A systemic approach to the application
of marketing theory for charitable
organisations
Graeme Lindsay and Alan Murphy
Coventry Business School, Coventry University, Priory St, Coventry CV1 5FB, UK;
Tel: +44 1203 838422; Fax: +44 1203/ 838400; E-mail: bsx060@coventry.ac.uk
Received (in revised form): 7st April, 7996
Graeme Lindsay is a Senior Lecturer in
Business Policy at Coventry Business School,
Coventry University, He is currently researching
the strategic orientations of funded and
charitable organisations and this paper forms
the basis of a Ph.D on which he is working. He
and Alan Murphy are also working on a book
entitled ‘Marketing for Public Services’.
Alan Murphy is Principal Lecturer in Interna-
tional Business at DeMonffort University. His
interests are in the areas of economic transac-
tion in the charitable sector and economics of
process plant contract. He has wide experience
in undergraduate and post-graduate teaching in
the UK and other countries.
Top:
ABSTRACT
Graeme Lindsay
Below:
This paper will examine the contribution
Alan Murphy
which core marketing concepts and ideas can
make to an examination of the nonprojit-
making sector, specifically charitable organisa-
tions. Using systemic theory as a framework it
will be argued that core marketing concepts and
ideas developed in, and specific to, the private
sector, cannot be easily transferred to an ex-
amination of the charitable sector. A t the
same time however it will be stressed that
these core concepts and ideas can provide a
useful initial framework of reference against
whichfurther developments can be undertaken.
The paper will propose a new dynamic ap-
proach to examining the charitable sector which
facilitates a more discriminating approach to
the application of marketing constructs.
INTRODUCTION
It is the duty of academics to develop new
areas of research and to incorporate new
concepts, theories and constructs that
extend understanding and knowledge.
However, the quality and quantity of
research that is being undertaken in areas
not normally associated with marketing’s
original remit, the facilitation of profit
making within private sector organisa-
tions, is now being challenged.
‘Decline in incremental value added
by current research . . . . the
trend towards increasing marketing’s
domain to the point when it will
subsume other fields whose prac-
titioners might legitimately consider to
be quite distinct from marketing.”
Baker supports his own view by citing
the authors of the ‘Call for Papers’ for the
Winter Educators’ Conference 1994.*
‘The on-going interplay of marketing
theory and practice has led to several
new research areas. As a field our
agenda now features topics such as
relationship marketing, strategic al-
liances, managing brand equity, to-
tal quality management, amongst
others.
The emergence of such topics raises
at least two provocative issues for
marketing scholars. First, are we
 reinventing the wheel? even though the
general topic headings may be new,
how new are the specific research
questions related to each area? . . .
Second, interest in many of these
emerging topics extends beyond the
traditional domain of marketing.
Unfortunately, interdisciplinary col-
laborations in the conduct of research
in marketing is rare.’2
If the position is taken that some areas
of investigation cannot usefully be ex-
amined using key marketing concepts,
then the question is raised about the
nature of the contribution which market-
ing can make in these areas. Is it to take
part in interdisciplinary projects and to
provide insights as appropriate, or should
academics re-evaluate marketing’s basic
concepts? This paper puts forward the
view that marketing techniques have a
very wide range of applications in many
contexts but in contrast marketing con-
cepts cannot be used in all contexts, and
new concepts may have to be developed
which are context specific.
The area chosen for investigation is
the nonprofit-making (NPM) sector,
specifically charitable organisations. The
framework for examining whether or not
the concept of marketing is relevant to
this sector is provided by systemic
theorists, who believe that theories and
models cannot be transposed from one
cultural environment to another. If it can
be demonstrated that the relationship
which NPM organisations enjoy with
their particular environment is unique
and distinct from the relationships that
private sector firms enjoy, then the
relevance of the concept of marketing,
which derives from a very special set of
relationships between private sector firms
and others, to the NPM sector must be
questioned. Hence the paper will present
a new framework which will clarify and
augment marketing’s role within the
NPM sector.
