Context: In our introductory textbook Ch$.1,$ recall that Green and Keegan defined an ethnocentric orientation as $$a person who assumes that his or her home country is superior to the rest of the world$(17).$ In Ch$.4$ on $$Social and Cultural Environments$$ to global marketing, they call for $$open$-$mindedness$(107)$ and $$cultural empathy$(108)$ to overcome ethnocentric prejudices stemming from family, education, tradition, national pride, and religious differences. As the authors include Buddhism, Hinduism, Islam, Judaism, and Christianity as the world$$s major religions $(109$; for context$$these are the $$Axial Period$$ traditions mentioned in the supplementary reading from Jaspers that, for him, also include Confucianism and Taoism$),$ they offer examples of how different faiths react to global marketing activities through a polycentric localized adaptation approach $(18)$ as $$the opposite of ethnocentricism....$[$since$]$ products must be adapted in response to different market conditions$(18).$ For example, in this chapter on culture, they endorse polycentric localized adaptation approaches through the successes of McDonald$$s offering non$-$beef items in Hindu countries like India and KFC advertising to Muslim consumers in Indonesia to dine at the end of daily fasts during Ramadan $(109).$

Question: Assuming that the authors are correct in claiming that $$One reason cultural factors challenge global marketers is that many of these factors are hidden from view$(108),$ later in the chapter, they propose James Lee$$s four$-$step method for the systematic reduction of perceptual blockage $(121-122).$ According to the portrayal of Lee$$s four$-$step framework in their section $$The Self$-$Reference Criterion and Perception,$$ explain the role of the self$-$reference criterion $($SRC$)$ with one or more clarifying example$($s$).$ Be sure to explain why Lee recommends in Step $3$ to isolate the SRC and then in Step $4$ recommends reducing ethnocentric $$cultural myopia$(121)$ by redefining the global marketing strategy from the perspective of stripping away home$-$country prejudices when adapting to the new host country. In comparison, Saeed, Ahmed, and Muktar argue that the U$.$S$.($and $$Western$)$ assumption of the $$principle of profit maximization$(129)$ is an ethnocentric imposition of American cultural values onto Islamic international marketing practices that, in stark contrast, place a much higher priority on value$-$maximization based on equity, justice, and the wider welfare of society. Explain with one or more clarifying example$($s$)$ how they propose that one can adopt an Islamic framework for realizing equity $($literally the absence of bias$)$ while nonetheless drawing upon $$innate universal moral values in every human being irrespective of their culture, creed, or religion$(129$ bottom right column$).$ As a last civilizational approach for eliminating ethnocentric bias, in the short supplementary reading on the $$Axial Age thesis$$ from Karl Jaspers, he defines the Axial Period as $$a common frame of historical self$-$comprehension for all peoples$$for the West, for Asia, and for all men on earth, without regard to particular articles of faith$(1).$ Explain with one or more example$($s$)$ how Jaspers viewed the Axial Age thesis as having successfully $$disregarded the pre$-$eminence which Europeans are accustomed to abrogate to themselves$(67$; $69).$ In your own view, which of the three proposals seems the most convincing as a strategy for eliminating ethnocentric bias from global marketing practices? Explain why. Lastly, in your view, which of the three proposals seems the least convincing as a strategy for eliminating ethnocentric bias from global marketing practices? Explain why.