Tackling the social marketing formative research bottleneck: comparative analysis of the complementary nature of community-generated personas and focus groups

IF 3.1 4区 管理学 Q2 BUSINESS
Mahmooda Khaliq, Dove Wimbish, Angela Makris
{"title":"Tackling the social marketing formative research bottleneck: comparative analysis of the complementary nature of community-generated personas and focus groups","authors":"Mahmooda Khaliq, Dove Wimbish, Angela Makris","doi":"10.1108/jsocm-06-2023-0141","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<h3>Purpose</h3>\n<p>This study aims to understand the utility of personas and illustrate, through a case study, how a persona-building exercise in a Community Based Prevention Marketing (CBPM) training of community leaders elicited important insights that complemented findings from ongoing formative research on vaccine hesitancy in the Hispanic/Latino population in the USA during COVID-19 pandemic.</p><!--/ Abstract__block -->\n<h3>Design/methodology/approach</h3>\n<p>An exploratory concurrent parallel qualitative study design compared three personas created by community-based organization members (<em>n</em> = 37) to transcripts from five formative research focus groups (<em>n</em> = 30) from the same project. All participants in this study were recruited by the National COVID-19 Resiliency Network as part of their capacity-building and formative research activities. Grounded theory guided the content analysis.</p><!--/ Abstract__block -->\n<h3>Findings</h3>\n<p>This study found personas and focus groups to be complementary. A high degree of co-occurrence was observed when investigating the uptake of the COVID-19 vaccine under the categories of barriers, culture and communication. Between the two methods, the authors found strong associations between fear, disruption to the value system, work-related barriers, inaccessibility to health care and information sources and misinformation. Areas of divergence were negligible.</p><!--/ Abstract__block -->\n<h3>Research limitations/implications</h3>\n<p>While personas provided background information about the population and sharing “how” to reach the priority population, focus groups provided the “why” behind the behavior, followed by “how”.</p><!--/ Abstract__block -->\n<h3>Practical implications</h3>\n<p>A community-driven persona-building process built on cultural community knowledge and existing data can build community capacity, provide rich information to assist in the creation of tailored messages, strategies and overall interventions during a public health crisis and provide user-centered, evidence-based information about a priority population while researchers and practitioners wait on the results from formative research.</p><!--/ Abstract__block -->\n<h3>Originality/value</h3>\n<p>This case study provided a unique opportunity to analyze the complementary effectiveness of two methods acting in tandem to understand the priority population: stakeholder-informed persona-building and participant-informed focus group interviews. Understanding their complementary nature addresses a time gap that often exists between researchers and practitioners during times of crises and builds on recommendations associated with bringing rigor into practice, promoting academic contribution to real-world issues and building collaborative partnerships. Finally, it supports the utility of a nimble tool that improves social marketers’ ability to know more about their audience for intervention design when time is of the essence and formative research is ongoing.</p><!--/ Abstract__block -->","PeriodicalId":51732,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Social Marketing","volume":"15 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.1000,"publicationDate":"2024-04-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Social Marketing","FirstCategoryId":"91","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1108/jsocm-06-2023-0141","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"BUSINESS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Purpose

This study aims to understand the utility of personas and illustrate, through a case study, how a persona-building exercise in a Community Based Prevention Marketing (CBPM) training of community leaders elicited important insights that complemented findings from ongoing formative research on vaccine hesitancy in the Hispanic/Latino population in the USA during COVID-19 pandemic.

Design/methodology/approach

An exploratory concurrent parallel qualitative study design compared three personas created by community-based organization members (n = 37) to transcripts from five formative research focus groups (n = 30) from the same project. All participants in this study were recruited by the National COVID-19 Resiliency Network as part of their capacity-building and formative research activities. Grounded theory guided the content analysis.

Findings

This study found personas and focus groups to be complementary. A high degree of co-occurrence was observed when investigating the uptake of the COVID-19 vaccine under the categories of barriers, culture and communication. Between the two methods, the authors found strong associations between fear, disruption to the value system, work-related barriers, inaccessibility to health care and information sources and misinformation. Areas of divergence were negligible.

Research limitations/implications

While personas provided background information about the population and sharing “how” to reach the priority population, focus groups provided the “why” behind the behavior, followed by “how”.

Practical implications

A community-driven persona-building process built on cultural community knowledge and existing data can build community capacity, provide rich information to assist in the creation of tailored messages, strategies and overall interventions during a public health crisis and provide user-centered, evidence-based information about a priority population while researchers and practitioners wait on the results from formative research.

Originality/value

This case study provided a unique opportunity to analyze the complementary effectiveness of two methods acting in tandem to understand the priority population: stakeholder-informed persona-building and participant-informed focus group interviews. Understanding their complementary nature addresses a time gap that often exists between researchers and practitioners during times of crises and builds on recommendations associated with bringing rigor into practice, promoting academic contribution to real-world issues and building collaborative partnerships. Finally, it supports the utility of a nimble tool that improves social marketers’ ability to know more about their audience for intervention design when time is of the essence and formative research is ongoing.

解决社会营销形成性研究的瓶颈:对社区生成的角色和焦点小组互补性的比较分析
目的 本研究旨在了解 "角色 "的效用,并通过一个案例研究,说明在社区预防营销(CBPM)培训中,社区领导者如何通过建立 "角色 "来获得重要的见解,从而补充正在进行的关于COVID-19大流行期间美国西班牙裔/拉美裔人群对疫苗犹豫不决的形成性研究的结果。设计/方法/途径 一项探索性的并行定性研究设计将社区组织成员创建的三个角色(n = 37)与同一项目中五个形成性研究焦点小组(n = 30)的记录进行了比较。本研究的所有参与者都是由国家 COVID-19 复原力网络招募的,作为其能力建设和形成性研究活动的一部分。研究结果本研究发现 "角色 "和焦点小组是互补的。在障碍、文化和沟通类别下调查 COVID-19 疫苗的吸收情况时,观察到了高度的共存性。在这两种方法之间,作者发现恐惧、价值体系混乱、与工作有关的障碍、无法获得医疗保健和信息来源以及错误信息之间存在密切联系。研究的局限性/意义 "角色 "提供了有关人群的背景信息,并分享了 "如何 "接触重点人群,而焦点小组则提供了行为背后的 "为什么",然后是 "如何"。原创性/价值这项个案研究提供了一个独特的机会来分析两种方法的互补性,这两种方法是:由利益相关者提供信息的角色塑造和由参与者提供信息的焦点小组访谈。了解这两种方法的互补性可以解决危机时期研究人员与实践者之间经常存在的时间差问题,并在将严谨性融入实践、促进学术界对现实问题的贡献以及建立合作伙伴关系等相关建议的基础上更进一步。最后,它支持一种灵活工具的实用性,这种工具可以提高社会营销人员的能力,使他们在时间紧迫、形成性研究正在进行的情况下更多地了解受众,从而进行干预设计。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
4.60
自引率
29.20%
发文量
33
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信