Social Marketing: Its Definition and Domain

Alan R. Andreasen

The author argues that social marketing has been defined improperly in much ofthe
literature. A revised definition is proposed and the domain of social marketing defined. He
concludes with suggestions for implications for fitture growth ofthe discipline.

I
t is clear that the temi social marketing is now a well- new paradigm. The old way, like earth-centered astronomy be-
established part of the marketing vocabulary in univer- fore Copernicus, was simply not elastic enough to contain these
sities, govemmetit agencies, private nonprofit organiza- new transactions. Thus, we slowly embraced exchange theory.
tions, and private for-profit firms. There are now social mar-
However, despite the rapid growth of Interest in social
keting textbooks (Kotler and Roberto 1989; Manoff 1975),
marketing (or perhaps because of it), there is still consider-
readings books (Fine 1990), chapters within mainstream
able disagreement about what social marketing is and how
texts (Kotler and Andreasen 1991) and a Harvard teaching
it differs from similar fields like communications and behav-
note (Rangun and Karim 1991). There have been reviews
ior mobilization. Tbis disagreement is not uncommon for a
ofthe accomplishments of social marketing (Fox and Kot-
new discipline. Debates about definition and domain in
ler 1980; Malafarina and Loken 1993) and calls to research-
other fields are quite common witbin university walls. Care-
ers to become more deeply involved in studies of social mar-
ful definition of any field is important to the advancement
keting to advance the science of marketing (Andreasen
of scholarship and the training of future researchers. How-
1993). Major international and domestic behavior change
ever, in the present case, the issue has an additional, impor-
programs now routinely have social marketing components
tant implication.
(Debus 1987; Ramah 1992; Smith 1989). People with titles
like Manager of Social Marketing now can be found in pri- Many believe that social marketing can have a major im-
vate consulting organizations. pact on society's myriad social problems. However, this im-
pact can be seriously compromised if the technology is ap-
plied incorrectly or to areas in which it is not appropriate. If
Why Definitions Matter practitioners misuse the concept, its effectiveness may be
limited. If researchers and scholars assess its performance
There bave been critics of the expansion of marketing be-
in areas for which it should not be responsible, social mar-
yond its traditional private sector origins from the begin-
keting may be blamed for failures for wbich it should not
ning (cf. Bartels 1974; Luck 1974). However, today, a great
be held accountable.
many scholars and practitioners now see social marketing
as a viable subject of researcb, teaching, and practice. Tbey It is time, therefore, to introduce precision into the dia-
see tbe field as growing and expanding and tbereby increas- logue by establishing a clear consensus on what social mar-
ing the relevance of marketing education and scholarship to keting is and is not and what its "legitimate" domains are
the problems of tbe broader society, (t also has been argued and are not. These definitions and distinctions bave impor-
tbat involvement in these new areas has bad an important re- tant implications for present and future practical applica-
ciprocal effect on marketing scholarship. T note one exam- tions, academic discussions, and field researcb. The central
ple of the latter in my 1992 Association for Consumer Re- premise of the article is that social marketing stands a sig-
search Presidential Address o" social marketing (Andreasen nificant chance of failure if existing issues of definition and
1993, p. 1): domain are not adequately resolved.
The rise of exchange theory, I believe, was given a major stim-
ulus by marketing scholars trying to expand the concept of 'con-
The Emergence of Social Marketing*
sumer behavior' and 'marketing' to encompass something as Altbough in the 1960s, marketing scholars wrote and car-
nontraditional as going to college, wearing seat belts, or giving ried out research on topics tbat today would be considered
blood. For example, promoting blood donations seemed to be social marketing (e.g., Simon 1968), the origins of tbe term
an opportunity for 'marketing,' yet there were no products or ser- .social marketing can be traced to Kotler and Zaltman's clas-
vice.s offered and no monetary payment made by the consumer. sic 1971 article in tbe Journal of Marketing titled "Social
In fact, the consumer often voluntarily suffered when making Marketing: An Approach to Planned Social Change" (Kot-
the 'purchase.' Traditional unidirectional views of consumer be-
havior could not encompass such a strange case. We needed a ler and Zaltman 1971). As Elliott (1991) points out, tbe
emergence of social marketing at just tbat moment in time
was a logical outgrowth of the attempt of tbe Northwestern
ALAN R ANDREASEN is Professor of Markehng, Georgetown Univer-
sity. The author thanks William Smith of the Academy for Educa-
School to broaden tbe discipline of marketing (cf. Kotler
tional Development for comments on an earlier draft of tbis and Levy 1969). Elliott suggests that tbis development re-
article.
