Social marketing 715
clarify their product attributes. In commercial
marketing, product attributes range on a con-
tinuum from the tangible (colour, taste, shape,
size, packaging, performance) to the intangible
(brand, image, status). Social marketing prod-
uct attributes are largely situated at the intan-
gible end of this continuum. Some potential
classifications of product attributes are sug-
gested below:
Trialability– Can the behaviour be tried out
beforehand before permanent or full adoption
(e.g. wearing a cycling helmet)?
Ease– How easy or difficult is it to adopt the
behaviour (wearing a seat belt versus giving up
smoking)?
Risks– What are the risks of adopting the
behaviour?
Image– Is the behaviour attractive or
unattractive?
Acceptability– Is the behaviour socially
acceptable?
Duration– Is the behaviour to be practised
once or repeatedly? Is it to be sustained over
the short or long term?
Cost– Does the behaviour have a financial cost
or not (eating a healthier diet may involve
more expense, drinking less alcohol does not)?
Analysing product attributes in this way helps
social marketers to formulate meaningful and
communicable product concepts. For example,
in addressing teen smoking, research may
suggest that image is a key issue, rather than
the avoidance of health risks. The social mar-
keter can then put particular emphasis on
producing non-smoking options that are cool
and trendy – such as freedom of choice – rather
than ones that major on the health benefits of
quitting.
A second major potential problem with the
product for social marketers is flexibility. It is
commonly argued that social marketers have
less flexibility than commercial marketers in
shaping their product offerings (Bloom and
Novelli, 1981), for a number of reasons. First,
the resources, technology and skills to develop
alternative products may not be as readily
available to the social marketer as they are in
commercial marketing, so the range of product
innovation options is smaller. Fox and Kotler
(1980) note that the anti-smoking social mar-
keter seeking to develop the most attractive
substitute product really should invent a safe
cigarette, but is constrained by technological,
financial and political factors. Second, product
offerings may be constrained by political fac-
tors outside the social marketer’s control. Gov-
ernment policy or local public health strategy
may dictate that only one behaviour or way of
practising the behaviour should be endorsed.
For example, harm minimization, as opposed
to abstention, solutions to the problem of drug
abuse may be unacceptable in certain political
climates.
Third, social marketing’s offerings often
appear to be ‘absolutes’ in that the social or
health benefit pertains only if the behaviour is
adopted wholesale (so partial or temporary
adoption is not possible) or is adopted in one
particular form (so different forms of the
behaviour cannot be marketed to different
adopter groups). An example of such an abso-
lute is smoking, where only total abstinence
produces meaningful health benefits, as
opposed to drinking, where different modera-
tion messages can be promoted. Immunization
and fluoridation of the public water supply are
also examples of absolutes.
However, many other social marketing
offerings are ‘relative’, in that a health or social
benefit accrues even if the behaviour is adopted
only in a moderate way. Exercise by elderly
people is one example (Stead et al., 1997b).
Nutrition is another instance where social
marketers can develop a wide range of product
offerings for different target segments: the fruit
and vegetable consumption programme out-
lined in Case 4 above is one such example.
Furthermore, even in the case of absolute
products, although social marketers may have
limited control over the fundamental aspects of
their offerings, they do, like commercial mar-
keters, have potential control over how their