The Co-creation of Brand Image via Social Media, Insights in the Process and Technological Backbone
Master Thesis
MSc in Business Administration, Change Management University of Groningen, Faculty of Economics and Business
January 21, 2018
Author: Yanick Rowan Mollema Student number: 2179954
Supervisor: dr. I. Maris-de Bresser Co-assessor: dr. Q. (John) Dong
1. Abstract
1. Table of content
1. Abstract 2
2. Table of content 3
3. Introduction 4
4. Methodology 7
4.1 Systematic literature review 7
4.2 Search & Selection 8
4.3 Data Analysis 11
5. Findings 12
5.1 Customers’ use of social media 14
5.1.1 Antecedents of customer participation 14
5.1.2 Customer differences and differences across social 14 media platforms
5.1.3 Customer engagement with the brand 16
5.1.4 Effects of customer engagement with the brand 17
5.2 Organizations’ use of social media 19
5.2.1 Social media strategy 19
5.2.2 Measurement of social media 21
5.2.3 Challenges of social media 23
5.2.4 Use of social media 24
5.3 Co-creation of customers and organizations through 27
social media
5.3.1 Framework for studying customer-company 27
brand co-creation
5.3.2 Challenges of brand co-creation 30
5.3.3 New technologies and opportunities for 31
brand co-creation
5.4 Synthesis 32
6. Discussion & Conclusion 35
6.1 Discussion 35
6.2 Conclusion 37
7. References 38
3. Introduction
Recent years many changes have occurred in the environment in which organizations operate. Fast pace and overall interconnectedness pose organizations with opportunities as well as threats. One of the largest changes in the environment has come from the use of social media in the daily life of individuals. The amount of time spent on social media via devices that connect individuals around the world is astonishing. The impact this brings should not be underestimated. An example of the power of social media is Iran’s Twitter revolution. While mainstream media was barred from reporting protests, dissidents from the government used social media to communicate with the rest of the world (Valentini & Kruckenberg, 2011). Another example is the alleged influences of Russia on the United States elections through social media.
For organizations, social media preludes inevitable changes. Customers seek social media to discover brands and their products. In the same time these individuals have the possibility to voice their experiences and ideas regarding products and services. An individual can have an enormous influence on a brand and on how others perceive this brand. When the video, which Dave Caroll posted on social media about his guitar being destroyed by United Airlines baggage handlers, went viral, it led to a drop in the share price of United Airlines. On the other hand however, social media provides organizations with chances. Customer feedback, market intelligence and brand communities are a few of the possibilities social media offers to organizations. The above-mentioned factors make social media into an undeniable contingency for organizations.
The rise of social media has major impact on the creation of brand image. The days in which the creation of a brand and its image was a top-down process are way past due. In the world of today the construction of brands can thus be interpreted as a collective, co-creational process involving several brand authors who all contribute their stories: firms, popular cultural intermediaries, customers, as well as influencers (Holt, 2003).
their brand. This evolution is recognized as a paradigm shift that makes it necessary for organizations to reconsider their old ways of brand creation. Gensler et al. (2013) recognize this paradigm shift with their literature review ‘Managing Brands in the Social Media Environment’. The literature review presents a conceptual framework of social media’s impact on brand management therefore linking the unique characteristics of social media to the core of brand management. The framework shows the process whereby customers and brands over time add their own individual pieces to the puzzle and therefore co-create brand stories via social media. In this process, not the firm but customers are pivotal authors of brand stories in the branding process.
There are some parts of this new paradigm that remain underdeveloped in the Gensler et al. (2013) article. The process of how customers and organizations use social media specifically to create brand image is not discussed. Together with this, the technological backing of the article, by that we mean the features of social media used by customers as well as organizations, is not discussed either. The article of Gensler et al. (2013) is a framework of co-creation, but it fails to identify the tools and their use by which this co-creation process on social media is undertaken. A thorough review of the literature field of both co-creation and social media is used to search for the answers that remain after the framework of Gensler et al. (2013).
This thesis aims to build on the literature review of Gensler et al. (2013) by specifically looking in more detail on two aspects mentioned, but not illustrated in their review. Firstly, the research will focus on the technological backbone of social media use. Investigating the features of social media that are being used by both customers and organizations to influence and co-create the image of a brand. Secondly, the research will focus on the actual process of creation through social media, in other words, how do customers and organizations co-create and build a brand-image.
Whereas the literature review presents a paradigm and overarching idea, it misses the hands-on process of brand co-creatihands-on. This is the particular gap this thesis aimsto fill.
Furthermore this research contributes to the existing literature by expanding the new paradigm of brand co-creation through social media. The interaction brands and customers have via social media and the features of social media use are reviewed. Furthermore the technological backing of the framework of Gensler et al. (2013) is developed. Since this thesis not only reviews the interactions between brands and customers through social media, but additionally targets the new paradigm of brand co-creation through social media, it enhances relevance for academics investigating the field of social media.
This thesis is relevant for academics investigating the fields of social media, since it provides an overview of the literature written regarding the usage of social media by both organizations and consumers as well as the interaction between the two.
Next to this, the research has relevance for managers and marketing professionals. The thesis explains the process by which brands are created in a world that is dominated by social media. It shows the process by which customers can influence the co-creation process of brand image and thereby guiding managers in their choices regarding social media use and brand creation. Social media is a new development, but its importance is undeniable.
Research is done regarding social media and brand management, but it is still a new and undeveloped field. Organizations and scholars need to gain understanding of the working of social media and how it can be used and managed, not only today, but also in the future. This systematic literature review therefore combines the fields of brand creation and social media use to investigate and gain insights in social media use to create brand image.
4. Methodology
4.1 Systematic Literature Review
To find answers for the gaps indicated in the introduction, a systematic literature review was conducted. A systematic literature review, as Fink (2005) describes, is “a systematic, explicit, and reproducible method for identifying, evaluating, and synthesizing the existing body of completed and recorded work produced by researchers, scholars, and practitioners” (p. 3). The core principles of a systematic literature review are rigour, transparency and replicability (Mallet et al., 2012). The aim of a systematic literature review is to come to a complete and exhaustive summary of the literature field in order to come to new synthesis. The systematic review protocol helps researchers to stay on track by guiding them through the process. Next to this the protocol aids in replicability (Gough & Elbourne, 2002).
The advantage of a systematic literature review over other types of literature reviews is that traditional literature reviews are often too dependent on literature already known by the researcher. This leads to the frequent citing of the same researches leading to a persistent bias. The systematic literature review helps to reduce researcher bias.
