“Emerging Adulthood” and Social Marketing Implications

Aug 24

An article in the New York Times last week,  “What Is It About 20-Somethings?”,   instantly caught my eye.  After all, I am myself a 20-something, and it’s always interesting to scrutinize what people unlike you scientifically conclude about people like you.  I remember taking my first psychology class in high school and learning about adolescence.  My text book told me that I, as a teen, was emotional, struggling with self-identity, and that I was rebellious.  At the time, I thought this was a stretch.  But in retrospect, this was probably spot-on. 

Now in 2010, the question “Why are so many people in their 20s taking so long to grow up?” seems to be at top of mind to many top social psychologists.

New York Times journalist Robin Marantz Henig sums it up nicely: “ It’s a development that predates the current economic doldrums, and no one knows yet what the impact will be…The traditional cycle seems to have gone off course, as young people remain un­tethered to romantic partners or to permanent homes, going back to school for lack of better options, traveling, avoiding commitments, competing ferociously for unpaid internships or temporary (and often grueling) Teach for America jobs, forestalling the beginning of adult life.”

Jeffery Jensen Arnett,  a psychology professor at Clark University in Worcester, MA,  is pushing for a recognized new stage in life called “emerging adulthood”.  Due to a growing need for higher education in U.S.  based on the job market, the acceptance of premarital sex, and the diminishing pressure for people in their 20s to marry young, Arnett believes that “emerging adulthood” is a time that young adults explore their possibilities while they have an uncertain future, and really engage in self-focus and awareness.  “Emerging adulthood” is not yet a recognized stage in life due to a great deal of debate, particularly because it can’t be applied to developing countries.  The “failure to launch” epidemic that is found in this period of life can only be applied to industrialized countries. 

So what would happen if “emerging adulthood” became a recognized life stage? I believe that the social marketing implications would be vast.  Just think.  Adolescence wasn’t an accepted stage in life until 1904, coined by G.  Stanley Hall.  Once it was recognized, healthcare, education, and even laws were adapted to provide special services aimed at this group.  And because of this, we now have numerous social marketing programs aimed to reduce teen violence, programs to keep teenagers sober and off drugs, and programs to decrease adolescent obesity, just to name a few. 

If “emerging adulthood” was commonly accepted by individuals and governments alike, I could easily foresee behavioral social marketing programs aimed at 20-somethings to help them gain independence from parents.  And because substance abuse tends to become a more serious problem when those affected are in their early 20s, I could foresee programs specifically targeted at this age group…focusing on getting treatment, rather than prevention.  In addition to this, I can envision social marketing programs with a goal to reduce 20-something anxiety.  People in their 20s have so much pressure to get so many things accomplished in a short amount of time.  We’re supposed to get an education, and now even a bachelor’s degree doesn’t seem to be enough.  We’re supposed to find jobs we like, but somehow make enough money to establish ourselves and pay off our often tens of thousands of dollars in student loans.  We’re supposed to decide if we want a life partner, and if so, we’re supposed to find them.  We’re supposed to maintain friendships to last a lifetime, and we also need to start taking care of our parents as they’re getting older.  Wouldn’t it be great if the government encouraged us to all do yoga and provided free yoga classes in every metropolitan city? Just kidding (kind of). 

At this point, there really is no way to know whether or not “emerging adulthood” will actually become an accepted and recognized stage in life.  It will be interesting to follow the debate as the months and perhaps years go by.  But one thing is certain—we as social marketers, will unquestionably be involved.

The Push-Me Pull-You of Social Media

Aug 24

Last week, I attended CDC’s National Health Communication, Marketing, and Media conference in Atlanta. And whether you call it new media, social media, or Web 2.0—the new tactics available online and via mobile devices took center stage at the conference. The presentation, “Social Marketing and the Uses of Social Media: Cases from the American Red Cross, American Legacy Foundation (Legacy), U.S. Census Bureau, and Ad Council” provided the most thought provoking example of the diversity of outcomes that can be influenced by social media.

Throughout the conference, presenters reiterated that social media is a tool or tactic to be used to achieve a goal. Often, because people get excited about the next new things, they say, “We need a Twitter account!” instead of, “What could a Twitter account do for us?” The desired outcome needs to drive the choice of tools. Perhaps the best example of that oft-repeated maxim is Legacy’s two-pronged approach to reducing the rate of smoking in the US, the truth® and EX® campaigns.

