Enterprise Social Networks: Social Features and Organizational
Identification
Master’s Thesis Communication Science Graduate School of Communication Corporate Communication
Nicole Silva Orellana 10842098
Supervisor: Lise van Oortmerssen January 29, 2016.
Abstract
Social interaction within organizations has gained special attention during the past years. Issues like knowledge sharing and new ways of working have given interaction among co-workers a new importance. In order to facilitate these interactions,
organizations have started to incorporate innovative communication platforms such as the enterprise social network. This type of platforms work as an internal social media that enables employees to have their own profile, initiate group chats, share documents and photos, post comments, and other type of social interactions. Previous research has suggested that the main benefits of these platforms are enhancing productivity and problem solving, improving collaboration and communication, better access to
information, and enhancing knowledge sharing and innovation. But so far, the potential effects on non task-related matters, such as organizational identification, have been ignored. Literature suggests that using enterprise social networks for social interaction purposes can lead to positive emotional effects on employees that can be associated with organizational identity. This study concerns a quantitative research taking into
consideration two organizations that currently use enterprise social networks. The purpose was to establish a relationship between the use of enterprise social networks for social interaction purposes and organizational identification, taking into account other factors that may moderate that relationship. It was found this type of social interaction does indeed predict organizational identification, although a moderation effect was rejected. Results also highlight the importance of considering a mixed approach to the research.
Introduction
Internet based communication plays a mayor role in modern organizations’ business strategies. Factors such as globalization and technological advances are some of the motives for the shift from traditional to new forms of communication. According to Chung and Zhao (2004) interactivity is one of the key differences between old and new media. More and more organizations find themselves using online interactive tools such as games, discussion forums, and real time communication instruments, in order to engage with their stakeholders (Van Noort, Voorveld & Van Reijmersdal, 2012). Studies suggest that including interactive tools on online media forms can lead to favorable affective responses and attitudes towards the brand on behalf of the consumers (Van Noort et al., 2012, Liu & Shrum, 2009). Based on the results online interactive forms of communication have on external stakeholders, this paper aims to examine if the strategy also works within an organization’s internal audience.
Among organization’s communicational attempts towards their internal audiences, there is the use of enterprise social networks. A study by Deloitte (2013) estimated that more than 90% of the Fortune 500 companies would implement enterprise social network software during the upcoming years. Enterprise social network is a corporate social network developed for employees’ use within a specific organization, with the goal of encouraging social exchange and knowledge sharing (Kim, Jeong & Lee, 2010). One of the enterprise social network’s main features and what differentiates it from traditional forms of communication such as the intranet, is interactivity
(Parameswaran & Whinston, 2007). Such interactivity contributes to creating a sense of community among co-workers, positive emotional responses towards work and
employees’ engagement (Denyer, parry & Flowers, 2011; Kim & Byrne, 2011; Leidner et al., 2010; Fulk & Yuan, 2013), which are concepts usually associated with organizational identification. This implies there may be a relation between the use of an enterprise social network and organizational identification. Literature also suggests that the success of implementing an enterprise social network depends on managerial support and a
receptive communicational climate (Butler, 2013; Chin et al., 2015; Huang et al. 20013; McAfee, 2006). There are plenty of studies that examine the effects of using an enterprise social network, but none of them link it to the concept of organizational identification.
Identifying organizational identification as an outcome of an enterprise social network use is valuable to the organization in particular because employees’ actions as a result tend to advantage the organization as a whole (Lee, Park & Koo, 2015). Since enterprise social network’s use among organizations only seems to be increasing, acknowledging new potential benefits of this tool could result beneficial for both the organization and employees.
This paper contributes to the understanding of an enterprise social network’s effects on organizations by studying the relationship between the enterprise social network’s use and organizational identification, as well as the factors that influence the enterprise social network implementation such as change management and
communication climate. The next sections provide the theoretical background of the study, followed by he research methodology and results, and the conclusion stating how the study builds into further research.
Theoretical Background Enterprise Social Networks
A large amount of organizations are shifting from traditional forms of internal communication into enterprise social networks (Deloitte, 2013). Enterprise social networks are corporate social networks specially designed for employees in a particular organization to form corporate communities and create and exchange knowledge (Chin et al. 2015; Kim et al. 2010). Fulk and Yuan (2013) describe enterprise social networks as “social network systems implemented inside bounded organizations to support social networking within the organization” (p. 21). The main differences between enterprise social networks and traditional forms of communication have to do with the channels and the platforms (McAfee, 2006). Channels refer to the medium where digital content can be created, such as emails and person-to-person instant messaging, but they lack reach and communality. Platforms refer to the medium where digital content can be shared, such as intranet, information portals and corporate websites, and while the reach and
communality is pretty high for platforms, digital content creation is centralized and controlled by a small group of people. Both channels and platforms contrast with new forms of communication, in that these new forms combine characteristics form the former two. New technologies such as enterprise social networks are significant because
they help to knit together an organization and to create and share knowledge in ways that traditional forms could not (McAfee, 2006). So far, literature suggests that the main feature enterprise social networks provide to organizations is the ability of users to freely interact and create and share content.
Enterprise social networks provide a variety of tools for its users, such as posting comments and status updates, suggest connections, search for people or topics, create social profiles, micro blogging, participate in online groups and communities, instant messaging, content managing, provide ratings and reviews, among others (Fulk &Yuan, 2013; Chin et al. 2015). There are several benefits associated with the use of enterprise social networks. When used properly, these types of platforms can improve
communication and collaboration, increase employees’ productivity, accelerate problem solving, and enhance knowledge sharing and innovation (Chui et al., 2012). Enterprise social networks can also lead to better knowledge access and job performance (Kügler & Smolnik, 2013). Although most studies agree on knowledge sharing and innovation as enterprise social networks’ main advantages (Chin et al, 2015; Chui et al., 2012; Kügler & Smolnk, 2013; Fulk & Yuan, 2013), the social enhancing features of these platforms provide other benefits as well. Online-based forms of communication and content sharing across geographic boundaries enhance the possibility of new ways of working, such as schedule and location flexibility (Lombardi, Huysman & Steinfield, 2013). With regards to the employees’ ability to interact with each other, social interaction through an
enterprise social network often works as a break helping to refresh the mind and boost energy, generating a positive attitude towards work (Kim & Byrne, 2011). This type of break generates emotional responses such as happiness and the feeling of enjoying work, leading to a sense of cultural fit and connectedness among people and the organization (Leidner, Koch & Gonzalez, 2010). Social interaction through an enterprise social network facilitates relationship building among employees and strengthens social capital (Fulk and Yuan, 2013). All these arguments lead to the idea that enterprise social
networks contribute to creating a community environment that could lead to engagement (Denyer et al., 2011).
