ from those of managers (e.g., Blocker et al. 2011; Kunz 2024), and empirically exploring these differences could yield valuable insights. Due to the complexity of the models, Studies 2 and 3 did not include behavioral or intention-based outcomes. However, examining the effects on outcomes such as willingness to pay or word-of-mouth intentions would be interesting (e.g., Vaquero Martín 2021; Wong and Haque 2022). Moreover, while all three studies controlled for individual-level factors, investigating possible moderations of consumer characteristics (such as education, income, involvement, or consumer innovativeness, Kurtmollaiev, Lervik-Olsen and Andreassen 2022) could broaden the scope of insights. Finally, exploring additional country-level moderators would enhance understanding of the observed effects. Interesting options would be to examine the role of a firm’s country-of-origin or the impact of a country’s internet penetration on the effects on corporate ability or innovativeness perceptions (e.g., Gürhan-Canli, Hayran and Sarial-Abi 2016; 2018).

Fourth, the selection of cognitive theories was carefully justified in each study. Study 1 is based on information processing theory, complemented by the institutional economics perspective to conceptualize the moderating factors. However, the research design did not allow the precise measurement of each theoretical mechanism (i.e., information access, processing, and relevance evaluation, Hansen 2005). As a result, it is not possible to determine which of these mechanisms had the strongest influence. Most research in this area does consider indirect pathways, which limits the applicability of used theories to the context of our study. Nevertheless, alternative theories such as consumer inference theory or schema theory may be useful for further research (e.g., Vaquero Martín 2021). Similarly, Study 3, which applied information integration theory, similarly faced the limitation of not being able to measure the specific mechanisms through which consumers integrate information into broader perceptions of firms. This prevents insights into which mechanisms are most effective in integrating each strategic orientation perception. Other applicable theories that have been used in similar contexts include cue utilization or signaling theory (e.g., Jin et al. 2015). In Study 2, signaling theory was used to represent the mechanisms shaped by the environment, namely the national institutions, which were conceptualized using the organizational perspective of institutional theory. However, since both Studies 2 and 3 did not include intentional or behavioral outcome variables due to the specific conceptual frameworks studied, some mechanisms or aspects inherent to the respective theories were not fully incorporated.

Fifth, the nested structure of the datasets across all three studies in this thesis was addressed by applying MSEM, as was appropriate according to the calculated ICCs (e.g., Hox, Moerbeek and van de Schoot 2018, pp. 4–6; Weiber and Sarstedt 2021, pp. 415–424). Expanding the datasets to include further companies or industries might introduce one or more additional levels of analysis, which could lead to methodological challenges (e.g., Hox, Moerbeek and van de Schoot 2018, pp. 19–23). The stability checks on competitors included in all three studies were computed using two-level models due to the small firm cluster size and low ICCs. Therefore, while the use of three-level or cross-classified models could provide insightful conclusions, these models should only be applied if they are methodologically appropriate for the available data (e.g., Hox, Moerbeek and van de Schoot 2018, pp. 161–163).

References

Abbey, J. D., & Meloy, M. G. (2017). Attention by design: Using attention checks to detect inattentive respondents and improve data quality. Journal of Operations Management, 53–56, 63–70.

Acar, O. A., & Puntoni, S. (2016). Customer empowerment in the digital age. Journal of Advertising Research, 56(1), 4–8.

Adidas (2022). Annual report 2021. Herzogenaurach.

Ahmad, W., Battisti, E., Akhtar, N., Ahmad, M. I., & Rehman, R. U. (2023). Global retailers' CSR initiatives during COVID-19 crisis: A cross-cultural examination. International Marketing Review, 40(5), 1054–1070.

Ahmadi, I., Habel, J., Jia, M., Lee, N., & Wei, S. (2022). Consumer Stockpiling Across Cultures During The COVID-19 Pandemic. Journal of International Marketing, 30(2), 28–37.

Al-Aly, Z. (2023). Prevention of long COVID: Progress and challenges. The Lancet Infectious Diseases, 23(7), 776–777.

Altmann, D. M., & Boyton, R. J. (2022). COVID-19 vaccination: The road ahead. Science, 375(6585), 1127–1132.

Amazon (2020). Meeting the Moment. https://​www.​aboutamazon.​com/​news/​operations/​meeting-the-moment. Accessed 12.08.2024.

Amazon (2025). About Us. https://​www.​aboutamazon.​com/​about-us. Accessed 14.01.2025.

Anderson, J. C., & Gerbing, D. W. (1988). Structural equation modeling in practice: A review and recommended two-step approach. Psychological Bulletin, 103(3), 411–423.

Anderson, N. H. (1971). Integration theory and attitude change. Psychological Review, 78(3), 171–206.

Ang, S. H., Benischke, M. H., & Doh, J. P. (2015). The interactions of institutions on foreign market entry mode. Strategic Management Journal, 36(10), 1536–1553.

Anzola-Román, P., Garcia-Marco, T., & Zouaghi, F. (2024). The Influence of CSR Orientation on Innovative Performance: Is the Effect Conditioned to the Implementation of Organizational Practices? Journal of Business Ethics, 190(1), 261–278.

Aurier, P., & Séré de Lanauze, G. (2012). Impacts of perceived brand relationship orientation on attitudinal loyalty. European Journal of Marketing, 46(11/12), 1602–1627.

Backhaus, K., Erichson, B., Gensler, S., Weiber, R., & Weiber, T. (2023). Multivariate Analysis: An Application-Oriented Introduction. Wiesbaden: Springer Gabler.

Bae, H., Jo, S. H., & Lee, E. (2021). Why do older consumers avoid innovative products and services? Journal of Services Marketing, 35(1), 41–53.

Bagdadli, S., Gianecchini, M., Andresen, M., Cotton, R., Kaše, R., Lazarova, M., Smale, A., Bosak, J., Briscoe, J. P., & Chudzikowski, K. (2021). Human capital development practices and career success: The moderating role of country development and income inequality. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 42(4), 429–447.

Baghi, I., & Gabrielli, V. (2019). The role of crisis typology and cultural belongingness in shaping consumers’ negative responses towards a faulty brand. Journal of Product & Brand Management, 28(5), 653–670.

Bagozzi, R. P., & Yi, Y. (1988). On the evaluation of structural equation models. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 16(1), 74–94.

Bartikowski, B., & Berens, G. (2021). Attribute framing in CSR communication: Doing good and spreading the word–But how? Journal of Business Research, 131, 700–708.

Baskentli, S., Sen, S., Du, S., & Bhattacharya, C. (2019). Consumer reactions to corporate social responsibility: The role of CSR domains. Journal of Business Research, 95, 502–513.

Beamish, P. W. (2025). JIBS reflections: Rare events/outliers, grand challenges, and managerial interaction. Journal of International Business Studies, 56(1), 1–3.

Beck, J. T., Rahinel, R., & Bleier, A. (2020). Company worth keeping: Personal control and preferences for brand leaders. Journal of Consumer Research, 46(5), 871–886.

Becker-Olsen, K. L., Taylor, C. R., Hill, R. P., & Yalcinkaya, G. (2011). A cross-cultural examination of corporate social responsibility marketing communications in Mexico and the United States: Strategies for global brands. Journal of International Marketing, 19(2), 30–44.

Beckert, J. (2010). How do fields change? The interrelations of institutions, networks, and cognition in the dynamics of markets. Organization Studies, 31(5), 605–627.

Berens, G., van Riel, C., & Van Rekom, J. (2007). The CSR-quality trade-off: when can corporate social responsibility and corporate ability compensate each other? Journal of Business Ethics, 74(3), 233–252.

Berens, G., Van Riel, C. B., & Van Bruggen, G. H. (2005). Corporate associations and consumer product responses: The moderating role of corporate brand dominance. Journal of Marketing, 69(3), 35–48.

Berry, H., Guillén, M. F., & Zhou, N. (2010). An institutional approach to cross-national distance. Journal of International Business Studies, 41(9), 1460–1480.

Bettinazzi, E. L., & Feldman, E. R. (2021). Stakeholder orientation and divestiture activity. Academy of Management Journal, 64(4), 1078–1096.

Bettinazzi, E. L., & Zollo, M. (2022). Stakeholder orientation and experiential learning: Evidence from corporate acquisitions. Journal of Management Studies, 59(6), 1422–1459.

Bettman, J. R. (1970). Information processing models of consumer behavior. Journal of Marketing Research, 7(3), 370–376.

Bettman, J. R. (1979). Memory factors in consumer choice: A review. Journal of Marketing, 43(2), 37–53.

Bettman, J. R., Luce, M. F., & Payne, J. W. (1998). Constructive consumer choice processes. Journal of Consumer Research, 25(3), 187–217.

Beugelsdijk, S., Kostova, T., Kunst, V. E., Spadafora, E., & Van Essen, M. (2018). Cultural distance and firm internationalization: A meta-analytical review and theoretical implications. Journal of Management, 44(1), 89–130.

Bhattacharya, A., Good, V., Sardashti, H., & Peloza, J. (2021). Beyond warm glow: The risk-mitigating effect of corporate social responsibility (CSR). Journal of Business Ethics, 171(2), 317–336.

Bish, A., Yardley, L., Nicoll, A., & Michie, S. (2011). Factors associated with uptake of vaccination against pandemic influenza: a systematic review. Vaccine, 29(38), 6472–6484.

Biswas, M. K., & Suar, D. (2016). Antecedents and consequences of employer branding. Journal of Business Ethics, 136(1), 57–72.

Blocker, C. P., Flint, D. J., Myers, M. B., & Slater, S. F. (2011). Proactive customer orientation and its role for creating customer value in global markets. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 39(2), 216–233.

