skip to main content
10.1145/2535813.2535823acmotherconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PagesnspwConference Proceedingsconference-collections
research-article

Can we sell security like soap?: a new approach to behaviour change

Published:09 September 2013Publication History

ABSTRACT

Many organisations run security awareness programmes with the aim of improving end user behaviours around information security. Yet behavioural research tells us that raising awareness will not necessarily lead to behaviour change. In this paper we examine the challenge of changing end user behaviour and put forward social marketing as a new paradigm. Social marketing is a proven framework for achieving behavioural change and has traditionally been used in health care interventions, although there is an increasing recognition that it could be successfully applied to a broader range of behaviour change issues. It has yet to be applied however, to information security in an organizational context. We explore the social marketing framework in relation to information security behavioural change and highlight the key challenges that this approach poses for information security managers. We conclude with suggestions for future research.

References

  1. Action Fraud. 2012. The Devil's in Your Details {Online}. Available at: http://www.actionfraud.police.uk/thedevilsinyourdetails {Accessed 11th August, 2013}.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  2. Action Fraud 2013. Pre-Campaign Surveys {Online}. Available at: http://www.actionfraud.police.uk/majority-of-women-feel-falling-victim-to-fraud-is-inevitable-according-to-new-study {Accessed 11th August, 2013}.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  3. Adams, A. and Sasse M. A. 1999. Users are not the enemy, Communications of the ACM. 42(12), 40--46. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  4. Albrechtsen, E., 2007. A qualitative study of users' view on information security, Computers & Security. 26, 276--289.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  5. Andreason, A. R., 2006. Social Marketing in the 21st Century. California, Sage.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  6. Andreason, A. R. and Herzberg, B. 2005. Social Marketing Applied to Economic Reforms, Social Marketing Quarterly, 11:2, 3--17.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  7. Burton, E. 2008. Report into the Loss of MOD Personal Data: Final Report. London, MOD.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  8. Click it or Ticket 2013. Click it or Ticket {Online}. Available at: http://www.texasclickitorticket.com {Accessed 11th August, 2013}.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  9. Coles-Kemp, L. and Ashenden, D. 2012. Community-centric engagement: lessons learned from privacy awareness intervention design, Proceedings of HCI 2012 -- People & Computers XXVI, Birmingham, UK, 12--14 September 2012.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  10. Data Handling Procedures In Government: Final Report. 2008. London, Cabinet Office.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  11. Data Security in Financial Services. 2008. London, Financial Services Authority.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  12. Desai, D., 2009. Role of Relationship Management and Value Co- Creation in Social Marketing. Social Marketing Quarterly, 15:4, 112--125.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  13. Drevin, L., Kryger, H.A. and Steyn, T. 2007. Value-focused assessment of ICT security awareness in an academic environment, Computers & Security, 26, 36--43.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  14. Fogg, B. J., 2002. Persuasive technology: using computers to change what we think and do, Ubiquity, 2002, December, 5, 89--120. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  15. Fogg, B. J., 2009. Creating persuasive technologies: an eight-step design process, Persuasive '09, Proceedings of the 4th International Conference on Persuasive Technology, Article No. 44. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  16. French, J. and Blair-Stevens, C. 2010. Key Concepts & Principles of Social Marketing, in French, J., Blair-Stevens, C., McVey, D. and Merritt, R. (eds). Social Marketing & Public Health: Theory & Practice, Oxford, OUP.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  17. French, J., Merritt, R. and Reynolds, L. 2011. Social Marketing Casebook,. London, Sage.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  18. Garg, V. and Camp, J., 2013. Heuristics and Biases: Implications for Security Design, IEEE Technology and Society Magazine, Spring, 73--79.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  19. GCHQ. 2011. IISS Cyber Speech {Online}. Available at: http://www.gchq.gov.uk/Press/Pages/IISS-CyberSpeech.aspx {Accessed 11th August, 2013}.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  20. Gonzalez, J.J. and Sawicka, A. 2002. A framework for human factors in information security, WSEAS International Conference on Information Security, Rio de Janeiro.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  21. Hastings, G. 2007. Social Marketing: Why should the devil have all the best tunes?, Oxford, Elsevier.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  22. Hastings, G., MacFadyen, L. and Anderson, S. 2010. Whose behavior is it anyway? The broader potential of social marketing, Social Marketing Quarterly 6:2, 46--58.