Social marketing: implications for contemporary marketing practices classication scheme

Christine T. Domegan
National University of Ireland, Galway, Ireland
Abstract Purpose The purpose of this paper is to reect upon social marketing and its implications for the contemporary marketing practices (CMP) classication scheme. Design/methodology/approach The paper adopts a theoretical approach. Examples from the public engagement with science are used in the reection. Findings A phenomenon not commonly associated with social marketing is the growing number of science communication, outreach and public activities to engage the public with science. These scientic initiatives, established to drive knowledge-based societies around the world, are charged with changing the publics behaviour towards science. This analysis shows the application of the CMP classication explicitly to the broader context of social marketing. Originality/value This paper examines how complex multiple exchanges, and social and environment inuences, associated with social marketing provide a broader context to examine marketing practice. Further investigation is needed as to whether a sixth aspect of marketing practice is required to fully capture social marketing practice. Keywords Social marketing, Marketing strategy, Networking Paper type Research paper

An executive summary for managers and executive readers can be found at the end of this issue.

Introduction
Social marketing is, broadly speaking, the application of marketing principles and exchange to social issues. It is best known for its use in campaigns related to public health and the environment. Successful strategies dealing with obesity, tobacco consumption, family planning, safe sex, recycling, waste management and water purity are the more common applications (Kotler et al., 2002; Andreasen, 2002; Hastings, 2003). It is widely accepted that many social problems have underlying behavioural causes. As social marketing is about inuencing behavioural exchange outcomes, we have witnessed dramatic growth in its use (Gordon et al., 2006). Both commercial and non-prot organisations alike are undertaking social marketing, especially in areas where educational and legal interventions have failed (Diamond and Oppenheim, 2004). Extensive qualitative and quantitative multi-country empirical research in the last decade, clearly point to a variety of marketing practices under the auspices of contemporary marketing practices (CMP) (Brodie et al., 2007). The ndings consistently demonstrate that there is no
The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available at www.emeraldinsight.com/0885-8624.htm

Journal of Business & Industrial Marketing 23/2 (2008) 135 141 q Emerald Group Publishing Limited [ISSN 0885-8624] [DOI 10.1108/08858620810850254]

paradigm shift from transaction marketing to relationship marketing[1]. Rather the ndings signal that both transaction and relational marketing are comfortably pursued by organisations, depending upon the market, customers, competition and environment in question. The CMP classication scheme features ve different aspects of marketing practice (Coviello et al., 1997). These are: 1 Transaction marketing (TM). This is the 4P approach to customers. Classically explained as an economic goods exchange process, TM utilises the traditional marketing mix management approach. It strongly connected with discreet transactions, lending itself to mass marketing. Customers are characterised as passive and the exchange is centred on a physical, tangible good. Communications, trust, relationships, the number of parties participating in the exchange process, together with time, are very limited in nature and extent. 2 Database marketing (DM). Similar to TM, DM concentrates upon the traditional 4Ps and the economic transaction. DM does, however, take the rst tentative steps towards personalising the exchange process between the rm and customer. This is achieved through the application of database tools to attract and retain specic customers. Communication is individualised with the help of technology (Coviello et al., 2002). For example, loyalty card schemes, typical of DM, close the divide between the organisation and the end consumer. The exchange process, while featuring elements of service, is still very focused on a tangible good and the DM processes are heavily economic-driven. 3 eMarketing (eM). This is where the marketing exchange makes extensive use of the Internet and interactive technologies (e.g. electronic systems, sophisticated 135

Social marketing: implications for CMP classication scheme Christine T. Domegan

Journal of Business & Industrial Marketing Volume 23 Number 2 2008 135 141

software programmes) to create dialogue with customers. Here, communications becomes a two-way process and the role of the customer shifts from being passive to active in the exchange. Tangible and intangible elements compliment either the product and/or service, all resulting in closer relationships between the buyers and sellers (Coviello et al., 2001; Brady et al., 2002; Brookes et al., 2004; Brodie et al., 2007). Interaction marketing (IM). Here, personal relationships are a dening characteristic. This requires face-to-face personal formal and informal communication with individualised, active customers to facilitate extensive interactions and relationships between employees and customers (Coviello et al., 2002). This empowers the customers to be highly participative in all aspects of the consumption process, giving rise to the co-creation of value and benets between the organisation and customer. Network marketing (NM) . This involves active, participative customers and rms where the relational exchange occurs and is orchestrated at two simultaneous levels both the interpersonal and inter-organisational relationships between rms within an industry or across a market segment (Coviello et al., 2002).