Platforms that encourage social interaction and relationship building among employees can potentially reinforce a sense of community and shared characteristics
aligned to the organization, between its users. This specific form of social identification where individuals associate themselves with an organization is known as organizational identification (Mael & Ashforth, 1992).
Organizational Identification
Organizational identification derives from the social identity theory. Tajfel and Turner (1985) describe social identity as the idea that individuals construct their self-concept based on the identity of the groups they belong to. When this idea is transferred to the organizational frame, organizational identification refers to a specific form of social identity where individuals define themselves in terms of their involvement to a particular organization (Mael & Ashforth, 1992). Organizational identification roots employees to the organization making organizational values, goals and norms become salient in their behavior and attitude (Lee et al., 2015). The antecedents behind this type of identification are organizational prestige, tenure, experience and comparison to other organizations, knowledge about the organization, satisfaction with the organization and sentimentality (Mael & Ashforth, 1992). When addressing sentimentality, it is important to emphasize on the influence of emotional bonds in the process of developing
engagement and organizational identification (Bergami and Bagozzi, 2000). Psychological attachment can be referred to as a main factor for organizational identification, and the perception of social exchange between individuals and the organization play a major role in the development of such attachment (Lee et al., 2015). Positive feelings and emotions related to the organization acquire even more importance when linked to the idea that individuals within an organization tend to associate
themselves with positive and distinctive social instances in an attempt to boost their self esteem and need of belongingness (De Roeck & Delobbe,2012). Employees’ perception of the organization’s social actions and image may lead to view their employer as an institution that shares their own social views and values (Rodrigo & Arenas, 2008), reinforcing the importance on social spaces encouraged by the organization.
A global study by McKinsey (2013), where they conducted surveys throughout organizations that use an enterprise social network, identifies employee satisfaction as one of the main benefits of social enterprise network’s use. Social interaction through an enterprise social network has also been associated to emotional responses such as
happiness, feeling of enjoying work, energy boost, and a sense of connectedness (Kim & Byrne, 2011; Leidner et al., 2010). Employees’ positive feelings and attitudes towards their work and the organization as antecedents leading to organizational identity (Mael & Ashforth,1992). If social interactions through enterprise social networks result in a sense of connectedness between employees and the organization, positive emotional responses towards work, and employees’ engagement (Kim & Byrne, 2011; Leidner et al., 2010; Fulk & Yuan, 2013; Denyer et al. 2011), an enterprise social network could be used as a tool to enhance organizational identity. Forms of interactivity such as discussion groups, forums, comments and real time communication tools can generate positive responses and attitudes, and engagement towards external stakeholders (Van Noort et al., 2012; Liu & Shrum, 2002). Based on this idea, the use of these interactive tools to address internal stakeholders should lead to positive attitude and engagement towards the “brand”, also known as organizational identification. These effects of the use of enterprise social networks show a relation to antecedents of organizational identity, such as satisfaction with the organization and sentimentality (Mael & Ashforth, 1992), suggesting that an enterprise social network as a tool, may not cause, but enhance organizational identity. The aforementioned theories about enterprise social networks and organizational identity lead us to our first hypothesis.
Hypothesis 1: The use of an enterprise social network for social interaction purposes has a direct positive effect on organizational identification.
Organizational Climate
In order to understand the concept of organizational climate, one must first go through psychological climate. Jones and James (1979) define psychological climate as individuals’ perceptions and interpretations of their work environment in terms of the psychological meaning and significance they give it. Based on this concept,
organizational climate is defined as the shared psychological climate, meaning the shared perceptions that organization members have regarding their work environment (Smidts, van Riel & Pruyn, 2001). Communication climate is an aspect of organizational climate that considers specifically communicative elements of the work environment (Jones & James, 1979) such as openness in communication, receptivity of management to
Openness in communication can strengthen organizational identification because it boosts self-enhancement in the members of the organization by allowing them to actively participate in discussions regarding organizational issues and involving them in decision making processes (Smidts et al., 2001). Open communication can also influence
organizational identification because the possibility to communicate freely with
supervisors and colleagues can add a feeling of self-worth to the employee, making him or her experience a sense of being taken seriously. Openness in communication sets an environment where active participation is appreciated, which increases feelings of being part of the organization and leads to organizational identification (Smidts et al., 2001). Open communication climate can also be related to the use of an enterprise social network (McAfee, 2006), given the fact that the use of this type of platforms occurs the most when employees feel free to express themselves. Because of this, one can assume that, when an organization encourages openness in communication, there will also be more organizational identification on behalf of the employees, due to the increased enterprise social network use for social purposes, in comparison to an organization with a “closed” communication environment. The influence openness in communication may have on organizational identification and use of enterprise social networks leads us to our second hypothesis.
Hypothesis 2: Openness in communication moderates the relationship between use of an enterprise social network for social interaction purposes and
organizational identification; the positive relationship between use of an enterprise social network for social interaction purposes and organizational identification is in general stronger for organizations with a more ‘open’ communication.
Another communicative element of communication climate is receptivity of the management to employees’ collaboration (Guzley, 1992), also referred to as collaboration norms (Coleman, 1990; Kankanhalli, Tan & Wei, 2005). This concept refers to the
organization’s take on cooperation, collaboration and teamwork among its employees. Taking into account the idea that the organization’s social actions can affect employees’ perception and lead them to feel they share the same social views and values as the institution, a relation to organizational identification could be established (Rodrigo &
Arenas, 2008). These norms have also shown to improve information exchange, and for that reason are associated to the use of enterprise social networks for social interactions (Bock, Kankanhalli & Sharma, 2006). These arguments lead to the idea that when an organization has collaboration norms, there will also be more organizational
identification on behalf of the employees, because they use enterprise social networks for social purposes more than they would at an organization with low collaboration norms. The influence collaboration norms may have on enterprise social networks use and organizational identification leads us to the third hypothesis.
