The patterns of the past and future agenda in international branding: a literature review

International branding is a subfield of international marketing concerned with the challenges companies face when their brands cross national borders. These challenges relate to the essence of the brand in terms of brand name, brand visual (e.g. logo, colors) and aural (e.g. jingles, music) elements and brand personality Whitelock and Fastoso (2007).

Whitelock and Fastoso’s (2007) literature review finds only 40 articles on international branding throughout 31 years across 20 journals. Thus, although studies of international branding research can be traced back to the 1970s, international branding still needs a much broader exploration. After this work, several other literature reviews emerged that investigated various aspects of international branding. Chabowski et al. (2013) identified key components of global branding, emphasizing the importance of international strategy and brand positioning. Trim and Lee (2008) highlighted the role of strategic marketing intelligence, while Polonsky and Jevons (2009) explored the complexities of integrating corporate social responsibility (CSR) into branding. Other studies, such as Steenkamp et al. (2003), brought forth the cultural nuances and the role of international advertising in global brand perceptions. However, it is possible to observe that while international branding has been discussed across multiple facets, there is still room for exploration. The dynamics of globalization, cultural shifts, technological advances and evolving consumer preferences have made international branding a continually evolving field. Moreover, as businesses expand their businesses, understanding the differences of branding in diverse cultural, economic and social contexts is important. For example, the rise of social media, sustainability concerns and calls for inclusivity and diversity emphasize the need for brands to be agile and culturally adjusted.

International branding strategy is an essential component of a marketing strategy designed to achieve brand performance in the international business (IB) environment through an attractive and efficient marketplace. Effective international branding generally aligns with the culture and customer preferences in the markets in which companies operate (Foltean, 2019). Although international branding studies have explored various brand approaches across borders, many gaps in the literature remain. A significant portion of work in the area explores how a brand is global, foreign or local nature influences consumer behavior (Halkias et al., 2017).

This article presents the results of a semisystematic literature review on international branding. This literature review addresses three main research questions:

The purpose of this research is to, first, analyze the past years of research on international branding, as a continuation of Whitelock and Fastoso (2007) and, second, analyze the patterns of the field and suggest future research, building on this analysis. It contributes to the literature in two significant ways. First, this article structures and identifies key institutions, articles, regions and authors in the field. Second, it provides an overview of the past years of research in the area and suggests research gaps that need further investigation.

Since knowledge creation in the field of IB research is always expanding, the literature review method is relevant, since traditional literature evaluations are generally insufficiently detailed and rigorous, and they are undertaken randomly rather than according to a set of guidelines (Snyder, 2019). The same can be argued in the international marketing field. Despite the rising importance of international branding in the global arena, the existing literature has yet to provide a holistic scholarly review of the domain. To address this gap, a semisystematic literature review was chosen to provide an understanding of the research on international branding (Snyder, 2019), following similar studies in the international branding and IB fields (Üner et al., 2022; Whitelock and Fastoso, 2007). This method is used to explore how a selected field has progressed over time and developed across research traditions (Snyder, 2019). Specifically, the semisystematic approach was applied by defining clear inclusion and exclusion criteria, conducting a comprehensive search in relevant databases and synthesizing the findings. Following Paul et al. (2017) the paper focuses on the theory, context and methods (TCM) framework to analyze the field of studies and the findings through the lenses of a framework-based review (Paul and Criado, 2020). TCM framework is relevant for structuring the semisystematic review, as it allowed for a comprehensive analysis of the diverse aspects of international branding studies.

This article analyzes the past years of international branding research and its patterns based on Whitelock and Fastoso (2007) research. The study by Whitelock and Fastoso (2007) was chosen to be the basis of this article, as it is considered a starting point of the field, since it provides a definition for international branding based on these previous studies on the topic. Whitelock and Fastoso (2007) propose the following definition of international branding: “international branding is a field within international marketing concerned with the challenges that companies face when their brands cross national borders.” This analysis, as Whitelock and Fastoso (2007) focuses on journals, articles, authors, institutions and countries.

