tom fred making social marketing work in your pct dan wellings, head of the ipsos mori social...
TRANSCRIPT
TOM
FRED
Making Social Marketing work in your PCT Dan Wellings, Head of the Ipsos MORI Social Marketing Unit
The Ipsos MORI Social Marketing Unit
Dan Wellings, RD, Head of the Social Marketing Unit
Steve Bell, RM, Deputy-head of the Social Marketing Unit
SMT:
Tim Burns (RD), Meghann Jones (RM), Laura Clarke (SRE), Matt Evans (SRE)
The Social Marketing Unit was set up in 2008 in response to the increasing demand for insight and evaluation work
leading to evidence-based actionable reporting to inform the design and development of social marketing interventions.
The Unit is led by staff who have extensive experience in the public health and communications sectors, and
understanding of health-related behaviour change theory:
Social marketing is…
“the use of marketing techniques to tackle social
issues by changing attitudes and behaviour”
Insight research
Evaluation Consultancy
Development and testing
The SMU offer
North West Social Marketing Capacity and Capability Research
Summary of Findings
North West Social Marketing Capacity and Capability Research
Summary of Findings
Aims of the Study
The overall aims of the study were:
– To inform policy makers about the understanding and practice of Social Marketing at different levels within PCTs
– To identify opportunities for how the Our Life program, NHS North West and the National Social Marketing Centre, and other partners can support Social Marketing to improve public health
Research was commissioned jointly by the National Social Marketing Centre and the NHS North West
Methodology
64 qualitative interviews conducted
– 40 face to face and 24 by telephone
All 24 PCTs included in the sample - max of 3 interviews per PCT
Respondent types in each PCT
– Director of Public Health
– Health improvement/Health promotion manager or equivalent
– Communications manager or equivalent
Process was iterative with analysis taking place throughout
Please note that whilst a picture of each PCT has been drawn it is based on three interviews and can not claim to be definitive
Fieldwork was conducted from November 2007 - February 2008
Awareness and Knowledge of Social Marketing
High awareness of social marketing concept
– Area of focus for NHS
– Buzzword
Knowledge and skills levels were mixed both across and within PCTs
– Majority at the beginning of the learning curve
– Danger of people being left behind
– Recognition of need to improve capacity and capability at all levels
– Fad?
– Respondents were keen to develop their skills base
Potentially valuable tool - jury still out
Definitions of Social Marketing
Large variation in definitions
– Gaps in understanding
– Criticism of jargon - esoteric
– Fear of “getting it wrong”
Distrust of “marketing” within the NHS potential barrier to further integration
Some confusion between Social Advertising and Social Marketing
In many areas projects were taking place, which had elements of Social Marketing but were not placed in the SM category
– By acknowledging both the similarities and differences between previous work and Social Marketing the transition is made easier
The lack of clear definition is a barrier impeding the progress of Social Marketing
Strategic versus Operational
QuickTime™ and aTIFF (LZW) decompressor
are needed to see this picture.
Most of the current thinking is
on topic based programmes or
campaigns. Few talk about
strategic element using it to inform
policy and strategy
Social Marketing Benchmark Criteria - understanding
?
Customer Orientation
Behaviour and Behavioural Goals
Theory-based & Informed
Insight Driven
Exchange analysis
Competition
Segmentation & Targeting
Intervention & Marketing Mix
Of concern is the lack of understanding/recognition of Customer Orientation
Emperor’s New Clothes or Entirely New Concept?
HPSM
HP
SM
HP
SM
Paradigm shift rather than paradigm change- accretion of skills
Spectrum of Stages
At the very beginning of the journey
No projects undertaken
Limited understanding
Responsibility for Social Marketing not decided upon
Projects already completed
Advanced understanding
Clear delineation of roles and responsibilities
The PCTs are at very different stages regarding progress in implementing social marketing.
Why are some PCTs more advanced than others?
Buy-in from top down Board buy-in was key as was sign-up across PCT
Resources available - finance and time
Limited resources led to limited initiatives - catch 22
Expertise Individuals with specific interest, more often than not
it is self-driven
Recruitment/appointing of specific personnel
Remit to develop Social Marketing
Champion somewhere in PCT
Individuals who advocated its adoption and drove
programmes forward - belief
Prioritisation Adoption of Social Marketing seen as priority
Where should it sit?
The responsibility for Social Marketing differed considerably from PCT to PCT
– Communications or Public Health/Health Improvement - some competition
– Specialist roles and remits in some PCTs
– Question mark over provider arm role going forward
Where Social Marketing sits within a PCT is key - both models as described above seem to be effective in different ways
– Resources
– Skills sets - Process and Content
– Interest
– Effective communication
Qualitative capacity and capability should be addressed
Using the respective skills of Communications and Public Health/Health Improvement is key to progress
Embedding Social Marketing
Who should be involved in Social
Marketing?
Executive
CommunicationsHealth Promotion
Public Health
Key is to establish knowledge and understanding at all levels of the PCT - shared ownership
Health TrainersCommissioning
External agencies and Commissioning
Working with private companies is a relatively new process for most respondents
Working with them effectively was seen as key to the process
– Understanding who to use and when?
– How to effectively commission?
