Influences on Social Media Usage and Adoption
Research to identify the influences on social media usage and adoption in the Dutch SMEconstruction industry
Edo te Selle
S2220695
MSc. Business Administration – Organization and Management Control Faculty of Economics and Business
University of Groningen Supervisor: Dr S. Girdhar
Date: 21-01-2019
Word count: 11011 (incl. references and appendix)
ABSTRACT
Social media adoption has received increasing attention in the SME sector. This research is using the technological, organizational and environmental (TOE) framework to identify the factors that influence the adoption and use of social media in the Dutch SME construction sector. With eight interviews in eight companies, this study was able to confirm determinants suggested by the TOE-framework. Besides confirmation, new determinants of social media adoption and usage are found: target
audience, knowledge, risk, bottom-up approach, employee diversity, and mimetic isomorphism. Several
2
1. INTRODUCTION
Many small and medium enterprises (SME’s) use social media as a critical marketing tool. Geho, Smith, and Lewis (2010) Found that SME’s can gain business value from the use of social media for internal and external purposes. With creating a social media strategy SME’s create new opportunities to communicate with their customer (Jantsch, 2010). The greatest advantages of social media marketing are improving search engine rankings, increasing traffic, and more business exposure (Stelzner, 2010). The ease and use of different platforms make social media accessible to both inexperienced and experienced people (Lacho & Marinello, 2010). This accessibility is of particular relevance for SME’s since they have traditionally lacked the skills to effectively use IT (Wielicki & Arendt, 2010). This ease and use are also true for the consumers of the SME’s, which brings opportunities but also risks to the SME. All these benefits are important for SME’s, the owners often wear many hats in the organization and have many demands on their time (Mershon, 2011). Besides marketing owners must also make sure that the organization runs efficiently, finances are well taken care of, and employees are satisfied and productive. With all these demands and limited time and resources, owners need to find creative ways to perform many tasks at limited costs. This is where social media plays an important role (Schaupp & Bélanger, 2014)
Prior research has only focused on SME’s in general. In this paper, the focus is on the SME construction sector in the Netherlands. In the Netherlands 99,5% of all companies are SME’s. In the construction sector 81% of the companies are SME’s. The total number of all SME’s are good for 70% of the employment opportunities and 61% of the gross domestic product (GDP)(CBS, 2015). The SME construction sector represents 10% of all the SME’s in the Netherlands (CBS, 2015). An increase in the construction industry’s efficiency would improve national GDP. Therefore, it is essential that the construction industry operate efficiently and productively and thus might be adopting social media (Love, Ghoneim, & Irani, 2004).
3
a ‘laggard’ in terms of adoption of IT when compared to other sectors of the economy (Love et al., 2004). Despite the advantages of social media for the construction industry, the adoption of social media in the sector is low compared to other industries. Research on the influences of adoption of social media in SME’s is limited and for the construction sector, in particular, is to my knowledge still missing. To fill the gap this study aims to understand the influences of the adoption of social media in de Dutch SME construction sector in terms of technology, organizational and environmental context. This results in the following research question: “What influences the adoption and use of social media
in the Dutch SME construction sector?”
This research has a qualitative theory development approach. Qualitative research methods are very useful for gaining insight into novel or unusual events, practices, phenomena, or trends still in the early stages of theory development (Edmondson & McManus, 2007). To gather data, directors and management employees from SME’s in the construction sector were interviewed.
This paper contributes to the existing literature in three ways. First, this research adds several concepts to the TOE-framework which influences adoption. Second, this research provides an in-depth look at the concepts of interest by using a qualitative approach. Third, prior research focused on SME’s in general. This research is focused on one particular industry and therefore are more generalizable for construction companies. The findings, therefore, contribute to the literature on social media, SME’s, and the construction industry.
For practitioners, this research is of relevance because it provides them with a roadmap to identify ways to increase their social media usage. The influences of social media adoption can guide them to where to invest to improve their social media presence. Also, this paper is of relevance for the SME owners who haven’t implemented social media thus far. This paper can guide them in the implementation, adoption and usage of social media.
The rest of this paper will be structured as follows. First, in the theory background, social media and the value of social media for SME’s will be described. Furthermore, a theoretical framework will be explained for structuring the input out of the interviews. Then the methodology will explain the research method and how the data was gathered and analysed. The results will be shown in chapter four. Finally, there is a discussion and conclusion with the limitations and further research.
2. THEORY BACKGROUND
4
2.1 Social media
The term “social media” can be described as a group of web applications like social networking sites, video sharing platforms, blogs, microblogs, or wikis that involve sharing multimedia, user-generated content for free or at a low cost (Fuchs, 2017). The key difference between social media and the traditional mass media is that the audience is active and has more power and control over what information is shared (Humphreys, 2016). These social media applications are built on the ideological and technological foundations of Web 2.0 which allows the creation and exchange of user-generated content (Kaplan & Haenlein, 2010). Where Web 1.0 had only limited opportunities for user engagement and interaction, Web 2.0 facilitates the active creation of content by users or members (Demek, Raschke, Janvrin, & Dilla, 2018). When social media applications were created in the mid-2000s, they were not designed to be organizational tools. After several years organizations started to experiment with them. At first, organizations used social media for marketing purposes (Israel, 2009). Now it is a two-way communication platform between organizations and their stakeholders (Preece & Shneiderman, 2009). In addition, social media allows managers to share and engage in this information environment (Ravichandran & Liu, 2011).
2.2 Value of social media in the construction industry
5
(BIM) based social platform for knowledge management has been proposed to enable project-related discussions, to provide visualizations to project stakeholders and thus to create tacit knowledge (R. Grover & Froese, 2016). To make communications easier between on-site and off-site teams a social media app like the interactive blueprint app “PlanGrid” provides the opportunity for project teams to view, share and sync blueprints on tablets and in the cloud (Oesterreich & Teuteberg, 2016). Furthermore, a survey done by the Construction Industry Council (CIC), which is the representative forum for the professional bodies, research organizations and specialist business associations in the construction industry in the UK, outlines how social media can be used to tackle the industry’s challenges. They see great potential for social media use for recruitment, promotion, reputation, innovation and collaboration within the industry (CIC 2050 Group Construction Industry Survey 2014, 2014). This is supported by ABN AMRO (2013) which argues that Dutch construction companies which use social media increases their authority, improves the speed of information sharing, strengthens the client relationships and increases transparency. As a result, they put themselves on the map, it increases collaboration between companies and their brand recognition increased. Another potential benefit of social media use for the construction industry is knowledge management. Due to the fragmented nature of the industry, knowledge management becomes important (Dave & Koskela, 2009). Social media has the potential to bridge the fragmentation between stakeholders of a project (Porkka, Jung, Paivanen, Javaja, & Suwal, 2012). Despite the benefits of social media, the construction industry in general lags behind most other industries in terms of social media usage.