Hypothesis 3: Collaboration norms moderate the relationship between use of an enterprise social network for social interaction purposes and organizational identification; the positive relationship between use of an enterprise social network for social interaction purposes and organizational identification is in general stronger for organizations with collaboration norms.
Community ties are also a communicative element of communication climate, and refer to the perception of employees having a strong social tie to their co-workers and experiencing a sense of closeness to each other (Kügler, Smolnik & Raeth, 2013). This suggests that closeness and social ties among employees lead to identification with the group, and consequently to organizational identification. Community ties can also increase the motivation to exchange knowledge, cooperate within the group and engage in social interaction (Lewicki & Bunker, 1996), all of which are associated to the use of enterprise social network. This leads to the assumption that when an organization has strong community ties, there will also be more organizational identification on behalf of the employees, due to the increased enterprise social network use for social purposes, in comparison to an organization with weak community ties. The influence community ties may have on an enterprise social network use and organizational identification leads us to the fourth hypothesis.
Hypothesis 4: Community ties moderate the relationship between use of an enterprise social network for social interaction purposes and organizational identification; the positive relationship between use of an enterprise social network for social interaction purposes and organizational identification is in general stronger for organizations with high community ties.
Change Management
In order to remain competitive and keep up with new developments, organizations must face change at some point (Allen et al. 2007). Introducing an enterprise social network to the communication flow of an organization falls into the change category of “introduction to new technologies” (Allen et al. 2007). Organizations struggle when facing change and according to Burns (2000), 40% to 70% of change initiatives fail. How management acts and responds to change can influence the effectiveness of its actions (Allen et al., 2000). Management plays a big role in change situations, and referring specifically to the implementation of an enterprise social network, the importance of developing strategies that will encourage its use should be emphasized (McAfee, 2006). Employees’ decision to use an enterprise social network is associated to the perceived value of the enterprise social network; will using an enterprise social network enable them to achieve goals and needs (Chin et al., 2015). In order to take full advantage of all the benefits an enterprise social network has to offer, managers need to clearly define and explain them to employees (Denyer et al., 2011). This goes along with the idea of the importance of effective communication practices in change situations, and how communication is a vital component of implementation plans. But just providing information is not enough; it is the quality of communication that actually influences employees’ appraisal to change (E.g. Schweiger & Denisi’s, 1991; Bordia, Hobman, Jones, Gallois, & Callan, 2004). As a matter of fact, some communication strategies attempting to smooth change process fail due to lack of quality (Smeltzer, 1991). Along with this thought, being well informed about organizational change will enable
employees to assimilate the salient characteristics that distinguish their organization from others (such as corporate values, mission and vision), allowing them to identify with it (Dutton, Dukerich & Harquail, 1994). When the quality of the change communication is being conducted in a strategic way, the repeated exposure to such messages may increase attractiveness and reassure members that they work for an organization that is worth to be associated with (Smidts et al., 2001). This leads to the assumption that when an
organization’s quality of change communication is high, there will also be more organizational identification on behalf of the employees, due to increased enterprise social network use for social purposes, in comparison to an organization with low quality
of change communication. The influence quality of change communication may have on an enterprise social network use and organizational identification leads us to the fifth hypothesis.
Hypothesis 5: Quality of change communication moderates the relationship between use of an enterprise social network for social interaction purposes and organizational identification; the positive relationship between use of an enterprise social network for social interaction purposes and organizational identification is in general stronger for organizations with a high quality of change communication.
Change can also be affected by trust in management. Mayer, Davis and Schoorman (1995) defined trust as, “the willingness of a party to be vulnerable to the actions of another party based on the expectation that the other will perform a particular action important to the trustor, irrespective of the ability to monitor or control that other party” (p. 712). Trust in management can be related to success in a change strategy based on the premise that employees who trust their management would be more willing to follow the actions suggested by the management, because they believe in the rationale supporting the decisions (Allen et al., 2007). It is suggested that trust in management makes employees more vulnerable to embrace organizational messages, implying a relation to organizational identification. The influence trust in management, as a factor of change management, may have on an enterprise social network use and organizational identification leads us to the sixth hypothesis.
Hypothesis 6: Trust in management moderates the relationship between use of an enterprise social network for social interaction purposes and organizational identification; the positive relationship between use of an enterprise social network for social interaction purposes and organizational identification is in general stronger for organizations with a high trust in management.
Methods
The study will employ a quantitative approach for the data collection process since all the variables to be examined can be measured in a quantitative way and have validated measures. A cross-sectional online survey was distributed among two
organizations that have recently implemented the use of an enterprise social network and that went through a process of change management regarding the implementation. Sampling
A purposive sampling was used to select the organizations, due to the fact that they had to be currently using an enterprise social network, and also that they were reached through a recommendations of colleagues that knew the type of programs the organizations used.
Organization 1.
Organization 1 is a Dutch organization that belongs to the medical research sector and has an amount of 250 employees, where all employees have access to a computer with Internet. The organization has been using an enterprise social network since October 2012. Their enterprise social network uses Wordpress and allows its users to have their own profiles and perform functions such as sending personal or group messages, post blog entries, share documents, and like and comment on other users’ activities. Within the organization, they call their enterprise social network Intranet. Before this Intranet,
they were working with a regular type of Intranet with limited functions, and therefore had to undergo a change management process for the users to adapt to the new functions. As part of the management’s initiative, the organization had sessions to explain users the new functions provided by the Intranet as well as appointed a team of trained employees to help their colleagues with any needs regarding the use of the Intranet.
It is important to emphasize the fact that even though the change management process took place a couple of years ago, the organization still has an undergoing plan to encourage the use of the Intranet as the main source of communication among the
organization, and works towards the goal of making it the official form of communication among employees in the organization. Among the tactics they use to engage users, is having the Intranet start automatically in the computers as soon as they are turned on. Also, they have adapted several systems such as the Employee Self Service, so they can be accessed to only through the Intranet. In addition to encouraging its use, there is also an active Intranet-Team made up by employees who work as ambassadors to help other users and also gather information about the organization to generate content for the Intranet. In the case of new hires entering the company, a movie has been developed to provide a smooth introduction to the system. All these tactics are accompanied by regular updates about new features and presentations focused on explaining specific features. Through the use of the Intranet, the organization aspires to increase knowledge sharing, group work and facilitate interaction among colleagues, encouraging the Intranet’s use not only for job-related topics, but also for social activities such as sports and after office gatherings. Based on this undergoing change and reinforcement process provided by the organization and the encouragement of social interaction, it is fair to say that
Organization 1 meets the characteristics necessary to participate in the research. Organization 2.