'This section draws significantly from Elliolt (1991).

Vol. 13 (I)
108 Journa] of Public Policy & Marketing Spring 1994, 108-114
 Journal of Public Policy & Marketing 109

fleeted both significant increases in the pressures within tbe Andreasen, fortbcoming) suggest that interest in the topic is
marketing discipline to be more socially relevant and the accelerating.
emergence of technologies in otber disciplines that could be There is now a modest body of social marketing research
applied to social change. Tbe latter was represented in tbe produced in the 1980s and early 1990s that is beginning to
work of Rogers (1962), Weibe (1951/52), and others. find its way into the marketing and social science literature.
Brown (1986) concurs in this assessment, arguing that so- The present section of the Journal of Marketing and Public
cial marketing is a natural outgrowth of several develop- Policy is one sucb example. In a recent review, Malafarina
ments in and out of marketing, including the following: and Loken (1993) catalogue 76 empirical articles tbat al-
1. Increased needs of nonbusiness organizations for marketing ready bave appeared in the five leading marketing publica-
services, tions since 1980. Their review documents the scope of
2. Attacks on marketing's negative impact on society, work in this area. But it also makes anotber important contri-
3. The emergence of exchange theory, bution by sbowing tbat eariy concems expressed by Bloom
4. The coalescence of social marketing oriented theory, and and Novelll (1981) about the difficulties of doing research
5. The decline of consensus-oriented perceptions of social in this new area "were not bome out to the degree antici-
reality. pated" (Malafarina and Loken 1993, p. 403 ). Tbis bodes
well for even greater growth of the field in future.
In the years that followed the Kotler-Zaltman (1971) arti-
cle, the growth of social marketing continued to be fueled This makes even stronger the need for clear guideposts.
by both supply and demand pressures within tbe field of ac-
ademic marketing. Marketing scholars found more opportu-
Defining Social Markeiing
nities to work with nonprofit and government organizations The very first fonnal definition of social marketing was tbat
to apply marketing skills to social change programs. Tbis de- offered by Kotler and Zaltman in 1971 (p. 5):
mand already was being met partially by rival academic dis- Social marketing is the design, implementation and control of
ciplines including "social advertising" (Davison 1959; programs calculated to influence the acceptability of social
Hyman and Sbeatsley 1947; Merton, Fiske, and Curtis ideas and involving considerations of product planning, pricing,
1946) and public relations (e.g., Bernays 1952), but govem- communication, distribution, and marketing researcb.
ment and nonprofit practitioners sensed tbat marketing had Tbis definition proved problematic in several ways. First,
a broader role to play. the choice of the term social marketing was itself a source
It was during this period that marketing was being infil- of early confusion. As Rangun and Karim (1991) note, tbis
trated by a growing number of young marketing scholars term tended to lead individuals to confuse social marketing
who were energized by the general social unrest and cam- with societal marketing. Rangun and Karim (1991, p. 3)
pus turmoil of the late 1960s and wanted to become more argue that social marketing "involves: (a) changing atti-
"socially relevant." My own early involvement in social tudes, beliefs, and behaviors of individuals or organizations
marketing reflects this phenomenon (Andreasen 1993, p. for a social benefit, and (b) the social change is tbe primary
1): (rather than secondary) purpose of the campaign." In tbeir
I was an academic product of the social revolution of the late six- view, societal marketing deals witb regulatory issues and
ties and early seventies and frustrated with what 1 was doing. other efforts to protect consumers from what Hirschman
My friends in Sociology and Political Science were worrying terms the "dark side of tbe marketplace" (Hirscbman
about issues like poverty, the Viet Nam war, and military recruit-
ing on campus, and so on, while I was busy teaching my stu- 1992; cf. Magnuson and Carper 1965) and does not neces-
dents bow to market Chevrolets and Clairol Shampoo.... My sarily involve influencing target consumers in any way.
