This article appeared in a journal published by Elsevier.

The attached
copy is furnished to the author for internal non-commercial research
and education use, including for instruction at the authors institution
and sharing with colleagues.
Other uses, including reproduction and distribution, or selling or
licensing copies, or posting to personal, institutional or third party
websites are prohibited.
In most cases authors are permitted to post their version of the
article (e.g. in Word or Tex form) to their personal website or
institutional repository. Authors requiring further information
regarding Elsevier’s archiving and manuscript policies are
encouraged to visit:
http://www.elsevier.com/copyright
 Author's personal copy

Journal of Business Research 63 (2010) 147–153

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Journal of Business Research

Redefining social marketing with contemporary commercial marketing definitions

Stephen Dann
School of Management, Marketing & International Business, ANU College of Business & Economics, LF Crisp Building, 26, Room 1070, The Australian National University,
Canberra ACT 0200, Australia

a r t i c l e i n f o a b s t r a c t

Article history: Social marketing is based on the adaptation of the contemporary commercial marketing theory and practice as
Received 1 January 2009 a means of guiding and aiding social change campaigns. This paper draws on recent developments in
Received in revised form 1 January 2009 commercial marketing theory and prior work in social marketing definitions to create a new definition of social
Accepted 1 February 2009
marketing which integrates the commercial definitions of the American Marketing Association (AMA) and
Chartered Instituted of Marketing (CIM) with established social marketing definitions from the past thirty
Keywords:
years of social marketing conceptual development. The development of the definition is supported through the
Social marketing definition
Marketing definition
use of qualitative research technique of text mining which uncovered a core series of principles consistent to
Leximancer the historical definitions of social marketing. Finally, the new definition also introduces clarification of several
key subcomponent elements as part of an expanded definition of social marketing.
© 2009 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

1. Introduction paper presents the new definition of social marketing accompanied by a

set of explanatory notes to guide future interpretations.
The paper introduces the new definition of social marketing which
recognizes the core objective of social marketing is to facilitate social
1.1. A(nother) new definition of social marketing
change through increasing the adoption of a positive behavior (exercise)
or decreasing the use of a negative behavior (over nutrition), and at-
The presentation of yet another new definition of social marketing
tempts to facilitate the change by moving the individual's preference
into a crowded field of existing definitions is not without controversy.
away from the negative actions (under exercising, over eating) towards
Forty years of social marketing has produced more than forty five peer
the more positive outcomes (exercise, diet change) for the benefit of
reviewed academic definitions of social marketing. The proliferation
the individual, group or society. The rationale for a new definition is
of definitions prompted Andreasen (2006) raise the lack of consensus
based on the release of the American Marketing Association (2008)
as a possible barrier for social marketing's future development. How-
definition of commercial marketing providing an opportunity to return
ever, Stead et al. (2007) offers a counterpoint by viewing social mar-
to the core principle of adapting marketing for social change. As a
keting not as a single theory, but rather as a structural framework,
discipline grounded in social change and marketing theory, changes in
much in the same light as Burton (2001) described critical marketing
either parent discipline offer the opportunity for exploration, adaptation
as a conceptual cluster rather than centrally defined concept.
and eventual adoption of the new concepts. The paper overviews the
To that end, the paper draws on commercial marketing thinking to
philosophy underpinning the development of a new social marketing
present social marketing as a generic product class whereby the breadth
definition, followed by an exploration of the key influences that un-
of customized social marketing definition is an illustration of the pro-
derpin the new definition. First, the paper examines the two core com-
duct portfolio concept applied to theory rather than in theory. Drawing
mercial marketing definitions presented by the American Marketing
on an analogy from commercial marketing practice, most marketers
Association (AMA) and Chartered Institute of Marketing (CIM) in their
would recognize the generic product of cola although few would agree
capacities as world business thought leaders. Second, the paper com-
on the exact composition of cola as a drink, and even fewer would agree
pares the CIM and AMA definitions to the peak social marketing
that Coca Cola and Pepsi should produce identical products. If social
definitions of Kotler and Lee (2008) and the National Social Marketing
marketing is regarded as the generic term for marketing's involvement
Centre (2006). Third, the paper uses an unstructured ontological dis-
in a social and behavioral change, then the diverse range of definitions
cover process through the Leximancer software to develop guiding
represent the extensions and product variations designed to meet the
parameters from the history social marketing definitions. Finally, the
differing needs of a range of target markets from journal editors, con-
ference reviewers through to government agencies or change cam-
paigns. On the basis of customized ongoing product development, the
E-mail address: stephen.dann@anu.edu.au. definition presented in the paper is aimed at a target market of social