investment of resources (Beetlestone et al., 1998; Edwards, 2004). Better known as science communication, outreach and public engagement activities, because they are charged with raising public engagement with science, they allow children, teachers and parents experience science in a fun, hands-on exciting way, to stimulate their interest and participation in science as career options and research avenues. Behind this worldwide science movement, there is an accepted, implicit assumption a seamless link between science interest, enthusiasm, science literacy levels, science careers and economic and social prosperity (Layton et al., 1993; Beetlestone et al., 1998; Edwards, 2004; Evans and Durant, 1995).

Social marketing and the CMP classication scheme

Theoretically, there is no generalised denition of social marketing (McDermott et al., 2005). The term social marketing rst appeared in a pioneering article, Social marketing: an approach to planned social change coauthored by Philip Kotler and Gerald Zaltman in 1971 in the Journal of Marketing (Kotler and Zaltman, 1971). In the 1970s, social marketing was about selling ideas. With the nature of social marketing being to sell brotherhood the way we sell soap (Wiebe, 1951/1952, p. 679) these early beginnings for social marketing are now referred to as tell and sell marketing (National Social Marketing Centre, 2006). This initial conceptualisation of social marketing dened itself based on discreet, economic marketing transactions. Like commercial marketing, it focused upon a market to consumers managerial perspective. This inevitably resulted in social marketing in its infancy being strongly concerned with the communication of a message. For this reason, non-marketing professionals tended to confuse social marketing with social communication. Social communication does not use the principles of marketing. As Sargeant (2005, p. 184) suggests:
[. . .] the social marketer is concerned not only with the communication of a message; she must also attempt to make the adoption of a behavioural change relatively easy to achieve.

The contemporary marketing framework allows for TM, DM, eM, IM and NM to be practised together, at varying levels of use or different degrees of intensity. The different practices may complement or substitute for each other (Brodie et al., 2007, p. 4), implying these forms of marketing represent distinctive but not independent or discreet categories of practice. To this end, the CMP model has an inherent logic when one accepts that marketing is exchange within the context of the economic and social structures of society (Macneil, 1980). The different forms of CMP represent varying degrees of economic and relational combinations along the marketplace exchange matrix. The different practices are varying reections of value creation before in and after exchanges. Thus, marketing managers are presented with the task of managing a portfolio of relationship types, from discreet, distant economic exchanges to close, personal social and economic exchanges (Morgan and Hunt, 1994; Donaldson and OToole, 2002; Holden, 2006). The purpose of this paper is to reect upon the CMP research in light of Social marketing literature and practice. Specically, with CMP empirical ndings of the last decade dominated to a large extent by prot-orientated companies, this paper investigates the relevance of Social marketing using the CMP lens. It seeks to inform how social marketing relates to CMP. Specically, the paper looks to social marketing literature and practice to identify CMP areas for future development over the coming decade. The paper focuses on following question:
Do the existing aspects of marketing practice (TM, DM, eM, IM, NM) in the CMP classication scheme accommodate Social Marketing practices or are they lacking in some way?

In the past, social marketing has also been wrongly dened as social propaganda and education (OShaughnessy, 1996). Despite this nebulous beginning, most (but not all) welcomed the expansion of economic transaction marketing into nontraditional and non-commercial areas such as public health and family planning (Kotler and Levy, 1969; Luck, 1969). The conceptually modern view of social marketing has matured and now delineates its domain around the exchange process of voluntary behavioural change. Currently, the three most accepted meanings of social marketing manifesting this modern view have been advanced by Kotler et al. (2002, p. 5), Andreasen (2002, p. 296) and Hastings (2003, p. 12). Kotlers view is that:
Social Marketing is the use of marketing principles and techniques to inuence a target audience to voluntarily accept, reject, modify, or abandon a behaviour for the benet of individuals, groups, or society as a whole.