Organization 2 is a Dutch organization that belongs to the public sector and has an approximate amount of 900 employees, out of whom more or less 800 employees have access to a computer with Internet on a daily basis, and the rest does occasionally. The organization has been using an enterprise social network called Enzo since February 2013. Enzo enables its users to have a personal profile, send personal and group messages, share documents and post entries. Since the functions provided by Enzo
differed from their previous form of Intranet, the organization also went through a change management process. One of Enzo’s main features is the fact that it is a user-friendly program, and for that reason, the main point through the change process was a digital tour through the program with pop-ups that helped to explain its main features. To accompany this digital tour, the organization provided each user with a printed explanation of the most important functionalities, and set up a support desk that worked both via email and telephone to help users. They also provided one-on-one sessions to people who needed extra help.
Even though the change process occurred a couple of years ago, Organization 2 also has an undergoing plan to encourage Enzo’s use. One of the tactics is to have Enzo start automatically as soon as the computer is turned on. Also, they have suppressed the use of emails for official communications such as newsletter, and now all information must be posted on Enzo. This also applies to the different internal communication campaigns. As an additional form of reinforcement, tips and tricks training sessions are organized each month with the goal to provide users easier ways to use the features and encourage its use, and all employees who are interested are welcomed to participate. Through the use of Enzo, the organization aspires to increase knowledge sharing and group work among different departments. Enzo also provides the tools for its users to engage in social interaction and the organization stimulates its use enough to create opportunities for social interactions. Based on this undergoing change and reinforcement process provided by the organization as well as the opportunities for social interaction, it is fair to say that Organization 2 meets the characteristics necessary to participate in the research.
Sample.
A total of 136 respondents participated in the study. 65 respondents corresponded to Organization 1 and 71 respondents were from Organization 2. Out of the 136, 33 respondents had to be dropped from the study because they didn’t complete the
questionnaires. The final sample had 103 participants (41 male and 62 female), and the mean age was 42.77 (SD = 10.52). All respondents had a minimum of 1 year working in the organization and use the enterprise social network at least 2 – 3 times per week. Procedure
Information regarding the specific enterprise social network history, features, goals, and current uses within each organization was gathered through brief screening process interviews via Skype with representatives of both organizations. Once the requirements for each organization were established, an announcement was posted in each enterprise social network indicating the interest of the study and inviting its users to participate though the link that would lead them to the online survey. The questionnaire took approximately 10 minutes to complete. Participants were recruited over a two-week period during December 2015.
Measures
Independent variables.
Enterprise social network use. Based on Roussos (2007) questionnaire of factors influencing Internet use, both questions of the “Social Media Use at Work” section were selected. The questions were “I regularly use (the ESN) to maintain and strengthen communication with colleagues at work” and “I regularly use (the ESN) to obtain work related information and knowledge”. The questions were measured on a five-point scale where the anchors were 1 (strongly disagree) to 5 (strongly agree). The question taken into consideration as the predictor variable was the one that makes reference to
“strengthen communication with colleagues at work”, because it explains a social interaction through the enterprise social network use, which is the main interest of the research. The purpose of including both questions in the questionnaire is for respondents to have a clear distinction between “work related” and “communication” use of the enterprise social network. The item had an M = 3.76 and a SD = 0.98.
Change management. This variable is divided into two constructs: quality of change communication and trust in management. To measure quality of change
communication, all nine items were selected from the subscale “Quality of Change
Communication” of the change management survey by Allen et al. (2007). Employees were required to rate the change communication they received in relation to: job-related, implementation and strategic issues, on three dimensions: usefulness, timeliness, and accuracy. An example of an item evaluating usefulness of job-related information is “Overall, the official communication I received about the potential job-related changes that may result from (implementing the ESN) has been useful”. An example of an item
evaluating timeliness of implementation-related information is “Overall, the official communication I received about the (implementation of the ESN) has been timely”. And an example of an item evaluating accuracy of information about strategic issues is “Overall, the official communication I have received about the strategic direction of (using the ESN) has been accurate”. The items were measured on a five-point scale where the anchors were 1 (strongly disagree) to 5 (strongly agree). The resulting scale had a Cronbach’s alpha of 0.90 (M = 3.30, SD = 0.61).
Regarding trust in management, all seven items were selected from the subscale “Trust in Management” of the survey by Robinson and Rousseau (1994). An example of an item is “I can expect management to treat me in a consistent and predictable fashion”. The items were measured on a five-point scale where the anchors were 1 (strongly disagree) to 5 (strongly agree). The resulting scale had a Cronbach’s alpha of 0.84 (M = 3.26, SD = 0.54).
Organizational climate. This variable is divided into three constructs:
collaboration norms, community ties and open communication. Based on Kügler et al.’s (2013) questionnaire of factors influencing ESSPU (Enterprise Social Software Platform Usage), two subscales have been taken into account. Regarding collaboration norms, all three items of the subscale were selected. An example of an item is “People in my organization collaborate well with each other”. The items were measured on a five-point scale where the anchors were 1 (strongly disagree) to 5 (strongly agree). The resulting scale had a Cronbach’s alpha of 0.70 (M = 3.56, SD = 0.77).
To measure community ties all four items of the subscale with the same name (Kügler et al., 2013), were selected. An example of an item is “People in my organization have the feeling of togetherness or closeness with each other”. The items were measured on a five-point scale where the anchors were 1 (strongly disagree) to 5 (strongly agree). The resulting scale had a Cronbach’s alpha of 0.83 (M = 3.13, SD = 0.76).
With regards to openness in communication, all fourteen items were selected from the subscale “Open Communication” of the organizational identification survey by
Smidts et al. (2001). An example of an item is “My (superiors, colleagues,
five-point scale where the anchors were 1 (strongly disagree) to 5 (strongly agree). The resulting scale had a Cronbach’s alpha of 0.71 (M = 3.38, SD = 0.40).
