Published by World Advertising Research Center Farm Road, Henley-on-Thames, Oxon RG9 1EJ, UK Tel: +44 (0)1491 411000  Fax: +44 (0)1491 571188

Vol.3, Issue 3 (2002)

Attitudes of School Directors Towards in-School Marketing: an Exploratory Study

Maggie Geuens,
Vlerick Leuven Gent Management School
Patrick De Pelsmacker,
Universiteit Antwerpen Management School
and
Gitte Mast,
Vlerick Leuven Gent Management School

In-school or school marketing may be defined as developing marketing activities towards kids at school. In-school marketing is already extensively practised in several countries, although the situation is very different for the different countries. In a UK study, for example, 90% of the companies interviewed mention being involved in marketing activities aimed at children in schools (Atherton & Wells 1998). In Finland in-school marketing is even more extensively practised than in the UK. Also in the Netherlands and France commercially sponsored materials are produced and distributed inside the school. Contrary to the previous examples, commercially sponsored materials and commercial activities in schools are completely prohibited in Denmark (Atherton & Wells 1998). Meanwhile, societal criticism of schools being sold to business is increasing (Molnar 1996), and in several countries the debate goes on: ‘Is it right to expose children to advertising in school, where attendance is required and they cannot walk away? Or does it really matter, in an era when children themselves are walking billboards of ads and slogans?’ (Stanbrook 1997). Contrary to opponents of any kind of business involvement in schools, others hold the opinion that companies perform an important and unique role in consumer socialisation by giving information on their products and helping children to behave as conscious consumers (McNeal 1992; Thompson 2000). 

As to the attitude towards commercial initiatives of schools themselves, some sources suggest­ that schools are concerned about over-commercialisation (Muret 2000). Others claim that schools are more than happy with the money they get from companies because it offers them possibilities to enliven the educational programme (Anderson 2000). Despite the generally widespread practice of in-school marketing, the increasing societal criticism and the unclear attitude of schools themselves, few studies have addressed the topic in an empirical way. The objective of this study is to shed some light on the attitude and intentions of Belgian school directors regarding in-school commercial activities in order to better understand what they think may be allowed and what opportunities in-school marketing has to offer to companies operating in Belgium.

Before addressing the research methodology and research results, a brief review of marketing to kids is presented. Since little is known about the effectiveness of school marketing, we start with a marketing tool that is most frequently used and for which plentiful research results abound: advertising. Next, potential advantages and disadvantages of in-school marketing will be discussed, as well as some examples of current in-school marketing activities.

THE INFLUENCE OF ADVERTISING ON CHILDREN

American children aged between 4 and 12 spend about $24 billion directly, and about $188 billion indirectly by exerting an influence on family purchases (McNeal 1992). Children in Germany spend about DM 4 billion on a yearly basis (Villwock 1997), and Belgian children and teenagers (9 to 18 years old) dispose of a weekly allowance of Euro 7.9 billion (De Pelsmacker etal. 1998), making the kids’ market a very interesting consumer segment.

Reviewing the literature concerning marketing and advertising efforts, it becomes obvious that children are easily influenced by marketing campaigns. John (1999) undertook an extensive study on consumer socialisation of children. One of the conclusions from this work is that from the age of 8 children are able to recognise that ads are often biased and contain deception in order to sell the products. However, although this knowledge increases scepticism towards advertising (Boush et al. 1994), it does not translate into more critical evaluations of advertised products or impact on brand preference. On the contrary, from preschool years onwards children prefer familiar branded items above generic items and this preference even increases with elementary school years (John 1999). The more children watch TV, the more they ask for products such as cereals, sweets and toys (Isler et al. 1987). As is the case for adults, liking ads should not be underestimated, since the attitude towards the ad (Aad) seems to significantly impact on brand attitudes (Ab) (Derbaix & Bree 1997). Although the influence of Aad on Ab is tempered when adults have brand usage experience, this holds to a much lesser extent in children for whom the impact of Aad remains considerable (Moore & Lutz 2000). Further­ more, besides increasing brand preference, ads also seem to be valued as a tool for social interaction and as a topic of conversation with peers (Moore & Lutz 2000), while branded products are used for prestige and fitting in (Jamison 1996). Thus there is no doubt that advertising works with children. Opponents of marketing to children are also well aware of this, and it is there­ fore not surprising that ads directly targeting kids are under fire. In Sweden it is already prohibited to advertise directly to the younger audience, and it is rumoured that a law bill may be institutionalised throughout Europe (Stanbrook 1997). In view of this threatening ban, one may expect that alternative marketing tools, such as school or in-school marketing, may become even more important in the future than they are today.