The structure of the paper takes two forms. First, the central differentiating characteristics of social marketing are investigated to see where they t within CMP. Second, to deepen the reection, examples of social marketing practices are examined. These are drawn from exploratory case study work from the growing number of science-society programmes aimed at the general public and established to drive knowledge-based society, representing a major 136

Andreasen perceives social marketing as:

[. . .] the application of commercial marketing technologies to the analysis, planning, execution and evaluation of programs designed to inuence the voluntary behaviour of target audiences in order to improve their personal welfare and that of their society.

Social marketing: implications for CMP classication scheme Christine T. Domegan

Journal of Business & Industrial Marketing Volume 23 Number 2 2008 135 141

According to Hastings:
Social Marketings most fundamental feature is that it takes learning from commerce . . . such as consumer orientation, mutually benecial exchange, the need to focus on behaviour change and address the context as well as the individual.

As dened above, the very core of social marketing voluntary behavioural change and the exchange context implicitly and explicitly embraces relationships. Recent debates within the literature (Kotler et al., 2002; Andreasen, 1995, 2002; Hastings, 2003) conrm the conceptual movement towards the market with relational approach (Lusch and Vargo, 2006). Not surprisingly then, these denitions reect many of the existing CMP activities and practices interaction, communication, value and exchange processes to a greater or lesser extent. Social marketings economic and social exchange is, in turn, reected in a number of broad resonating elements. These are complex, multi-level engaged exchange beyond the individual consumer; competition; time; partnerships and evaluation (McDermott et al., 2005; Andreasen, 2002). Complex multiple exchanges One characteristic agreed by all in the social marketing literature is that the voluntary behavioural change occurs at both individual and society level (Lawther and Lowry, 1995; Murray and Douglas, 1988; Hastings et al., 2000). Levy and Zaltman (1975) identify three dimensions in society that are affected by the change sought in social marketing campaigns: micro level, group level and macro level. They capture this distinctive trait of social marketing in their examination of the impact of social marketing campaigns as displayed in Table I. Like commercial marketing, the unit of analysis in social marketing begins at the micro level of the customer, as in TM and DM. Social marketing also pays attention to the next level of analysis or impact, the inter-organisational relationships of varying content, duration and strength, as seen in NM (Ford et al., 2003). This has to be managed with the micro or customer unit. As a sign of this, the term community-based social marketing now exists. However, social marketing, while incorporating both these levels of analysis, adds yet a third level or unit of analysis, that of the whole system a macro, society level, constituting those who control the social context inuencing the other two units (Brenkert, 2002). This third social context level signals a further complexity for social marketing managers, not normally seen by commercial managers. This is attributable to the fact that individuals inuence and are inuenced by those surrounding them, thereby requiring this three-tiered analysis approach to the exchange process. Hastings and Saren (2003, p. 315) believe this three-unit impact at different levels is social marketings biggest contribution, bridging the gap between the corporate sector and public welfare and understanding both worlds. Table I Types of social change, by time and level of society
Change Micro level (individual)

This multiple impact results in social marketing having an extensive constellation of stakeholders and relationships to satisfy. Social marketing stresses relationships beyond the consumer into the traditional market place, including suppliers, distributors, supporting rms, and extending to the broader social context of local communities, regional bodies and government. The relationships are simultaneously active at all levels with the customers, communities and policy makers to achieve synergy between the multiple change agents and bring about the desired behavioural change (National Social Marketing Centre, 2006). Bagozzi (1975, p. 35) refers to this co-creation of value as a complex marketing exchange, where more than three parties are involved in a network of relationships and there is not the simple quid pro quo notion characteristic of most economic exchanges. In a very real sense, social marketing is as much about community, relational and value dimensions, as well as economic relationships of a society-wide network (Penaloza and Venkatesh, 2006). However, this is not to deny the signicant economic impact arising from exchanges such as the elimination of smoking and the positive health effects for individuals and society. These relations are formal and informal. Based upon a customer focus that considers the selfinterested perspective of a target segment, social marketing has to successfully manage a multitude of varied, individualised target audiences. Communications and interactions are extensive and vital to the proper function of the relations (Coviello et al., 1997). Social marketing is the co-creation of complex social and economic benets and value with customers among/throughout an entire community network of relationships. It is more than a rmlevel network it is a marketing process that works up, down and in-stream, throughout an entire holistic system of relationships (National Social Marketing Centre, 2006). It is a system of deep collaboration, problem solving and passion, entirely centred on, among and concerned with the real and true needs of the customer (Smith, 2000, 2006). The pre and post exchange circumstances, processes and participants are as important (if not more) as the activities in the exchange itself, a characteristic not linked to discreet economic exchange marketing activities. Another facet that Social marketings multiple concurrent co-creation of benets has to contend with, is the complexity of the relationships reected in the continuum of selfinterested stakeholders that vary from customer segments that behave as we wish to resistant to behave as we wish, to programme designers and policy makers who fund such strategies (Rothschild et al., 2006, p. 1220). In a free society, the customer has the choice to refuse to change behaviour and maintain the current undesirable behaviour. The product or intervention from the social marketer must deliver greater immediate benet, greater perceived value, than the alternative behavioural choices. This could be seen to be

