FACULTY OF ECONOMICS AND BUSINESS, UNIVERSITY OF GRONINGEN AND NEWCASTLE
UNIVERSITY BUSINESS SCHOOL
MASTER THESIS
How and why do consumers follow particular
brands on Facebook and what is the effect of
brand liking on (e)WOM and consumers’
purchase intention(s)?
A qualitative study on consumer behavior, online brand liking, (e)WOM, and
purchase intentions
by
René van de Keuken
2
December 2012
University of Groningen, the Netherlands
Newcastle University Business School, United Kingdom
Faculty of Economics and Business
Master Thesis
Master of Science International Business and Management
Master of Science International Business Management and Marketing
1
stsupervisor Mr. Drs. H.A. (Henk) Ritsema
2
ndsupervisor Mrs. N. (Natalia) Yannopoulou
René van de Keuken
Sikkel 5
7641 HL Wierden
3
Management Summary
This study investigates how and why consumers follow particular brands on Facebook and what the effect is of brand liking on (electronic)Word-of-Mouth and the consumers’ intention to purchase a brand. Brand liking is a little studied topic and in most cases the research focuses on brand liking in an offline environment. No research so far has focused on the combination of brand liking, (e)WOM and purchase intention in an online environment and in particular on the Social Network Site Facebook.
When questioning why brand liking is important for consumers Keller’s Consumer Based Brand Equity comes in. It has been discussed that it is important how consumers associate brands which is driven by brand identity and it has been argued that consumers like brands because they associate themselves with the brand, the brand correspond with their identity. Image has been discussed as well in playing a role in brand liking due to the fact that consumers often think of how they are being perceived by others; they derive a feeling of positive social identity from belong to specific groups. Theory further shows that next to several factors (e)WOM is an important antecedent of purchase intention. Out of the theoretical framework it is expected that brand liking on Facebook therefore indirectly affects consumers intention to purchase a brand.
4
Preface
After seven years of studying at Saxion Hogescholen Enschede, the University of Utrecht, Instituto de Español Pablo Picasso, the University of Groningen and the Newcastle University Business School my wonderful era of student life comes to an end. At the same time my professional life will start which is something I really look forward too.
With great interest I wrote this master thesis about brand liking on Facebook and its effect on (e)WOM and consumers’ purchase intention. My interest is a result of both the study IB&M in Groningen as well as the study IBM&M in Newcastle Upon Tyne. This in combination with my personal interest in social media was decisive in selecting this topic. During the last five months I have been studying consumer behavior on the Social Network Site Facebook. I have tried to give an answer to the question how and why consumers follow particular brands on Facebook and what the effect of brand liking is on (e)WOM and consumers’ purchase intention.
First of all I would like to thank all professors I had during my study. Without them I could not develop the basic foundation of this thesis. I would like to thank my supervisor from the University of Groningen Mr. Drs. H.A. (Henk) Ritsema and my supervisor Mrs. N. (Natalia) Yannopoulou from the Newcastle University Business School for their valuable feedback, comments, support and guidance during the thesis project.
I would like to thank my fellow students in Groningen and Newcastle Upon Tyne for a couple of interviews for my research. Thanks should also be passed on to the other participants in the interviews whose responses have enabled the detailed analysis of their views and interpretations. Last but not least I would like to thank my family and friends and in particular my mum and dad for supporting, stimulating and advising me during the thesis process. Thank you all!
5
Table of Contents
Management Summary ... 3 Preface ... 4 List of tables ... 7 List of figures ... 7 List of abbreviations ... 8 List of symbols ... 8 1 | Introduction ... 9 1.1 | Background ... 9 1.2 | Motivation ... 101.3 | Theoretical and Managerial Relevance ... 12
1.4 | Research question... 14
1.5 | Aims and objectives ... 15
1.6 | Structure of the thesis ... 15
2 | Theoretical framework ... 16
2.1 | Part 1: Social Network Sites and Brand Liking ... 16
2.1.1 | Introduction to Social Network Sites ... 16
2.1.2 | Facebook ... 18
2.1.3 | Brands ... 19
2.1.4 | Brand equity ... 20
2.1.5 | Brand Liking ... 21
2.1.6 | The importance of brand liking for firms... 24
2.1.7 | Co-creation ... 26
2.1.8 | Likejacking ... 27
2.1.9 | The importance of brand liking for consumers ... 28
2.2 | Part 2: (e)Word-of-Mouth ... 30
2.2.1 | Facebook as Word of Mouth-platform... 30
2.2.2 | WOM vs. eWOM ... 35
2.2.3 | Brand Liking and (e)WOM ... 36
2.2.4 | Determinants of (e)WOM ... 37
2.3 | Part 3: Consumers’ intention to purchase a brand ... 40
2.3.1 | Consumers’ purchase intention ... 40
2.3.2 | (e)WOM and purchase intention ... 42
6
2.4 | Conceptual model ... 45
3 | Research design and methodology ... 47
3.1 | Method roadmap ... 47
3.2 | The method approach explained ... 47
3.3 | Research strategy... 48
3.3.1 | Data gathering ... 49
3.4 | Secondary Data ... 49
3.5 | Primary Data ... 50
3.4.1 | Qualitative research ... 51
3.4.2 | Reliability & Validity ... 52
3.4.3 | Research method: Interviews ... 54
3.4.4 | Sampling ... 56
3.4.5 | Choice of Social Network Site ... 57
3.5 | Plan of Analysis ... 58
4 | Empirical research; main findings ... 60
4.1 | Sample characteristics ... 60
4.2 | Main findings ... 60
4.2.1 | How and why do consumers follow particular brands on Facebook? ... 61
4.2.2 | Influence of brand liking on (e)WOM ... 65
4.2.3 | Influence of (e)WOM on consumers’ intention to purchase the brand ... 67
4.2.4 | Influence of brand liking on consumers’ purchase intention ... 69
5 | Conclusions and discussion ... 71
5.1 | Managerial implications ... 74
6 | Limitations and further research ... 76
6.1 | limitations ... 76
6.2 | Further research ... 77
References ... 78
Appendix A: Timeline Social Network Sites... 94
Appendix B: Honda Crosstour debut on Facebook ... 95
Appendix C: Typology of eWOM channels ... 95
7
List of tables
Table 1: Definitions of WOM ... Page 31 Table 2: Definitions of eWOM ... Page 34 Table 3: Determinants of (e)WOM ... Page 39 Table 4: Determinants of consumers’ purchase intention(s) ... Page 41 Table 5: Quantitative vs. qualitative research ... Page 55
List of figures
8
List of abbreviations
used in this thesis
AMA
American Marketing Association
BBC
British Broadcasting Corporation
CBBE
Customer Based Brand Equity
CRM
Customer Relationship Management
eWOM
Electronic word-of-mouth
(e)WOM
Electronic word-of-mouth / Word-of Mouth
FB
GM
General Motors
IDC
International Data Corporation
IN
Interviewer
IPO
Initial Public Offer
LI
RE
Respondent
PR
Public Relations
SAS
Statistical Analysis System
SNS(s)
Social Network Site(s)
WOM
Word-of-mouth
WWW
World Wide Web
List of symbols used in this thesis
$
US dollar
9
1 | Introduction
This chapter contains an introduction into the context of the thesis. First of all some background information about the subject will be provided followed by the motivation for writing this thesis. Thereafter the theoretical and managerial relevance will be highlighted followed by the problem statement and research question. Furthermore the aim and objectives of the study will be given. The chapter ends with an outline of the structure of this thesis.