MARKETING THEORY AS AN
ENVIRONMENTAL CONSTRUCT
Systemic theorists of corporate strategy
such as Granovetter, Marris and Whit-
tington, dismiss the development of
corporate strategy as being rational, but
instead see it as being embedded in
what Whittington describes as ‘particular
sociological context’.
‘Behaviour that may look irrational or
inefficient. . . may be perfectly rational
and efficient according to the local
criteria and modus operandi of the par-
ticular social context.”
Therefore the decision making that oc-
curs within an organisation is not a
rational cognitive exercise but a product
of influence exerted by social groups,
interests and resources within the exter-
nal environment. Any strategy that is
developed is only relevant to the par-
ticular cultural environment that it has
been created within, as it is merely a
construct of that environment. This then
raises questions about the wholesale
transference of theories and knowledge
from one culture to another.
If it can be shown that nonprofit-
making organisations operate within a
unique external environment and base
their actions upon different internal
premises to those in the private sector,
then the systemic view that theories and
models cannot be transposed from one
cultural environment to another, must be
sustainable for the transference of
theoretical constructs developed in the
private sector and transposed onto the
nonprofit-making sector. Consequently,
any theory or model that is used by
marketers to express relationships within
 sectors other than the private sector must
be open to question.
The nonprofit sector, with its myriad
organisational types, raises particular
difficulties for marketing. Even the term
‘Nonprofit’ is merely a homogeneous
term that covers a wide variety of
heterogeneous organisations including
charities, voluntary organisations and the
public sector. Such luminaries as Kotler4
and Drucker’ have written extensively
on the nonprofit-making sector with-
out accepting its heterogeneous nature.
Glancing at standard text on marketing
(Kotler and Armstrong; Dibb Simkin et
al; Baker, etc.) the limited attention given
to the NPM sector and the unsophisti-
cated approach is evidence of the reluc-
tance of academics to deal with each
unique organisational type in a similarly
unique way. This has increased the
perception that marketing theory has a
simplistic view of NPM organisations
that consequently diminishes its ability to
produce purposive and relevant contribu-
tions to the development of both market-
ing strategy and corporate strategy in this
sector.
That is not to say that valid contribu-
tions have not been made by marketing
to the NPM sector. The use of tools
and techniques such as segmentation
and promotion have been invaluable to
charities involved in fundraising ac-
tivities. The concerns raised are relevant
to the wider, issue of the wholesale
transference of marketing theory to
organisations outside the private sector.
Graham6investigating the appropriate-
ness of marketing theory to the public
sector finds that the unsophisticated
analysis of the sector by marketing
academics makes the transposition of
marketing and theory difficult. He em-
phasises the lack of economic exchange
that characterises the private sector, and
stresses the concept of marketing, as
being the key element to this difficulty.
Graham questions whether this precludes
any organisation that is not involved in an
economic transactional relationship, as in
the public sector, ever truly embracing
marketing in all its aspects. However,
those organisations that are not involved
in an economic transactional relationship,
are involved in a relationship with the
providers of their financial resources that
Shapiro’ identifies as ‘Mutually satisfying
exchanges’. Birks and Southan’ and
Lindsay and Murphy’ have expanded
upon this to show that marketing does
not need direct financial transaction
between providers and consumer to
have a wide ranging and inclusive role
within organisations. Much of this role
being developed from the philosophical
perspective of marketing is described by
Roberto” as providing a ‘relentless and
synergistic’ influence upon corporate be-
haviour in the nonprofit-making sector.
MARKETING AS A STRATEGIC
RESPONSE
The variety of corporate strategies that
develops within a particular sector is a
function of the individualistic response
that an organisation produces to its
external environment. These individual
responses are the manifestation of the
corporate vision, with marketing theories
and models forming the basis and
parameters for its expression. In simplis-
tic terms this strategic response is
expressed through the co-ordination
and achievement of resource attraction
and resource allocation. Irrespective of
the environmental influences or intra-
organisational strategic considerations,
these two elements have to be satisfied for
corporate objectives to be achieved.