Group level (group/organisation)

Macro level (society)

Short-term Example: Long-term Example

Behaviour change Attendance at stop-smoking clinic Lifestyle change Smoking cessation

Changes in norms/administrative change Removal of tobacco advertising from outside a school Organisational change Deter retailers from selling cigarettes to minors

Policy change Banning of all forms of tobacco marketing Socio-cultural evolution Eradication of all tobacco

137

Social marketing: implications for CMP classication scheme Christine T. Domegan

Journal of Business & Industrial Marketing Volume 23 Number 2 2008 135 141

different from commercial marketing where the main source of greater benet or value comes from other organisations and businesses who offer similar goods and services (Szydlowski et al., 2005). This internal customer-competition, behaviour versus behaviour, often results in negative demand, inertia and/or high involvement for the target audience(s) and social marketer (Fine, 1990). The self interest of customers/target markets requires the social marketer to work harder, faster, deeper and more extensively, in understanding the motivations of the target customers and designing a market offering or intervention to appeal to them. As customers become more individualised, the need to understand and invest in motivations, commitment and trust rise (Hjelmar, 2005; Hastings, 2006). Exchange context social and environment inuences beyond the marketplace Behaviour and relationships are socially as well as economically determined (Maibach and Cotton, 1995; Hastings, 2007). In social marketing, partnerships manifest the social context of complex multiple exchanges. Partnerships occur simultaneously at ve levels: 1 intrapersonal/individual; 2 interpersonal (family and friends lend social support); 3 institutional/organisational; 4 community (local or regional social networks more distant from family and friends); and 5 public policy (Morgan and Hunt, 1994; McLeroy et al., 1988). Downstream partners concentrate upon creating and distributing the interventions (Wallack et al. , 1993). Upstream behaviour is aimed at altering the environment and policies affecting the target audience to encourage and support the required individual behaviour change. Upstream partners have to include the public, the media and the policy makers (Andreasen and Herzberg, 2005; Andreasen, 2006). Such partnerships, especially upstream, are timeconsuming and expensive to develop and manage (Haytko, 2004). The best social marketing strategies advocate ten years duration. Lusch and Vargo (2006) suggest that lengthy time frames for adaptive learning and exibility are necessary for some marketing practices. The ability to adapt and learn from the community of partnerships and exchange parties is the result of extensive formative, impact and process evaluation in social marketing (Weinreich, 1995; Sargeant, 2005). Evidence-based, actionable insights using considered judgement, supporting decision making and performance is vital to social marketing (Hastings, 2007).

e.g. forensic crime solving workshops for school children, microscope training for teachers, and hands-on cell experiments. REMEDIs target audiences for public engagement with science are: . the general public; . students at primary, secondary and third level education; . teachers; . career guidance ofcer; . parents; . industry, e.g. American Chamber of Commerce; and nally . policy makers, such as the Minister for the Department of Education and Science. A different example of social marketings three levels of analysis in science/society is visible in the Our Universe campaign by PharmaChemical Ireland. With 16 of the top 20 pharmaceutical and chemicals companies in the world currently based in Ireland, PharmaChemical Ireland, a nonprot organisation, established within the Irish Business and Employers Confederation (IBEC) in 1994 to expand and develop the sectors business activities, thus enabling it to maintain international competitiveness and to improve the industrys communications with all sectors of society. The Our Universe campaign, provides business volunteers to visit local schools to deliver a range of activity based enterprise and science offerings for young people aged ve to 18 years in partnership with the class teacher. These are designed to encourage young people to make the successful transition from education into the science workplace. Table II shows how PharmaChemical Irelands Our Universe campaign is aimed at multiple groups and communities as well as individuals.The campaign allows members to be caring and open to one another and to people in the community outside of PharmaChemical Ireland:
Industry benets because the campaigns will hopefully lead to an increased supply of employees. The volunteers have a good time and that creates employee satisfaction. Schools benet because the science campaign takes pressure off teachers and also creates further teacher resources. The students benet because, in the modern world, to have a rm science grounding is essential (Domegan and Corry, 2006, p. 20).