To cover a diverse range of publications, the search included published journal articles on international branding found in two databases, Web of Science (WoS) and Scopus, chosen for their comprehensiveness, in line with the standards of most European Universities (Vieira and Gomes, 2009). The search encompassed titles, abstracts and keywords, using search terms such as “international branding” and “global branding” (for the list of articles, see  Appendix 1). Although the decision was made not to include synonyms for “international branding,” it was essential to include “international brands” and “global brands” to ensure comprehensive coverage of studies related to international brands. The aim was to review the literature specifically focused on international branding or articles and papers that used these precise terms. While the author acknowledges a difference between “international branding” and “global branding,” for the purposes of this literature review, the decision was made to encompass both (Chabowski et al., 2013).

As a continuation of Whitelock and Fastoso (2007), the research included only articles from 2007 to 2023 published in journals chosen by their quality and impact in the ABS Journal Guide (2021). The Guide includes journals that rely on peer review, editorial and expert judgments that follow the evaluation of many hundreds of papers and are informed by statistical information relating to the citation.

The data set comprises journals that are ranked three and four in the ABS guide. There were 19 marketing journals, nine IB journals and five additional journals previously used in the research conducted by Whitelock and Fastoso (see Table 1). These journals are considered core IB and marketing journals. The database search was conducted in October 2023 and, therefore, includes all articles that the databases accumulated at that point in time.

During the literature search, the WoS database initially returned 515 papers. Upon applying the first criterion of including only articles, this number was reduced to 374. Further refinement was conducted to include only the articles from journals recognized in the ABS guide (three and four ranking), which resulted in a shortlist of 104 papers. Simultaneously, a search on the Scopus database provided a more extensive list of 1,774 papers. Restricting the search to only articles brought this number down to 1,222. Another layer of selection was then applied to include only articles written in English, leaving 1,178 papers. Finally, narrowing down the selection to only include articles from journals listed in the ABS guide, 193 papers from the Scopus database were retained for the study.

Detailed inclusion and exclusion criteria ensured the relevancy of all the articles. First, studies that did not include an international perspective were excluded, because international branding deals with all the aspects and challenges of a brand (name, visual and sound elements and personality) at an international level (Whitelock and Fastoso, 2007). In this case, “international perspective” means investigating the challenges of brand strategies across national borders. Studies that analyze brands in a single country context were also excluded in this step.

The second step was to exclude the articles that did not focus on products or services. Finally, four studies that focus on the country-of-origin effect and country of production were eliminated, in line with Whitelock and Fastoso (2007), who removed these phenomena to mitigate bias in the literature and one article was also excluded because of incomplete data available. These eliminations resulted in a final data set of 81 articles, from the 297 articles. These articles have 187 authors in total from 25 countries in various study areas, highlighting the interdisciplinary nature of the field (Figure 1).

The 81 articles left in the analysis represent the past years of research in international branding (2007–2023), with an average of 4,7 articles published per year. The year 2019 had the most publications about international branding with 13, followed by 2017 and 2020 with seven (9%) and nine (11%) publications, respectively. Compared with Whitelock and Fastoso’s (2007) data set of 40 articles over a 31-year period, the increase in the production of international branding articles is readily evident. Moreover, the substantial increase in 2019 publications shows that this topic is of current and increasing interest.

With regard to the distribution of articles in the journals, more than half the publications (70%) in the Journal of International Marketing, International Marketing Review and Journal of Business Research are about international branding (Table 2). Moreover, the Journal of International Marketing is the most productive journal, with 25 articles (31%). Whitelock and Fastoso’s (2007) findings show that the journals with more publications in the area were the Journal of International Marketing, International Marketing Review and Harvard Business Review, indicating that, in general, the same journals have continued to focus on international branding during the past years of research. Moreover, Table 2 shows that the number of international branding publications per year has remained stable over the past years, with a further increase in articles in the area in 2019 (16%). This demonstrates both the stability of the topic and the ongoing global interest in the field. Finally, the Journal of Marketing Research and Journal of Retailing entered the international branding publication scene later (2020–2023). This might indicate newer platforms recognizing the importance of the topic.