To come to answers this research is sectored into three pillars. These three pillars are intertwined with both aims mentioned in the introduction. The first aim being the focus on the technological backbone of social media and with that the investigation of the features of social media that are being used by both customers and organizations to influence and create the image of a brand. The second aim being the focus on the actual process of co-creation through social media, in other words, how do customers and organizations co-create and build a brand-image. To structure the systematically analysis of the data to fulfil the two aims mentioned above, three pillars are devised.
to create the path this thesis follows. Next to this it provided a clear distinction from the literature review of Gensler et al. (2013). The following parts of this methodology section will consist of the search and selection process, as well as the analysis process.
4.2 Search and selection
Two databases were primarily used for the search of relevant articles, namely Web of Science and SmartCat. A combination of both was chosen in order to minimize the chance of missing parts of the literature field due to the possibility of a database not possessing certain articles and therefore missing a part of the literature field.
An algorithmic search with keywords related to social media and brand management created the initial sample. These keywords were selected after a primary research of keywords, used by important articles in the field. Then, during the process of finding more articles related to social media use and brand management, other relevant keywords were found in these articles and were added to the point that there was no change in sample size. This led to the final algorithm. The academic field of business was added to the algorithm meaning that only articles published in this field were selected. The algorithm used is shown below.
Algorithm ('social media' OR ‘social media use’ OR ‘social media features’ OR ‘social networking sites’ OR ‘Facebook’ OR
’Twitter’ OR ‘Instagram’ OR ‘YouTube’) AND ('brand management' OR ‘brand creation’ OR ‘brand image’ OR ‘Branding’ OR ‘brand co-creation’ OR ‘firms’ OR ‘organizations’ OR ‘companies’) so: Business
This resulted in an initial sample of 415 articles, which was further reduced by the use of inclusion and exclusion criteria presented in Table 1 below.
Inclusion criteria Exclusion criteria Published after 2006 Published before 2006
Published in English Published in a language other than English At least 5 times cited Cited less than 5 times
Peer reviewed article
Published in an academic business journal The article relates to the interaction between firm or customer with social media
Open access article
Published in the fields of business
The publication year of 2006 or later was used as an exclusion criteria since the mother article of Gensler et al. (2013) uses the same threshold. The reason for using the same threshold as the article of Gensler et al. (2013) is because social media sites that play a key role in the lives of many people of today were founded in this period. Facebook was founded in 2004, but gained traction at the end of 2006, YouTube was founded in 2005, and Twitter in 2006. Instagram, which is owned by Facebook, was founded in 2010. The types of social media that existed before the period of 2006 are not representative for today’s world. Therefore I believe that the use of the same publication year as the article of Gensler et al (2013) is rational. Articles that are not published in English and which are not open access were excluded as well. Articles that are cited less than 5 times were also excluded in order to maintain quality of the sample by using only articles that deem to have knowledge that is valid for use in other articles.
The process of inclusion and exclusion, which is presented in a descriptive way below in ‘Figure 1 - Prisma diagram of exclusion process’, led to an initial sample of 253 (SmartCat) + 163 (Web of Science) articles. These remaining 415 articles were screened and carefully selected based on title, abstract and conclusion. This led to the exclusion of 362 articles. During this exclusion process of 163 articles, which remained after the Web of Science search, 18 were deleted because they were not written in English. Another 85 were deleted because they were cited less than 5 times. This led to a remainder of 60 articles from the initial sample of 163 Web of Science articles. These were screened based on title, abstract, introduction and conclusion. After the exclusion of articles that were not written in English and that were unable to be downloaded, the SmartCat sample of 253 articles was screened based on title and abstract, and when needed introduction and conclusion. The remainder of this sample, together with the articles that remained out of the initial 6o of Web of Science led to a sample of 54 articles that were relevant for the literature review and deemed eligible. All these 54 articles were fully read. After reading these, 22 were excluded based on the analysis of the content of the full text. Reasons for this varied from lack of relevance due to a focus on a niche market, lack of literary relevance, one-sided focus, and on occasion absence of quality of content. This selection led to a sample of 32 articles.
other articles. Therefore chain referral sampling is also known as snowball sampling, since the process of adding articles is similar to a snowball rolling of a mountain while growing. The articles which were used for chain referral sampling are the articles Genslet et al. (2013) and that of Tajvidi et al. (2018). This presents us with a total sample of 42 articles.
4.3 Data Analysis
The sample of 42 articles was analysed both quantitatively as well as a qualitatively. The quantitative analysis focused on the methodology of the articles. Looking at the research design, the type of analysis (quantitative/qualitative), if the article is empirical or theoretical, and the main focus. The descriptive statistics were used to gain insight in the sample, which is the clear and easy to gasp way of presenting the information gathered from the articles in a descriptive manner.
In order to systematically analyse the sample, all the articles were assigned to one or more of the three pillars that form the base of this research (the three pillars being customers’ use of social media, organizations use of social media, and the co-creational process of brand image). This primary selection of the articles in the three areas helps with the qualitatively analysing of the articles in a constructive way. After the process of quantitative analysis of the articles this research continued with qualitative analysis.
The qualitative research process of coding and categorization in this research is an inductive process because the main aim of this research is not to test hypothesis, but to come to new insights in a new literature field. The focus of the (qualitative) analytic component of the results was on the similarities, as well as the differences of the results between the different articles and how they relate to one another. The aim was to synthesize. Next to this the focus was on the underlying assumptions and the research models of the articles. The qualitative analysis formed the main guidance throughout the results and these were backed by descriptives.
5. Findings
In this section of the research the findings retrieved from the articles compiled through the search and selection process, will be presented and analysed. The search is for similarities and discrepancies between the articles resulting in a synthesis of the relevant literature. The findings section will be structured along the three pillars discussed previously, customer and social media, organizations and social media and co-creation through social media.
The sample consists of a total of 42 articles. Table 2 (next page) shows how many articles were published per year. The year with the highest amount of published articles is 2015 (10), followed by the year 2018 (8). The ratio between quantitative, qualitative articles, and articles that use a combination of both qualitative and quantitative research is depicted in figure 2. Figure 3 shows the ratio between theoretical and empirical articles in the sample. The ratio is 33% of articles are theoretical whereas 67% of the articles are empirical.
Table 2 – Articles published per year
Table 3 below is a descriptive representation of the references per theme and per pillar. This is used to subdivide the articles into the different themes of the literary landscape.