Bloomberg Media (2022). Customer Centricity Index. https://​sponsored.​bloomberg.​com/​immersive/​salesforce/​customer-centricity-index. Accessed 14.01.2025.

Blut, M., & Wang, C. (2020). Technology readiness: A meta-analysis of conceptualizations of the construct and its impact on technology usage. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 48(4), 649–669.

Boisvert, J., & Ashill, N. J. (2011). How brand innovativeness and quality impact attitude toward new service line extensions: The moderating role of consumer involvement. Journal of Services Marketing, 25(7), 517–527.

Boston Consulting Group (2018). Innovation in 2018. https://​www.​bcg.​com/​publications/​2018/​most-innovative-companies-2018-innovation. Accessed 30.03.2023.

Boston Consulting Group (2023). Reaching New Heights in Uncertain Times. https://​www.​bcg.​com/​publications/​2023/​advantages-through-innovation-in-uncertain-times. Accessed 07.11.2024.

Bourdeau, B. L., Cronin Jr, J. J., & Voorhees, C. M. (2007). Modeling service alliances: an exploratory investigation of spillover effects in service partnerships. Strategic Management Journal, 28(6), 609–622.

Brexendorf, T. O., & Keller, K. L. (2017). Leveraging the corporate brand. European Journal of Marketing, 51(9/10), 1530–1551.

Brockman, P., Rui, O. M., & Zou, H. (2013). Institutions and the performance of politically connected M&As. Journal of International Business Studies, 44(8), 833–852.

Brown, T. J., & Dacin, P. A. (1997). The Company and the Product: Corporate Associations and Consumer Product Responses. Journal of Marketing, 61(1), 68–84.

Bruton, G. D., Ahlstrom, D., & Li, H. L. (2010). Institutional theory and entrepreneurship: where are we now and where do we need to move in the future? Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 34(3), 421–440.

Buil, I., De Chernatony, L., & Martínez, E. (2013). Examining the role of advertising and sales promotions in brand equity creation. Journal of Business Research, 66(1), 115–122.

Byrne, B. M., & van de Vijver, F. J. R. (2010). Testing for Measurement and Structural Equivalence in Large-Scale Cross-Cultural Studies: Addressing the Issue of Nonequivalence. International Journal of Testing, 10(2), 107–132.

Camacho, N., De Jong, M., & Stremersch, S. (2014). The effect of customer empowerment on adherence to expert advice. International Journal of Research in Marketing, 31(3), 293–308.

Campbell, M. C., Inman, J. J., Kirmani, A., & Price, L. L. (2020). In times of trouble: A framework for understanding consumers’ responses to threats. Journal of Consumer Research, 47(3), 311–326.

Carlson, B. D., & White, M. A. (2008). Enhancing stimulus integration in a consumer information processing system: A theoretical foundation. Marketing Management Journal, 18(2), 154–167.

Chan, E. Y., & Saqib, N. U. (2021). The moderating role of processing style in risk perceptions and risky decision making. Journal of Behavioral Decision Making, 34(2), 290–299.

Chang, H.-H., & Lu, L.-C. (2019). Actively persuading consumers to enact ethical behaviors in retailing: The influence of relational benefits and corporate associates. Journal of Business Ethics, 156(2), 399–416.

Chang, Y., Ko, Y. J., & Leite, W. L. (2016). The effect of perceived brand leadership on luxury service WOM. Journal of Services Marketing, 30(6), 659–671.

Chao, M. C.-H., & Kumar, V. (2010). The impact of institutional distance on the international diversity–performance relationship. Journal of World Business, 45(1), 93–103.

Chatzoglou, P., & Chatzoudes, D. (2018). The role of innovation in building competitive advantages: an empirical investigation. European Journal of Innovation Management, 21(1), 44–69.

Chen, F. F. (2007). Sensitivity of Goodness of Fit Indexes to Lack of Measurement Invariance. Structural Equation Modeling: A Multidisciplinary Journal, 14(3), 464–504.

Chen, S., Wright, M. J., Gao, H., Liu, H., & Mather, D. (2020). The effects of brand origin and country-of-manufacture on consumers' institutional perceptions and purchase decision-making. International Marketing Review, 38(2), 343–366.

Chen, X., Huang, R., Yang, Z., & Dube, L. (2018). CSR types and the moderating role of corporate competence. European Journal of Marketing, 52(7/8), 1358–1386.

Chen, Y.-R., Yang, C., Hsu, S.-M., & Wang, Y.-D. (2009). Entry mode choice in China's regional distribution markets: Institution vs. transaction costs perspectives. Industrial Marketing Management, 38(7), 702–713.

Cho, H., Guo, Y., & Torelli, C. (2022). Collectivism fosters preventive behaviors to contain the spread of COVID‐19: Implications for social marketing in public health. Psychology & Marketing, 39(4), 694–700.

Choi, S., Ahn, Y.-j., & Kim, I. (2020). The roles of perceived innovativeness in creating visitors’ citizenship behaviors at an international game exhibition. Sustainability, 12(12), 4950.

Çilingirtürk, A. M., & Koçak, H. (2018). Human Development Index (HDI) rank-order variability. Social Indicators Research, 137(2), 481–504.

Connelly, B. L., Certo, S. T., Ireland, R. D., & Reutzel, C. R. (2011). Signaling theory: A review and assessment. Journal of Management, 37(1), 39–67.

Contini, M., Annunziata, E., Rizzi, F., & Frey, M. (2019). Consumers' corporate social responsibility and corporate ability associations as predictors of reputation: Developing countries under analysis. Business Strategy & Development, 2(3), 228–241.

Contini, M., Annunziata, E., Rizzi, F., & Frey, M. (2020). Exploring the influence of Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) domains on consumers’ loyalty: An experiment in BRICS countries. Journal of Cleaner Production, 247, 119158.

Cortez, R. M., & Johnston, W. J. (2020). The Coronavirus crisis in B2B settings: Crisis uniqueness and managerial implications based on social exchange theory. Industrial Marketing Management, 88, 125–135.

Crespo, C. F., & Inacio, N. (2019). The influence of corporate social responsibility associations on consumers’ perceptions towards global brands. Journal of Strategic Marketing, 27(8), 679–695.

Cui, V., Vertinsky, I., Wang, Y., & Zhou, D. (2023). Decoupling in international business: The ‘new’vulnerability of globalization and MNEs’ response strategies. Journal of International Business Studies, 54(8), 1562–1576.

Danatzis, I., & Möller-Herm, J. (2023). Stopping the Spread: How Blame Attributions Drive Customer-to-Customer Misbehavior Contagion and What Frontline Employees Can Do to Curb It. Journal of Service Research, 26(3), 459–475.

Das, G., Jain, S. P., Maheswaran, D., Slotegraaf, R. J., & Srinivasan, R. (2021a). Pandemics and marketing: Insights, impacts, and research opportunities. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 49(5), 835–854.

Das, G., Peloza, J., Varshneya, G., & Green, T. (2021b). When do consumers value ethical attributes? The role of perceived quality in gift-giving. European Journal of Marketing, 55(1), 315–335.

Davidov, E., Dülmer, H., Schlüter, E., Schmidt, P., & Meuleman, B. (2012). Using a multilevel structural equation modeling approach to explain cross-cultural measurement noninvariance. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 43(4), 558–575.

Davis, H. E., McCorkell, L., Vogel, J. M., & Topol, E. J. (2023). Long COVID: Major findings, mechanisms and recommendations. Nature Reviews Microbiology, 21(3), 133–146.

Davvetas, V., Ulqinaku, A., & Abi, G. S. (2022). Local Impact of Global Crises, Institutional Trust, and Consumer Well-Being: Evidence from the COVID-19 Pandemic. Journal of International Marketing, 30(2), 73–101.

De Mooij, M. (2017). Comparing dimensions of national culture for secondary analysis of consumer behavior data of different countries. International Marketing Review, 34(3), 444–456.

Dean, A. M. (2007). The impact of the customer orientation of call center employees on customers' affective commitment and loyalty. Journal of Service Research, 10(2), 161–173.

Deephouse, D. L., Newburry, W., & Soleimani, A. (2016). The effects of institutional development and national culture on cross-national differences in corporate reputation. Journal of World Business, 51(3), 463–473.

Denk, N., Kaufmann, L., & Roesch, J.-F. (2012). Liabilities of foreignness revisited: A review of contemporary studies and recommendations for future research. Journal of International Management, 18(4), 322–334.

Deshpandé, R., Farley, J. U., & Webster, F. E. (1993). Corporate culture, customer orientation, and innovativeness in Japanese firms: A quadrad analysis. Journal of Marketing, 57(1), 23–27.

Dheer, R. J., Egri, C. P., & Treviño, L. J. (2021). A cross-cultural exploratory analysis of pandemic growth: The case of COVID-19. Journal of International Business Studies, 52(9), 1871–1892.

Dineva, D., Breitsohl, J., Roschk, H., & Hosseinpour, M. (2023). Consumer-to-consumer conflicts and brand moderation strategies during COVID-19 service failures: A framework for international marketers. International Marketing Review, 40(5), 1112–1133.

Ding, Y., & Xu, S. (2023). Detrimental impact of contagious disease cues on consumer preference for anthropomorphic products. Marketing Letters, 34(1), 139–153.

Donthu, N., & Gustafsson, A. (2020). Effects of COVID-19 on business and research. Journal of Business Research, 117, 284–289.

Drucker, P. (1954). The Practice of Management. New York: Harper & Row.

Dzandu, M. D. (2023). Antecedent, behaviour, and consequence (abc) of deploying the contact tracing app in response to COVID-19: Evidence from Europe. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 187, 122217.