However the external dynamics and the
internal volition that drive the decision-
making process create the individualis-
L
 tic approaches that characterise the Exchange between Figure 1
customer and
development of appropriate corporate marketers
Need
Exchange between
strategies.
The concept of marketing allows an Markets
n Wants
customer and
marketers
understanding of the co-ordination of
resource attraction and resource alloca-
tion in the private sector through Transictions Demands
‘creating and exchanging products and
value with other^'.^ The simple model
\ /
J
Products
presented in figure 1 illustrates the broad
nature of the exchange.
Exchange -
This model clearly identifies the
relationship between resource attraction
and resource allocation based on the
economic transactional relationship be- identify as being social constructs and
tween customer and marketers. It shows culturally specific, theoretical constructs
how economic transaction creates a based on this transactional model, such as
system that is able to communicate the the concept of marketing, must be
success of marketing strategies and recognised as being similarly environ-
implementation. The self regulatory mentally specific. Inevitably preclusion of
nature of this system allows an under- the transference of corporate strategy
standing of the benefits obtained from the between different cultures must also
successful implementation of the concept apply to the transposition of marketing
of marketing. concepts between different economic
However this model is unrepresenta- sub-s ystems.
tive of the relationships within which a Although the concept of marketing
charity develops its corporate strategy. as a’ purposive and indicative construct
As a funded organisation a charity, such does not assist the development of cor-
as the NSPCC, is unable to attract porate strategy within other sectors it
resources via direct economic transaction does provide a framework for examin-
with its customers. The model, presented ing and explaining the development of
in figure 2 by Lindsay and Murphy’ organisational responses to their exter-
of the NSPCC, is a more accurate nal environment and the theoretical basis
representation of the relationships that for the importance of satisfying con-
facilitate resource attraction and resource
allocation.
This example is typical of charities Figure 2
whose beneficiaries are inactive economi- Resource
cally and who rely upon funding from relationships
’donors. It shows that the economic orientation orientation
context within which these charities
operate, bears no resemblance to that
in which a private sector organisa-
tion operates. Even the identification of
a charity’s ‘customer’ is not obtained
through a transactional relationship. As
Resource
attraction
I 1 Resource
allocation
with corporate strategies that systemics
 sumer wants. The concept of market-
ing shows the dynamic nature of private
sector organisations and recognises that
they will proceed through various prior
stages before arriving at the situation
where the concept of marketing is firmly
embedded. Three stages in which the
firms are product orientated, production
orientated and selling orientated mark a
progression in the firms’ learning about
their customers. As they learn about their
customers, so they are able to raise more
income and move towards achieving their
desired objectives.
In the private sector fundraising is in-
trinsically tied to the satisfaction of con-
sumer wants. The strategy of the private
sector firms can thus be encapsulated by
the term ‘market responsiveness’. Market
responsiveness is at the root of the con-
cept of marketing. In the charitable sector
there is a beneficiary of the charity’s
services and someone who pays for the
service; but they are very often not one
and the same person.
Thus the charity has multiple consumer
groups that it must identify before it can
begin to be market or consumer respon-
sive.
While the concept of marketing as
a construct is inappropriate for all
charitable organisations, as an analytic
tool it is invaluable.” It identifies that
within a sector, organisations through
their ‘market responsiveness’ can develop
and articulate’ more appropriate orienta-
tions that are progressive steps towards
achieving their desired objectives. It
shows that the corporate objectives and
strategies are dynamic and evolve as
expressions of the corporate vision within
its environmental context.
The recent re-launch of well-known
charities such as the Anti-Apartheid
Movement and the Spastics Society, as
Action for Southern Africa and SCOPE
respectively, indicates a fundamental
willingness of those charities to make
strategic responses to a changing external
environment. In this way their actions
closely mirror those of private sector
firms that continually make strategic
adjustments. However, a charity has a
more difficult time of it. This is
because a charity provides a service to
beneficiaries that may have to change
over time but also has to manage
its fundraising activities by establish-
ing relationships with various donor
groups.