1.1 | Background
With the use of traditional marketing communications tools such as advertising, public relations, sales promotions and direct marketing (Fill, 2006) companies try to create brand equity and measure this in the form of brand awareness, brand loyalty, perceived quality, brand associations and market behavior (Aaker, 1996). A more financial reason for firms to use these traditional marketing communications tools is to persuade consumers in buying their products.
10
More and more brands find their way to these Social Network Sites, in particular Facebook. The brands with the most Fans on Facebook are respectively Facebook, YouTube, Coca-Cola, Disney, MTV, Converse, Converse All star, Starbucks Coffee, Red Bull and Oreo (Fanpagelist.com, 2012). Although millions and millions of people have Liked these brands on Facebook there is still little known about the motives of these people. Do consumers really expect that companies with their brands become active on these Social Network Sites? And how do the same consumers respond to these Fan Pages? Are they more satisfied with brands operating on Social Network Sites? Do consumers talk about the brands they have Liked? Are consumers more likely to buy these brands due to the fact that these brands have a Fan Page, they have Liked the brand on Facebook or because others have Liked the brand which result in a positive (electronic)Word-of-Mouth?
Especially after recent publication of articles about huge amount of fake-accounts and Likes on Facebook1, companies who are specialized in the trade of Likes2 and the poor stock performance of the share Facebook Inc.3 it is interesting to understand the value of a “brand-Like”, the motives of why consumers follow brands on Facebook and in what way brand liking relates to (e)WOM and consumers’ intention to purchase a brand.
1.2 | Motivation
Since the Internet has been embraced worldwide in the form of the WWW the way of using the Internet has changed tremendously. Whereas in the past people used the internet for information search only nowadays people are active on Social Network Sites and spread their opinions and share their experiences over the web which meanwhile got a new name; the web 2.0 and refers to the interactivity of the web.
11
Network Sites brings along opportunities. Being present on a Social Network Site as a brand has a lot of advantages as well. On Facebook alone brands can reach a target audience of over one billion people (Wall Street Journal, 2012) a number marketers cannot reach with traditional media such as television and print. Furthermore Social Network Sites create a high level of WOM especially in the form of reviews and ratings. Reichheld (2006) state that WOM-recommendation is the most effective way of advertising and the highest form of loyalty behavior.
As stated before the most popular Social Network Site measured in active users is Facebook. This site was founded only eight years ago and had its IPO in 2012 making the company the most valuable Social Network Site in the world with a value of over $70 billion (Bloomberg, June 2012). Recently Facebook took over the 2-year old Social Network Site company Instagram for $ 1 billion (Reuters, 2012). With more and more brands popping-up on Facebook and users who Like these brands’ Fan Pages one can wonder if these consumers really care about these brands and interact with them or that they just Like these brand pages due to a friend’s request or for promotional reasons. Also the recent move of GM who has pulled $ 10 million in ads from Facebook for the reason that “they just didn't work” (DailyFinance, 2012) was an incentive in choosing the subject for this thesis. Although the brand still has a Fan Page on Facebook they probably don’t even know why consumers Like the brand and what these consumers do with it afterwards.
12
Additional, in the U.S. alone 80% of the companies are using Facebook (BusinessCourier, 2012) and over 58% of the Fortune 500 companies have established Facebook Fan Pages for their brands. This underscores even more the importance of Social Network Sites and in particular Facebook as a communication channel.
1.3 | Theoretical and Managerial Relevance
From an academic point of view gaps in current knowledge about brand liking clearly exist due to the newness of Social Network Sites. Very little research has been done on social media marketing in general or on the impact of any specific online social medium as marketing tool and in particular brand liking on (e)WOM and consumers’ purchase intentions. The impact of Social Network Sites on (e)WOM have been explored by only a few authors (e.g. Brown et al., 2007) but no research to date explains the relationships that may exist between brand liking on Facebook, (e)WOM and consumers’ purchase intention.
13
“understand the profile of those audiences reached with various types of content and to begin to understand the impact of that content exposure” (Lipsman et al., 2012). In the academic literature a lot of research has been done in consumer behaviour and how and why consumers like brands. Some research indeed have focused on liking brands in the online environment but not specified to Social Network Sites like Facebook. Research to the relationship between brand Liking in combination with (e)WOM and consumers’ purchase intention has remained unexplored and therefore this gap in the literature has to be filled. Furthermore it is important to understand consumers’ behaviour on Social Network Sites for the reasons mentioned above.
14
To summarize; the academic motivation for this research is that the new interactive WWW with its Social Network Sites is very different than the Web 1.0 from the past and little people understand the working of these websites and its effect onto all kinds of factors. Additional, practitioners are on their way to get more knowledge in this new internet area and are ways ahead of theory development in the area of internet-related topics (Chrisodoulides, 2006). This research aims at filling a gap between the world of Social Network Sites and in particular Facebook with its brand liking and the marketing academic research on online communities.
This study will give more insight in the understanding of how and why consumers Like several brands on Facebook and how brand liking affects (e)WOM and consumers’ purchase intention so companies get more insight in the effectiveness of SNS-marketing.
1.4 | Research question
It seems logical that consumers buy brands they like instead of brands they dislike. But to understand and control consumer behavior it is important to understand why consumers like particular brands and what the meaning and value of this like actually means.
The main research question of this thesis can be subdivided into two parts; the first part of the research question refers to the reasons why consumers follow particular brands on Facebook and the way consumers do this. The second part of the research question refers to the effect of brand liking on (e)WOM and consumer’s intention to purchase a brand. Therefore the main research question can be formulated as follows:
“How and why do consumers follow particular brands on Facebook and what is the effect of brand liking on (e)WOM and consumers’ purchase intention(s)?”