2.3 Technology Organizational Environment framework
The Technology-Organization-Environment (TOE) framework (Tornatzky, Fleischer, & Chakrabarti, 1990) is useful in exploring the factors that may influence the use of social media by SME’s. The TOE framework as an organization-level theory explains how the firm context influences the adoption and implementation of innovations (Baker, 2012). In a variety of contexts the framework is empirically supported (e.g., e-business, mobile business, and enterprise resource planning) (Pan & Jang, 2008; Picoto, Belanger, & Palma-dos-Reis, 2012; Zhu & Kraemer, 2005). The TOE framework consists of three elements: (1) technological, (2) organizational, and (3) environmental contexts.
2.3.1 Technological Context
6
constructs in the technological context are relative advantage, complexity, and compatibility. (Grover, 1993; Ramdani, Kawalek, & Lorenzo, 2009; Thong, 1999)
Relative advantage defines as “the degree to which an innovation is perceived as being better than the idea it supersedes
”
(Rogers, 2010). Schaupp and Bélanger (2014) argue that the adoption of social media by SME’s heavily depends on the degree to which they can utilize social media sites and their offerings. Jantsch (2010) has found that a great deal of value can be created when technology is leveraged to facilitate and enhance social interaction. Therefore I assume that if companies see the value of social media for their enterprise they will adopt social media and use it frequently.The next construct is complexity: “the degree to which an innovation is perceived as […] difficult to understand and use” (Rogers, 2010). Lacho & Marinello (2010) state that social media is accessible for both experienced and inexperienced users. Yet, 65% of SME owners attempt to manage social media without the necessary skills (Looney & Ryerson, 2011). This is also confirmed in the information systems literature, where human resources in terms of knowledge and skills are required to implement a specific technology (Soares-Aguiar & Palma-dos-Reis, 2008; Zhu & Kraemer, 2005). Similarly, Askool and Nakata (2011) found that employee training is needed for social media adoption.
The last construct is compatibility and reflects “the degree to which an innovation is perceived as being consistent with the existing value, past experiences, and needs of receivers” (Rogers, 2010). Zhu and Kraemer (2005) argue that the technology infrastructure in the firm should support the specific technology implementation. In terms of social media, the hardware should be able for social media usage and for software the social media applications and programs used in the firms should be integrated within each other (Askool & Nakata, 2011). Therefore I assume if programs have social media applications integrated social media adoption and usage will rise.
2.3.2 Organizational Context
7
Intra-firm communications can support or prevent the adoption of technology innovations (Baker, 2012). Top management support creates a fertile environment for adopting innovations (Ramdani et al., 2009). There are several ways for top management support. First, true participation where top management takes action or intervenes personally. Second, by placing the technology innovation as an important business tool, executive involvement as a psychological state occurs. And last, “air cover” where top management supports the technology innovation by communicating a vision and allocating resources (Borgman, Bahli, Heier, & Schewski, 2013).
The structure of a firm has been studied to identify its relationship to the innovation adoption process. Organic and decentralized organization are more likely to adopt new technology innovations. On the other hand, formalized and centralized organizations are less likely to initiate a new innovation but are better in implementing a technology innovation. (Baker, 2012; Frambach & Schillewaert, 2002; Zaltman, Duncan, & Holbek, 1973) Since the Dutch construction sector is a tradition-based sector (van Egmond-de Wilde de Ligny & Mohammadi, 2011), I assume most of the companies have a formalized and centralized organization. And therefore, social media adoption and usage will be less likely to be initiated.
The research in slack resources and their effect on innovations is ambiguous. Much research state that slack promotes innovation since firms have the resources for pilots and create a culture of experiments. Conversely, firms with slack are prone to inefficiency and promote risk-taking behaviour (Huang & Chen, 2010).
2.3.3 Environmental Context
The environmental context is where the firm conducts its business. The structure of the industry, competitors, access to resources supplied by others, and the regulatory environment are all part of the environmental context (Baker, 2012; Borgman et al., 2013; Tornatzky et al., 1990).
Within the industry structure, intense competition is a stimulation to adopt technology innovation (Baker, 2012; Mansfield, 1977). By adopting new innovations firms might be able to change the structure of the industry and leverage new ways to outperform competitors (Lippert & Govindarajulu, 2006; Porter & Millar, 1985). Prior research in e-business usage by Zhu and Kraemer (2005) has confirmed this. Therefore, businesses in a more competitive environment are more motivated to use new innovative technology such as social media.
8
for social media (Lin & Lu, 2011). Besides competitive pressure Schaupp and Bélanger (2014) state that consumer pressure is also relevant for the adoption of social media in SME’s. Customers may have the ability to pressure organizations in adopting new technology, depending on their bargaining power (Teo, Wei, & Benbasat, 2003). Therefore if customers have enough bargaining power to request social media usage from a firm, it is more likely a firm will adopt and use social media.
The resources supplied by others can be seen as the availability of mobile resources for the use of social media (Schaupp & Bélanger, 2014). The prices and availability of mobile devices are likely to influence the use (Tarasewich, Nickerson, & Warkentin, 2002). Businesses that are operating with mobile devices are therefore more likely to use social media.
Government regulation can have a positive and negative effect on innovation (Baker, 2012). By providing subsidies or introducing regulation that force firms to adopt an innovation. Conversely, governments can introduce constraining regulation which can make adoption of an innovation less attractive (Frambach & Schillewaert, 2002). In the European Union, there is a law introduced on may the 25th of 2018: General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR). This legislation has strengthened the privacy rights of people, and therefore I assume it has an influence on the usage of social media within organizations.