ADVANTAGES AND DISADVANTAGES OF IN-SCHOOL MARKETING

It is generally acknowledged that a child’s consumer development is influenced by different sources. Besides family, media and point of sale, peers and schools play an important role in this process (Shah & Mittal 1997). Peers become more and more important between the ages of 7 and 9 (Acuff 1997; McNeal 1998). This is confirmed in several studies. One study investigated children’s relationships with adults and peers and found that middle-school children, as compared to elementary school children, held more positive perceptions of their relationships with peers and less positive perceptions of their relationships with their parents and teachers (Lynch & Cicchetti 1997). Another study investigated the sources children use for choosing products. Kindergarteners rely mainly on in-store information, while third and sixth graders are more likely to use mass media advertising and interpersonal sources. Evidently, friends are the most important source for products where peer acceptance is an important issue (John 1999). Furthermore, the importance of the school as the major extrafamilial environment in which children operate should not be underestimated (Minuchin & Shapiro 1983). On the one hand, the school is a place where children meet important socialising agents: teachers and peers. On the other hand, it is a place where they can learn and gather information. Since social acceptance by peers (being part of a group, impressing friends) and feeling intellectually clever (knowing things parents do not, etc.) are two of the basic, enduring motivations of children, then schools indeed play an important role in a child’s life (Mathews 1997). It is a fact, for example, that children talk a great deal about products and services at school (Gunter & Furnham 1998), and that by having frequent contact, doing common activities and sharing a sense of connectedness, peer groups exert a strong socialising impact in the classroom (Kindermann 1993). Moreover, communicating to kids in schools usually implies that they pay more attention to the message, since they are in an environment where they are used to paying attention and learning (MacIndoe 1999). Therefore, interaction with a company’s product or brand in a learning setting where both peers and teachers are present may be very valuable to companies, and may even have a similar impact on brand image and brand preference to advertising.

Besides the presence of peers and the stimulating environment for learning, in-school marketing possesses several other potential advantages­ to companies. In-school marketing may also constitute an effective and efficient targeting means. One problem with kids and teens marketing is the ‘push away’ effect (Acuff 1997): when children notice that something is popular in younger age groups, they consider the product or item to be ‘for kids younger than me; for babies’. In a school setting, younger segments can be approached without pushing away the older children, and each segment can be approached in the most appropriate way. Instead of targeting kids, parents may also be targeted by marketing the products to their children. Children seem to tell their parents about the products they hear about at school and to ask for the products their peers and teachers talk favourably about (Gunter & Furnham 1998). About 12% of the UK companies communicating to and through schools admit that their sole purpose is to exploit ‘pester power’ by targeting parents through communicating to their kids (O’Sullivan 1997).

Other potential advantages of school marketing are that marketers can reach target groups in an environment devoid of competitors (Atherton & Wells 1998), that early brand preference can be created, and that a social image can be built (Molnar 1996). Indeed, by acquainting children with commercial products in an educative and responsible manner, a strong brand impression can be formed in the children, and the company’s societal image will be enhanced in teachers, parents and children (Gunter & Furnham 1998).

However, in-school marketing may also be perceived less favourably. If not done in an ethical, responsible and educational manner, it can harm the company’s image, since that company can be considered to be exploiting a helpless segment of society. Other potential disadvantages of in-school marketing are the budget needed to address the schools effectively, and the problem of assessing the effectiveness of marketing actions such as sponsoring of material and external activities (O’Sullivan 1997; Gardyn 2000).