15
1.5 | Aims and objectives
The aims and objectives of this research can be defined as follows:
Examine how consumers use the Social Network Sites Facebook with respect to brands and why consumers Like brands on Facebook.
To find out how brand Liking on the brand’s Fan Page of the Social Network Site Facebook has an effect on (e)WOM and consumers’ purchase intention.
To manage practitioners who wish to evaluate the impacts of their firms actions on Social Network Sites and know how to use them best in order to increase (e)WOM and purchase intentions.
To help managers to better use the Social Network Site Facebook
1.6 | Structure of the thesis
16
2 | Theoretical framework
In order to answer the research question which was outlined above current research in the academic literature about the constructs brand liking, word of mouth and purchase intentions will be investigated. The secondary data will be used in order to build a solid theoretical basis of the research. The theoretical framework consist of three parts. Part 1 will discuss the phenomenon Social Network Sites, in particular Facebook and the construct brand liking. Part 2 will discuss (e)WOM and its relation with brand liking. How does brand liking affect or stimulate (e)WOM? Because little or no literature exist about brand liking in an online setting there is looked at how brand love and brand liking works in an offline environment. Part 3 will discuss the consumers’ intention to purchase a brand. There is looked at the determinants of purchase intentions and how (e)WOM and brand liking fits into this picture. The chapter ends with a conceptual model resulting from the prior chapters.
2.1 | Part 1: Social Network Sites and Brand Liking
In this part an introduction to Social Network Sites will be given – and in particular Facebook – in order to get a deeper insight into this topic. The researcher will explain how these networks function and how brand liking plays a central role within these networks. Before brand liking can be explained in more detail the researcher will explain what a brand is and how CBBE – which is a part of brand liking – is being build up. Additional it will be explained why brand liking is important for both consumers and companies which in the end can be compared with the findings of this study.
2.1.1 | Introduction to Social Network Sites
17
lot of Social Network Sites around the world, the most popular one – measured user numbers – is Facebook. This will be discussed more in-depth in chapter 2.1.2.
According to Boyd & Ellison (2008) Social Network Sites can be defined as “web-based services that allow individuals to construct a public or semi-public profile within a bounded system, articulate a list of other users with whom they share a connection, and view and traverse their list of connections and those made by others within the system”. Although dozens of different kind of Social Network Sites exists, the basic ingredient consists of visible profiles that display a list of Friends which are members of the website as well. On these profiles – which are unique pages – the user can type anything he or she likes or can post pictures, music, or videos. In other words, as Sundén (2003) describes it; “one can type oneself into being”.
When people become members of a Social Network Sites they normally have to fill in some kind of questions concerning age, location, interests and upload a profile photo. Thereafter users are prompted to identify others within the Social Network Site with whom they have a relationship and become “Friends” of each other. In order to become “Friends” both users have to give permission. However, permission from the other side is not always necessary. When there is talk of one-directional ties these users are often called “Followers” or “Fans” (Boyd & Ellison, 2008) which is mostly the case for brands. To give an example; on Facebook the brand Apple is followed by almost 8 million people (Facebook, 2012). These people have Liked the brand’s page on Facebook and therefore became a Fan of the brand.
18
When users become “Friends” of each other this does not necessarily mean they are friends in daily life. According to Boyd (2006) there are a lot of varied reasons why people connect with each other. Some are simply entertained by the profiles themselves, others want to broaden their network reach and still others are looking to meet like-minded souls. Additional Fono & Raynes-Goldie (2005) found huge variation in why people “Friended” each other and found that friendship stood for content, offline facilitator, online community, trust, courtesy, declaration, or nothing. Boyd (2006) found that the most common reasons for friendship on Social Network Sites are that (1) the users are actual friends, (2) the users are acquaintances, family members, or colleagues, (3) it would be socially inappropriate to say no because one know each other, (4) it looks popular when having lots of friends and (5) it is a way of indicating that you are a fan of a brand.
The reason why people become Friends or Fans of a brand remains a little-explored topic. If research of Fono & Raynes-Goldie (2005) and Boyd (2006) into why people become friends of each other on Facebook is being followed it should be expected that if people become Friends or Fans of a brand by Liking the brand’s page on Facebook does not necessarily mean they are a Fan of the brand but have other reasons to do so.
2.1.2 | Facebook
As stated before the largest Social Network Site nowadays is Facebook. According to the latest numbers Facebook has over one billion active users a month (The Guardian, 2012). Like other Social Network Sites Facebook is free to use and allows users to create profiles, upload photos and video, send messages and keep in touch with friends, family and colleagues. The website is currently available in 70 languages (FacebookDevelopers, 2012).
19
settings. Users can choose to make all their communications visible to everyone, make it visible to a selection of other users or keep it private. Furthermore Facebook let users decide if they want to be searchable, which parts of their profile may be available for public, what users want to see in their newsfeed and arrange who can see their posts. Finally like other Social Network Sites Facebook has a Messaging feature (similar to email) which allow those users to communicate privately with each other if they do not want to share anything in public.
For this research Facebook is being chosen above all other Social Network Sites. This because Facebook surpassed one billion users in 2012 of whom 600 million are mobile users. Since the foundation of Facebook over 219 billion photos have been uploaded onto Facebook, 62,6 billion songs have been played, there have been 140,3 billion friend connections, and the Facebook Like button has been hit 1,13 trillion times (FacebookNewsroom, 2012). There is no other Social Network Site with these impressive numbers. The reason for Facebook as Social Network Site for this research will be explained in more detail in chapter 3.4.2.
Not only consumers make use of Facebook but more and more brands become active on this Social Network Site as well as they see massive opportunities in increasing their sales. Before discussing the construct brand liking it is important to get more in-depth knowledge about what a brand is and how it is being build up.
2.1.3 | Brands
20
In order to identify and differentiate a brand the brand elements such as name, logo, color, characters, slogans, and packaging are essential. The most important thing a marketer has to accomplish is to target a brand in the consumers’ mind. A study of Aaker (1997) to brand personality showed that consumers even consider brands to possess human characteristics which are also known as the personality traits. In a way consumers develop relationships with brands (Fournier, 1998) and these relationships affects how consumers value and interact with the brand. For firms a successful branding strategy is highly important making building brand equity the most important one.
2.1.4 | Brand equity
According to Keller et al. (2012) CBBE occurs when the consumer has a high level of awareness and familiarity with the brand and holds in their memory some strong, favourable and unique brand associations. Brand equity can be best described as “a summary measure of a brand’s ability to attract and retain loyal customers expressed in monetary terms” (Haefner, Deli-Gray and Rosenbloom, 2011). Additional Aaker (1991) notes that brand equity is “a set of brand assets and liabilities linked to the brand’s name and symbols, which ad to or subtract from the value provided by the product to a firm and / or to customers”.