0148-2963/$ – see front matter © 2009 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
doi:10.1016/j.jbusres.2009.02.013
 Author's personal copy

148 S. Dann / Journal of Business Research 63 (2010) 147–153

Table 1 and CIM definitions represent different functional applications, where-

Comparison of CIM and AMA. as combined, they represent coverage of the key issues of commer-
Definition Mechanism How Why Whom cial marketing — the need for a customer orientated approach to value
CIM (2005) Management Identify Satisfy Customer generation, and the fulfilment of the long term goals of the orga-
Process requirements nisation through cost recovery and profit. A comparison of the key
Anticipate (Profit) (Profit) areas is listed in Table 1.
AMA (2008) Activity Create Offerings Client
Shared areas between the two definitions include the overlap be-
Processes Communicate that have Customer
Institution Deliver value Partner tween the procedural mechanisms of marketing, motivation for mar-
Exchange Society keting and targets of the marketing activity. For the purpose of the
paper, the minimum elements of commercial marketing that should be
incorporated into a social marketing adaptation consist of the shared
marketers who wish to draw of the application of the CIM and AMA customer orientation and the recognition of the marketing tool kit in
definitions of marketing for use in theory or practice. the form of marketing processes shared by the CIM and AMA. However,
future researchers will be needed to further examine if the profit
1.2. (Re)defining social marketing orientation of the CIM and the value creation orientation of the AMA
are conceptually and practically aligned. However, such an exploration
Three influences guide the new definition of social marketing — is beyond the scope of the current paper.
AMA (2008) and CIM (2005) commercial marketing definitions, two
peak contemporary social marketing definitions, and the results of the 1.5. Influence 2: dominant definitions of social marketing
textual analysis of forty five historical definitions of social marketing.
The selection of these three influences has been designed to develop Kotler and Zaltman (1971) first coined the term social marketing to
a social marketing definition that incorporates the work of social describe an expanded role for marketing practice in the business of idea
marketing from the North American, European, Australasian and sub and behavioral change. As a key figure in the ongoing development of
continental Asian regions. To that end though, the current work is social marketing, Kotler's work has influenced large portions of the US
designed to produce a Westernized definition for the purposes of social marketing community, and for that reason, his recent definition of
addressing social marketing in English as first language nations. Con- social marketing was selected as a key platform for the development of
sequently, the research draws heavily on English language based pub- the definition in the paper. Kotler and Lee (2008) define social
lications and prior studies. Future research by non-English language marketing as “process that applies marketing principles and techniques
communities is needed to develop this work into a global definition to create, communicate, and deliver value in order to influence target
rather than its current multi-national format. audience behaviors that benefit society (public health, safety, the
environment and communities) as well as the target audience”. The
1.3. Influence 1: commercial marketing AMA (2008) and CIM (2005) definition of social marketing published in Kotler and Lee (2008) is
credited interpersonal correspondence between Phillip Kotler, Nancy
The paper draws on both American and British definitions of com- Lee and Michael Rothschild in 2006. For the purpose of this paper, text
mercial marketing in an effort to develop a cross regional social mar- book version is cited here as the definitive reference.
keting definition. The Chartered Institute of Marketing (2005) defines The second definition selected was the British National Social Mar-
marketing as “the management process responsible for identifying, keting Centre's (NSMC) official definition of social marketing as “the
anticipating and satisfying customer requirements profitably” which systematic application of marketing concepts and techniques to achieve
represents a marketing management view of the discipline with the specific behavioral goals relevant to a social good”(French and Blair-
customer orientation coupled with satisfaction metric and profitability Stevens, 2006). Although the National Social Marketing Centre definition
focus. The CIM's definition has been influential in the development of was first published in Social Marketing Quarterly by French and Blair-
the British social marketing frameworks that have the central require- Stevens (2006). It is more commonly known as the NSMC (2006)
ment that interventions must begin with the target customer (French definition. The NSMC definition represents a normative influence over
and Blair-Stevens, 2006). The American Marketing Association (2008) the current practice and future development of the British social
launched defines marketing as the activity, set of institutions, and marketing sector and was therefore the selected definition. Further,
processes for creating, communicating, delivering, and exchanging offerings although Kotler and Lee are social marketing academics and practitioners,
that have value for customers, clients, partners, and society at large. The the NSMC definition was introduced to provide a centralized framework
AMA (2008) offers a value development framework which recognises for recognizing social marketing in practice in the United Kingdom. As
that marketing is a social and societal process (Dann, 2008). Notably,
clients is an explicit recognition of the influence of social marketing
practice on the role of contemporary marketing. Further exploration of Table 2
Contemporary social and commercial marketing.
the AMA (2008) and its impact for social marketing can be found in
Dann (2008) and Andreasen et al. (2008). Definition Mechanism Method Purpose Market
CIM (2005) Management Identify Satisfy Customer
1.4. Unification and reconciliation of commercial marketing Process requirements
Anticipate (Profit) (Profit)
AMA (2008) Activity Create offerings that Client
Although both definitions represent their respective peak asso-
Processes Communicate have value Customer
ciations view of marketing, the differences between the two needs to Institution Deliver Partner
be reconciled before adaptation or adoption by social marketers. The Exchange Society
following section examines the areas of conceptual overlap between Kotler and Lee Process Create Influence Society
(2008) Communicate behaviors Target audience
the definitions, and how these shared frames of reference can be used
Deliver value
as the foundation for a social marketing definition. The AMA (2008) NSMC (2006)a Systematic Marketing Achieve Targeted
definition is focused on orientating marketing to customer needs as a application behavioral goals audience
form of value creation and exchange, whilst the CIM (2005) definition Achieve social
addresses meeting the long term survival requirements of the orga- good