CURRENT IN-SCHOOL MARKETING ACTIVITIES

Up until now, it is still rather unclear what types of activities are favoured by schools and what are often used. Because of the small amount of funding which US schools receive, in-school marketing is carried out to a much greater extent in the USA than in Europe. To our knowledge, almost no empirical studies have been carried out in Europe. One of the exceptions may be McIndoe (1999), who observed seven different commercial activities in UK schools:

1. Incentive voucher schemes or saving actions: the saving of points on product packages that may be traded for stationery. United Biscuits and the Mirror Group, for example, have run an action called ‘Maths Stuff for Schools’. In order to get supporting material for the maths classes, children had to save points on the biscuits’ packaging or in the newspapers (Wilkinson 1999).

2. Educational sponsoring in which educational aspects are linked to the product and the brand. Examples are packs containing free samples and a video on tooth hygiene by a toothpaste brand, or an educational pack on income, budget, bills and savings by a bank.

3. Citizenship projects.

4. Sponsored stationery and school lunch menus.

5. Billboard and poster advertising.

6. Advertising on free exercise books.

7. Internet and banner advertising.

The author does not make reference to the extent to which these activities are used or appreciated. Another UK study does provide numbers, although they should be interpreted with caution, since they are based on only 49 companies involved in in-school marketing. According to this study, 80% provide resource packs, 43% spend budgets on charitable donations, and 35% support schools by means of sponsorship and free product samples (O’Sullivan 1997).

RESEARCH OBJECTIVES

The objective of this study is to make an inventory of the contemporary practices of in-school marketing in Belgium, and more importantly, to assess the opinion of school directors towards this subject. Indeed, the attitudes and intentions of the schools themselves are very important since schools exert a lot of power over commerce. First of all, schools decide on what does and does not reach the young audience, and, second, schools also exert a strong influence both on children and on their parents (Anderson 2000). Therefore, a good insight into what matters to schools, what they are in favour of, and what is considered acceptable or unacceptable can help marketers to approach schools in a more appropriate and effective way and increase the likelihood of pleasing three different publics: schools, pupils and parents.

RESEARCH METHODOLOGY

This study encompasses a limited qualitative and a more extensive quantitative part, in which the qualitative part was used as input for the quantitative. The qualitative study consisted of depth interviews with five school directors. Questions asked pertained to the current marketing activities the schools are involved in and the reasons why certain commercial activities are accepted or not.

The information gathered in this way was used to compose a list of in-school marketing activities, as well as a set of statements concerning the attitude towards in-school marketing. Statements included were, for instance, ‘companies cannot perform a socially responsible role within schools’, ‘a school has to teach youngsters certain values and one cannot do this by protecting them from certain realities’, ‘for health reasons, vending machines carrying soft drinks and sweets should be banned from the school’.

For the quantitative part, a questionnaire was mailed to 2600 school directors. Quota variables used to compose the sample were primary versus secondary schools, public versus private schools, and geography (situated in the Flemish versus the French-speaking part of Belgium). A total of 638 correctly filled out questionnaires were returned, leading to a response rate of about 25%. Measures included whether or not the school was currently involved in one or more of 27 in-school marketing activities, as well as to what extent the directors thought they would allow these activities in the future (measured on a 5-point Likert-type scale ranging from 1 = definitely not to 5 = definitely).  Below are examples of activities given on the questionnaire:

• Saving actions (saving recyclable materials such as batteries, and saving points on product packages or in newspapers for which the school can obtain school material).

• Sponsoring (financial sponsoring, sponsoring of school material, sponsoring of non-education­ -related activities such as school festivities­).

• Sampling (related to themes covered in class and otherwise).

• Advertising (billboards, ads in school diary or exercise books, and ads in school magazine of non-commercial and commercial organisations).

• Lectures by non-commercial and commercial organisations on topics such as food, financial products, body care, advertising, the Internet.

• Vending machines (soft drinks, food) and school shop.