According to Keller (1993) consumers do not see brands just as tangible products but more as an abundance of associations. To understand how CBBE is being build up one has to look at Keller’s CBBE-pyramid (figure 1) which include the six brand building blocks salience, performance, imagery, judgements, feelings and resonance.
21
Brand credibility refers to the extent to which the brand is seen as credible in terms of perceived expertise, trustworthiness and likeability. In other words, “credibility concerns whether consumers see the firm behind the brand as good at what they do, concerned about their customers or just easy to like” (Keller et al., 2012). Brand consideration depends among others how personally relevant consumers think a brand is.
Figure 1: CBBE-pyramid. Source: adapted version of Keller et al. (2012)
Brand feelings on the other hand can be defined as “consumers’ emotional responses and reactions with respect to a brand” (Keller et al., 2012). These feelings can be neutral, positive or negative. Aaker (1996) notes that brands create emotional benefits if consumers experience a feeling when buying or using brands. Kahle, Poulos and Sukhdial (1988) have distinguished six brand feelings which are warmth, fun, excitement, security, social approval and self-respect. These brand judgments and brand feelings are closely interwoven with the construct brand liking.
2.1.5 | Brand Liking
22
relationships with consumers by addressing them as individuals. According to Sirgy (1982) and Biel (1993) this brand personality increases the preferences and usage of consumers and evokes emotions in consumers.
According to Ye and Van Raaij (2004) brand liking can be defined as “the likeability of the brand and is a vital and central component of brand equity”. The favorability of brand association – which is anything that is linked in the consumer’s memory to a brand (Aaker, 2008) – will form the positive or negative brand likeability. Brand liking has among others been used to identify consumer-based brand strength (Ye and Van Raaij, 2004; Lassar, Mittal and Sharma, 1995; Sirgy et al., 1997; and Lau and Lee, 1999). From the traditional marketing communications tools PR is most likely to help building brand liking by (1) talking one-on-one to the individual in a controlled environment, (2) by using third-party sources and celebrity endorsement (3) by increasing messages through opinion relays and (4) by providing direct contact between the brand and the individual.
Aaker (1991) on the other hand sees brand liking as “something that is often a general feeling that cannot be closely traced to anything specific”. In other words, it has a life of its own. Brand liking can also be described as “a measure of the ideal consumer choice if all other (external) factors are excluded” (Anselmsson, Johansson and Persson, 2008) and as a measure of consumer-experienced brand equity. Chang (2008) found that by using national (Chinese) brand names instead of international (Western) brand names brand liking for Chinese consumers increased.
23
Arnould, Price and Zinkhan (2005) state that brand liking refers to “the positive attitudes consumers hold in memory towards a brand” and concluded that this attitude is determinant of the brand evaluation and decision making. Aaker (1991) goes a bit further and state that brand liking is a competitive advantage because it represents the overall feeling towards a brand and is not a part of any feature of a brand. Walther et al. (2005) further state that when for instance a liked celebrity who endorses a brand gets involved in scandals brand liking can change from one moment to the next into brand disliking.
In a lot of marketing journals brand love (Richins, 1997; Fournier, 1998; Lau & Lee, 1999) is used instead of brand liking. However, there is small difference between these two constructs. Fournier (1998) found that brand love and passion for a brand are deeper than just brand liking. She states that brand liking does not require deep emotional levels. Furthermore it is still unknown precisely how consumers experience brand love. Richins (1997) for example sees brand love as a short term relationship while others (Fournier, 1998; Lau and Lee, 1999) see it as a long lasting friendship which can last for decades. Therefore it is important to understand the definition of brand love and brand liking when consumers say they love or like a brand.
Consumers who say they truly like a brand are in general very loyal to the brand. Aaker (1991) for example distinguished five levels of loyalty making brand liking-consumers the second-highest ones. In his research he found that most people are completely indifferent from a brand and that only one-quarter truly like a brand. At this stage consumers truly like a brand based on different kind of brand associations such as symbols, packaging, user experience or quality.
24
marketers and flowing to consumers”. Especially with Fan Pages consumers have more power than ever before; they can make or break a brand.
To give an example, in September 2009 the car manufacturer Honda launched a new car named the Honda Accord Crosstour. In a marketing push the brand created a Facebook Fan Page. The response was all very negative and consumers did not like the new look of the car. In a reaction to all these negative comments a product manager of Honda started to delete some negative comments and placed new very positive comments (Appendix B) on the Fan Page not knowing the crowd would discover his relationship with Honda which indeed happened in the end (Techinasia.com, 2009). The Crosstour debut on Facebook was a real disaster.
2.1.6 | The importance of brand liking for firms
The most popular Social Network Site used by companies in order to promote their brand(s) is Facebook. With the “Like-button” (figure 2) on Facebook it is possible for users to show a brand, a company or other users that one likes a brand.
Figure 2: The “Like-button” on Facebook Source: InsideFacebook.com (2012)
25
that if a company post content on the Fan Page this will be shown in the Fan’s (the user that have Liked a brand) News Feed as well.
If a user Likes content a brand has posted on Facebook this will be shown to all the user’s Facebook friends as well which in turn can also Like the content which may lead to increased traffic to the brand’s Fan Page. Thus the content can achieve “wide viral syndication” (Practical ecommerce, 2011). In figure 3 an example is given for the brand Starbucks.
Figure 3: Starbucks’ Fan Page
Source: Facebook.com/Starbucks
(2012)
The number of consumers who Like Starbucks is shown on the brand’s Fan Page even as the number of consumers talking about the brand. The Like button is given which could be pressed by users to indicate that they Like the brand Starbucks. On the Starbucks’ Fan Page users can even see which of their Friends also like Starbucks.
26
and can generate traffic to the brand’s website too. Facebook keeps a record of all Like activity on its advertising platform whereof merchants can make use of in order to produce more targeted ads which in turn can achieve “greater degree of relevance with their advertising” (Practical ecommerce, 2011). Finally brand liking give firms insight and detailed data on Fan activity on the page which is highly important for market research and strategies.
Syncapse (2010) even calculated that one single Fan of a brand is worth $ 136,38. Syncapse (2010) found that users who Liked a brand were 28% more likely to continue using that brand than
Likers and that brand Likers were 41% more likely to recommend the brand to friends than non-Likers. But the question how valuable a Facebook Like is, is hard to find out. One can call the quality
of Facebook Likes as a useful indicator of advertising success on the social network into question especially with the recent news about fake-accounts – which will be discussed in chapter 2.1.8 – and
the even further downward spiral of the Facebook shares on the New York Stock Exchange4.