In the articles analyzed, the following patterns could be identified. In contrast with Whitelock and Fastoso’s (2007) findings, the publications are not predominantly from institutions in North America, but rather from institutions in the European region (35%), with emphasis on the UK, Spain and Austria (14% and 11%). The articles also come from new institutions from Asia (China and Pakistan) and Europe (Turkey, Serbia and Portugal), countries not listed in Whitelock and Fastoso’s (2007) results.

Furthermore, the new data set includes no publications from institutions in Latin American countries, such as Mexico or from regions like Africa, except for one publication from Brazil. This absence of international branding analysis from institutions in these regions mirrors the patterns observed in Whitelock and Fastoso (2007).

The authors with more publications in the field of international branding are A. Diamantopoulos, V. Davvetas and Y. Strizhakova, with five publications each. It is also possible to analyze the ties among authors, institutions and countries within the field. Table 3 shows that Europe is the region with the most notable results. In addition, the data show that authors from new regions, such as Oceania, have emerged in the past years. No other institution from Africa was identified using the same methods as Whitelock and Fastoso (2007).

Table 4 shows the countries of the institutions of the published author teams. Of the 187 authors and 81 articles studied, 54% of the articles had authors from multiple countries, higher than Whitelock and Fastoso’s (2007) 23%, demonstrating greater use of synergies and complementarities among authors from different institutions. In terms of the role of ties within coauthorship in this study, the most substantial ties between authors from different countries are between the UK and Austria and Australia with the USA. Several collaborations between coauthors from these two countries highlight a robust academic partnership and perhaps a shared research interest.

Table 5 shows the countries that were the focus of the articles studied. From the 81 articles analyzed, 12 were conceptual, so they did not have country analysis and 18 did not have an identifiable study country because they used databases and only mentioned multiple countries. While in 2007 the focus of the articles was on European countries, such as France, Germany, Italy, The Netherlands, Belgium and the UK; the USA; China; and South Korea, more recent attention has turned to emerging economies such as Mexico, Brazil and South Africa. However, most of the studies (33%) take place in Europe, the same result from 2007 (Whitelock and Fastoso, 2007).

Asia was another region of significant interest, making up 34% of the studies. Within Asia, China remained the focus of 12% of articles. The attention toward Japan, which was previously neglected, emerged with three publications accounting for 5%. Other Asian nations like South Korea, India, Russia, Hong Kong and Turkey also had representations in the analyzed articles. It is important to note that though new countries have been the focus of studies (South Africa, Russia, Hong Kong), the authors are not from institutions in these regions. Moreover, although there is a representation of African and Latin American countries in the current study, the overall focus on these regions remains relatively low, with only two publications in the past years.

Of the 81 included articles, 69 were empirical (see Table 6 for the distribution of research methods). Most of the studies (73%) are cross-sectional, which corroborates findings in marketing research at large: marketing academics and practitioners frequently use cross-sectional studies (Rindfleisch et al., 2008).

The 2007–2023 data set shows a difference in methodologies. In addition to the categories Whitelock and Fastoso (2007) find, subcategories were added in secondary data such as crossing information from existing databases, and companies’ content on social media was used in different studies.

In terms of data-gathering methods, surveys are the dominant method, with in-person surveys used in 25% of the articles. Online surveys were slightly less prevalent, being used in 19% of the articles. A smaller portion, 6% incorporated both online and in-person survey methods. Table 6 shows the increase in qualitative research since 2007. This information indicates the increase in cross-cultural marketing research, as qualitative studies are crucial in this area (Malhotra et al., 1996).