nisation through customer need fulfilment. In isolation, both AMA a

Cited as French and Blair Stevens (2006).
 Author's personal copy
S. Dann / Journal of Business Research 63 (2010) 147–153
with the commercial definitions of marketing, NSMC and the Kotler and
Lee frameworks must be recoiled. Both social marketing definitions share
a common ground in the systematic application of marketing principles,
and the targeting of audience behavior. However, the NSMC (2006)
definition does not have an easily identifiable connection to the voluntary
change element present in Kotler and Lee (2008). Further, these
frameworks also need to be reconciled with the AMA and CIM definitions
given social marketing is an applied adaptation of commercial marketing
which is outlined in Table 2.
The definitions are compared on four areas — mechanism is the
means by which marketing is applied, method is the techniques used
in marketing, purpose is the reason for the marketing activities being
conducted, and finally, market is the recipients of the marketing ef-
forts. All four commercial and social marketing definitions can be seen
to demonstrate overlap between method, mechanism and market, and
the disciplinary distinct purposes of behavior influence, profit and ex-
changes of value. Space constraints restrict the depth of analysis possi-
ble for, and future research opportunity exists for social marketers
to apply more robust theoretical and conceptual analytic tests to the
cross-compatibility of the core definitions of commercial marketing and
social marketing.
Whilst the four definitions are relatively cross-compatible, the new
elements of the AMA (2008) are reflected in the pseudo marketing mix
of create, communicate, deliver and exchange that are absent from the
predecessor definitions. Further, the CIM's profit orientation provides an
unusual element for social marketers to consider the role and value of
cost–benefit tradeoff as a central element of a future social marketing
definition. Prior literature in marketing has examined the expansion of
the value concept from the monetary to the non-monetary aspects for
commercial marketing. If a similar line of thought to the intangible value
creation which moves cost–benefit equations from purely financial into
a more holistic view of the marketing exchange, the CIM profit
orientation can be adapted to the social marketing exchange process
as a cost–benefit scenario. Rewards to the individuals and to the broader
society should be considered on the extent to which they exceed the
costs incurred by the behavior change. The applications of these
opportunities are examined later in the paper.
1.6. Influence 3: social marketing historical development
The third part of the development of the social marketing defi-
nition was the use of unstructured machine learning text analysis to
test for the existence of any underlying trends and thematic struc-
Fig. 1. Analysis 1 — primary domain discovery.
149
tures in the existing social marketing definitions. Forty five defini-
tions of social marketing were selected based from a range of peer
reviewed social marketing papers over the past three decades (The
full list of definitions used in the analysis is available from the author
on request.). Unstructured ontological discovery was performed using
Leximancer as the software package is designed to engage in facili-
tated knowledge discovery through ascertaining underlying themes in
texts through semantic information extraction (Smith and Hum-
phreys, 2006).
Leximancer is a specialist purpose content analysis emulator which
replicates the manual coding procedures through the use of algorithms,
machine learning and statistical processes (Smith et al., 2002). This
process allows for the development of thematic clusters and grouping
of related concepts either manually, or through the automated discov-
ery processes (Young and Denize, 2008; Smith, 2000). For further de-
tails of the Leximancer process, Grech et al. (2002) and Smith and
Humphreys (2006) detail both underlying method and statistical struc-
ture. Leximancer provides a means of unsupervised ontology discov-
ery which can uncover core associations within a body of text whilst
reducing expectation biases which may arise in manual coded analy-
sis (Isakhan, 2005; Michael et al., 2008; Smith, 2003; McKenna and
Waddell, 2007). Lastly, Leximancer capacity for discovering unexpected
meaningful connections through its automated objective analysis pro-
cess is central to the current task of ascertaining if existing social mar-
keting definitions have an underlying consistent framework or structure
(Petchkovsky et al., 2007).