2.1.7 | Co-creation
Another reason why Liking a brand on Facebook is interesting for companies is co-creation. Co-creation is a way for brands to develop products and make major decisions by involving consumers from the start and uses social media and communities to help brands derive insights (McEleny, 2010; Rowley et al., 2007). Furthermore co-creation denotes an active, creative and social collaboration process between producers and consumers, facilitated by the company (Piller et al, 2011). According to venturebeat.com (2010) the goal of co-creation is to allow customers to specify exactly what they want while engaging them an interactive building experience.
Some examples of co-creation are the “Do us a Flavour” contest on Facebook by the snack food company Frito-Lay where users could create their own flavour of potato chips. In the Netherlands the brand Lays organized the same kind of contest named: “maak de smaak” which was highly successful with 675.000 flavour entries and over 6 million crisps bags sold5. Other examples are the
4
Facebook Inc. stock price was worth $ 17,73 on 4 September, 53% less than its IPO (Yahoo Finance, 2012).
5
27
manufacturer of sport equipments Nike who launched a highly visual “build your own shoe” application and the electric utility service provider E.ON where customers could submit ideas for new E.ON products and services through an online community (Innovation Management, 2012).
Next to the benefits of co-creation there are also some drawbacks; employees for example are not trained and used to work with consumers or Fans, their topics of interest might differ from the community’s interests, and they might feel dispossessed by the whole process (Cova, 2012). Moreover everyone can watch the process which could affect the brand’s reliability. With co-creation a dialog is difficult because there is a physical distance between the brand and the consumers. (FrankWatching.com, 2010)
2.1.8 | Likejacking
In the summer of 2012 the BBC discovered that many of the Facebook Likes appear to come from users from countries as Egypt and the Philippines when setting up the fake company Virtual Bagel Ltd (BBC, 2012a). In the same year BusinessWeek (2012) wrote an article about spammers who spread their messages via Facebook by asking users to Like a page in order to gain access to the users’ profile. Facebook even sued a company named Adscend Media for sending a huge amount of unsolicited messages to Facebook users with the question to Like a page in order to see a particular video. Over 280.000 Facebook users have Liked these pages and the company earned millions of dollars with this method called likejacking.
28
Some examples of websites who sell Facebook Fans are shown in figure 4. Figure 4: For sale: Facebook Likes
Source: (buyrealfansandlikes.com, 2012; FBfanz.net, 2012; BulkFans.com, 2012)
Facebook states that around the 8,7% of all its users are fake accounts (BBC, 2012b). This means that approximately 87 million6 accounts are fake. This number encourages even more the discussion about brand liking on Facebook and its value.
2.1.9 | The importance of brand liking for consumers
That firms benefit from brand liking is explained before but how and why do consumers follow brands on Facebook? Consumers can gain free products when they Like a brand on Facebook. When supermarkt discounter Lidl for example reached one hundred thousand Likes on Facebook the firm gave all its fans a free pastry when visiting one of their shops (levensmiddelenkrant.nl, 2012). Recent research (Razorfish.com, 2011; Econsultancy.com, 2011; SocialMediaToday.com, 2011) shows that when consumers follow brands on Facebook they could indeed gain special offers and deals. Furthermore the research shows that most people who Like a brand seems already be a current customer of the particular brand and that the customer find the content interesting or entertaining. Other reasons mentioned are that friends are already Fan of a brand on Facebook or that they are looking for support, service or product news. The research also shows that most users who Like a brand do recommend the brand to others and most users really buy the products or service from the brand.
6
29
As discussed before, co-creation is not only important for companies but also for consumers. Consumers may Like brands on Facebook because they can participate in discussions about new products giving them more power than before. Also Keller’s CBBE pyramid comes into play when questioning why brand Liking is important for consumers. It is important how consumers associate brands which is driven by brand identity, the first building block ‘salience’ in the pyramid. One could argue that consumers Like brands on Facebook because they associate themselves with the brand, the brand correspond with their identity. Image plays a role in brand liking due to the fact that consumers often think of how they are being perceived by others; they derive a feeling of positive social identity from belong to specific groups (Taijel, 1974). The same should be expected in on online environment such as Facebook.
30
2.2 | Part 2: (e)Word-of-Mouth
Li and Bernoff (2008) already stated that WOM serves as “a powerful amplifier” of marketing which can be strengthened by social media. In this part of the theoretical framework the construct (e)WOM will be discussed. Literature about WOM in the offline environment in combination with literature about eWOM in general should lead to a theory about how WOM functions on Facebook. First of all the Social Network Site Facebook will be linked to (e)WOM. In the offline environment it has been investigated (Carroll & Ahuvia, 2006) that when people like brands they will say positive things about the brand to others, therefore it is important to find out how this brand liking relates to a WOM in the online environment; Facebook. In this part the differences between WOM and eWOM will be discussed as well as the determinants of (e)WOM and how (e)WOM relates to brand liking and consumer’s purchase intentions.
2.2.1 | Facebook as Word of Mouth-platform
WOM-communication is a much discussed construct by both academics and practitioners and has been studied for more than fifty years (Nyilasy, 2006). WOM has been referred to as one of the most powerful forces in business and has been defined as oral communication and oral publicity (Arndt, 1967). Table 1 indicates that WOM can also be seen as a spoken communications as a means of transmitting information and as an oral, person to person communication concerning a brand, product or service whereby the communicator is perceived as non-commercial by the receiver (Westbrook, 1987; Bone, 1995; Burmann & Arnold, 2008).
31 Table 1: Definitions of WOM, source: adapted from several authors
Additional WOM seems to be the most important source of influence in purchase of products (Kiel and Layton, 1981). Needless to say that a positive WOM is highly important for brands; if the brand has a positive WOM in public, the public is also positive to the brand (Sundaram & Webster, 1999). Furthermore Hogan et al. (2004) notes that the lifetime value of a customer may be estimated even twice as high when positive WOM effects are taken into consideration.
32
only details about brands, products and services are being provided and no judgements are being given. Examples of positive and negative WOM on Facebook are given below.
Figure 5: Positive (e)WOM on Facebook about Starbucks Source: Facebook.com/Starbucks (2012)
Figure 6: Negative (e)WOM on Facebook about Starbucks Source: Facebook.com/Starbucks (2012)
WOM communication can be created by both firms as consumers. According to Godes & Mayzlin (2009) firms try to increase the number of conversations about their brands, product or service in order to get more positive WOM. This strategy – whereby WOM is been created as the result of a firm’s own action– is often referred to as exogenous WOM. Exogenous WOM can lead to an increase in sales (Godes & Mayzlin, 2009).
