Tag Archives: theory

Beyond Marketing Gadgets, Thingymagigs and Gizmos

Define today’s concept of: marketing. Now, imagine yourself 40-50 years ago, and define marketing. Notice any big differences? Probably a few come to mind.

I bring this up because I was taught that to know where we are headed, we have to know and understand the past. Rewind back to 1969 when an article called “Broadening the Concept of Marketing” was published by Philip Kotler and Sidney J. Levy (remarkably–you can get a free copy online). My fellow social changers and social marketeers, it was this document that helped paved the way for careers, projects and initiatives we are doing today. It was this document that said marketing was a “societal activity” that can be applied for more than “toothpaste, soap and steel” but that marketing can be transferable to organizations (non-business organizations…aka, nonprofits), persons and ideas. IDEAS.

Fast forward to today, and we are still re-defining and evolving our concept of marketing. Take Seth Godin’s recent post about how we frame marketing.  Or better yet–he explains that marketing is what happens between the frames:

Marketing is what happens when you’re not trying, when you’re being transparent and when there’s no script in place.

With this sentence, one word comes to mind–authenticity. I see all the marketing, talk and chatter about the latest and greatest gizmo. I see people and organizations striving and racing. In between all that, there is authenticity. We must find it, and we must connect with it again if we are to truly be successful–and if we are truly going to make a difference. Makes me think, how will the idea of authenticity broaden marketing for future generations? Discuss.

flickr image credit: planigan412

Social Change: Art or Science?

When explaining social media, I find myself, at times, explaining how it is half art and half science. Last week, marketing guru Seth Godin brought up the age-old question again in terms of the marketing field, stating that marketing is both. He explains:

“Some marketers are scientists. They test and measure. They do the math. They understand the impact of that spend in that market at that time with that message. They can understand the analytics and find the truth.”

“The other marketers are artists. They inspire and challenge and connect. These marketers are starting from scratch, creating movements, telling jokes and surprising people. Scientists aren’t good at that.”

A solution Godin gives is that we must wear hats, and be willing to switch hats. A mental image of my boss immediately flashed in my mind as he loves Harvard’s creativity tool “6 Thinking Hats.” There is a heap of value from this exercise that I too have become quite a fan, but that is a blog post for another day.

On the social marketing list serv, Godin’s post inspired a discussion on how this debate applies to social marketing. Though social marketing, is in many ways, the “science behind social change,” my favorite perspective came from thought leader and the mother of social marketing herself, Nancy Lee:

“Personally, I think we need the scientific approach for the situation analysis, determining desired behaviors, selecting priority audiences, and identifying the competition, barriers and motivators. Then, the artists uses this input to inspire the strategy. Then, the science comes back to measure outcomes and impact and what to do better the next time.”

Applying this to Godin’s “hat” analogy, Lee offers us insight, as social marketers, when to wear which hat. Brilliant.

Applying this debate to social change, I believe it is both part art and part science, along with some sweat mixed in, buckets of perseverance, one strong vision, a diverse set of hands and a dash of luck. And, this is a good thing. Take architecture for example. There is no denying that there is a science to building strong foundation that support people, systems, and communities. But on the same note, there is no denying that certain places–the Sear Tower, Sydney’s Opera House, the Great Wall, the Eiffel Tower–emulate an artistic vision and ring a certain bell of inspiration upon viewing. It takes many, many types of hats at different times. The key, is knowing which hat and for what purpose.

Thus, to me, it’s not a question to debate, but a question that expands your closet (and your horizons!)

flickr credit: doc.holiday41

Social Marketing vs. Social Change Marketing

In an earlier post, I clarified how social marketing differentiates itself from social media marketing. Now, I am asking for your thoughts on how the term social marketing relates to the term social change marketing.

social change

 

Social marketing, as we’ve discussed, has decades of theoretical history and practice. It is a term constantly evolving and defining itself. However, the field also faces a challenge: branding itself…especially since the onset of social media marketing.

Reading through social marketing texts and journals, the terms – social change, marketing for social change, and social change marketing are making increasing appearances, so I am curious on others’ thought about how the two terms relate.

A good summary of the two concepts, including how they relate to commercial marketing, is found in Dr. Stephen Dann’s slideshow titled:

“Social change marketing in the age of direct benefit marketing – where to from here?”

In this presentation, Dann asks the question: Where to from here? which provides information on how social marketing has grown and compares to commercial marketing and what this may mean for the future. Other signs of the concept of social change’s relationship to social marketing dates back to Prof. Alan Andreason’s book: Marketing Social Change. So, there is a history. On the web, Craig Lefebvre’s blog is titled On Social Marketing and Social Change, suggesting the relationship.

Thus, I am curious on your thoughts about the terms/concepts of social marketing versus social change marketing:

  • Can social marketing be renamed social change marketing?
  • Or, is social marketing one component of social change?
  • Or, is social marketing one piece of social change marketing? What’s the difference? Is there a difference?

It may seem like a matter of scrabble to some, but these discussions really engage me, and I hope the enthusiasm sparks interest as I think the relationship between the two terms is continuing to develop and will becoming increasingly important as we work to brand social marketing. =)