Communications And Behaviour Change

Communications
and behaviour
change
CommonGood

Foreword ..................................................4

Introduction ..............................................6

What influences people’s behaviour?.......10

Embedding behavioural theory................40

Conclusions and future implications .......58

Next steps...............................................62

Appendices

Appendix 1: The five-step process .............................. 65

Appendix 2: References ............................................. 66

Appendix 3: Acknowledgements................................. 68

33

Communications and behaviour change
Foreword

4

Foreword
We need to
encourage positive
behaviour change

Tackling some of society’s most intractable
and costly problems most often requires us
to change behaviours in some way. Some
steps may be small, like turning off lights,
and others may be large, like changing our
diets. Some behaviours can have tragic
short-term consequences, like driving too
fast, and others longer-term damage to
ourselves and other people, like smoking.
What they have in common are the
personal, social and economic costs
to us as citizens and taxpayers. Money
and resources spent, for example,
on treating obesity is not just a cost
but also a lost opportunity to invest
in other areas of civil society.
So, increasingly, the success of many
government policies and priorities depends
on our achieving behaviour change with
the greatest effectiveness and efficiency.
But, as this document makes clear and
our experience has shown, behaviour
change is a complex area. If we are
to succeed, we need to understand
the theories underpinning behaviour
change and how marketing and
communication can aid policy formulation
and ensure effective delivery.
Government has a number of tools at its
disposal to stimulate behaviour change,
from legislation, regulation and taxation
to providing information, persuasion,
engagement and working in partnership. In
most cases, putting these tools into action
will require communications in some form.
Within government, we are continually
seeking new and better ways to
communicate with citizens to
encourage positive behaviour change.
With this document, we hope to
provide those working in government
communications with an update on
some of the latest thinking about what
drives human behaviour and to launch
the debate as to what this means for
our approach to communications,
from strategy development through
to evaluation. We see this as the first
stage in an ongoing dialogue.
There are already many examples
across government where the theories
and principles outlined below have
been used to develop effective
communication and marketing strategies.
We have drawn on these examples
and included some of them as case
studies, from which we can all learn.
I hope you find this a useful resource.
We look forward to working with you
to continue developing and delivering
communications that are informed by both
a deep understanding of the behaviour
we seek to influence and the rapidly
changing communications landscape.
Mark Lund, Chief Executive, COI
5

Introduction
Human behaviour is a very complex area. This document draws on
key sources from the disciplines of social psychology, economics and
behavioural economics (where the first two disciplines overlap).
We have sought to distil this information into some key factors
that are important to consider for anyone developing
communications that seek to influence behaviour, and
to develop a framework for applying these factors to the
development of a communications strategy.
6

Introduction
About this document
The document is designed primarily
for those working in government
communications and draws on the
Government Social Research (GSR)
Behaviour Change Knowledge Review.1
The GSR Review was developed primarily
for those in analysis, research and
policy roles. It is therefore important
that this document covers the same
key theories and principles, so that
those working across all types of
behaviour change interventions can
develop a common understanding.
Broadly speaking, most government
communications seek to encourage
or enable people to act in one or
more of the following ways:
• to start or adopt a new behaviour;
• to stop doing something damaging;
• to prevent the adoption of a negative
or harmful behaviour; and/or
• to change or modify an existing
behaviour.
In each case, the aim is to get people
to behave in a certain way. Insights
from social psychological theory and
behavioural economics, both of which
provide us with a deeper understanding
of human behaviour, are therefore relevant
to all government communications.
A brief introduction to
some key behavioural
theory disciplines
Many disciplines have something
to say about human behaviour,
including economics, psychology,
sociology and anthropology. Within
government, ‘behaviour change’
(which is often applied through social
marketing campaigns) tends to be
dominated by social psychological and
(behavioural) economics thinking.
Behavioural models are designed to
help us better understand behaviour.
Those used within government tend to be
social psychological models that explain
behaviour by highlighting the underlying
factors influencing the individual or
group. Behavioural economics combines
insights from economics and psychology to
generate principles that show how people’s
decision-making can be less ‘rational’.
Over recent years, behavioural
economics has attracted much interest,
with authors such as Richard Thaler
and Cass Sunstein2
exploring some
of the principles and looking at how
these can be used to ‘nudge’ us
towards making ‘better’ decisions.
1 Darnton A (2008), GSR Behaviour Change Knowledge Review. Reference Report: An overview
of behaviour change models and their uses, HMT Publishing Unit, London.
2 Thaler R and Sunstein C (2008), Nudge: Improving Decisions About Health, Wealth
7and Happiness, Yale University Press, New Haven, Connecticut.

While behavioural models and economics
both seek to explain why people behave
the way they do, theories of change
seek to explain how behaviour changes.
There are many theories of behaviour
change, drawn from a wide range of
disciplines. This document discusses a
few of the most commonly cited theories.
We have provided an overview of some of
the main factors from social psychological
models, the key principles of behavioural
economics and the best-known theories of
change. For a more in-depth discussion,
see the GSR Review,3
which covers over
60 social psychological behavioural
models and theories and includes an
appendix that matches behaviour types
or domains (for example environment,
health or transport) to models. You
may find this a helpful starting point in
identifying those models that are relevant
to you and warrant further exploration.
Within some government departments
and agencies, teams (usually either
policy or analysis) have already
undertaken significant research into
behavioural models and theories
relevant to their policies. It is therefore
well worth investigating whether any
work has already been carried out in
your department or agency before
starting your own exploration.
In this document
What influences people’s
behaviour?
This section outlines some of the key
factors that influence behaviour. It
draws on a range of social psychological
theories and includes three examples
of behavioural models. The section also
gives an overview of the key principles of
behavioural economics and of the best-
known theories of change. Case studies
provide a practical illustration of how
models and theories have been used to
inform government communications.
Embedding behavioural
theory
A five-step framework shows how, by
increasing our understanding of behaviour,
behavioural theory can help to define
the role for communications and build a
communications model. The Department
of Health’s Tobacco Control campaign
is used to show how each step of the
process might work in practice. The
section concludes with a summary of the
steps and a series of questions designed
to stimulate thinking at each stage.
of behaviour change models and their uses, HMT Publishing Unit, London.8

Introduction
Conclusions and future
implications
This section lists the main conclusions
emerging from the report, then
goes on to consider some of the key
implications for communicators.
Next steps
Finally, this section suggests some
areas for future discussion aimed at
embedding behaviour change theory
in communications development.
9

What
influences
people’s
behaviour?
Human behaviour is influenced by a huge range of factors. In this
section, we seek to distil the ever-increasing body of evidence about
why we do what we do into some key factors and principles that are
important to consider when designing communications aimed at
influencing behaviour change.
1010

What influences peoples’ behaviour?
‘Individual behaviours are deeply embedded in social and institutional
contexts. We are guided as much by what others around us say and
do, and by the “rules of the game” as we are by personal choice.’4
Social psychological
models of behaviour
There are many different social
psychological models that seek to
explain human behaviours. Broadly
speaking, the factors in most of them
can be split into three levels:
1. Personal (‘micro’) factors which are
intrinsic to the individual, such as
their level of knowledge or their belief
in their ability to change their behaviour
and their habits.
2. Social (‘meso’) factors which are
concerned with how individuals relate
to each other and the influence of other
people on their behaviour.
3. Environmental factors over which
individuals have little control. These
include both:
a. local (‘exo’) environmental

factors, for example the area in

which an individual lives and

local shops and facilities, and

b. wider (‘macro’) environmental

factors such as the

economy or technology.

Most models tend to focus on factors
at the personal and social levels, with
few explicitly referencing those at the
environmental level. It is, however,
essential to consider factors from all
three levels. For this reason, we suggest
that social psychological models are
used primarily to identify personal
and social factors and that additional
work (see the discussion of systems
mapping, page 13) is undertaken to
identify the relevant external factors.
There are a number of reasons why
it is so important to identify factors at
all three levels. Seeking to understand
and influence behaviour by addressing
personal factors alone, for example, is
unlikely to work, because it fails to take
into account the complex and interrelated
nature of the factors that influence what
we do: we do not act in isolation, and
most people are influenced to a very great
extent by the people around them and the
environment in which they live. Equally,
it would be overly simplistic to focus on
environmental factors, such as access to
services or levels of taxation, while ignoring
the social and personal factors at play.
In seeking to influence behaviour in
the context of health, for example,
it is generally accepted that an
ecological approach – that is, one that
identifies and addresses the factors
influencing behaviour at all three
levels – is likely to be most effective at
bringing about behaviour change.
4 Jackson T (2005), Motivating Sustainable Consumption: A Review of Evidence on Consumer Behaviour
and Behavioural Change, report to the Sustainable Development Research Network, London. 11

Key learnings
• It is essential to identify factors
influencing behaviour at the
personal, social and environmental
levels.
• An ‘ecological’ approach – one that
takes account of and addresses
factors at all three levels – is likely
to be most effective in bringing
about behaviour change.
A note about
behavioural models
While models can help us understand
more about human behaviour, they
do have some limitations:
• Models are deliberately simplified to
aid understanding, and ‘do not account
for all the complexities of behaviour’.5
• Most models do not segment the target
population. In reality, different factors
are likely to carry different weight for
different people.
• Models are usually based on data from a
specific audience and/or designed with
a specific behaviour in mind and may
not ‘travel’ well. Any model used must be
explored for relevance to the behaviour
that is being addressed.
It is also important to note that behavioural
models and theoretical insights are not
a substitute for primary research. Our
aim is to help you incorporate theory
into your planning alongside primary
research and other evidence.
12

Behavioural models
and communications
Understanding all the factors that
influence the behaviour you want to
change is an essential starting point.
It will enable you to start identifying
the most effective interventions and to
establish where communications (in
the broadest sense) sit within the mix.
The approach outlined in this section
is aligned with the early steps in the nine
principles for developing interventions
using behavioural models outlined
in the practical guide section of the
GSR Review.6
This is to ensure that
policy and communications teams
share a consistent framework.
Identifying behaviours
Some government communications
focus on influencing a single behaviour,
such as getting people to drive more
slowly. For many issues, though – for
example, climate change and obesity
– government will need to bring
about changes in multiple behaviours
in order to meet policy goals.
Where the specific behaviour or
behaviours in question have already been
identified and agreed, you can move
straight on to identifying the influencing
factors (see page 15). If, however, this
thinking has not yet been done, it is
important to identify all the relevant
behaviours and other factors contributing
to the issue you are seeking to address.
Otherwise, it will not be possible to select
the appropriate behavioural model(s).
The most complex behaviours may
require a systems thinking approach.
Systems thinking is a way of mapping
out all the factors influencing a particular
issue and the relationships between
them, so that issues can be seen as
part of an overall system rather than in
isolation. Systems diagrams provide
a visual representation. At the core
of systems thinking is the concept of
feedback, the idea that changing one
factor will often affect one or more of
the other factors within the system. It is
therefore particularly useful in helping
to anticipate the possible consequences
of interventions aimed at a specific
factor or factors. While it may not be
communications teams who undertake
systems mapping, such exercises can
nevertheless yield valuable insights into
the range of interventions needed to
address the various factors and the part
that communications can play in the mix.
Where the issues involved are less
complex, a full systems mapping
exercise may not be needed. However,
an exercise to identify the factors and
behaviours contributing to the issue
you are seeking to address will provide
a useful starting point in developing a
comprehensive picture of influences.
6 Darnton A (2008), GSR Behaviour Change Knowledge Review. Practical Guide: An overview
13

Mapping the causes of obesity
Obesity is a complex issue with extremely wide-ranging causes operating at the personal,
social and environmental levels.
In the absence of a model incorporating all the relevant factors, a team of experts from
a range of disciplines, including psychology, sociology, food sciences, genetics and
epidemiology, produced an Obesity System Map highlighting the full range of contributory
causes.7
The Obesity System Map shows a vast number of factors operating at the personal, social
and environmental levels with multiple linkages and no one factor dominating. This clearly
points to the need for a sustained and wide-ranging programme of interventions in order to
facilitate change.
7 Vandenbroeck P, Goossens J and Clemens M (2007), Tackling Obesities: Future Choices
– Building the Obesity System Map, Government Office for Science, London.14