Pillar Theme References
Customers Antecedents
Mahrous & Abdelmaaboud (2017), Hollebeek et al. (2014), Loureiro et al. (2017)
Differences
Harris & Rae (2010), Hudson et al. (2016), Gao & Feng (2016), Smith et al. (2012)
Engagement
Hudson et al. (2015), Dessart et al. (2015), Hollebeek et al. (2014), Geurin et al. (2017)
Effects
Mahrous & Abdelmaaboud (2017), Dessart et al. (2015), Hollebeek et al. (2014), Kang et al. (2014), Rishika et al. (2013), Laroche et al. (2013), Davis et al. (2014), Dijkmans et al. (2015)
Organizations Strategy
Kang et al. (2014), Durkin et al. (2013), Schultz (2016), Taiminen & Karjuluoto (2015), Harris & Rae (2010), Harrigan et al. (2017), Felix et al. (2017), Hewett et al. (2016), Ashley & Tuten, (2015), Henning-Thurau et al. (2010)
Measurement
McCann & Barlow (2015), Schultz (2016), Kloostermann et al. (2018), Nguyen et al. (2015)
Challenges
Jones et al. (2015), Morris & James, (2017), Durklin (2013), Taiminen & Karjaluto (2015)
Use
McCann & Barlow (2015), Andersson & Wikström (2017), Harris & Rae (2010), Harrigan et al. (2017), Ashley & Tuten (2015), de Vriet et al. (2012), Mangold & Faulds (2009) Co-Creation Frameworks
Rosenthal & Brito (2017), Gensler et al. (2013), Tajvidi et al. (2018), Wei et al. (2015), Tzu-Yi et al. (2016)
Challenges
Hanna et al. (2011), Nguyen et al. (2015), Jones et al. (2015), Harris & Rae (2010)
New technologies &
opportunities Harris & Rae (2010), Labrecque (2014), Arvidsson et al. (2015) Table 3 – References per pillar and theme
Year Articles published
5.1 Customers’ use of social media
The second pillar of the findings focuses on the customer and its interaction with social media. Starting with the antecedents of online customer participation, continuing with differences across customers and their social media interactions and use. These subsections will be followed by the differences that come with the different platforms of social media. Finally customer brand engagement and its effects will be analysed.
5.1.1 Antecedents of customer participation
Research regarding the antecedents of customer participation and engagement through social media indicate that, as Mahrous & Abdelmaaboud (2017) state, extrinsic motivation, usability of the technology, sociability and emotional trust are drivers for online participation. Their research developed an integrated framework of these operational and social antecedents (Mahrous & Abdelmaaboud, 2017). Harrigan et al. (2017) argue that the search for a strong emotional, psychical or psychological investment leads to a consumer interacting with the brand through social media. These effects are amplified when interactions are repeated over time between a customer and organization. As Loureiro et al. (2017) state, involvement and online brand experience are significant and effective drivers of online brand engagement. Online brand experience is, in the respective article of Loureiro et al. (2017), divided into affective, behavioural and intellectual dimension. The affective dimension is the most influential. Consumers that feel positive emotions and see a reflection of their self-image in the brand are more likely to engage with the brand. Brand love is a more effective driver for e-WOM than satisfaction. Satisfaction does not significantly influence positive e-WOM. The statement that involvement is an antecedent of online brand engagement is backed by the article written by Hollebeek et al. (2014), who designed a consumer brand engagement scale for social media settings.
5.1.2 Customer differences and differences across social media platforms
interaction on brand relationship quality as well as on other marketing outcomes are more pronounced. Uncertainty avoidance is one of the five dimensions by which Hofstede (2011) categorizes cultures. Cultures that have high scores in the dimension of uncertainty avoidance are more scientific in the way that they are stricter, rule based, comply with the law and believe in one lone truth that dictates.
Next to cultural differences there are differences in character that play a role in the behaviour of customers in their activities on social media. As presented in the article of Harris & Rae (2010), a ‘critic’ will be more likely to respond to a brand post, or will be tempted sooner to write a review, than a ‘spectator’ who presumably prefers to read reviews or brand posts without commenting or liking. Further argumentation of Harris & Rae (2010) discussed if different segments of customer base will all be receptive to a different approach. There also exist a difference between the usage patterns of individuals. Gao & Feng (2016) distinguish five different usage patterns being small community members, content producers, content consumers, producers, and consumers.
Continuing with this view, Gao & Feng (2016) state that different forms of social media are used for different targets. That means that customers visit different types of social media with different motives. Individuals engage on social media for information seeking, entertainment, social interaction, self-expression, or impression management (Gao & Feng, 2016). Impression management is positively related to the intention to participate in brand-related social media use. Self-expression is positively related for the food sector, but not for the electronics sector.
self-promotion. Facebook, which is a social networking site where individuals have their own profile and can engage with customers and brands by liking, commenting on posts( through pictures, texts, MEMEs, etc.) and sharing posts of others lies in between YouTube and Twitter. In addition to this Gao & Feng (2016) explain that individuals use blogs for the seeking of information while social network sites are more used for communication purposes. 5.1.3 Customer engagement with the brand
In this sub chapter of the pillar focused on the consumer and its use of social media the focus is on the consumers’ engagement with the brand through social media. Hollebeek et al. (2014) have researched this subject and developed and validated a consumer brand engagement scale for social media settings. According to their research, consumer brand engagement consists of cognitive processing, affection and activation. Below in Figure 4 the descriptive representation of the model is presented showing the dimensions of customer brand engagement, its antecedents and its consequences.
Figure 4 – Dimensions of customer brand engagement. Source: Hollebeek, L. D., Glynn, M. S., & Brodie, R. J.
(2014). Consumer brand engagement in social media: Conceptualization, scale development and validation.
Journal of interactive marketing, 28(2), 149-165.
members. The framework is depicted below in figure 5. Although the framework is more elaborate than the one discussed in the article by Hollebeek et al. (2014), it has the drawback that it is a theoretical framework based on qualitative data while the framework of Hollebeek et al. (2014) is empirically tested. The framework shows three dimensions of online brand community engagement: affective, cognitive and behavioural factors. The outcome of online brand community engagement is brand loyalty. While the drivers are divided into brand related drivers, social drivers and community values. The article mentions that the cross customer communication is mostly based on similarities in hobby’s or affection. When individuals interact on the KLM brand community, it is assumable for the individuals that the others like to travel too. For H&M community members will likely be into fashion.