3 METHODOLOGY
In this chapter first, the research approach is explained, followed by the data collection method and lastly, the data analysis is explained.
3.1 Research approach
The literature around social media is evolving. There have been a number of studies concerning the value of social media in SME’s. However, there is little knowledge about the Dutch SME’s in the construction industry and what the influences are for social media adoption and usage. Therefore it is suggested that a more comprehensive understanding is needed of why organizations are late in adopting social media. Theory development is chosen to explain and identify the mechanisms that explain this phenomenon. Qualitative research methods are very useful for gaining insight into novel or unusual events, practices, phenomena, or trends still in the early stages of theory development(Edmondson & McManus, 2007).
3.2 Data collection
9
and ask questions about new ideas that arise during the interview (Edwards & Holland, 2013). For a comprehensive understanding of the influences of social media adoption and usage, eight interviews were held between 03-12-2018 and 05-01-2019 with directors and management employees of SME’s in the construction sector of eight companies. Directors and management employees were chosen because they know why and how social media is implemented and used within the company. These people were approached through the network of the author. The average duration of the interviews was 50 minutes. A company is considered an SME when the staff headcount is between 10 and 250 employees and the turnover is between €2m and €50m (European Commission, 2019). Measuring for controllability, validity, and reliability will enhance inter-subjective agreements of research products (Aken, Berends, & Bij, 2012). To make the research controllable the process of the research is described in a way it can be easily replicated by a third party. There are some biases that need to be controlled to have reliable research. With another person to control the coding process, the researcher bias is controlled. Furthermore, a protocol is developed to guide the interview (appendix B).
3.3 Data analysis
Interviewees were asked about their general opinion of social media, the technology in their company, the organization of the company and their environment. The interviews were recorded to make sure no information was lost. These recordings were coded using inductive coding based on Thomas' (2006) five steps : (1) Preparation of raw data files (data cleaning): The raw data will be formatted into a common format. (2) Close reading of the text: the text will be studied until the researcher is familiar with its content and understand the themes and events covered in the text. (3) Creation of categories: the researcher identifies and defines categories of themes. (4) Overlapping coding and uncoded text: two rules are different from the typically used quantitative coding: a) a segment of text may be code into more than one category, and b) a considerable amount of the text may not be assigned to any category because it is not relevant to the evaluation objective. (5) Continuing revisions and refinement of category system: in each category there will be sub-categories. Finally, the results of the coding are explained in the results section.
4 RESULTS
In this chapter, the theory is applied to the interview results. First, the technological context from the companies will be discussed. Second, the companies are compared based on their organizational context. Last, the environmental influences are discussed.
4.1 Technological Context
10
The relative advantage of technology innovation, in this case social media, should increase the adoption and use of social media (Rogers, 2010). The relative advantage suggested by the theory are the ways social media can be used within a company compared to current technologies. Social media use for recruitment, promotion, reputation, innovation, knowledge sharing and collaboration within the industry are suggested for construction companies (CIC 2050, 2014; Porkka et al., 2012). However, companies do not see all the opportunities for social media. While theory suggests multiple benefits, companies see social media as a platform to communicate towards external parties. Social media gives companies the opportunity to show the world what they are creating. With social media they create enthusiasm towards the construction industry and create brand recognition. Therefore, the relative advantage in terms of reputation is visible in the companies.
“The thing we want to achieve with social media is brand recognition” – P1
“Social media can change the negative image the industry has, we can show the positive the industry has to offer.” - P2
However, despite the benefits social media has to offer in terms of reputation, they also see a downside in terms of reputation management. Social media is a two-way communication platform and customers have a great deal of power (Humphreys, 2016). Therefore, there are risks related to social media use. The positive side of social media can shift towards a negative side. Companies argue that nine of the ten messages are positive, but the negative messages are the ones that stick and trying to show otherwise is costing the companies energy.
“If you’re receiving negative attention on social media, how do you handle it? Nine out of ten are positive messages, but the negative message is the one that keeps me awake.” – P4 “Negative information spreads fast and often seen as true. Of course, it is a beautiful platform to
show them otherwise, but that takes a lot of energy” – P6
Social media usage for recruitment is mentioned by almost all the companies and is perhaps even more important than reputation management. Currently, the human resources in the construction industry in the Netherlands are scarce (UWV, 2018). Social media is mentioned by the companies as a way to show future and current employees how interesting the company is. With social media they try to attract young people towards the construction industry. They argue that the construction industry has an old fashioned image, and social media is useful in changing that image. For reputation and recruitment companies see an advantage for social media towards other media platforms.
11
The relative advantage of communication through social media is lacking. The ability to contact companies through social media is present in half of the companies. However, both companies and customers prefer the current communication channels (e.g. telephone and e-mail). PlanGrid, a social media app, provides the opportunity for project teams to view, share and sync blueprints on tablets and in the cloud. Oesterreich & Teuteberg (2016) argue PlanGrid will make communications easier between on-site and off-site teams. Only one company is making use of an application to communicate with their employees. That company made their own app to communicate with their employees on-site. Daily instructions are given to their employees and the employees send back photos to the office to guarantee quality and safety checkings.
“We’ve built our own application, daily jobs are distributed towards the construction site and the employees on-site send us photo’s of the quality and safety checks.” –P6
The other companies, however, do not make use of a social media platform or application. If there is an immediate change in the blueprint they send the new blueprint to the tablet on-site through e-mail. Besides that, the next day there still will be disturbed a blueprint on paper. Blueprints in the construction sector are very detailed and companies say that the blueprints on tablets are not as clear as on paper. Additionally, tablets are fragile and employees want to have a blueprint at hand. Possibly the greatest advantage social media has to offer for improving the efficiency and productivity in the construction sector is knowledge sharing and collaboration. In the construction sector, many different stakeholders work together on a project. Porkka et al. (2012) showed in their research that social media can bridge the fragmentation between the stakeholders of the project. A BIM-based social platform can enable project-related discussions or provide visualizations to project stakeholders (Oesterreich & Teuteberg, 2016). Although half of the companies say that they are willing to share everything on social media, it does not happen. The other companies are not willing to share everything on social media. In their opinion, the plans made with clients are of a private matter and one company states that their knowledge is their competitive advantage. One person summed it up all together.