Understanding
the factors that
influence behaviour
The factors that influence behaviour
fall into the following broad levels:
personal; social; local environment;
and wider environment.
This section provides an overview of
factors at all levels that can play a major
role in influencing behaviour. It does
not and cannot cover all the factors
that influence behaviour. Instead, we
have chosen to focus on those that
appear across a number of different
behavioural models and/or that we believe
are particularly important to consider
when designing communications aimed
at influencing behaviour change.
The section also includes three examples
of behavioural models to show how
the factors selected work in context.
Personal factors
Knowledge and awareness
When we ask people to change their
behaviour, we need to clearly set out our
expectations. This might be, for example,
the speed limit we want them to observe
when driving in a built-up area. Standard
economic theory assumes that if people
are provided with information, they will
act on it in such a way as to maximise
personal benefit and minimise their
costs, a concept often referred to as
‘rational choice theory’.
Personal
Social
Local environment
Wider environment
The AIDA (Attention, Interest, Desire,
Action) marketing model is an example of
an ‘information deficit’ model. It is based
on the idea that providing information
will spark interest, which in turn leads
to desire and subsequently to action.
Sometimes – for example, when telling
people how to deal with swine flu or
about a new piece of legislation – it is
appropriate simply to give them the
relevant information. But knowledge
and awareness are rarely enough by
themselves to bring about behaviour
change. Other factors can override
our ‘rational’ selves, and we may
make systematic errors in our rational
calculations (see the section on
behavioural economics, page 20).
Providing information is therefore a first
step towards influencing behaviour change
rather than an end point. For example, as
well as explaining how eating too much
and doing too little can lead to obesity, the
Change4Life campaign (see case study
on pages 28–29) also aims to increase
self-efficacy (see page 18) by showing
people that they can incorporate more
activity into their daily lives. Information
can also be used to direct people to
other communication channels or
services – such as a website – that aim
more directly at changing behaviour.
15

Attitudes
Attitudes are specific to particular
behaviours. Early psychological models
show attitudes leading to intention in a
predominantly linear fashion. In later
models, attitude still plays a role but
appears alongside a range of other factors.
While attitudes can influence behaviour,
evidence now suggests that the link is
not as strong as we might previously
have thought. The so-called ‘Value
Action Gap’describes those situations
where a person holds values that are
inconsistent with their behaviour.
The Value Action Gap can be particularly
evident with regard to attitudes to
the environment. While people may
believe that it is important to protect the
environment, other factors may take
precedence when it comes to actually
changing their behaviour. Darnton
cites research into pro-environmental
behaviours which found that at least
80 per cent of the factors influencing
behaviour did not stem from knowledge or
awareness.9
It is also important to bear in
mind that although attitudes can precede
behaviour, the opposite can also be true.
According to Festinger’s
theory of cognitive
dissonance,8
a person
holding two inconsistent
views will feel a sense
of internal conflict
(‘cognitive dissonance’),
which will prompt
them to change their
views and so bring their
perceptions into line. This
has also been found to
apply to inconsistencies
between perceptions
and behaviours.
A good example of cognitive dissonance
is evident among smokers. Most
smokers know that smoking causes
lung cancer and other health problems,
but they also want to live a long and
healthy life. Smokers can seek to reduce
this ‘dissonance’ either by giving up
smoking or by finding ways to justify
their habit, for example by claiming
that cigarettes keep them slim or that
they know someone who smoked 30
cigarettes a day and lived to be 100.
8 Festinger L (1957), A theory of cognitive dissonance, Stanford University Press, Palo Alto, California.

Communications can help to shift
attitudes. For example, government
campaigns have succeeded in changing
attitudes to drink driving and this,
combined with legislative change and
other interventions, has succeeded in
bringing about behaviour change (see
the case study on page 19). However, as
with knowledge and awareness, shifting
attitudes alone may not be enough to
bring about behaviour change. It is
therefore rarely advisable to view attitude
shift as a precursor to behaviour change,
or to use it as a proxy for behaviour
change for the purposes of evaluation.
Habit and routine
Habit or routine can be a key factor in
influencing frequent behaviours. In recent
years, it has become an emerging area of
study in social psychology and in fields
such as neuroscience. Here, experiments
on animals have given insights into the
dual process cognitive system10
whereby
the automatic mind handles most of our
day-to-day functioning while the executive
mind both monitors the automatic mind
and takes on focused mental tasks.
The more we repeat a particular behaviour,
the more automatic it becomes. As time
passes and the behaviour is undertaken
more and more frequently, habit can
therefore become the key factor driving
behaviour. As government communicators,
many of the behaviours we try to influence
will be habitual (for example, leaving
appliances on standby or having the
tap running while we brush our teeth).
Such behaviours are often unconscious,
and difficult to explain or justify.
Kurt Lewin’s theories
of change maintained
that breaking habits
required an ‘emotional
stir-up’11
to raise the habit
to conscious scrutiny.
Smoking is both an
addictive and a habitual
behaviour. The British
Heart Foundation’s Fatty
Cigarette campaign set
out to tackle the habitual
element by associating
the cigarette with the
damage it was doing. The
aim was to ensure that
each time the smoker
thought about having a
cigarette, they would also
think about the damage it
caused. This constituted
the ‘emotional stir-up’
needed to turn smoking
from an unconscious habit
into a conscious action.
10 Graybiel (2008), ‘Habits, rituals, and the evaluative brain’ in Annual Review of Neuroscience vol 31, 359–87.
11 Lewin K (1951), Field Theory in Social Science, Social Science Paperbacks, London. 17

A number of behaviour change theories
stress the importance of subjecting
habits to scrutiny as a first step towards
changing them, by raising them out of
the unconscious mind. Communications
designed to influence habitual behaviours
must therefore look at which strategies will
be most effective in turning a habit into
a conscious behaviour. Ambient media
used at the point where the behaviour
actually takes place is an example of
communications seeking to do this and
can be very effective – for example,
posters and stickers near washbasins
reminding people to wash their hands,
as used in the swine flu campaign.
Self-efficacy
Agency, self-efficacy and perceived
behavioural control (different terms are
used in different models) all describe
‘an individual’s sense that they can carry
out a particular action successfully and
that action will bring about the expected
outcome’.12
What is important is the
belief, not whether or not the individual is
actually capable of achieving a particular
goal. This will determine the effort a
person is prepared to put into changing
their behaviour and even whether they
will attempt it at all. People’s sense of
agency can be driven by many things,
including past experiences and personal
beliefs (for example, some people are
naturally more pessimistic than others).
This factor appears in many social
psychological models. Lack of agency
can be a strong barrier to behavioural
change. Again, environmental
issues are a useful example. ‘Public
responses to climate change are
commonly characterised by a lack
of agency, for instance, the sense
that the problem is too large for
individuals to make a difference.’13
Communications can help to increase
individuals’ sense of agency, for instance
by providing clear instructions that
make a particular behaviour seem more
achievable, by using testimonials to show
how other people have made the change
or by helping to teach relevant skills. For
example, one element of a recent sexual
health campaign set out to teach young
people negotiation skills which they could
then use to initiate discussions about,
for example, contraception. A further
exmple of a campaign seeking to increase
‘agency’ is the Home Office vehicle crime
campaign (see page 20). However, it is
essential that any such communications
are seen as trusted and credible and that
the behaviour is depicted as achievable.
13 Ibid.1818

Moment of Doubt campaign
The Department for Transport’s Moment of Doubt
campaign aims to convince young men aged between
17 and 29 that the consequences of drink driving are
relevant to them.
In the past, drink-driving
campaign messages have
been based on a risk and
reward model, contrasting
the pleasure of drinking
with the risk of causing
injury or death by driving
under the influence. While
the number of people
killed has fallen from 1,600
in 1979, it has stayed
relatively stable at above
500 a year since 2000.
The advertising agency,
Leo Burnett, set out to re
evaluate the assumptions
behind the campaign.
Attitudinal research
found that a small but
growing number of people,
particularly men aged 17–
29, refused to acknowledge
the risk of having a
crash when driving after
drinking, while qualitative
research suggested that
trying to shock viewers
with the most extreme
consequences was
becoming less effective for
this group, who did not see
drink drive-related crashes
as relevant to them.
From general
attitude to
personal response
These findings, along with
input from behavioural
psychologists, pointed
to a move away from
campaigns that build
public outrage towards
persuading the target
audience that drink driving
could have immediate,
negative consequences
for them personally.
Consumer research, a
semiotics analysis and
behaviour theory identified
the key intervention point
as occurring when the
drinker was deciding
whether to have a second
pint, ie when they were still
in control. The campaign
therefore focused on
creating cognitive
dissonance (see page
16) between the desire
for another drink and a
set of credible, relevant
consequences such as
getting a criminal record,
being banned from
driving and damaging
relationships with a partner
or family members.
Impact
Six months after the launch
of the campaign, young
men’s perception that they
would be caught by the
police had risen from 58 to
75 per cent.14
The number
of people breathalysed
during December 2007
rose by 6.4 per cent, while
the number testing positive
fell by 19.5 per cent.15
The number of deaths and
serious injuries caused by
drink driving fell for the first
time in six years, from 560
in 2006 to 410 in 2007.
14 BMRB Tracking, January 2008.
15 Accociation of Chief Police Officers. 1919

Home Office vehicle
crime campaign
The Home Office vehicle crime campaign
sought to increase people’s sense of
agency by persuading them that they
could outsmart the criminals.16
Where previous campaigns had used
images of circling hyenas to play on
people’s fear of crime, the strapline
‘Don’t give them an easy ride’ aimed
to empower people and convince
them that through their own actions
they could lessen their chances of
becoming a victim. The campaign also
sought to change habits by placing
ads reminding people to lock their cars
and not leave valuables on show in
strategic places such as parking meters
and petrol pumps where opportunistic
theft was most likely to happen.
Emotion
Emotions may be triggered without our
knowing and can have a strong influence
on our behaviour, both conscious
and unconscious. While most models
see emotion as influencing behaviour
change indirectly (by altering attitude,
habit or agency), there are occasionally
situations where behaviour is driven by
emotion alone. For example, a phobia
or fear can determine how an individual
behaves in certain situations.17
Where communications do aim to
stimulate emotion, it is important to
understand which factors are likely to be
affected by the emotional response, given
that often, emotion will not have a direct
influence on behaviour. Emotion can be
a useful ‘hook’ but it should not be the
end point. Otherwise, there is a risk that
the communication will not lead to any
change in behaviour, as in the Home
Office’s original vehicle crime campaign
(see box), where images of hyenas circling
a car inspired fear in some sectors of the
audience and left them feeling powerless.
Behavioural economics
In the previous section, we looked at some
of the most common factors that drive
behaviour at the personal level. These all
appear in social psychological models.
Behavioural economics can also be used
to understand individual behaviour.
16 COI/IPA (2008), How Public Service Advertising Works, World Advertising Research Centre, London.

What influences peoples’ behaviour
Behavioural economics involves applying
psychological insights to economic models
to account for the systematic ‘errors’ in
our decision-making. It suggests that
the decisions we make are dependent
on context and that natural biases and
mental shortcuts (heuristics) can lead to
‘imperfect’ decision-making. Behavioural
economics does not generate ‘drivers’,
but it does offer principles that can
help us understand why people deviate
from the assumed ‘rational’ standard.
Communicators seeking to influence
behaviour in a way that involves making a
decision or choice should therefore have
an understanding of those principles.
Mental shortcuts (heuristics)
We take ‘mental shortcuts’ or use ‘rules
of thumb’ hundreds of times each day,
and the more pressure we are under,
the more shortcuts we take. Where, for
instance, we don’t have time to make a
decision by calculating the pros and cons
of various options, we often make an
‘educated guess’ based on, for example:
• How easily we can recall (availability)
or imagine (simulation) something
happening: We tend to believe that
events we can easily think of or
imagine happen more often and are
consequently more likely to happen
to us.
‘... people tend to be more nervous
about flying than driving because
airplane crashes are easy to recall.
Similarly, it is found that the larger the
jackpot in a lottery, the more tickets that
are bought, because the consequences
of a large prize attract more attention
and are easy to imagine.’18
Communications can harness this
bias by making it easier for people
to imagine the consequences of a
particular behaviour or reminding them
of the (negative) consequences of a
past action.
• What has happened before
(representativeness): We generally
make decisions based on how similar
an outcome is to something that has
happened before, not by weighing up
all the possibilities.
‘The heart of the gambler’s fallacy is
the misconception of the fairness of
the laws of chance. The gambler feels
that the fairness of the coin entitles
him to expect that any deviation in one
direction will be cancelled out by a
corresponding deviation in the other …
This fallacy is not unique to gamblers’.19
Biases
Internal biases mean that our natural
responses are not always fully ‘rational’.
Recognising this can help us understand
why people make the choices they do
in the ‘real world’ and identify whether
there is a role for communications
in overcoming these biases, some
of which are discussed here.
We tend to prioritise short-term
reward over long-term gain (hyperbolic
discounting). For example, some people
prefer to have more money now than
to pay into a pension plan. This is an
important principle for government
communicators, as government is often
seeking to persuade people to make
choices that involve a long-term pay-off
but little immediate gain.
18 Halpern D, Bates C, Geales B and Heathfield A (2004), Personal Responsibility and Changing Behaviour: the
state of knowledge and its implications for public policy, Prime Minister’s Strategy Unit, Cabinet Office, London.
19 Kahneman D, Slovic P and Tvesrsky A (1974), Judgement Under Uncertainty: Heuristics and Biases’ in Science
vol 185 No. 4157, 1124–31. 21

?
?
?