Dependent variable.
Organizational identification. To measure organizational identification all six items were selected from the “Organizational Identification” scale by Mael and Ashforth (1992). An example of an item evaluating usefulness of job-related information is “I am very interested in what others think about (name of the organization)”. The items were measured on a five-point scale where the anchors were 1 (strongly disagree) to 5 (strongly agree). The resulting scale had a Cronbach’s alpha of 0.78 (M = 3.27, SD = 0.62).
Control variables. Variables such a gender and age were controlled during the tests in order to prevent them from influencing the results. Also, the experience using
social networks and tenure in the organization were controlled because of the effect the
may have on the enterprise social network use and organizational identification. Results
Given the fact that the data obtained concerns two different organizations, and even though both organizations met the requirements to participate in the study, an independent sample t-test was executed with all the variables used in the study to determine if there was a statistical significant difference between the means for these variables in both organizations. The test was performed with the following variables: “age”, “gender”, “experience using social networks”, “tenure”, “enterprise social network use”, “organizational identification”, “quality of change communication”, “trust”,
“collaboration norms”, “community ties” and “openness in communication”. The results for the independent sample t-tests between the organizations were not significant for all of the aforementioned variables, rejecting the possibility of a statistically significant difference between the mean of the variables for both organizations. Based on these results, we can proceed to work with the data concerning both organizations, as one.
A correlation analysis was run between the variables to determine if there was a relationship among them, and results show that there is indeed a significant positive correlation. The variables that showed the strongest correlation were: collaboration norms and openness in communication r = .687, p < .001; community ties and organizational
identification r = .657, p < .001; and quality of change communication and organizational identification r = .656, p < .001. Results are shown in Table 1.
Table 1
Correlations for Main Variables in the Model
Variables 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 1. ESN use - 2. Quality of Change Comm. .371** - 3. Trust .263** .336** - 4. Collab. Norms .255** .518** .428** - 5. Community Ties .250* .539** .325** .612** - 6. Openness in Comm. .347** .619** .567** .687** .517** - 7. Org. Identification .277** .656** .394** .653** .657** .629** - Note. *p < .05. **p < .01. ***p < .001.
In order to determine if respondents were more likely to identify with their organization depending on their enterprise social network use and how other variables affect this relationship, a regression and moderation analysis were performed. The first hypothesis stated that the use of an enterprise social network for social interaction purposes would have a direct positive effect on organizational identification. A simple regression analysis was run to test the influence of the “use of an enterprise social network for social interaction purposes” on the outcome variable “organizational identification”, while controlling for “age”, “gender”, “tenure” and “experience using social networks”. The results of the regression model were significant F(1, 101) = 8.42, p = .005. The regression model can therefore be used to predict organizational
identification among employees. Though, only 7 per cent of the variation in an
enterprise social network for social interaction purposes (adjusted R2 = .07). Use of the enterprise social network for social interaction purposes, b = .17, b* = .27, t = 2.90, p = .005, 95% CI [.05, .29] has significant, but small effect on organizational identification, therefore H1 is accepted.
The second hypothesis stated that openness in communication moderates the relationship between the use of an enterprise social network for social interaction purposes and organizational identification. A moderation analysis was run with PROCESS, controlling for “age”, “gender”, “tenure” and “experience using social
networks”. The result of the moderation analysis was not significant F(3, 99) = 14.83, p = .247.
The third hypothesis stated that collaboration norms moderate the relationship between the use of an enterprise social network for social interaction purposes and organizational identification. A moderation analysis was run with PROCESS, controlling for “age”, “gender”, “tenure” and “experience using social networks”. The result of the moderation analysis was not significant F(3, 99) = 13.38, p = .753.
The fourth hypothesis stated that community ties moderate the relationship between the use of an enterprise social network for social interaction purposes and organizational identification. A moderation analysis was run with PROCESS, controlling for “age”, “gender”, “tenure” and “experience using social networks”. The result of the moderation analysis was not significant F(3, 99) = 13.99, p = .719.
The fifth hypothesis stated that quality of change communication moderates the relationship between the use of an enterprise social network for social interaction purposes and organizational identification. A moderation analysis was run with PROCESS, controlling for “age”, “gender”, “tenure” and “experience using social
networks”. The result of the moderation analysis was not significant F(3, 99) = 18.61, p = .369.
The sixth hypothesis stated that trust moderates the relationship between the use of an enterprise social network for social interaction purposes and organizational identification. A moderation analysis was run with PROCESS, controlling for “age”, “gender”, “tenure” and “experience using social networks”. The result of the moderation analysis was not significant F(3, 99) = 6.55, p = .647.
Additional to the analysis of the hypotheses, a regression was run to examine organizational identification as a predictor for the use of enterprise social network for social interaction purposes while controlling for “age”, “gender”, “tenure” and
“experience using social networks”. The results of the regression model were significant
F(1, 101) = 8.42, p = .005. The regression model can therefore be used to predict use of
enterprise social network for social interaction purposes among employees. Though, only 7 per cent of the variation in an employee’s use of the enterprise social network for social interaction purposes could be predicted on the basis of organizational identification (adjusted R2 = .07). Organizational identification, b = .43, b* = .27, t = 2.90, p = .005, 95% CI [.13, .74] has significant, but small effect on use of enterprise social network for social interaction purposes. The results are shown in Table 2.
Table 2
Results of Regression Model – Organizational Identification Influences the Use of Enterprise Social Networks for Social Interaction Purposes
b*
Constant 2.31
Use ESN soc. int. purposes .27*
Age .16
Gender .13
Tenure .15
Experience of social net. use .21
Adjusted R2 .07
F 8.42
Note. *p < .05. **p < .01. ***p < .001.
