MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2100674952 · doi:10.1002/nvsm.1434

Marketing social missions—adopting social marketing for social entrepreneurship? A conceptual analysis and case study

2012· article· en· W2100674952 on OpenAlexaff
Judith Madill, Rafael Ziegler

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Marketing · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicService and Product Innovation
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSocial marketingMarketingSocial entrepreneurshipMarketing researchMarketing managementBusinessReturn on marketing investmentPublic relationsMarketing strategyEntrepreneurshipPolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In aiming for voluntary behavioral change, social marketing may be particularly attractive for social entrepreneurs, but conversely, they may not have the resources or knowledge for conducting full‐blown social marketing campaigns. In response to the growing importance and role of social entrepreneurship in tackling social problems and the lack of research concerning how social marketing may play a role in such organizations, the purpose of this paper is to develop a deeper conceptual understanding of how social marketing may be of use to social entrepreneurial organizations. The research reports on a case analysis of One Drop and its Aqua expo and the utilization of social marketing in pursuit of its goal to achieve water conservation in the Northern Hemisphere. The research shows the adoption of elements of social marketing but not a conscious adoption of social marketing as a strategy. Copyright © 2012 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.043

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0100.014
Scholarly communication0.0090.007
Open science0.0010.005
Research integrity0.0030.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.044
GPT teacher head0.298
Teacher spread0.254 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designQualitative
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations41
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector MarketingSame topicService and Product InnovationFrench-language works237,207