Cass Sunstein and
Richard Thaler in Nudge:
Improving Decisions
About Health, Wealth and
Happiness20
use the term
‘choice architecture’ to
describe how decisions
can be influenced by the
way in which they are
framed. They argue that
the ‘choice architect’
can ‘nudge’ people
towards ‘better’ choices
without compromising
individual freedom.
This concept is
particularly relevant to
communications and
central to the aims of
many communications
strategies, suggesting
as it does that the way
choices are framed can
make them more effective.
The extent to which we disregard future
gain (the ‘discount rate’) will increase the
more remote the issue appears to be.
So, generally speaking, the younger the
person, the less likely they are to prioritise
investing in a pension plan. Disadvantaged
groups also tend to be more likely to
discount future gain, focusing instead
on getting by in the short term.
‘... policies that are based on individuals’
investment in their future (eg personal
pensions, adult education) have a
tendency to widen inequalities as those
with high discount rates will be less
likely to take on these opportunities.’21
We’re loss-averse. We tend to put more
effort into avoiding loss than ensuring gain.
Evidence suggests that communications
focusing on potential losses rather than
gains are more motivating: in other words,
disincentives are more effective than
incentives. According to this principle, a
message that states ‘You will lose £X each
year if you don’t insulate your loft’ will have
more impact than one that states ‘You
will save £X each year if you do insulate
your loft’.
We have a natural preference for the
status quo (inertia). When faced with a
difficult or complex choice, our tendency is
to carry on doing what we’ve always done
and avoid making a decision.
In recent years, there has been much
discussion about how government
can harness the power of inertia by
adjusting society’s ‘default’ settings, for
example by requiring people to opt out
20 Thaler R and Sunstein C (2008), Nudge: Improving Decisions About Health, Wealth and Happiness, Yale University
Press, New Haven, Connecticut.
21 Halpern D, Bates C, Geales B and Heathfield A (2004), Personal Responsibility and Changing Behaviour: the
state of knowledge and its implications for public policy, Prime Minister’s Strategy Unit, Cabinet Office, London.
22

of becoming organ donors or making
pension contributions something to opt
out of rather than opt in to. Indeed,
in the case of pensions this is already
happening: from 2012, all employers
will have to automatically enrol their
eligible employees into a good quality
workplace pension scheme and provide
a minimum contribution unless the
employee chooses to opt out.
Such decisions tend to be taken by
policy teams (although communications
may have a part to play both in
helping to develop the policy and in
getting messages out to the relevant
audiences). But where this approach
is not possible, communicators should
give some thought to strategies for
overcoming inertia, for example by
making the behaviour seem easier to
undertake than people perceive it to be.
Choices are influenced by the way they
are presented (framing). As the discussion
of biases demonstrates, many of the
choices we make are hugely influenced by
how they are presented to us or how they
are framed.
Key learnings
• Understanding the natural
biases and mental shortcuts that
shape people’s thinking should
inform the nature and content
of communications.
Social factors
‘… an extremely important task during the
formative stages of the strategic planning
process is to gain an understanding of the
extent to which interpersonal influences
are likely to be important for one or more
target groups.22
Other people’s values, attitudes,
beliefs and behaviour can have a
strong social influence on our own
behaviour, a phenomenon that has been
widely discussed in recent years.
Social norms are the group ‘rules’ that
determine what is deemed ‘acceptable’
behaviour. Social norms can have a
huge influence on our thoughts and
behaviours and therefore appear in
many different social psychological
models. Social norms vary by group,
so what the norm is for one group of
young people may well be different from
that adopted by another group living in
different circumstances. Failure to act
in accordance with these ‘rules’ can
lead to exclusion from the group.
When we are unsure of how to act in social
situations we often assume that others
around us know more and look to them for
pointers on how to behave, a phenomenon
known as social proof. An example of
this would be a party where food is laid
out but guests are unsure whether it’s
acceptable to help themselves. As soon as
the first person helps themselves, others
will quickly follow: the behaviour has been
shown to be acceptable to the group.
22 Andreasen A (1995), Marketing social change: Changing behaviour to promote health, social development and the
environment, Jossey-Bass, San Francisco.
23

We tend to underestimate the extent
to which we are influenced by others.
Most people will deny any influence
at all, an important factor to consider,
particularly for researchers. Direct
questioning alone is unlikely to be the
best way of establishing the influence
of social norms on an individual.
Communications and
social norms
Communications can be effective in
highlighting social norms and prompting
people to act in accordance with them.
An experiment involving hotel guests
provides an illustration.23
Half the guests
had signs in their bathrooms with a
message about how reusing towels
could benefit the environment. The
other half had the same sign but with
an extra message stating that most hotel
guests reused their towels at least once
during their stay. Guests exposed to the
additional message were 26 per cent
more likely to reuse their towels: a clear
demonstration of the power of social proof.
Further examples of how
communications can utilise the
power of social norms include:
• peer-to-peer approaches such as
online forums or communities where
people can connect to others in similar
circumstances. This can be particularly
helpful with regard to less common or
more sensitive issues, as social proof
and reassurance can be provided in a
‘safe’ and anonymous way;
• positive testimonials from others who
have used a service or adopted a
particular behaviour (thus showing that
such behaviours are acceptable). Note
that testimonials can also help to boost
self-efficacy (see page 18);
• targeting campaigns at respected,
authoritative opinion leaders or
recruiting them as ‘ambassadors’ for a
brand or behaviour. These people can
help both to spread the message and to
provide social proof of the acceptability
of a particular behaviour; and
• driving word of mouth, for example
by using PR techniques to generate
news stories that describe other people
behaving in a particular way.
Social norms can be particularly
strong in relation to some of the most
intractable behaviours that government
is seeking to change. For example, if
the norm within a peer group is to go
out and drink to excess, it is unlikely
that lasting behaviour change will be
achieved unless that norm is addressed.
For the young people in that group,
the views and behaviour of their peers
will be a more powerful influence than
information provided by other sources.
Descriptive and injunctive norms
The social pyschologist Robert Cialdini
distinguishes between two types of
social norm: ‘descriptive norms’ and
‘injunctive norms’.24
Descriptive norms
fit the description of social norms set out
above: that is, we base our own behaviour
on how other people act. Injunctive
23 Goldstein N, Martin S and Cialdini R (2007), Yes! 50 Secrets from the Science of Persuasion, Profile, London.
24 Cialdini R, Kallgren C and Reno R (1991), ‘A Focus Theory of Normative Conduct: a theoretical refinement and re
evaluation of the role of norms in human behaviour’ in Advances in Experimental Social Psychology vol 24, 201–34.24

70
norms are the rules and regulations that
tell us what we should do. Often, the
two types of norm align but sometimes,
as in Tim Jackson’s motorway driving
example (see right), this is not the case.
The risk of unintended
consequences
Communicators must be aware of the risk
of making the behaviour they are seeking
to change seem as if it is widespread
and therefore acceptable. For example,
in seeking to highlight the problem of
missed appointments, hospitals and GP
surgeries will often cite the number of
people that fail to turn up. It has been
argued that this approach runs the risk of
inadvertently legitimising the behaviour –
other people are doing it, so why shouldn’t
I? An alternative would therefore be to
focus instead on the fact that the vast
majority of people do turn up on time.
Similarly, it has been argued that raising
awareness, particularly of risky health
behaviours such as heavy drinking or
drug taking, may serve to exacerbate the
problem. Research in the US into the
different approaches taken by colleges
to try to reduce alcohol consumption
found that most campaigns highlighted
the ‘descriptive norm’, that is the high
consumption of alcohol. Through
the use of trial communications, the
team found that such messages could
actually encourage those students who
drank less than the amount described
to increase their consumption to the
level presented as the norm.25
70
‘Tim Jackson gives the
example of motorway
driving (Jackson 2005):
if other drivers around
him are driving over the
speed limit, he may be
likely to do the same
(following the descriptive
not the injunctive norm).
If he sees a police car
up ahead, he is likely
to reduce his speed;
the police car performs
a focusing function,
making the injunctive
norm salient. The police
car also provides an
element of ‘surveillance’,
the sense of foreboding
that sanctions may be
imposed which is a
requirement for adherence
to injunctive norms. The
focusing function is also
required in activating
descriptive norms.’26
25 Schultz PW, Nolan JM, Cialdini RB, Goldstein NJ and Griskevicius V (2007) ‘The Constructive, Destructive,
and Reconstructive Power of Social Norms’, in Psychological Science, vol 18 No. 5, 429–34.
26 Darnton A (2008), GSR Behaviour Change Knowledge Review. Reference Report: An overview of behaviour change
models and their uses, HMT Publishing Unit, London. 25

While there are instances of social
norms changing rapidly, this has often
been as a result of legislative change,
for example the ban on smoking in
public (smoking had already become
less acceptable, but the ban made it
even more so). More commonly, social
norms change slowly, and therefore,
in the absence of legislative change, a
long-term approach will be required as
it will take time for any changes to filter
through and become commonplace in
society. In other words, a short burst of
communications activity alone is unlikely
to be effective in shifting a social norm.
Environmental factors
In order to understand why people behave
in the way they do, it is essential to take
into account the physical conditions
and environment in which they live.
Environmental factors can be hugely
significant in determining how an
individual will behave. Before behaviour
change can occur, the right ‘facilitating
conditions’27
must be in place in both
the individual’s local (exo) environment
and the wider (macro) environment.
The local (exo) environment
However motivated we are to behave in
a certain way, if our local environment
puts barriers in the way of that behaviour
it is unlikely that we will succeed. For
example, an individual may be strongly
motivated to use public transport
instead of a car, but if there is little
access to public transport in their area,
it will be difficult if not impossible for
them to change their behaviour.
Another example is recycling.
Before kerbside collections became
commonplace, anyone wanting to
recycle needed not only the motivation
to recycle but also the commitment to
find a recycling facility and access to
transport. To be effective, communications
aimed at persuading people to recycle
needed to go hand in hand with
improving access to recycling facilities.
The wider (macro) environment
Factors that operate at a national
or even international level can also
have a huge influence on individual
behaviour. Wider or macro environmental
factors can include technology, the
economy, taxation and legislation.
Most social psychological behavioural
models do not make explicit reference to
external factors. The Theory of Planned
Behaviour (see page 31) looks at
environmental factors within the context
of ‘perceived behavioural control’, while
the Theory of Interpersonal Behaviour
(see page 32) considers external factors
as part of ‘facilitating conditions’.
Although few models reference specific
environmental factors, it is essential
that communicators take them fully into
account. Systems mapping or similar
exercises at the start of any interventions
planning should identify the factors
influencing behaviour at this level. Social
psychological models can then be used
to identify factors and plan interventions
at the personal and social levels.
27 Triandis H (1977), Interpersonal Behavior, Brooks/Cole, Monterey, California.26

The implications for
communicators
Broadly speaking, factors influencing
behaviour at the environmental level will
often be tackled through policy or delivery
interventions, for example by making
changes to regulations or the provision of
services. Communications nevertheless
have an important role to play.
Communications can provide vital support
for policy interventions, for example
by providing information about new
legislation (such as the reclassification
of cannabis) or promoting local services.
In such cases, more traditional forms
of advertising may be appropriate.
Communications can also influence
environmental factors by helping to
frame the discourse on particular issues.
While this may challenge ‘traditional’
definitions of the role of communications,
it is an important point to consider,
particularly where government is seeking
to influence behaviours that are deep-
seated and difficult to change.
Participative approaches such as citizens’
summits, workshops or online dialogue
draw on theories of learning and change
which argue that sustainable change
cannot be imposed. Rather, people
need to play an active role in the change
process. Communications could be
used, for example, to recruit people
into programmes that empower them
to change the environment themselves
or to highlight local problems, thus
creating the momentum for change.
Even where hard policy levers are
applied, individuals may fail to respond
in a ‘rational’ way (see page 15). Litter
penalties are one example of this. Since
2006, councils have had the power to
issue fixed penalty notices to anyone
dropping litter in public. However, littering
remains a major problem, even in areas
where those penalties are enforced. In
such cases, communications can play a
crucial role alongside policy interventions
by seeking to persuade people to adopt
or advocate a particular behaviour.
Key learnings
• We cannot rely on people to make
rational decisions based on the
information provided, and we cannot
assume that changing attitudes will
lead to a change in behaviour.
• Social factors are powerful, and
social norms are deeply entrenched.
Change in social norms is often slow
to happen, and communications
are likely to be most effective when
working with other interventions in
shifting social norms.
• Communications will often
provide valuable support for
policy interventions in influencing
environmental factors.
27