1975 encounter with |social marketing] opened my eyes to the Therefore, it is clearly distinguishable from social
potential for marketing to work positively for the good of so- marketing.
ciety beyond merely (to use a classroom cliche of the time) 'de- A second problem in early discussions of social market-
livering a better standard of living.'
ing was confusion over whether its practice was limited to
Despite a growing interest in the topic by marketing schol- public and nonprofit marketers. It can be argued that private
ars in the 1970s, the first major book on the subject was pub- sector firms engage in "social marketing." for example,
lisbed in 1975 by a social marketing practitioner, Richard when tbe insurance industry encourages seat belt usage or
Manoff. In his pioneering volume, Manoff set forth several the beer industry promotes "responsible drinking." Again,
principles he bad derived from his years of work on social Rangun and Karim (1991) would argue tbat sucb efforts
cbange projects in the areas of food and nutrition and fam- should not fall within the domain of social marketing be-
ily planning in developing countries. Academics were slow cause social cbange is a secondary purpose of tbe campaign
to respond. It was six years before Manoff s contribution from tbe private sector firm's standpoint.
was followed by the first book by an academician on the A third problem witb this first definition is tbat it limits
topic, Seymour Fine's The Marketing of Ideas and Social Is- its objective to influencing "tbe acceptability of social
sues (1981). It was eight more years before Kotler and ideas." Some autbors, most prominently Seymour Fine, sup-
Roberto's book Social Marketing: Strategies for Changing port such a restrictive definition. Fine (1991, p. xiv) defines
Public Behavior was published, and one more year before social marketing "at its simplest [as] ... tbe application of
we saw tbe first readings book on Social Marketing: Pro- marketing methods to the dissemination of ideas-—socially
moting the Causes of Public and Nonprofit Organizations beneficial ideas like cancer research, energy conservation,
(Fine 1990). The latter and otber books in preparation (e.g.. and carpooling."
 Social Marketing
uo
Most scholars and researchers, bowever, believe that so- Sales are examples of consumer behavior, and it is my con-
cial marketing involves much more than ideas—specifi- tention that, if we are borrowing commercial technology,
cally, attitudes and behavior. Tbis broadened review is re- we sbould hold social marketing to the same objectives;
flected in Kotler and Roberto's (1989) social marketing tbat is, social marketing should be designed to have as its
text. Here, tbe authors equate social marketing witb a social "bottom line" influencing behavior.
cbange campaign, which they define as "an organized ef-
fort conducted by one group (the change agent), which in- Social Marketing Is Applied to Programs
tends to persuade others (the target adopters) to accept, mod- Social advertising is synonymous witb campaigns. Cam-
ify, or abandon certain ideas, attitudes, practices, and behav- paigns have a fixed termination point, Programs, by con-
iors" (p. 6). They indicate that a social marketing campaign trast, may last decades and contain several campaigns
can include the "mere" provision of infonnation on impor- within tbem. Thus, tbe American Cancer Society has a long-
tant issues or, in some cases, just change values and beliefs. run social marketing program to reduce the incidence of
Although an improvement, Kotler and Roberto's (1989) smoking, within which tbey bave annual campaigns, such
expanded definition still leaves unanswered some other im- as eacb year's Great American Smokeout. An important
portant questions about social marketing's legitimate do- strength of social marketing is tbat it takes a programmatic
main. For example: rather than campaign view of its mission.
1. Is social marketing really any different from other technolo- Social marketing is not synonymous with organizations.
gies, sucb as "bealth education" or "health promotion." Many organizations that are primarily social marketers also
with which it shares many common features (cf. Glanz, carry on activities that are not social marketing. Thus, in the
Uwis, and Rimer 1990)? 1970s, contraceptive social marketing programs in Colom-
2. Is any technique "fair game" to be called social marketing bia, Thailand, and Pakistan experimented with various sales
if it helps to achieve social marketing objectives? For exam- programs that were strictly commercial but would enhance
ple, is the imposition of a govemment regulation sucb as a the limited revenues they were deriving from social market-
ban on smoking in public buildings a legitimate social mar- ing contraceptive sales (Andreasen 1988). Although suppor-
keting strategy? tive of the overall mission of the organization, such pro-
3. Is it appropriate to use attempts to include ideas and atti- grams would not be considered social marketing.
tudes as legitimate objectives of social marketing programs?
