Transcript SBA Heads/BMs Lunch - Kcl Learning Centre Ltd.

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
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:
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)
Social marketing is…
“the use of marketing techniques to tackle social
changing attitudes and
behaviour”
issues by
The SMU offer
Insight research
Development and testing
Evaluation
Consultancy
North West Social Marketing
Capacity and Capability Research
North West Social Marketing
Capacity and Capability
Research
Summary of Findings
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
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 and understanding
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 a
TIFF (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

Behaviour and
Behavioural Goals
?

Insight Driven
Segmentation &
Targeting
Customer Orientation
Exchange analysis
Intervention &
Marketing Mix
Competition
Theory-based & Informed
Of concern is the lack of understanding/recognition of
Customer Orientation
Emperor’s New Clothes or Entirely New
Concept?
HP
HP
HP
SM
SM
SM
Paradigm shift rather than paradigm change
- accretion of skills
Different Stages
Spectrum of Stages
The PCTs are at very different stages regarding progress in
implementing social marketing.
 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
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
Roles and Responsibilities in PCTs
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
Executive
Who should be
involved in Social
Marketing?
Public Health
Communications
Health Promotion
Health Trainers
Commissioning
Key is to establish knowledge and understanding at all
levels of the PCT - shared ownership
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
Partnerships and Commissioning
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
Community
Engagement
Public Health
Observatory
Private
Companies
Networks and
RHA
Third
Sector
SM
Partnership
PCTs
Local
Authorities
PPI
Concerns about Capacity and Resources can be allayed by
establishing partnerships
Recommendations from NW Study
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
Lessons we have learnt since
Understand what you are commissioning and
when
What do I
need?
Get your evaluation in early
Project/programme cycle
Planning
Evaluation
Implementation
Social marketing intervention cycle
Insight
research
Intervention
development
Implementation
Evaluation
Best
practise
Evaluation
FORMATIVE 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
Mini-groups will give us
detail on the kinds of
attitudes and experiences
that have helped form
relationships with alcohol
2 mini-groups
with service
users
To cross-check and
provide greater
detail around the
segmentation,
resulting in video
case studies to help
identify with the
target audience
15 Stakeholder
interviews
3 in-situ minigroups with social
drinkers
3 follow up
depths
4 Ethnographic interviews:
detailed video profiles
Action Planning Workshop
Review of secondary literature,
identification of key stakeholders,
competition analysis, and identification of
initial psycho-graphic segmentation
Interviews to gain insight and
experience from expert
practitioners
20 depth
interviews with
non-users
Depths will
allow us to go
into more
detail with
each of these
respondents,
which we will
use to shore
up our
segmentation
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
Do not congratulate yourselves on finishing one
stage of the process – reports gather dust
People do not behave in isolation so why would
you?
Talk to each other…
GUM Nurse: we talk to them (the
patients) about lifestyle and being
fat and drinking and low selfesteem 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!
Importance of a shared vision
Excellent councils are the best places to work
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…?
% Above average
Excellent
% Below average
68
Good
27
55
Fair
31
55
Weak
Poor
% Average
Base: All respondents (500). Fieldwork: 12th – 27th May 2005
10
29
39
20
1
8
38
45
14
24
Job satisfaction is higher in better performers
% very satisfied with their present job
33%
33%
30%
30%
23%
18%
Overall
Excellent
Good
Base: All respondents (500). Fieldwork: 12th – 27th May 2005
Fair
Weak
Poor
But views on pay are similar everywhere
% strongly agree that my pay is fair
20%
17%
19%
18%
14%
Overall
Excellent
Good
Base: All respondents (500). Fieldwork: 12th – 27th May 2005
Fair
15%
Weak
Poor
Too much bureaucracy everywhere!
% strongly agree there is too much bureaucracy
35%
31%
28%
Overall
Excellent
34%
29%
26%
Good
Base: All respondents (500). Fieldwork: 12th – 27th May 2005
Fair
Weak
Poor
Nice people, interesting work - everywhere
% very satisfied with job factors
Excellent
Good
Fair
Weak
Poor
77%
82%
Friendliness of
colleagues
62%
81%
74%
Interesting work
Working hours
57%
53%
52%
51%
54%
46%
46%
47%
57%
49%
Base: 500 staff interviewed by phone - July/August 2003
So what is different
in the most
effective??
What seems to distinguish excellent performers is performance
management and listening to staff
% very satisfied with job factors
Excellent
Good
Weak
Fair
Poor
62%
47%
42%
45%
Input into job plans
32%
61%
59%
Opportunity to
show initiative
44%
42%
39%
46%
Feedback on your
performance
34%
22%
25%
27%
Base: 500 staff interviewed by phone - July/August 2003
Staff feel they are kept better informed in the best
councils
% strongly agree
31%
28%
20%
12%
13%
6%
Overall
Excellent
Good
Base: All respondents (500). Fieldwork: 12th – 27th May 2005
Fair
Weak
Poor
Best have more
internal cohesion overall
% Strongly agree
I understand my organisation’s
overall objectives
I understand my unit’s overall
objectives
77%
65% 65% 65%
64%
57%
41%
37% 38%
26%
Excellent Good
Fair
Weak
Poor
Base: All respondents (500). Fieldwork: 12th – 27th May 2005
Excellent Good
Fair
Weak Poor
What about senior management?
% Disagree
I have confidence in the senior
management team
Senior management have a clear
vision of where the organisation
is going
33% 32%
31%
30%
31%
28%
24%
18%
10%
5%
Excellent Good
Fair
Weak
Poor
Base: All respondents (500). Fieldwork: 12th – 27th May 2005
Excellent Good
Fair
Weak Poor
As a result
of all of
these
things….
Best are most likely to tell people outside they are
great!
% Strongly agree that they would speak highly of the
authority to others outside the organisation
51%
38%
33%
25%
25%
20%
Overall
Excellent
Good
Base: All respondents (500). Fieldwork: 12th – 27th May 2005
Fair
Weak
Poor