Social Marketing Critical Analysis

Report format/Template

Note:

1: You are required to attach a Griffith University assignment cover sheet to the front of your assignment

2: State your name, sNumber, and chosen paper to the first page of your assignment

3: Ensure you review the marking criteria prior to commencing this assessment task.{" "}

Identify case study journal article

Social change initiative overview :

briefly, yet succinctly summarise the social change initiative

NSMC Benchmark Criteria Analysis

Analyse the extent that the eight (8) social marketing benchmark criteria have/have not been used in the campaign. Discuss each benchmark criteria separately, and in the following order:

Behaviour
Customer orientation
Theory
Insight
Exchange
Competition
Segmentation
Methods mix

Social change initiative improvements:

The final section of your report should outline how the campaign could be improved.

References must be APA

SOCIAL MARKETING CRITICAL ANALYSIS REPORT GUIDELINES

Learning Objectives Assessed: 1, 2, & 4

Weight: 30%

Length: 1000 words, excluding reference list and appendices

The main focus on social marketing is on the application of well-known marketing tools and techniques to achieve positive social change (Wymer, 2011). For over 40 years social marketing has primarily been used to reduce behavioural risk factors for chronic diseases and for fostering the use of health related products and services (Lefebvre, 2011). However, the scope of social marketing has continued to expand to encourage a broader range of pro-social behaviour including pro-environmental household behaviour and consumption, blood donation, urban graffiti reduction, responsible pet ownership, and so on. It has also been argued that social marketing has increasing potential to concern itself with many larger social goals including issues of the social consequences, both positive and negative, of marketing policies, decisions and activities, and thus may eventually lead the effort to harness the power of markets to benefit society as a whole (Lefebvre, 2011, p. 65).

Donovan (2011) argues that “where the primary, if not only motivation, is to enhance the public good, then it is social marketing” (p. 9). However, if an organisation is engaged in contributing to a social cause such as donating to UNICEF some portion of sales, it is not social marketing; it is cause marketing, where the primary motive is not the social good but the achievement of profits via increased sales or enhanced public image (Donovan, 2011, p. 9). In order to clearly define social marketing the National Social Marketing Centre extended Andreasen’s (2002) benchmark criteria and identified eight key criteria{" "} for determining ‘what is’ and ‘what is’ not social marketing.

The eight criteria include:

Behaviour
Customer orientation
Theory
Insight
Exchange
Competition
Segmentation
Methods mix

Importantly, the benchmark criteria provides a robust mechanism for identifying genuine social marketing interventions, establishes a set of guidelines for best practice social marketing, and reduces misapplication of the social marketing label. Systematic reviews of social marketing initiatives (e.g. Carins and Rundle-Thiele 2014; Stead et al 2007) identify social marketing campaigns are more likely to be effective when more of the social marketing benchmark criteria are used.

Task

Please find the selected Journal Article that has been identified in the section on Blackboard below by Harris, et al. This paper describes one social marketing intervention for you to critically analyse.

Your task is:

To critically analyse the paper in relation to other literature.
Identify which NSMC criteria are clearly reported in the paper.

In the assessment you are undertaking a critical review to assess the extent that social marketing has/has not been used. Your recommendations should clearly outline how the missing benchmarks could be applied if the intervention were to be run again.

Summary of Assignment 1asks you to review one paper which describes a social marketing campaign. Your task in no more than 1,000 words is to assess which of the UK’s National Social Marketing Centre benchmark criteria are present or absent in the paper.

(see http://www.thensmc.com/sites/default/files/benchmark-criteria-090910.pdf)

This is the critical part - how well can you assess the number of benchmark that are present. Don’t expect all 8 to be there, they rarely are. You can do this part in a table pointing to evidence for the benchmarks you find.

The second part of the assignment asks you to make some recommendations. What else could they have done? This is where you consider which benchmarks are absent and explain what else they could have done to further increase the rates of behavioural change.

In 2021 this assessment is worth 30% of your total grade. The key is to master the 8 benchmarks - social marketing’s fundamental activities. Your second assessment will have you working to apply these benchmarks to change people’s behaviour. Therefore, we want to make sure you get a good understanding of the basics in Assignment 1.

References:

Andreasen, A. R. (2002). Marketing social marketing in the social change marketplace.{" "} Journal of Public Policy & Marketing, 21(1), 3-13.

Carins, J., & Rundle-Thiele, S.R.(2014). Eating for the better: A social marketing review (2000-2012).{" "} Public Health Nutrition, 17(7), 1628 - 1639

Donovan, R. (2011). Social marketing’s mythunderstandings.{" "} Journal of Social Marketing, 1(1), 8-16.

Lefebvre, R. C. (2011). An integrative model for social marketing. Journal of Social Marketing, 1(1), 54-72.

Robinson-Maynard, A., Meaton, J. & Lowry, R. (2013). Identifying key criteria as predictors of success in social marketing: Establishing an evaluation template and grid. In: Kubacki, K. and Rundle-Thiele, S. (eds.){" "} Contemporary Issues in Social Marketing, Cambridge Scholars Publishing.