• School excursions (sponsoring in-company visits, cultural activities, sports days, etc.).

Next, the attitude towards in-school marketing was measured by means of a 29-item scale composed on the basis of the qualitative study. Each item was rated on a 5-point Likert-type scale ranging from 1 = totally disagree to 5 = totally agree.

The decision-making process within the schools was assessed by asking the directors to indicate which roles (initiator, influencer, decider, gatekeeper and facilitator) were played by different parties (political authority, organising institution, school director, parents’ committee, teachers and pupils).

Finally, respondents indicated socio-demographic characteristics such as the size of the school (number of pupils), public or private school, primary or secondary school (for the latter also the type of secondary school was included: general education, technical or vocational), whether or not the school had a parents’ committee, geography (school located in the city or not), and age and gender of the school director.

RESEARCH RESULTS

The sample consists of 527 Flemish (83%) and 111 French- (17%) speaking schools; 31% are primary and 69% secondary schools, while 65% are private and 35% public schools. Moreover, 83% of the schools have a parents’ committee.

CURRENT ACTIVITIES AND FUTURE INTENTIONS

Respondents indicated whether or not their school was involved in 27 activities. Table 1 gives an overview of the extent of current usage expressed as a percentage of schools admitting to engaging in the respective activities. The activities are classified in high penetration (used by more than 50% of the schools), medium penetration (a quarter to half of the schools are engaged in it), and low penetration (less than a quarter of the schools are involved in it) activities. Non-commercial activities are extensively used, while a school shop, soft drink vending machines and commercial lectures are tolerated in about 50% of the cases. Almost none of the schools is involved in purely commercial deals.  

TABLE 1: TO WHAT EXTENT ARE COMMERCIAL ACTIVITIES PRESENT IN SCHOOLS?

ATTITUDE TOWARDS IN-SCHOOL MARKETING

The school directors participating in the study indicated, for 29 items related to in-school marketing, to what extent they agreed with the respective items on a 5-point Likert-type scale (1 = completely disagree, 5 = completely agree). Principal components analysis with Varimax rotation resulted in four dimensions explaining 43.16% of the variance:

1. Being permissive and realistic with highly loading items such as ‘commercial activities within schools should be tolerated’, ‘everything wears a company logo, therefore it would be artificial to ban this from schools’, ‘you cannot keep publicity outside school walls’, ‘whether or not an initiative is commercial should not influence the decision to participate in it’, etc.

2. Companies’ societal and educational role consisting of items such as ‘company interventions can only be tolerated when they offer an added value’, ‘company financing of educational projects should be tolerated when it enhances the education of the pupils’, ‘it is a pity that companies are not more interested in schools’, and ‘companies should invest more in schools, just as they are doing in culture’.

3. Healthy and environmentally friendly products pertaining to items such as ‘schools should only offer products for sale that are environmentally friendly’, ‘schools should only offer healthy products for sale’, and ‘the environmental friendliness of products should be a determining factor in the decision whether or not to allow the product in the school’.

4. Exploiting and bothering others with highly loading items such as ‘saving actions should not be tolerated because it causes too much pressure on parents’, ‘pupils should not be used by schools for commercial or non-commercial actions’, and ‘companies are not able to add societal responsible value to schools whatsoever’.

In order to find out whether school directors can be segmented on the basis of the attitude they hold towards in-school marketing, a cluster analysis was carried out on the four attitude factors. The following three-cluster solution was deemed to be most appropriate:

1. The politically correct cluster (33%) scoring moderately high on being permissive and realistic, while valuing to a great extent the fact that children are not exploited, parents are not bothered, and products are healthy and environmentally friendly.

2. The realistic, permissive cluster (31%) is most prone to school marketing activities, and scores the highest on being realistic and permissive.

3. The societal cluster (36%) is not very tolerant, and is very concerned with the educational and societal value companies can deliver.