These two related, though functionally
separate, activities undertaken by many
charities make it necessary to move out
from under the burden of the ‘marketing
concept’. A new framework is clearly
necessary to explain the long-term na-
ture of the relationship between these
two elements and how it may evolve.
In traditional private sector marketing
it has been recognised that historically
many companies passed through stages
of development in the relationship with
their customers, which are universally
described as production orientated, sell-
ing orientated and marketing orientated
stages. In the same way the authors are
proposing a development framework for
charities, which are presumed to pass
through similar stages of development
described as cause orientated, funding
orientated and need orientated.
NEW ORIENTATIONS
The new orientations that this paper
proposes are linked by stages in their
progression. They can be viewed as a
historical process and as an evolutionary
process through which the charity passes,
developing the quality of both its service
provision and fundraising activity as it
does so. This developmental process not
only has implications for strategic im-
 plementation but also for the nature of
corporate objectives.
Cause orientation
Historically charities are formed to
achieve a specific purpose, whether it is
to send an individual child for surgery in
the United States, or to alleviate famine.
That is to say, they have a specific cause
or remit at the outset. At this early stage
the specific aims of the charity are clearly
identifiable and can be shared by all those
involved in its operation. Thus at this
stage there is a widespread consensus
within the charity, which enables it to
function as a coherent whole and
to develop appropriate objectives and
strategies.
Organisations may stay at this stage for
a long time. This in itself is not a problem
since the continuing consensus about cor-
porate objectives is likely to facilitate the
internal implementation of strategy. At
this stage fundraising activity is directly
related to the cause. The fundraising task
is to raise a sufficient level of funds
to enable the charity’s objectives to be
achieved. Due to the novelty of the appeal
or the interest aroused by the cause funds
may arrive spontaneously at this time.
Fundraising thus requires less time and
effort. By contrast, and because of con-
sensus among the charity’s principals,
effort and resources can be allocated to the
resource allocation process, and to the
provision of solutions to the charity’s
specific cause.
At this point the charity may be
dissolved, if the specific cause which
brought it into existence is removed. If,
however, the cause is more complex and
deeper rooted (such as the alleviation of
famine) then the need for a charitable
response is ongoing. Another possibility
is that the charity’s members decide to
prolong the life of their organisation.
Whichever of the two possibilities occurs
as time passes and the external environ-
ment changes, so the organisation’s
specific and agreed mission becomes less
clear and is open to reinterpretation by
managers and a few key stakeholders in
the charity. At this point the organisation
is opened up to those influences to which
corporate strategy must respond, among
which are likely to be the funders.
Funding orientation
Over time the emergence of other com-
peting charities and a diminution in public
and media interest are likely to reduce the
income flow of the charity. If the initial
cause of the charity’s existence is removed
then a shortage of income will result for
that charity. Thus serious attention has to
be given in the former case to identify-
ing and securing long-term funding for
charitable activities, and in the latter to
identifying a new cause for the organisa-
tion, and then identifying and securing
funding to support and maintain it.
Charities which continue to exist, out-
living their original cause, because of the
volition of their organisation members
are still to be found today. Thus the
Southern Marketing charity in the United
States was set up to find a cure for
polio, but then turned to raising money
to investigate birth defects. Organisation
members in such cases, because of a
shared system of values, wish to pass on
their experience and to develop this or-
ganisational ethos.
At this stage the charity is moving into
a funding orientation. Whatever the
circumstances, with a funding orientation
the charity moves away from coherent
and shared objectives and towards an
orientation that emphasises the fundrais-
ing element of the corporate strategy.
More sophisticated fundraising activities
are developed out of necessity and
through learning by the fundraising
manager of the charity.