Figure 5 – Online brand community engagement framework. Source: Dessart, L., Veloutsou, C., &
Morgan-Thomas, A. (2015). Consumer engagement in online brand communities: a social media perspective. Journal of
Product & Brand Management, 24(1), 28-42.
5.1.4 Effects of customer engagement with the brand
What are the effects of customer engagement with the brand via social media? This sector focuses on these effects. The two figures above show the effects of customer engagement as self-brand connection, brand user intent (Hollebeek et al., 2014), and brand loyalty (Dessart et al., 2015). Rishika et al. (2013) state that customers' participation in a firm's social media efforts leads to an increase in the frequency of customer visits. The participation in social online communities has a positive significant influence on purchase decisions. No less than 71% of consumers surveyed changed their brand preference based on reviews they read on an online brand community, 51% of Facebook users are more likely to buy the products of brands they follow online (Abeer et al., 2017).
participation of customers. Contradictory to this, Dijkmans et al. (2015) state that for customers, a social media platform is, next to a channel for customer service and direct feedback, a place to look for product or company upgrades.
5.2 Organizations’ use of social media
The main focus of twelve articles from the sample is on the adoption and use of social media by organizations. Of course there exists overlap in articles between the pillars, however this research categorizes the articles primarily to the three pillars and discusses overlap in the respective pillars. This pillar of organizations’ use of social media is divided into subcategories based on codes which came forward after the search for synergies. As a starting point of this pillar the focus is on the strategy firms use and adopt for the implementation of social media. After this, findings regarding strategy, measurement, challenges, and usage, are presented.
5.2.1 Social media strategy
The driver of many organizational activities is strategy. The route of an organization is designed through strategy. Therefore we argue that the driver for the use of social media in organizations is strategy. Felix et al. (2017) designed a framework to align the social media marketing approach with the organizations’ mission and objectives at the strategic level. Thereby taking into account the social media marketing scope, culture, structure and governance. It differentiates between an internal, conservative and external, innovative approach.
Figure 6 – RBV joint venture whereby customer acts as co-producer. Source: Durkin, M., McGowan, P., &
McKeown, N. (2013). Exploring social media adoption in small to medium-sized enterprises in Ireland. Journal
of Small Business and Enterprise Development, 20(4), 716-734. doi:10.1108/JSBED-08-2012-0094
between user-generated social media and corporate communication. Essential for this is that managers need to rethink their brand communication strategies.
Taiminen & Karjaluoto (2015) state that many firms do not use social media to its full potential and therefore do not derive its full benefit. The reason for this lies, according to the authors, in the fact that organizations do not understand the fundamental change in the nature of communication via social media. The lack of understanding of this fundamental change comes forward in this same article by Taiminen & Karjaluoto (2015) who discover that organizations’ goals are too vague for their social media use. Organizations primarily use social media to post company news and fail to develop a dialogue with the customer. This is backed by the research of Ashley & Tuten (2015) whose content analysis found that most branded social content could be categorized as functional. Reasons for this lack of understanding can be that social media and its features such as blogs, Facebook, and Twitter are not in the core line of business and therefore there exists difficulty in creating presence and using these websites. Next to this, the costs of social media for organizations are difficult to justify since the returns are hard to measure (Taiminen & Karjaluoto, 2015).
Multiple authors bring forward the features of strategy that they deem needed for the successful implementation of a social media strategy. The stand is made by Schulz (2016), he states that an essential part of any social media strategy should be reacting to negative social interaction. This is not only of importance for customers but also improves the view non-customers have of the organization (Dijkmans et al., 2015). This is backed by the research of Harrigan et al. (2017) who state that brands that provide honest and transparent responses to customer reviews can experience positive interactions with their customers. If there is no strategy regarding the reaction to negative social interaction the risk exists of spontaneous, not thought through responses which can harm the organization (Morris & James, 2017).
5.2.2 Measurement of social media
from social media might be equally beneficial, although it must be noted that (parts) of these non-financial gains eventually turn into financial gains. These non-financial gains are enclosed in qualitative data such as conversations and interactions with the customer. The true value of these social media interaction lies in the nuances, tone and perception of customers. The fact that social media is everywhere and at any time make its measurement even harder. To overcome these difficulties key performance indicators need to move from traditional conventional measures to a combination of qualitative and quantitative measures.
Quantitative measures that can be used are:
- Number of contacts, followers and enquiries that have come through social media - Number of visitors through, e.g. Facebook diagnostics, number of hits on YouTube
channel;
- Number of likes/comments on Facebook, number of clicks, follows and responses - Retweets
- Number of bookings and referrals received via social media - Sources of traffic to web site.
Qualitative measures that can be used are: - “Informally, by observation”
- What comments are saying and what it means for business - Views of promotions
- Brand awareness
Next to these qualitative and quantitative measures there are also features of the social media websites themselves that aid organizations in the measurement of their social media effectiveness. Examples are in-house analytical tools such as Facebook analytics, Twitter analyser, YouTube analytics and Google analytics. These analytical features are of great value for organizations to measure the success of their social media strategy. One of the aims of firms should be on acquiring knowledge from social media in order to become more competitive. The knowledge from social media tells what plays in the mind of consumers (Nguyen et al., 2015). The knowledge acquired from social media has a significant positive effect on brand innovation.
Social media is not only text based. A considerable amount of social media interaction is image based. This feature of social media is used by both customers and organizations to express, inform and share information or thoughts. The article of Klostermann et al. (2018) investigates brand-related images by researching brand images posted, the caption text, tags, and the reactions to the image to come to cues about feelings or thoughts. In sum the analysis of images help to achieve a differentiated insight into how consumers experience, perceive and interact with the brand.
5.2.3 Challenges of social media
actively. Ashley & Tuten (2015) present four challenges of social media use for customers. Namely, the challenge to use social media effectively, the challenge to create or develop marketeers with creative vision, the challenge to involve customers in telling their stories, and the challenge to reinvent the mass media model.
5.2.4 Use of social media
The study of Ashley & Tuten (2015) confirms the importance of frequent updates on social media and that these updates possess an incentive for participation. This can be done by a branded social media campaign that provides touch points to encourage on-going interaction between consumers and the brand story throughout the day. This interaction is on the foreground while the brand content that prompts conversation remains in the background. Firms use different forms of social media for different stakeholders (Andersson & Wikström, 2017), which is in agreement with the findings of Ashley & Tuten (2015) that state that brands go where the consumers are. Organizations need to select the type of social media they use to gain optimal access to target customers. Harris & Rae (2010) pose the question if the different segments of the customer base all will be receptive to certain approach. There is a nuance here, which is that brands tend to prefer social media channels which are functional and easy to use, over more experiential channels which poses the danger of losing customers. This functionality of the social media channel is not related to performance (Ashley & Tuten, 2015).