You are probably familiar with truth’s hard-hitting, eye-catching ads that position rebellion against big tobacco as a better way for teens to assert independence than smoking. This campaign is all about viral communications—pushing out edgy, fun, sharable materials for teens to take ownership of and pass on. Recognizing that most smokers start as teens, Legacy’s goal with truth is to reduce the number of teens who start smoking. To do this they try to “infect” teens with truth so that they’ll spread it to their friends through YouTube, e-cards, computer games, Facebook, and other truth social media assets. truth uses social media to push out messages to their target.

While pushing information is a classic paradigm of health communication, the “be an EX” campaign uses social media as a tool to pull people into the website. According to the American Legacy Foundation, 34% of smokers say they want to quit each year, but only 10% succeed. EX is designed to support current adult smokers in their decision to quit. So while EX uses many of the same tools (e.g. YouTube, Facebook, and online discussion groups) the goal of EX’s social media is to draw the audience into becomeanex.org to connect them with cessation tool, support, and resources.

Looking at the two programs side-by-side the push-pull distinction seems intuitive. However, most conversations about social media focus on pushing out messages, raising awareness, or educating. The Legacy Foundation’s programs illustrate how outcomes need to drive social media engagement, rather the social media driving the outcomes.

Laura Howe, from the American Red Cross, cautioned that not only must social media strategy be outcome driven, but it also must take into account audience expectations. An American Red Cross survey discovered that one in six people look to social media sources for information on disasters. Knowing this, the Red Cross is better able to meet those expectations by live-tweeting important information, including shelter locations, safety tips, numbers of people sheltered and fed by the Red Cross, evacuation routes, etc. Unfortunately, sometimes expectations are ahead of capabilities; three out of four people surveyed believed that if they posted a call for help to a social media platform, emergency responders would arrive within an hour. Some believed their friends or family would call 911, but others believe that emergency services are, or should be, monitoring social media platforms.

I walked away from the session with the basics (outcome-driven efforts and targeting programs to the audience) and the possibilities (how do we mitigate audience expectations of social media?) swirling around in my head and reminding me why social media is such a powerful and misunderstood tool of the trade.

CDC’s National Conference on Health Communication, Marketing, and Media 2010

Aug 16

Tomorrow morning CDC kicks-off the 2010 National Conference on Health Communication, Marketing, and Media. This year’s theme, “Convergence: Purpose, Programs, & Partners” looks to open an educational dialogue among the many attendees–from practioners to researchers and individuals from academia–about how these fields are continually merging.

After looking over the agenda, it’s hard to pick out which sessions to attend. A few highlights:

0 Expanding Our Reach: Leveraging Social Media and Partnerships for a Public Health Emergency, featuring results and lessons learned from the 2009 H1N1 flu event (Wednesday at 10:45 AM)

Tweets, Retweets and @Replies: Using Twitter to #Hash out Better Public Health Communications by Listening, Engaging and Responding, CDC representatives discuss the increasing use of Twitter for health communication including lessons how to listen, engage, and evaluate (Wednesday at 10:45 AM)

Open Health: Embracing Open Government in Health Communications Efforts, a panel on how the Open Government Initiative, signed by President Obama on his first day in office, can help improve health communication (Wednesday at 4:15 PM)

Examining the Power of Text Messages for Health Promotion and Disease Prevention, a review of best practices and examples of using text message for health promotion (Thursday at  10 AM)

You can find us on Tuesday at 2:15 presenting, “Using Near-Peers to Communicate with Hard-to-Reach Youth” as part of the panel presentation, “Using Social Networking and New Media to Solve Old Problems.” Our presentation will provide best practices in developing near-peer or brand ambassador programs. If you miss this, find us on Wednesday with our poster presentation, “Using Research to Understand Hard to Reach Audiences” profiling 11 to 14-year-old youth in high-risk, inner-city communities, as well as 15 to 18-year-old youth who act as their near-peer influencers.

Check out the full schedule and details here. What are you looking forward to?  See you in Atlanta!

New Resource: CDC’s Gateway to Health Communication and Social Marketing Practice

Aug 13

The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) debuted a new website this week: The Gateway to Health Communication and Social Marketing Practice. The site includes public and private resources organized into six key topics: audience, campaigns, research/evaluation, channels, and tools & templates. A brief overview of each topic and available resources:

Audiences: Features CDC’s Audience Insights on a number of populations (moms, teens, elderly) and includes links to resources for diverse populations and information on health literacy.

Campaigns: A great list of CDC’s current health campaigns, as well as links to social media programs, and federal resources on developing campaigns.