Of the 69 empirical articles, 25 had settings based on a multi industry context, which indicates the growth of more elaborate, comparative studies. The remaining studies are divided into ten industries and investigate carefully chosen brands well-positioned in the international market. These categories may be chosen due to the state of the economy from the countries the studies were made, changes in consumer spending patterns or industries growth. Importantly, only five studies were conducted with companies in the business-to-business (B2B) context. However, these were not exclusive to B2B; they also encompassed the business-to-consumer (B2C) context (Table 7).

Table 8 shows that the main keywords (all the keywords can be seen in  Appendix 2) covered are perceived brand globalness (PBG) and perceived brand localness (PBL). The most discussed subtopic is standardization/adaptation. This suggests a significant interest in how brands are perceived in terms of their global or local identity. For example, Wahid et al. (2023) on global smartphone brands using TikTok in Indonesia demonstrates how global brands adapt content characteristics and language to engage with local consumer behavior effectively, reflecting the standardization and adaptation. Whitelock and Fastoso (2007) define “standardization/adaptation” in the context of international marketing as the ability of a company or business to effectively apply a consistent marketing strategy across different countries and cultural contexts. Thus, the discussions are similar, with a focus on the challenges of the brands across countries. In this sense, the main discussion topics have not changed since Whitelock and Fastoso (2007).

Keywords like “Standardization/adaptation,” “Global brands,” “Local brands” and “Glocal Brands” indicate an ongoing debate or exploration of how brands navigate global and local market dynamics. For example, Baršytė et al. (2023) suggest that global food brands’ positioning affects consumer perceptions of freshness, showcasing how global brands must adapt to local consumer perceptions and behaviors. Table 8 also shows that there is a significant focus on “Consumer behavior,” which indicates that the field attention is on how consumers perceive them and how their purchasing habits evolve across different cultural contexts. For example, Ng et al. (2021), which explores how consumers’ global or local identities influence their brand preferences in different states of certainty and uncertainty.

It is interesting to highlight the focus on “social responsibility” and “corporate social responsibility” in the field, which highlights the emergent emphasis on ethical considerations in branding.

Analyzing the selected papers, topics and the timeline of the studies, it is possible to observe a progression in the field of international branding. This progression has been shaped by different factors, such as globalization, digital innovation and shifts in consumer values. Initial studies focused on the effects of global consumer culture (GCC) on brand strategies and consumer perceptions (Özsomer and Altaras, 2008). In the following years research began to focus into other aspects of international branding, such as the role of CSR in brand equity (Torres et al., 2012) and the complexities of brand extension strategies (Martinez et al., 2008). Strizhakova et al. (2012) explored consumer preferences for global versus local brands based on their belief in global citizenship. More recent research has focused on the interaction between global and local brand perceptions and the intricacies of digital globalization (Steenkamp, 2014; Steenkamp, 2020). Recent studies also indicate a shift toward understanding the impact of cultural identity, authenticity and technology on brand perception (He and Ge, 2023; Papadopoulou et al., 2023).

To answer the second research question of the paper, this article analyzes the international branding research and the patterns of the field, as a continuation of Whitelock and Fastoso’s (2007) literature review. The data show that the maturity of international branding mentioned by these authors remains the same: the more recent data indicate little change in specific patterns in the past years of research.

That said, the observed patterns are similar to other areas of international marketing, for example, the lack of publications from institutions outside the USA and Europe (Chabowski et al., 2013; Ford et al., 2011). Moreover, the focus of studies continues to be on Europe and the USA (Kolbl et al., 2019; Lehmann et al., 2008; Sichtmann et al., 2019). Although some authors suggest that studies from highly industrialized countries such as the USA are likely to be more exact than those from developing countries (Malhotra et al., 1996), studies from different regions are essential to understand behaviors in different markets.

It is also evident that no studies explore institutions from regions such as Central America and the countries of Africa. Moreover, although no Russian or Chinese institutions are publishing in the area, studies do focus on these countries. Latin American countries continue to have little investigation.