4. Sbould the domain of social marketing be limited, as many Social Marketing Focuses on Behavior as its
government agency directors would have it, only to pro- Bottom Line
grams that market products, such as condoms and birth con-
troi pills or oral rehydration solutions, or services, such as im- The "bottom line" of social marketing is behavior change.
munizations and vasectomies? A major shortcoming of a wide range of social marketing
programs that I have observed in the field is that, though
A Proposed Definition their managers consider themselves at least in part social
In my view, what is needed is a definition of social market- marketers, they fail to keep their eye on tbe bottom line.
ing that would (1) keep practicing social marketers focused They think that all tbey must do is provide information
on the outcomes tbey are best suited to influence, (2) keep (ideas) or change beliefs. Sometimes they think this way be-
the discipline of social markefing distinguishable from its cause they were trained in other disciplines and tend to
academic "competitors," and (3) keep social marketing pro- equate marketing with advertising. So they think tbeir goal
grams out of areas in which tbeir likelihood of failure is is to "get the word out" or to "change attitudes" without
high. Witb these objectives in mind, I propose tbe follow- asking whether eitber of these activities is likely to lead to
ing definition: the desired behavior. They seem to assume that this will hap-
Social marketing is the adaptation of commercial marketing pen in some mystical "long run."
technologies to programs designed to influence the voluntary be- Ironically, in my view, a factor contributing to this con-
havior of target audiences to improve their personal welfare and fusion is the original definition of social marketing pro-
that of the society of whieb they are a part. posed by Kotler and Zaltman in 1971, a definition that is rou-
Key elements of this definition merit further elaboration. tinely (often uncritically) repeated by otbers (e.g., Malafar-
ina and Loken 1993). This overly broad definition only en-
Social Marketing Is an Adaptation of Commercial courages practicing social marketers to think that ali they
Marketing Technologies have to do is change attitudes and ideas to be successful. It
Implicit in most definitions of social marketing is that we keeps them from asking the question every first-rate private
borrow our technology from the private sector. However, sector marketer asks: Does the communication of an idea or
other autbors appear to forget that the bottom line of all pri- the changing of an attitude really influence behavior? This
vate sector marketing is the production of sales. To achieve neglect ofthe bottom line can lead to enormous waste of in-
tbeir sales objectives, private sector marketers engage in a evitably scarce resources. In my judgment, it is sinful for
great many activities tbat are designed to cbange beliefs, at- marketing scholars to neglect their true private sector "her-
titudes, and values. But tbeir only reason for doing tbis is itage" and contribute—!ven indirectly—to such waste in
that they expect such changes to lead to increased sales.^ areas that are so crucial to the welfare of society.
Tbe sole emphasis on behavior as social marketing's bot-
^As with social marketing, sometimes private sector marketers conduct
campaigns Ihal are designed to prevent change, e.g., switching to a newly tom line also belps keep tbe field distinct from other disci-
introduced brand. plines. As I have noted elsewhere (Andreasen 1993, p. 2):
 Journal of Public Policy & Marketing 111

Too many in social marketing confuse marketing with commu- objectives where massive cbanges in knowiedge and values
nication. While marketers communicate information, we are have not already been achieved, tbey wiil misapply tbeir val-
not in the education business. While we attempt to convince peo- uable skills, waste scarce resources, and show very limited
ple of the rightness of certain beliefs, we are also not in the prop- success, at least in the .short term. I fear tbat such failures
aganda business. Many of the health programs I bave observed will not only discourage them and their sponsors, it also
or worked with around the world are. in fact, largely education will give a black eye to this fiedgling discipline.
and propaganda programs.... Education and propaganda are
only useful to marketers if they lead to behavior change. Let me be clear: I am not arguing that social marketing
should never attempt to educate or change values as part of
Tbe emphasis on behavior also forces social marketers to a behavior cbange program. Such components are essential
adopt what I would argue is commercial marketing's sec- to most of the social marketing programs with which I am
ond major contribution, its fanatical emphasis on the cus- familiar. I am arguing only tbat social marketing should not
tomer. What I believe distinguishes tbe best professional so- be the technology of choice if dramatically large segments
cial marketers from a great many others I bave encountered of tbe target population are still ignorant of the behavior
in social marketing programs is their "natural" tendency to and/or opposed to it on the grounds that it offends central
ask constantly, "How will this (strategy, tactic) affect con- community values.