According to Feick & Price (1987) consumers engage in WOM because they are knowledgeable about products or brands and want to share this information with other consumers. Other reasons for consumers to engage in WOM are the desire to help others, a greater sense of obligation to talk and a feeling of pleasure from telling others about products (Feick & Price, 1987). Striking is the fact that consumers are less willing to generate positive WOM for publicly consumed products they own (Cheema & Kaikati, 2010).
33
unbiased motives behind the behaviour of the communicator and the perceived vividness of oral and interactive information (Nyilasy, 2006). Westbrook (1987) states that positive and negative feelings associated with a product experience creates inner tension which calls for a discharge in the form of WOM. Other authors (Nyer, 1997; Neelamegham & Jain, 1999) found that consumer’s affective elements of satisfaction, pleasure, and sadness motivates consumers to wish to share experiences with others.
Social talks between consumers – such as talking about new clothes, complaining about bad service or sharing information about products – generates more than 3,3 billion brand impression every day in the USA alone (Keller & Libai, 2009). Keller (2007) even notes that 92 times out of the 121 WOM conversations the average US consumer weekly has a specific brand name is mentioned. These social talks further evolved in the online environment. Consumers are being provided with more and more tools that facilitate the spread of eWOM and the ability to influence show no signs of decreasing (Thackery et al., 2008).
Bristor (1990) defines a WOM network as a “social network consisting on a set of people who engage in WOM plus de relationship between them” making Social Network Sites the perfect platforms for the new WOM; the eWOM. As stated before the way consumers use the world wide web has changed tremendously. WOM is being given new significance by the unique property of the internet (Dellarocas, 2003). Where in the past consumers used the internet for information search only nowadays with the rise of Social Network Sites consumers write their opinions and share their experiences on different kind of platforms (Hennig-Thurau et al. 2004; Ewing, 2008). Duan et al. (2008) already noted that the otherwise fleeting WOM targeted to one or a few friends has been transformed into enduring messages visible to the entire world.
34
interact about consumption-relevant circumstances on the internet (Stauss, 2000). eWOM can be further defined as “any positive or negative statement made by potential, actual, or former customers about a product or company, which is made available to a multitude of people and institutions via the Internet” (Hennig-Thurau et al., 2004). In other words; all statements about brands on the internet can be regarded as eWOM between consumers. Table 2 includes an extended list of eWOM definitions.
Table 2: Definitions of eWOM. Source: adapted from several authors
35
According to Nardi et al. (2004) people express themselves online due to documenting one’s life, providing commentary and opinions, expressing deeply felt emotions, articulating ideas through writing, and forming and maintaining community forums. eWOM in Social Network Sites occurs when consumers provide or search for informal product-related advice through the unique applications of Social Network Sites (Chu & Kim, 2011). The authors further state that there are several characteristics that makes Social Network Sites unique from other eWOM media which are; highly interactive eWOM, social networks of users are readily available and users within their network may be perceived as more trustworthy and credible than unknown people. Dunne et al. (2010) state that becoming friends of a brand is a statement of personal endorsement of this particular brand and in turn this action can provide the brand with very positive eWOM. Therefore Social Network Sites become an important source of product information for consumers which could facilitate eWOM.
2.2.2 | WOM vs. eWOM
36
their messages on factors such as credibility. Besides it is only possible to judge the credibility of the communicators based on the associated cues through online reputation systems.
2.2.3 | Brand Liking and (e)WOM
According to several authors (Senecal & Nantel, 2004; Weathers et al., 2007) consumers who want to buy products tends to seek recommendations and advice about the particular brand online. Warren (2009) states that due to the fact more and more people have an account on a Social Network Sites like Facebook will lead to an increased network density which helps in the spread of eWOM. Indeed, it is easier to share information or recommend a brand to a lot of users than to share it individually. In general eWOM in Social Network Sites exists of three dimensions; opinion seeking, opinion giving and opinion passing. Flynn et al. (1996) found that opinion seekers tend to search for information and advice from others when making a purchase decision and Feick & Price (1987) state that opinion givers exert great influence on others’ attitudes and behaviours. Furthermore Hammond (2000) in his research distinguished two types of online consumers, the quite ones – which rarely posting anything further – and the communicative members which are active and interact with other users by generating content themselves. According to Henning-Thurau et al. (2004) consumers are more likely to serve as WOM referrals because of their interest in others, their desire to fulfill social needs, their ambition to help the brand by giving feedback and their need to express their emotions and attitudes, either positive or negative.
On a brand’s Fan Page on Facebook users can post comments, give reaction to other users’ comments, discuss, ask questions and share their opinion of the brand by giving reviews. When members of Facebook communicate about brands the information will be shown to their Friends as well because these messages will appear in their News Feed as explained before. These message will also be perceived as more trustful and credible than information from unknown people.
37
brand decision making. In this way a Facebook user may serve as an endorser of a brand by liking the brand’s Fan Page. When consumers become Fans of brands and start to Like brands on Facebook the brands can build a world of virtual references (Janusz, 2009). Furthermore, a positive WOM leads to trial and acquisition (Ferguson, 2008). Gruen et al. (2006) state that eWOM communication is perceived to be a reliable source of information by consumers and affects the perceived overall value of the firm’s offering.
2.2.4 | Determinants of (e)WOM
38
Carroll and Ahuvia (2006) stated that customer satisfaction is also an important driver in creating brand liking; satisfaction builds trust (Keh et al., 2007). The more a person is satisfied with the brand the more the person could like the specific brand. It should be expected thus that when a person Likes a brand on Facebook he or she should be satisfied with the brand beforehand. Consumers who Like a brand are presumed to have a strong relation with this brand and according to Oliver (1999) consumers believe that the brand they like is superior to other brands and therefore will experience a high level of satisfaction. Lau & Lee (1999) state that when consumers had positive experience and relationship with a brand this will lead to an increase in satisfaction. Furthermore Keh et al. (2007) found a significant and positive relationship between customer satisfaction and brand liking.
39
engage in negative WOM (de Matos & Rossi, 2008). A list of the determinants of (e)WOM found in the literature is shown in Table 3.