Einwiller, S. A., Fedorikhin, A., Johnson, A. R., & Kamins, M. A. (2006). Enough is enough! When identification no longer prevents negative corporate associations. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 34(2), 185–194.

Eisingerich, A. B., MacInnis, D. J., & Park, C. W. (2023). Do CSR efforts that focus on helping the environment influence brand purchase more than other forms of CSR? Journal of Business Research, 168, 114240.

Eisingerich, A. B., & Rubera, G. (2010). Drivers of brand commitment: A cross-national investigation. Journal of International Marketing, 18(2), 64–79.

El Ghoul, S., Guedhami, O., & Kim, Y. (2017). Country-level institutions, firm value, and the role of corporate social responsibility initiatives. Journal of International Business Studies, 48(3), 360–385.

Erdem, T., Swait, J., & Valenzuela, A. (2006). Brands as signals: A cross-country validation study. Journal of Marketing, 70(1), 34–49.

Falkenreck, C., & Wagner, R. (2011). The impact of perceived innovativeness on maintaining a buyer-seller relationship in health care markets: A cross-cultural study. Journal of Marketing Management, 27(3/4), 225–242.

Farndale, E., Brewster, C., Ligthart, P., & Poutsma, E. (2017). The effects of market economy type and foreign MNE subsidiaries on the convergence and divergence of HRM. Journal of International Business Studies, 48(5), 1065–1086.

Fatma, M., Khan, I., & Rahman, Z. (2016). How does corporate association influence consumer brand loyalty? Mediating role of brand identification. Journal of Product & Brand Management, 25(7), 629–641.

Fazal-e-Hasan, S. M., Ahmadi, H., Kelly, L., & Lings, I. N. (2019). The role of brand innovativeness and customer hope in developing online repurchase intentions. Journal of Brand Management, 26(2), 85–98.

FDA (2020). FDA Takes Key Action in Fight Against COVID-19 By Issuing Emergency Use Authorization for First COVID-19 Vaccine. https://​www.​fda.​gov/​news-events/​press-announcements/​fda-takes-key-action-fight-against-covid-19-issuing-emergency-use-authorization-first-covid-19. Accessed 27.01.2023.

FDA (2021). FDA Approves First COVID-19 Vaccine. https://​www.​fda.​gov/​news-events/​press-announcements/​fda-approves-first-covid-19-vaccine. Accessed 19.04.2022.

Feldman, P. M., & Vasquez‐Parraga, A. Z. (2013). Consumer social responses to CSR initiatives versus corporate abilities. Journal of Consumer Marketing, 30(2), 100–111.

Feng, T., Wang, D., Lawton, A., & Luo, B. N. (2019). Customer orientation and firm performance: The joint moderating effects of ethical leadership and competitive intensity. Journal of Business Research, 100, 111–121.

Ferguson, J. L., & Mohan, M. (2020). Use of celebrity and non-celebrity persons in B2B advertisements: Effects on attention, recall, and hedonic and utilitarian attitudes. Industrial Marketing Management, 89, 594–604.

Fink, M., Koller, M., Gartner, J., Floh, A., & Harms, R. (2020). Effective entrepreneurial marketing on Facebook–A longitudinal study. Journal of Business Research, 113, 149–157.

Flammer, C., & Kacperczyk, A. (2016). The impact of stakeholder orientation on innovation: Evidence from a natural experiment. Management Science, 62(7), 1982–2001.

Ford, J. B., Merchant, A., Bartier, A.-L., & Friedman, M. (2018). The cross-cultural scale development process: The case of brand-evoked nostalgia in Belgium and the United States. Journal of Business Research, 83, 19–29.

Fornell, C., & Larcker, D. F. (1981). Evaluating structural equation models with unobservable variables and measurement error. Journal of Marketing Research, 18(1), 39–50.

Foscht, T., Lin, Y., & Eisingerich, A. B. (2018). Blinds up or down? The influence of transparency, future orientation, and CSR on sustainable and responsible behavior. European Journal of Marketing, 52(3/4), 476–498.

Francioni, B., Curina, I., Hegner, S. M., & Cioppi, M. (2021). Brand addiction: Brand characteristics and psychological outcomes. Journal of Consumer Marketing, 38(2), 125–136.

Freeman, R. E. (1984). Stategic Management: A Stakeholder Approach. Boston: Pitman.

Freeman, R. E., Harrison, J. S., Wicks, A. C., Parmar, B. L., & De Colle, S. (2010). Stakeholder theory: The state of the art. New York: Cambridge University Press.

Fuchs, C., & Schreier, M. (2011). Customer empowerment in new product development. Journal of Product Innovation Management, 28(1), 17–32.

Gaganis, C., Papadimitri, P., Pasiouras, F., & Ventouri, A. (2021). Informal institutions and corporate reputational exposure: the role of public environmental perceptions. British Journal of Management, 32(4), 1027–1061.

Garcia-Piqueres, G., & Garcia-Ramos, R. (2022). Complementarity between CSR dimensions and innovation: Behaviour, objective or both? European Management Journal, 40(4), 475–489.

Gaur, A., & Kumar, M. (2018). A systematic approach to conducting review studies: An assessment of content analysis in 25 years of IB research. Journal of World Business, 53(2), 280–289.

Geldhof, G. J., Preacher, K. J., & Zyphur, M. J. (2014). Reliability estimation in a multilevel confirmatory factor analysis framework. Psychological Methods, 19(1), 72–91.

Ghanbarpour, T., & Gustafsson, A. (2022). How do corporate social responsibility (CSR) and innovativeness increase financial gains? A customer perspective analysis. Journal of Business Research, 140, 471–481.

Gidaković, P., & Zabkar, V. (2021). How industry and occupational stereotypes shape consumers' trust, value and loyalty judgments concerning service brands. Journal of Service Management, 32(6), 92–113.

Gidaković, P., & Zabkar, V. (2022). The formation of consumers' warmth and competence impressions of corporate brands: The role of corporate associations. European Management Review, 19(4), 639–653.

Godefroit-Winkel, D., Schill, M., & Diop-Sall, F. (2022). Does environmental corporate social responsibility increase consumer loyalty? International Journal of Retail & Distribution Management, 50(4), 417–436.

Goins, S., & Gruca, T. S. (2008). Understanding competitive and contagion effects of layoff announcements. Corporate Reputation Review, 11(1), 12–34.

Goswami, S., & Bhaduri, G. (2023). Communicating Moral Responsibility: Stakeholder Capitalism, Types, and Perceptions. Sustainability, 15(5), 4386.

Grant, R., Sacks, J. A., Abraham, P., Chunsuttiwat, S., Cohen, C., Figueroa, J. P., Fleming, T., Fine, P., Goldblatt, D., & Hasegawa, H. (2023). When to update COVID-19 vaccine composition. Nature Medicine, 29(4), 776–780.

Gregoire, K. (2021). How Can Conscious Capitalism Drive Innovation In Your Company? https://​www.​forbes.​com/​sites/​forbesbusinessco​uncil/​2021/​08/​20/​how-can-conscious-capitalism-drive-innovation-in-your-company/​. Accessed 08.11.2023.

Griffith, D. A., Lee, H. S., & Yalcinkaya, G. (2022). The use of social media and the prevalence of depression: A multi-country examination of value co-creation and consumer well-being. International Marketing Review, 39(1), 1–31.

Griffith, D. A., Lee, H. S., & Yalcinkaya, G. (2023). Understanding the relationship between advertising spending and happiness at the country level. Journal of International Business Studies, 54(1), 128–150.

Guedhami, O., Knill, A., Megginson, W., & Senbet, L. W. (2023). Economic impact of COVID-19 across national boundaries: The role of government responses. Journal of International Business Studies, 54(7), 1278–1297.

Gupta, S., Pansari, A., & Kumar, V. (2018). Global customer engagement. Journal of International Marketing, 26(1), 4–29.

Gürhan-Canli, Z., & Batra, R. (2004). When corporate image affects product evaluations: The moderating role of perceived risk. Journal of Marketing Research, 41(2), 197–205.

Gürhan-Canli, Z., Hayran, C., & Sarial-Abi, G. (2016). Customer-based brand equity in a technologically fast-paced, connected, and constrained environment. AMS Review, 6(1/2), 23–32.

Gürhan-Canli, Z., Sarial-Abi, G., & Hayran, C. (2018). Consumers and brands across the globe: Research synthesis and new directions. Journal of International Marketing, 26(1), 96–117.

Gustafsson, A., & Ghanbarpour, T. (2024). Commentary: Customer-Perceived Innovation: Considerations for Financial Performance and Methodological Approaches. Journal of Service Research, 27(4), 490–493.

Ha, H.-Y., & John, J. (2010). Role of customer orientation in an integrative model of brand loyalty in services. The Service Industries Journal, 30(7), 1025–1046.

Habel, J., Kassemeier, R., Alavi, S., Haaf, P., Schmitz, C., & Wieseke, J. (2020). When do customers perceive customer centricity? The role of a firm’s and salespeople’s customer orientation. Journal of Personal Selling & Sales Management, 40(1), 25–42.

Habel, J., & Klarmann, M. (2015). Customer reactions to downsizing: when and how is satisfaction affected? Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 43(6), 768–789.

Hagtvedt, H. (2011). The impact of incomplete typeface logos on perceptions of the firm. Journal of Marketing, 75(4), 86–93.

Hair, J. F., Black, W. C., Babin, B. J., & Anderson, R. E. (2018). Multivariate Data Analysis. Boston: Cengage.

Hammami, S. M., Souiden, N., & Bennour, K. (2021). Knowledge-based resources in explaining service recovery performance: A multilevel investigation. Journal of Marketing Theory and Practice, 29(2), 189–209.