sumers?" This customer focus leads them to begin every so-
cial marketing program with fonnative research designed to Social Marketing Programs Influence Behavior—
understand target audiences fully before the development of They Do Not Always Change It
expensive programs. It encourages tbem to test key strate-
Social marketing campaigns need not involve behavior
gies and tactics against real consumers and monitor behav-
change. Definitions such as Kotler and Roberto's (1971)
ior as programs unfold to make sure that they are on track.
tbat speak of social marketing goals as necessitating that con-
The behavioral emphasis also ensures that marketers sumers "adopt, modify, or abandon" something ignores
have the appropriate evaluation criteria for everything they the fact tbat some social marketing programs are designed
do. Those without a "behavioral bottom line" are more in- to discourage behavior. For example, campaigns to prevent
clined to evaluate program success in nonbehavioral tenns children from using drugs (e.g., the "Just Say No" cam-
such as number of messages distributed, beliefs changed, im- paign in tbe United States) are clearly intended to discour-
ages improved, or lectures given. They tend to measure suc- age cbange.
cess by what can be measured rather than tackle the harder
problem of figuring out what should be measured and then Social Marketing Seeks to Influence Voluntary
attempting to do so. It is a tendency reinforced by well- Behavior
meaning consultants who forget (or never learned) that so-
In tbe private sector, marketers seek to influence voluntary
cial marketing is really all about influencing behavior.
consumer spending and choice and stop short of outright co-
This focus on behavior has a fourth advantage. It keeps so- ercion. (Coercion sometimes is employed in relationsbips
cial marketing from being given responsibility for objec- with distributors, though it is often characterized as a tactic
tives in areas in which I do not believe it has any particular of last resort.) Marketers can attempt to influence behavior
differential advantage—education and propaganda. Con- through behavioral shaping or reinforcement strategies but,
sider the challenge of persuading a woman wbo has little un- ultimately, consumers do bave the choice not to buy. Thus,
derstanding of conception—let alone the prevention of con- we should be clear that marketer's basic talents lie in influ-
ception—to undertake family planning. A moment's reflec- encing voluntary behavior, and these are the talents they
tion suggests that there are several steps involved in taking bring to sociai marketing.
a woman from the stage at which she does not understand
how babies are made all the way to the point at whieb she Experience bas sbown that coercion can be very effective
is correctly and continually practicing family planning. in achieving social behavior goais, for example, inducing
These steps can be grouped into five broad categories: basic consumers to wear seat beits or stop smoking. It shouid be
education, value change, attitude change, motivation to act. clear, however, that tbese are not parts of social marketing
and training and reinforcement. campaigns. In some cases, tbey can be substitutes for social
marketing (e.g., wben the latter has not been effective) or
In my opinion, social marketers sbould not be tasked combined with social marketing efforts. Indeed, a social mar-
with tbe burden of carrying out either basic education or keter may wish to argue tbat legal solutions would be more
value change if these present massive challenges. First, effective than social marketing to achieve particular behav-
such undertakings can be very long term, and marketers are ioral goals and, at this point, step out of the program.^
best at producing "sales" in the relatively short run. Sec-
ond, as argued previously, tbese tasks are more properly the Social Marketing Seeks to Benefit Target
domain of educators and propagandists. The latter know Consumers and/or the Society as a Whole,
how to inform entire populations about new ideas or prac- Not the Marketer
tices, for example, through textbooks or tbe school system.
Sociai marketing programs benefit either individuais or so-
And they know how to bring about major value changes
ciety. In some programs, tbe primary beneficiary is the tar-
through speeches and pronouncements by govemment, relig-
ious, and civic leaders. Social marketers sbouid be brougbt get consumer or bis or her family. This would be the case
in to "do their thing" when tbese other speciaiists have
'l have argued that social marketing technology can be applied to get-
achieved a considerabie amount of success. My fear is tbat, ting laws passed because there one again is dealing with intiuencing rhe vol-
if social marketers are called in to achieve bebavior change untary behavior of legislators.