– Knowing when not to use external agencies
– Employing people with experience of commissioning
Knowledge of companies working in this area was limited
– Concern about legacy/ownership
– Need for choice, diversity and competition in the market
Guidance and shared learning should be made available to PCTs new to working with private companies
Networks and SHA
The level of knowledge of Social Marketing activities taking place across North West was mixed
– Those respondents who had less understanding of Social Marketing were also those who were unaware of broader initiatives across the Regional Health Authority
– Similar projects run but not shared
Network and Regional initiatives were providing a forum for shared knowledge and expertise
– Avoiding duplication
– Saving time
– Sharing resources
Improved communication across PCTs is essential
Capacity and resources - potential parts of a whole
Networks and RHA
Local Authorities
PPI
Public Health Observatory
Private Companies
Community Engagement Third
Sector
Concerns about Capacity and Resources can be allayed by establishing partnerships
Partnership PCTs
SM
Recommendations
Each PCT to conduct internal audit to establish current resources
– Where are potential skill sets?
– What training should take place?
Ongoing training at all levels
– Assumptions about understanding should not be made
– Explain similarities and differences from what has gone before
– Clarify definitions
– Further explanations of Strategic role
Ensure that Social Marketing is embedded across the PCTs
Recommendations
Areas where partnership can be formed should be highlighted both within PCTs and beyond
Qualitative capacity and capability should be looked at and improved where necessary
– Training on how qualitative research informs Insight
Guidelines drawn up on how to work with external agencies
Increase communication across PCTs, Networks and Regionally
– Sharing resources
– Avoiding duplication
– Highlighting areas of cooperation
Get your evaluation in early
Insight research
Intervention development
Implementation EvaluationBest
practise
Planning Implementation Evaluation
Social marketing intervention cycle
Project/programme cycle
EvaluationFORMATIVE EVALUATION:
- Insight research
- Baseline
- Pre testing
- Design of process and impact evaluation cycle
PROCESS EVALUATION
OUTCOME or IMPACT EVALUATION
+
DOCUMENTATION OF LEARNING/BEST PRACTICE
Think about your methodologies carefully and feedback at the end
Secondary research Review of secondary literature, identification of key stakeholders,
competition analysis, and identification of initial psycho-graphic segmentation
15 Stakeholder interviews
To cross-check and provide greater
detail around the segmentation,
resulting in video case studies to help
identify with the target audience
Interviews to gain insight and experience from expert
practitioners
Mini-groups will give us detail on the kinds of
attitudes and experiences that have helped form
relationships with alcohol
Depths will allow us to go
into more detail with
each of these respondents, which we will use to shore
up our segmentation
2 mini-groups with service
users
3 in-situ mini-groups with social
drinkers 20 depth interviews with
non-users3 follow up depths
Action Planning Workshop
The workshop will provide an opportunity to engage stakeholders in the planning of local alcohol strategies, and
leave a legacy of involvement among key
contacts
4 Ethnographic interviews: detailed video profiles
Talk to each other…
GUM Nurse: we talk to them (the patients) about lifestyle and being fat and drinking and low self-esteem as well as our normal stuff
Interviewer: Do people working in the PCT know you do that?
GUM Nurse: Only if they’ve been a patient!
20
39
55
55
68
45
38
29
31
27
24
14
8
10
1
% Above average % Average % Below average
Q I am now going to ask you to rate [Authority name] as a place to work compared with other organisations? Would you rate it as…?
Base: All respondents (500). Fieldwork: 12th – 27th May 2005
Excellent
Good
Fair
Weak
Poor
Excellent councils are the best places to work
30%33% 33%
30%
23%
18%
Job satisfaction is higher in better performers
Overall Excellent Good Fair Weak Poor
% very satisfied with their present job
Base: All respondents (500). Fieldwork: 12th – 27th May 2005
17%18%
20%
14%15%
19%
But views on pay are similar everywhere
Overall Excellent Good Fair Weak Poor
% strongly agree that my pay is fair
Base: All respondents (500). Fieldwork: 12th – 27th May 2005
31%28% 29%
35%
26%
34%
Too much bureaucracy everywhere!
Overall Excellent Good Fair Weak Poor
% strongly agree there is too much bureaucracy
Base: All respondents (500). Fieldwork: 12th – 27th May 2005
77%82%
62%
52%
47%
81%
51%
57%
74%
54%
49%
57%
46%46%
53%
Nice people, interesting work - everywhere
Friendliness of colleagues
Interesting work
Working hours
Base: 500 staff interviewed by phone - July/August 2003
% very satisfied with job factors
Excellent Good Weak PoorFair
62%47%
42%
44%
22%
45%
42%
25%
32%
39%
27%
61%
46%34%
59%
What seems to distinguish excellent performers is performance management and listening to staff
Input into job plans
Opportunity to show initiative
Feedback on your performance
Base: 500 staff interviewed by phone - July/August 2003
% very satisfied with job factors
Excellent Good Weak PoorFair
20%
31%28%
12% 13%
6%
Staff feel they are kept better informed in the best councils
Overall Excellent Good Fair Weak Poor
% strongly agree
Base: All respondents (500). Fieldwork: 12th – 27th May 2005
Best have more internal cohesion overall
64%
77%
41%
65%
37%
65%
38%
65%
26%
57%
I understand my organisation’s overall objectives
I understand my unit’s overall objectives
% Strongly agree
Excellent Good Fair Weak Poor Excellent Good Fair Weak Poor
Base: All respondents (500). Fieldwork: 12th – 27th May 2005
What about senior management?
10%
5%
24%
18%
31% 30%33%
28%
32% 31%
I have confidence in the senior management team
Senior management have a clear vision of where the organisation
is going
% Disagree
Excellent Good Fair Weak Poor Excellent Good Fair Weak Poor
Base: All respondents (500). Fieldwork: 12th – 27th May 2005