The country focus of the studies also shows a lack of representation of specific regions. Although North America, Europe and Asia collectively account for 93% of the focus of publications, Latin American countries, as well as regions such as Central America and most of Africa, remain little researched. Surprisingly, while significant emphasis is on countries like the USA, China and the UK, Russia and emerging economies in South America and Africa are still awaiting comprehensive exploration.

Journals such as the Journal of International Marketing and International Marketing Review continue to lead the field, with 31% and 26% of the publications, respectively. These results are consistent with Whitelock and Fastoso’s (2007) findings, which identified them as leaders in the international branding field. Interestingly, the Journal of Business Research experienced an increase in publications on the topic after 2018.

One point observed in this analysis is the considerable increase in publications by author teams from different countries, with 54% of articles written by author teams from multiple countries. This indicates the global nature of the topic and the need for varied perspectives. However, only 10% of the articles were written by single authors, suggesting a potential inclination toward collaborative research in this field. Nonetheless, the data shows a low production output per author in the field, with an average of 1.21 articles per author.

Until 2007, few studies investigated international branding, and those that did are concentrated in institutions from the USA and Europe and in journals from the same regions. By contrast, this area has gained interest, mainly since 2019, though publications are concentrated from the same institutions, focusing on the same countries and published in the same journals.

Moreover, few authors have taken up Whitelock and Fastoso’s (2007) future research suggestions. For example, they note that the area of international branding would benefit significantly from a change in focus away from consumer goods and toward industrial/B2B products and services, but the 2007–2023 analysis shows only five studies analyzing the B2B context. However, although these studies approach the B2B domain, their focus is not exclusive, containing both B2B and B2C context.

Finally, considering that PBG/PBL is the most covered topic, it is safe to conclude that the main discussion topics have not changed in the past years when compared with Whitelock and Fastoso (2007). Other theories are also widely approached by the papers, such as resource-based view; resource-based theory; consumer-based brand equity and brand orientation. The literature on international branding has moved from examining the broad effects of globalization toward a more detailed exploration of the interplay between local and global dynamics, digital influences and the psychological aspects of consumer-brand relationships. Moreover, it is possible to observe that they focus on different aspects of consumer and brand relationships and the improvement and management of international brands. Important to highlight is the lack of studies that use institutional theory or legitimation of these brands internationally. These are valuable theories that can provide effective frameworks for better understanding the dynamics of international branding (Pandya and Dholakia, 1992). The following subsections discuss other observations that reflect the international branding area today.

As Table 8 shows, one of the most covered international branding topics during the past years is PBG/PBL. Although Whitelock and Fastoso (2007) also highlight this theme as the third most researched topic in their data set (with 15%), the further growth of interest in the topic is evident. As PBG/PBL is considered a dominant paradigm in international branding (Davvetas and Halkias, 2019), many authors have tried to understand why consumers prefer global brands to local brands. These perceptions may serve as signals to communicate high-quality and prestige brand positions (Özsomer, 2012).

Studies define PBG as the extent to which a brand is perceived as available and in demand worldwide, and it refers to companies’ marketing strategies in different markets (Mandler et al., 2020; Sichtmann et al., 2019). Perceived globalness may indicate a high worldwide demand for superior quality and/or the added expertise that comes with producing larger quantities for many markets (Özsomer, 2012). It also refers to consumers’ beliefs that a “brand is marketed in multiple countries and is generally recognized as global in these countries” (Steenkamp et al., 2003, p. 54). By contrast, PBL refers to consumers’ perceptions that “a brand symbolizes the values, needs and aspirations of the members of the local country” (Özsomer, 2012, p. 73). In this respect, PBG and PBL are two strategic alternatives that contribute to a clear differentiation of a brand in customers’ minds and to the brand’s sustainability in international markets (Foltean, 2019).