The article of McCann & Barlow (2015) asked respondents to identify the type of social media used: Twitter 81%, Facebook 74%, LinkedIn 70%, YouTube 29%, and Blogs 37%. If these figures are compared with the usefulness of the social media as seen for the company we see that (in percentage of the sample that found the form of social media useful): Twitter 82%, LinkedIn 76%, Blogs 75%, YouTube 67%, and Facebook 64%. It is in line of the research to see that Twitter is seen as most useful. What is surprising is that Facebook is seen as least useful, while 74% of companies are active on the platform.
findings.
Table 4 - Ashley & Tuten 1 Table 5 – Ashley & Tuten 2
Source: Ashley, C., & Tuten, T. (2015). Creative strategies in social media marketing: An exploratory study of branded social content and consumer engagement. Psychology & Marketing, 32(1), 15-27.
What we see in the strategy table (4) is that most brand use a strategy that can primarily be seen as functional. This indicates a strategy to promote the utility/functionality of the product or service. Resonance is the use of both image and text to convey a ‘hidden treasure’ of information. Experiential appeal is focused at the experience of the product or service through sound, taste, touch or smell. With a switch of focus to table 5 it shows that 27 out of 28 brands use the features of microblogs, social networks, and microsites. Next to these, discussion forums, social bookmarking, and photo sharing are the main features of social media which are being used by the brands in the sample.
5.3 Co-creation
The third pillar that will be discussed in this findings chapter is the pillar focused on co-creation of brands between customers and organizations. The section will start with a focus on the different frameworks that are being used for studying this co-creation. Secondly the focus will be on the challenges of creation. Lastly, new developments and opportunities for co-creation are discussed.
5.3.1 Frameworks for studying customer-company brand co-creation
Figure 7 – Social media’s impact on brand management. Source: Gensler, S., Völckner, F., Liu-Thompkins, Y.,
& Wiertz, C. (2013). Managing brands in the social media environment. Journal of interactive marketing, 27(4), 242-256.
in other words the pieces of the puzzle, whereas the latter is more focused on the story, the actual puzzle.
Figure 8 – Brand meaning. Source: Rosenthal, B., & Brito, E. P. Z. (2017). The brand meaning co-creation
process on Facebook. Marketing Intelligence & Planning, 35(7), 923-936.
and integration with the brand content displayed. It argues that it is important to make the brand flexible so it can align with multiple meanings.
Kao et al. (2016) have created a process model of co-creation consisting of five steps, being interact, engage, propose, act, and lastly, realize. Per step the model presents objectives, the process and the means to realize these. Below the process framework is shown in figure 9.
Figure 9 – Process framework. Source: Kao, T. Y., Yang, M. H., Wu, J. T. B., & Cheng, Y. Y. (2016).
Co-creating value with consumers through social media. Journal of Services Marketing, 30(2), 141-151.
5.3.2 Challenges of brand co-creation
co-creation of marketing content, as stated by Hanna et al. (2011), is for companies that, although they recognize the need for social media, they do not understand how to do this effectively, what performance indicators to use and how to measure it. Social media needs to be part of an integrated system instead of being a stand-alone feature. It is not sufficient anymore to ‘just be present’. The challenge for organizations is to have the human resources as well as the monetary resources to be able to present on social media, and use it to come to brand co-creation (Jones et al., 2015). It needs to be taken into account that there is not one silver bullet in co-creation via social media. It is dependent on many factors and variables, which is why there is not one best way. Organizations need to consider traditional and social media as part of an ecosystem where all elements work together towards a common objective (Hanna et al., 2011). Further challenges related to the use of social media by organizations are discussed above and therefore will not be repeated here. The challenge of brand co-creation for firms is the lack of control over the ‘pieces of the puzzle’ the customer contributes, as discussed in the research by Nguyen et al. (2015). This challenge can be reduced by the acquisition of knowledge, which will also aid the organizations competitive advantage. The other challenge of brand co-creation is that ‘the customer’ is not one entity. It is composed of individuals with their own frame of reference, identity, language, and demographics, which not all will be receptive to one certain approach (Harris & Rae, 2010).
5.3.3 New technologies and opportunities for brand co-creation
5.4 Synthesis
Through the interpretation of the findings multiple connections can be made, not only within certain pillars but especially between pillars. The arguments which are made in the different articles led to the formation of the conceptual model depicted below (figure 10). On the basis of this model the literature will be discussed.
Figure 10 – Conceptual model
Starting at the customer side, the antecedents for customer use of social media are operational and social (Mahrous & Abdelmaaboud, 2017) (Harrigan et al., 2017). Customers care, if they did not care they would not participate (Loureiro et al., 2017). The literature field of brand co-creation sees the customer as one entity instead of a group of individuals (Rosenthal & Brito, 2017). Customers, in most of the cases, are not on social media to co-create. A like, comment, or share is a quick thing to do. The threshold to co-create on the web is lower than it is in real life (Davis et al., (2014). This makes it easier, almost natural, to co-create. What is another underdeveloped part of the literary field of brand co-creation is the difference in customers. The difference in character of customers and the difference in activity and activities on social media has a big influence on the co-creation process of a brand. The ‘critic’ on the one hand, who maybe even is a non-customer, is very active on social media through writing reviews plus commenting, and claims substantially more attention than the ‘spectator’, who on the other hand, despite of its absence of visible activity, might be a very valued customer (Harris & Rae, 2010). The differences in customers is shown through the different colours of the different customers in the model. It is important for organizations to keep track of where the customer is active on social media (Ashley & Tuten, 2015). The linkage between customer (and its antecedents) and social media use are the features of the different social media forms. The driver for brand engagement for customers is the fulfilment of psychological and social needs (Harrigan et al. 2017).
6. Discussion and Conclusion 6.1 Discussion
The aim of this literature review was to focus on the actual process of co-creation through social media by customers and organizations and the features of social media which are used by both consumers and organizations to come to co-creation.
