Challenge N Opportunity In Socmar - Powerpoint

Challenges & Opportunities in Social Marketing Walter Wymer University of Lethbridge

Social Marketing Defined • …the systematic application of marketing concepts and techniques to achieve specific behavioural goals relevant to the social good » French & Blair-Stevens 2005

Accountability • Social marketing has experience growth and development. • But, as SM increases in visibility and acceptance, funders and policymakers are increasingly asking for hard evidence of its Gordon, McDermott, & Hastings 2008 effectiveness.

SM Success • SM success is often linked to our ability to change individual behaviour. • Barriers to changing behavior: – Intrinsic motivation – External influences

Successful Campaigns • A 60 year old campaign, still in use, teaches us how to avoid starting forest fires. • In the early campaigns, saturation advertising, followed by school programs reduce forest fires.

Keep America Beautiful Campaign • Saturation advertising, school programs, aimed at reducing littering. • Emotional television commercial featuring a tearful Native American made it seem immoral and unpatriotic to litter.

Why were these two SM campaigns successful? • Used a simple message people could relate to. • Saturation advertising. • Long duration (years) • Able to create a social norm (it’s bad to start forest fires or litter) • Few competing forces working against change.

Montana Meth Project • A successful SM campaign based on Social Entrepreneurship model • Purpose: reduce illegal drug use of methamphetamine in state of Montana. • Social entrepreneur: Thomas Siebel • Link

Thomas Siebel • Former advertising executive • Montana native • Founded software company, which he later sold for $5 billion. • Retired after becoming billionaire, returning to Montana. • Became aware of meth problem.

Thomas Siebel became aware of the problem in Montana • 52% of children in foster care are there due to Meth. Cost to the state: $12 million a year. • 50% of adults in prison are there due to Meth-related crime. Cost to the state: $43 million a year. • 20% of adults in treatment are there for Meth addiction. Cost to the state: $10 million a year.

Montana Meth Project • Montana is a state with a relatively low population, enabling someone with Siebel’s personal resources to reach the target audience made of Montana youth ages 12 -17 with saturation advertising. • Television, radio, and print advertisements were created. • 90% of target audience was exposed to message on average 3X/week

Montana Meth Outcomes …after two years • 93% of teens see great risk in trying Meth • 96% of parents say they have discussed Meth use with their teen in the past year • 87% of teens disapprove of Meth use • 85% of young adults say their friends would give them a hard time for using Meth

Ancillary Outcomes… • 70% decrease in workers testing positive for Meth • 41% decrease in criminals testing positive for Meth • 53% decrease in Meth-related crime from 2005 to 2006

Impact of Success • The Montana Meth Project, because of its success, is now getting federal funding to continue. • Other states are using the ad materials of Montana Meth Project to role out their own SM campaigns.

What made the campaign work? • Focused and committed leadership. No other issues. • Resources: money to reach audience and advertising skills. • Entrepreneurial: Siebel says a nonprofit could not have gotten a consensus to make the hard hitting, edgy ads. It would have been too controversial.

What made the campaign work? • Simple, focused message– not even once • Relatively small population (could afford to buy ads in the media markets) • Defined target audience (12-17 youth) • Edgy, effective ads • Sustained, saturation advertising. • Few competing forces to counter message

Social Entrepreneurship: Research Questions • How to get more entrepreneurs to become personally involved in a cause? • Is the social entrepreneurship model suitable for a nonprofit organization? Govt agency? • What differentiates social entrepreneurship from traditional social marketing?

Forces Working Against Social Marketing Effectiveness… • • • •

Biological – current behaviour is reinforced Social – family, friends, co-workers Cultural – societal norms, current trends Corporate – their marketing efforts oppose SM message

The opposition • People often enjoy their unhealthy lifestyles, finding them pleasurable, as well as socially, culturally, and biologically reinforced. • Television, to attract the right audience, glamorises unhealthy behaviours like promiscuity and violence. • Corporations often encourage unhealthy lifestyles with their advertising aimed at increasing sales.

The Opposition—Safe Sex • Teens who watch a lot of television with sexual content are more likely to initiate intercourse in the following year. • Television in which characters talk about sex affects teens just as much as television that actually shows sexual activity. • Shows that portray the risks of sex can help educate teens.

The Opposition—Drinking • Among the top 20 shows for teenagers, Illicit drugs were used in 3% of all episodes, tobacco in 19%, and alcohol in 71%. • Half of the scenes with alcohol featured it as part of humour.

The Opposition: Healthy Eating

Fast Food Chains • In the U.S. alone, fast • Restaurants offer incentives such as food chains spend playgrounds, contests, more than $3 billion a clubs, games, and free year on advertising, toys and other much of it aimed a merchandise related to children. movies, TV shows and even sports leagues.

New Report Shows Food Industry Advertising Overwhelms Government’s “5 A Day” Campaign to Fight Obesity and Promote Healthy Eating

$11.26 billion By industry. $9.55 million By government

Social Marketing Effectiveness • Food, beverage, candy and restaurant advertising hit $11.26 billion in 2004, compared to a mere $9.55 million to advertise the Five A Day campaign, which promotes eating five or more servings of fruits and vegetables daily.

Future Research • More work on strategy aimed at dealing with competition. • How to deal with massive corporate advertising? • How to deal with unhealthy cultural forces? • How to deal with inertia in policy makers?

SM Effectiveness—Bigger Impact • Treat SM Campaign as a social movement, not aimed changing individual behaviour, but at creating a grass roots movement. • Bring in social movement research and concepts.

Future of SM • Should social marketers become activists? • Should they advocate social reform? • Should they focus more on changing social policy? • Should they focus more on stimulating debate on important issues? (Should corporations be able to advertise fast food during children’s television programming?)

Future of SM • Should social marketers focus on the macro level (societal) or the micro level (individual)? • Which will have the greater impact? • Which will benefit society more?