 This process of acquiring financial
resources may in turn have an effect on
the implementation of the corporate
strategy, to the extent that efficient
resource allocation may no longer be the
primary concern of the organisation. In
this way the need to secure financial
resources may influence resource alloca-
tion strategies. Thus a charity may begin
to agree to carry out a particular service
that may not have been in its original
remit, but a financial carrot dangled in
front of it encourages it to move into new
areas. The Government’s approach to
contracting out services relies on charities
taking this approach to their corporate
strategy.
What is clear is that the charity’s
primary purpose at this stage is to raise
funds and this has a great effect on
other aspects of the corporate strategy,
either directly or indirectly. The charity
develops more sophisticated fundraising
activities or diverts more resources to
fundraising activities. This strategic ap-
proach may be a transitional period for
some charities, for others it may become
a way of life, whereby their primary
consideration is fundraising, their secon-
dary consideration how to spend the
funds raised. For those charities in
transition however the funding orienta-
tion will change towards an orientation
wherein the charity will be focused upon
its purpose in terms of service provision,
and yet at the same time be aware of the
need to incorporate various stakeholders’
views in fundraising strategies.
Need Orientation
This stage of development is where the
organisation as a whole has developed a
particular vision. This may be due to
strong leadership or to the development
of a common consciousness shared by all
stakeholders, which may have developed
over a period of time or have come from
a charismatic leader. The important thing
is not so much how the vision is arrived
at, but that it is coherent and shared, and
most importantly directed at satisfy-
ing the needs of the target market
beneficiaries. This coherence allows the
organisation to develop opinions and
beliefs about how needs should be
satisfied.
A charity, such as Oxfam, has a
particular ideology and consequently a
particular strategic perspective on the
problem with which it is dealing. This
perspective underpins the strategic alloca-
tion of resources and service provision.
Once a charity has developed an ideologi-
cal position that is expressed through
resource allocation it is better able to resist
the temptation to be diverted into areas
or services that are not part of its vision.
Similarly it is not drawn into areas that
it does not have the resources to serve,
simply to secure funds. As a consequence
there is greater coherence in respect
to the implementation of the charity’s
mission.
The management role of fundraising
within the corporate strategy of a charity
is to provide resources for the implemen-
tation of its vision, not to influence or
deflect it. By developing a need orienta-
tion, a charity will not be concerned
primarily with the attraction of funds,
but rather will see successful fundraising
as a consequence of the implementation
of the corporate objectives, which are
based on the identification of needs
alongside the successful incorporation of
all stakeholders within a relationship
fundraising strategy. Thus fundraising is
not a separate activity but part of the
wider corporate strategy.
The framework thus identifies a need
orientation as the most appropriate. It
should not be forgotten however that the
particular development of any charity
from cause orientation to need orientation
very much depends upon the particular
situation that each charity finds itselfin. It
is the authors’ contention however that
passing through the funding orientation
stage is an important part of the charity’s
development, much as it was important
for the private sector firm to pass through
the production and selling orientations
stages. Although funding orientation is
not appropriate for a charity in the long
term, the desire to develop a strategic
approach that secures financial resources
in the short term will provide a basis to
move towards a need orientation as the
basis of a long-term strategy.
The appropriateness of any organisa-
tion’s strategic response within the con-
fines of its corporate vision and external
environment can be identified by its
approaches to resource attraction and
resource allocation. Due to the disloca-
tion between resource attraction and
resource allocation the co-ordination of
the two cannot be obtained through the
‘market mechanism’ but only through the
proactive efforts of management. AS
the different orientation stages require
different strategic responses, then any
charity moving towards need orientation
must ensure its response is appropriate
both in the way resources are attracted
and are allocated. The final section of this
paper will focus on resource attraction
strategies by identifying and prescribing
fundraising strategies that are most ap-
propriate for each orientation.