“Everyone is screaming: “We have to share everything.” But when it comes to it… When I invent the wheel, I’m not going to share that wheel. I’m willing to share a little, but not everything” – P3
12
“Almost 80% of my clients are regular clients, and they almost always came through mouth to
word communication” –P3
Overall the relative advantage for adopting social media is present in the companies. The relative advantage for companies to create brand recognition and recruitment were enough reasons for most companies to create a social media presence. However, they are not aware of its full potential.
4.1.2 Complexity
Complexity is about the ease and use of social media. Lacho and Marinello (2010) state that social media is a platform for both inexperienced and technological people. The companies think they have the expertise in-house because of two reasons. One, current employees with interest in social media have the knowledge. Two, new young people arriving in the company bring in new knowledge. Contrarily to the argument of Lacho & Marinello (2010), Looney and Ryerson (2011) found that 65% of SME owners do not have the necessary skills to manage their social media. As discussed in the paragraph above, companies use social media only for recruitment and brand recognition and for those parts the knowledge is mostly available in the company. However, as discussed, there are more ways for social media to create value for the company. Companies are not aware of them or do not see the relative advantage towards it and that has to do with the lack of knowledge. Currently, employees are not hired for social media purposes. If an employee has social media skills it is an advantage, but they are not selected on social media skills.
“We don’t hire employees for social media usage within the firm.” – P3 “We hire craftsmen and if they have social media knowledge that is an advantage but
certainly not a requirement.” –P4
One company mentioned hiring people for social media might perhaps happen in the future since they think if social media emerges more into their strategy, it may become necessary. An important factor influencing social media adoption is employee training (Askool & Nakata, 2011). However, opportunities for social media training are lacking. Companies give three reasons for the lack of training. First, they do not see the value. Second, employees do not ask for social media training, and third, employees do not want social media training.
1 -“No I don’t think that is necessary” – P7
2- “We did not have any demand for social media training from the employees” – P4 3- “I indicated towards the employees that perhaps we should do something with social media
13
One company did provide a non-committal social media workshop for their employees once, but they did not feel it is necessary to give training on a timely basis since there were no significant results. The composition of the employees seems to be an influence in the adoption of social media. The new generation is willing to use social media and asks for more social media usage. In contrast to the new generation, the older generation is not so fund of the new technology and instead of putting time into learning the new technology, they rather work.
“We can bind the younger generation with new technology to our organization, while the older
generation is thinking: this is costing me time and effort I rather put into work.” –P4
One company mentioned that the mix in the organizations creates are environment where employees are willing to learn from each other. The older generation learns the younger generation the intricacies of the profession, while the younger generation learns the older generation how new technology such as social media works.
4.1.3 Compatibility
The compatibility is about the technology infrastructure. A company would adopt an innovation earlier if the present technology infrastructure is compatible with the new technology (Zhu & Kraemer, 2005). The first part of the infrastructure is about the technology assets available for social media usage. Simply put, hardware. A computer, tablet, phone and an internet connection is all that is required to use social media. These basic technologies for social media are available in all companies since companies already have these assets in-house for their day to day business (e.g. administrative, calculation, making blueprints). Therefore the compatibility in terms of hardware is not a problem for social media adoption in the office. Furthermore, the majority of the companies distributed laptops, tablets and phones to the construction site. Since all the companies have the possibility to use social media in the office and the majority on the construction site, I would argue that the hardware is not an influence whether or not to adopt social media.
“At the office we have all the necessary equipment for social media use: smartphones, PC, tablets.” – P1
14
send and then using social media for sharing has no more value than sending an e-mail. I would argue this is an important influence whether companies will start using social media to share and collaborate with each other. At this point, the possibility is not there, or companies are not aware the possibility is there.
“There are no programs I’m working with that have integrated social media tools, or I’m just not familiar with them.” - P5
4.2 Organizational Context
Size is recognized as an important facilitator for the adoption of technology innovations (Tornatzky et al., 1990). Larger organizations have more resources available and therefore are able to test new social media opportunities. On the other hand, because small organizations have fewer resources available social media can be an opportunity for cheap advertising and promotion. Between the selected companies the small organizations are less active on social media. The medium-sized organizations use social media more frequently. As suggested in the theory small organizations could use social media as a cheap advertising and promotion tool, but they argue that while the platform is free of use, the hours spend on social media are not.
“We’re not a world concern, time spend on social media has to earn itself back, I’m afraid if we spend too much time on social media our expenditures will rise and we price ourselves out of the market” –
P4
The medium-sized firms are saying that they make sufficient time and money available if there is a good idea in terms of social media usage. They argue that money is not an issue in social media usage, but time perhaps is. Employees are mostly busy with the core business, and social media is, therefore, a neglected child.
“I think we have enough budget for social media, but maybe there is not enough time available.” –P2
“We have a budget for social media, but we don’t have people for social media. Before the crisis we had an office manager, among his tasks was social media. At this moment we do not have hired a
new office manager for financial reasons. And current employees do not have the time” – P5
15
page has been set up for the employees to show their family and friends what they are working on. The demand came from within the company.
“There are some employees who are interested in using social media, they want to share on their own Facebook page what projects they are working.” P7
The other company does nothing with social media, even while the management team is in favour of using social media the directors are firmly against social media. Surprisingly this is one of the biggest firms in the sample. In contrast to the last paragraph where size was mentioned as a facilitator of adoption, top management support seems to be an immense influence on social media adoption. Their reason for not adopting social media is simple, do it right or do not do it at all. They argue that you do not buy a house from the internet, but if you’re present on social media you should keep it up-to-date. They feel social media use will not rise acquisition but will decrease acquisition when not used properly. This is in line with Kaplan and Haenlein (2010), they state that for creating a relationship with your customers on social media you have to be active.
