Journal of Service ManagementHow to transform consumers into fans of your brandBenedikt Jahn Werner Kunz

Article information:To cite this document:Benedikt Jahn Werner Kunz, (2012),"How to transform consumers into fans of your brand", Journal ofService Management, Vol. 23 Iss 3 pp. 344 - 361Permanent link to this document:http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/09564231211248444

Downloaded on: 21 October 2014, At: 16:02 (PT)References: this document contains references to 68 other documents.To copy this document: permissions@emeraldinsight.comThe fulltext of this document has been downloaded 3904 times since 2012*

Users who downloaded this article also downloaded:Richard C. Leventhal, Elaine Wallace, Isabel Buil, Leslie de Chernatony, (2014),"Consumer engagementwith self-expressive brands: brand love and WOM outcomes", Journal of Product & BrandManagement, Vol. 23 Iss 1 pp. 33-42 http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/JPBM-06-2013-0326Kenneth Cortsen, (2013),"Annika Sörenstam – a hybrid personal sports brand", Sport, Business andManagement: An International Journal, Vol. 3 Iss 1 pp. 37-62Jeff McCarthy, Jennifer Rowley, Catherine Jane Ashworth, Elke Pioch, (2014),"Managing brand presencethrough social media: the case of UK football clubs", Internet Research, Vol. 24 Iss 2 pp. 181-204 http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/IntR-08-2012-0154

Access to this document was granted through an Emerald subscription provided by 349235 []

For AuthorsIf you would like to write for this, or any other Emerald publication, then please use our Emerald forAuthors service information about how to choose which publication to write for and submission guidelinesare available for all. Please visit www.emeraldinsight.com/authors for more information.

About Emerald www.emeraldinsight.comEmerald is a global publisher linking research and practice to the benefit of society. The companymanages a portfolio of more than 290 journals and over 2,350 books and book series volumes, as well asproviding an extensive range of online products and additional customer resources and services.

Emerald is both COUNTER 4 and TRANSFER compliant. The organization is a partner of the Committeeon Publication Ethics (COPE) and also works with Portico and the LOCKSS initiative for digital archivepreservation.

Dow

nloa

ded

by J

ames

Mad

ison

Uni

vers

ity A

t 16:

02 2

1 O

ctob

er 2

014

(PT

)

*Related content and download information correct at time of download.

Dow

nloa

ded

by J

ames

Mad

ison

Uni

vers

ity A

t 16:

02 2

1 O

ctob

er 2

014

(PT

)

How to transform consumersinto fans of your brand

Benedikt JahnInstitute of Marketing, Ludwig-Maximilians-University, Munich, Germany, and

Werner KunzCollege of Management, University of Massachusetts,

Boston, Massachusetts, USA

Abstract

Purpose – Brand fan pages on social networks have become very popular online services. However,empirical research on fan pages is still in its infancy. Therefore, the purpose of this study is to investigatethe effect of fan pages on the customer-brand relationship and what motivates users to participate.

Design/methodology/approach – For this a framework was developed based on classical conceptsof use and gratification theory, customer engagement, and involvement theory. The model is testedusing a multi-step approach of qualitative and quantitative methods.

Findings – The paper can show a significant influence from online service usage behavior on the fanpage on the customer-brand relationship. Furthermore, the paper identifies different values such asfunctional and hedonic content as drivers of fan-page participation.

Research limitations/implications – The results are limited by the used data set, which is notrepresentative for all industries and is cross-sectional. Further research could build up a database overa longitudinal time frame in different industries. The results are interesting for theory and practice.They confirm the positive effect of integration and engagement in general and show that fan pages aremore than just tools to connect brand fans. They are also instruments for gaining new fans.

Originality/value – The present study is the first study that not only shows the effect of fan pageson customer behavior, but also analyses the motives for participation and the crucial constructs tomanage them successfully.