In the past years of studies, the articles in the 2007–2023 data set were cited 9,247 times. An analysis of the most cited articles in the area shows that conceptual articles stand out: of the most cited articles, two are conceptual articles and three are empirical papers. Eisingerich and Rubera (2010), Cayla and Arnould (2008) and Özsomer (2012) highlight the importance of cultural and contextual factors in defining international branding strategies. Eisingerich and Rubera (2010) specifically focus on cultural dimensions such as individualism and collectivism, suggesting that brand strategies need to be tailored according to the cultural characteristics of target markets. This echoes with Cayla and Arnould’s (2008) affirmation that international branding should be contextually and historically grounded. Özsomer’s (2012) findings reinforce the significance of local context by underscoring the different reactions to PBG in emerging and advanced markets.

The most cited papers indicate a notable convergence on the importance of brand credibility and responsibility. Specifically, the research of Torres et al. (2012) aligns with the findings of Özsomer and Altaras (2008), both of which highlight the role of these factors in successful global branding. Their research not only emphasizes the essential nature of brand credibility and responsibility in brand management but also repeats an academic agreement on their integral role. Moreover, these key studies aim to support previous theories about the interplay between global and local branding strategies. For example, Halkias et al. (2017) provide insights on how global branding elements like PBG and PBL can exist within the same brand architecture, discussing the potential synergies and tensions that global brands may manage.

As Whitelock and Fastoso (2007) note, to increase relevance in the international branding field, scholars need to get involved in the real world of practitioners, which is a precondition to engaging in dialogue and collaborating with these valuable sources in the research process (Foltean, 2019). Global marketing research in general has witnessed a surge of academic inquiry into B2B branding over the past two decades (Seyedghorban et al., 2016), finding that B2B brands play a pivotal role in the current global market (Guo et al., 2018) and that B2B branding can enhance an organization’s competitive advantage and financial performance (Ohnemus, 2009). However, in the past years, only five empirical works in the international branding area have studied the B2B context, and most of the studies focus on both B2B and B2C sectors:

Matanda and Ewing (2012) find that balancing standardization and global best practices with regional empowerment and capacity building is paramount to the global brand management strategy in the context of a new global brand management strategy for Kimberly–Clark, a leading manufacturer of health and hygiene products.

Mandler et al. (2020) investigated the implications of market globalization on consumer preferences. They analyzed the importance of PBG and PBL as signals of brand credibility across different globalization levels. In globalized markets, PBG is seen as a weaker brand credibility indicator compared to PBL. For B2B firms, understanding this dynamic is crucial, especially when considering global brand positioning in different markets.

Talay et al. (2015) focus on the market-based performance implications of global brand architecture positions. The authors designed a conceptual framework to understand global brand management. Their findings indicate that globally recognized brands outperform nonglobal ones. The influence of cultural values on this relationship was also underscored. This insight can be vital for B2B businesses, particularly those looking to establish or optimize their global brand strategies.

Akaka and Alden (2010) investigate GCC, with a particular emphasis on the significant role played by international advertising. The authors reviewed global consumer culture positioning (GCCP) and perceived brand globalness (PBG)’s historical significance, pointing to their importance in progressing international advertising theory, research and practice. While primarily consumer-focused, B2B firms can benefit from understanding these constructs when positioning themselves in a global market.

Eren Erdoğmuş et al. (2010) explored the factors affecting brand management standardization decisions for emerging market firms. They suggested a theoretical model considering target market characteristics, firm attributes, strategic resources and product features. Their empirical data indicated that firm characteristics and strategic resources are primary brand performance drivers. Interestingly, choosing between standardization and adaptation did not significantly impact brand performance. These findings can provide B2B businesses insights into optimizing their branding strategies in emerging markets.

Finally, Murphy and Scharl’s (2007) research focused on global vs local online branding strategies. The authors analyzed the relationship between search engine popularity and branding choices. They found that larger organizations and certain firms (B2B, for example), and cultural values like individualism and masculinity, substantially influenced online branding decisions. These studies shed light on the lack of research in the B2B context.