“In different industries, online shopping is booming, then social media is an effective way to increase your sales. In the construction industry, it is different, people do not buy a house from the internet. Therefore social media use can only damage our reputation when our social media use is not up to
date.” –P8
Conversely, in companies with top management support, social media is encouraged, even with their limited knowledge about the full potential of social media usage. They feel they need to put more energy into it, but do not know how. Age is an important factor, where the younger directors are using social media personally, the older generation of directors are personally more or less inactive. The younger directors are showing a form of true participation (Borgman et al., 2013) However, even the personally inactive directors do notice that social media is an important tool. They do not want to limit their employees with restrictions on time, money and people which is an example of top management support through air cover (Borgman et al., 2013). Although time and money can be an issue, since the construction industry is currently scarce in human resources, employees do not always have the time to give it the amount of attention needed. The encouragement to use social media more actively is more or less focused on the employees in the office, employees on the construction site are not encouraged nor discouraged to use social media.
“We are aware of the opportunities social media provides. However, we do not know how to fill it in” –P2
16
that companies have an organic and decentralized organization, which are more likely to adopt new technology innovations (Baker, 2012; Frambach & Schillewaert, 2002; Zaltman et al., 1973). However, the structure does not seem to be of any influences on the adoption of social media if you look at the differences in social media presence. The companies with no social media at all and the most active on social media all have the same structure.
One director did mention something interesting. He felt that employees were afraid to post something on social media since they did not know the guidelines. In the TOE-framework there is nothing mentioned about strategy to increase adoption. However, Kaplan and Haenlein (2010) suggest that companies should start with a strategy regarding social media. Overall a social media strategy is lacking in the companies. There are no specific formal rules about social media use, but there are some informal rules. The informal rules in the companies are more or less the same, there are a couple of people who post on social media. When others have an update for social media they go to them. The companies argue that since they have a flat structure, the employees are free and willing to bring in new ideas.
“We don’t have any guidelines, we give employees freedom and with that ownership.” –P3
4.3 Environmental context
While the theory suggests that the construction sector operates in a competitive environment (Oesterreich & Teuteberg, 2016). Companies feel that the competition has slumped after the financial crisis. There is more demand for construction companies and the supply of construction companies is less because of the bankruptcy of companies in the financial crisis.
“The competitive environment is less tight, currently there are fewer construction companies and the demand increased.” –P2
17
competition is toned down and companies are looking for new ways to present themselves, including social media. This in line with the research done by Aghion, Bloom, Blundell, Griffith, and Howitt (2005). They argue that the relation between competition and innovation adoption is an inverted-U curve. Where heavily competition forces companies to cut cost and research and development is the first division to be cut. With average competition, it give firms the space to outperform each other with new technology adaption, and last with little competition firms do not have the urge to innovate and adopt new technology.
In the construction industry competitors often call each other “concullega” which is a merger of the two Dutch words “concurrent” (competitor) and “collega” (colleague). Companies see each other as a competitor, but also as a colleague since companies in the industry often collaborate on projects. Social media as a platform to collaborate and communicate with each other is suggested in the theory to create value for the construction industry (ABN AMRO, 2013; Oesterreich & Teuteberg, 2016). If multiple companies are using social media platforms to collaborate and communicate it can create network externalities. The value of an innovation becomes more valuable when the number of users rises (Frambach & Schillewaert, 2002). A simple example; if only one person on earth has a telephone, who is he going to call? The telephone has no value for the person since it is useless. Social media is heavily dependent on network externalities (Lin & Lu, 2011). As discussed in paragraph 4.1.1 companies currently see no relative advantage for collaboration and communication through social media. All the companies in the environment use telephone and e-mail as their primary communication channels and social media is therefore not creating a network externality. A company did mention another phenomenon what is currently not found in the TOE-framework. The company noticed that after they started experimenting with posting videos on YouTube to attract new employees, other companies in the environment copied them. This is a form of “mimetic isomorphism” were firms reduce the uncertainty from decisions by copying the decision choices made by other firms (Tingling & Parent, 2002).
“We started posting video’s on YouTube to attract new employees, a few weeks later I saw two other companies also posting video’s for recruitment.” –P3
Customer pressure is labelled as a factor influencing the adoption of technology innovation, depending on their bargain power (Teo et al., 2003). Companies which already adopted social media did not get demands for more social media use from their clients. They do sometimes receive questions from their clients not to show the clients project. So in a sense, one could argue that customer pressure is a factor for not adopting social media.
18
However, a company which did not adopt social media so far did get demands from clients to use social media. I would suggest looking at it in a different way, and state that the target audience of the company is of more relevance whether or not to adopt social media. Companies who primary build for other businesses, did not get much demand for social media use. Companies building mostly for consumers did get asked for more social media presence. And even then it depends on the client. So in that way the consumer does have the power whether or not their project appears on social media, it does not have the power to make a company adopt or quit social media.
“We get a lot of demands from private individuals to start using social media, but our direction is firmly against it.” –P8
Schaupp and Bélanger (2014) argue that the mobile environment where a company is located depends whether companies adopt and use social media. The prices and the availability of devices influences the use (Tarasewich et al., 2002). The prices of mobile devices (e.g. computer, laptop, tablet and mobile phone) do not influence the adoption of social media. They all replied with the same resolute answer that the prices of devices are low compared with other expenditures. And besides that, companies do not have to buy them for social media, they are already available.
“Personally? way to expensive! Everything is expensive. Our employees get all their tools and a van,
they are on the road with roughly €10.000,-. Then the price of a phone is nothing compared to that.” –P6
“Compared to the prices of human resources I’m not shocked by technology prices.” –P1
The government can have a positive and negative effect on innovations (Baker, 2012). Providing subsidy or introducing regulation which forces to use social media the government can influence the adoption of social media. The companies do not see signs of positive governmental interference towards social media adoption. On the other hand, there are signs of a negative influence. In one company half their customer base includes government or semi-government organizations. One government organization, in particular, has indicated that they are not allowed to communicate anything at all. Making pictures to record quality is already a big issue. However, this is client based agreement and has nothing to do with government regulation as suggested by Frambach & Schillewaert (2002) and more to the target audience I mentioned before.
“Half our customers are government or semi-government. Some clients are having trouble when we make pictures to record the quality of our work. Which is not even meant for social media purposes.”