Chi-square analyses with cluster membership on the one hand and socio-demographic characteristics on the other are used to further describe the profile of the three clusters (see Table 2). The politically correct cluster typically contains directors of basic schools, the directors are more likely to be aged over 50 and none of the parties (director, parents’ committee, teachers and pupils) weighs significantly on the decision-making process. The realistic, permissive cluster encompasses slightly more directors from general education secondary schools, who are on average younger than 50 and are predominantly male, while more parties exert an influence on the decision-making process by playing several roles. Finally, the societal cluster consists predominantly of directors of secondary schools offering a technical and vocational education, the schools are more likely to be located in the countryside, the directors are more likely to be male and younger than 50, while more parties are again involved in the decision-making process.

TABLE 2: PROFILING THE THREE ATTITUDE CLUSTERS

IN-SCHOOL MARKETING INTENTIONS

Besides indicating whether or not a marketing activity is currently taking place in the school, school directors were also asked to rate the extent to which they intend to participate in such activities in the future. The intentions with regard to the 27 above-mentioned activities (see Current activities and future intentions) were measured on a 5-point Likert-type scale (1 = definitely not, 5 = definitely). Principal component analysis with Varimax rotation on these intention ratings resulted in six factors explaining 51% of the variance:

1. Sponsoring (composed of items such as giving school material, giving non-educational material, sponsoring non-educational activities, offering free in-company visits, financing sports days, financing school excursions, etc.).

2. Lectures (with highly loading items such as lectures and video material concerning food, textiles, financial aspects, body care, advertising, the Internet, etc.).

3. Vending machines (food and soft drinks machines).

4. Saving actions (consisting of saving material, saving points on product packages, and saving points in newspapers and magazines that may be exchanged for school material).

5. Advertising (composed of billboards, ads in diaries and exercise books, ads in the school magazine, etc., all pertaining to commercial organisations).

6. Non-commercial activities (composed of billboards of non-commercial organisations, non-commercial lectures and charity activities­ ).

For each factor a mean is calculated over the items loading more than 0.50 on the respective factor and lower than 0.30 on the other factors (see Table 3, second column). In general, intentions to engage in future school marketing activities are quite high, apart from using straight commercial advertising. Furthermore, school directors’ intentions differ depending on the cluster to which they belong (see Table 3). School directors belonging to the permissive cluster as compared to school directors from the other clusters hold significantly stronger intentions concerning all types of activities. Directors in the politically correct and the societal cluster do not differ in intentions, apart from the intention to engage in non-commercial activities for which the societal school directors indicated a higher proneness. Within each cluster separately, a similar ranking order of intended activities may be found. School directors express quite a low intention to participate in commercial advertising, seem to be moderately inclined to engage in saving actions, sponsoring activities and installing vending machines, while indicating quite high intentions to allow lectures and non-commercial activities.

TABLE 3: EXPLAINING INTENTIONS BY CLUSTER MEMBERSHIP

IMPLICATIONS AND SUGGESTIONS FOR FURTHER RESEARCH

Up until now, only non-commercial in-school activities have enjoyed a very high penetration rate. However, school directors’ attitudes and intentions towards most other initiatives are not negative, and do not greatly differ for different types of schools. Pure commercial activities, such as straight advertising, are not very likely to be tolerated, but marketing opportunities seem to be present for lectures, sponsoring, vending machines and saving actions. Moreover, the latter activities are more likely to be accepted if they can be coupled with healthy and environmentally­ friendly products, or if they can offer an educational or societal value.

This study focused on school directors. It would be interesting to repeat the same study interviewing parents. After all, they are often the people whom companies really want to target. Other interesting future research topics would be to investigate the acceptability of different concrete marketing actions together with the possible moderating role of product category, as well as to assess more precisely the decision-making process of schools concerning in-school marketing and the roles played by the different parties involved. 

REFERENCES

Acuff, D.S. (1997) What Kids Buy and Why. The Psychology of Marketing to Kids. New York: The Free Press.

Anderson, W. (2000) It’s high time our marketers went back to schools. Marketing, 10 August, p. 18.

Atherton, M. & Wells, J. (1998) Business involvement in schools. Consumer Policy Review, September/ October, pp. 184–188.

