The cross‐cultural appropriateness of survey‐based value(s) research : A review of methodological issues and suggestion of alternative methodology

Purpose – Cross‐cultural research in marketing has been dominated by survey‐based quantitative approaches; however, the assumption of prior validity required for the adoption of the survey approach to values in cross‐cultural research has yet to be established. This paper aims to review the literature and outlines the problems of the survey‐based approach to cross‐cultural values research. These criticisms relate both to the choice of the method and its execution. The paper outlines the multiplicative effects of these problems, that threaten the validity of the survey methodology in this context, and suggests a methodological alternative. Design/methodology/approach – This paper reviews and synthesises the relevant literature on conceptual and methodological issues pertinent to the survey approach to values research in a cross‐cultural context. Findings – A review of the literature suggests numerous methodological problems that threaten the validity and reliability of the survey approach to cross‐cultural values research. This review exposes a methodological gap that can be filled by a qualitative approach to the study of values in cross‐cultural research. In particular, the paper advocates means‐end methodology as offering significant strengths and addressing several of the weaknesses of the survey‐based approach to cross‐cultural values research. Originality/value – The paper synthesises the literature on methodological issues in cross‐cultural values research, bringing together disparate criticisms which reveal the range of unresolved problems with the empirical, survey‐based approach to cross‐cultural values research; the paper also offers a suggestion for an alternative methodological approach. The means‐end approach is increasingly being used in various research areas; this paper highlights its appropriateness in a cross‐cultural context, as an alternative to predefined and culturally determined measures that limit our understanding of cross‐cultural values. Means‐end addresses many of the specific weaknesses of the survey method identified in the literature review. This discussion of methodological issues has implications for the field of cross‐cultural research more generally and suggests a critical re‐assessment of cross‐cultural methods is needed.