–P2
19
European Union. Companies are aware of the new legislation but do not seem to find any hinder through it in terms of social media use. Most of the companies ask for permission to post on social media about the project. While others argue that since they make pictures from the outside, they do not need permission. At this point, it does not seem to be an influence on whether or not to use social media, but perhaps in the future, it will.
“We make agreements with our clients, most of the clients like it, it has not been an impeding factor” –P2
“We share projects but I don’t think we have permission from the future residents. We make the pictures from the street, I have no idea if we need permission.” P6
5. DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION
This research was focused on the influences of adoption and usage of social media in the Dutch SME construction industry. This research is based on the TOE-framework. Eight interviews were conducted with directors and employees of the management team. Most influences of social media adoption are in line with the theory around technology innovation. However, there are determinants which are different than suggested in the TOE-framework. In this study, there are made several contributions to the TOE-framework. This will be discussed below.
For the technology context, the relative advantage by the companies is missing for knowledge sharing, collaboration and more or less in communication. Companies are not aware of the possibilities and or do not see the advantage to use social media instead of the current technology. Therefore I would argue that not the relative advantage is of importance to the adoption of social media but the
knowledge of the possibilities. One could hardly make a comparison between two different options if
one option is not known. This is supported by Leonard-Barton (1995) she argues that knowledge is essential to successful adoption.
The companies see an advantage for recruitment and public relations. However, most of the companies see social media also as a reputation risk. For two companies reputation risk is the reason for not adopting social media. You could argue that risk assessment is part of the relative advantage. I personally disagree, since related advantage has been defined as “the degree to which an innovation is perceived as being better than the idea it supersedes
”
(Rogers, 2010). Companies argue that social media is useful for recruitment and public relation and therefore “better than the idea it supersedes”. However, the adherent risks concerned with social media are reasons not to adopt.20
adoption. However, instead of size, the slack resources of a company are more important. Which is in line with research from Kimberly (1976) he argues that size is often a crude proxy for underlying factors such as the availability of resources. Therefore, I would argue that instead of organization size, slack resources are an influence on social media adoption.
The IT infrastructure of a company has an impact on the adoption of new technology (Zhu & Kraemer, 2005). However, the TOE-framework does not make a difference between hardware and software. For social media adoption hardware is definitely necessary but not an impeding factor. Conversely, software is not necessary for adoption, but an impeding factor to the usage of social media (Askool & Nakata, 2011).
Besides top management support, another intra-firm communication is noticed as an influence on social media adoption. Based on the demand from the employees, companies started using social media. This bottom-up approach for technology adoption cannot be found in the TOE-framework. However, for social media adoption in the construction sector, it is an import influence. The bottom-up approach has proven its value in the construction industry with the adoption of BIM in the UK. With the bottom-up approach resistance to change decreased (Arayici et al., 2011).
The structure of the companies was the same in the sample. Therefore, differences in social media use and adoption cannot be explained in this study with whether an organization has an organic and decentralized structure or formalized and centralized structure. However, employee diversity influences the adoption and use of social media. The participants argue that the mix between young and old employees creates a learning curve. While the elderly teach the youngster the intricacies of the profession, the younger generations bring in new knowledge concerning social media. Employee diversity is widely recognized for achieving greater innovation and creativity (Shen, Chanda, D’netto, & Monga, 2009). However, in the TOE-framework it has not been mentioned.
In the TOE-framework intense competition is a stimulation to adopt technology for SME’s (Lippert & Govindarajulu, 2006). For the construction industry intense competition does not provide a stimulation to adopt new technology. However, competitive competition is still an influence. But it is supported by another theory. The construction industry's relation between competition and innovation adoption is an inverted-U curve, where intense competition leads to a decrease in innovation adaption because of cutting costs. An average competition increases innovation adoption since companies have the freedom and resources to try new things and outperform each other. This is in line with research by Aghion, Bloom, Blundell, Griffith, and Howitt (2005).
21
that they copy behaviour regarding social media from other companies in their environment (Tingling & Parent, 2002). Mimetic isomorphism has not been indicated in the TOE-framework as an influence of adoption.
Customer pressure is labelled as an influence of adoption (Teo et al., 2003). However, the customers do not have the bargaining power to make companies adopt social media. The target audience of a company is an influence of social media adoption. To my knowledge, there is no theory available to explain this phenomenon.
Overall, the findings are an extension towards the TOE-framework. Earlier research has been confirmed and several concepts are added or explained further in-depth. In addition, the paper adds to the social media, SME and the construction industry research. Finally, owners, directors and employees can consider the influences of social media adoption as a guide to adopt or improve their social media usage.
There are several limitations to this study. First, the participants were all contacted through the author's network. All the companies are settled in the east of the Netherlands and therefore generalizability may have decreased for the rest of the Netherlands. Second, most of the participants in the study where attracted towards the subject social media. They are more active on social media than the average company in the environment. However, this study is about the influences and usage of social media, the non-adapters are perhaps the most interesting. Many companies who did not adopt social media yet were not attracted to the subject and therefore unwilling to participate. This may have influenced the results and because of this, the validity of this study may have decreased. Third, the number of interviews is low, the separation line between homogenous (4-12) and heterogeneous (12-30) groups is twelve interviews (Saunders, 2012). Therefore eight interviews in a homogenous construction industry may be sufficient. Fourth, There have been adjustments to the theoretical background after the interviews were conducted. Therefore, some insights in concepts are less exposed. Last, the theoretical background consists a lot of old references. A number of new studies on social media were not available for the author.
22
REFERENCES
ABN AMRO. (2013). social media in de bouw. Retrieved from https://www.bothsocial.nl/wp-content/uploads/2013/04/bouw-rapport-socialmediaindebouw.pdf
Aghion, P., Bloom, N., Blundell, R., Griffith, R., & Howitt, P. (2005). Competition and innovation: An inverted-U relationship. The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 120(2), 701–728.
Aken, J. E., Berends, J. J., & Bij, J. D. (2012). Problem solving in organizations: A methodological
handbook for business and management students. Cambridge University Press.
Arayici, Y., Coates, P., Koskela, L., Kagioglou, M., Usher, C., & O’reilly, K. (2011). Technology adoption in the BIM implementation for lean architectural practice. Automation in Construction, 20(2), 189–195.
