For years, global brands have been balancing the need for international consistency with the desire to create local presence – striving to keep their brands authentic yet relevant within different countries, cultures and languages. Leading brands like Coca-Cola, Disney, Nike and Starbucks have significantly tailored their brands to be relevant to the widest number of consumers. Although these brands maintain their Western roots and leverage American caché to support their image and price-points, they have aggressively developed localized campaigns, translated copy and customized logos to make them more accessible. All while maintaining strong brand control and trademark protection. But how do brands manage this balancing act as the world becomes smaller? Localization is taking on a new dimension that could either create stronger connections – or just add consumer confusion and brand dilution.

Understanding cultural sensitivities is key to defining the right localization strategy for a brand. That’s why when a business is creating a new brand for international markets they carefully evaluate the issues they may face. No one launches a brand in Korea with the letter “Z” because it doesn’t exist in their alphabet and is consequently un-pronounceable. Brands have avoided specific colors and imagery that have negative connotations in certain markets – white can symbolize death in China while an “ok” hand symbol is an obscene gesture in Brazil. Avoiding pitfalls with a new brand is easy, but what do you do with an established brand that is expanding into new markets?

McDonald’s has been experimenting for a number of years with radically different designs, menus and stores. In India, the Maharaja Mac is made with lamb or chicken to align with the dietary guidelines of the Hindu consumer, while fish-loving customers in Norway enjoy salmon McLaks. Despite localized ingredients that reflect cross-continental customs and preferences, McDonald’s has managed to retain an overall sense of consistency through familiar packaging and delivery. One unifying factor is their tagline, but even there some flexibility is allowed. Markets can opt to keep the English tagline “I’m lovin’ it,” translate it exactly, or adapt it to work for their local culture. This strategy mitigates the possibility of negative connotations experienced by translations like “Come Alive: You’re in the Pepsi Generation,” which, in Chinese, alluded to bringing ancestors back from the dead.

Going beyond translation, Pepsi is now going as far as changing the spelling of their brand name for Hispanic markets – calling themselves Pecsi in Argentina or Pesi in Spain, where these variations are more easily pronounced and better received. With only a small percentage of the local populations currently pronouncing the brand “Pepsi,” perhaps the goal of the localized variations is broader: bring Pepsi’s modern, hip, flexible, and open attributes onto a global platform, further differentiating itself from the traditional, classic, All-American competitor.

Worldwide customers, your voices have been heard…literally. But where will the translation stop? Perhaps Pepsi sees the value for a large market like Spain, but would it do the same for Norway or Israel? These initial decisions create a slippery slope because with even the most minor brand variations come a mountain of trademark concerns. Are brands finally becoming frustrated with legal constrictions and prioritizing consumer need over compliance? Surely corporate counsel has weighed in, but did they actually win the battle?

The web is beginning to change the definition of global branding. The suffix of a URL may denote the country of origin, but the experience is no longer geographically limited. As technology and global commerce continue to advance, the world will continue to shrink. Brands will continue to face the challenge of balancing consistency with consumer preference, finding clever ways to integrate local nuances into a global platform. So will we soon see more brands respond to their global customers? Might eBay become ez-Bay or Xerox actually become pronounceable – Zerox? Of course, they’d need to be tweaked for Korea.