Case study
Background Under the auspices of the Centres for Science, Engineering and Technology (CSETS) of Science Foundation Ireland (SFI), REMEDI, Regenerative Medicine Institute (see www. remedi.ie) was set up in 2003 through a e14.9 million award. REMEDI conducts basic and applied research in regenerative medicine, an emerging eld that combines the technologies of gene therapy and adult stem cell therapy. Part of REMEDIs strategy is science initiatives to create awareness of and promote science to school children, teachers, parents, the local community and general public through interventions, 138

Like REMEDI, Pharmachemical Ireland has dedicated fulltime educational and outreach ofcers to mange their science and public engagement strategies. These outreach science initiatives capture the essence of social marketing the central role of community networks and interaction in value creation and exchange. At the micro level, primary and secondary school children, their teachers and their parents constitute different target audiences, with different social and economic needs. At the macro level, relationships between community groups and regional bodies facilitate the exchange process, with national agents at the top end of the value co-creation chain, shaping the context for such exchanges to occur. Implications for the CMP classication scheme To capture the discussion so far and elucidate these subtle yet central distinctions between social marketing and CMP, Table III suggests the issues that distinguish the CMP extremes of TM and NM with social marketing practice. Under the banner of complex multiple exchanges, the more obvious common denominators between social marketing practice and CMP include the unit of analysis, the role and individualisation of the customers and the range of

Social marketing: implications for CMP classication scheme Christine T. Domegan

Journal of Business & Industrial Marketing Volume 23 Number 2 2008 135 141

Table II Complex simultaneous exchanges Our Universe campaign

Students Students awareness/interest in science is directly affected by the campaign Teachers Teachers have access to new equipment and living scientists to achieve interaction between students and materials in classroom and everyday life Parents Parents have given positive feedback to volunteers and shown an increased awareness of the initiative, endorsing science as a suitable career option Community Initiative has strengthened relationships with local school and community and increased the communitys awareness of science and its value to students undertaking science projects via equipment access Society The campaign has contributed to a nation-wide effort to have science introduced as an obligatory subject at primary school level

Table III Complex multiple exchanges and exchange context

Issues Unit of analysis Role of customers Individualisation of customers TM Customer Passive Prei, in- and post-exchange None NM Customer, organisation Active Pre-, in- and post-exchange Extensive economic Wide relational Wide Social marketing practice Customer, organisation and society Active Pre-, in- and post-exchange Extensive economic Extensive relational Extensive Extensive across all layers of society Marketplace, community and society Expands to longer time, adaptive learning, and exibility Upstream partnerships

Level of motivational investment Limited Range of relationships Exchange context Time Partnerships Evaluation/performance Sales, market share success/failure

Narrow, limited to buyers and sellers Firm level specic Marketplace Short-term Marketplace and community Long-term Strategic alliances; networks

Customer retention, customer loyalty, Behaviour change success/failure Evidence-based insight, adaptive learning, exibility

relationships. Under exchange context, partnerships, time and evaluation are central. The CMP classication scheme as it has emerged to-date, accounts for exchanges that occur at either the individual, customer level, TM or across one level, the rm-to-rm NM practice. Social marketing demonstrates another layer of marketing exchanges, adding a third unit of analysis, the community or society level. Thus, the range of buyer/seller relationships can be narrow (TM) rm specic (NM) or extensive (SM). In TM, the customer adopts a passive role to the exchange. The focus is upon a product, as dened by the rm. Either the consumer buys or does not buy. In NM, the customer is active pre and post exchange with the seller. The aim is to bring about the best match between them. The exchanges are often no longer seen as independent of each other, no longer discreet. But the exchanges are still dominated by products or services dened by the rm and modied by customer. The social marketer has to nd behavioural changes that do more than match the consumers; the exchanges have to be required by consumers. Signicant exibility on the social marketers behalf is a necessary condition to the engaged exchange. This is given further expression through the amount of customer motivational investment. In SM, behavioural change can only occur when 139

there is signicant and on-going customer motivational investment the direct opposite to TM, where there is little investment beyond the economic outlay. Thus, the true individualisation of the customer, not present in TM, evident to a large degree in NM through customisation, could be more fully engaged, in all its complexity at multiple levels in social marketing. The implications of social marketings attention to the context of the exchange is greater understanding of the societal, policy, environmental and contextual factors (Andreasen, 2006). Social marketing uses and manages time, partnerships and evaluation/performance more extensively than TM, and in different, richer ways than NM in CMP.