Askool, S., & Nakata, K. (2011). A conceptual model for acceptance of social CRM systems based on a scoping study. AI & SOCIETY, 26(3), 205–220. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00146-010-0311-5 Baker, J. (2012). The technology–organization–environment framework. In Information systems theory
(pp. 231–245). Springer.
Bankvall, L., Bygballe, L. E., Dubois, A., & Jahre, M. (2010). Interdependence in supply chains and projects in construction. Supply Chain Management: An International Journal, 15(5), 385–393. Bonsón, E., & Flores, F. (2011). Social media and corporate dialogue: the response of global financial
institutions. Online Information Review, 35(1), 34–49.
Borgman, H. P., Bahli, B., Heier, H., & Schewski, F. (2013). Cloudrise: exploring cloud computing adoption and governance with the TOE framework. In System Sciences (HICSS), 2013 46th Hawaii
International Conference on (pp. 4425–4435). IEEE.
CBS. (2013). Twee derde van de bedrijven gebruikt nu sociale media. Retrieved January 21, 2019, from https://www.cbs.nl/nl-nl/nieuws/2015/44/twee-derde-van-de-bedrijven-gebruikt-nu-sociale-media
CBS. (2015). Staat van het MKB 2015. De Staat van het MKB. Retrieved from http://www.staatvanhetmkb.nl/dashboard/economisch-belang
CBS. (2017). StatLine - ICT-gebruik bij kleine bedrijven; bedrijfstak en bedrijfsgrootte, 2017. Retrieved
January 21, 2019, from
https://opendata.cbs.nl/statline/#/CBS/nl/dataset/83955NED/table?ts=1546694914789
CIC 2050 Group Construction Industry Survey 2014. (2014). Retrieved from http://cic.org.uk/admin/resources/05-11-14cic-2050-group-construction-industry-survey-2014final.pdf
Collins, P. D., Hage, J., & Hull, F. M. (1988). Organizational and technological predictors of change in automaticity. Academy of Management Journal, 31(3), 512–543.
Dave, B., & Koskela, L. (2009). Collaborative knowledge management—A construction case study.
Automation in Construction, 18(7), 894–902. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.AUTCON.2009.03.015
Demek, K. C., Raschke, R. L., Janvrin, D. J., & Dilla, W. N. (2018). Do organizations use a formalized risk management process to address social media risk? International Journal of Accounting
Information Systems, 28, 31–44. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.ACCINF.2017.12.004
23
Edmondson, A. C., & McManus, S. E. (2007). Methodological fit in management field research.
Academy of Management Review, 32(4), 1246–1264.
Edwards, R., & Holland, J. (2013). What is qualitative interviewing? A&C Black.
Frambach, R. T., & Schillewaert, N. (2002). Organizational innovation adoption: A multi-level framework of determinants and opportunities for future research. Journal of Business Research,
55(2), 163–176.
Fuchs, C. (2017). Social media: A critical introduction. Sage.
Geho, P., Smith, S., & Lewis, S. D. (2010). Is Twitter a viable commercial use platform for small businesses? An empirical study targeting two audiences in the small business community. The
Entrepreneurial Executive, 15(1), 73–85.
Grover, R., & Froese, T. M. (2016). Knowledge Management in Construction Using a SocioBIM Platform: A Case Study of AYO Smart Home Project. Procedia Engineering, 145, 1283–1290. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.proeng.2016.04.165
Grover, V. (1993). An empirically derived model for the adoption of customer‐based interorganizational systems. Decision Sciences, 24(3), 603–640.
Huang, Y.-F., & Chen, C.-J. (2010). The impact of technological diversity and organizational slack on innovation. Technovation, 30(7–8), 420–428.
Humphreys, A. (2016). Social media: Enduring principles. Oxford University Press.
Israel, S. (2009). Twitterville : how businesses can thrive in the new global neighborhoods. Portfolio. Jantsch, J. (2010). Let’s talk: social media for small business. Duck Tape Marketing. Accessed July, 25,
2014.
Kaplan, A. M., & Haenlein, M. (2010). Users of the world, unite! The challenges and opportunities of Social Media. Business Horizons, 53(1), 59–68. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.BUSHOR.2009.09.003 Kimberly, J. R. (1976). Organizational size and the structuralist perspective: A review, critique, and
proposal. Administrative Science Quarterly, 571–597.
Lacho, K. J., & Marinello, C. (2010). How small business owners can use social networking to promote their business. The Entrepreneurial Executive, 15, 127.
Leonard-Barton, D. (1995). Wellsprings of knowledge: Building and sustaining the sources of innovation.
Lin, K.-Y., & Lu, H.-P. (2011). Why people use social networking sites: An empirical study integrating network externalities and motivation theory. Computers in Human Behavior, 27(3), 1152–1161. Lippert, S. K., & Govindarajulu, C. (2006). Technological, organizational, and environmental
antecedents to web services adoption. Communications of the IIMA, 6(1), 14.
Looney, B., & Ryerson, A. (2011). So, you’re a Millennial–Create us a Facebook presence. The Business
Review, Cambridge, 17(1), 157–163.
Love, P. E. D., Ghoneim, A., & Irani, Z. (2004). Information technology evaluation: classifying indirect costs using the structured case method. Journal of Enterprise Information Management, 17(4), 312–325. https://doi.org/10.1108/17410390410548724
24
Moeilijk vervulbare vacatures Landelijk overzicht van beroepen. (n.d.). Retrieved from
https://www.uwv.nl/overuwv/Images/moeilijk-vervulbare-vacatures-landelijk-overzicht-van-beroepen.pdf
Oesterreich, T. D., & Teuteberg, F. (2016). Understanding the implications of digitisation and automation in the context of Industry 4.0: A triangulation approach and elements of a research agenda for the construction industry. Computers in Industry, 83, 121–139. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.COMPIND.2016.09.006
Pan, M.-J., & Jang, W.-Y. (2008). Determinants of the adoption of enterprise resource planning within the technology-organization-environment framework: Taiwan’s communications industry.
Journal of Computer Information Systems, 48(3), 94–102.