Change4Life
The cross-government Obesity Team’s Change4Life
campaign aims to help families improve their long-term
health by making positive changes to their lifestyle.
The Foresight report
Tackling Obesities: Future
Choices28
concluded that
obesity is caused by a wide
range of factors, including
environmental, economic,
media, educational and
technological factors,
and that tackling it calls
for a multi-faceted,
cross-societal approach.
Change4Life, which
was launched in 2009,
therefore forms part of a
wider cross-government
strategy, Healthy Weight,
Healthy Lives, which
includes initiatives such
as building safe places to
play, promoting healthy
food in schools and
the development of an
active transport policy.
There is no behaviour
change model for obesity
prevention, so the
Change4Life team based
its marketing campaign on
a hypothetical behaviour
change journey derived
from a review of behaviour
change theories and
research with the target
market. The plan is to
adapt the hypothesis as the
campaign progresses.29
The right conditions
for change
The most relevant models
included Robert West’s
‘PRIME’ Theory, the Theory
of Planned Behaviour,
Social Cognitive Theory
and Social Capital Theory.
The team agreed that the
programme should be
split into two steps: first,
creating the right conditions
for behaviour change;
and second, supporting
people on their behaviour
change journey. Findings
from the Tobacco Control
campaign (see case study
on page 43) suggested
that the conditions for
behaviour change included
being dissatisfied with
the present, having a
positive image of the
future and having specific
triggers for action.
The marketing plan was
therefore split into six
phases, which map on
to the behaviour change
journey shown opposite:
• Pre-stage: engaging
with workforces and
partners, including
local service providers
and NGOs, both face
to face and through
direct marketing.
• Phase 1: reframing
obesity as relevant to
the target audience
groups with the aim of
encouraging a social
movement, using TV,
print and outdoor
advertising, PR, a
helpline, a campaign
website and fulfilment
materials, and by
building partnerships.
• Phase 2: personalising
the issue by making
people realise that their
behaviours could be
putting themselves and
their families at risk. The
main mechanism for
this was a questionnaire,
asking families about
a typical day in their
lives. Responding to this
questionnaire triggered
individualised advice and
guidance. Activity was
targeted at postcodes
with the highest risk
of obesity.
28 Vandenbroeck P, Goossens J and Clemens M (2007), Tackling Obesities: Future Choices
– Building the Obesity System Map, Government Office for Science, London..
29 Department of Health, Change4Life marketing strategy, 2009.2828

• Phase 3: defining the
eight behaviours families
should adopt and
promoting them through
advertising and a range
of partners, using
direct and relationship
marketing and focusing
activity on areas where
target audience groups
were most likely to live.
• Phase 4: inspiring
people to change
through real-life stories
in the local and national
press, and locally
targeted activities.
• Phase 5: ongoing
support and
encouragement
for at-risk families
going through the
change process,
delivered by post
and online.
Impact
Although it is too early in
the campaign to validate
all the assumptions
made about behaviour
change, early results
suggest that behaviour
is being influenced
by the campaign.
The ultimate aim is to
establish a correlation
between campaign
response, behaviour
change, altered weight
status and improved
health outcomes.
Measuring Change4Life’s impact through the behaviour change journey
Reaching
at-risk families
Helping families
understand
health
consequences
Convincing
parents that
their children
are at risk
Teaching
behaviours to
reduce risk
Inspiring people

to believe they
can do the
behaviours
2929
Creating desire
to change
Triggering

action
Supporting
sustained
change

Behaviour models:
some examples
Models help us to understand the
underlying factors that influence
behaviour. There are many different social
psychological models, some specific to
particular behaviours and others more
general, and it is worth spending time
identifying which are most appropriate to
the behaviour you are seeking to influence.
It is likely that you will identify a number
of models that are relevant to the
behaviour you are seeking to influence.
From these, you will be able to identify
those factors where communications are
likely to have an impact. As discussed
previously, models should be used
in conjunction with other evidence to
build up as comprehensive a picture as
possible of the behaviour in question.
The three examples of models included
here have been selected because they
represent the differing levels of complexity
and scale that can be found in models:
• The Theory of Planned Behaviour:
provides an example of an intention-
based model. It is also one of
the best-known and widely used
behavioural models.
• The Theory of Interpersonal Behaviour:
builds on intention-based models by
including other factors, notably habit.
As discussed above (see page 17) this
factor is a major influence on many
of the behaviours that government is
seeking to change.
• The Needs, Opportunity, Ability model
refers explicitly to environmental-level
factors, something that is relatively rare
in social psychological models.
For a more comprehensive list of
models, see the appendices to the
GSR Review30
which cover over 60
social psychological and behavioural
models and theories and includes an
appendix matching behaviour types
or domains (for example environment,
health or transport) to models.
30 Darnton A (2008), GSR Behaviour Change Knowledge Review. Reference Report: An
overview of behaviour change models and their uses, HMT Publishing Unit, London.30

Ajzen’s Theory of Planned Behaviour (1986)31
Evaluation of
outcomes
Beliefs about
what others think
Beliefs about
outcomes
Attitudes towards
the behaviour
Intention Behaviour
Relative importance
of attitude and norm
Subjective norm
Perceived
behavioural control
The Theory of
Planned Behaviour
The Theory of Planned Behaviour (TPB)32
is a well-known model that has been
fairly widely used in the past, in part due
to its relative simplicity and ease of use.
According to the model, the key factors
influencing behavioural intention are:
• attitudes towards the behaviour;
• subjective norms and;
• perceived behavioural control or agency.
Intention is seen as leading directly
to behaviour.
The TPB is an ‘adjusted expectancy
value model’. Whereas an ‘expectancy
value’ model is based solely on attitude,
the TPB also recognises the influence
of the ‘subjective norm’ (that is, how
socially acceptable an individual believes
their behaviour to be). It also includes
‘perceived behavioural control’, defined
in this case as the ease (or otherwise)
of performing the behaviour in question
(see page 18, on self-efficacy).
For these reasons, the model is seen as
providing a more accurate prediction
of behaviours than models based solely
on attitude. Nevertheless, the TPB
remains an intention-based model.
Given that behaviour is driven by many
factors other than intention, the model
may be more effective at predicting
intention than actual behaviour.
overview of behaviour change models and their uses, HMT Publishing Unit, London.
32 Ibid. 31

Triandis’ Theory of Interpersonal Behaviour (1977)33
Evaluation of
outcomes
Beliefs about
outcomes
Attitude
Intention
Habits
Behaviour
Facilitating
conditions
Roles
Self-concept
Norms
Social factors
Emotions Affect
Frequency of
past behaviour
The Theory of
Interpersonal Behaviour
Harry Triandis’ Theory of Interpersonal
Behaviour (TIB) also defines intention
as one of the key factors influencing
behaviour. However, unlike the TPB,
it also recognises the role of habit
and acknowledges the importance of
environmental factors (called ‘facilitating
conditions’ in the model). Triandis also
recognised that behavioural intention is
influenced by emotions and social factors,
elements not included in the TPB.
Of the three directly influencing
factors (habit, intention and facilitating
conditions), Triandis saw habit as the
most influential. He also believed that
its influence increased over time and,
therefore, that the influence of intention
decreased. The more times a behaviour
is repeated, the more automatic
and less deliberative it becomes.
While the TIB is less widely used
than the TPB, it can be particularly
helpful in relation to regular/habitual
behaviours such as car use.

Velk et al’s Needs Opportunities, Abilities model (1997)34
Technology Economy Demography Institutions Culture
Motivation Behavioural control
Needs
Relations, development, comfort, pleasure, work,
health, privacy, money, status, safety, nature,
freedom, leisure time, justice
Intention
Consumer behaviour
Subjective well-being, environmental quality
Opportunities
Availability,
advertisement,
prices, shops
Abilities
Financial, temporal,
spatial, cognitive,
physical
Needs, Opportunity, Ability
The Needs, Opportunity, Ability
(NOA) model of consumer behaviour
is a good example of a model that
explicitly incorporates factors at
the environmental level.35
NOA consists of an intention-based
model of individual behaviour ‘nested’
within a model that shows the influence
of macro-level environmental factors.
At the individual level, intentions are
formed through both ‘motivation’ (which
is driven by needs and opportunities) and
‘behavioural control’ (agency) (which is
driven by opportunities and abilities).
At the macro level, needs, opportunities
and abilities are influenced by the five
environmental factors at the top of the
model: technology, economy, demography,
institutions and culture. The model
shows a two-way relationship between
environmental factors and consumer
behaviour, with a large ‘feedback loop’
linking the top and bottom levels.
Perhaps because of its greater complexity,
the NOA is used less frequently than
either the TPB or the TIB. However, it
provides a valuable demonstration of
how environmental factors can influence
behaviour and shows clearly that
focusing only on personal factors will
not be enough to bring about change.
‘The NOA emphatically shows the
interaction between individual
and society, and demonstrates
the need for interventions to work
on multiple levels of scale.36
The FRANK case study (overleaf)
provides a practical example of how a
behavioural model has been used to
inform a communications strategy.
34, 36 Darnton A (2008), GSR Behaviour Change Knowledge Review. Reference Report: An overview of behaviour change models
and their uses, HMT Publishing Unit, London.
35 Gatersleben B and Vlek C (1998), Household Consumption, Quality of Life and Envrironmental Impacts: A Psychological
Perspective and Empirical Study, in Noorman KJ and Schoot-Viterkamp, AJM (eds), Green Households? Domestic Consumers,
Enviroment and Sustainability, Earthscan Publications, London.
33

FRANK
In 2005, the FRANK campaign team set out to adopt a
more targeted approach to communicating with young
people about drugs
Desk research into the best ways of
communicating with young people
about drugs37
identified Gibbons and
Gerrard’s Dual Path Theory38
as an
effective way of addressing risk issues
where there was no direct correlation
between attitude and behaviour.
Dual Path Theory
behavioural model
Gibbons and Gerrard’s model reflects
the fact that drug taking involves
rational, irrational and social factors
and informs four potential roles for
intervention communications:
• boosting young people’s resistance
(behavioural willingness);
• encouraging young people to see drug
use as marginal rather than mainstream
(subjective norms – peers’ behaviour);
• emphasising the risks involved in taking
drugs (personal vulnerability); and
• undermining the image of drug users
(risk images).
Insights and implications
The model research yielded a number
of valuable insights. The first was that if
a young person has previously used a
drug, this will inform their future drug-
taking behaviour. Communications
therefore work best when they are
targeted at young people before they
become regular drug users. The
FRANK campaign is not interested in
outright rejecters, so resources have
been focused on young people who
are thinking about taking a drug for
the first time and occasional users.
Secondly, younger adolescents (11–14
years old) are heavily influenced by
their peers. Even where there is a
strong intention not to use drugs, their
high level of behavioural willingness
means that they will look to their peer/
Previous behaviour
Attitudes
(personal vulnerability)
Behavioural
intention
Risk behaviour
Behavioural
willingness
Subjective norms
(peers’ behaviour)
Risk images
Social
comparison
37 Darnton A (2005), Understanding Young People’s Drug Use, Desk Research Report One: Commentary, for FRANK
and COI, London.
38 Gibbons F, Gerrard M and Lane D (2003), ‘A Social Reaction Model of Adolescent Health Risk’ in Suls J and
Wallstone K (eds), Social Psychological Foundations of Health and Illness, Wiley-Blackwell, Malden, Massachusetts.
34

social group when making a decision.
Messages therefore encouraged this
group to contact FRANK for expert advice
rather than listening to their friends.
They also indirectly promoted negative
perceptions of drug users and
emphasised the risks of drug taking.
The campaign focused on cannabis, the
most prevalent drug for this age group.
Thirdly, young people aged 15+ tend to
think more rationally about the risks of
drugs and be more drug experienced.
Their decisions are more likely to be
informed by their own sense of personal
vulnerability as well as by their peer/social
group. Messaging for this group therefore
focused on the risks involved in using
drugs (mainly cocaine) and on building
up trust and confidence in FRANK.
Impact
This model-driven approach to the
campaign is reflected in its evaluation.
Key performance indicators (KPIs)
include the number of young people
contacting FRANK, increasing awareness
of the risks, strengthening resistance
and promoting negative perceptions of
drug users. The campaign has achieved
considerable, measurable success in these
areas since the model was adopted.
Knowing and trusting FRANK
as the expert on drugs:39
• Total awareness of the FRANK
campaign among the target group
is 90 per cent.
• FRANK is the most trusted source
of drug information and advice for
young people
– 81 per cent trust FRANK to provide
them with reliable information;
– 59 per cent would turn to FRANK for
information about drugs, compared
with 44 per cent who would turn to
their mother, 22 per cent who would
turn to their friends and 20 per cent
who would turn to their doctor.
Perceived risk of drugs (of
cannabis among the 11–14s and
cocaine in the 15+ group):
• The percentage of 11–14-year-olds
agreeing that cannabis is very likely to
damage the mind rose from 45 per cent
in April 2006 to 63 per cent in April
2009.
• After the last burst of cannabis
advertising (February 2009), 74 per
cent said the advertising made them
realise that cannabis is more risky than
they thought.
• After the last burst of cocaine
advertising (January 2009), 67 per cent
said the ads made them realise that
cocaine is more risky than they thought.
Negative perceptions of drug users
(negative average out of 10):
Drug user March April March 5 April
2006 2007 2008 2009
Cannabis40
7.2 7.5 7.5 7.7
Cocaine41
7.4 7.6 7.8 8.0
Note: The higher the score the more negative
the perception is of users of that drug.
Building young people’s resistance skills
• After the last burst of cannabis
advertising, 73 per cent said that the
advertising made them less likely to take
cannabis in the future.
• After the last burst of cocaine
advertising, 62 per cent said that the
campaign made them less likely to take
cocaine in the future.
39 Tracking survey (Synovate).