Research/Evaluation: The most helpful resource on this page is the “This Just In” research summaries; I hope to see new summaries as the site grows. I also must note that, that not surprisingly this is the most robust section of the site. The page also provides e-Health Data Briefs, and research and evaluation tools among others.

Channels: Provides overview of channels CDC used for disseminating messages, media resources, and links for usability and best practices in web development and marketing.

Tools/Templates: A number of government resources for getting your health communications programs started.

CDC also launched a new blog, “The Communicator” to engage health communicators and social marketers alike in conversations about the practice. The first conversation: What should we call this conversation, this blog? Post your ideas here.

At first glance, the site encompasses and organizes a number of resources helpful for those just starting in the field, like myself, as well as the season practitioner.  I would love to see more private resources added as CDC continues to evolve the Gateway. On this same note, I really like that CDC offers a way to share success stories. So what do you think: Is CDC’s new resource helpful? What do you want to see added? 

PS. Come back on Monday for a preview of CDC’s Health Communication, Marketing, and Media conference and check out the conversation online: #HCMM10.

“What Do You Do?”

Aug 11

When you meet someone for the first time (friend of a friend, parent of a friend, someone random on the street who starts talking to you), you are inevitably compelled to make conversation.  Sometimes it’s small talk.  Sometimes it’s more substantial.  But always…always…the question comes up.  “What do you do?”

When I first started at Ogilvy, I used to say “Social Marketing.”  But then the endless amount questions followed.  How do you explain something so complex to a person you hardly know?  They may have little understanding of communications and marketing, never mind the intricacies of behavior change principals we employ on a daily basis.  After a few months of looking at confused faces as I tried to articulate myself around the concept of social marketing, I changed my answer.

“What do you do?” they would ask.  And I began say “Cause Marketing.”  With this answer, people immediately understood that my job involves marketing for the ‘good’ of society.  People got it.  Well…kind of.  Cause marketing technically involves for-profit businesses helping out non-profit cause(s) in one way or another, whether it is through corporate giving, or through collaboration on other cause-related programming.  But I also personally work on behalf of two public Federal agencies.  So my answer “Cause Marketing” wasn’t really accurate across all of my accounts.

Social marketing involves the application of consumer marketing principles to the promotion of ideas and practices to create awareness and change attitudes and behaviors regarding social issues.   Public safety, violence reduction, environmental sustainability, the promotion of volunteerism, and health and well-being are all social marketing topics, just to name a few.   Social marketing can be used to change intentions around perception of risk and social norms, and can additionally provide skills needed to carry out specific behaviors to improve the health and safety of individuals, or of a population, or even of an ecosystem.  (Imagine saying this at a dinner party…)

My conclusion: There is sometimes an overlap between social marketing and cause marketing.  For example, one project I work on involves a corporate organization that aims to advance education.  We apply behavior change tactics to encourage people to give back to their local educational communities, reward teachers for hard work, and volunteer in their local school systems.   Social marketing. The project also involves corporate giving to educational non-profits through corporate social responsibility.  And with this, the program promotes consumer purchasing behavior.  Cause marketing.

“What do you do?” I now have it down to just a few short and sweet sentences:

“I work in social marketing.  I use traditional communications principals and apply them to help others change their behaviors for the ‘social good.’ It’s kind of like cause marketing—making a difference.”

Washington Flip Flops – Literally!

Aug 10

At our recent Ogilvy Exchange – How Social Change Happens in the 21st Century – my friend and CNN producer Val Willingham took up the opposition to the “blame it on the media” camp. As a former CNN producer myself, I was sensitive to how the discussion was going and how a favorite Washington scapegoat – the media – was rearing its ugly head. Val reminded the panelists and guests that the media-consuming public prefers the spoon full of sugar without the medicine when they go shopping for news. News producers like her are in a constant battle to give the public what they want while providing important and valuable information that they need. She concluded with the prediction that her upcoming story on the foot health hazards of flip flops would be a big hit. It’s now out and she is absolutely right: nearly 150 comments and nearly 900 recommendations on Facebook.

PhDs, policy wonks and politicians all might fuss and fume about CNN expending resources on the banal and trivial but I think Val’s story on flip flops was engaging, interesting, and darn right informative. On this one, she hit the right balance.