A regression analysis was also run to determine if the moderation variables had a direct effect on organizational identification, while controlling for “age”, “gender”, “tenure” and “experience using social networks”. The results of the regression model were significant for all five of the moderation variables. Quality of change
76.21, p < .001. 43 per cent of the variation in an employee’s organizational identification could be predicted on the basis of the quality of change communication (adjusted R2 = .43). Quality of change communication, b = .66, b* = .65, t = 8.73, p < .001, 95% CI [.51, .81] has a significant large effect on organizational identification. Trust predicts
organizational identification among employees F(1, 101) = 18.58, p < .001. 15 per cent of the variation in an employee’s organizational identification could be predicted on the basis of trust (adjusted R2 = .15). Trust, b = .44, b* = .39, t = 4.31, p < .001, 95% CI [.24, .65] has a significant medium effect on organizational identification. Collaboration norms predict organizational identification among employees F(1, 101) = 74.94, p < .001. 42 per cent of the variation in an employee’s organizational identification could be predicted on the basis of collaboration norms (adjusted R2 = .42). Collaboration norms, b = .52, b* = .65, t = 8.65, p < .001, 95% CI [.40, .64] have a significant large effect on
organizational identification. Community ties predict organizational identification among employees F(1, 101) = 76.50, p < .001. 43 per cent of the variation in an employee’s organizational identification could be predicted on the basis of community ties (adjusted
R2 = .43). Community ties, b = .53, b* = .65, t = 8.74, p < .001, 95% CI [.41, .65] have a significant large effect on organizational identification. Openness in communication predicts organizational identification among employees F(1, 102) = 66.15, p < .001. 39 per cent of the variation in an employee’s organizational identification could be predicted on the basis of openness in communication (adjusted R2 = .39). Openness in
communication, b = .97, b* = .62, t = 8.13, p < .001, 95% CI [.73, 1.21] has a significant large effect on organizational identification.
Conclusion and Discussion
The aim of the study was to establish a relationship between the use of enterprise social networks for social interaction purposes and organizational identification. The model suggested that the use of enterprise social networks for social interaction purposes would enhance organizational identification on behalf of the employee. It has become clear that for most participants using the enterprise social network for social purposes does predict organizational identification. However, the model failed to predict the factors that could moderate this relationship.
The results of the study confirm that social activity on enterprise social networks relates to organizational identification in employees, supporting the idea that one of the benefits of using enterprise social networks is engaging employees to the organization (Denyer et al., 2011). This could be due to the fact that providing a platform that facilitates communication and offers a space for employees to interact not only for job-related matters but also in a social way, gives them the opportunity to create positive experiences that can later on be associated with the work environment and their feelings towards the organization. Another enterprise social network feature that might influence this relationship is the information access that could result of a more social and informal consultation between colleagues, and that can lead to better job performance and
satisfaction, and consequently to organizational identification (Kügler & Smolnik, 2013). Results may also be related to the idea that social interaction through enterprise social networks work as a refreshing break and energy boost for employees, again creating positive experiences and feelings that can later on be associated with the work
environment and work as organizational identification (Leidner et al., 2010). Also, using a technological tool such as an enterprise social network, which provides features that are up to date with other forms of social networks in terms of social interaction, gives the organization a “current” image and could make employees perceive the organization as a place that shares their social views and values and identify with it (Rodrigo & Arenas, 2008).
Although the results support the ideas presented above, it does not give any insight to what aspects of the social use of enterprise social networks specifically lead to organizational identification. Also, the small effect use of enterprise social networks has on organizational identification suggests that there could be the possibility the
relationship is actually moderated or even mediated by other factors not considered in the model, such as the type of tactics carried on by the management during the change
process. The relationship between both variables has also been suggested to work in different directions, but studies indicate that using enterprise social networks for social purposes engages employees and encourages its use even more, which implies a cyclical relationship instead of a linear one and could help explain the results obtained (McAfee, 2006).
The different variables presented in the model as a part of the communication climate, failed to work as moderators for the relationship between use of enterprise social networks and organizational identification. Literature suggests that factors such as
openness in communication, strong community ties and collaboration norms influence both enterprise social network use and organizational identification (McAfee, 2006; Smidts et al., 2001), and even though results for the scales of all the aforementioned variables were on the higher end of the scale and each moderator proved to have a direct significant effect on the dependent variable, they had no effect on the relationship itself. Results could be supported by the idea that the level of organizational identification on employees is not only the result of use of enterprise social network for social interaction purposes, but also the result of other factors and tactics on behalf of each organization that were not taken into consideration in the study, and in such case the moderators could not affect the relationship. This would also explain why each moderator successfully predicted organizational identification on employees given that none of them were tailored to the use of enterprise social network.
The variables presented in the model as part of the change management process also failed to moderate the relationship between the use of enterprise social network for social interaction purposes and organizational identification. The change management process was regarded in the literature as crucial to the implementation of an enterprise social network in order to achieve its goals (Allen et al., 2007; Burns, 2000; Denyer et al., 2011), and the quality of the change communication as well as the trust employees have on the management affect such process. Again, results show that the respondents were on the high end of the scale for both variables and also each variable had a direct significant effect on the dependent variable, yet they didn’t influenced the relationship between the enterprise social network use and organizational identification. A factor that wasn’t taken into consideration in the model and that may explain the results is the specific strategy or tactics each organization uses to promote and encourage social interaction through the enterprise social network and organizational identification among employees. Given the case that organizational identification on employees could be due mainly to other elements, the moderators would fail to influence the relationship. Again, this would
explain why each moderator predicted organizational identification, although quality of change communication was tailored to the use of enterprise social networks.
Limitations and Future Research
In order to determine the actual effect of the use of enterprise social networks for social interaction purposes on organizational identification, it is necessary to perform a longitudinal study where the initial organizational identification of employees is known pre enterprise social network implementation, and can be compared afterwards its implementation. This would help to rule out different factors that may influence
employees’ organizational identification, other than the predictor variable. Results in this study were obtained through a cross-sectional method that complicates the process of ruling out external factors that can influence the results on the outcome variable.
This research tested the model through validates scales that made it possible to generalize its results, but through this process, valuable specific information regarding each organization looses relevance during the analysis. Future research should consider including a qualitative approach where insightful perceptions of employees could be taken into consideration and perhaps fill in certain gaps regarding the effects of enterprise social networks’ use for social purposes. Such approach might also clear out the specific approach each organization has towards the use of their enterprise social network.
Future research should consider revising the model and including other variables that might moderate the relationship between the predictor and the outcome variable, such as the strategies used to incentive use of enterprise social network for social
purposes and organizational identification, the time the platform has been active and how active the users actually are, and the tone the organization sets for its use.