A lot of research has been done regarding the antecedent of, engagement with, and effects of customers’ online brand engagement via social media. The literature regarding the actual features customers use to come to this brand engagement is scarce. The literature regarding organizations use of social media is more extensive although still scattered. Gaps are present regarding social media strategy, how to correctly measure the use of social media. Next to this, literature regarding the actual features of social media used is rare. The number of articles related to the actual process of co-creation through social media is low. This means that the literature field is underdeveloped and gaps exist. The majority of the articles are published in 2015. The reason will lie in the fact that literature is always written in retrospect and social media took flight in this period. The overall sample consists of mainly empirical and quantitative articles. This suggests an imbalance in the literature field and a lack of theoretical development. This is logical since social media is a recent development and the field is still underdeveloped.
The model presented in this literature review builds upon these existing frameworks and fills the gap that remained regarding the use of features of social media and the process of co-creation via social media. With this, it is an extension to the model designed by Gensler et al. (2013). The model of Gensler et al. (2013) initiated a paradigm shift. It presented a new way of thinking regarding brand creation but where the model presented co-creation as the construction of a puzzle, the model presented in this thesis shows the actual process of co-creation and presents the use of features in a timeless manner. The model presented in this thesis shows in detail the process on both the consumer as well as the organisation side of incorporating antecedents, features, social media use, brand engagement, co-creation and effects of social media on the customer side and strategy, measurements, feedback, use and features and consumer-company engagement on the organization side.
This thesis contributes to the literature by connecting the fields of social media use and brand co-creation via social media. Furthermore this thesis is an addition to a new development in a scarce literature field. It presents a model showing the process of co-creation via social media by customers and organizations and the features that are used in this process. Further research is needed regarding the actual features which are being used by both consumers and organizations since these are the tools by which brand co-creation is build. This research presents features which were not yet linked to the process of co-creation but more research regarding this is advised.
The managerial relevance of this paper is the development of the model of brand co-creation via social media and the use features to come to this co-creation. What social media tools can managers use? It presents managers with insights regarding social media strategy and how to measure the success of this said strategy. Furthermore it provides managers with insights in the process of the customer side of co-creation. What drives customers to co-create and how to influence this?
that, even though this research is conducted systematically, different interpretations were possible.
6.2 Conclusion
7. References
Andersson, S., & Wikström, N. (2017). Why and how are social media used in a b2b context, and which stakeholders are involved? Journal of Business & Industrial Marketing, 32(8), 1098-1108.
Arvidsson, A., & Caliandro, A. (2015). Brand public. Journal of Consumer Research, 42(5), 727-748.
Ashley, C., & Tuten, T. (2015). Creative strategies in social media marketing: An exploratory study of branded social content and consumer engagement. Psychology & Marketing, 32(1), 15-27.
Baek, E. K. (2010). The Pleasures and Perils of Social Media: A Case Study. Design Management Review, 21(1), 24-29.
Davis, R., Piven, I., & Breazeale, M. (2014). Conceptualizing the brand in social media community: The five sources model. Journal of retailing and consumer services, 21(4), 468-481.
De Vries, L., Gensler, S., & Leeflang, P. S. (2012). Popularity of brand posts on brand fan pages: An investigation of the effects of social media marketing. Journal of interactive marketing, 26(2), 83-91.
Dessart, L., Veloutsou, C., & Morgan-Thomas, A. (2015). Consumer engagement in online brand communities: a social media perspective. Journal of Product & Brand Management, 24(1), 28-42.
Dijkmans, C., Kerkhof, P., & Beukeboom, C. J. (2015). A stage to engage: Social media use and corporate reputation. Tourism Management, 47, 58-67.
Felix, R., Rauschnabel, P. A., & Hinsch, C. (2017). Elements of strategic social media marketing: A holistic framework. Journal of Business Research, 70, 118-126.
Fink, A. (2005). Conducting research literature reviews: From the internet to paper. Sage. Gao, Q., & Feng, C. (2016). Branding with social media: User gratifications, usage patterns, and brand message content strategies. Computers in Human Behavior, 63, 868-890.
Gensler, S., Völckner, F., Liu-Thompkins, Y., & Wiertz, C. (2013). Managing brands in the social media environment. Journal of interactive marketing, 27(4), 242-256.
Geurin, A. N., & Burch, L. M. (2017). User-generated branding via social media: An examination of six running brands. Sport Management Review, 20(3), 273-284.
Goh, K. Y., Heng, C. S., & Lin, Z. (2013). Social media brand community and consumer behavior: Quantifying the relative impact of user-and marketer-generated content. Information Systems Research, 24(1), 88-107.
Gough, D., & Elbourne, D. (2002). Systematic research synthesis to inform policy, practice and democratic debate. Social policy and society, 1(3), 225-236.
Hanna, R., Rohm, A., & Crittenden, V. L. (2011). We’re all connected: The power of the social media ecosystem. Business horizons, 54(3), 265-273.
Harrigan, P., Evers, U., Miles, M., & Daly, T. (2017). Customer engagement with tourism social media brands. Tourism Management, 59, 597-609.
Harris, L., & Rae, A. (2010). The online connection: Transforming marketing strategy for small businesses. Journal of Business Strategy, 31(2), 4-12.
Hewett, K., Rand, W., Rust, R. T., & van Heerde, H. J. (2016). Brand buzz in the echoverse. Journal of Marketing, 80(3), 1-24.
Hofstede, G. (2011). Dimensionalizing cultures: The Hofstede model in context. Online readings in psychology and culture, 2(1), 8.
Hollebeek, L. D., Glynn, M. S., & Brodie, R. J. (2014). Consumer brand engagement in social media: Conceptualization, scale development and validation. Journal of interactive marketing, 28(2), 149-165.
Holt, D. B. (2003). How to build an iconic brand. Market Leader, 21, 35-42.
Hudson, S., Huang, L., Roth, M. S., & Madden, T. J. (2016). The influence of social media interactions on consumer–brand relationships: A three-country study of brand perceptions and marketing behaviors. International Journal of Research in Marketing, 33(1), 27-41.
Hudson, S., Roth, M. S., Madden, T. J., & Hudson, R. (2015). The effects of social media on emotions, brand relationship quality, and word of mouth: An empirical study of music festival attendees. Tourism Management, 47, 68-76.
Jones, N., Borgman, R., & Ulusoy, E. (2015). Impact of social media on small businesses. Journal of Small Business and Enterprise Development, 22(4), 611-632.
Kang, J., Tang, L., & Fiore, A. M. (2014). Enhancing consumer–brand relationships on restaurant Facebook fan pages: Maximizing consumer benefits and increasing active participation. International Journal of Hospitality Management, 36, 145-155.
Kao, T. Y., Yang, M. H., Wu, J. T. B., & Cheng, Y. Y. (2016). Co-creating value with consumers through social media. Journal of Services Marketing, 30(2), 141-151.