Table 3: Determinants of (e)WOM, source: adapted from several authors
To summarize: Theory shows that consumers engage in WOM because they are knowledgeable about products or brands and want to share this information with other consumers, because of the desire to help others, a greater sense of obligation to talk and a feeling of pleasure from telling others about products. Furthermore they are more likely to serve as WOM referrals because of their interest in others, their desire to fulfill social needs, their ambition to help the brand by giving feedback and their need to express their emotions and attitudes, either positive or negative. Additional it is explained that consumers are less willing to generate positive WOM for publicly consumed products they own which will be interesting to see if this is the same case in an online setting. Furthermore it is found that consumers’ affective elements of satisfaction, pleasure, and sadness motivates consumers to wish to share experiences with others.
40
positive eWOM on a Social Network Site will lead to an increase in purchase intention. Furthermore the determinants of (e)WOM are being discussed and is found that when consumers have positive experience and relationship with a brand this will lead to an increase in satisfaction which leads to an increase in liking of the brand. Therefore it should be expected that when a person Likes a brand on Facebook he or she should be satisfied with the brand beforehand. Also is found that the more loyal a person is the more likely it will be that he or she will engage in WOM.
2.3 | Part 3: Consumers’ intention to purchase a brand
Earlier research state hat an increase in average brand liking improves brand sales and that brand liking is the most important predictor of consumers’ purchase intention. In this part – which is the final part of this theoretical framework – theories about brand liking and purchase intentions are taken from an offline environment and being applied to the online environment. The consumers’ purchase intention and how this purchase intention relates to (e)WOM and brand liking will be discussed. After part 3 a conceptual model will be given resulting from all the theoretical parts combined.
2.3.1 | Consumers’ purchase intention
Brand purchase intention can be defined as the buyer’s self-instruction to purchase the brand, or take purchase-related action within a given time period (Rossiter and Percy, 1987). Other definition of purchase intention are individual’s readiness and willingness to purchase a certain product or service (Ajzen & Fishbein, 1980) and as a purchase probability associated with an intention category at the percentage of individuals that will actually buy a product (Whitlark et al., 1993). Furthermore Purchase intention has widely been found as the antecedent of actual purchase (Rawwas, 1996; McEachern et al., 2007; Chen & Corkindale, 2008; De Cannière et al., 2009).
41
(Bosnjak et al., 2007), brand equity (Moradi & Zarei, 2011), customer satisfaction (Cho and Park, 2001; Kwahk et al., 2012) trust (Everard & Galletta, 2006; Kwahk et al., 2012), loyalty (Oliver, 1999) quality (Everard & Galletta, 2006) and (e)WOM (Jalilvand & Samiei, 2012) which are being summarized in table 4.
Table 4: Determinants of consumers’ purchase intention(s). Source: adapted from several authors
42
2.3.2 | (e)WOM and purchase intention
As Duan et al. (2005) already stated the effect eWOM has on consumers’ purchase intention is not very well understood. There are a number of studies (Chatterjee, 2001; Chen et al., 2004; Godes & Mayzlin, 2004; Dellarocas et al., 2007) which have investigated the impact of eWOM on product sales. However the outcomes were very contradictory. Most research about (e)WOM have indentified interpersonal and non-interpersonal factors which determine the influence and use of WOM communication and the receiver’s purchase decision. Bansal & Voyer (2000) for example have identified the interpersonal factors; active seeking and tie strength and the non-interpersonal factors; perceived risk, sender’s expertise and receiver’s expertise as one can see below.
Figure 7: Interpersonal and non-interpersonal factors influencing WOM. Source: Bansal & Voyer (2000)
Bansal & Voyer (2000) found evidence for all of the relationships in the model with the exception of the relationship between the receiver’s expertise and the influence of the sender’s WOM on the receiver’s purchase decision. The most important relationships show that (1) the greater the extent to which the WOM is actively sought by the receiver, (2) the greater the strength of the tie between the sender and the receiver and (3) the greater the sender’s expertise, the greater the influence of the sender’s WOM on the receiver’s purchase decision.
43
(2009) already stated that “time in research is much better spent asking friends”. Finally the greater the expertise of the sender is being perceived by the receiver the more this influences the consumers’ purchase decision.
Richins & Root-Shaffer (1988) also state that WOM communication influences consumers’ purchase intentions. Park et al. (2007) take it further and state that the quality of the (e)WOM message plays an important role in influencing the consumers’ purchase intention. The authors state that high quality messages have a greater impact on consumers’ purchase intention than low quality messages. High quality messages are specific and objective messages while low quality messages normally have an emotional and subjective character.
According to Srinivasan & Ratchford (1991) before consumers make a purchase they search for information first in order to reduce perceived risk. One such source of information is (e)WOM which is also being spread via Social Network Sites as discussed before. Furthermore consumers’ purchase intentions increase when they are exposed to more messages (Park et al., 2007). Additional, consumers trust information posted by other consumers more and perceive it as more credible than information given by marketers. Jalilvand & Samiei (2012) did a quantitative research in consumer behavior in the automobile industry and found significant evidence that (e)WOM has considerable effects on brand image and indirectly leads to intention to purchase. In their research Jalilvand & Samiei (2012) state that (e)WOM is one of the most effective factors influencing brand image and purchase intention of brands in consumer markets. Based on the argument that especially (e)WOM communication has a strong impact on product judgments (Herr et al.,1991) it is argued that (e)WOM might have strong effects on the purchase intention of consumers. Therefore it should be expected that especially (e)WOM on Facebook will have a great influence on consumers’ intention to purchase a brand.
44
brand are made might be positively influenced in his purchase intention. Hereby brand liking on Facebook generates positive (e)WOM which has an influence on consumers’ purchase intention. This all said it is expected that brand liking will have a direct effect on (e)WOM which in turn has a direct effect on consumers’ purchase intention. Therefore brand liking has an indirect effect on purchase intention.
2.3.3 | Brand liking and Purchase Intention
In general consumers are increasingly influenced by Social Networks Sites and especially when gathering information about products and making purchase decisions (Vollmer & Precourt, 2008). Consumers are more likely to purchase a brand that is recommended by a friend or member of the family than one advertised by marketers. When consumers become a Fan of a brand by Liking the brand’s Fan Page on Facebook this may lead to more loyalty to the brand, creating commitment. Algesheimer et al. (2005) state that these bonds may have a positive influence on the purchase intention of the consumer. Consumers’ intention to purchase is also being influenced by the satisfaction of informational needs about a brand via Social Network Sites (Kim et al., 2004). Therefore it should be expected that when consumers interact with a brand on Facebook – which starts with liking the brand – they are more likely to be exposed to information and marketing messages that may fulfil their need to know more about the brand. Burnett (2000) already stated that via Social Network Sites consumers can search and find information according to their interests and preferences. In this way Facebook communication move consumers from awareness to engagement to purchase (Hanna et al., 2011).