The analysis process consists of a three stages from the explora-
tion of the dominant thematic group through to the discovery of related
concept groups within the textual data (Smith, 2000). The initial explo-
ration determined the presence of dominant thematic clusters which
was used as the parameters for the subsequent textual analysis. Three
visualization maps have been provided to illustrate the phases of the
analysis. Analysis 1 resulted in a confirmation of the apparently self
evident — the dominant theme of the definitions is the application of
marketing. Fig. 1 represents the initial analysis to ascertain the primary
conceptual domain(s) of the social marketing definitions.
Two items of note emerged from the conceptual clusters — first, the
analysis detected the systematic use of marketing in the form of change
programs; and, second, the influence was a significant factor which
connects to the previously stated assumption of social marketing as a
form of voluntary change regime (Andreasen, 1995; Rothschild, 1999).
Analysis 2 involved a level of manual intervention with the Lexi-
mancer software instructed to ignore the concept marketing in order
 Author's personal copy
150 S. Dann / Journal of Business Research 63 (2010) 147–153
Fig. 2. Secondary thematic groups.
to explore the interactions within the top level domain. This ap-
proach, in conjunction with the machine learning technique of the
Leximancer software allowed the system to extract the major the-
matic groups within the definitions primary domain of marketing. The
“Behavior” cluster encompasses the majority of the identified out-
comes of social marketing with concepts such as “society”, “change”,
and “voluntary”. The behavioral orientation of social marketing is also
supported throughout the social marketing literature as behaviors are
easier to measure, observe and change than internal attitudes and
belief (Almendarez et al., 2004). Behavior can also be used as a lear-
ning tool to assist attitude change and value development through
the do–feel–learn model espoused by Kotler and Roberto (1989). The
Fig. 3. Two set Venn diagram of principle social marketing components.
small cluster of “activities” represented the mechanisms of marketing
used to effect social change, and emphasizes the need to include the
recognition of the social marketing tool kit in any description of the
discipline such as the use of the marketing mix (Cohen et al., 1999)
services delivery theory and practice (Bryant et al., 1998, 2007), or the
techniques of internet marketing (Dann and Dann, 1999; Brace-Govan
and Harrick, 2006) or mobile marketing (Lefebvre, 2007). These are
illustrated in Fig. 2.
The third and final analysis was undertaken to further explore the
thematic clusters within the marketing domain. The technique ap-
proach relies reducing the size of the thematic clusters reported by the
Leximancer analysis until an overlap occurs in the report results, thus
effectively generating a two set Venn diagram. The resultant thematic
cluster of “behavior” and “voluntary” reinforce social marketing as a
non-coercive means of social change which rejects the Donovan and
Henley (2003) inspired involuntary change categorization. The
intersection set includes the voluntary exchange aspect of commercial
marketing, alongside the role of social marketing as an influencer in
society rather than a mandatory behavior outcome. Within voluntary,
Rothschild's (2002) self interest through the location of “beneficial”
and “improve” the voluntary set is supported. In addition, “designed”
as part of the intersecting set represents the consistent theme of social
marketing as a planned activity that is based on analysis, research
and designed behavior interventions (Kotler and Zaltman, 1971;
Andreasen, 1995; Kotler and Lee, 2008). These results are illustrated
in the final Leximancer diagram in Fig. 3.
2. Constructing the definition
The following section outlines how the bounding expectations
derived from the three analyses detailed above will be used as guide
parameters for the new definition of social marketing. First, the def-
inition will follow the pedigree of social marketing as part of the
broader marketing discipline. Second, the definition will represent the
means and mechanism for behavioral change using marketing con-
cepts and practice which acknowledges that behaviors are embedded
in the individual, consumer, and societal level behavioral change oc-
curs through mass adoption of individual level behavior. Third, volun-
tary change is included in based on the results of the Leximancer
 Author's personal copy
S. Dann / Journal of Business Research 63 (2010) 147–153