Keywords Online services, Brand page, Engagement, Facebook, Customer-brand relationship,Motivation, Consumer behaviour, Brands

Paper type Research paper

IntroductionThe ways people exchange information and how individuals communicate with eachother have changed dramatically over the last years (Hennig-Thurau et al., 2010). Socialmedia channels like Facebook, Twitter, or YouTube are becoming more and moreimportant in business communication. The changes brought by the new online serviceshave also transformed our relationships to each other and to companies andorganizations. Traditionally, companies have tried to reach and build up relationshipswith customers through marketing activities like reward programs, public relations,and direct marketing. In this world, customers were passive “receivers” of relationshipactivities as well as brand messages and the company had control over the branddevelopment process (Hennig-Thurau et al., 2010; Libai et al., 2010). Today, customerscan increasingly integrate and act as co-creators and multipliers of brand messages,which enables enormous viral effects and creates opportunities for word-of-mouthmarketing (Kozinets et al., 2010; Libai et al., 2010). Thus, both customer and company

The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available at

www.emeraldinsight.com/1757-5818.htm

JOSM23,3

344

Received 30 September 2011Revised 15 February 2012Accepted 19 February 2012

Journal of Service ManagementVol. 23 No. 3, 2012pp. 344-361q Emerald Group Publishing Limited1757-5818DOI 10.1108/09564231211248444

Dow

nloa

ded

by J

ames

Mad

ison

Uni

vers

ity A

t 16:

02 2

1 O

ctob

er 2

014

(PT

)

participate actively in a “conversation” about the brand (Deighton and Kornfeld, 2009;Hennig-Thurau et al., 2010).

Social media offer users a variety of online services to communicate with others,which results in a completely new communication style. Customers are now empoweredto get in contact with each other, as well as engage and participate actively in brandcommunication. Social networking sites like Facebook offer companies several optionsto contact and communicate with their customers (fans). Fan pages are an importantonline service for brand communication. They can be used by organizations, businesses,brands, public figures, or causes to integrate and interact with their customer base(Dholakia et al., 2004). They offer companies a service to communicate and interact withtheir customers as well as deliver a variety of interesting content (Borle et al., 2012).In marketing communication today fan pages have significant relevance for businesses.

However, empirical research on fan pages and its role for the customer-brandrelationship is in its infancy. Making use of the opportunities provided by fan pages onsocial networking sites requires a thorough understanding of why consumers areattracted to them and how customer integration and engagement on these platformsinfluence their relationships to the brands and their offline behaviors. Therefore, thepresent study investigates how brand fan pages affect the customer-brandrelationship. In particular, we consider the following research questions:

RQ1. What effects has fan page participation on customer loyalty?

RQ2. Which constructs are central for the management of fan pages?

RQ3. What are the drivers of successful brand fan pages?

We begin with a brief overview of the literature regarding social media, brandcommunities, and fan pages. We then develop our framework that describes how fanpages can contribute to brand loyalty of the customer and how fan-page participationis influenced by various consumer values. Further, we describe the methodology of ourstudy and show the results of our analyses. Finally, we discuss managerialimplications, limitations of the study, and further research suggestions.

Research backgroundAlthough there have been several calls for more research on social media services(Hoffman and Novak, 2009; Hennig-Thurau et al., 2010; van den Bulte, 2010; Kunz andHogreve, 2011) and there exists a huge demand from the business world, the empiricalresearch is limited. Because social media is still a relatively new research field, weintroduce various central concepts we use in our study before presenting our research.

Central conceptsSocial media can be described as “a group of internet-based applications that build onthe ideological and technological foundations of web 2.0, and that allow the creationand exchange of User Generated Content” (Kaplan and Haenlein, 2010, p. 61). Some ofthe most prominent forms of social media are social networking sites like Facebookor LinkedIn. Social networking sites are defined as:

[. . .] web-based services that allow individuals to construct a public or semi-public profilewithin a bounded system, articulate a list of other users with whom they share a connection,

How totransform

consumers

345

Dow

nloa

ded

by J

ames

Mad

ison

Uni

vers

ity A

t 16:

02 2

1 O

ctob

er 2

014

(PT

)

and view and traverse their list of connections and those made by others within the system(Boyd and Ellison, 2007, p. 211).

Users with profiles interlinked in this manner are called “friends”. These profiles caninclude anything from favorite food and movies to relationship status and especiallypreference for particular brands, organizations, or celebrities. For example, users canpost information about themselves, post links of web sites they like, commenton postings of their friends, post pictures, and accept invitations for events; they alsocan receive invitations to become fans of particular brands, organizations, or celebrities(Raacke and Bonds-Raacke, 2008).

