Development of a Global Social Marketing Community

I have written and talked about the need to develop a global social marketing community and organization (The Global Marketing Challenge) that could be crafted around the following ideals:

To continually improve the knowledge base and skill level of people who use social marketing in their professional activities to improve the health and social conditions of people around the world.

With the purpose of creating a set of experiences for program managers; policy-makers; program planners, evaluators and staff; implementing agencies; and investor and donor organizations that provide them with knowledge and tools to utilize social marketing to improve the health of poor and vulnerable populations.

Since then, with initial support from USAID through PSP - One, I have been meeting with people, sketching out ideas and testing them, and establishing a working relationship with Rare and their RarePlanet network site to weave together a proposal I am putting out here for you to review and comment on. You can view the presentation for a global social marketing network that includes background and rationale, features and benefits of the site, and screen shots from the existing rareplanet site.

The question that people raise when they see all of this is 'How does the social network site fit into an overall picture of social marketing?' 

Envisioning a social marketing ecology places the network into a larger framework of how this site could both anchor and support social marketing practitioners, a social marketing organization (or organizations), donors and investors in social marketing, experts/consultants, and academic institutions. This digital community (social network) should weave together the strands of social marketing that now exist. It should be the catalyst that brings them together, the glue that holds them together and the platform for innovation, improvement and expansion of the field. In the following diagram I identify 5 core elements of a social marketing ecology; these include

1.    A Social Marketing Organization (a global one that may have regional and country specific affiliates).

2.    Donors or Investors (Large organizations - public, private and NGO – that support and/or implement social marketing programs around the world. I prefer the latter term as I believe they should reasonably expect to see an ROI for investing in social marketing approaches to their causes and issues and we need to provide some of the tools to make this possible for them).

3.    Universities (and affiliated faculty, particularly those that sponsor or conduct social marketing education and research programs).

4.    Experts (individuals identified as offering value to social marketing organizations and program managers as consultants, trainers or in other roles).

5.    Social Marketing Practitioners (the people who are in the field doing the work of designing, implementing, evaluating and seeking funding for social marketing programs aimed at environmental, health and social causes and issues). These are the people who should be the ultimate beneficiaries of our efforts to design a social marketing ecology in which to work for they are the ones who will create the social impact and achieve the promises social marketing holds out as an innovative and unique approach to social change.

The diagram includes a set of arrows indicating what I think are the most salient sets of exchanges between these actors we should focus on. I do not presume that no other relationships can exist (for example, directly between experts and donors or universities); my point is to offer some parsimony while also focusing our attention on how a digital social network can intermediate some of these relationships and thus create networks of value, not maintain the current state-of-affairs where direct connections predominate and power and influence go to the most connected.

Each set of arrows has a box connected with it in which some of the more salient benefits that can be exchanged between two actors, but certainly not all of them, are identified. For instance, while there may be many different benefits to relationships among Investors (Donors) and Universities, funding for the development of academic and research programs is certainly a primary interest of universities. In turn, many of these investors may expect to benefit from such investments by being able to take early advantage of advances in knowledge and practice these academic and research projects produce and apply them to their other programs and portfolios.

Similarly, I have located each set of actors proximate to what I see as their most important transactions – experts next to the social marketing organization and practitioners for example. Most important for this concept of the social marketing ecology is that all actors have primary roles to play within the digital community to service the ultimate (social) benefits of increasing the capacity, innovativeness, effectiveness and efficiency of network members (social marketing practitioners) to achieve social impact. My point here is not to be exhaustive of the relationships and possible benefits among the actors, but to provide some clear targets for thinking through our marketing of the entire ecology to prospective constituents. I do know we need to get these right, especially for practitioners and investors.

My next steps are to approach potential investors to support further development of this social marketing network (all leads will be appreciated!). An equally important, and ambitious, step is to attract programs and people to get involved in the community - to stake their claim to becoming part of a social marketing community. When you review the slideshow, I believe the benefits for doing so will become clear. And then, let me know what you think of these ideas and how you would like to become involved.

You can leave comments here, at the slideshow, or at the social marketing wiki.

Comments

[Craig]

Alex and mcmcgrath,

Thanks for reading through all of it and sending in some comments. The one point I do want to respond to has to do with an organization-centric vs community centric point-of-view on all of this. As one offline comment made to me put it...
"..clearly your ecology is not intended to be an organizational structure for a social marketing organization but rather a description of our cosmos...the Digital Community seems representative of the gravitational field that influences the orbits of the entities you’ve described. This is a bigger and more dynamic conceptual framework than the way the discussion has gone up to now; one which called for an organization to make social marketing “real”. This model truly captures the “community” of social marketing in a way no one had done until now..."
It also captures what I believe is the essence of the struggle many people have with both social marketing and social media - THEY are no longer the center of the universe. A community should drive governance, not the other way around which is why I believe that the community should be the focal point of our activities whether we are practitioners, experts, academics, implementing agencies or donors.
Then, once you dive into the description of the community at slideshare, you can see where the social marketing project manager becomes the center of that universe. Our collective efforts should be focused on making each of us as innovative and effective as we can be in applying social marketing to all types of social problems in education, environment, health care, housing and yes, public health among others. An organization can support it and play various roles with external audiences (such as advocating for social marketing policies), but it cannot make a community happen. People have to do that.
And finally, as I end many of my social media presentations - "it's when people stop thinking of something as a piece of technology that the thing begins to have its biggest impact." Social networks are strategies to develop, engage and enable communities - it is not what many, but not all, of the 'new social marketers' (aka social media marketers) think of as just a new communication hammer. Though it can clearly be used for such narrow (and banal) purposes, let's aim higher than that for true social marketing that is aimed at improving lives and changing the world.

[mcmcgrath]

Hi Craig,
I agree with Alex about placing the Social Marketing Organization in the center, and the whole framework within the Digital Community. Perhaps certain transactions (speaking engagements, field laboratories) would need to be moved to indicate they are outside of this Digital Community sphere, emerging from it.

[Alex, aka Socialbutterfly]

Craig,

This is great news, and as you know, I for one am pumped. The potential in this type of network to get individuals and organizations to connect and collaborate across geographies, intangible boundaries and more, will allow those of us who are all working on the same cause to come together, share best practices, and learn from one another.

In terms of the presentation, I really like how you outline the "opportunity" that exists in our already existing community. In addition, it might be good to show the size of related fields who could also join up (i.e. NPOs). In addition, I do agree that the relationship between social marketing, and its need for social media marketing will be a growing focus for our field, and thus, am glad that is reflected in that powerpoint. I recently have also got into some thoughts on exploring more its fluid relationship (which I'd love to hear your thoughts on more sometime), considering so many get the two confused. This confusion is one reason why I think it is so important for us to know the differences and similarities. And, after that tangent...moving forward.

In terms of the diagram, I agree with the audience groups, though, I would place the Social Marketing Organization in the middle, as the social network is really the tool, and a means to an end. Then, I would add a background umbrella circle that envelopes all aspects and mark THAT the digital community. Just my humble thoughts. Plus, investors might be more slow to invest in "another" social network, but not as slow to invest in something more traditional, that also offers innovation...i.e. establishing a community with the tools that are all a-buzz.

I will continue to marinate on this and look over the presentation some more, as I currently have limited time, but wanted to share my first reaction/comments.

All in all, this is amazing and awesome news. And, I hope all get on board the train! =)