analysis, and marketing's pedigree as a contractual and exchange
based social mechanism. Finally, benefit is recognized through AMA
(2008) exchange, NSMC 2007's social good, and the CIM (2005) focus
on profitability which has been converted into the cost–benefit trade-
off. These four elements are represented in Fig. 4.
Based on these parts, and drawing on the influence of the prior
definitions, the paper defines social marketing as:
the adaptation and adoption of commercial marketing activities,
institutions and processes as a means to induce behavioral change in
a targeted audience on a temporary or permanent basis to achieve
a social goal.
Additional sub definitions have been included in the paper. This
inclusion is designed to address one of the weaknesses of marketing
definitions typified by the AMA (2004) definition of commercial mar-
keting which have required significant levels of inclusion by inter-
pretation and assumptions as to the meaning, intent and translation
of key sections (Dann, 2005; Gundlach, 2007; Dann and Dann, 2007).
Fig. 4. Core principles and influences on the new definition of social marketing.
151
As the inclusion by implication approach to interpreting a definition
is problematic with its reliance on shared frames of reference for
similar interpretations, the paper offers further definitions of key sub
components to provide greater depth for interpreting and applying
the core definition.
The definition uses “induce” rather than “influence” in order to
frame social marketing as a social leadership approach which involves
the deliberate use of influence and persuasion to move a target market
towards a specific course of action. An important semantic differ-
ence exists between the more passive approach of influencing behavior
change and active leadership orientation of inducing behavior change.
In the context of the definition, behavioral change is the process of
altering, maintaining or encouraging the cessation of a specific activity
undertaken by the targeted audience. Behavioral change is achieved
through the creation, communication, delivery and exchange of a
competitive social marketing offer that induces voluntary change in the
targeted audience, and which results in benefit to the social change
campaign's recipients, partners and the broader society at large.
 Author's personal copy
152 S. Dann / Journal of Business Research 63 (2010) 147–153
A competitive social marketing offer is an alternative product offering
that has been developed through the identification or anticipation of
a market need for a socially beneficial alternative behavior that satis-
fies the same needs an individual in the targeted audience is currently
meeting through the consumption or use of less socially desirable
products. Product offering draws on the broadest understanding of
the product concept in commercial marketing to include, but not be
limited to, physical goods which incorporates both the service dom-
inant logic construct of embedded co-created services and the goods-
dominant logic of value in ownership; service which can be admin-
istered by third party delivery, co-created through participation in the
service delivery and/or self service activity; ideas which including
knowledge of how to perform a self-service behavior; attitudes to-
wards the beneficial social outcome which incorporates the newly
developed fields of emotional and experiential marketing; and, the
specific behavior that is undertaken by the recipient in the course of
acting upon the competitive social marketing offer.
“Benefit” is where the return on social investment through actual
or perceived returns exceeds the financial and non financial costs of
the social marketing activity. The approach draws on the work of
Rothschild's (2002) self interest motivation as the consumer-side
framework for determining value, and includes the Joyce and Morris
(1990) total price concept which recognizes the financial costs of
adoption, and the associated non-financial costs such as time, effort
and prestige. Simultaneously, benefit also engages Bright's (2000)
observations of the need for cost effectiveness in social marketing for
the supplier side equation which has been reflected in the practice of
reporting societal cost–savings per dollar of intervention spent (Lee,
2008; Starinchak, 2008). The construction of benefit is dual focused on
downstream benefit with an emphasis on the return to the adopter
exceeding the total cost of adoption, and upstream benefit with the
return to the society at large and partners exceeding the societal level
investment in the social change activity.
“Targeted audience” reflects the use of the customer orientation by