IMPLICATIONS FOR FUNDRAISING
STRATEGIES
Each orientation of a charity identifies
different approaches to the problems of
resource attraction through fundrais-
ing activities. The identification of the
fundraising strategies that the charity is
implementing provides a clear indication
of the orientation of the charity’s cor-
porate strategy. An understanding of a
charity’s own fundraising strategies and
the relationship of these strategies to their
corporate orientation is essential for
the successful co-ordination between
resource attraction and resource alloca-
tion. See figure 3.
Cause orientation
As the creation of a charity is a response
by individuals to an event, the volition
that produces this response (whether
limited to a small number of people or as
a national response, such as Band Aid),
will produce financial resources. It may
be that the charity a t this embryonic stage
is merely a receptacle for donations.
(Oxfam was originally created as a
response to the Biafra Crisis.) The
primary objective at this stage is resource
attraction, which will fuel the resource
allocation strategies to be developed. This
narrow remit facilitates consensus among
the stakeholders. Fundraising strategies
do not need to be highly co-ordinated
or part of a sophisticated promotional
strategy because of the wide-ranging
awareness of the problem and a shared
consensus about the need to provide
funds for the cause. Whether this is
localised in terms of fundraising for a new
church roof or national such as recent
AIDS events, the mission and immediate
need is clear. There is little procrastina-
tion as the moment must be seized, and
resource allocation decisions can be left
until later. At this early stage there is
no division between those involved in
resource attraction and resource alloca-
tion activities. As the identification ofthe
fundraising need is so widely accepted
there is shared responsibility, and every
individual is involved in this activity. The
fundraising activities that are used clearly
identify the simplicity of the corporate
aims, for instance jumble sales or spon-
sored events.
 Funding orientation
After the initial rush of voluntary
contributions and enthusiasm dies away
resource allocation decisions become
more important as the charity will be
seeking to balance and integrate its
resource attraction and resource alloca-
tion strategies. As a consequence the
corporate objectives will become wider,
since the simplistic corporate objectives
based upon the ease of resource
attraction are no longer appropriate.
Stakeholders with a variety of respon-
sibilities will appear, and distinctions will
exist between those involved with
resource allocation and resource attrac-
tion roles. Systems and procedures will
be developed as the organisation grows.
Full-time workers employed by the
charity will start developing spheres
of interest and exerting a role as
stakeholders. At this stage fundraising is
important as the fuel for the achievement
of wider corporate strategies. However as
a result of circumstances such as a
reduction in the importance attached by
the public to the cause, or the arrival of
other more pressing and glamorous
causes, the task of attracting funds
becomes more complex. The charity
develops distinct resource attraction
strategies and targets, and the ability to
achieve these successfully directly affects
the charity’s responsiveness to its con-
sumers.
Charities will develop promotional
activities that segment their proposed
donor market. They will endeavour
to commit donors to planned giving
through such instruments as cause-related
marketing or Deeds of Covenant. Adver-
tising will emphasise the problem that the
charity is up against rather than the
solution, and may even use highly
emotive imagery that pushes ‘the right
button’. Literature about the charity will
emphasise its administrative and financial
efficiency rather than its success in
achieving and managing its ‘market
responsiveness’.
This emphasis upon the needs of
resource attraction activities indicates the
susceptibility that the charity will have to
the demands of funders (particularly the
Government). The market responsive-
ness of the charity can become not only
dependent on funders, but also subser-
vient to them. This can be exacer-
bated by the charity’s corporate vision
being misunderstood by funders, so that
the product that they believe they are
‘buying’ for the beneficiaries is different
from the product being ‘marketed’ to
them. This can produce a short-term
approach to both resource attraction and
resource allocation strategies. The con-
sensus that existed between stakeholders
while ‘cause orientated’ becomes dis-
sipated. Corporate objectives and their
hierarchical configuration become con-
fused and a shared vision becomes
unobtainable. The need for funds can thus
become so fundamental to the charity that
its success is measured purely in those
terms.