A Formula for Social Change

Jul 23

As social marketing communicators, we are challenged with the task of promoting complex issues that impact the daily lives of Americans. On July 15, four distinguished panelists, Dr. Sandeep Jauhar (Director of the Heart Failure Program at Long Island Jewish Medical Center), Bill Novelli (Distinguished Professor at the McDonough School of Business), Debbie Witchey (Executive Vice President, Healthcare Leadership Council) and Robert Davis (President & Editor in Chief of Everwell TV and author of “The Healthy Skeptic”) participated in a lively discussion on “How Social Change Happens in the 21st Century.”

The session began with the following question:  What are the main challenges that communications professionals face today in bringing about significant behavior change?  How has this shifted over the past decade? Panelists approached these questions through several different lenses, including that of obesity and the rising rates of obesity among children.

The panelists addressed the question, “why is it so difficult to motivate an individual to do the “right” thing” when they:  a) acknowledge that the action or behavior is the best one to take; b) have the tools and the means to take the prescribed action; and c) are exposed to repeated messaging that reminds them to take the action?

Novelli discussed the fact that there are admittedly many different factors at play here—including a cultural shift that has effectively made obesity a “normal” part of our daily lives. Dr. Jauhar commented that one thing is clear; the current message of “eat less” is not working when it comes to encouraging individuals to maintain a healthy weight.

So what then is the “formula” we need to adopt as communicators?  While not exhaustive, the panel proposed the following elements during the course of the discussion:

Creative Pressure Points—Referencing the “truth” campaign, Novelli noted the success that this anti-smoking campaign has had among young adults. Specifically, the campaign leveraged this group’s inherent need to rebel against an entity and the campaign organizers made that entity the tobacco industry.

Work with the Media to Paint a Clear Picture of the Implications of Scientific findings—The science is always changing and we need avoid oversimplifying the issue.  We saw this issue take center stage when the U.S. Preventive Task Force published recommendations on breast cancer. Their recommendations were not a surprise to the public health community, but some media painted the picture that the task force was “flip flopping” on the issue. Davis’ recommendation was to give audiences more context around an issue to allow room for future interpretation and to provide the information necessary for the audience to make an informed decision.

Understanding Environmental Factors—Often times the issue is not as black and white as it may appear. Witchey, an expert in community interventions and grassroots program planning recounted a story about how she developed training modules to educate those in a community where heart attack rates were increasing. However, she soon realized that the health interventions she designed had not made any impact on the rate of heart attack deaths. Only after talking with community members did she learn that one of the fundamental  problems involved ambulance response times—drivers could not locate the patients’ houses due to the fact that few had address numbers and  there was generally poor street lighting. She quickly worked to integrate these elements into her work and consequently helped lower the rate of heart attack deaths.

Public/Private Partnerships—Everyone agreed that no one can solve this issue on his or her own; partnerships are a critical element of success. Davis did warn that partnerships must be entered into with caution so as not to damage or degrade either party.

Carrots and Sticks—Motivating individuals through incentives and punitive factors is being adopted by some campaigns. Take for example West Virginia’s 2006 plan to reward Medicaid patients who “signed a pledge to enroll in a wellness plan and to follow their doctors’ orders with special benefits.” According to Dr. Jauhar, “those who did not sign up were enrolled in a more restrictive plan that, among other things, limited drug coverage to only four prescriptions a month.” Dr. Jauhar’s point is that “sticks” do not work. He reported that “as of August 2009, only 15 percent of 160,000 eligible patients in West Virginia had signed up for the program.” Like other similar carrot and stick type initiatives, “there are simply too many external factors that impact our ability to be persuaded by carrots and sticks. In this instance, “patients with limited transportation options were having a hard time committing to regular office visits. And experts say there is no evidence that restricting benefits for noncompliant patients has promoted healthy behaviors.”

Not Enough Time—Panelists agreed that more time is needed with patients in the health care setting, specifically to allow health care practitioners, such as doctors, nurse practitioners, and physician assistants to be able to reinforce prevention messages. The current model of physician reimbursement does not encourage health care providers to spend time with patients beyond a minimum, and herein lays a root problem with the way health care treatment is perceived and administered. Some panelists indicated that help might be on the way with calls for changes in reimbursement and health reform legislation.

Each of these elements plays a critical factor in determining a formula for success.  However, the bottom line is that there is no definitive answer. Any “formula” we have now will inevitably change.  As Davis so appropriately noted, as science, technology, and our understanding of issues such as obesity change and evolve so too will our approach to addressing the issue.

Natalie Adler, Senior Vice President at Ogilvy Public Relations contributed to this post.