Hansen, T. (2005). Perspectives on consumer decision making: An integrated approach. Journal of Consumer Behaviour, 4(6), 420–437.

Harzing, A.-W. (2021). Journal Quality List, 68th Edition. https://​harzing.​com/​resources/​journal-quality-list. Accessed 05.05.2022.

Hausman, J. (1978). Specification tests in econometrics. Econometrica: Journal of the Econometric Society, 46(6), 1251–1271.

He, H., & Harris, L. (2020). The impact of COVID-19 pandemic on corporate social responsibility and marketing philosophy. Journal of Business Research, 116, 176–182.

Heidenreich, S., Wittkowski, K., Handrich, M., & Falk, T. (2015). The dark side of customer co-creation: Exploring the consequences of failed co-created services. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 43(3), 279–296.

Heinberg, M., Katsikeas, C. S., Ozkaya, H. E., & Taube, M. (2020). How nostalgic brand positioning shapes brand equity: Differences between emerging and developed markets. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 48(5), 869–890.

Heller, R., Rosenbaum, P. R., & Small, D. S. (2009). Split samples and design sensitivity in observational studies. Journal of the American Statistical Association, 104(487), 1090–1101.

Henard, D. H., & Dacin, P. A. (2010). Reputation for product innovation: Its impact on consumers. Journal of Product Innovation Management, 27(3), 321–335.

Heritage Foundation (2022). Index of Economic Freedom. https://​www.​heritage.​org/​index/​. Accessed 15.05.2022.

Hesham, F., Riadh, H., & Sihem, N. K. (2021). What have we learned about the effects of the COVID-19 pandemic on consumer behavior? Sustainability, 13(8), 4304.

Hetet, B., Ackermann, C.-L., & Mathieu, J.-P. (2020). The role of brand innovativeness on attitudes towards new products marketed by the brand. Journal of Product & Brand Management, 29(5), 569–581.

Hill, A. D., Johnson, S. G., Greco, L. M., O’Boyle, E. H., & Walter, S. L. (2021). Endogeneity: A review and agenda for the methodology-practice divide affecting micro and macro research. Journal of Management, 47(1), 105–143.

Hofmann, V., Stokburger-Sauer, N. E., Wanisch, A., & Hebborn, H. (2021). Masked smiles matter-employee verbal expertise and emotion display during COVID-19. The Service Industries Journal, 41(1/2), 107–137.

Hofstede, G., Hofstede, G. J., & Minkov, M. (2010). Cultures and Organizations - Software of the Mind: Intercultural Cooperation and Its Importance for Survival. New York: McGraw Hill.

Holbrook, M. B., & Hirschman, E. C. (1982). The experiential aspects of consumption: Consumer fantasies, feelings, and fun. Journal of Consumer Research, 9(2), 132–140.

Homburg, C., Müller, M., & Klarmann, M. (2011). When Should the Customer Really Be King? On the Optimum Level of Salesperson Customer Orientation in Sales Encounters. Journal of Marketing, 75(2), 55–74.

Hossain, M. (2024). How Chinese Companies are Dominating Electric Vehicle Market Worldwide. https://​cmr.​berkeley.​edu/​2024/​03/​how-chinese-companies-are-dominating-electric-vehicle-market-worldwide/​. Accessed 25.03.2024.

Hox, J., Moerbeek, M., & van de Schoot, R. (2018). Multilevel Analysis: Techniques and Applications. New York: Routledge.

Huaman-Ramirez, R., Albert, N., & Merunka, D. (2019). Are global brands trustworthy? The role of brand affect, brand innovativeness, and consumer ethnocentrism. European Business Review, 31(6), 926–946.

Huang, M.-H., & Cheng, Z.-H. (2016). Strategies to enhance consumers’ identification with a service firm. Journal of Services Marketing, 30(4), 449–461.

Hubert, M., Florack, A., Gattringer, R., Eberhardt, T., Enkel, E., & Kenning, P. (2017). Flag up! - Flagship products as important drivers of perceived brand innovativeness. Journal of Business Research, 71, 154–163.

Iglesias, O., Markovic, S., Singh, J. J., & Sierra, V. (2019). Do customer perceptions of corporate services brand ethicality improve brand equity? Considering the roles of brand heritage, brand image, and recognition benefits. Journal of Business Ethics, 154(2), 441–459.

IMD World Competitiveness Center (2018). World Competitiveness Yearbook. Lausanne.

IMD World Competitiveness Center (2021). World Competitiveness Yearbook. Lausanne.

Inditex (2022). Seven brands. One purpose: ZARA. https://​www.​inditex.​com/​itxcomweb/​en/​brands. Accessed 14.11.2022.

Islam, T., Pitafi, A. H., Arya, V., Wang, Y., Akhtar, N., Mubarik, S., & Xiaobei, L. (2021). Panic buying in the COVID-19 pandemic: A multi-country examination. Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, 59, 102357.

Jabeen, F., Kaur, P., Talwar, S., Malodia, S., & Dhir, A. (2022). I love you, but you let me down! How hate and retaliation damage customer-brand relationship. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 174, 121183.

Jacobs, N., & Swoboda, B. (2023). The role of national institutions in the effects of consumers’ perceived customer orientation and firm innovativeness. International Business Review, 32(5), 102172.

Jain, V., Merchant, A., Roy, S., & Ford, J. B. (2019). Developing an emic scale to measure ad-evoked nostalgia in a collectivist emerging market, India. Journal of Business Research, 99, 140–156.

Jak, S., Oort, F. J., & Dolan, C. V. (2013). A test for cluster bias: Detecting violations of measurement invariance across clusters in multilevel data. Structural Equation Modeling: A Multidisciplinary Journal, 20(2), 265–282.

Jang, J., Kang, J., & Huan, C. (2024). A committed brand facing moral dilemma crises: The role of inferred goodwill and self-brand connection in consumer regret. Journal of Product & Brand Management, in press.

Janz, B. D., & Prasarnphanich, P. (2003). Understanding the antecedents of effective knowledge management: The importance of a knowledge‐centered culture. Decision Sciences, 34(2), 351–384.

Jean, R.-J., Sinkovics, R., & Kim, D. (2017). Antecedents and outcomes of supplier innovativeness in international customer-supplier relationships: The role of knowledge distance. Management International Review, 57(1), 121–151.

Jian, Y., Yu, I. Y., Yang, M. X., & Zeng, K. J. (2020). The impacts of fear and uncertainty of COVID-19 on environmental concerns, brand trust, and behavioral intentions toward green hotels. Sustainability, 12(20), 8688.

Jiang, W., Wang, A. X., Zhou, K. Z., & Zhang, C. (2020). Stakeholder relationship capability and firm innovation: A contingent analysis. Journal of Business Ethics, 167(1), 111–125.

Jin, N., Goh, B., Huffman, L., & Yuan, J. J. (2015). Predictors and outcomes of perceived image of restaurant innovativeness in fine-dining restaurants. Journal of Hospitality Marketing & Management, 24(5), 457–485.

Johnson, Z. S., Lee, Y. J., & Ashoori, M. T. (2018). Brand associations: the value of ability versus social responsibility depends on consumer goals. Journal of Brand Management, 25(1), 27–37.

Johnson, Z. S., Mao, H., Lefebvre, S., & Ganesh, J. (2019). Good guys can finish first: How brand reputation affects extension evaluations. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 29(4), 565–583.

Jørgensen, S., Pedersen, L. J. T., & Skard, S. (2022). How going green builds trusting beliefs. Business Strategy and the Environment, 31(1), 297–311.

Jung, J., Kim, S. J., & Kim, K. H. (2020). Sustainable marketing activities of traditional fashion market and brand loyalty. Journal of Business Research, 120, 294–301.

Jung, W., Peck, J., Palmeira, M., & Kim, K. (2022). An unintended consequence of product upgrades: How upgrades can make current consumers feel left behind. Journal of Marketing Research, 59(5), 1019–1039.

Kassemeier, R., Haumann, T., & Güntürkün, P. (2022). Whether, when, and why functional company characteristics engender customer satisfaction and customer-company identification: The role of self-definitional needs. International Journal of Research in Marketing, 39(3), 699–723.

Keil, M., Tan, B. C., Wei, K.-K., Saarinen, T., Tuunainen, V., & Wassenaar, A. (2000). A cross-cultural study on escalation of commitment behavior in software projects. MIS quarterly, 24(2), 299–325.

Keiningham, T., Aksoy, L., Buoye, A., Yan, A., Morgeson III, F. V., Woodall, G., & Larivière, B. (2024). Customer perceptions of firm innovativeness and market performance: a nation-level, longitudinal, cross-industry examination. Journal of Service Research, 27(4), 475–489.

Khalilzadeh, J., & Tasci, A. D. (2017). Large sample size, significance level, and the effect size: Solutions to perils of using big data for academic research. Tourism Management, 62, 89–96.

Khan, S. N., & Kamal, A. (2021). Investigating corporate social irresponsibility (CSIR) and its impact on social judgments in the weak institution: Moderating the role of corporate ability. Journal of Business & Industrial Marketing, 36(5), 749–764.

Khan, Z., Lew, Y. K., & Park, B. I. (2015). Institutional legitimacy and norms-based CSR marketing practices: Insights from MNCs operating in a developing economy. International Marketing Review, 32(5), 463–491.

Khanna, T., & Palepu, K. (1997). Why focused strategies. Harvard Business Review, 75(4), 41–51.

Kibbeling, M., van der Bij, H., & van Weele, A. (2013). Market orientation and innovativeness in supply chains: Supplier's impact on customer satisfaction. Journal of Product Innovation Management, 30(3), 500–515.