A common growth strategy for B2B firms are international acquisitions (Casillas et al., 2015). Through acquisitions, firms can “buy” markets and knowledge. However, acquisitions can lead to challenges in how to deal with different brands. Should they keep the different brands or merge them to a few or one single brand? Firms acquiring other foreign firms must deal with the liability of foreignness (Zaheer, 1995) that entering a different institutional context entails, and they must build and preserve legitimacy as the brand changes (Kostova and Zaheer, 1999). However, the B2B branding studies have largely ignored implementing a rebranding strategy after international acquisition (Fram and McCarthy, 2004; Gotsi et al., 2008).

This is a significant gap in the literature (Notteboom et al., 2020). Considering that B2B markets are increasingly implementing strategies and policies to build and sustain strong brands, future research should focus on the topic. Earlier research is inconclusive about the importance of institutional differences when dealing with firm integration and branding strategies after international acquisitions (Dikova and Sahib, 2013). Some researchers claim that institutional differences lead to increased hindrances and costs of brand integration (Stahl and Voight, 2004); others show that institutional differences are positive and bring new resources to the acquiring firm (Chakrabarti et al., 2009). As the literature review shows there still is a lack of studies dealing with branding literature in emerging markets, more research dealing with how differences in international institutions are influencing the brandings strategies of firms, for example, between emerging and developed markets influence firms branding strategies is recommended.

To answer the third research question of the paper, this analysis brings to light some gaps in extant research that could be fruitful for future research. First, one major gap in the international branding field is the lack of studies on emerging markets. Future researchers have the challenge and opportunity to work with emerging markets and to question assumptions and frameworks stemming solely from the experience of Western contexts. In addition, further research in emerging markets may need to be receptive to the use of recognized measures and the possible need to adapt Western-based measures (Strizhakova et al., 2008). Emerging markets address unique challenges and opportunities of international branding.

Second, future research should focus on longitudinal studies with a more significant number of samples, as noted by Small and Melewar (2007) and use a more diversified population (Torelli et al., 2012). This shortcoming is a common gap in international marketing studies. Third, the articles analyzed show a lack of research designed for international marketing practice. As Foltean (2019) affirms, scholars need to participate in the real world of practitioners, plan their studies according to the needs of various practitioner groups, engage in conversation and cooperate with them in the study process.

Fourth, researchers must go beyond the B2C area of study, as few international branding studies have been conducted in the B2B context (Roper and Davies, 2010). Researchers have identified several intangible benefits to investing in branding in a B2B context: it can increase the confidence of buyers in their choice, increase the level of satisfaction buyers feel about the purchase, and provide a “feel good” factor (Leek and Christodoulides, 2011). Scholars have also identified several reasons for the paucity of branding among B2B companies: the lack of academic research in B2B branding, the perception that B2B branding is gimmicky, impracticality due to the large number of products in the companies, the lack of studies regarding rebranding strategies and lack of clarity about whether B2B branding will increase the financial reward (Leek and Christodoulides, 2011).

The literature review shows that the field of international branding still attracts a great deal of interest from international marketing scholars. Indeed, in this study, the stability of publications in the area and the field’s continued interest in the subject over the past years are evident (Table 2). On the one hand, the field of international branding studies does not seem to be evolving according to Whitelock and Fastoso’s (2007) recommendations; instead, it has developed in several different directions, focusing on consumer-based brand equity and GCC, among other factors. On the other hand, patterns emerged in international branding research. In 2007, the focus was on European countries such as France, Germany, Italy, The Netherlands, Belgium and the UK; the USA; China; and South Korea. Now, attention is also on emerging economies such as Mexico and Brazil. That said, most of the studies (33%) in the more recent data set are located in Europe, similar to the 2007 data set.