Conclusions
Fasten your seat belt. Wash your hands. Dont drink and drive. Safe sex. Reduce, Recycle, Reuse. Exercise. Eat ve fruit and veg a day. Science is fun. The above are popular themes requiring a voluntary behavioural change of benet to the individual and society. They go to the very heart of social marketing, an increasingly important development in the eld of marketing. This exploratory paper examined the relevance of relational

Social marketing: implications for CMP classication scheme Christine T. Domegan

Journal of Business & Industrial Marketing Volume 23 Number 2 2008 135 141

marketing in this different setting, by questioning how social marketing could expand the CMP classication scheme. The question posed was: Do the existing aspects of marketing practice (TM, DM, eM, IM, NM) in the CMP classication scheme accommodate social marketing practices or are they lacking in some way? Social marketing puts the behavioural changing individual at the centre of the process and orchestrates a society wide network of relationships and partnerships to achieve such goals, using extensive research, evidence based information and evaluation in decision making. Hence it deepens the understanding of networks, of relationships, of complex economic and social exchanges, conict, communication, and of the link between performance and practice. Social marketing delivers innovative insights into the communal, relational and economic exchange process that underlies marketing. These insights suggest that, marketing practitioners and academics alike, need to give serious attention to the marketplace context and social environment of the exchange, regardless of whether it is a prot or nonprot organisation engaging in the exchange. Interestingly from the CMP perspective, social marketing has adopted and developed this extensive relational approach to marketing without signicant reference to the mainstream relational marketing debate. The social marketing literature is largely devoid of any discussion of commercial marketings embracing of relationships, with the one notable exception being Hastingss 2003 article, discussed in this paper. The CMP scheme resonates with social marketing, particularly NM, but social marketing offers the potential to enrich and expand the horizons of the existing contemporary marketing research agenda. This exploratory social marketing analysis suggests that the CMP dimensions could be modied in two main ways. First, the classication scheme could be expanded by adding a third layer to the unit of analysis a community/society aspect. This takes cognisance that marketing exchanges have both a consumption and social component. Second, the CMP classication scheme could attempt to capture the societal space, beyond the marketplace, where marketing exchanges occur. This could be achieved by the addition of a new dimension, exchange context, embracing time, upstream partnerships and evaluation/performance. As to whether social marketing is sufciently different to the CMP of TM, DM, eM, IM or NM, further investigation is needed.

Note
1 See the CMP at http://cmp.auckland.ac.nz

References
Andreasen, A.R. (1995), Marketing Social Change: Changing Behavior to Promote Health, Social Development and the Environment, Jossey-Bass, San Francisco, CA. Andreasen, A.R. (2002), Marketing social change in the social change marketplace, Journal of Public Policy and Marketing, Vol. 21 No. 1, pp. 3-13. Andreasen, A.R. (2006), Social Marketing in the 21st Century, Sage, London. Andreasen, A.R. and Herzberg, B. (2005), Social marketing applied to economic reforms, Social Marketing Quarterly, Vol. 11 No. 2, pp. 3-17. 140