Kim, J., Kim, K. H., Garrett, T. C., & Jung, H. (2015). The contributions of firm innovativeness to customer value in purchasing behavior. Journal of Product Innovation Management, 32(2), 201–213.

Kim, J. S. (2016). An investigation of key factors affecting the adoption of smartphone in three regions. International Journal of Innovation and Technology Management, 13(6), 1640017.

Kim, Y., Park, H., & Kim, J. K. (2019). Corporate association strategies and consumer responses: The relative effectiveness of CA versus CSR communication strategy by industry type. Journal of Marketing Communications, 25(2), 204–227.

Kirca, A. H., Bearden, W. O., & Roth, K. (2011). Implementation of market orientation in the subsidiaries of global companies: The role of institutional factors. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 39(5), 683–699.

Kirca, A. H., Jayachandran, S., & Bearden, W. O. (2005). Market orientation: A meta-analytic review and assessment of its antecedents and impact on performance. Journal of Marketing, 69(2), 24–41.

Kissel, P., & Büttgen, M. (2015). Using social media to communicate employer brand identity: The impact on corporate image and employer attractiveness. Journal of Brand Management, 22(9), 755–777.

Kline, R. B. (2015). Principles and practice of structural equation modeling. New York: Guilford Publications.

Kostova, T., Beugelsdijk, S., Scott, W. R., Kunst, V. E., Chua, C. H., & van Essen, M. (2020). The construct of institutional distance through the lens of different institutional perspectives: Review, analysis, and recommendations. Journal of International Business Studies, 51(4), 467–497.

Kraft, P. S., & Bausch, A. (2018). Managerial social networks and innovation: a meta‐analysis of bonding and bridging effects across institutional environments. Journal of Product Innovation Management, 35(6), 865–889.

Krammer, F. (2020). SARS-CoV-2 vaccines in development. Nature, 586(7830), 516–527.

Kunz, W., Schmitt, B., & Meyer, A. (2011). How does perceived firm innovativeness affect the consumer? Journal of Business Research, 64(8), 816–822.

Kunz, W. H. (2024). Company Innovativeness—A Radically New Perspective on an Old Concept. Journal of Service Research, 27(4), 494–496.

Kurtmollaiev, S., Lervik-Olsen, L., & Andreassen, T. W. (2022). Competing through innovation: Let the customer judge! Journal of Business Research, 153, 87–101.

Lacey, R., Kennett-Hensel, P. A., & Manolis, C. (2015). Is corporate social responsibility a motivator or hygiene factor? Insights into its bivalent nature. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 43(3), 315–332.

Leckie, C., Nyadzayo, M. W., & Johnson, L. W. (2018). Promoting brand engagement behaviors and loyalty through perceived service value and innovativeness. Journal of Services Marketing, 32(1), 70–82.

Lee, C., & Green, R. T. (1991). Cross-cultural examination of the Fishbein behavioral intentions model. Journal of International Business Studies, 22(2), 289–305.

Lenharo, M. (2023). WHO declares end to COVID-19’s emergency phase. https://​www.​nature.​com/​articles/​d41586-023-01559-z. Accessed 23.05.2023.

Leonidou, L. C., Aykol, B., Samiee, S., & Korfiatis, N. (2022). A Meta-analysis of the Antecedents and Outcomes of Consumer Foreign Country Image Perceptions: The Moderating Role of Macro-level Country Differences. Management International Review, 62(5), 741–784.

Li, J., Zhang, Y., Hu, Y., Tao, X., Jiang, W., & Qi, L. (2018). Developed market or developing market?: A perspective of institutional theory on multinational enterprises’ diversification and sustainable development with environmental protection. Business Strategy and the Environment, 27(7), 858–871.

Li, S., Zhang, Z., Liu, Y., & Ng, S. (2021a). The closer I am, the safer I feel: The “distance proximity effect” of COVID‐19 pandemic on individuals' risk assessment and irrational consumption. Psychology & Marketing, 38(11), 2006–2018.

Li, Y., Teng, W., Liao, T.-T., & Lin, T. (2021b). Exploration of patriotic brand image: Its antecedents and impacts on purchase intentions. Asia Pacific Journal of Marketing and Logistics, 33(6), 1455–1481.

Lin, C. Y. (2019). How does perceived retail service innovativeness affect retail patronage intentions? Creativity and Innovation Management, 28(4), 519–532.

Lin, J., Lobo, A., & Leckie, C. (2019). The influence of green brand innovativeness and value perception on brand loyalty: The moderating role of green knowledge. Journal of Strategic Marketing, 27(1), 81–95.

Lin, N. (2020). Designing global sourcing strategy for cost savings and innovation: A configurational approach. Management International Review, 60(5), 723–753.

Lindell, M. K., & Whitney, D. J. (2001). Accounting for common method variance in cross-sectional research designs. Journal of Applied Psychology, 86(1), 114–121.

Liu, J., Shahab, Y., & Hoque, H. (2022). Government Response Measures and Public Trust during the COVID‐19 Pandemic: Evidence from Around the World. British Journal of Management, 33(2), 571–602.

Luger, M., Hofer, K. M., & Floh, A. (2022). Support for corporate social responsibility among generation Y consumers in advanced versus emerging markets. International Business Review, 31(2), 101903.

Lunardo, R., Jaud, D., & Jaspers, E. (2022). Engagement in vice food and beverage consumption: The role of perceived lack of control. Psychology & Marketing, 39(12), 2221–2239.

MacKay, R. B., & Chia, R. (2013). Choice, chance, and unintended consequences in strategic change: A process understanding of the rise and fall of NorthCo Automotive. Academy of Management Journal, 56(1), 208–230.

Madden, T. J., Roth, M. S., & Dillon, W. R. (2012). Global product quality and corporate social responsibility perceptions: A cross-national study of halo effects. Journal of International Marketing, 20(1), 42–57.

Mandler, T., Bartsch, F., & Han, C. M. (2021). Brand credibility and marketplace globalization: The role of perceived brand globalness and localness. Journal of International Business Studies, 52(8), 1559–1590.

Mäntymäki, M., Islam, A. N., Turel, O., & Dhir, A. (2022). Coping with pandemics using social network sites: A psychological detachment perspective to COVID-19 stressors. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 179, 121660.

Marín-García, A., Gil-Saura, I., & Ruiz-Molina, M.-E. (2021). Understanding innovativeness and commitment to sustainable service practices. Journal of Services Marketing, 35(8), 1092–1103.

Marquina, P., & Morales, C. E. (2012). The influence of CSR on purchasing behaviour in Peru and Spain. International Marketing Review, 29(3), 299–312.

Marsh, H. W., Lüdtke, O., Robitzsch, A., Trautwein, U., Asparouhov, T., Muthén, B., & Nagengast, B. (2009). Doubly-latent models of school contextual effects: Integrating multilevel and structural equation approaches to control measurement and sampling error. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 44(6), 764–802.

Martin, K. D., Johnson, J. L., & French, J. J. (2011). Institutional pressures and marketing ethics initiatives: the focal role of organizational identity. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 39(4), 574–591.

Matarazzo, M., Resciniti, R., & Simonetti, B. (2020). Cause-related marketing for successful cross-border post-acquisition performance. International Marketing Review, 37(4), 695–712.

Maxham, J. G., & Netemeyer, R. G. (2002). A longitudinal study of complaining customers' evaluations of multiple service failures and recovery efforts. Journal of Marketing, 66(4), 57–71.

Maxwell-Smith, M. A., White, T. B., & Loyd, D. L. (2020). Does perceived treatment of unfamiliar employees affect consumer brand attitudes? Social dominance ideologies reveal who cares the most and why. Journal of Business Research, 109, 461–471.

Maydeu-Olivares, A. (2017). Maximum likelihood estimation of structural equation models for continuous data: Standard errors and goodness of fit. Structural Equation Modeling: A Multidisciplinary Journal, 24(3), 383–394.

Mazzoni, M. (2020). 15 Companies Retooling Their Operations to Fight COVID-19. https://​www.​triplepundit.​com/​story/​2020/​companies-retooling-operations-covid-19/​88921. Accessed 15.01.2025.

McLeay, F., Osburg, V. S., Yoganathan, V., & Patterson, A. (2021). Replaced by a Robot: Service Implications in the Age of the Machine. Journal of Service Research, 24(1), 104–121.

Mecit, A., Shrum, L., & Lowrey, T. M. (2022). COVID‐19 is feminine: Grammatical gender influences danger perceptions and precautionary behavioral intentions by activating gender stereotypes. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 32(2), 316–325.

Meena, P., & Kumar, G. (2022). Online food delivery companies' performance and consumers expectations during COVID-19: An investigation using machine learning approach. Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, 68, 103052.

Meißner, M., Haurand, M. D., & Stummer, C. (2017). With a little help from my customers: The influence of customer empowerment on consumers' perceptions of well-establised brands. International Journal of Innovation Management, 21(6), 1750048.

Miller, D., Tang, Z., Xu, X., & Breton-Miller, L. (2022). Are socially responsible firms associated with socially responsible citizens? A study of social distancing during the COVID-19 pandemic. Journal of Business Ethics, 179(2), 387–410.

Moon, B.-J., Lee, L. W., & Oh, C. H. (2015). The impact of CSR on consumer-corporate connection and brand loyalty: A cross cultural investigation. International Marketing Review, 32(5), 518–539.

Morgan, B. (2022). The Top 100 Most Customer-Centric Companies of 2022. https://​www.​forbes.​com/​sites/​blakemorgan/​2022/​05/​01/​the-top-100-most-customer-centric-companies-of-2022/​. Accessed 07.11.2024.

Morgen, J. (2024). Autonomous Consumer Business. Wiesbaden: Springer.