The area shows increasingly diversified authors from other regions, such as Oceania and Pakistan (Table 3), though no authors from the African region. Another point is the significant increase in jointly authored studies (Table 4) with authors from different countries, a necessity for increasing knowledge and shared experiences in the area considering that the distance is not as much of a barrier than it was in the past (Frenken et al., 2009).

Another aspect that emerged is the increased use of secondary data to shed more light on the phenomenon studied (pieces of information provided by, e.g. company websites, databases and other secondary data). In summary, it was possible to note that though the pattern of studies in developing countries is similar to what Whitelock and Fastoso (2007) observed, this research area is gaining visibility (Table 2). Findings from the 2007–2023 data, such as the increase in qualitative studies and studies with multiple industries, indicate an exciting future for international branding.

The topics covered in the area have not changed: although Whitelock and Fastoso (2007, p. 266) indicate that standardization/adaptation has been “quite substantially researched” today, PBG/PBL is still a hot topic; indeed, the concentration of publications in the past years is in 2019, a year with more publications about the theme. Future studies should focus on the B2B area and on developing countries, areas that have not been widely explored in the past years, considering the lack of multiindustry and multimethods research in the B2B contexts. In addition, B2B markets are increasingly implementing strategies and policies to build and sustain strong brands, so future research should focus on the topic.

This article supports academics interested in international branding because it structures and identifies key institutions, articles, regions, authors, methodologies and topics in the field. First, it provides an overview of the past years of research in the area and suggests research gaps that need further investigation. Second, this research provides a quick reference for scholars and managers who want to become familiar with current international branding literature. Third, this research shows that the international branding area, though growing, still needs to become more pertinent to practitioners in the area. For managers and practitioners, knowing the relevant topics in international branding can help them better understand the growth in the area and its main focuses and insights. Thus, executives should pay close attention to standardization, adaptation and digitalization.

This article not only contributes to the academic understanding of international branding but also offers valuable insights for practitioners. The theoretical implications of this paper highlight the need for a broader research focus beyond Western contexts, encouraging scholars to explore branding dynamics in emerging markets and explore B2B branding, while also encouraging the exploration of new theoretical paradigms. On the managerial contributions, the paper emphasizes the importance of tailoring branding strategies to fit local contexts, conducting custom research for B2B branding in international acquisitions and developing collaboration between academia and industry to align research with real-world challenges. These theoretical and managerial implications collectively serve as a roadmap for advancing international branding research and practice.

A literature review educates and encourages new academic community study and helps generate ideas for new research areas (Kraus et al., 2022). This study synthesizes a significant number of international branding studies for both academics and managers interested in the area, but the information provided is meant to be complementary with an informative nature. The study has five limitations. First, this research was conducted only using two databases, building on Whitelock and Fastoso’s (2007) study. Researching more databases and journals would provide more thorough insights into international branding. This literature review might have overlooked seminal works or articles not indexed in the two databases selected, leading to potential gaps in the analysis. Second, due to the broad nature of “international branding,” certain niche areas or subtopics within this domain might not have received detailed attention. This could result in a generalized view rather than an in-depth understanding of the field. Third, the review does not consider the chronological development of theories and ideas in international branding. A time-based progression could offer insights into how concepts and strategies have evolved over the years. Fourth, while the objective is to provide a holistic overview of the international branding field, this study does not explore specific aspects like exclusively B2B or B2C branding literature. Future studies could focus on these areas to provide a more targeted analysis. Finally, this paper uses a semisystematic literature review method. Although this method efficiently synthesizes extensive literature, it might not offer the critical analysis typically associated with systematic literature reviews. Future papers could use other methodologies to analyze the literature critically.

This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020 research and innovation program under the Marie Skłodowska-Curie grant agreement No. 860364. This communication reflects only the author’s view and that the agency is not responsible for any use that may be made of the information it contains.

Disclosure statement: The author reports there are no competing interests to declare.

Table A1 

Table A2