Social marketing and social influences: Using social ecology as a theoretical framework

Katie Collins,Alan Tapp,Ashley Pressley

doi:10.1080/0267257x.2010.522529

Abstract

Social marketing has traditionally been dominated by an individualistic model of design. In this work, the authors apply a social ecology model to the theory and practice of social marketing, demonstrating that a multilevel framework is required to fully expose and account for the complexity of sociocultural and environmental effects. The authors have generated a diagnostic tool for this use. The paper then provides a detailed demonstration of the potential power of the tool by applying it to three illustrative case studies: one on encouraging safer driving, the second promoting sustainable travel, and the third increasing early detection of lung cancer.

Highlights

Introduction ‘No man is an Island, entire of itself; every man is a piece of the Continent, a part of the main’ John Donne
The authors contend that the Social Ecology Framework contributes to the development of social marketing strategic planning
The diagnostic tool identifies the need to address barriers and triggers at four distinct levels of effect. The value of this lies in the clarity with which the complexity of social and cultural influences can be classified into a structure, and possible solutions pre-defined into a strategic model

Summary

Introduction

Introduction ‘No man is an Island, entire of itself; every man is a piece of the Continent, a part of the main’ John Donne. Valuable contributions have been made to this way of thinking, such as McKenzie-Mohr and Smith‟s (1999) work on community-based interventions, which addresses social norms and social influences Their emphasis on community implies a tendency to group-level solutions, but the approach remains subordinate to the mainstream model (Lefebvre 2000): there seems to be clear potential to expand, and a number of attendant benefits. A fascinating study reported by Wansink (2006) found that sociality influences food consumption: those who eat with one other person eat 35% more, a group of seven or more people eating together will consume up to 96% more food than if they ate alone Such factors can hamper change even when an individual is motivated to make it (Andreasen, 2006)

Methods

Findings

Conclusion