ABSTRACT
In recent years, a growing body of literature has begun to emerge regarding the concept of generalized exchange and generalized exchange benefits as useful tools in public policy and social marketing. Social marketing involves influencing voluntary behavior of people towards a broad social end by offering or demonstrating benefits to be received as a result of desired behaviors (Bagozzi 1975, Kotler and Andreasen 1991). Social marketing presents a dilemma to marketers in that marketers typically focus on an exchange model that emphasizes self-interest, whereas social marketing programs often address situations in which individuals are asked to act in the interest of others or the broader social group (Bendapudi, Singh and Bendapudi 1996). Altruism and the needs of others are common themes, but these may be seen as lacking an exchange orientation, a fundamental principle of marketing. Generalized exchange, as a social marketing concept, offers an alternative to appeals based on altruism and other’s need. Generalized exchange firmly roots social marketing efforts in a marketing exchange context by emphasizing indirect exchange benefits desired by target markets rather than altruistic orientations or direct reciprocal exchange benefits. In so doing, generalized exchange ties individual self-interest to the interest of the social group. Previous examples of applications of generalized exchange to social marketing include tax support for public education and social welfare systems (Bagozzi 1975, Marshall 1998). These are discussed further below. While cognizant of Hutton’s (2001) concerns over the expansion of the field of marketing, the current research follows a long tradition in which a marketing exchange perspective is applied to
encouraging voluntary behaviors in which two or more entities transfer values to mutual benefit (Houston and Gassenheimer 1987, Bagozzi 1975).