Mukherjee, D., Kumar, S., Donthu, N., & Pandey, N. (2021). Research published in Management International Review from 2006 to 2020: A bibliometric analysis and future directions. Management International Review, 61(5), 599–642.

Narver, J., & Slater, S. (1990). The effect of a market orientation on business profitability. Journal of Marketing, 54(4), 20–35.

Nawaz, M. Z., Nawaz, S., Guzmán, F., & Plotkina, D. (2023). The aftermath of Covid-19: The rise of pandemic animosity among consumers and its scale development. Journal of Business Research, 157, 113550.

Ndubisi, N. O. (2012). Mindfulness, reliability, pre-emptive conflict handling, customer orientation and outcomes in Malaysia's healthcare sector. Journal of Business Research, 65(4), 537–546.

Neill, M. S., & Jiang, H. (2017). Functional silos, integration & encroachment in internal communication. Public Relations Review, 43(4), 850–862.

Newell, A., Shaw, J. C., & Simon, H. A. (1958). Elements of a theory of human problem solving. Psychological Review, 65(3), 151–166.

Nielsen, B. B., Wechtler, H., & Zheng, L. G. (2023). Disasters and international business: Insights and recommendations from a systematic review. Journal of World Business, 58(4), 101458.

Nilashi, M., Abumalloh, R. A., Minaei-Bidgoli, B., Zogaan, W. A., Alhargan, A., Mohd, S., Azhar, S. N. F. S., Asadi, S., & Samad, S. (2022). Revealing travellers’ satisfaction during COVID-19 outbreak: Moderating role of service quality. Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, 64, 102783.

North, D. C. (1990). Institutions, institutional change and economic performance. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Oh, C. H., & Oetzel, J. (2022). Multinational enterprises and natural disasters: Challenges and opportunities for IB research. Journal of International Business Studies, 53(2), 231–254.

Orlandi, L. B., Febo, V., & Perdichizzi, S. (2022). The role of religiosity in product and technology acceptance: Evidence from COVID-19 vaccines. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 185, 122032.

Orr, R. J., & Scott, W. R. (2008). Institutional exceptions on global projects: A process model. Journal of International Business Studies, 39(4), 562–588.

Ort, A., & Fahr, A. (2018). Using efficacy cues in persuasive health communication is more effective than employing threats–An experimental study of a vaccination intervention against Ebola. British Journal of Health Psychology, 23(3), 665–684.

Ozkaya, H. E., Droge, C., Hult, G. T. M., Calantone, R., & Ozkaya, E. (2015). Market orientation, knowledge competence, and innovation. International Journal of Research in Marketing, 32(3), 309–318.

Özsomer, A. (2012). The interplay between global and local brands: A closer look at perceived brand globalness and local iconness. Journal of International Marketing, 20(2), 72–95.

Özsomer, A., Güzel, Z., Newmeyer, C., & Schmidt‐Devlin, E. (2022). Can advertising enhance consumers' desirable COVID‐19 health behavioral intentions? The role of brand‐pandemic fit. Journal of Consumer Behaviour, 21(4), 685–696.

Ozuem, W., Ranfagni, S., Willis, M., Rovai, S., & Howell, K. (2021). Exploring customers' responses to online service failure and recovery strategies during COVID‐19 pandemic: An actor–network theory perspective. Psychology & Marketing, 38(9), 1440–1459.

Palazón, M., López, M., Sicilia, M., & López, I. (2022). The customer journey: A proposal of indicators to evaluate integration and customer orientation. Journal of Marketing Communications, 28(5), 528–559.

Panagopoulos, N. G., Menguc, B., & Mullins, R. (2023). Will you speak up for me? Inducing retail store managers’ engagement with MNCs’ brands across cultures. Journal of International Business Studies, 54(7), 1222–1255.

Pantano, E., Priporas, C.-V., Devereux, L., & Pizzi, G. (2021). Tweets to escape: Intercultural differences in consumer expectations and risk behavior during the COVID-19 lockdown in three European countries. Journal of Business Research, 130, 59–69.

Papovsky, M. (2023). Navigating Tomorrow: The Shift Toward Win-Win Leadership Paradigms. https://​www.​forbes.​com/​sites/​forbesbusinessco​uncil/​2023/​10/​31/​navigating-tomorrow-the-shift-toward-win-win-leadership-paradigms/​. Accessed 7.12.2023.

Pappu, R., & Quester, P. G. (2016). How does brand innovativeness affect brand loyalty? European Journal of Marketing, 50(1/2), 2–28.

Park, J., Kim, J., Lee, D. C., Kim, S. S., Voyer, B. G., Kim, C., Sung, B., Gonzalez‐Jimenez, H., Fastoso, F., & Choi, Y. K. (2022). The impact of COVID‐19 on consumer evaluation of authentic advertising messages. Psychology & Marketing, 39(1), 76–89.

Pedersen, M. J., & Nielsen, C. V. (2016). Improving survey response rates in online panels: Effects of low-cost incentives and cost-free text appeal interventions. Social Science Computer Review, 34(2), 229–243.

Pfizer (2020). Pfizer and BioNTech Achieve First Authorization in the World for a Vaccine to Combat COVID-19. https://​www.​pfizer.​com/​news/​press-release/​press-release-detail/​pfizer-and-biontech-achieve-first-authorization-world. Accessed 04.05.2022.

Pfizer (2022). Pfizer Reports Fourth-Quarter and Full-Year 2021 Results. https://​www.​businesswire.​com/​news/​home/​20220208005226/​en/​Pfizer-Reports-Fourth-Quarter-and-Full-Year-2021-Results. Accessed 27.01.2023.

Pilawa, J., Witell, L., Valtakoski, A., & Kristensson, P. (2022). Service innovativeness in retailing: Increasing the relative attractiveness during the COVID-19 pandemic. Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, 67, 102962.

Preacher, K. J., Zhang, Z., & Zyphur, M. J. (2016). Multilevel structural equation models for assessing moderation within and across levels of analysis. Psychological Methods, 21(2), 189–205.

Preacher, K. J., Zyphur, M. J., & Zhang, Z. (2010). A general multilevel SEM framework for assessing multilevel mediation. Psychological Methods, 15(3), 209–233.

Prentice, C., Nguyen, M., Nandy, P., Winardi, M., Chen, Y., Le Monkhouse, L., Dominique-Ferreira, S., & Stantic, B. (2021). Relevant, or irrelevant, external factors in panic buying. Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, 61, 102587.

Puck, J. F., Holtbrügge, D., & Mohr, A. T. (2009). Beyond entry mode choice: Explaining the conversion of joint ventures into wholly owned subsidiaries in the People's Republic of China. Journal of International Business Studies, 40(3), 388–404.

Puffer, S. M., McCarthy, D. J., & Boisot, M. (2010). Entrepreneurship in Russia and China: The impact of formal institutional voids. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 34(3), 441–467.

Putnick, D. L., & Bornstein, M. H. (2016). Measurement invariance conventions and reporting: The state of the art and future directions for psychological research. Developmental Review, 41, 71–90.

Quintelier, K. J., & Vock, M. (2024). The effect of mixing stakeholder value and profit on cooperation: You can't have your cake and eat it too. European Management Journal, 42(2), 255–265.

Raza, A., Rather, R. A., Iqbal, M. K., & Bhutta, U. S. (2020). An assessment of corporate social responsibility on customer company identification and loyalty in banking industry: A PLS-SEM analysis. Management Research Review, 43(11), 1337–1370.

Roy, S. (2018). Effects of customer experience across service types, customer types and time. Journal of Services Marketing, 32(4), 400–413.

Roy, S., Guha, A., Biswas, A., & Grewal, D. (2019). Celebrity endorsements in emerging markets: Align endorsers with brands or with consumers? Journal of International Business Studies, 50(3), 295–317.

Rubera, G., & Kirca, A. H. (2012). Firm innovativeness and its performance outcomes: A meta-analytic review and theoretical integration. Journal of Marketing, 76(3), 130–147.

Rubera, G., & Kirca, A. H. (2017). You gotta serve somebody: The effects of firm innovation on customer satisfaction and firm value. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 45(5), 741–761.

Rubera, G., Ordanini, A., & Griffith, D. A. (2011). Incorporating cultural values for understanding the influence of perceived product creativity on intention to buy: An examination in Italy and the US. Journal of International Business Studies, 42(4), 459–476.

Ruiz, B., García, J. A., & Revilla, A. J. (2016). Antecedents and consequences of bank reputation: A comparison of the United Kingdom and Spain. International Marketing Review, 33(6), 781–805.

Rust, R. T., Lemon, K. N., & Zeithaml, V. A. (2004). Return on Marketing: Using Customer Equity to Focus Marketing Strategy. Journal of Marketing, 68(1), 109–127.

Rybaczewska, M., Sparks, L., & Sułkowski, Ł. (2020). Consumers’ purchase decisions and employer image. Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, 55, 102123.

Ryu, E. (2015). The role of centering for interaction of level 1 variables in multilevel structural equation models. Structural Equation Modeling: A Multidisciplinary Journal, 22(4), 617–630.

Ryu, E., & West, S. G. (2009). Level-Specific Evaluation of Model Fit in Multilevel Structural Equation Modeling. Structural Equation Modeling: A Multidisciplinary Journal, 16(4), 583–601.

Sakib, M. N., Hasan, F., Al-Emran, M., & Felix, R. (2023). A cross-cultural analysis of ridesharing intentions and compliance with COVID-19 health guidelines: The roles of social trust, fear of COVID-19, and trust-in-God. Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, 71, 103207.

Samsung (2023a). Five Samsung business principles. https://​www.​samsung.​com/​us/​about-us/​leadership-and-mission/​. Accessed 7.12.2023.