112 Social Marketing

in programs designed to promote breast self-examination, di- 3. Whenever economically feasible, all major elements of pro-
eting, or the immunization of children. Other programs tar- gram strategy and tactics are pretested with members of ihe
get tbe society at large as tbe major beneficiary, as in ef- target audience.
forts to increase consumer recycling or induce home- 4. Program managers conceive of the decision process by
builders to plant more trees. Finally, some programs have which target consumers come to undertake a target behavior
joint beneficiaries. The latter would include efforts to get as comprising the following steps:
drivers to obey the 55 miles per hour speed limit, which a. Acquire the necessary knowledge to be aware of the
would help save tbe lives of drivers and their passengers, re- option;
duce society's health care costs, free its law enforcement of- b. Embrace the values that permit the behavior to be consid-
ficers for other tasks, and reduce the country's dependence ered for adoption;
on foreign oil. c. Perceive Ihe behavior as potentially relevant lo their own
Note that the definition of social marketing omits cases circumstances, those of a member of their family or those
in which the beneficiary is the social marketing organiza- of Ihe broader society;
tion. This is a major distinction between private sector and d. Conclude that the positive consequences of the behavior
social marketing and, as Rangun and Karim (1991) argue, it exceed the negative consequences to a degree that is su-
prevents us from including efforts of private sector organi- perior to realistic alternatives:
zations to achieve social ends, as in tbe insurance industry's e. Believe that they have the ability to carry out the action;
seat belt campaign. Also note that the proposed definition and
would not include such nonprofit marketing activities as f. Believe that others who are important to them support
fundraising and political campaigning, in which tbe major their action.
objective is to benefit tbe marketer. 5. The program explicitly recognizes that it faces direct or in-
Finally, it should be pointed out that the definition is si- direct competition for ihe target consumer's behavioral
lent about who is to define well-being. The definition of so- choices.
cial marketing only requires that the social marketer not un- 6. Strategies designed to effect behavioral cbange always com-
dertake programs to benefit him- or herself; tbat he or she prise all four elements of the marketing mix (the four Ps)i
must believe that the program will improve long run individ- a. Design of a product (i.e., the bebavior to be promoted)
ual or societal well-being. This is a point I return to that is fuHy responsive to the target consumers' needs
subsequently. and wants, in other words, that is easy and satisfying;
b. Making the place at which the behavior can be carried
out convenient and accessible;
Social Marketing Criteria c. Minimizing to the extent possible the economic, social
Implicit in the definition of social marketing outlined here and psychological price of the behavior; and
are the following criteria. To be labeled social marketing, a d. Seeking to promote the behavior with messages through
program must personal or impersonal media appropriate to the target
• apply commercial marketing technology, audience's lifestyle patterns and preferences.
• have as ils bottom line the influencing of voluntary behavior, Tbe need to have a full complement of marketing mix el-
and ements is very often one of tbe key traits on which pro-
• primarily seek to benefit individuals/families or the broader so- grams fail to be true marketing programs. Too many practi-
ciety and not the marketing organization itself. tioners are really doing social advertising and think it is so-
These characteristics, however, comprise necessary but not cial marketing. This misapplication of the term has caused
sufficient criteria for labeling a program as social market- some of our very best practitioners to despair. Recently.
ing. A great many approaches to influencing behavior that Bill Smith of the Academy for Educational Development
carry other labels like health communication meet the last (Smith 1993. p. 2, 5) said:
two criteria. So the truly distinguishing trait for social mar- I tbink the future of Social Marketing is in doubt. I believe that
keting is that it applies marketing technology. Wbat, then, unless we do something now, il will either pa.ss away as just an-
are the defining characteristics of such a technology? This other fad of the 80*s, or worse yet, be institulionalized as a new
is a topic that heretofore has not been addressed systemati- bureaucratic routine of the 9O's. In both cases it may die, or be-
cally (although cf. Hunt 1991). In my own efforts to use so- come fossilized, without ever having been understood. The prob-
cial marketing to influence voluntary behaviors, I bave de- lem with social marketing today is clear. There is often little or
veloped a modest set of characteristics that distinguish the no marketing.... Social Marketing was taken over by social ad-
very best social marketing: vertising early in its history. Wbenever 1 mention the Four Ps
(Product, Place, Price, and Promotion) these days you can sec
1. Program managers understand the target audience's needs, the audience glaze over, sit back and say 'where has this guy
wants, perceptions, and present behavior patterns before act- been—the Four Ps—we're way beyond the Four Ps.' We have
ing, in many cases through the use of specific formative re- come to believe that the Four Ps are boring, because we are
searcb. Managers do not make assumptions about these char- only truly doing anything about the fourth P—promotion.
acteristics.