Stead, M., Gordon, R., Angus, K., McDermott, L. (2007). A systematic review of social marketing effectiveness. Health Education, 107(2), 126-191.

Wymer, W. (2011). Developing more effective social marketing strategies. Journal of Social Marketing, 1(1), 17-31.

7004MKT– Social Marketing Critical Analysis
Criterion	Excellent	Very Good	Good	Satisfactory	Unsatisfactory
Social Change Initiative summary 5%	Demonstrates excellence in identifying and accurately summarising the case/problem (4.3-5)	Demonstrates good ability to identify and accurately summarising the case/ problem. (3.8-4.2)	Demonstrates a sound ability to identify and accurately summarise the case/problem. (3.3-3.7)	Demonstrates a satisfactory ability to identify and accurately summarise the case/problem (2.5-3.2)	Demonstrates limited or no ability to identify and accurately summarise the case/problem (0-2.4)
BC: Behaviour 10%	Demonstrates excellence in describing and analysing behavioural criterion (8.5-10)	Demonstrates competence in describing and analysing behavioural criterion (7.5-8.4)	Demonstrates a sound ability to describe and analyse behavioural criterion (6.4-7.4)	Demonstrates a satisfactory ability to describe and analyse behavioural criterion (5-6.3)	Demonstrates limited or no ability to describe and analyse behavioural criterion (0-4.9)
BC: Customer Orientation 10%	Demonstrates excellence in describing and analysing customer orientation criterion	Demonstrates competence in describing and analysing customer orientation criterion	Demonstrates a sound ability to describe and analyse customer orientation criterion	Demonstrates a satisfactory ability to describe and analyse customer orientation criterion	Demonstrates limited or no ability to describe and analyse customer orientation criterion
BC: Theory 10%	Demonstrates excellence in describing and analysing theory criterion	Demonstrates competence in describing and analysing theory criterion	Demonstrates a sound ability to describe and analyse theory criterion	Demonstrates a satisfactory ability to describe and analyse theory criterion	Demonstrates limited or no ability to describe and analyse theory criterion
BC: Insight 10%	Demonstrates excellence in describing and analysing insight criterion	Demonstrates competence in describing and analysing insight criterion	Demonstrates a sound ability to describe and analyse insight criterion	Demonstrates a satisfactory ability to describe and analyse insight criterion	Demonstrates limited or no ability to describe and analyse insight criterion
BC: Exchange 10%	Demonstrates excellence in describing and analysing exchange criterion	Demonstrates competence in describing and analysing exchange criterion	Demonstrates a sound ability to describe and analyse exchange criterion	Demonstrates a satisfactory ability to describe and analyse exchange criterion	Demonstrates limited or no ability to describe and analyse exchange criterion
BC: Competition analysis: 10%	Demonstrates excellence in describing and analysing competitor issues	Demonstrates competence in describing and analysing competitor issues	Demonstrates a sound ability to describe and analyse competitor issues	Demonstrates a satisfactory ability to describe and analyse competitor issues	Demonstrates limited or no ability to describe and analyse competitor issues
BC: Segmentation 10%	Demonstrates excellence in describing and analysing segmentation criterion	Demonstrates competence in describing and analysing segmentation criterion	Demonstrates a sound ability to describe and analyse segmentation criterion	Demonstrates a satisfactory ability to describe and analyse segmentation criterion	Demonstrates limited or no ability to describe and analyse segmentation criterion
BC: Methods Mix 10%	Demonstrates excellence in describing and analysing method mix criterion	Demonstrates competence in describing and analysing method mix criterion	Demonstrates a sound ability to describe and analyse method mix criterion	Demonstrates a satisfactory ability to describe and analyse method mix criterion	Demonstrates limited or no ability to describe and analyse method mix criterion
Improvements analysis 10%	Demonstrates excellence in identifying improvements relevant to previous analysis	Demonstrates competence in identifying improvements relevant to previous analysis	Demonstrates a sound ability in identifying improvements relevant to previous analysis	Demonstrates a satisfactory ability in identifying improvements relevant to previous analysis	Demonstrates limited or no ability in in identifying improvements relevant to previous analysis
Written presentation –structure & referencing 5%	Content organised clearly & logically; no technical errors; followed structural requirements closely. APA referencing system used correctly with diversity and appropriate references. (4.3-5)	Content organised logically; no technical errors; APA referencing system used correctly with appropriate references (3.8-4.2)	Content organised clearly; very few technical errors; structural requirements attempted. APA referencing system used with minimal errors; references are relevant (3.3-3.7)	Attempt to organize content clearly, technical errors evident; attempt to follow structure. APA referencing system used; yet with some errors. References not appropriate (2.5-3.2)	Presents content in an incoherent way and make frequent technical errors through the paper. Referencing not used correctly. Lack of evidence of references or not appropriate (0-2.4)