Samsung (2023b). Samsung Announces Innovations to Enhance Memory Customer Experience in Data-Centric Era at FMS 2023. https://​semiconductor.​samsung.​com/​news-events/​tech-blog/​samsung-announces-innovations-to-enhance-memory-customer-experience-in-data-centric-era-at-fms-2023/​. Accessed 19.12.2024.

Samsung (2023c). Samsung Eco-Friends: The Journey of a Used Bottle. https://​www.​instagram.​com/​reel/​CymfcVvpCnH/​?​igsh=​OTlkM3R2eDZhaThy​. Accessed 12.08.2024.

Sarstedt, M., Hair, J. F., Ringle, C. M., Thiele, K. O., & Gudergan, S. P. (2016). Estimation issues with PLS and CBSEM: Where the bias lies! Journal of Business Research, 69(10), 3998–4010.

Sarstedt, M., Wilczynski, P., & Melewar, T. (2013). Measuring reputation in global markets: A comparison of reputation measures’ convergent and criterion validities. Journal of World Business, 48(3), 329–339.

Sasaki, I., & Yoshikawa, K. (2014). Going beyond national cultures–Dynamic interaction between intra-national, regional, and organizational realities. Journal of World Business, 49(3), 455–464.

Schreier, M., Fuchs, C., & Dahl, D. W. (2012). The Innovation Effect of User Design: Exploring Consumers’ Innovation Perceptions of Firms Selling Products Designed by Users. Journal of Marketing, 76(5), 18–32.

Schulz, M., & Voelckner, F. (2020). It’s all in the mix: How user-designed products and company-designed products can peacefully coexist. International Journal of Innovation Management, 24(07), 2050067.

Schwartz, S. H. (1994). Beyond individualism/collectivism: New cultural dimensions of values. In New cultural dimensions of values. Eds. U. Kim, H. C. Tirandis, C. Kagitcibasi, S.-C. Choi and G. Yoon. Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications Inc., 85–119.

Schwartz, S. H. (1999). A theory of cultural values and some implications for work. Applied Psychology: An International Review, 48(1), 23–47.

Schwartz, S. H. (2008). The 7 Schwartz cultural value orientation scores for 80 countries. https://​www.​researchgate.​net/​publication/​304715744_​The_​7_​Schwartz_​cultural_​value_​orientation_​scores_​for_​80_​countries. Accessed 15.08.2021.

Schwartz, S. H. (2014). National culture as value orientations: Consequences of value differences and cultural distance. In Handbook of the Economics of Art and Culture. Eds. V. A. Ginsburgh and D. Throsby. Amsterdam: Elsevier, 547–586.

Scott, W. R. (1995). Institutions and Organizations. Thousand Oaks: Sage.

Scott, W. R. (2014). Institutions and Organizations. Thousand Oaks: Sage.

Seele, P., & Lock, I. (2015). Instrumental and/or deliberative? A typology of CSR communication tools. Journal of Business Ethics, 131(2), 401–414.

Shahzad, M., Qu, Y., Javed, S. A., Zafar, A. U., & Rehman, S. U. (2020). Relation of environment sustainability to CSR and green innovation: A case of Pakistani manufacturing industry. Journal of Cleaner Production, 253, 119938.

Shams, R., Alpert, F., & Brown, M. (2015). Consumer perceived brand innovativeness: Conceptualization and operationalization. European Journal of Marketing, 49(9/10), 1589–1615.

Shams, R., Brown, M., & Alpert, F. (2017). The role of brand credibility in the relationship between brand innovativeness and purchase intention. Journal of Customer Behaviour, 16(2), 145–159.

Shao, L., Kwok, C. C., & Guedhami, O. (2010). National culture and dividend policy. Journal of International Business Studies, 41(8), 1391–1414.

Shaw, J. B. (1990). A cognitive categorization model for the study of intercultural management. Academy of Management Review, 15(4), 626–645.

Sheth, J. (2020). Impact of Covid-19 on consumer behavior: Will the old habits return or die? Journal of Business Research, 117, 280–283.

Sheth, J. N. (2011). Impact of emerging markets on marketing: Rethinking existing perspectives and practices. Journal of Marketing, 75(4), 166–182.

Shi, W., Wajda, D., & Aguilera, R. V. (2022). Interorganizational spillover: A review and a proposal for future research. Journal of Management, 48(1), 185–210.

Shin, H., & Larson, L. R. (2020). The bright and dark sides of humorous response to online customer complaint. European Journal of Marketing, 54(8), 2013–2047.

Shin, S., Lee, J., & Bansal, P. (2022). From a shareholder to stakeholder orientation: Evidence from the analyses of CEO dismissal in large US firms. Strategic Management Journal, 43(7), 1233–1257.

Song, Z., Liu, C., Shi, R., & Jing, K. (2022). Is Distant Extension Always Upset? Neural Evidence of Empathy and Brand Association Affect Distant Extension Evaluation. Frontiers in Psychology, 13, 804797.

Spence, M. (1973). Job Market Signaling. The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 87(3), 355–374.

Steenkamp, J.-B., Batra, R., & Alden, D. L. (2003). How perceived brand globalness creates brand value. Journal of International Business Studies, 34(1), 53–65.

Steenkamp, J.-B., & Baumgartner, H. (1998). Assessing measurement invariance in cross-national consumer research. Journal of Consumer Research, 25(1), 78–90.

Steenkamp, J.-B., & Geyskens, I. (2006). How country characteristics affect the perceived value of web sites. Journal of Marketing, 70(3), 136–150.

Stock, J., & Watson, M. (2019). Introduction to econometrics. Boston: Pearson.

Stockemer, D. (2019). Quantitative Methods for the Social Sciences. Cham: Springer.

Suifan, T. (2021). How innovativeness mediates the effects of organizational culture and leadership on performance. International Journal of Innovation Management, 25(2), 2150016.

Sung, H., Kim, J., & Choi, H. (2021). Effects of consumer–cause fit and consumer–product fit of cause‐related marketing on product purchase intention. Journal of Consumer Behaviour, 20(3), 791–802.

Swoboda, B., & Batton, N. (2019). National cultural value models and reputation of MNCs. Cross Cultural & Strategic Management, 26(2), 166–198.

Swoboda, B., & Batton, N. (2020). Cross-national roles of perceived reputation dimensions for MNCs. International Marketing Review, 37(6), 1051–1081.

Swoboda, B., Huber, C., Schuster, T., & Hirschmann, J. (2017). Corporate Reputation Effects Across Nations: The Impact of Country Distances and Firm-Specific Resources. Management International Review, 57(5), 717–748.

Swoboda, B., Puchert, C., & Morschett, D. (2016). Explaining the differing effects of corporate reputation across nations: a multilevel analysis. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 44(4), 454–473.

Swoboda, B., & Sinning, C. (2020). How country development and national culture affect the paths of perceived brand globalness to consumer behavior across nations. Journal of Business Research, 118, 58–73.

Swoboda, B., & Sinning, C. (2021). Endorsement of Global Product Brands by Global Corporate Brands–A Consumer Perspective Across Nations. Management International Review, 61(4), 563–598.

Talay, M. B., Akdeniz, M. B., Obal, M., & Townsend, J. D. (2019). Stock market reactions to new product launches in international markets: The moderating role of culture. Journal of International Marketing, 27(4), 81–98.

Taleb, N. N. (2007). The black swan: The impact of the highly improbable. New York: Random House.

Taras, V., Steel, P., & Kirkman, B. L. (2012). Improving national cultural indices using a longitudinal meta-analysis of Hofstede's dimensions. Journal of World Business, 47(3), 329–341.

Taylor, L. (2023). COVID-19: Vaccination reduces severity and duration of long covid, study finds. BMJ: British Medical Journal, 380(4), 491.

Teng, W. (2020). Importance of corporate image for domestic brands moderated by consumer ethnocentrism. Journal of Product & Brand Management, 29(3), 257–272.

Theurer, C. P., Tumasjan, A., Welpe, I. M., & Lievens, F. (2018). Employer branding: A brand equity‐based literature review and research agenda. International Journal of Management Reviews, 20(1), 155–179.

Tihanyi, L., Griffith, D. A., & Russell, C. J. (2005). The effect of cultural distance on entry mode choice, international diversification, and MNE performance: A meta-analysis. Journal of International Business Studies, 36(3), 270–283.

Triandis, H. C. (1995). Individualism & Collectivism. Boulder: Westview Press.

Tsai, Y.-H., Lin, C.-P., Ma, H.-C., & Wang, R.-T. (2015). Modeling corporate social performance and job pursuit intention: Forecasting the job change of professionals in technology industry. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 99, 14–21.

Tuominen, S., Reijonen, H., Nagy, G., Buratti, A., & Laukkanen, T. (2023). Customer-centric strategy driving innovativeness and business growth in international markets. International Marketing Review, 40(3), 479–496.

Tybout, A. M., Calder, B. J., & Sternthal, B. (1981). Using information processing theory to design marketing strategies. Journal of Marketing Research, 18(1), 73–79.

UNDP (2018). Human Development Index (HDI). http://​hdr.​undp.​org/​en/​indicators/​137506. Accessed 15.10.2024.

Unilever (2021). What's behind the extraordinary growth of digital commerce? https://​www.​unilever.​com/​news/​news-search/​2021/​whats-behind-the-extraordinary-growth-of-digital-commerce/​. Accessed 25.11.2022.

Unilever (2023a). Engaging with stakeholders. https://​www.​unilever.​com/​planet-and-society/​responsible-business/​engaging-with-stakeholders/​. Accessed 8.11.2023.

Unilever (2023b). How social media is helping make the switch to sustainability. https://​www.​unilever.​com/​news/​news-search/​2023/​how-social-media-is-helping-people-make-the-switch-to-sustainability/​. Accessed 12.08.2024.