2. Program managers segment target markets wherever politi- Smith's solution (p. 8) is to "go back to basics—to stop
cally feasible and devise budgets and strategies tbat are spe- stressing awareness, acceptance and knowledge before we
cifically adapted to tbe characteristics of each defined figure out what new services people need, what benefits
segment. they want, and what banriers we can make easier to over-
 Journal of Public Policy & Marketing 113

come. Marketing is about programs, it's not about Bartels. Robert (1974). "The Identity Crisis in Marketing." Jour-
posters." nal of Marketing, 38 (October), 73-76.
Clearly, practitioners of social marketing find that good Bemays. Eugene (1952), Public Relations. Norman, OK: Univer-
definitions, like good theories, bave very practical implica- sity of Oklahoma Press.
tions. It is important that the field come to a clear agree-
Bloom. Paul and William D. Novelli (1981), "Problems and Cbal-
ment about what social marketing comprises and how it dif-
lenges in Social Marketing," Joumal of Marketing, 45 (Spring)
fers from its rivals. A clear, accepted definition will ensure 79-88.
that social marketing is applied where it is appropriate and
withheid where it is not. And it wili ensure that those carry- Brown, B. (1986), "Social Marketing and the Construction of a
ing out sociai marketing are not misappiying its basic ten- New Policy Domain: An Understanding ofthe Convergence
ets. Only under these circumstances will social marketing Wbich Made Social Marketing Possible." doctoral thesis. Vir-
ginia Commonwealth University (quoted in Elliott 1991).
have a fair chance to fuifill the great potential many of us be-
lieve that it has for doing "social good." Davison, P. (1959), "On the Effects of Communications." Public
Opinion Quarterly, 23, 3343-60.
Debus, Mary (1987), Lessons Learned from the Dualima Condom
An Ethical Concern Te.st Market. Washington, DC: SOMARC/Tbe Futures Group.
Social marketing is supposed to be applied to achieving so-
Elliott, Barry J. (1991), A Re-examination ofthe Social Marketing
cial good (cf Murphy and Bloom 1990). But social market-
Concept. Sydney: Elliott & Shanahan Research.
ing is in one sense merely a tecbnology to be employed by
those who wish to achieve social good. As such, it can be Fine, Seymour (1981), The Marketing of Ideas and Social Issues.
used by anyone who claims (or believes) that it is being New York: Praeger.
used for such an end. Tbe determination of wbat is social _, ed. (1990). Social Marketing: Promoting the Causes of Pub-
good is entirely in the hands of the would-be social mar- lie and Nonprofit Agencies. Boston: Allyn & Bacon.
keter. Tbis means that, inevitably, social marketing tecbnoi-
Fox, KarenF. A. and Philip Kotler, (1980), "The Marketing of So-
ogies wiii be applied by partisans promoting their own par- cial Causes: The First Ten Years," Journal of Marketing 44,
ticular visions of social welfare, which can differ signifi- 24-33.
cantly from those held be the general society.
Glanz, Karen, Frances Marcus Lewis and Barbara K. Rimer, eds.
Tbus, sociai marketing could be used by the Ku KIux (1990). Health Behavior and Health Education. San Francisco:
Klan, the German Nationai Socialist (Nazi) Party, Mother Jossey-Bass Publishers.
Teresa, and both pro-life and pro-choice forces. This possi-
bility raises a critical ethical issue: How do we ensure tbat Hirschman, Elizabeth (1991), "Secular Morality and the Dark
this exciting new tecbnology is used for " g o o d " ends? Side of Consumer Behavior: Or How Semiotics Saved My
Life," Advances in Consumer Research, 18, 1-4.