40 Base: young people who have never used cannabis.

41 Base: young people who have never used cocaine.
35

Key learnings
• Models should be used as tools to
identify factors that influence the
behaviour you are seeking
to change.
• You may find that there are
a number of models that are
relevant to the behaviour.
• Not all models include factors at
the environmental level, but it is
nevertheless critically important to
identify these and build them into
your planning.
• Models should be used in
conjunction with primary research
and other evidence to build up
a full picture of the behaviour.
This can then be used to develop
an intervention/communications
strategy.
Understanding how
behaviour changes
In the section headed ‘Understanding the
factors that influence behaviour’ (see page
15) we looked at the various factors that
can influence behaviour. In this section,
we will look at some theories on how
behaviour actually changes. Anyone
working on communications aimed at
influencing behaviour will need an
understanding of the main theories of
behaviour change and their implications
for communications.
The Stages of Change
The best-known theory of behaviour
change is the ‘Stages of Change’ model,42
developed in the late 1970s and early
1980s by James Prochaska and Carlo
DiClemente and based on smokers’
approaches to giving up cigarettes.
Since then, this model has been used for
a wide range of primarily health-related
behaviours, including weight loss and
alcohol and drug problems. The central
idea is that behaviour change comprises
six stages, with people progressing from
one to the next at their own pace.
The six stages of change are:
1. Pre-contemplation: The individual has
no intention of changing their behaviour
in the foreseeable future (usually
defined as the next six months),
possibly because they have not yet
acknowledged that there is a problem
behaviour that needs to be changed.
2. Contemplation: The individual
acknowledges that their behaviour
needs to change. While they are not yet
ready to change, they intend to do so
within the next six months.
42 See Prochaska J and Velicer W (1997), ‘The Transtheoretical Model of Health
Behaviour Change’, American Journal of Health Promotion, 12(1), 38–48.
36

3. Preparation: The individual is preparing
to change their behaviour within the
next month and may already have
devised a plan of action.
4. Action:The individual has changed
their behaviour within the past six
months.
5. Maintenance: The individual is actively
maintaining the changed behaviour
(although they can still relapse at this
stage).
6. Termination: The new behaviour
is embedded and the individual is
confident that they will not relapse.
Their self-efficacy (see page 18) is high.
Individuals are segmented by stage.
‘Staged-matched interventions’ have been
devised and provide suggestions as to how
people at each stage can best be moved
forward. Over recent years, however, the
model has been subject to criticism, with
some arguing that there is no evidence
that stage-matched interventions are any
more effective than other interventions,
and that interventions can work at
any stage of the change process.
Nevertheless, the model can provide
a useful way of identifying where
an individual is in their ‘change
journey’ and understanding what this
means for targeting and messaging.
For instance, individuals who are
interested in changing their behaviour
(ie who are in the ‘contemplation’
stage) may be a useful primary target
for any communications activity.
Rogers’ Diffusion
of Innovations
This well-known theory seeks to explain
how new ideas and technology spread
through society by ‘diffusion’, defined
as ‘the process by which an innovation
is communicated through certain
channels over time among the members
of a social system’.43
Its basic premise
is that people fall into the following five
categories, according to how likely they
are to adopt particular ‘innovations’:
1. Innovators: The first to adopt. As a
group they are more willing to take
risks. They also tend to be young and
to belong to the higher social classes.
2. Early adopters: Tend to be seen as
opinion leaders among the later adopter
groups and, like innovators, tend to be
younger and from higher social classes.
3. Early majority: Later to adopt than
innovators and early adopters.
Innovation ‘spreads’ through contact
with early adopters. They are also seen
as opinion leaders by some.
4. Late majority: Adopt innovations later
than average and tend to be more
sceptical than the above groups.
They are less likely to show opinion
leadership than groups 1, 2 and 3,
and have less contact with earlier
adopter groups.
5. Laggards: Adopt innovations later than
all the other groups. Laggards tend to
be older and are not usually opinion
leaders. Their networks tend to be
limited to family and close friends.
43 Rogers E (1995), Diffusion of Innovation, Free Press, New York.
37

It is notable that the groups most likely
to adopt an innovation early on tend to
demonstrate higher levels of opinion
leadership (that is, to be held in high
regard and have their opinion respected
by others). Opinion leadership is often
subject-specific; it is possible to be an
opinion leader in relation to one innovation
but a follower with regard to another.
Rogers argues that adoption depends
on access to ‘information’ about the
innovation, and that this information
should be tailored to the group.
According to the theory, innovation
spreads gradually through the first groups.
When the level of adoption reaches
between 10 and 20 per cent (Gladwell’s
‘tipping point’44
) the rate of adoption
suddenly increases steeply before levelling
off at around 80 to 90 per cent. Diffusion
itself also follows a five-stage process:
1. Knowledge: The individual is aware of
the innovation but lacks information
about it.
2. Persuasion: The individual becomes
interested in the innovation and seeks
information about it.
3. Decision: The individual weighs the
pros and cons and decides whether or
not to adopt the innovation.
4. Implementation: The individual adopts
the innovation.
5. Confirmation: The individual decides to
continue using the innovation.
The theory is based on a deliberative
linear process similar to that shown in the
AIDA marketing model (see page 15). The
individual decision as to whether or not
to adopt the innovation is very ‘rational’.
This theory of change has been widely
used in commercial marketing, principally
in relation to the adoption of new
technologies and products rather than
behaviours. Nevertheless, the concept
of opinion leaders as important agents
of change is a useful one, as is an
understanding of how change spreads
through society. Both these factors support
the case for using communications
to target opinion leaders (in the hope
that they will then spread the message
and encourage take-up among others)
and for peer-to-peer marketing that
exploits the power of social networks.
Key learnings
• As well as understanding the
factors that influence behaviour,
it is important to understand how
behaviour changes.
44 Gladwell M (2000), The Tipping Point: How Little Things Can Make a Big Difference, Little, Brown, London.38

39

EMBEDDING
BEHAVIOURAL
THEORY
40
This section focuses on how behavioural theory can be used
to support the practical planning, delivery and evaluation of
communications. This will help to ensure that communications
are designed with a realistic understanding of what they can be
expected to achieve, within what timescale and at what cost.

Embedding behavioural theory
‘What influences people’s behaviour?’
demonstrated some of the ways in
which behavioural theory can help
us understand human behaviour.
However, it also highlighted some of the
complexities of the field, and showed
that there is no one simple way of
addressing communications challenges.
The process set out here recognises
and reflects that complexity, but is
nevertheless designed to be practical.
It is not prescriptive; rather, its aim is
to show how behavioural theory can
be used to support the development of
a robust communications model. We
appreciate that communications teams
are often working to tight time constraints.
This process is designed to be usable
and achievable within tight deadlines,
and can be adapted to work within
both shorter and longer timescales.
For clarity and simplicity, we have
split the process into five steps, as
shown in the figure overleaf..
The five-step process
Many communications and policy
formation projects are already broadly
following all or some of these steps.
However, what is often missing is any
systematic attempt to utilise the value
of behavioural theory throughout the
process and to share knowledge between
all of those involved in developing
interventions, including communications
teams and their agencies.
At each stage of the process, an
example drawn from the Department
of Health’s Tobacco Control project
brings the theory to life by showing how
that step could operate in practice.
‘We need an even better understanding of human
behaviour, not just to arrive at the optimum solution
in terms of motivation but also to understand how
to get as close as possible to the behaviour under
investigation to stand the greatest chance
of influencing it.’ Judie Lannon45
45 COI/IPA (2008), How Public Service Advertising Works, World Advertising Research Centre, London.
41

Exploration – wide range of thinking
Reducing focus down to solution
The five-step process
42
1 Identifying behaviours
2 Understanding the influences by audience
3 Developing a practical model of influences on behaviour
4 Building a marketing framework
5 Developing a communications model
Why use the five-step
process?
Identifying, translating and applying
relevant behavioural theory from
the outset will help you to:
• make sure that the right questions are
asked and the right people are involved;
• build close working relationships
between communications and policy
teams and external agencies;
• set clear expectations as to what
communications can achieve;
• identify new roles for communications;
• identify the types of agencies that
should be involved in the process and
ensure that their energies are focused
on addressing the challenge, rather than
defining it; and
• support robust evaluation based
on a clear, shared understanding
of objectives and the role of
communications in achieving them.

In practice: background to the strategic review of the
Tobacco Control campaign
The behavioural goal of the Department of Health’s Tobacco Control
marketing and communications strategy 2008–10 is to help reduce
smoking prevalence to 21 per cent among the general adult population
and to reduce the prevalence among routine and manual workers to
26 per cent.
Before a recent strategy review, Prochaska and DiClemente’s Stages
of Change model (see page 36) played a major role in shaping
communications activity. The model was used both to focus the creative
targeting of campaigns (for example, campaigns about NHS Stop Smoking
services targeted those in the preparation phase) and to evaluate them
(for example, analysis of campaign tracking data was based on the stages
within the model).
For one part of the campaign, the ‘Together’ programme, the Prochaska
model has formed the basis of the entire contact strategy. Together,
which is still in use, offers remote support to move potential quitters from
preparation to maintenance (that is, from stage 3 to stage 5 of the model).
The blueprint for content creation and the timing of messages are entirely
dictated by the model.
However, while the Stages of Change model has been invaluable in
structuring thinking, it is a model about how behaviour changes, not what
influences behaviour. Many important influences in smoking cessation –
such as the impact of legislation and pricing – are ‘off the model’ and not
explicitly described.
Moreover, there was growing clinical evidence that interventions tailored
around the model were no more effective than untailored approaches.
The strategic review of Tobacco Control communications presented an
ideal opportunity to survey the behaviour change landscape and identify
a more appropriate model.
43

Step Key questions Outcome
Step 1 • Are we addressing single or multiple behaviours?
Ex
Agreed target behaviours
Identifying • How do we break down the issue into its component behaviours?
plo
behaviours • How do multiple behaviours relate or group?
ration
• Who do we want to undertake the behaviour?
• What is the desired and current behaviour?
• Does the behaviour involve people starting, stopping, maintaining
or preventing?
1 Identifying behaviours
Step 1 involves identifying the
behaviour or behaviours that your
policy and/or communications
activities are seeking to influence.
As previously mentioned, sometimes
government communications will seek
to influence a single behaviour – for
example, getting drivers to reduce their
speed. But many of the more complex
issues government is seeking to address,
such as climate change and obesity, will
require changes in multiple behaviours.
If you are aiming to influence a single
behaviour, or the component behaviours
have already been identified, go straight
to step 2. If not, your starting point should
be to identify all the relevant behaviours
relating to your policy and communication
goals (which may not necessarily be
the same) (see pages 13–15 for more
detail). Otherwise, it will be impossible
to develop an understanding of the
factors that influence those behaviours.
Step 1 in practice: the
The Department of Health identified
two key behaviours that it would need
to influence in order to reduce smoking
prevalence:
• whether or not an individual chooses
to make a quit attempt; and
• the method by which they choose
to quit.
By getting more people to make quit
attempts the aim is to increase the
‘market’ for quitting. In influencing ‘how’
people quit, the aim is to increase the
overall success of quit attempts. Evidence
shows that some methods of quitting are
more successful than others: for example,
smokers who quit with NHS Stop Smoking
services are four times more likely to
succeed than those who go ‘cold turkey’.
44