targeting social marketing activity on specific, identifiable and reach-
able market segmentation within a broader community population.
This sub definition incorporates the Kohli and Jaworski (1990) market
orientation alongside the CIM (2005) customer requirements, AMA
(2008) clients/customers framework, Kotler and Lee (2008) target
audience and the NSMC (2006) targeted audiences. Social marketing
campaigns must have an identifiable target audience in order to meet
the key criteria of providing a competitive social marketing offer based
on altering, maintaining or ceasing an identified behavior amongst in
an individual member of a larger population group.
Finally, “social goal” represents the objective of the campaign to
change or maintain society in accordance with the long term objectives
of the campaign's organizers. Whilst social marketing is an inherently
neutral toolkit, the goals of a social marketing campaign are inherently
subjective and political in nature (Dann, 2007). The complex nature
of social goal has been incorporated to recognize that social marketing
is a purpose driven platform which is implemented for the improve-
ment of society as defined by the driving forces behind the campaign.
Change requires the presumption that the current behavior of the
target market can be replaced with a more beneficial set of activities
which will lead to positive societal outcomes. Similarly, maintenance
of behavior assumes the current behavior is beneficial for society, and
needs to be defended against less beneficial alternative behaviors. The
concept of social goal is also connected to the use of the term induce to
indicate the implicit assumption of planned objectives with marketing
based metrics to determine success by the creation or prevention of
observable and measurable change within the targeted population.
3. Limitations
The paper does not claim to contain a definitive list of social
marketing definitions due to limitations on the selection process. The
analysis excluded any website based definitions, blogs, trade press or
government periodicals, and instead focused on the academic papers
where social marketing was given a specific meaning for the context of
the paper. This restriction ensured that the concepts presented in the
analysis had been subjected to peer-review prior to publication, and
the exposure to peer review is utilized as a proxy minimum quality
standard measure. Further, the range of arbitrary lines drawn in the
sand to determine key foundations of the definition do limit the global
application of the research. Arguments as to the influence of the AMA
and CIM can, and should, be made by future researchers who wish to
raise alternative foundations for their own definitional work. Sim-
ilarly, the English language bias of the definitions is a further limi-
tation of the research alongside the Anglo-American focus of the
definitional dataset, even with the inclusion of Australasian research-
ers and papers. However, with the continued absence of an iden-
tifiable Australasian academy definition of commercial marketing,
researchers in the geographic area are still adapting either the AMA or
CIM as their officially sanctioned definition. Further, at the time of
publication, the Chartered Institute of Marketing had commissioned a
review into its official definition with the intention to develop a new
conceptual framework which would differ from the definition used in
the paper.
Finally, Lazer and Kelley's (1973) work was excluded from inclusion
in the paper as, although the work contains both social marketing
and critical marketing elements, the paper is the foundation of critical
marketing rather than a social marketing definition. To that end, the
paper does not presume to merge Lazer and Kelley's (1973) critical
marketing into the social marketing research. Rather, the critical mar-
keting field is respected and recognized as a related but indepen-
dent area of study that has equal application in commercial and non-
commercial marketing.
4. Further research
The definition represents approximately one-third of the possible
means of inducing social change through social marketing activity as
a deliberately constructed piece to represent a downstream view of
social marketing, and not inclusive of the Goldberg (1995) upstream
approach, or Kotler's (2008) mid-stream marketing concept. The
strength of the definition is the clarity of focus on individual and group
level behavior for systematic social change, yet the weakness is the
limited application in the upstream environment. To that end, future
research into the definition of social marketing needs to explore the