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  23. Heider, F. 1958. The Psychology of Interpersonal Relations. New York, Wiley.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  24. Helokunnas, T. and Kuusisto, R. 2003. Information Security Culture in a Value Net, Managing Technologically Driven Organizations: The Human Side of Innovation and Change, IEEE, 190--194.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  25. Herley, C. 2010. So Long, And No Thanks for the Externalities: The Rational Rejection of Security Advice by Users, NSPW '09, 133--144. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  26. Kotler and Zaltman 1971. Social Marketing: An Approach to Planned Social Change, Journal of Marketing, Vol 35, 3--12.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  27. Kotler, P. and Lee, N. R. 2008. Social Marketing: Influencing Behaviors for Good (3rd edn), London, Sage.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  28. Levitt, T. 1960. Marketing Myopia, Harvard Business Review, 38, July-Aug, 29--47.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  29. McKenzie-Mohr, D. 2011. Fostering Sustainable Behaviour: An Introduction to Community-Based Social Marketing, (3rd edn), New Society Publishers.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  30. McVey, D., Crosier, A. and Christopoulos, A. 2010. Evaluation in in French, J., Blair-Stevens, C., McVey, D. and Merritt, R. (eds). Social Marketing & Public Health: Theory & Practice, Oxford, OUP.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  31. Munton, A. G., Silvester, J., Stratton, P. and Hanks, H. 1999. Attributions in Action: A Practical Guide to Coding Qualitative Data, Chichester, Wiley.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  32. National Fraud Authority 2013. Awareness & Behaviour Change in the UK {Online}. Available at: http://korrupciomegelozes.kormany.hu/download/a/15/60000/Budapest%2019%20Mar%20Main%20Pres.pdf {Accessed 11th August, 2013}.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  33. Potter, I., 2007, New Zealand Herald.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  34. Poynter, K. 2008. Review of information security at HM Revenue and Customs: Final Report. London, HMSO.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  35. Prochaska, J. O. 1992. In Search of How People Change: Applications to Addictive Behaviours, American Psychologist, Vol 47, No 9, 1102--1114.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  36. Project Bernie. 2013. Project Bernie {Online}. Available at: http://www.bernie.uk.com/ {Accessed 12th April 2013}Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  37. Rader, E., Wash, R. and Brooks, B., 2012. Stories as Informal Lessons about Security, Symposium on Usable Privacy and Security (SOUPS), July 11--13, 2012, Washington, DC, USA. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  38. Silvester, J. 2004. Attributional Coding, in Cassell, C. and Symon, G. (eds.) Essential Guide to Qualitative Methods in Organizational Research, London, Sage.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  39. Siponen, M.T. 2000. A conceptual foundation for organizational information security awareness, Information Management & Computer Security, 8(1), 31--41.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  40. Siponen, M.T. 2001. Five dimensions of information security awareness, ACM SIGCAS Computers and Society, 31(2), 24--29. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  41. Stanton, J.M., Stam, K.R., Mastrangelo, P. and Jolton, J. 2005. Analysis of end user security behaviors, Computers & Security, 24(2), 124--133.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  42. Taylor, S. 2007. Attitudes, in Langdridge, D. and Taylor, S. (eds.) Critical Readings in Social Psychology, Maidenhead, OUP.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  43. Thaler, R. H. & Sunstein, C. R. 2009. Nudge, London, Penguin.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  44. Thomson, M.E. and Solms, R. V. 1998. Information security awareness: educating your users effectively, Information Management & Computer Security, 6(4).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  45. Truth. 2013. Truth {Online}. Available at: http://www.thetruth.com/about/ {Accessed 11th August, 2013}Google ScholarGoogle Scholar

Index Terms

  1. Can we sell security like soap?: a new approach to behaviour change

      Recommendations

      Comments

      Login options

      Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

      Sign in
      • Published in

        cover image ACM Other conferences
        NSPW '13: Proceedings of the 2013 New Security Paradigms Workshop
        December 2013
        132 pages
        ISBN:9781450325820
        DOI:10.1145/2535813

        Copyright © 2013 ACM

        Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than ACM must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected]

        Publisher

        Association for Computing Machinery

        New York, NY, United States

        Publication History

        • Published: 9 September 2013

        Permissions

        Request permissions about this article.

        Request Permissions

        Check for updates

        Qualifiers

        • research-article

        Acceptance Rates

        NSPW '13 Paper Acceptance Rate11of32submissions,34%Overall Acceptance Rate62of170submissions,36%

      PDF Format

      View or Download as a PDF file.

      PDF

      eReader

      View online with eReader.

      eReader