This study has contributed to exploring the different benefits of using new communicational platforms such as enterprise social networks, adding organizational identification as a possible result of social interaction through the medium. This information is of great relevance to Human Resources departments who could incorporate the social network enterprise as part of the strategy to encourage
organizational identification. Also, this new perspective of the benefits enterprise social networks offer, work as a guideline to introduce innovative and creative ways to boost employee wellbeing with positive effects for the organization.
References
Allen, J., Jimmieson, N. L., Bordia, P. & Irmer, B. E. (2007). Uncertainty during
organizational change: Managing perceptions through communication, Journal of
Change Management, 7, 2, 187-210. doi: 10.1080/14697010701563379
Arens, W. F. (2006), Contemporary Advertising, New York: McGraw-Hill Irwin. Bergami, M., & Bagozzi, R. P. (2000). Self-categorization, affective commitment and
group self-esteem as distinct aspects of social identity in the organization. British
Journal of Social Psychology, 39, 555–577. http://dx.doi.org/10.1348/014466600164633
Bock, G.W., Kankanhalli, A., & Sharma, A. (2006). Are norms enough? The role of collaborative norms in promoting organizational knowledge seeking. European
Journal of Information Systems, 15(4), pp. 357-367.
Bordia, P., Hobman, E. V., Jones, E., Gallois, C., & Callan, V. J. (2004).
Uncertainty during organizational change: types, consequences, and management strategies. Journal of Business and Psychology, 18(4), pp. 507–532.
Boyd, D., & Ellison, N. B. (2007). Social network sites: Definition, history, and scholarship. Journal of Computer Mediated Communication, 13(1), 210–230. doi:10.1111/j.1083-6101.2007.00393.x
Burns, B. (2000). Managing Change: A Strategic Approach to Organizational Dynamics. 3rd edn (Harlow: FT/ Prentice-Hall).
Chin, C. P. Y., Evans, N. & Choo, K. K. R. (2015). Exploring Factors Influencing the Use of Enterprise Social Networks in Multinational Professional Service Firms.
Journal of Organizational Computing and Electronic Commerce, 25:3, 289-315. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/10919392.2015.1058118
Chui, M., J. Manyika, J. Bughin, R. Dobbs, C. Roxburgh, H. Sarrazin, G. Sands, & M. Westergren. (2012). The social economy: unlocking value and productivity through social technologies.
http://www.mckinsey.com/insights/mgi/research/technology_and_innovation/the_s ocial_ economy (accessed October 22, 2012).
Chung, Hwiman & Xinshu Zhao (2004), Effects of Perceived Interactivity on Web Site Preference and Memory: Role of Personal Motivation. Journal of
Computer-Mediated Communication, 10, 1 http://jcmc.indiana.edu/vol10/issue1/chung.html
(article 7).
Coleman, J. (1990). The foundations of social theory. University Press, Cambridge, MA: Harvard.
De Roeck, K., & Delobbe, N. (2012). Do environmental CSR initiatives serve organizations’ legitimacy in the oil industry? Exploring employees’ reactions through organizational identification theory. Journal of Business Ethics, 110, 397-412.
Denyer, D., Parry, E., & Flowers, P. (2011). “Social”, “open” and “participative”? Exploring personal experiences and organisational effects of enterprise2.0 use.
Long Range Planning, 44, 375 – 396.
Dutton, J. E., Dukerich, J. M., & Harquail, C. V. (1994). Organizational images and member identification. Administrative Science Quarterly, 39: 239-263. Fulk, J. & Yuan, Y. C. (2013). Location, motivation, and social capitalization via
enterprise social networking. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 19, 20–37. doi:10.1111/jcc4.12033
Guzley, R. M. (1992). Organizational climate and communication climate: Predictors of commitment to the organization. Management Communication Quarterly, 5, 379-402.
Jones, A. P., & James, L. R. (1979). Psychological climate: Dimensions and relationships of individual and aggregated work environment perceptions. Organizational
Behavior and Human Performance, 23, 201-250.
Kankanhalli, A., Tan, B.C.Y. and Wei, K. K. (2005). Contributing knowledge to electronic knowledge repositories: an empirical investigation. MIS Quarterly,
29(1), 113-143.
Kim, S. J., & Byrne, S. (2011). Conceptualizing personal web usage in work contexts: A preliminary framework. Computers in Human Behavior, 27, 2271 – 2283.
Kim, W., Jeong, O. R., & Lee, S. W. (2010). On social web sites. Information Systems, 35(2), 215–36. doi:10.1016/j.is.2009.08.003.
Kügler, M., & Smolnik, S. (2013). Just for the fun of it? Towards a model for assessing the individual benefits of employees’ enterprise social software usage. Proceedings from the 46th Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences. Hawaii, USA. Kügler, M., Smolnik, S., & Raeth, P. (2013). Determining the Factors Influencing
Enterprise Social Software Usage: Development of a Measurement Instrument for Empirical Assessment. Proceedings from the 46th Hawaii International
Conference on System Sciences. Hawaii, USA.
Lee, E.S., Park, T.Y., & Koo, B. (2015). Identifying organizational identification as a basis for attitudes and behaviors: A meta-analytic review. Psychological Bulletin,
141, 1049–1080.
Leidner, D., Koch, H., & Gonzalez, E. (2010). Assimilating generation Y IT new hires into USA’s workface: The role of an enterprise 2.0 system. MIS Quarterly
Executive, 9.
Leonardi, P. M., Huysman, M., & Steinfield, C. (2013). Enterprise social media: definition, history, and prospects for the study of social technologies in organizations. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 19, 1–19 Lewicki, R.J. & Bunker, B. B. (1996). Developing and maintaining trust in work
relationships. Sage: Thousand Oaks, CA, pp. 114-139.
Liu, Y. & Shrum, L. J. (2002).What is interactivity and is it always such a good thing? Implications of definition, person, and situation for the influence of interactivity on advertising effectiveness. Journal of Advertising, 31, 4, 53–64.
Liu, Y., & Shrum, L. J. (2009). A dual process model of interactivity effects. Journal of
Advertising, 38(2), 53 68.
Mael, F., & Ashforth, B. (1992). Alumni and their alma mater: A partial test of the reformulated model of organizational identification. Journal of Organizational
Behavior, 13, 103–123.