adaptation of business to business marketing into the social market-
ing environment. Current definitions have focused on consumer level
interventions based on individual behavioral change. Future research
should examine the application of an upstream social marketing pro-
cess through the adaptation and adoption of business to business and
business to government marketing insight.
The definition of social marketing presented in the paper is a
snapshot of a definition that will need to evolve when the underlying
conceptual commercial marketing frameworks adapt and change.
Specific challenges for the definition, and all social marketing defini-
tional research, come from the stated intention of the American
Marketing Association to review the 2007 definition in 2012, and the
Chartered Institute of Marketing's intention to release a revised
definition by 2010. Given the paper originated from the changes in
AMA (2008) and CIM (2005), further research will be needed to
update and patch the current work to meet the challenges of the future
understanding of marketing.
Acknowledgements
Thanks to Alan Andreasen, Nedra Weinreich and Susan Dann for
their feedback on the paper. Thanks also to the National Centre for
Social Marketing and the participants at the World Social Marketing
 Author's personal copy
S. Dann / Journal of Business Research 63 (2010) 147–153
Conference 2008 for insights and discussions that guided the final
version of the social marketing definition.
References
Almendarez Isabel S, Boysun Michael, Clark Kathleen. Thunder and lightning and rain: a
Latino/Hispanic diabetes media awareness campaign. Family and Community
Health 2004;27(2):114–22.
American Marketing Association. Definition. Marketing news. September 15. 2004: 4.
American Marketing Association. Definition of marketing. Marketing news. Jan 15. 2008:
28–29.
Andreasen Alan. Marketing social change: changing behavior to promote health. Social
Development and the environment. San Francisco: Jossey Bass; 1995.
Andreasen Alan. Social marketing in the 21st century. London: Sage Publications; 2006.
Andreasen Alan, Lee Nancy, Rothschild Michael. Further thoughts on the 2007 AMA
definition of marketing and its implications for social marketing. Social Marketing
Quarterly 2008;14(2):101–4.
Brace-Govan Jan, Harrick Julie. Is there a role for blogging in activist social marketing or can
you blog brotherhood? 3rd Australasian nonprofit and social marketing conference.
University of Newcastle, NSW CD ROM; 2006. 10–11 August, Newcastle.
Bright Alan D. The role of social marketing in leisure and recreation management.
Journal of Leisure Research 2000;32(1):12–7.
Bryant Carol, Kent Ellen B, Lindenberger James, Mogg-Schreiher Janet, Canright Marsha,
Walker W, Cole Steve, Uccellani Valerie, Brown Christoper A, Blair R Clifford,
Bustillo-Hernandez Marta M. Increasing consumer satisfaction. Marketing Health
Services 1998;18(4):4-17.
Bryant Carol A, McCormack-Brown Kelli R, McDermott Robert J, Forthofer Melinda S,
Bumpus Elizabeth C, Calkins Susan A, Zapata Lauren B. Community-based preven-
tion marketing: organizing a community for health behavior intervention. Health
Promotion Practice 2007;8(2):154–63.
Burton Dawn. Critical marketing theory: the blueprint? European Journal of Marketing
2001;35(5/6):722–43.
Chartered Institute of Marketers. Marketing and the 7Ps: a brief summary of marketing
and how it works. Knowledge Hub http://www.cim.co.uk/KnowledgeHub 2005.
Cohen Deborah A, Farley Thomas A, Bedimo-Etama Jean Roger, Scribner Richard, Ward
William, Kendall Carl, Rice, Janet. Implementation of condom social marketing in
Louisiana. 1993 to 1996. American Journal of Public Health 1999;89(2):204–8.
Dann, Stephen. Social change marketing in the age of direct benefit marketing — where
to from here? Social change in the 21st century. QUT Carseldine 28 October 2005.
Dann Stephen. Reaffirming the neutrality of the social marketing tool kit: social market-
ing as a hammer, and social marketers as hired guns. Social Marketing Quarterly
2007;13(1):54–62.
Dann Stephen. Adaptation and adoption of the American Marketing Association (2007)
definition for social marketing. Social Marketing Quarterly 2008;14(2):92-100.
Dann Susan, Dann Stephen. Cybercommuning. Advances in Consumer Research 1999;70.
Dann Stephen, Dann Susan. Competitive marketing strategy. Sydney: Pearson; 2007.
Donovan Robert, Henley Nadine. Social marketing IP communications. East-Hawthorn;
2003.
French Jeff, Blair-Stevens Clive. From snake oil salesmen to trusted policy advisors: the
development of a strategic approach to the application of social marketing in
