Research: Getting to grips with behavioural change
By Hugh Jordan. Central comms. The Central Office of Information is the driving force behind the UK government’s hard-hitting ad campaigns. Whether tackling obesity, smoking or STDs, the organisation’s primary focus is inducing behaviour change. And a report published at the tail-end of last year by the COI looked at ways of doing this more effectively.
“We are trying to improve what we do,” says Fiona Wood, the COI’s director of research. “Lots of people are already using the principles of behavioural change theory. The idea of this report is that our clients and agencies can use this research and embed it into their campaigns.”
First, the COI conducted a literature review, looking back at past papers and other research on the topic – “making sure we weren’t reinventing the wheel”, says Wood. It also consulted a number of thought leaders and industry professionals to get a comprehensive overview of behaviour change through advertising.
One immediate result has been the implementation of a new five-point process.
Identifying behaviours, understanding the influences, developing a practical model, building a marketing framework and creating a communications model are cited as the key steps to achieving behaviour change success.
Paid-for media, such as TV and radio, provide effective channels for information and persuasion, but the COI report states that these channels are not always the most trusted or listened to sources. Emerging platforms such as social networks provide a real opportunity for the COI to develop ongoing, more meaningful relationships with those whose behaviour they are attempting to influence.
“The proliferation of new media means there are many, many more ways to have a conversation with people and, most importantly, a two-way dialogue,” says Wood.
Some might argue whether there is a need for behaviour change communications at all. Total government spend on advertising in the year up to March 2009 was put at £540 million, a vast sum of money and one that perhaps could have been used more effectively elsewhere.
“Behavioural change is not a new idea,” states Wood. “Governments have been using it for years. It is not just important from a public perspective, it is important from an economic perspective.”
She points to the Wanless review, which grew out of the 2003 Choosing Health White Paper.
Derek Wanless, who authored the review, estimated that by 2022, the additional cost to UK government of a public that took no active interest in its health, compared to a public that did, would be £30 billion.
That figure puts the £540 million in some kind of context. Prevention is better than a cure.
Clearly the financial ramifications of a blasé public are something the government and COI are taking seriously, evidenced by this latest report.
“We are not claiming to have all the answers,” Wood says. “This report is the opening to a conversation that will unfold over time. One that we hope will lead to better practice and more effective government communications.”