Picoto, W., Belanger, F., & Palma-dos-Reis, A. (2012). Leveraging on Mobile Business to Enhance Firm Performance: an Organizational Level Study. In ECIS (p. 113).
Porkka, J., Jung, N., Paivanen, J., Javaja, P., & Suwal, S. (2012). Role of social media in the development of land use and building projects. In Proceedings of ECPPM.
Porter, M. E., & Millar, V. E. (1985). How information gives you competitive advantage. Harvard Business Review Cambridge, MA.
Preece, J., & Shneiderman, B. (2009). The Reader-to-Leader Framework: Motivating
Technology-Mediated Social Participation Theory & Review. Transactions on Human-Computer Interaction AIS Transactions on Human-Computer Interaction (Vol. 1). Retrieved from
https://aisel.aisnet.org/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1004&context=thci
Ramdani, B., Kawalek, P., & Lorenzo, O. (2009). Predicting SMEs’ adoption of enterprise systems.
Journal of Enterprise Information Management, 22(1/2), 10–24.
Ravichandran, T., & Liu, Y. (2011). Environmental Factors, Managerial Processes, and Information Technology Investment Strategies. Decision Sciences, 42(3), 537–574. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-5915.2011.00323.x
Rogers, E. M. (2010). Diffusion of innovations. Simon and Schuster.
Saunders, M. N. K. (2012). Choosing research participants. Qualitative Organizational Research: Core
Methods and Current Challenges, 35–52.
Schaupp, L. C., & Bélanger, F. (2013). The value of social media for small businesses. Journal of
Information Systems, 28(1), 187–207.
Schaupp, L. C., & Bélanger, F. (2014). The Value of Social Media for Small Businesses. Journal of
Information Systems, 28(1), 187–207. https://doi.org/10.2308/isys-50674
Shen, J., Chanda, A., D’netto, B., & Monga, M. (2009). Managing diversity through human resource management: An international perspective and conceptual framework. The International Journal
of Human Resource Management, 20(2), 235–251.
Soares-Aguiar, A., & Palma-dos-Reis, A. (2008). Why do firms adopt e-procurement systems? Using logistic regression to empirically test a conceptual model. IEEE Transactions on Engineering
Management, 55(1), 120–133.
Stelzner, M. A. (2010). 2013 Social media marketing industry report: How marketers are using social
media to grow their businesses. SocialMediaExaminer. com.
Tarasewich, P., Nickerson, R. C., & Warkentin, M. (2002). Issues in mobile e-commerce.
25
Teo, H.-H., Wei, K. K., & Benbasat, I. (2003). Predicting intention to adopt interorganizational linkages: An institutional perspective. MIS Quarterly, 19–49.
Thomas, D. R. (2006). A general inductive approach for analyzing qualitative evaluation data. American
Journal of Evaluation, 27(2), 237–246.
Thong, J. Y. L. (1999). An Integrated Model of Information Systems Adoption in Small Businesses.
Journal of Management Information Systems, 15(4), 187–214. https://doi.org/10.1080/07421222.1999.11518227
Tingling, P., & Parent, M. (2002). Mimetic Isomorphism and TechnologyEvaluation: Does Imitation TranscendJudgment? Journal of the Association for Information Systems, 3(1), 5.
Tornatzky, L. G., Fleischer, M., & Chakrabarti, A. K. (1990). The processes of technological innovation. Issues in organization and management series. Lexington Books. Available at Http://Www.
Amazon. Com/Processes-Technological-Innovation-Organization/Management/Dp/0669203483. Accessed June, 10, 2013.
van Egmond-de Wilde de Ligny, E. L. C., & Mohammadi, M. (2011). Innovations in domotics: fulfilling potential or hampered by prevailing technological regime? Construction Innovation, 11(4), 470– 492.
Wielicki, T., & Arendt, L. (2010). A knowledge-driven shift in perception of ICT implementation barriers: Comparative study of US and European SMEs. Journal of Information Science, 36(2), 162–174. https://doi.org/10.1177/0165551509354417
Yin, R. K. (2013). Validity and generalization in future case study evaluations. Evaluation, 19(3), 321– 332.
Zaltman, G., Duncan, R., & Holbek, J. (1973). Innovations and organizations. John Wiley & Sons. Zhu, K., & Kraemer, K. L. (2005). Post-Adoption Variations in Usage and Value of E-Business by
Organizations: Cross-Country Evidence from the Retail Industry. Information Systems Research,
16(1), 61–84. https://doi.org/10.1287/isre.1050.0045
APPENDIX A List of interviewees
Participant Function Firm size Duration in min Social Media adopted
P1 Director Small 40 no
P2 Director Medium 60 yes
P3 Director Medium 50 yes
P4 Director Small 55 yes
P5 Director Medium 50 no
P6 Management Medium 60 yes
P7 Management Small 35 yes
26
APPENDIX B Interview guide
General questions1. What is your function?
2. How long have you been working in the current job? 3. How big is the company ?
4. What kind of social media do you use and for what purpose? a. For how long?
b. How often?
c. Why do you use this?
5. How do you feel about your current social media presence? 6. How do you measure the effectiveness of social media?
7. Are you following what online is being said about your company? Technology
8. How comfortable do you feel using social media?
9. What kind of technology is there available in your organization for social media use? a. On the construction site?
10. What kind of human resources / expertise is their available in your organization for social media use ?
a. Did you hire employees for social media ? b. Is there social media training?
11. Are there programs you are using where social media is integrated? Organizational
12. What kind of culture is there in the company? 13. What is the social media strategy?
14. What do you think about the applicability for social media in the construction sector? 15. Is there attention for social media on the -
a. Work floor ? b. Construction site ?
16. Who are allowed to post on social media behalf on the company? 17. How do you communicate with -
a. Customers? b. Suppliers? c. Employees?
i. Could social media improve communication?
18. Is their demand for social media use from inside the company by employees? 19. Time, money, and human resources availability?
Environment
20. How competitive is the construction sector in the region? a. Does social media affect the competition?
21. When working on a project with multiple firms are there any rules about social media usage? 22. Are you willing to share knowledge?
23. Are there barriers in the environment to attract technology? 24. What do you think about the prices of technology?
27 Closing questions