Need orientation
Need orientation emphasises a strategic
response that is focused on resource al-
location. Fundraising activities are seen as
subservient to servicing of the identified
beneficiary of the charity’s activities. The
stakeholders of the charity will have a
shared vision, particularly in terms of
identification of need and the solution to
it. Therefore those involved in the cor-
porate governance of the charity will be
agreed upon the charity’s mission. This
may be based on a variety of shared values
and beliefs, whether ideological ones such
as those held at Oxfam or religious ones
such as those of World Vision. Fundrais-
ing will emphasise longer term commit-
ment on the part of funders and a greater
 Figure 3
Primary
corporate Market response Orientation of
objectives Funding strategy strategy fundraising
strategy
Cause Solution Short-term
orientated Event-based Under-developed

Sophisticated
Funding Survival Segmentation Reactive
orientated CRM Secondary
Brand-based

Need Vision-led Relationship Primary

orientated Market-led Fundraising Proactive
Product-based Indicative of
vision

flow of information from the charity.
Wider involvement in corporate gover-
nance may be available in exchange for
commitment by funders due in part to
the greater consensus developed among
stakeholders. Promotion of the charity
will emphasise its vision and its view of
problem solving.
The success of the charity will
be measured not in terms of
resource attraction, but through ‘market
response’. The charity will be able to
protect its shared mission from the
incursions of specific funders, thus
making it orientated towards need, not
funding. This need will be responded to
only if it is within the charity’s mission
and the stakeholders consider the charity
has the resources to make the most
appropriate response, rather than a
response that is either inappropriate or
beyond the corporate objectives.
NPM organisations. Systemic theory was
used to show that new concepts may have
to be developed to explain new contexts,
such as those within which NPM or-
ganisations operate. Thus a revised con-
cept or framework was required within
which resource attraction and resource
allocation could be examined and ex-
plained.
To enable such an examination and to
provide such an explanation the authors
have presented a basic framework, which
has as its objectives the reconciliation of
these two elements. The framework
presented is tentative and requires further
refinement, but does enable the relation-
ship between resource attraction and
resource allocation to be considered from
a new perspective, and does highlight the
importance for charities of effecting a
reconciliation between these two ac-
tivities, by the identification of a clear and
coherent vision.

CONCLUSION
The authors have shown that the market-
ing concept in its traditional sense cannot
explain the relationship between resource
attraction and resource allocation in many
REFERENCES
(1) Baker, M. J. (1994)Journal of Marketing
Management, 10(5),pp. 2, 343-6.
(2) Smith, D. and Whan Park, C . (1994)
 ‘Call for Papers’, Winter Educators’
Conference.
(3) Whittington, R. (1993) ‘What is
Strategy - And Does it Matter?’
Routledge, London.
(4) Kotler, P. and Andreason, A. (1983)
‘Marketing Strategies for Non-Profit
making Organisations’, Prentice Hall,
London.
(5) Drucker, P. (1990) ‘Managing the Non
Profit Organisation’, Butterworth,
London.
(6) Graham, P. (1994) ‘Marketing in the
Public Sector: Inappropriate or merely
difficult?’Journal of Marketing
Management, 10(5), pp. 361-75.
(7) Shapiro, B. (1973) ‘Marketing for
Non-Profit Organisations’, Harvard
Business Review, Vol. 51, pp. 123-32.
(8) Birks, D. and Southan, J. (1990) ‘The
Potential of Marketing Information
Systems in Charitable Organisations’
(Autumn) Marketing Information and
Planning, Vol. 8, pp. 15-20.
(9) Lindsay, G. and Murphy, A. (1994)
‘NSPCC: Marketing the Solution,
not the Problem’ Marketing
Education, Group Conference Paper.
(10) Roberto, E. L. (1991) ‘Applying a
marketing model to the Public Sector’,
in ‘Service Delivery and Public Sector
Marketing’, O’Fairchellaigh, C.,
Graham, P. and Warburton, J. (eds),
Macmillan & Co Sydney.
(11) Bruce, I. (1994) ‘Marketing Need -
Successful Charity Marketing’,
Prentice Hall.