Step Key questions Outcome
Step 2 • What factors are at play at the following levels:
Ex
Detailed understanding of all
Understanding – personal (for example habit, emotions, confidence, knowledge,
plo
influencing factors
the influences biases or mental shortcuts)?
ration
by audience – social (for example is the behaviour with or against social norms,
peer pressure, who will influence and how strongly)?
– local and wider environmental (for example access, price,
opportunity, services, proximity)?
• How do factors differ across audiences? How does their importance
vary across different audience groups?
2 Understanding the
influences by audience
The next step is to identify all the factors
influencing the behaviour(s) that relate
to your policy and communication goals.
These factors will vary among different
audience groups. Behavioural theory
should play an important role in this task.
The factors influencing behaviour can be
divided into broad levels: personal, social
and environmental (both local and wider).
(See pages 15–27for more detail.) You will
need to consider factors at all these levels.
Note that this may mean considering
more than one behavioural model and
looking at other relevant theories.
The GSR Review46
describes over 60
models and theories and includes
an appendix that matches behaviour
types or domains (eg environment,
health, transport) to models. This can
be a useful starting point for identifying
relevant models and factors that
influence the behaviour(s) in question.
Generating behavioural insight
As noted above, behavioural models and
theories are often based on a theoretical
‘everyman’. Models do not always indicate
the relative importance of factors, and
some are developed with a specific
behaviour in mind. To develop meaningful
insights into the reasons why people
behave as they do, you will need to draw
on other information (including primary
research) as well as on behavioural theory.
In practice, steps 1 and 2
are likely to be iterative.
Exploring the factors that
influence one behaviour
might highlight another
behaviour that could be
easier to influence, or
where communications
have a more obvious
role to play. In this case,
you will need to go back
to step 1 and add the
‘new’ behaviour to your
list before proceeding
again to step 2.
Personal
Social
Local environment
Wider environment
overview of behaviour change models and their uses, HMT Publishing Unit, London. 45

Creating an accurate
segmentation will mean
exploring people’s
claimed behaviours;
intentions; attitudes;
physical, practical and
psychological barriers;
motivations; goals; and
levels of self-efficacy.
You may also wish to
find ways of linking
the segmentation with
data describing the
actual behaviour of
different groups.
Consider links to
planning tools such as
TouchPoints,47
TGI48
and
MOSaIC,49
which leave
detailed information
on demographics,
geodemographics, life
stage, media consumption
and attitudes, supporting
the segmentation
process. The tools will
help to ensure that
your segmentation is
actionable, and are best
used to supplement your
own primary research.
The Cabinet Office has
produced guidance
on segmentation.50
Behavioural
insight
Behavioural
theory
Previous experience/
understanding of
audience, issue
and behaviour
Primary research
Combining sources to generate
‘behavioural insights’
The figure above shows the range
of sources that will often need to be
used to help generate behavioural
insights. Techniques may include:
• drawing on the knowledge and
experiences of relevant stakeholders,
for example frontline service staff;
• reviewing and analysing existing
information (including relevant
behavioural theory) and data through
desk research;
• qualitative and ethnographic research
or customer immersion; and
• using semiotics to look at how
specific audiences construct and
understand meaning.
Behavioural insights can then help to
identify the most important influencing
factors – that is, those that have the
strongest influence on the behaviour
or behaviours in question.
Carrying out a bespoke segmentation
can help you identify how the factors
that influence behaviour affect
different audience sub-groups.
47 IPA TouchPoints is a consumer-focused
multi-media database designed to provide
insights into how people use media.
46 48 The TGI Survey enables an understanding of
consumer attitudes, motivations and behaviour.
49 MOSAIC classifies residential postcodes
into 12 lifestyle groups.
50 www.cabinetoffice.gov.uk/public_service_reform/
contact_council/resources/segmentation.aspx

Segmentation in action: HMRC
When HM Revenue & Customs set out to segment its target audience by looking at the
factors that influence their behaviour in relation to tax, the first step was to scope the issue
through a large-scale data review and over 100 interviews. These were used to develop
a framework that identified the factors driving the way that people behave. Qualitative
research followed, and was used to design a major piece of quantitative research. The
findings pointed to five distinct segments, based on four dimensions: awareness (of
obligations); motivation (to comply); ability (to comply); and opportunity (to comply).
Step 2 in practice: the Tobacco Control campaign
The Department of Health used a number of different models and theories to gain further
insight into the factors that influence smoking behaviour, as well as primary research with
the target audience and interviews with academics and practitioners. A number of new
insights emerged from these sources.
Many theories identify the role of attitudes and beliefs in driving motivation. For smoking
cessation these operate in two ways: by shaping the desire to stop smoking (through beliefs
such as ‘smoking harms me and my family’); and by shaping positive images or a ‘vision’
of the future. This latter form of ‘positive motivation’ was particularly important, as primary
research among the target audiences identified that while many smokers had a strong
desire to stop smoking, there were far fewer positive associations with the concept of being
a ‘non-smoker’.
Robert West’s ‘PRIME’ Theory of motivation identified the need for a trigger as well as
motivation to drive a quit attempt. Previous marketing had sought only to drive motivation.
The concept of self-efficacy or agency (the extent to which an individual believes that
they can carry out a particular action successfully and that that action will bring about the
expected outcome) has been identified in many theories, including the Theory of Planned
Behaviour and the Theory of Reasoned Action. The role of self-efficacy was also highlighted
by NHS Stop Smoking service practitioners and is summarised in the model subsequently
developed (see below) as ‘confidence in ability to quit’.
The impact of social norms on behaviour is also explicit in many models, and research
among the target audience highlighted the role of peer pressure in driving both quit
attempts and relapse. This was captured in the model as an influence that drove ‘positive
environmental pressure to quit’.
Many other influences that operate at a cultural or environmental level – such as legislation
and price – play a very important role in driving cessation and influence the ‘environment’
for quitting.
Finally, in order to successfully change their behaviour smokers have to know how to
change successfully. In culture change models this is sometimes referred to as ‘practical
steps for action’.
47

Factors and behaviour
Step Key questions Outcomes
Step 3 • How do we prioritise the factors identified at step 2?
To
• Model of key influencing
Developing a • How do these factors influence current and desired behaviours?
wa
factors
practical model • What is the relative importance of the factors?
rds
• Understanding and/or
of influences on • Do we have data to measure the factors?
a
measurement of how the
behaviour • Can we build a data-driven model? factors work together and
• If we can’t, what are the pragmatic hypotheses we can work with
solution
their importance
and test? • Initial hypothesis about role
• What are our early hypotheses about how behaviour might change? of communications
• What are our early hypotheses about the role that communications
might play?
3 Developing a practical
model of influences on
behaviour
The insights into behaviour developed
at step 2 can now be used to develop a
practical model that brings together all
the relevant behaviours and influencing
factors, and which is based on a deep
understanding of the relationship between
current and desired behaviours and
the key influencing factors involved.
Sometimes, it will be appropriate to
adapt an existing model; at other
times, you will need to create a model
specifically for the task in hand.
Developing a practical model will require
input from people with a range of different
skills, including experts in behaviour (who
may well be academics) and experts in
policy and communication. This will help
ensure that the model works across all
interventions, not just communications,
ensuring consistency and coherence.
The model should be dynamic and
have a temporal element too it so that
it can adapt in line with changing
circumstances. For example, a model
developed two years ago might not take
into account the economic downturn,
and would need to be updated to reflect
the impact of this factor on customers’
attitudes, behaviours and intentions. The
simplest solution is to schedule regular
reviews into your planning process.
Whether it is data-driven or not, a
practical model is essential. It will help
to focus thinking about the behaviour(s)
in question and the influencing factors,
and can be used to develop a marketing
framework (see step 4 below).
Often, practical models
are developed both from
a behavioural theory
(explains behaviour)
and change theory
(explains how to change
behaviour) perspective.
48

Factors and behaviour
Using the behaviour model to
create hypotheses of change
Interrogating the model can help you to
develop hypotheses about how change
might take place and (in the case of data-
driven models) to predict the role that
communications might play within the
wider intervention mix. This information
can then be fed into the marketing
framework (see step 4). You can use the
model to answer the following questions:
• Which influencing factors have the
biggest impact on the behaviour(s) we
are seeking to change?
• Where can communications legitimately
play a role?
• How much of our budget should we
allocate to communications and how
much to other interventions?
Testing the model
You can test your model by populating
it with data that measure factors and
behaviour (note that you may need to
use proxy data measures against some
inputs). It can then be used to predict
the outcomes of different interventions.
The data will need to be measured
over time to allow understanding
of how the behaviour changes.
Once you have data or proxy data for
each factor, you can use a statistical
technique for modelling the relationships
between variables (such as linear
regression or agent dynamics) to produce
a predictive tool. This can be used to
predict the response to future interventions
and also look at future trends.
Data-driven models should
always be created in
partnership with policy
colleagues. Such models
require considerable
resources, and may not
always be achievable at
the outset. In practice,
ongoing evaluation
should aim to create
a data-driven model
that can then be used
to adapt and refine the
communications strategy.
49

The influences that were identified in step 2, along with the conditions for successful behaviour change,
are captured in this generalised model of smoking cessation (see figure).
Identifying the influences on behaviour change has shaped the Department of Health’s marketing and
communications strategy in many ways. Most profoundly, it has helped to define marketing objectives and
to develop the workstreams that contribute to meeting those objectives.
The department also developed a data-driven model that would quantify the impact of levers such as
price and legislation and help everyone involved gain a better understanding of the scale of the task for
communications. For example, when first developed in 2007, the model identified that the all-adult
prevalence target would be met but that the target for prevalence among routine and manual workers was
much more challenging. Among this audience, 530,000 smokers needed to quit in order to hit the target.
The model showed that communications should deliver 298,000 of these. The model is updated on a
regular basis as new information emerges, and it continues to be used to help set quantifiable targets for
communication and to aid budget setting.
Generalised and simplified smoking cessation behavioural model
Positive
environmental
pressure
Dissatisfaction
with the present
Positive vision
of the future
Motivation
Quit attempt Successful quit
Relapse
Trigger
Confidence in
ability to quit
Knowing how to
quit successfully
Physical
addiction
Habit
Legislation
Price Peer influence Social and cultural norm
s
Access
50

Step 4 • What factors will marketing/interventions need to target?
To
• An understanding of the role
Building a • Where will communications play a role? What factors will they affect,
wa
of communications and the
marketing and how? Will they play a leading or supporting role?
rds
factors they are designed to
framework • What are the communications objectives?
a
influence
• What are our top-line evaluation metrics for these communications • An agreed set of
objectives?
solution
communications objectives
• How communications fit into
the wider picture
• Top-line metrics for
setting and evaluating key
performance indicators
4 Building a marketing
framework
Techniques such as systems thinking
(see page 13) and approaches such
as social marketing show the benefits
of looking at communications in the
context of all interventions rather than
in isolation. Communications should be
designed to complement and reinforce
other interventions. In the private sector,
this holistic approach is generally
seen as the key to effective marketing
and the most ‘joined-up’ companies
are usually the most successful.
The basic idea underpinning systems
thinking is that the whole is more than
the sum of the parts, and that putting
pressure on a single point will impact
on the rest of the system. For example,
if a police drug seizure reduces supply
but demand remains constant, the
price of drugs will increase and other
supply streams will open up. The main
purpose of the marketing framework is
therefore to show how all interventions
– including, for example, legislation,
enforcement and stakeholder engagement
as well as communications – can
work together to deliver change.
The framework will help to identify the role
– or roles – that communications can play.
Often, this will be to influence factors and/
or intermediate behaviours rather than to
have a direct effect on the end behaviour.
As the case study earlier shows (pages
34–35), one of the key aims of the current
FRANK campaign is to make drug use less
appealing by focusing on non-aspirational
and unattractive images of drug users.
In other cases, communications may
be used to support and maintain the
behaviour change once it has taken
place (for example, by supporting
people who have given up smoking
so that they don’t relapse).
It is important to recognise that, in some
instances, taxation and legislation (for
example) may be more effective than
communications in changing behaviour.
However, even in these instances
communications are likely to play a
supporting role. It is therefore important
to take care when identifying the role we
expect communications to perform.
Setting objectives and
writing a brief
The marketing framework should be
used to identify and set communications
objectives. In practice, these objectives
are often to change one or more of
the factors that influence behaviour,
rather than the end behaviour itself.
The communications objectives –
combined with an audience segmentation,
as described above (page 46) – can be
used to generate a high-level evaluation
matrix and plan. It is important to
remember that communications may need
to be assessed in terms of their impact
on influencing factors rather than on the
actual behaviour itself. Any evaluation of
communications must therefore form part
of a broader evaluation framework or at
least attempt to separate out the effect of
other influences and/or interventions.
51