United Nations (2025). World Economic Situation and Prospects 2025

United Nations Development Programme (2021). Human Development Insights. http://​hdr.​undp.​org/​en/​indicators/​137506. Accessed 1.12.2023.

Upadhye, B. D., Das, G., & Varshneya, G. (2019). Corporate social responsibility: A boon or bane for innovative firms? Journal of Strategic Marketing, 27(1), 50–66.

Valenzuela, L. M., Mulki, J. P., & Jaramillo, J. F. (2010). Impact of customer orientation, inducements and ethics on loyalty to the firm: Customers’ perspective. Journal of Business Ethics, 93(2), 277–291.

van der Lans, R., van Everdingen, Y., & Melnyk, V. (2016). What to stress, to whom and where? A cross-country investigation of the effects of perceived brand benefits on buying intentions. International Journal of Research in Marketing, 33(4), 924–943.

van Riel, A. C., Andreassen, T. W., Lervik-Olsen, L., Zhang, L., Mithas, S., & Heinonen, K. (2021). A customer-centric five actor model for sustainability and service innovation. Journal of Business Research, 136, 389–401.

Vaquero Martín, M. (2021). Communicating new product development openness - The impact on consumer perceptions and intentions. European Management Journal, 39(6), 802–815.

Vasudeva, G., Nachum, L., & Say, G.-D. (2018). A signaling theory of institutional activism: How Norway’s sovereign wealth fund investments affect firms’ foreign acquisitions. Academy of Management Journal, 61(4), 1583–1611.

Verlegh, P. W., Bernritter, S. F., Gruber, V., Schartman, N., & Sotgiu, F. (2021). “Don’t Worry, We Are Here for You”: Brands as External Source of Control during the COVID-19 Pandemic. Journal of Advertising, 50(3), 262–270.

Walsh, G., & Bartikowski, B. (2013). Exploring corporate ability and social responsibility associations as antecedents of customer satisfaction cross-culturally. Journal of Business Research, 66(8), 989–995.

Walsh, G., & Beatty, S. E. (2007). Customer-based corporate reputation of a service firm: Scale development and validation. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 35(1), 127–143.

Walsh, G., Beatty, S. E., & Shiu, E. M. K. (2009). The customer-based corporate reputation scale: Replication and short form. Journal of Business Research, 62(10), 924–930.

Walsh, G., Shiu, E., & Hassan, L. M. (2014). Cross-national advertising and behavioral intentions: A multilevel analysis. Journal of International Marketing, 22(1), 77–98.

Wang, C. L., & Ahmed, P. K. (2004). The development and validation of the organisational innovativeness construct using confirmatory factor analysis. European Journal of Innovation Management, 7(4), 303–313.

Wang, F., Zuo, L., Yang, Z., & Wu, Y. (2019). Mobile searching versus online searching: Differential effects of paid search keywords on direct and indirect sales. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 47(6), 1151–1165.

Wang, J., Jing, R., Lai, X., Zhang, H., Lyu, Y., Knoll, M. D., & Fang, H. (2020). Acceptance of COVID-19 Vaccination during the COVID-19 Pandemic in China. Vaccines, 8(3), 482.

Wang, L., Touré-Tillery, M., & McGill, A. L. (2023). The effect of disease anthropomorphism on compliance with health recommendations. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 51(2), 266–285.

Wang, Q., Zhao, X., & Voss, C. (2016). Customer orientation and innovation: A comparative study of manufacturing and service firms. International Journal of Production Economics, 171(2), 221–230.

Warrens, M. J. (2015). On Cronbach’s Alpha as the Mean of All Split-Half Reliabilities. In Quantitative Psychology Research. Eds. R. E. Millsap, D. M. Bolt, L. A. van der Ark and W.-C. Wang. Cham: Springer, 293–300.

Watkins, L. (2010). The cross‐cultural appropriateness of survey‐based value (s) research: A review of methodological issues and suggestion of alternative methodology. International Marketing Review, 27(6), 694–716.

Weiber, R., & Pohl, A. (2016). Innovation und Marketing. Stuttgart: Kohlhammer Verlag.

Weiber, R., & Sarstedt, M. (2021). Strukturgleichungsmodellierung: Eine anwendungsorientierte Einführung in die Kausalanalyse mit Hilfe von AMOS, SmartPLS und SPSS. Wiesbaden: Springer Gabler.

Wenzel, M., Stanske, S., & Lieberman, M. (2021). Strategic responses to crisis. Strategic Management Journal, 42(2), O16-O27.

Whelan, J., & Hingston, S. T. (2022). Pathogens, privilege, and purity: How pathogen threat and childhood socioeconomic status influence consumers’ condemnation of purity violations. Journal of Business Research, 142, 636–647.

Wielgos, D. M., Homburg, C., & Kuehnl, C. (2021). Digital business capability: Its impact on firm and customer performance. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 49(4), 762–789.

Williams, L. J., Hartman, N., & Cavazotte, F. (2010). Method variance and marker variables: A review and comprehensive CFA marker technique. Organizational Research Methods, 13(3), 477–514.

Wolter, J. S., Bock, D., Mackey, J., Xu, P., & Smith, J. S. (2019). Employee satisfaction trajectories and their effect on customer satisfaction and repatronage intentions. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 47(5), 815–836.

Wong, A., & Haque, M. (2022). Understanding the brand and website effects of online loyalty: A mediation perspective. Journal of Marketing Management, 38(3/4), 333–368.

World Bank (2018). GDP (current US $). http://​hdr.​undp.​org/​en/​indicators/​137506. Accessed 15.04.2021.

World Bank (2022a). GDP (current US$). https://​data.​worldbank.​org/​indicator/​NY.​GDP.​MKTP.​CD?​end=​2022&​name_​desc=​false&​start=​1960. Accessed 21.12.2023.

World Bank (2022b). Worldwide Governance Indicators. http://​info.​worldbank.​org/​governance/​wgi/​Home/​Reports. Accessed 21.10.2021.

World Economic Forum (2018). Global Competitiveness Index 4.0. http://​reports.​weforum.​org/​global-competitiveness-report-2018/​competitiveness-rankings/​. Accessed 15.04.2021.

World Economic Forum (2019). The Global Competitiveness Report. Geneva.

World Health Organization (2023). Coronavirus disease (COVID-19) pandemic. https://​www.​who.​int/​europe/​emergencies/​situations/​covid-19. Accessed 27.01.2023.

Wu, S.-I., & Ho, L.-P. (2014). The influence of perceived innovation and brand awareness on purchase intention of innovation product - An example of iPhone. International Journal of Innovation and Technology Management, 11(04), 1450026.

Yang, C., & Tebbutt, S. J. (2023). Long COVID: The next public health crisis is already on its way. The Lancet Regional Health–Europe, 28, 100612.

Yang, M. X., Tang, X., Cheung, M. L., & Zhang, Y. (2021). An institutional perspective on consumers' environmental awareness and pro‐environmental behavioral intention: Evidence from 39 countries. Business Strategy and the Environment, 30(1), 566–575.

Yang, Z., Floyd, K., & Tanner Jr, J. (2019). Effects of antismoking messages from media on adolescent smoking: The roles of family, school, and culture. Journal of Business Research, 103, 222–231.

Yao, F. K., Jiang, K., Combs, D. R., & Chang, S. (2022). Informal institutions and absorptive capacity: A cross-country meta-analytic study. Journal of International Business Studies, 53(6), 1091–1109.

Yazdanparast, A., & Alhenawi, Y. (2022). Impact of COVID‐19 pandemic on household financial decisions: A consumer vulnerability perspective. Journal of Consumer Behaviour, 21(4), 806–827.

Yen, C.-H., Teng, H.-Y., & Tzeng, J.-C. (2020). Innovativeness and customer value co-creation behaviors: Mediating role of customer engagement. International Journal of Hospitality Management, 88, 102514.

Yu, W., Han, X., Ding, L., & He, M. (2021). Organic food corporate image and customer co-developing behavior: The mediating role of consumer trust and purchase intention. Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, 59, 102377.

Yuan, K.-H., & Bentler, P. M. (2000). 5. Three likelihood-based methods for mean and covariance structure analysis with nonnormal missing data. Sociological Methodology, 30(1), 165–200.

Zaefarian, G., Kadile, V., Henneberg, S. C., & Leischnig, A. (2017). Endogeneity bias in marketing research: Problem, causes and remedies. Industrial Marketing Management, 65, 39–46.

Zaleski, R. (2024). 10 Sports Companies Pivoting or Modifying Their Business Due to COVID-19. https://​www.​netguru.​com/​blog/​sports-companies-pivots-covid-19. Accessed 15.01.2025.

Zhang, X., & Jeong, E. L. (2023). Are co-created green initiatives more appealing than firm-created green initiatives? Investigating the effects of co-created green appeals on restaurant promotion. International Journal of Hospitality Management, 108, 103361.

Zhang, Z., Zhang, C., & Chang, J. (2021). The deterrence effect of Guanxi on opportunism: The moderating effects of “three institutional pillars”. Industrial Marketing Management, 94, 41–51.

Zhao, X., Lynch Jr, J. G., & Chen, Q. (2010). Reconsidering Baron and Kenny: Myths and truths about mediation analysis. Journal of Consumer Research, 37(2), 197–206.

Zhou, L., Yang, Z., & Hui, M. K. (2010). Non-local or local brands? A multi-level investigation into confidence in brand origin identification and its strategic implications. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 38(2), 202–218.

Zimmer, L., & Swoboda, B. (2023). Perceived corporate social responsibility effects across nations: The role of national institutions. International Business Review, 32(3), 102073.