Klostermann, J., Plumeyer, A., Böger, D., & Decker, R. (2018). Extracting brand information from social networks: Integrating image, text, and social tagging data. International Journal of Research in Marketing, 35(4), 538-556.
Kozinets, R. V., De Valck, K., Wojnicki, A. C., & Wilner, S. J. (2010). Networked narratives: Understanding word-of-mouth marketing in online communities. Journal of marketing, 74(2), 71-89.
Labrecque, L. I. (2014). Fostering consumer–brand relationships in social media environments: The role of parasocial interaction. Journal of Interactive Marketing, 28(2), 134-148.
Laroche, M., Habibi, M. R., & Richard, M. O. (2013). To be or not to be in social media: How brand loyalty is affected by social media. International Journal of Information Management, 33(1), 76-82.
Loureiro, S. M. C., Gorgus, T., & Kaufmann, H. R. (2017). Antecedents and outcomes of online brand engagement: The role of brand love on enhancing electronic-word-of-mouth. Online Information Review, 41(7), 985-1005.
Mahrous, A., & Abdelmaaboud, A. (2017). Antecedents of participation in online brand communities and their purchasing behavior consequences. Service Business: An International Journal, 11(2), 229-251.
Mallett, R., Hagen-Zanker, J., Slater, R., & Duvendack, M. (2012). The benefits and challenges of using systematic reviews in international development research. Journal of development effectiveness, 4(3), 445-455.
Mangold, W. G., & Faulds, D. J. (2009). Social media: The new hybrid element of the promotion mix. Business horizons, 52(4), 357-365.
Merz, M. A., Zarantonello, L., & Grappi, S. (2018). How valuable are your customers in the brand value co-creation process? The development of a Customer Co-Creation Value (CCCV) scale. Journal of Business Research, 82, 79-89.
Morris, W., & James, P. (2017). Social media, an entrepreneurial opportunity for agriculture-based enterprises. Journal of Small Business and Enterprise Development, 24(4), 1028-1045. Nguyen, B., Yu, X., Melewar, T. C., & Chen, J. (2015). Brand innovation and social media: Knowledge acquisition from social media, market orientation, and the moderating role of social media strategic capability. Industrial Marketing Management, 51, 11-25.
Rishika, R., Kumar, A., Janakiraman, R., & Bezawada, R. (2013). The effect of customers' social media participation on customer visit frequency and profitability: an empirical investigation. Information systems research, 24(1), 108-127.
Rosenthal, B., & Brito, E. P. Z. (2017). The brand meaning co-creation process on Facebook. Marketing Intelligence & Planning, 35(7), 923-936.
Schultz, C. (2016). Insights from consumer interactions on a social networking site: Findings from six apparel retail brands. Electronic Markets: The International Journal on Networked Business, 26(3), 203-217. doi:10.1007/s12525-015-0209-7
Shao, W., Jones, R. G., & Grace, D. (2015). Brandscapes: contrasting corporate-generated versus consumer-generated media in the creation of brand meaning. Marketing Intelligence & Planning, 33(3), 414-443.
Smith, A. N., Fischer, E., & Yongjian, C. (2012). How does brand-related user-generated content differ across YouTube, Facebook, and Twitter?. Journal of interactive marketing, 26(2), 102-113.
Tajvidi, M., Richard, M. O., Wang, Y., & Hajli, N. (2018). Brand co-creation through social commerce information sharing: The role of social media. Journal of Business Research. Tajvidi, M., Wang, Y., Hajli, N., & Love, P. E. (2017). Brand value Co-creation in social commerce: The role of interactivity, social support, and relationship quality. Computers in Human Behavior.
Tiago, M. T. P. M. B., & Veríssimo, J. M. C. (2014). Digital marketing and social media: Why bother?. Business Horizons, 57(6), 703-708.
8. Appendix
Year Author Title Method Analysis Empirical
or
Theoretic
Main focus Perspective 2009 Mangold, W.
G., & Faulds, D. J.
Social media: The new hybrid element of the promotion mix
Literature review
Qualitative Theoretical Co-creation Social media enables customers to have conversations regarding the brand outside managers' control. This article aids managers by presenting ways in which they can shape consumer discussions in a manner that is consistent with the organization's mission and goals. Ways are providing networking platforms, using blogs, social media tools, and promotional tools to engage customers. 2010 Lisa Harris, Alan Rae The online connection: Transforming marketing
strategy for small businesses
Case study Qualitative Theoretical Co-creation Use of new technologies by
entrepreneurial businesses. Overview of recent trends. Social networks will play a key role in future marketing and can
replace customer annoyance with
2010 Hennig-Thurau, T., Malthouse, E. C., Friege, C., Gensler, S., Lobschat, L., Rangaswamy, A., & Skiera, B. The Impact of New Media on Customer Relationships Literature review
Qualitative Theoretical Social media and firms
Pinball framework of new media's impact
on relationship with customers
identifying key new media phenomena is relevant. Key challenges are identified relating to the understanding of customer behavior, the successful use of new media and effective measurement of customers activities and outcomes. New media requires shift in marketing thinking due to the active role of consumers. Managing customer relations through new media resembles pinball playing. Extensive information brings positive (multiply marketing messages) and negative (interference) consequences. New media phenomena and challenges are backed by the literature review
2011 Hanna, R., Rohm, A., & Crittenden, V. L. We're all connected: The power of the social media ecosystem
2012 Smith, A. N., Fischer, E., & Yongjian, C.
How Does Brand-related User-generated Content Differ across YouTube, Facebook, and Twitter? Empirical study, primary data Quantitativ e
Empirical Social media
and customers
Differences in brand-related
user-generated content between Twitter, Facebook and YouTube. Present general framework consisting of six dimensions to compare brand-related user-generated content. Article improves understanding of how specific social media channels influence the brand-related messages that consumer create. Highlights difference of UGC when it is managed more versus less. Dimensions: promotional self-presentation, brand centrality, market-directed communication, response to online marketeers action, factually informative about the brand, brand sentiment. YouTube focus is on self-promotion, brand plays a role but focus is on the self. Twitter is the opposite, least likely to feature self-promotion but more
discussion generating and news
spreading. Twitter less positive content, more neutral and negative. Facebook falls in between the two.
