Striking the Balance: Globalization vs Localization

© 2016 SiriusDecisions. All Rights Reserved

Striking the Balance: Globalization vs Localization


Executive Summary

• Key issues– Localization is more than the creation of assets for local use in

campaigns – organizations must consider multiple factors

– A key challenge is to offer a localized experience to prospects and customers, while enjoying multi-market efficiencies of scale

– Marketers must identify gaps between the current state and the agreed-upon localization model, and then take action to eliminate those gaps

• What you will walk away with– A clear breakdown of the localization challenge into constituent parts

– An introduction to the SiriusDecisions Localization Decision Framework


Finding Balance in Localization


The Scope of Localization

Assets

Legal Org

Product

Tech and Data

Timing


Localization Responsibilities

Marketing Planning

Who determines

what marketing will

be executed?

Marketing Execution

Who does the work to

manage and deliver

marketing?

Content Creation

Who creates the content

and assets needed?

Decision Rights Who has the final say in any decision that needs to be made?

ProcessOwnership

Who defines and manages the required processes?

Budget Who owns and manages the budgets?

Resources Who manages the resources that do the work?


The SiriusDecisions Localization Model

LE

VE

L O

F L

OC

AL

IZA

TIO

N

1

2

3

4

1 2 3 4

LEVEL OF MARKETING DIFFERENTIATION


The Localization Scale

Culture

Language

Content

DOMESTICLevel 1

Content produced

for domestic

use only

Culture

Content

GLOBALLevel 2

Content applicable

but requires

adaptation

Culture

Language

Content

TRANSLATELevel 3

Content requires

translation and

localization

Culture

Language

Content

COMPLETELevel 4

New content needed

Language


The Marketing Differentiation Scale

Ta

cti

c M

ix

A B

SAMELevel 1

The same tactics and

mix are effective in

both regions

SIMILAR Level 2

A B

The same tactics are

effective – but the

overall mix must

be adjusted

INCREMENTALLevel 3

A B

Incremental tactics

should be added to

the tactic mix to

ensure it is effective

A B

DIFFERENTLevel 4

Completely different

tactics are needed to

be effective


The SiriusDecisions Localization Model

LE

VE

L O

F L

OC

AL

IZA

TIO

N

1

2

3

4 Program-Centric

High level of content localization.

Similar marketing approaches used across

geographies.

Centrally Driven

Minimal localization. Marketing

approaches are largely similar across

different geographies.

Geographically Driven

High level of localization. Marketing

approaches differ by geography.

Content-Centric

Minimal content localization. Marketing

programs differentiated to meet needs of

individual geographies.

1 2 3 4



Localization Responsibility By Model

Program-Centric

Centrally Driven

Geographically Driven

Content-Centric

Marketing

Planning

Marketing

Execution

Content

Creation

Marketing

Planning

Marketing

Execution

Content

Creation

Marketing

Planning

Marketing

Execution

Content

Creation

Marketing

Planning

Marketing

Execution

Content

Creation

Central Geography

LE

VE

L O

F L

OC

AL

IZA

TIO

N

1

2

3

4

1 2 3 4



Assessing Your Current State

Item

Marketing

Planning

Marketing

Execution

Content

Creation

Decision

Rights

Process

Ownership

Budget

Resources

SCORE:

1. Assess current state

Review the elements under each marketing

task and assign current ownership

Headquarters

Headquarters and Regions

Regions/Sub-Regions

1

2

3

1

1

2

1

5

1

1

2

1

5

3

3

3

3

12


Assessing Your Current State

4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12

Planning

Execution

Content

2. Plot Current State

Map scores to alignment grid

RegionsHQ


Mapping To Localization Models

Program-Centric Geographically Driven

Centrally Driven Content-Centric

4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12

Planning

Execution

Content

4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12

Planning

Execution

Content

4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12

Planning

Execution

Content

4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12

Planning

Execution

Content


Mapping To Ideal State

4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12

Planning

Execution

Content

4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12

Planning

Execution

Content

• Model selected:

Content-centric

Current Score

• Planning responsibilities

need to be shifted to Region

• Execution and content

responsibilities already aligned


IBM Case Study

• Performance marketing team

responsible for working with regions

worldwide

• Consistently faced challenges planning

and delivering marketing assets on a

timely basis

• Localization issues affecting

effectiveness and performance of

marketing


IBM Case Study

Remember, scores represent…1 = Central marketing function 2 = Shared between central marketing and geographic regions 3 = Geographic region function

Responsibility

Dimension

Marketing

Planning

Marketing

Execution

Content

Creation

Decision Rights 1.3 2.4 1.3

Process

Ownership1.0 2.4 1.3

Budget 1.3 2.1 2.1

Resources 1.8 2.4 1.8

SCORE: 5.3 9.3 6.4



IBM Case Study

4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12

Planning

Execution

Content



IBM Case Study


2. Map to localization models

Responsibility

Dimension

Marketing

Planning

Marketing

Execution

Content

Creation

Centrally Driven4–6 4–8

Decrease

4–8

Geographically

Driven10–12Increase

8–12 8–12Increase

Program-Centric4–6 4–8

Decrease

10–12Increase

Content-Centric10–12Increase

8–12 4–6Decrease

IBM SCORE: 5.3 9.3 6.4

Increase local control

Decrease local control

In Range


IBM Case Study



3. Determine ideal model

Benefits Challenges Impacts

1. WW has more control over what gets executed

2. IMTs have flexibility to produce content that bestresonates in their market

1. Inconsistentmessaging

2. Limited ability to create local tactics to drive pipeline for sales

3. Limited visibility of locally created content available for repurpose

4. IMTs turn into a content creation vs. an execution unit –execution needs to happen where they have customers

1. Need to define standards for content creation in IMTs to maintain IBM brand/image

2. Increased total expense, limited ability to repurpose content

3. Increased development time due to lack of expertise, skills and SMEs

4. More development work required for English language IMTs

5. IMT needs to create a content production discipline with resources and budget required to support local content creation

6. Risk of duplication

7. Shift resources/budget from marketing execution to content development

Program-Centric Implications


IBM Case Study




4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12

Planning

Execution

Content


IBM Case Study




4. Gain consensus with regions

5. Implement model


AMD Case Study

• 80% of revenue and 65% of

marketing spend outside the US

• “Blank check” regional marketing

planning model

• Business included b-to-b and b-to-c

components


AMD Current State

4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12

Planning

Execution

Content

Operating in a geographically driven model without appropriate processes

resulted in wasted spend, overlapping efforts, and inconsistent marketing


4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12

Planning

Execution

Content

AMD Optimized State

Centrally Driven Corporate

Marketing

4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12

Planning

Execution

Content

To drive consistency, efficiency, and

scale a set of corporate driven

marketing was developed and

delivered in all regions

Content-Centric Regional Marketing

Regions were permitted to created

regionally specific marketing but

within a content centric model that

ensured consistency of message


Questions?

Striking the Balance: Globalization vs Localization

Documents

Transcript of Striking the Balance: Globalization vs Localization