Exchange Marketing Technique and Social MarketingThis is a featured page



Posted Anonymously Latest page update: made by Anonymous , Jul 23 2007, 11:53 AM EDT (about this update About This Update Posted Anonymously Edited anonymously

No content added or deleted.

- complete history)
More Info: links to this page
Started By Thread Subject Replies Last Post
Anonymous Erica's thoughts 1 Jul 27 2009, 3:43 PM EDT by jvagroup
 
Thread started: Jul 23 2007, 12:08 PM EDT  Watch
Relationship
Value
Benefit
Norm

These are words commonly associated with social marketing campaigns. As a health marketer, I was surprised and impressed to see that these words also continuously appeared in two articles from Journal of Marketing about the consumer marketing technique exchange.

Exchange is a critical factor in the success of traditional marketing campaigns because it suggests that all exchanges are interactions, created and executed from social norms related to how people interact with one another. Consider these similarities:

In social marketing, researchers listen to the target audience to determine what they need in order for a campaign to succeed. In traditional marketing, companies identify what conditions are necessary for their product to be successful.

In both, the goal is to create a relationship between two parties in which both benefit equally, creating a reciprocal, rather than an unbalanced relationship.

Social and traditional marketing each offer something of value: In social marketing, the item and value are often both intangible, while in traditional marketing, both may be tangible or one may be tangible while the other is not.

A final similarity is that both seek to provide solutions or fulfill a need, which is the benefit of the exchange to both parties.

The main distinction between traditional marketing and social marketing from the point of view of exchange is the length of the relationship. The traditional marketing technique seeks a long term relationship of supply and demand social marketing seeks a long term impact, not necessarily a long term relationship.

As social marketing comes more and more into its own as a discipline and profession, the overlap of traditional marketing and social marketing will allow both practices to learn and borrow from one another, thus enhancing the ability of both to be successful.
1  out of 1 found this valuable. Do you?    
Keyword tags: None (edit keyword tags)
Show Last Reply
jonpaulb Centrality of Exchange Theory to Social Marketing 1 May 7 2009, 7:36 PM EDT by Anonymous
Thread started: Aug 10 2007, 5:45 PM EDT  Watch
Richard Bagozzi’s pioneering work on the Exchange Theory in the 1970s created a framework for marketers to better understand how they can influence behavior. While traditional marketing revolves around a simpler concept of reciprocity in which a product or service is exchanged for money Social Marketing depends on a more complex understanding of exchange. Social marketing complexity is due to the fact that the benefits offered by the marketer have not necessarily been understood, or in some cases do not directly apply to the target audience so much as to society. In some cases, the behavior sought by the marketer might run completely counter to the target audience's prevailing norms.

For that reason exchange theory is central to social marketing. A target audience’s perception of the benefits they will receive through the adoption of a certain behavior is the key motivation that marketers must tap into.

Therefore a highly developed understanding of which benefits are most important to the audience is crucial to a campaign’s success. Research is framed around the audience’s values and informs the marketer what types of incentives must be offered as a result of the new behavior being promoted.

Exchange theory focuses on the audience. The application of exchange theory allows social marketers to understand the consumer mindset and design a behavior (product) and message (promotion) that appeal to the audience’s pre-existing values. More directly, exchange theory provides insight into the audience’s perception of the price of the existing behavior weighed against the cost of altering that behavior (or in some cases maintaining behavior).

Sources:
Andreason, Alan R. (2000). Intersector Transfer of Marketing Knowledge, Handbook of Marketing and Society, Sage Publications, Washington, DC
Smith, William A. (2000). Social Marketing: An Evolving Definition, American Journal of Health Behavior, Washington, DC

8  out of 8 found this valuable. Do you?    
Keyword tags: None (edit keyword tags)
Show Last Reply

Anonymous  (Get credit for your thread)


Showing 2 of 2 threads for this page

Related Content

  (what's this?Related ContentThanks to keyword tags, links to related pages and threads are added to the bottom of your pages. Up to 15 links are shown, determined by matching tags and by how recently the content was updated; keeping the most current at the top. Share your feedback on Wetpaint Central.)