2012 de Vries, Lisette; Gensler, Sonja; Leeflang, Peter S. H. Popularity of Brand Posts on Brand Fan Pages: An Investigation of the Effects of Social Media Marketing Empirical study, primary data Quantitativ
likes or reactions. For likes, posting a question or entertainment have a negative influence positive comments on a post enhance the number of likes. The longer a brand post stays on top of the page, the more likes it receives. For comments a highly interactive post such as a question is needed. A link has a negative effect on the amount of comments. Both positive and negative comments have positive effect on amount of comments. Negative comments are not necessarily bad.
2013 Goh, K. Y., Heng, C. S., & Lin, Z. Social Media Brand Community and Consumer Behavior: Quantifying the Relative Impact of User- and Marketer-Generated Content Empirical study, primary data Quantitativ e & qualitative
Empirical Co-creation Article investigates the impact of user generated content and marketer generated content on consumer's apparel purchase expenditures. Next to this the researcher also investigates the communication methods used (directed and undirected). Discover a positive impact of joining brand community. Consumers impact purchase decision by informative and persuasive communications. Marketeers
influence only through persuasive
communication. 2013 Rishika, R., Kumar, A., Janakiraman, R., & Bezawada, R. The Effect of Customers' Social Media Participation on Customer Visit Frequency and Profitability: An Empirical
Case study Quantitativ
e
Empirical Social media
and customers
Investigation 2013 Laroche, M., Habibi, M. R., & Richard, M. O. To be or not to be in social media: How brand loyalty is affected by social media? Survey Quantitativ e
Empirical Social media
and customers
Social media brand communities have a
positive effect on
customer/product/brand/company/custom er relation which has a positive effect on brand loyalty. Based on the customer centric model. Customer relation has the highest coefficient. Working for the social aspect of social media.
2013 Mark Durkin, Pauric McGowan, Niall McKeown Exploring social media adoption in small to medium-sized enterprises in Ireland Longtitudina
2014 Hollebeek, L. D., Glynn, M. S., & Brodie, R. J. Consumer Brand Engagement in Social Media: Conceptualization , Scale Development and Validation Literature review Quantitativ e & qualitative
Empirical Co-creation Focused on the consumer side of co-creation by developing and validating a consumer brand engagement scale for social media settings. Consumer brand engagement antecedent is consumer
involvement. Consumer brand
engagement itself consists of cognitive processing, affection and activation. The consequences are self-brand connection and brand usage intent.
2014 Labrecque, L. I. Fostering Consumer-Brand Relationships in Social Media Environments: The Role of Parasocial Interaction Multi-method approach Quantitativ e
Empirical Social media
and customers
Parasocial interaction can be used to design social media strategies. It could aid in development of illusionary one-to-one communication without the consumer knowing. When the automated response becomes salient. The advantages of PSI do not longer hold.
2014 Davis, R., Piven, I., & Breazeale, M. Conceptualizing the brand in social media community: The five sources model Focus group interviews
Qualitative Theroretical Social media and customers
The nature of consumers’ consumption of the brand in a social media community. Focus on benefits that consumers derive from participating. Five core elements of brand consumption: functional brand
consumption, emotional brand
consumption, self-oriented brand
likelihood of participating from consumers who have not been able or inclined to do so previously. Ease of participating in an online community may increase the diversity of its community members. Could be possible that moral responsibility which exists in face-to-face communities may decrease in an online community. 2014 Kang, J., Tang, L., & Fiore, A. M. Enhancing consumer-brand relationships on restaurant Facebook fan pages: Maximizing consumer benefits and increasing active participation Questionnair
e Quantitative Empirical Social media and customers Fan page members are more likely to visit a restaurant Facebook page when they obtain socio-psychological and hedonic benefits from their interactions on the pages. Indicates members seek both psychological attachment as well as social relationships with other members. Functional and monetary benefits do not have significant effect on active participation. 2015 Shao, Wei; Jones, Richard Gyrd; Grace, Debra Brandscapes: contrasting corporate-generated versus consumer-generated media in the creation of brand meaning
content on website. For co-creation it is important to make the brand flexible so it can align with multiple meanings.
Facebook interactions were
predominantly focused on consumer experiences of a functional and/or hedonic nature.
2015 Arvidsson, Adam; Caliandro, Alessandro
Brand public Case study Quantitativ
e
Empirical Social media
and customer
Brand publics. Different than brand communities since not based on interaction but on continuous focus of interest and mediation, not structured by discussion or deliberation but by individual and collective affect and consumers do not develop a collective identity around the brand. Rather the brand is valuable as a medium that can offer publicity to a multitude of diverse situations of identity. Due to new social media such as Facebook and Twitter relationships among consumers and brands are less structured and more fleeting and ephemeral. Bigger mass but
for shorter bursts Therefore the
development from brand communities to brand public. Social media gives rise to
publics rather than communities.
2015 Hudson, Simon; Roth, Martin S.; Madden, Thomas J.; et al. The effects of social media on emotions, brand relationship quality, and word of mouth: An empirical study of music festival attendees Structural equation modelling Quantitativ e
Empirical Social media
and customers
Purpose is how social media interactions affect how consumers think and feel about brands and how these interactions affect desired marketing outcomes. Next to this, do stronger brand relationships, cultivated through social media, enhance the willingness to recommend the brand? Brand relationship quality is higher with emotional attachment. Social media is a mediator in this link and can be used to develop or build emotional attachment. However this must be done subtle since the effect of emotional elements in
communications is higher when
customers are less aware. 2015 Dessart, L., Veloutsou, C., & Morgan-Thomas, A. Consumer engagement in online brand communities: a social media perspective
Interviews Qualitative Theoretical Social media
and customers Engagement in online brand communities with other individuals and with brands. Consumer engagement and interplay between consumer engagement and other concepts in the context of online brand communities. Focus in community lies in interpersonal interaction and interaction with the brand. Affective engagement,
cognitive engagement, behavioral
2015 Dijkmans, Corne; Kerkhof, Peter; Beukeboom, Camiel J. A stage to engage: Social media use and corporate reputation
Survey Quantitativ
e
Empirical Social media
and customers
Consumers’ level of engagement in a company's social media activity was positively related to perceptions of corporate reputation, consumers intensity of social media use is positively related to engagement in a company's social media activity. For customers, company social media platforms is a channel for customer
service, direct feedback and
product/company upgrades. For non-customers, general company interest or just curiosity may play an important role. The customer service and feedback showed through social media can aid non-customers in their image of the
organization positively. There are
multiple reasons why organizations should actively focus their social media activities on non-customers. 1) Largest part of company's target markets consist of non-customers. 2) Important market changes are often first observable among
non-customers. 3) Engaged