45
Many researchers (Prasad & Dav, 2000; Myers, 2003; de Chernaony, 2004) found that high brand equity leads to high brand preference and loyalty. According to Chang & Liu (2009) it could be inferred that brand preference would be reflected in consumers’ purchase intention. As stated before consumers’ purchase intention does not depend on merely one factor but on various factors including (e)WOM. The question remains if brand Liking on Facebook and the related (e)WOM effect result in an increase in consumers’ purchase intentions and therefore actual purchase.
To summarize: purchase intention has widely been found as the antecedent of actual purchase. Furthermore consumers’ intention to purchase a brand is being influenced by various factors including (e)WOM. Brand attitude, involvement, perceived risk, satisfaction, trust, loyalty and brand equity also affects purchase intention. A number of studies have investigated the impact of eWOM on product sales but the outcomes were very contradictory. Theory shows that the closer the relationship among people the more a person’s purchase decision will be influenced by the WOM which comes from that person; the information is being perceived as more credible. Furthermore theory shows that consumers’ purchase intentions increase when they are exposed to more messages. Additional it is found that (e)WOM has considerable effects on brand image and indirectly leads to intention to purchase of brands in consumer markets. Finally ratings and reviews could lead to a higher perception of product quality by consumers which in turn leads to an increase in purchase intention. Out of the literature a conceptual model has been developed which is given in the next chapter.
2.4 | Conceptual model
46
(e)WOM and purchase intention. Furthermore many antecedents of consumers’ intention to purchase a brand were found including (e)WOM.
In short; based on the literature discussed in the previous chapters it should be expected that brand liking increases the consumers’ positive (e)WOM referral directly which in turn leads to an increase in the intention to purchase a brand. Therefore it should be expected that brand liking indirectly leads to an increase in purchase intention which in the end leads to actual purchase.
In the literature it is found that among others brand equity and in particular the building blocks ‘judgment’ and ‘feelings’ have an influence on consumers’ purchase intention. These brand judgments and brand feelings are closely interwoven with the construct brand liking. Obviously it is not very likely that brand liking on its own causes an increase in consumers’ intention to purchase a brand. Other factors such as perceived risk, attitude, involvement, satisfaction, loyalty, quality and other parts of the brand equity play a role in the consumers’ purchase intention as well.
Therefore the model shows an expected direct effect for brand liking on Facebook on (e)WOM which in turn also directly influence the consumers’ intention to purchase a brand. The effect of brand liking on purchase intention is therefore indirect.
47
3 | Research design and methodology
In this chapter the research design and methodology of the study will be discussed. A research design is a blueprint for conducting the research (Malhotra and Birks, 2003) or as Flick (2006) states; the methods used in a research become the point of reference for checking the suitability of ideas and issues for empirical investigations. This chapter begins with an outline of the method used for this study. Subsequently the method approach will be explained followed by the research strategy, the secondary and primary research which are subdivided into qualitative research, a subchapter for the reliability, validity and generalizability, the research instrument and the sampling. Thereafter the data analysis and limitations will be discussed. This chapter ends with a summary.
3.1 | Method roadmap
Figure 9 illustrates the roadmap of the method used for this study. The dark blue rectangles show the path that has been followed. In chapter 3.2 each step will be explained in further detail.
Figure 9 : a roadmap of the method. Source: self-developed
3.2 | The method approach explained
48
deductive approach often starts with propositions derived from the literature which are being analyzed and tested.
Both approaches could have been possible for this study and it has been decided to use a combination of an inductive and deductive approach which is not very uncommon in academic literature. Although an inductive approach is more common in qualitative research a deductive approach was found to be needed for the second part of the research question. As stated before due to the lack of literature in brand liking and Social Network Sites and the researcher’s interest in the need to know how and why consumers follow particular brands on Facebook and not in proving hypotheses an inductive approach has been chosen for this part of the research. This bottom-up approach starts with observations which will be realized by conducting interviews. It will be tried to find several patterns and regularities out of the data from the interviews which in turn end up in developing some general conclusions or theories.
In order to find out if brand liking stimulates (e)WOM and consumers’ purchase intentions a deductive approach has been chosen. After having created a solid base on the areas of investigation it has been decided to make us of a qualitative method in order to get more in-depth knowledge about brand liking and consumer behavior on Facebook. After having collected all the data it has been decided to go back to the literature in order to see whether the theory is supported or should be modified.
3.3 | Research strategy
49
For this study there is a need to know how and why consumers follow particular brands on Facebook while little is known about brand liking in online communities. Choosing an exploratory research strategy for this part of the research should lead to an increase in understanding of how consumers follow brands on Facebook and what the main reasons are to do this.
Next to exploratory research an explanatory research has been chosen. Explanatory research can be done when the key variables and relationships are defined. These explanatory studies look for explanations of the nature of certain relationships and often test hypotheses which provide an understanding of the relationships that exist between variables. For this study the relationship between brand liking as an antecedent of (e)WOM and purchase intentions as an outcome of (e)WOM and indirectly for brand liking have been conceptualized. Although most explanatory research has a quantitative approach several authors (i.a. Maxwell, 2004) claim that this research strategy can be applied to qualitative research as well. By analyzing the data derived from the interviews and looking back at the literature which is based mainly on an offline environment there will be looked if these causal relationships indeed exists in an online environment.
3.3.1 | Data gathering
It has been decided to combine both primary and secondary data in order to gain a wider understanding of why and how consumers follow particular brands on Facebook and how brand liking relates to (e)WOM and consumers’ purchase intention. In the next chapter the secondary data will be explained prior to the primary data collection.
3.4 | Secondary Data
50
databases such as Business Source Premier, JSTOR, SAGE publications, Emerald Insight, ScienceDirect, SpringerLink and Wiley Online Library. Most data is found in journals concerning Marketing, Advertising and Business Research. Additional European Management Journals, Journals of Consumer Research and Journals of Brand Management are used . Furthermore the internet has been used extensively for among others online newspapers like De Telegraaf, het Financieel Dagblad, the BBC, Wall Street Journal, New York Times as well as Nu.nl, Reuters, Daily Finance, Business Week, Google Books and for the Social Network Site Facebook.
The information founded in the above mentioned data have been analysed in order to present the most important information. In a way secondary data analysis is “data used for a research project that were originally collected for some other purpose” (Saunders et al., 2007) and therefore makes it a re-analysis of information. Because new data concerning Social Network Sites like Facebook, consumer behaviour and data on the internet is being published every day the analysis of secondary data is an ongoing process. The reliability and validity have been taken into account by using reliable statistics, websites, blogs, documents and journals only.
