Marks and Sparks on world tour

Marks & Spencer is a British icon: familiar, dependable and woven into the high street. Think of it as a much-loved band setting out on a world tour. A loyal home crowd is a wonderful starting point, but it does not guarantee that the same setlist will work in every arena.

When it came to international expansion, M&S didn’t rely on a single route. Their approach was a bit like a band planning a world tour — adapting the setup based on the market. Exporting St Michael-branded goods offered one route into overseas markets. Like a band sending records to radio stations before performing live, it was a low-risk, hands-off approach designed to test the waters (Root, 1994).

As confidence grew, M&S shifted to franchising, particularly in markets where local knowledge was key or the environment was politically uncertain — places like Israel, Bermuda and the Philippines (CIBER, 2000). This was their version of Elvis Costello letting a local act cover his music: you extend your presence but avoid the full commitment of being on the ground yourself (Anderson & Gatignon, 1986).

In markets with greater complexity or where consumer preferences felt culturally distant, they moved into joint ventures. A key example was their partnership with Spanish retailer Cortefiel. It was like Oasis dropping a collaborative track with a local artist to help them break into that market’s charts — not just musically but socially and culturally relevant (Johanson & Vahlne, 2009).

And then, of course, there were the full solo shows — the wholly owned subsidiaries. In big markets like France and Germany, M&S set up shop completely on their own. This was the retail equivalent of David Bowie producing and staging every element of his global tour himself — full control, high cost, but entirely on-brand (Dunning, 1988).

So why did parts of the world tour disappoint? My reading is that M&S did not always adapt its setlist to the local crowd. UK-tested styles and assumptions could not be counted on to match every market’s expectations (Kotler & Keller, 2016). Reports of inventory and logistics difficulties add another layer: even a strong proposition suffers if the retail stagecraft lets it down (Business Week, 1998). At home and abroad, the competitive environment was changing too, with retailers pursuing different combinations of price, freshness and responsiveness (Mintel, 1999).

Ultimately, M&S had the reputation, the legacy, and the loyal home crowd — but global stardom requires more than playing the same old hits. Success in international markets is like touring foreign arenas: you’ve got to read the room, remix your material, and sometimes let the local talent take the lead. M&S may have been rockstars at home, but abroad, they needed to learn to improvise — or risk getting booed off the stage.