Boush, D.M., Friestad, M. & Rose, G.M. (1994) Adolescent scepticism toward TV advertising and knowledge of advertiser tactics. Journal of Consumer Research, 21 (June), pp. 165–175.

De Pelsmacker, P., Van den Bergh, J. & Verhaegen, B. (1998) De Rol van het Kind/de Tiener in de Gezins-D.M.U. (The Role of the Child/Teenager in the Family D.M.U.). Kids and Teens
Marketing Research Centre: Research Report 1.

Derbaix, C. & Bree, J. (1997) The impact of children’s affective reactions elicited by  commercials on attitudes toward the advertisement and the brand. International Journal of Research in Marketing, 14 (July), pp. 207–229.

Gardyn, R. (2000) Mouse-trapping the student market. American Demographics, 22, pp. 30–34.

Gunter, B. & Furnham, A. (1998) Children as Consumers. A Psychological Analysis of the Young People’s Market. London: Routledge.

Isler, L., Popper, E.T. & Ward, S. (1987) Children’s purchase requests and parental responses. Journal of Advertising Research, 27, pp. 28–39.

Jamison, D.J. (1996) Idols of the tribe: brand veneration and group identity among pre-adolescent consumers. Working paper, Department of Marketing, University of Florida, Gainsville, 32611.

John, D.R. (1999) Consumer socialization of children: a retrospective look at twenty-five years of research. Journal of Consumer Research, 26 (December), pp. 183–213.

Kindermann, T.A. (1993) Natural peer groups as contexts for individual development: the case of children’s motivation in school. Developmental Psychology, 29, pp. 970–977.

Lynch, M. & Cicchetti, D. (1997) Children’s relationships with adults and peers: an examination of elementary and junior high school
students. Journal of School Psychology, 35, pp. 81–99.

MacIndoe, G. (1999) A case study of schoolcards: innovative communication with teenagers in secondary schools. International Journal of Advertising and Marketing to Children, September/October, pp.219–228.

McNeal, J.U. (1992) Kids as Customers,  A Handbook of Marketing to Children. New York: Lexington Books.

McNeal, J.U. (1998) Tapping the three kids’ markets. American Demographics, 20 (April), pp. 37–41.

Mathews, J. (1997) How to make effective advertising aimed at children, in: Smith, G. (Ed.), Children’s Food. Marketing and Innovation. London: Blackie Academic & Professional, pp. 20–35.

Minuchin, P. & Shapiro, E. (1983) The school as a context for social development, in: E.M. Hetherington (Ed.), Handbook of Child Psychology, Volume 3: Socialization and Personality Development. New York: John Wiley.

Molnar, A. (1996) Giving Kids the Business. The Commercialization of America’s Schools. Boulder, CO: Westview Press.

Moore, E.S. & Lutz, R.J. (2000) Children, advertising, and product experiences: a multi-method inquiry. Journal of Consumer Research, 27 (June), pp. 31–48.

Muret, D. (2000) University officials learn marketing and sponsorships are growing trends. Amusement Business, 22 (May), p. 4.

O’Sullivan, T. (1997) Class Facts. Marketing Week, March, pp. 42–43.

Shah, R.H. & Mittal, B. (1997) Toward a theory of intergenerational influence in consumer behaviour: an exploratory essay. Advances in Consumer Research, 24, pp. 55–59.

Stanbrook, L. (1997) The politics of advertising to children, in: Smith, G. (Ed.), Children’s Food. Marketing and Innovation. London: Blackie Academic & Professional, pp. 94–118.

Thompson, S. (2000) Pepsi hits high note with schools. Advertising Age, 71 (October), p. 30.

Villwock, B. (1997) New findings on purchasing power and purchase decisions, in:  ESOMAR, Seminar on Youth Research: How to Be Number One in the Youth Market, pp. 105–119.

Wilkinson, A. (1999) Mirror and UB start £15m schools equipment drive. Marketing Week, 16 September, pp. 12–13.

http://www.warc.com

© World Advertising Research Center