Bagozzi, R.P. (1975), Marketing as exchange, Journal of Marketing, Vol. 39 No. 4, October, pp. 32-9. Beetlestone, J.G., Johnson, C.H., Quin, M. and White, H. (1998), The Science Centre Movement: contexts, practice, next challenges, Public Understanding of Science, Vol. 7, pp. 5-26. Brady, M., Saren, M. and Tzokas, N. (2002), Integrating information technology into marketing, Journal of Marketing Management, Vol. 18 Nos 5-6, pp. 1-23. Brenkert, G.G. (2002), Ethical challenges of social marketing, Journal of Public Policy & Marketing, Vol. 21 Nos 1, Spring, pp. 14-25. Brodie, R., Winklofer, H., Coviello, N. and Johnston, W. (2007), Is e-marketing coming of age? An examination of the penetration of eM and rm performance, Journal of Interactive Marketing, Vol. 21 No. 1, pp. 2-21. Brookes, R.W., Brodie, R.J., Coviello, N.E. and Palmer, R.A. (2004), How managers perceive the impacts of information technologies on contemporary practices: reinforcing, enhancing or transforming?, Journal of Relationship Marketing, Vol. 3 No. 4, pp. 7-26. Coviello, N.E., Brodie, R.H. and Munro, H.J. (1997), Understanding contemporary marketing: development of a classication scheme, Journal of Marketing Management, Vol. 13 No. 6, pp. 501-22. Coviello, N.E., Milley, R. and Marcolin, B. (2001), Understanding IT-enabled interactivity in contemporary marketing, Journal of Interactive Marketing, Vol. 15 No. 4, pp. 18-33. Coviello, N.E., Brodie, R.H., Danaher, P.J. and Johnston, W.J. (2002), How rms relate to their markets: an empirical examination of contemporary marketing practices, Journal of Marketing, Vol. 66 No. 3, pp. 33-47. Diamond, W. and Oppenheim, M.R. (2004), Sources for special topics: social marketing, nonprot organisations, service marketing and legal/ethical issues, Journal of Business and Finance Librarianship, Vol. 9 No. 4, pp. 287-99. Domegan, C. and Corry, A. (2006), The use of social marketing to evaluate science outreach programmes, paper presented at the Irish Academy of Management Conference, Cork, September. Donaldson, B. and OToole, T. (2002), Strategic Market Relationships. From Strategy to Implementation, Wiley, Chichester. Edwards, C. (2004), Evaluating European public awareness of science initiatives: a review of the literature, Science Communication, Vol. 25 No. 3, March, pp. 260-71. Evans, G. and Durant, J. (1995), The relationship between knowledge and attitudes in the public understanding of science in Britain, Public Understanding of Science, Vol. 4 No. 1, pp. 57-74. Fine, S.H. (1990), Social Marketing: Promoting the Causes of Public and Nonprot Agencies, Allyn & Bacon, Needham Heights, MA. Ford, D., Gadde, L., Hakansson, H. and Snehota, I. (2003), Managing Business Relationships, 2nd ed., Wiley, Chichester. Gordon, R., McDermott, L., Stead, M. and Angus, K. (2006), The effectiveness of social marketing interventions for health improvement: whats the evidence?, Public Health, Vol. 120 No. 12, pp. 1133-9. Hastings, G.B. (2003), Relational paradigms in social marketing, Journal of Macromarketing, Vol. 23 No. 1, June, pp. 6-15.