Mayer, R. C., Davis, J. H. & Schoorman, F. D. (1995) An integrative model of organizational trust. Academy of Management Review, 20(3), pp. 709–734. McAfee, A. (2006). Enterprise 2.0: the dawn of emergent collaboration. MIT Sloan
McKinsey. (2013). Evolution of the networked enterprise: McKinsey global survey
results. Retrieved from
http://www.mckinsey.com/insights/business_technology/evolution_of_ the_networked_enterprise_mckinsey_global_survey_results
Parameswaran, M., & A. B. Whinston. 2007. Research issues in social computing.
Journal of the Association for Information Systems 8(6):336–50.
Robinson, S. L. & Rousseau, D. M. (1994) Violating the psychological contract: not the exception but the norm. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 15(3), pp. 245–259. Rodrigo, P., & Arenas, D. (2008). Do employees care about CSR programs? A typology
of employees according to their attitudes. Journal of Business Ethics, 83(2), 265– 283.
Roussos, P. (2007). The Greek computer attitudes scale: Construction and assessment of psychometric properties. Computers in Human Behavior, 23(1), 578–590.
Schweiger, D. and Denisi, A. (1991) Communication with employees following a merger: a longitudinal field experiment. Academy of Management Journal, 34(1), pp. 110–135.
Smidts, A., van Riel, C. B. M., & Pruyn, A. T. H. (2001). The impact of employee communication and perceived external prestige on organizational identification.
Academy of Management Journal, 44, 975–988.
Smeltzer, L. R. (1991). An analysis of strategies for announcing organization-wide change. Group & Organization Studies, 16(1), pp. 5–24.
Tajfel, H. and Turner, J. C. (1985). The social identity theory of intergroup behavior. In: Worchel, S. and Austin, W. G. (Eds) Psychology of Intergroup Relations, 2nd edn, Nelson-Hall, Chicago.
Tucker, D. A., Yeow, P., & Viki, G. T. (2013). Communication during organizational change using social accounts: The importance of ideological accounts.
Management Communication Quarterly, 27, 2, 184-209.
Van Noort, G., Voorveld, H.A.M., & Van Reijmersdal, E.A. (2012). Interactivity in Brand Web Sites: Cognitive, Affective, and Behavioral Responses Explained by Consumers' Online Flow Experience. Journal of Interactive Marketing, 26(4), 223 234.
Young, A. M., & Hinesly, M. D. (2014). Social Media Use to Enhance Internal
Communication: Course Design for Business Students. Business and Professional
Appendix A: Online Questionnaire (ESN)
Do you use (name of the organization’s ESN)? Yes No
How often do you use (name of the organization’s ESN)? Rarely
Once a week 2 – 3 times a week Every day
Please indicate to what extent you agree or disagree with the following statements: I regularly use (name of the organization’s ESN) to maintain and strengthen communication with colleagues at work.
I often use (name of the organization’s ESN) to obtain work related information and knowledge.
(QUALITY)
Please indicate to what extent you agree or disagree with the following statements: Overall, the official communication I received about the potential job-related changes that may result from implementing (the ESN) has been useful.
Overall, the official communication I received about the potential job-related changes that may result from implementing (the ESN) has been timely.
Overall, the official communication I received about the potential job-related changes that may result from implementing (the ESN) has been accurate.
Overall, the official communication I received about the implementation of (the ESN) has been useful.
Overall, the official communication I received about the implementation of (the ESN) has been timely.
Overall, the official communication I received about the implementation of (the ESN) has been accurate.
Overall, the official communication I have received about the strategic direction of using (the ESN) has been timely.
Overall, the official communication I have received about the strategic direction of using (the ESN) has been useful.
Overall, the official communication I have received about the strategic direction of using (the ESN) has been accurate.
(TRUST)
Please indicate to what extent you agree or disagree with the following statements: I am not sure I fully trust my employer.
My employer is open and upfront with me. I believe my employer has high integrity.
In general, I believe my employer's motives and intentions are good. My employer is not always honest and truthful.
I can expect my employer to treat me in a consistent and predictable fashion (COLLABORATION)
Please indicate to what extent you agree or disagree with the following statements: People in my organization collaborate well with each other.
Knowledge sharing is regarded important in my organization. Sharing information is strongly encouraged in my organization. (COMMUNITY TIES)
Please indicate to what extent you agree or disagree with the following statements: People in my organization have the feeling of togetherness or closeness with each other. People in my organization have a strong feeling of being 'one team'.
People in my organization keep close ties with each other. I feel like being 'part of the family' in my organization. (OPENESS IN COMMUNICATION)
Please indicate to what extent you agree or disagree with the following statements: When my colleagues tell me something, I trust them to tell me the truth.
When my direct boss tells me something, I trust him/her to be candid and honest. My direct boss is open to suggestions I put to him/her.
If you say something here, you are taken seriously.
If the general management tells us something (about how we are doing our job), I trust them to tell us the truth.
My colleagues are open to suggestions I put to them.
Our general management is open to suggestions we put to them. In this organization I have ample opportunity to have my say.
Employees should be involved more in the decision-making in the organization. The information we receive here is often about trivial matters.
In conversations with colleagues you often hear more about our organization than you do from the management.
The objectives of the organization are probably only known by those who formulated them.
Most of what you hear through official channels (such as corporate mails, boards, etc.) has long ceased to be topical.
If I put a question to a colleague from another department or office, then I usually get an answer quickly.
(ORGANIZATIONAL IDENTIFICATION)
Please indicate to what extent you agree or disagree with the following statements: When someone criticizes the company I work for, it feels like a personal insult. I am very interested in what others think about the company I work for.
When I talk about my place of work, I usually say ‘we’rather than ‘they’. This company’s successes are my successes.
When someone praises this company, it feels like a personal compliment.
What is your gender? Male Female How old are you?
How long have you been working in this organization? Less than a year
1 to 5 years More than 5 years
What is your highest level of education? No schooling completed High school Vocational training Bachelor’s degree Master’s degree PhD Other
In which department do you work?
How would you rate your experience with social software (e.g,. social networks, blogs, wikis, etc.)?
Very inexperienced Inexperienced
Neither experienced nor inexperienced Experienced