Tbose of us who wish to promote the use of social market-
ing are faced with two challenges. First, we must ensure Hunt, Shelby D. (1991). Modern Marketing Theory. Cincinnati:
that the characteristics of good social marketing enunciated South-Westem Publisbing Co.
previously are adhered to—that is, that we teach and advise Hyman. Herbert and Paul Sheatsley (1947), "Some Reasons Why
otbers in the very best social marketing practice. Second, Information Campaigns Fail." Public Opinion Quarterly 11,
we must make personal ethical judgments about the kinds 412-23.
of organizations and individuals to whom we offer our so-
Kotler, Philip and Alan R. Andreasen (1991), Strategic Marketing
cial marketing services. for Nonprofit Organizations, 4th ed. Englewood Cliffs. NJ: Pren-
Leo Szilard was instrumental to the development of tice-Hall, Inc.
atomic bomb technology. However, at the end of his career,
and Sidney Levy (1969), "Broadening the Concept of Mar-
he also spent much of his time lobbying to ensure that his keting," Journal of Marketing. 33, 10-15.
legacy was put to peaceful usage. There is a lesson here for
those of us who wish to be "social marketing experts." We and Eduardo Roberto (1989), Social Marketing: Strategies
must devote our energies to building the best technology for Changing Public Behavior. New York: The Free Press.
that we can. But we also owe it to ourselves and our com- :md Gerald Zaltman (1971), "Social Marketing: An Ap-
munities to see that it is used for what a broad consensus of proach to Planned Sociai Change," Joumal of Marketing, 35, 3 -
society agrees is its own social good. 12.
Luck, David J. (1974), "Social Marketing: Confusion Com-
pounded," Journal of Marketing. 38 (October). 70-72.
References Magnuson. Warren G. and Jean Carper (1968), The Dark Side of
Andreasen, Aian R. (1988), "Alternative Growth Strategies for the Marketplace. Englewood Cliffs. NJ: Prentice-Hall, Inc.
Contraceptive Social Marketing Programs," Joumal of Health
Malafarina, Katryna and Barbara Loken (1993), "Progress and
Care Marketing, 8 (June), 38-46.
Limitations of Social Marketing: A Review of Empirical Liter-
(1993), "A Social Marketing Research Agenda for Con- ature on the Consumption of Social Ideas," in Advances in Con-
sumer Behavior Researchers," in Advances in Consumer Re- sumer Research. Vol. 20, Michael Rothschild and Leigb McAl-
search, Vol. 20. Micbael Rothschild and Leigh McAlister. eds. ister, eds. Provo, UT: Association for Consumer Research. 397-
Provo. UT: Association for Consumer Research, 1-5. 404.
(forthcoming). Marketing for Social Change. San Francisco; Manoff, Ricbard K. (1985), Social Marketing. New York: Praeger
Jossey-Bass. Publishers.
114 Social Marketing

Merton, Robert, M. Fiske, and A. Curtis (1946), Mass Persuasion. Rothschild, Michael (1979), "Marketing Communications in Non
New York: Harper & Row. Bu.siness Situations or Why It's So Hard to Sell Brotherhood
Murphy, Philip and Paul Bloom (1990), "Ethical Issues in Social Like Soap," Joumal of Marketing 43. 11-20.
Marketing," in Social Marketing: Promoting the Causes of Pub- Simon, Julian (1968), "Some 'Marketing Correct' Recommenda-
lic and Nonprofit Agencies, Seymour Fine. ed. Boston: Allyn & tions for Family Planning Campaigns," Demography, 5, 504-7.
Bacon, 68-86. Smith, Wiiliam A. (1989), Lifestyles for Survival: The Role of So-
Ramah, Michael (1992), Social Marketing and the Prevention of cial Marketing in Mass Education. Washington. DC: Academy
AIDS. Washington, DC: Academy for Educational Develop- for Educational Development,
ment AIDSCOM Project. (1993), "The Future of Social Marketing," paper presented
Rangun. V.K. and S. Karim (1991). Teaching Note: Focusing the to the Marketing Conference on Creating Successful Partner-
Concept of Social Marketing. Cambridge, MA: Harvard Busi- ships, Carleton University, Ottawa. Canada,
ness School. Weibe. G.D. (1951/52), "Merchandising Commodities and Citi-
Rogers, Everett M. (1962), Diffusion of Innovations. New York: zenship in Television," Public Opinion Quarterly, 15 (Winter).
The Free Press. 679-91.