Facebook offers companies several services for contacting and communicating withtheir customers. Fan pages are an especially interesting tool for companies to use. Butwhat does it mean to become a “fan” of a brand-related page? In general, a fan can beanything from a devotee to an enthusiast of a particular object. Typical characteristics offans are self-identification as fan, emotional engagement, cultural competence, auxiliaryconsumption, and co-production (Kozinets et al., 2010). The internet has made it possibleto overcome geographical restrictions and to build fan communities world-wide. Inpractice, users become fans of a Facebook fan page by pressing the “like-button,” whichindicates to their social network that they like this brand; this preference is then added totheir profiles. The new content of this fan page is automatically posted to their personalFacebook news feed, and they can post comments on the fan page, get in contact with thecompany, forward offers from this page as well as interact with other fans.

Especially for the consumer motivation to use brand fan pages exist to ourknowledge till now no empirical study. But regarding the motivation to use socialnetworking sites and participating in brand communities empirical results are alreadypublished, which is related to our research focus.

Research on social networking sitesA central topic in studies towards social networking sites is the motivation, why peopleuse these platforms. For instance, Raacke and Bonds-Raacke (2008) found two mainreasons for this: social connections (i.e. keeping in touch with friends) and informationsharing (e.g. events or gossip). In a similar fashion, Foster et al. (2010) found one of themain motivations for participating in social networking sites is the perceivedinformation value from the community and the connection to friends. Many studiesalso show that entertainment plays an important role as shared and consumed contenton social networking sites (Sheldon, 2008; LaRose et al., 2001).

Ellison et al. (2007) presented a more differentiated perspective on the social connection.In a study with undergraduate students, they showed that Facebook develops socialcapital in that participating is useful for strengthening friend relationships (i.e. bondingsocial capital), expanding an individual’s network (i.e. bridging social capital), and keepingin contact with past relationships (i.e. maintaining social capital).

Additionally, Tufekci (2008) found that many activities on social networking sitescan also be conceptualized as forms of self-presentation. Users present themselves byadjusting their profiles, linking to particular friends, displaying their likes and dislikes,and joining groups. This motivation for social networking usage is supported byseveral other studies (Dholakia et al., 2004; Bolar, 2009; Acquisti and Gross, 2006).In particular, Peluchette and Karl (2009) shows that Facebook users employ theirpostings consciously to portray images about themselves.

JOSM23,3

346

Dow

nloa

ded

by J

ames

Mad

ison

Uni

vers

ity A

t 16:

02 2

1 O

ctob

er 2

014

(PT

)

Considering the existing research on social networking sites, we believe there arethree main motivation areas for consumers’ using social networking sites. The first is arelationship area, where the focus of the individual is to stay connected and interact withothers and participate in a social (online) life. The second area is content acquisition anddistribution based on the individuals’ interests. This content can be functional as well ashedonic. Finally, the third area is self-presentation, which is related to the social contextbut also serves more the purpose of self-assurance and personal identity.

Research on brand communitiesSince brand fan pages are organized around a single brand, product, or company, theycan be seen as a special kind of brand community. Since the last decade, brandcommunities became very interested in branding research (Muniz and O’Guinn, 2001;McAlexander et al., 2002; Algesheimer et al., 2005; Adjei et al., 2010).

Muniz and O’Guinn (2001, p. 412) defined a brand community as a:

[. . .] specialized, non-geographically bound community, based on a structured set of socialrelationships among admires of a brand. It is specialized because at its center is a brandedgood or service. Like other communities, it is marked by shared consciousness, rituals andtraditions, and a sense of moral responsibility.

McAlexander et al. (2002) indicated four crucial relationships in a brand community: therelationships between the customer and the brand, between the customer and the firm,between the customer and the product in use, and among fellow customers.

Algesheimer et al. (2005), using survey data from a European auto club, showed thatcommunity identification leads to positive (i.e. community engagement and communityloyalty) and negative (i.e. normative community pressure and reactance) consequences.Further, they showed an effect of membership continuance intentions to brand loyaltyintentions. Woisetschlager et al. (2008) support their results. Additionally, they foundtwo further reasons for consumer participation in brand communities: communitysatisfaction and degree of consumer influence within the community. Moreover, theyshowed an effect from community participation on word-of-mouth, brand image, andcommunity loyalty. An effect on brand loyalty was not shown.

By means of data from an online community, Kim et al. (2008) showed that onlinecommunity commitment is a driver on brand commitment. They also showed thatonline community participants possess stronger brand commitment than consumerswho are not members of the community. Recently, Adjei et al. (2010) verified in anetnography and experimental approach that online brand communities are successfultools for increasing sales and showed that the sharing of information significantlymoderates this effect.