England. Social Marketing Quarterly 2006;12(3):29–40.
Goldberg Marvin. Social Marketing: are we fiddling while Rome burns? Journal of
Consumer Psychology 1995;4(4):347–70.
Grech M, Horberry T, Smith A. Human error in Maritime Operations: Analyses of Accident
Reports using the Leximancer Tool. Proceedings of the Human Factors and
Ergonomics Society 46th Annual Meeting, Baltimore: Human Factors and Ergonomics
Society Oct; 2002. Online at https://www.leximancer.com/wiki/images/4/44/
HFE2002_MGRECH.pdf.
Gundlach Gregogry T. The American Marketing Associations 2004 definition of marketing:
perspectives on its implications for scholarship and the role and responsibility of
marketing in society. Journal of Public Policy and Marketing 2007;26(2):243–50.
153
Isakhan Benjamin. From despotism to democracy: reporting Iraq's January 2005 election
in the Australian and Middle Eastern print media. In: Stockwell Stephen, Isakhan
Ben, editors. Proceedings of the 2005 journalism education association conference.
Griffith University: School of Arts; 2005. Copyright Date: 20th December.
Joyce, Mary L. and Morris, Michael N. “Pricing considerations in social marketing” in
Fine Seymour H. 1990 Social marketing: promoting the causes of public and non-
profit agencies Allyn and Bacon Boston.
Kohli Ajay K, Jaworski Bernard J. Market orientation: the construct, research pro-
positions, and managerial implications. Journal of Marketing 1990;54(2):1-18.
Kotler, Philip. The global challenge — we are in this together: reducing poverty through
social marketing world social marketing conference key note presentation Brighton
29–30 September 2008.
Kotler Philip, Zaltman Gerald. Social marketing: an approach to planned social change.
Journal of Marketing 1971;35:3-12.
Kotler Philip, Roberto Eduardo L. Social marketing. London: MacMillan Publishing; 1989.
Kotler Philip, Lee Nancy. Social marketing. SAGE Publications; 2008.
Lazer William, Kelley Eugene J, editors. Social marketing: perspectives and viewpoints.
Homewood. IL: Richard D. Irwin; 1973.
Lee, Nancy. Good works & so do the 4Ps. Success stories from the U.S. world social
marketing conference key note presentation Brighton 29–30 September 2008.
Lefebvre R Craig. The new technology: the consumer as participant rather than target
audience. Social Marketing Quarterly 2007;13(3):31–42.
McKenna Bernard, Waddell N. Media-ted political oratory following terrorist events:
international political responses to the 2005 London bombing. Journal of Language
and Politics 2007;6(3):377–99.
Michael MG, Fusco Sarah Jean, Michael Katina. A research note on ethics in the
emerging age of uberveillance. Computer Communications 2008;31(6):1192–9.
Petchkovsky Leon, Cord-Udy Nigel, Grant Laurencia. A post-Jungian perspective on 55
indigenous suicides in Central Australia; deadly cycles of diminished resilience, im-
paired nurturance. Compromised interiority; and possibilities for repair. Australian e-
Journal for the Advancement of Mental Health 2007;6(3) Online at http://www.
auseinet.com/journal/vol6iss3/petchkovsky.pdf.
Rothschild Michael. Carrots. Sticks and promises: a conceptual framework for the manage-
ment of public health and social issue behaviors. Journal of Marketing 1999;63(4):24–37.
Rothschild Michael. Accommodating self interest. Social Marketing Quarterly 2002;8
(2): 32–5.
Smith Andrew E. Machine mapping of document collections: the Leximancer system.
Proceedings of the 5th Australaisan document computing symposium. Sunshine
Coast. Australia; 2000. Dec 1.
Smith Andrew E. Automatic extraction of semantic networks from text using Leximancer.
Companion volume of the proceedings of HLT-NAACL 2003; 2003. 23–24. May June.
Smith Andrew E, Humphreys Michael S. Evaluation of unsupervised semantic mapping of
natural language with Leximancer concept mapping. Behaviour Research Methods
2006;38(2):262–79.
Smith Andrew, Grech M, Horberry T, 2002. Application of the Leximancer text analysis
system to human factors research. Online manuscript. Brisbane: University of
Queensland. Online at http://www.leximancer.com/documents/hfes2002.pdf [Last
accessed 01 July 2008].
Starinchak Joe. Sophistication, integration and social innovation: the keys for selling
complex environmental issues and affecting large-scale behavioral change. World
social marketing conference presentation Brighton; 2008. 29–30 September.
Stead Martin, Gordon Ross, Angus Kathryn, McDermott Laura. A systematic review of
social marketing effectiveness. Health Education 2007;107(2):126–91.
Young Louise, Denize Sara. Competing interests: the challenge to collaboration in the
public sector. International Journal of Sociology and Social Policy 2008;28(1/2):46–58.