You should now have all the information
you need to create a communications
brief. The brief should reflect the five-
step process, and take into account
all other relevant interventions. It
should also include the behaviours
you have identified as relevant to
your policy and communication
goals, the influences that affect those
behaviours, your communication
objectives and your top-line KPIs.
Step 4 in practice: the
The marketing/interventions framework identifies the role for marketing in the context of other interventions
such as legislation and price. It should include the behavioural goals, the conditions for change and the
primary and secondary change agents for helping to bring these about. So, for example, we see that one of
the necessary conditions for tobacco control is to create dissatisfaction with the present. The interventions
aimed at bringing this about are marketing and communications and legislation.
The marketing/interventions framework
Conditions
forchange
Primary
changeagent
Secondary
changeagent
Behavioural goals:
1. To decrease smoking prevalance among routine and manual workers to 26 per cent by 2010 by:
2. Increasing the number of quit attempts
3. Increasing the success of quit attempts.
Positive
environment
for quitting
Confidence in
ability to quit
Dissatisfaction
with present
Positive vision
of future
Triggers
for action
Knowledge
of how to quit
Legislation NHS services/
medication
Marketing and
communications
Marketing and
communications
‘Natural’ triggers;
eg life stage,
illness
NHS service/
medication
Price Legislation Legislation Marketing and
communications
Marketing and
communications
52

Step 5 • Does everyone involved understand the role communications can play
To
• A communications strategy
Developing a and the factors they are aiming to influence?
wa
• An understanding of
communications • How do we expect communications to influence people’s behaviour
rds
whom communications
model over time?
a
are targeting and where
• What are the key triggers and barriers at each stage of our change communications fit into the
journey?
solution
overall picture
• How will communications influence these? • An evaluation plan
• Where do communications fit within the marketing framework? and matrix
• How do we evaluate each stage of the change journey?
• How can we use our learnings to adapt our practical model?
• How can we use our learnings to adapt our hypothesis?
5 Developing a
communications model
The marketing framework developed in
step 4 should define:
• the role of communications (which
factors it is aiming to influence
and how);
• where communications fit into the
wider picture;
• top-line metrics for setting and
evaluating KPls; and
• the target audience and its behaviour(s).
Once your communications brief is in
place, you can move on from looking
at behavioural theory to consider how
change theory can help you develop
a strategy for bringing about change.
Academic theories of change can be
useful here, although they will need
to be adapted to reflect the specific
behaviours you are seeking to influence;
this may require you to formulate and
test hypotheses about how they apply to
the behaviour you are seeking to change
over a period of time. The GSR Review51
has a detailed section on theories of
change, some insights from which
appear in section 1 of this document.
It is also important to remember that
when we talk about ‘behaviour change’
we are really looking at two distinct areas:
behavioural theory and change theory. A
practical behavioural model should reflect
the importance of changing, as well as
explaining, behaviour. But while a model
should incorporate some change theory, its
main purpose should be to understand the
behaviour and its influences. However,
as we move on to look at creating
a communications strategy (that is,
how we can use communications to
help change the behaviour), change
theory becomes more important.
Change theory and change modelling
tend to be generic and rarely seek to
explain how behaviours differ from each
other in terms of the way they change.
So when using change theory in creating
communications models, it is vital to
keep the specific behaviour that you
are trying to change in mind. If we lose
sight of the behaviour or behaviours we
are seeking to change, we will lose most
of the benefit of applying the theory.
Unlike many behavioural models (which
seek to explain the influences on people’s
behaviour), change models work over
time and in stages. The aim is to provide
a strategy for moving people from one
stage to the next. In practice, people
rarely move in a neat linear pattern.
Rather, they move forward, sometimes in
jumps, and relapse, often several times.
There are a number of examples of
campaigns where a behaviour change
model has been developed from change
theory only. For example, the original
Tobacco Control communications
strategy was based on Prochaska’s
Stages of Change model (see page
36). However, in testing the model,
the Department of Health found that
a deeper understanding of the factors
influencing behaviour needed to be
made more integral to the process.
51 Darnton A (2008) GSR Behaviour Change Knowledge Review. Reference Report: An
overview of behaviour change models and their uses, HMT Publishing Unit, London. 53

There are also plenty of communications
strategies (in the widest sense of the
term) that use change theory but that are
based on practical marketing experience
rather than academic theory. Often, in
practice, the theory is the same and
only the language is different; however,
there are a number of terms that are
used interchangeably but which actually
have quite different meanings.
For example, the terms ‘behavioural
change journey’ and ‘customer journey’
are sometimes used interchangeably.
However, these are two very different
things. The behavioural change journey
outlines the stages involved in a change
of behaviour (for example, in Prochaska’s
model, from pre-contemplation to
contemplation and so on). A customer
journey is the experience or series of
experiences that a citizen has with a
service or brand on the way to a specific
output – for instance, the number and type
of contacts they have with a government
department or agency before receiving
the benefit they have applied for.
Segmenting the audience
on the basis of change
While some change models (such as the
Stages of Change model, see page 36)
are based on audience segmentation,
generally they allow for the fact that, even
within specific behaviours, the extent
to which people want to change varies
greatly. This means that they can be
classified into different groups or stages.
Segmentation not only helps to define
groups; it can also help to determine the
most effective action for each group.
We have already suggested that target
audiences may need to be segmented
in order to understand their behaviour.
Now, we are suggesting that each
behavioural segment should be further
sub-divided according to how willing
(and able) its members are to change
their behaviour and what help they
need to bring that change about.
Prioritising barriers and
triggers for change
Even where the behaviour we are seeking
to influence is homogeneous across the
target audience (for example, paying the
congestion charge) we will need to look at
how communications can help to support
the desired change. That will mean
identifying and prioritising the barriers and
triggers associated with the behaviours
as well as assessing their relative weight.
Because most behaviours are influenced
by multiple factors, and people will
be at different stages of behaviour
change, you will almost certainly need
to develop a range of communications
targeted at multiple triggers and barriers
in order to bring about change.
Setting goals and evaluating
success
KPIs and plans for evaluating
communications should be developed
alongside and be based on the
communications model. Change to the
factors that the communications are
seeking to influence should be evaluated
at each stage, and the results used to
adapt both the communications
54

themselves and the applied behavioural
and change models that you have
developed. This is integral to the process
and will enable you to maximise the
efficiency and effectiveness of your
communications much more accurately.
The evaluation plan should be approached
with as much care as the other steps in
this process. Influencing behaviour is a
complex task, so it is important to learn
as much as possible both about what
works and what doesn’t work so well.
A typical evaluation plan will be based
on a consideration of behavioural insights,
the change process, communications
objectives and activity, and how best they
can all be measured and understood.
A simple model was used to drive the shape of the overall strategy. This identifies
three marketing objectives and, within these, a number of different workstreams for
communication. (Continued over)
Marketing objectives and workstreams
55

Triggering action
1. Lead generation and acquisition
2. Stakeholder activation
Making quitting more successful
3. Lead management/conversion
4. New product development
Reinforcing motivation
5. Reducing desire to smoke
6. Increasing motivation to be smoke free

A wide range of KPIs have been defined in order to enable the Department of Health to
monitor all aspects of the strategy (see next page). The KPIs reflect the defined marketing
objectives and the way in which communications are expected to influence behaviour.
Triggering action
Business KPls Percentage of smokers making a quit attempt in any given year
Percentage of smokers making a quitting-related action in any
given year
Percentage conversion of quitting-related actions to quit attempts
Marketing KPls Percentage of smokers making a quit attempt in any given year triggered
by Department of Health marketing activities
Percentage of smokers making a quitting-related action in any given
year triggered by Department of Health marketing activities
Volume of centrally generated valid responses for NHS support
Volume of centrally generated active responses for NHS support
Quality of centrally generated responses (percentage intermediate
conversion)
Cost per valid/active response
Making quitting more successful
Business KPls Volume of quitters using NHS support
Percentage of smokers using NHS support to quit (market share)
Marketing KPls Salience (spontaneous awareness) of NHS support
Percentage of smokers believing that NHS support is the most effective
way to quit
Understanding of the different types of NHS support available
User imagery associated with NHS support
Quit rate among customer relationship marketing (CRM) participants
vs control
Intermediate conversion among CRM participants vs control
Advocacy/net promoter score for NHS support
Reinforcing motivation
Business KPls Claimed motivation to quit
Smokers’ perceptions of smoking prevalence among general population
Increase in the proportion of smoke-free homes
Marketing KPls Awareness and understanding of negative consequences of smoking
Emotional engagement with communication
Fame/talkability/word of mouth impact of communication
Perceivedrelevanceofnegativeconsequencestothemselvesortheirfamily
Image of non-smokers and ex-smokers
Perceived impact of communication on desire to quit
56
The first year of the new strategy has seen improved overall quit results, with a particularly
large increase in online response and engagement. The statistical model predicts that
marketing activity has resulted in 1.3 million quit attempts and 95,000 successful quits in
2008/09, while econometric modelling for 2009/10 predicts over 2 million quit attempts
and 160,000 one-year quits as a result of social marketing activity.

57

mmunication
ConClusions
and Future
impliCations
58
This document is intended to stimulate debate about how
communications can most effectively influence behaviour, and
to contribute to our overall goal of helping to develop ever more
effective and efficient government communications. Here we
summarise our conclusions and look at some of the implications
for government communicators.

Conclusions and future implications
Applications for
communications
development
The starting point for effective
communications should be a deep
understanding of human behaviour and
how to change it. Behavioural theory
has a key role to play in helping us to
understand why people act in the way
they do. We have focused on social
psychology and behavioural economics,
two disciplines that have become more
accessible in recent years, but we
recognise the need to cast the net wide
to capture valuable learnings from other
relevant theories. In future, our aim will
be to develop our thinking and practice
in this area so that we draw from the full
range of insight into human behaviour
and apply it to the development, delivery
and evaluation of communications.
Understanding behaviour and its
influences should be based on a
combination of theory, primary
research and existing understanding
and experience. To provide the best
behavioural insights we need to employ the
most appropriate tools and techniques and
synthesise across the range of sources.
What we have learnt in practice is that
we don’t always have the time or budget
to work through the steps outlined in our
process in as much depth as we might
like. However, this should not preclude
the use of the process in a pragmatic
way, building up a deeper understanding
of the behaviour and its influences
as our communications develop.
Creating a single practical behavioural
model for each behaviour change
programme will enable a consistent
approach. We believe that using a team
of relevant experts to create one model
that is used by all of those involved in
developing and delivering activities to
support behaviour change has a number
of advantages. It allows us to develop
and share a common understanding
and language throughout the whole
process. It also provides a framework on
which the communication strategy can
be built and implemented, alongside
the range of other interventions. In the
longer term, it can be a unifying platform
across policy and communications.
Communications should not be viewed
in isolation. By taking a holistic view
of all interventions it becomes easier
to identify the role for communications
and help inform budgeting decisions,
by pointing to where communications
can have the biggest impact.
Developing a practical behavioural
model can help make communications
more effective at influencing behaviour.
Such models allow us to drill down into
the ecology of influences on people’s
behaviour and provide us with the tools
to work more efficiently and effectively
at changing it. Models should also
help us to better identify realistic
communications objectives targeted
at specific factors that contribute to
the behaviour, and to identify a role for
communications that complements
and supports other interventions.
Communications can work on many
levels. The case studies we have chosen
illustrate campaigns that have explicitly
drawn on behavioural theory. They show
that communications can perform a range
of different functions, from reframing
an issue, to promoting normalisation,
to building up people’s belief and
confidence in their own ability to change.
59

Future implications
for communications
development, delivery
and evaluation
Understanding behaviour will support
more robust and meaningful evaluation.
A deep understanding of the behaviour(s)
you are seeking to change should lead
to a clear understanding of the role that
communications can play and to the
establishment of specific and realistic
objectives. This should in turn enable
you to develop a focused evaluation plan
which sets relevant key performance
indicators and measures that explicitly
relate to the factors that communications
are seeking to address. The plan
should set out the methodologies and
techniques required to test, refine
and validate your initial hypothesis.
Evaluation should be ongoing. Given that
the process of developing communications
designed to bring about behaviour
change will necessarily be an iterative
one, evaluation should also be ongoing.
By evaluating behavioural and change
models and activities at each stage, we
can test our original hypotheses and either
validate or adapt them as necessary. This
should in turn yield valuable insights as
to what is and isn’t working and why.
Communications should be evaluated
with consideration of all interventions
and influences on behaviour, so that
the contribution of communications
can be clearly understood.
Understanding behaviour and its
influences will enable us to harness
the most efficient and effective
communications channels. The spread
of new technologies and the proliferation
of content and communications
channels mean that we have more
tools at our disposal than ever before.
It also means that we need to look at
communications in new ways and, as
emphasised throughout this document,
alongside the factors that influence the
behaviour we are seeking to change.
• Earned opportunities in the form
of trusted experts, such as family,
friends and social media contacts, are
an important resource. People look
to those around them to guide their
behaviour and support them through
change. For communications, this area
has traditionally been the preserve
of PR. However, the internet creates
powerful new opportunities, including
blogs and user-generated content,
which can be effective channels for
facilitating social proof and peer
group support.
60

Conclusions and future implications
• Owned communications opportunities
delivered via your own assets,
such as call centres, websites or
outreach programmes, will have a
significant impact on the way people
experience your brand or service.
Such opportunities can also provide a
useful way of offering the face-to-face or
personal encouragement that is such an
important part of the behaviour change
process. They can also be useful in
cases where people need to experience
the behaviour before their attitudes
can change.
• Paid-for media opportunities
(which traditionally account for
the biggest part of the government
communications budget) are not
always the most trusted sources. Such
opportunities provide effective channels
for information and persuasion but are
not always the most trusted or listened-
to sources. Consideration should be
given to how these work together with
the earned and owned opportunities,
within the ecology of influence on
people’s behaviour.
How we conceive and develop
campaigns and propositions will also
need to be reframed by a deeper
understanding of how to deliver the role
of communications within the practical
behaviour change model. It is apparent
that we increasingly need to understand
holistically how all the triggers of change
can be harnessed together and, within
that, how we re-purpose communications
to seed, start or simply nudge a wider
narrative among our audiences while
planning for its effects alongside those
of the other interventions. In this context
the implication is for a shift away from
discrete campaigns and towards multiple
messaging and propositions that stimulate
ongoing relationships with the distinctive
groups we need to engage for sustained
and successful behaviour change.
There is scope for further exploration
of the role that brands can play within
behaviour change campaigns. This will
help us to make more informed decisions
as to when a brand can be used to support
behaviour change, and to incorporate
an understanding of the behaviour and
its influences into the development of
the brand architecture and positioning.
61

next steps
62
There is still considerable scope to further explore the
implications of embedding behaviour change theory in
the development of communications.