Social marketing: implications for CMP classication scheme Christine T. Domegan

Journal of Business & Industrial Marketing Volume 23 Number 2 2008 135 141

Hastings, G. (2006), Ten promises to Terry: towards a social marketing manifesto, Health Education, Vol. 106 No. 1, pp. 5-8. Hastings, G. (2007), Social Marketing. Why Should the Devil Get All the Best Tunes?, Butterworth-Heinemann, Oxford. Hastings, G.B. and Saren, M. (2003), The critical contribution of social marketing, Journal of Marketing Theory, Vol. 3 No. 3, pp. 305-17. Hastings, G.B., MacFadyen, L. and Anderson, S. (2000), Whose behaviour is it anyway? The broader potential of social marketing, Social Marketing Quarterly, Vol. 6 No. 2, pp. 46-58. Haytko, D.L. (2004), Firm-to-rm interpersonal relationships: perspectives from advertising agency account managers, Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, Vol. 32 No. 3, pp. 312-28. Hjelmar, U. (2005), The concept of commitment as a basis for social marketing efforts: conversion model as a case, Social Marketing Quarterly, Vol. 11 No. 2, pp. 58-63. Holden, M. (2006), Modelling the effects of primary relations and inter-organisational communication on relational norms, PhD thesis, WIT, Waterford. Kotler, P. and Levy, S.J. (1969), Broadening the concept of marketing, Journal of Marketing , Vol. 33, January, pp. 10-15. Kotler, P. and Zaltman, G. (1971), Social marketing: an approach to planned social change, Journal of Marketing, Vol. 35, July, pp. 3-12. Kotler, P., Roberto, N. and Lee, N. (2002), Social Marketing, Improving the Quality of Life, 2nd ed., Sage Publications, London. Lawther, S. and Lowry, R. (1995), Social marketing and behaviour change among professionals, Social Marketing Quarterly, Vol. 2 No. 1, pp. 10-11. Layton, D., Jenkins, E., Macgill, S. and Davey, A. (1993), Inarticulate Science? Perspectives on the Public Understanding of Science and Some Implications for Science Education, Studies in Education, Drifeld. Levy, S. and Zaltman, G. (1975), Marketing, Society and Conict, Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ. Luck, D. (1969), Broadening the concept of marketing: too far, Journal of Marketing, Vol. 33, July, pp. 53-5. Lusch, R.F. and Vargo, S.L. (2006), Service-dominant logic: reactions, reections and renements, Marketing Theory, Vol. 6 No. 3, pp. 281-8. McDermott, L., Stead, M. and Hastings, G. (2005), What is and what is not social marketing: the challenge of reviewing the evidence, Journal of Marketing Management, Vol. 21 No. 5, pp. 545-53. McLeroy, K.R., Bibean, D., Steckler, A. and Glanz, K. (1988), An ecological perspective on health promotion programmes, Health Education Quarterly, Vol. 15 No. 4, pp. 351-77. Macneil, I.R. (1980), The New Social Contract: An Inquiry into Modern Contractual Relationships, Yale University Press, New Haven, CT and London. Maibach, E. and Cotton, D. (1995), Moving people to behaviour change: a staged social cognitive approach to message design, in Maibach, E. and Parrott, R. (Eds),

Designing Health Messages. Approaches from Communication Theory and Public Health Practice, Sage, Thousand Oaks, CA. Morgan, R.M. and Hunt, S.D. (1994), The commitmenttrust theory of relationship marketing, Journal of Marketing, Vol. 58, July, pp. 20-38. Murray, G. and Douglas, R. (1988), Social marketing in the alcohol policy arena, British Journal of Addiction, Vol. 83, pp. 505-11. National Social Marketing Centre (2006), Its Our Health: Realising the Potential of Effective Social Marketing, National Social Marketing Centre, London. OShaughnessy, N. (1996), Social propaganda and social marketing: a critical difference?, European Journal of Marketing, Vol. 30 Nos 10/11, pp. 54-67. Penaloza, L. and Venkatesh, A. (2006), Further evolving the new dominant logic of marketing: from services to the social construction of markets, Marketing Theory, Vol. 6 No. 3, pp. 299-316. Rothschild, M., Mastin, B. and Miller, T. (2006), Reducing alcohol-impaired driving crashes through the use of social marketing, Accident Analysis & Prevention, Vol. 38 No. 6, pp. 1218-30. Sargeant, A. (2005), Marketing Management for Non-prot Organizations, 2nd ed., Oxford University Press, New York, NY. Smith, W.A. (2000), Social marketing: an evolving denition, American Journal of Health Behaviour, Vol. 24 No. 1, pp. 11-17. Smith, W.A. (2006), Social marketing: an overview of approach and effects, Injury Prevention, Vol. 12 No. 1, pp. 138-43. Szydlowski, S.J., Chattopadhyay, S.P. and Babela, R. (2005), Social marketing as a tool to improve behavioral health services for understanding populations in transition countries, The Health Care Manager, Vol. 24 No. 1, pp. 12-20. Wallack, L., Dorfman, L., Jernigan, D. and Themba, M. (1993), Media Advocacy and Public Health, Sage, Newbury Park, CA. Weinreich, N.K. (1995), Building social marketing into your program, Social Marketing Quarterly, July, pp. 2-9. Wiebe, G.D. (1951/1952), Merchandising commodities and citizenship in television, Public Opinion Quarterly, Vol. 15, Winter, pp. 679-91.

Further reading
Department of Enterprise, Trade and Employment (2006), Strategy for Science, Technology and Innovation, 2006-2013, Department of Enterprise, Trade and Employment, Dublin. Economist Intelligence Unit (2006), The world in 2006, the world in gures: countries, The Economist, pp. 105-22.

Corresponding author
Christine T. Domegan can [email protected] be contacted at:

To purchase reprints of this article please e-mail: [email protected] Or visit our web site for further details: www.emeraldinsight.com/reprints

141

Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.