Adapted or standardized copy: Is non-cultural English the answer?

International advertisers often wonder whether to adapt their copy to each country they operate in or to globally standardize their message, especially in non-Anglophone markets. While the current business lingua franca is English, how easily can it be introduced into advertising without alienating consumers, and would a simpler English message work better? Does the culture of a brand also influence the impact of English use in non-Anglophone markets? This research examines the interaction between language choice and brand culture in a non-Anglophone market. Specifically, the studies review the value of Globish, a non-cultural form of English. The results suggest that using standardized English copy has relevance in non-Anglophone countries for global brands, but that Globish can also be useful for local brands seeking to upgrade their value in a local market. Globish is shown to be an interesting alternative option in adapting or standardizing advertising strategies. Managerial implications close the paper.     

Debt Overhang and Barter in Russia

This paper develops a model in which costly barter is used by firms to protect working capital against outside creditors. Although creditors could agree to postpone debt payments and to avoid destroying the firm's working capital, if the firm cannot commit not to divert cash ex post, the outcome of renegotiation still provides ex ante incentives to use barter. We show that the greater is the debt overhang, the more likely is the use of barter, with and without the possibility of debt restructuring. Empirical evidence from Russian firm-level data is shown to be consistent with the model's predictions. J. Comp. Econ., December 2002, 30(4), pp. 635–656. New Economic School, CEFIR, CEPR, and WDI, Nakhimovsky pr. 47, Moscow 117418, Russia; Sloan School of Management, M.I.T., 50 Memorial Drive, Cambridge, Massachusetts 02142; and ROSES–CNRS and CEPR, Maison des Sciences économiques, 106–112 Bd de l'Hôpital, 75647 Paris Cedex 13, France. © 2002 Association for Comparative Economic Studies. Published by Elsevier Science (USA). All rights reserved.Journal of Economic Literature Classification Numbers: E41, G34, P31.     

Preventive product safety – monitoring accidental injuries related to consumer products in the European Union

Objectives. To measure GPs' and paediatricians' expectations, attitudes, priorities and demands in the area of promoting safety and preventing accidents in the home involving children under 15 years of age.

Methods. A phone survey of a random sample of GPs and paediatricians in the French-speaking community of Belgium (Wallonia and Brussels) conducted in the course of September and October 2000.

Results. Close to two-thirds of the physicians surveyed stated that they had been contacted at least once in the 2 weeks preceding the survey to handle an injury. Of the physicians, 80% mention accident prevention after a childhood injury, but only 46% mention it during a routine consultation (whatever the reason of the latter may be). The main obstacles to mentioning prevention during routine consultation put forward by the interviewees are: 1) reasons for consultations that do not permit such an approach (79%); 2) the fact that injuries are not priorities for them (66%); 3) the lack of interesting materials to provide the subject with documentation (63%); 4) the unsuitability of the place where the contact occurs for such discussion, given the time required (56%); 5) insufficient information on the subject (41%); and 6) the patient's lack of interest (39%). An overwhelming majority (98%) nevertheless feel that they have a role to play in preventing children's accidents in the home, with 72.5% seeing this as informative (recommendation on safety rules). More than two-thirds of the respondents feel that they have enough requisite information to play such a role. Those who declare that they have not enough information (34%) proposed some priority subjects about which they would like to find information or additional information to be more effective in preventing accidents. The information needs mentioned most frequently were a systematic review of the risks, of the effective prevention strategies and epidemiological data.

Conclusions. The present study clearly reveals the interest of physicians for accident prevention and puts forward the current obstacles to offering prevention advice during routine consultation. The obstacles mentioned are fairly comparable to those mentioned in other studies, namely, because the reason for the visit does not give such an opening, the lack of appropriate materials and information, the lack of time, the patient's lack of interest, the fact that the issue is not a priority, etc. The problem of lack of priority for certain practitioners underlines the importance of making accident mortality and morbidity statistics available to doctors in order to improve their perception of the magnitude of the problem. The lack of interesting education materials and useful information seems to be a major reason for their failure to carry out such prevention work successfully. These factors should thus be taken into account when developing any policy and/or programme aimed at ‘using’ GPs and paediatricians in the prevention strategies that are adopted.