Next steps
The following questions provide
a flavour of the kinds of areas we
are currently considering:
• How do we best encourage this
emerging thinking and practice to
become a widespread and common
language that is understood and
applied by all of those involved in
supporting behaviour change?
• How do we ensure that we keep
abreast of theoretical developments?
• How do we ensure that all of those
involved in the development of
communications are trained in

understanding theory and applying

it to their work?

• How do we get better at applying theory
through the communications process?
What are the best tools and techniques
to use at each step?
• How do we best learn from and share
our experiences, so that we can gain a
better understanding of the factors that
influence behaviour across government
initiatives and of the most effective way
of addressing them?
• How do we ensure that we make
effective use of research, combined
with theory, to help us better
understand behaviour?
We hope that this document will launch the debate

and mark the start of an ongoing dialogue that will

lead to better practice and more effective government

communications. We are in the process of developing

a programme of work to take this thinking further.

Please go to http://coi.gov.uk/blogs/bigthinkers

if you would like to join the debate.

63

APPENDICES
64

Appendices
APPENDIX 1: The five-step process
Step 1 • Are we addressing single or multiple behaviours? Agreed target behaviours
Ex
Identifying • How do we break down the issue into its component behaviours?
plo
behaviours • How do multiple behaviours relate or group?
ration
• Who do we want to undertake the behaviour?
• What is the desired and current behaviour?
• Does the behaviour involve people starting, stopping, maintaining
or preventing?
Step 2 • Personal: Detailed understanding of all
Understanding – What are the attitudes, values and beliefs of the target audience? influencing factors
the influences – Is there a gap between attitudes and behaviour?
by audience – Are people aware of the need to undertake the behaviour? Is the
requirement known to them?
– Do they have the knowledge to undertake the behaviour?
– Is the behaviour habitual or one-off?
– Are people confident about undertaking the behaviour?
– If people do undertake the behaviour, will the outcome be beneficial
to them?
– What emotions are involved in the current and desired behaviours?
– What biases/heuristics might be at play?
• Social:
– Is the behaviour in line with or against social norms?
– Is peer pressure likely to be an influence?
– Who will influence them, and how strong will their influence be?
• Environmental
– What factors influence them at the local and wider environmental
level (access, price, opportunity, services and proximity)?
• How do factors differ across audiences? How does their importance
vary across different audience groups?
Step 3 • How do we prioritise the factors identified at step 2? • Model of key influencing
Developing a • How do these factors influence current and desired behaviours? factors
practical model • What is the relative importance of the factors? • Understanding and/or
of influences on • Do we have data to measure the factors? measurement of how the
behaviour • Can we build a data-driven model? factors work together and
• If we can’t, what are the pragmatic hypotheses we can work their importance
T
with and test? • Initial hypothesis about role
ow
• What are our early hypotheses about how behaviour might change? of communications
ard• What are our early hypotheses about the role that communications s
might play?
a
Step 4 • What factors will marketing/interventions need to target? • An understanding of the role
solution
Building a • Where will communications play a role? What factors will they affect, of communications and the
marketing and how? Will they play a leading or supporting role? factors they are designed
framework • What are the communications objectives? to influence
• What are our top-line evaluation metrics for these communications • An agreed set of
objectives? communications objectives
• How communications fit into
the wider picture
• Top-line metrics for
setting and evaluating key
performance indicators
Step 5 • Does everyone involved understand the role communications can play • A communications model
Developing a and the factors they are aiming to influence? • An understanding of
communications • How do we expect communications to influence people’s behaviour whom communications
model over time? are targeting and where
• What are the key triggers and barriers at each stage of our change communications fit into the
journey? overall picture
• How will communications influence these? • An evaluation plan
• Where do communications fit in with the marketing framework? and matrix
• How do we evaluate each stage of the change journey?
• How can we use our learnings to adapt our applied model?
• How can we use our learnings to adapt our hypothesis?
65

APPENDIX 2: References
Andreasen A (1995), Marketing social
change: Changing behaviour to promote
health, social development and the
environment, Jossey-Bass, San Francisco.
Aronson E, Akert RD and Wilson
TD (2006), Social Psychology (6th
ed), Pearson Prentice Hall, Upper
Saddle River, New Jersey.
Cialdini R, Kallgren C and Reno R
(1991), ‘A Focus Theory of Normative
Conduct: a theoretical refinement and re-
evaluation of the role of norms in human
behaviour’ in Advances in Experimental
Social Psychology vol 24, 201–34.
COI/IPA (2008), How Public Service
Advertising Works, World Advertising
Research Centre, London.
Darnton A (2005), Understanding
Young People’s Drug Use, Desk
Research Report One: Commentary,
for FRANK and COI, London.
Darnton A (2008), GSR Behaviour
Change Knowledge Review. Practical
Guide: An overview of behaviour change
models and their uses, HMT Publishing
Unit, London. www.civilservice.gov.
uk/Assets/Behaviour%20change_
practical_guide_tcm6-9696.pdf
Darnton A (2008), GSR Behaviour Change
Knowledge Review. Reference Report: An
overview of behaviour change models and
their uses, HMT Publishing Unit, London.
www.civilservice.gov.uk/Assets/Behaviour_
change_reference_report_tcm6-9697.pdf
Darnton A, Elster-Jones J, Lucas K and
Brooks M (2006), chapter 1, ‘Theory’
in Promoting Pro-Environmental
Behaviour: Existing Evidence to Inform
Better Policy Making, Defra, London.
Evidence to the London Assembly
Transport Committee on the
Proposed Congestion Charge
Increase (2005), available at www.
london.gov.uk/assembly/reports
Festinger L (1957), A theory of cognitive
dissonance, Stanford University
Press, Palo Alto, California.
Gatersleben B and Vlek C (1998),
Household Consumption, Quality of
Life and Envrironmental Impacts:
A Psychological Perspective and
Empirical Study, in Noorman KJ and
Schoot-Viterkamp, AJM (eds), Green
Households? Domestic Consumers,
Enviroment and Sustainability,
Earthscan Publications, London.
Gibbons F, Gerrard M and Lane D
(2003), ‘A Social Reaction Model of
Adolescent Health Risk’ in Suls J and
Walstone K (eds), Social Psychological
Foundations of Health and Illness, Wiley-
Blackwell, Malden, Massachusetts.
Gladwell M (2000), The Tipping Point:
How Little Things Can Make a Big
Difference, Little, Brown, London.
Goldstein N, Martin S and Cialdini R
(2007), Yes! 50 Secrets from the Science
of Persuasion, Profile, London.
66

Graybiel (2008), ‘Habits, rituals, and
the evaluative brain’ in Annual Review
of Neuroscience vol 31, 359–87.
Halpern D, Bates C, Geales B and
Heathfield A (2004), Personal
Responsibility and Changing Behaviour:
the state of knowledge and its implications
for public policy, Prime Minister’s
Strategy Unit, Cabinet Office, London.
Heath RG, Brandt D and Nairn
A (2006), ‘Brand Relationships –
Strengthened by Emotion, Weakened
by Attention’ in Journal of Advertising
Research vol 46, No. 4, 410–19.
Jackson T (2005), Motivating Sustainable
Consumption: A Review of Evidence on
Consumer Behaviour and Behavioural
Change, report to the Sustainable
Development Research Network, London.
Kahneman D, Slovic P and Tvesrsky A
(1974), Judgement Under Uncertainty:
Heuristics and Biases’ in Science
vol 185 No. 4157, 1124–31.
Knott D with Muers S and Aldridge S
(2008), Achieving Culture Change: A
Policy Framework, Prime Minister’s
Strategy Unit, Cabinet Office, London.
Lewin K (1951), Field Theory in
Social Science, Social Science
Paperbacks, London.
Rogers E (1995), Diffusion of
Innovations, Free Press, New York.
Schultz PW, Nolan JM, Cialdini RB,
Goldstein NJ and Griskevicius V
(2007) ‘The Constructive, Destructive,
and Reconstructive Power of
Social Norms’, in Psychological
Science, vol 18 No. 5, 429–34.
Social Marketing Foundation (2008),
Creatures of Habit? The Art of
Behaviour Change, SMF, London.
Thaler R and Sunstein C (2008), Nudge:
Improving Decisions About Health,
Wealth and Happiness, Yale University
Press, New Haven, Connecticut.
Triandis H (1977), Interpersonal Behavior,
Brooks/Cole, Monterey, California.
Vandenbroeck P, Goossens J and
Clemens M (2007), Tackling Obesities:
Future Choices – Building the
Obesity System Map, Government
Office for Science, London.
Appendices

67

APPENDIX 3: Acknowledgments
68
In creating this document we have drawn
on the expertise of a number of people
from government, academia, industry and
COI. Inclusion in this list does not imply
formal approval by these organisations
or individuals of the content of this
document. We would like to thank:
• colleagues from government
departments and agencies including
the Learning and Skills Council, the
Department for Children, Schools and
Families, the Department of Health, the
Department for Environment, Food and
Rural Affairs, HM Revenue & Customs,
the Department for Transport, the
Department for Work and Pensions, the
Home Office, RAF Careers, the Health
and Safety Executive, the Electoral
Commission, and industry and COI
colleagues who spoke to us about their
approach to developing behaviour
change strategies;
• experts in the areas of communications
and behaviour change who attended
workshops at COI and/or who peer
reviewed this document: Will Collin,
Andrew Darnton, Mark Earls, Daniele
Fiandaca, Alison Hoad, Robert Horler,
Steve Morris, John Owen, John Poorta,
Stuart Sullivan-Martin, Charlie Snow and
Kate Waters;
• the Government Social Research Unit,
in particular Anna Richardson and
those involved in the GSR Behaviour
Change Knowledge Review, with whom
we have worked closely to develop a
common understanding of behavioural
theory and models;
• the Department of Health, the
Department for Children, Schools and
Families, the Department for Transport,
the Home Office and Peterborough
Environment City Trust for providing
case studies of behaviour change
campaigns; and
• the Cabinet Office with which we’ve
worked closely throughout this project.
Their contribution has been invaluable
in helping shape our thinking and
to produce this final document.
This document was written by the
Behaviour Change and Communications
team: Mairi Budge, Clare Deahl,
Martin Dewhurst, Stephen Donajgrodzki,
and Fiona Wood.
If you have any further enquiries,please
email behaviourchange @coi.gsi.gov.uk

COI is the Government’s centre
of excellence for marketing
and communications.
We work with the Government and public
sector to inform, engage and influence
people about issues that affect their lives.
However complex or specific your
communications challenge, COI will
help you find a solution. To discover
how you and COI can work better
together across a range of marketing and
communication areas, contact us now.
T: 0300 1234 777
E: marketing@coi.gsi.gov.uk
SMS: Text ‘COI’ plus your
name to 80010
coi.gov.uk
Designed by COI Publications
© Crown copyright 2009 297631

Communications And Behaviour Change

More Related Content

What's hot (20)

Similar to Communications And Behaviour Change (20)

More from Think Ethnic (20)

Recently uploaded (20)

Communications And Behaviour Change