Multi-National Web Site Design. Zara

Multi-National Web site design.

Zara in the United States and Germany vs. IKEA in the United States and Germany

What elements are standardized?

Zara, a Brazilian clothing manufacturer, immediately assaults the web surfer with an artistic montage of images. Sultry, beautiful pouting men and women gaze at the viewer after a slew of leaping geometric designs. Zara's website lists the different product lines, but does not have wholly different concepts or sites for different countries, merely different languages and lists of areas where Zara is located across the world, including the United States and Germany. It is a difficult site to navigate, mainly relying upon images to encourage the viewer to shop at its multinational offerings of stores and uses very few words

IKEA in the United States, in contrast, is very wordy, stressing IKEA's commitment to the environment. Its layout for its American and German sites is similar, featuring various images to click to read more about the company as well as shop the online store.

Were the two companies similar with respect to the elements that were standardized?

The image was very similar -- IKEA brands itself as an environmentally friendly, quirky company while Zara brands itself as an elite clothing line that is artistic and sensual. Although both companies have different images, they relied upon virtually the same layout and aesthetic when marketing to both the nations of America and Germany.

Why do you think these elements are standardized? If the companies differ, why do you think they differ?

A brand 'makes' a fashion company, whether it is expensive clothing or inexpensive furniture. To say 'IKEA' immediately conjures up a certain price point and type of furniture, regardless of where one lives, and similarly a ZARA customer is likely to want to project a similar visual image, regardless of where he or she lives.

What differences do you observe between the U.S. sites and those in the other country?

Zara's site was exactly the same for all countries, and merely provided information about where the store was located -- clearly it expects to do most of its retail traffic in brick and mortar establishments, and uses its website to promote rather than sell its product. IKEA's German site was far more humorous and more daring than its United States incarnation -- it featured a sleeping Eskimo on a bed, perhaps indicating the warmth of the bed and its images on its U.S. site focused more on its bright, clean wooden lines of furniture. The German Eskimo image might be considered politically incorrect in the U.S., and it also took some attention away from the various articles included about IKEA's mission philosophy and focus on environmental sustainability, which was more prominent in the slightly tamer layout of the American IKEA site., although apparently still the same in content.

Are the two companies similar with respect to the customization that has been done?

IKEA is far more customized in terms of its design for the company websites, while ZARA has virtually no customization other than store locations and offering the site in different languages.

Why do you think this customization has been done? (Culture, market characteristics, competition, differences in customer Internet access, etc.)

Zara is a smaller and younger brand, and has not had the time to create slightly different approaches for different nations, while IKEA is more established. Also in the case of furniture, furniture must be more 'customized' to individual locations and regional preferences than one or two pieces of clothing. People are more likely to buy a single, daring coat than a sofa.

To what extent do you think these four Web sites are useful for marketing (as distinct from investor relations or other purposes)?

In the case of ZARA, the website and its various lists of locations are useful for conveying an image, which is critical for an expensive clothing line with an eye upon 'high end' customers. Its relative lack of customization as compared with IKA is less troubling, because it is so image-heavy it is possible to understand the website in almost every language. In the case of IKEA, the website contains a tremendous amount of information and humor and conveys additional ethical information about the company not apparent when merely gazing upon the products.