Social Marketing Fieldtrip to FOX 5 Evening News

Jul 23

Blogging. Twitter. Facebook. WOM. Widgets.

It’s so true, these words are all “household names” that have become more and more common over the past decade. So what is happening to traditional media? With the ever growing channels of mass communication in the world around us, is there still a place for, say, long-established TV news?

Yes. According to the Pew Research Center for the People & the Press, 68% of people still get their local news from television reports. This is huge. And we can’t ignore it despite the fact that we’re all going digital.

Mason Essif, a media strategist in our social marketing practice here in DC, invited Jenna McIntyre, Alexandra Vaughn, and I to FOX 5 on Monday to watch the FOX 5 evening news filmed live. Laura Evans, host of the evening news gave us a tour of the studio, and talked us all through the process of generating content, and ensuring that viewers are receiving the most applicable, timely, and relevant news available.

Check out the video link below. It’s really interesting to see what is happening “behind the scenes” the broadcasts we all see on TV, especially since we all still need to consider how many Americans are still gathering their news from traditional broadcast media.

Modifying Behavior Through Video Games

Jul 21

If you haven’t already heard, The Let’s Move! campaign, started by First Lady Michelle Obama, is working towards the goal of eliminating childhood obesity.  The campaign takes an approach that works through engaging multiple audiences, including children.  As part of the campaign, the First Lady has challenged gamers and inventors across the nation to create a video game app would help children and their parents eat healthily and become more physically active. 

And the First Lady is not alone.  Utilizing video games to encourage positive, healthier behaviors is a trend that appears to be on the rise.  Just as young children can use video games to learn math and reading skills, it appears as though people of all ages might also be able to learn the importance of exercise or calorie intake through gaming.  Adam Penenberg interviewed neuroeconomist Dr. Paul Zak recently for Fast Company on this very topic.  Dr. Zak felt that casual social games, such as those on Facebook, can truly modify behavior and that by focusing on small actions and using small amounts of motivation, behavior can be modified.   

So what are your thoughts?  Do you think our actions can truly be modified through games?  Why not see for yourself?  The Let’s Move! apps have all been submitted and you can now test them out and vote for your favorite at http://go.usa.gov/OI8.  Who knows, maybe one will have you rethinking that big piece of chocolate cake!

Patient Autonomy: Good or Bad?

Jul 16

Yesterday, Ogilvy held a really interesting panel discussion called “How Social Change happens in the 21st Century.” (Natalie posted a nice synopsis about it here). We covered a variety of topics regarding healthy behavior change, and discussed appropriate and effective channels of communication to reach audiences that are already bombarded with thousands of messages every day.

The “issue” of patient autonomy came up. When I say “issue,” I am not kidding. Some people in the room truly felt that patient autonomy is a major hindrance to public health. I get it. I am even a culprit. When I have a headache, I go online to see what may or may not be wrong with me. When my friends want to lose weight, they search blogs for diet plans. And my parents (they’re very young) are approaching age 50. And with age 50 comes a variety of new tests and screenings. Who do they talk to? They talk to their friends who have already gone through the “50-year-old” exams. Do we talk to our doctors about our health concerns? Absolutely.  But with modern technology and an openness to discuss personal health perhaps more than ever before, we all have other ways of seeking health information.

I never really viewed all of this as negative. More channels of seeking information gives public health communicators more channels of reaching target audiences. The more ways you can reach your target audiences, the more powerful your messaging becomes. Although some of my colleagues work on campaigns that are directed toward physicians, I personally work on campaigns that are directed mainly toward consumers. I guess this is why I never saw a problem with patient autonomy.

So what is the “issue” with patient autonomy? Yesterday’s panel made me realize that health literacy is a real concern in the U.S. and finding information online, for example, does not always translate to comprehension. Furthermore, doctors go through years and years of training, and can absolutely give personal advice and the best possible quality of care to patients. When patient / physician interaction is cut down due to patient autonomy, this can be dangerous.

So what do we do about this? Well, we can’t possibly stop human curiosity. We’re not going to regulate the internet so that people can’t look up health information. We’re not going to infringe on free speech when a woman wants to talk to another woman about her first mammogram. I say…let’s roll with it. Technology isn’t going away, and neither is the basic human instinct to be inquisitive. Let’s use the many lines of information and communication to encourage patients to talk to their doctors. Let’s use these channels to encourage healthy behaviors.

Patient autonomy can be a scary thing, but in another light, it also opens doors and opportunities for those us seeking to create and implement public health programs that have lasting effects.