Considering the existing work on brand communities, we can see communityidentification as a central influence for community participation (Bhattacharya et al.,1995). Previous work has shown that brand community engagement can affectmembership loyalty, brand image, and word-of-mouth. Thus, community participationand membership can be seen as an important tool for a successful branding strategy.

Research on brand fan pagesAlthough very similar and sometimes used interchangeably, differences do existbetween brand fan pages on social networking sites and traditional online brandcommunities. What fan pages differ from brand communities is the fact that they are

How totransform

consumers

347

Dow

nloa

ded

by J

ames

Mad

ison

Uni

vers

ity A

t 16:

02 2

1 O

ctob

er 2

014

(PT

)

embedded in an organic grown and not brand-related network of social ties. Thus,members of a fan page are also connected within the social network site to so-called“friends” who might be not “fans” of the brand and are mostly real offline connections(Boyd and Ellison, 2007). Given this, fan-page membership can be used by theindividual to show a peer group the own self(-concept). In this sense fan pagememberships become signals of a person’s self-identity.

Further fan pages are mainly company driven and used as an explicit brandcommunication and interaction channel. In a classical brand community the brand isthe center of the community and the community is “based on a structured set of socialrelationships among admires of a brand” (Muniz and O’Guinn, 2001, p. 412). Incontrast, a fan page is supposed to be first of all a connection between the user and thebrand. Thus, fan-page usage and engagement motivation might differ from traditionalbrand communities.

Despite the popularity in the business practice, we found only one empirical researchstudy that considered fan pages in a branding context. Borle et al. (2012; Dholakia andDurham, 2010) examined the degree to which participating on a Facebook fan pageaffects customer behaviors. In a longitudinal study, conducted in cooperation with tworestaurants, they showed an effect of membership on the fan page to behavioral loyalty,spending in the restaurants, and the restaurant category over all. The findings supportthe idea that Facebook fan pages are useful for deepening the relationship withcustomers. But it is still not clear what is happening inside of the “black box” fan pageand what the crucial constructs are for managing fan pages. Therefore, we introduce inthe next section a framework that shows a differentiated effect of fan pages from theusage motivation to brand loyalty.

Theoretical frameworkConsidering the concept of a brand fan page, we developed a framework based onclassical concepts of uses and gratifications theory (Katz, 1959), customer engagement(van Doorn et al., 2010; Brodie et al., 2011), and involvement theory (Zaichkowsky, 1985).By this, we follow a basic approach, describing how fan-page behavior might influenceconsumers’ brand loyalty and what might influence the fan-page behavior itself. For this,we divide the process into three zones: gratification, participation, and customer-brandrelationship. The basic idea of this framework is that, if the brand fan page satisfiesparticular needs of a user, this satisfaction should lead to a higher approach to the brandfan page, which should in turn lead to a higher brand loyalty (Figure 1).

The uses and gratification (U&G) theory, proposed by Katz (1959), has been founduseful for application to new media like the internet, online communities, socialnetworking, and blogs (Raacke and Bonds-Raacke, 2008; Sheldon, 2008; Chung andAustria, 2010; Ko et al., 2005; Ruggiero, 2000; Song et al., 2004). U&G theory tries toexplain why individuals have different media-usage patterns. According to U&Gtheory, people use media to satisfy various needs and to achieve their goals. The mostprominent needs can be subsumed into three areas: a content-oriented area based on theinformation delivered by the media, a relationship-oriented area based on socialinteraction with others, and a self-oriented area based on particular needs of individualssuch as achieving status or need for diversion. With the second concept, consumerengagement, we want to differentiate the usage pattern of a fan page. The concept has itsorigin in organizational psychology and can be defined as “persistent, positive,

JOSM23,3

348

Dow

nloa

ded

by J

ames

Mad

ison

Uni

vers

ity A

t 16:

02 2

1 O

ctob

er 2

014

(PT

)

affective-motivational state of fulfillment” (Maslach et al., 2001, p. 417). Consumerengagement can be seen as special form of the widely discussed concept of customerengagement in the service research community (Brodie et al., 2011; Libai et al., 2010;van Doorn et al., 2010; Verhoef et al., 2010). Following this understanding, customerbehavior goes “beyond transaction, and may be specifically defined as a customer’sbehavioral manifestation that has a brand or firm focus, beyond purchase, resultingfrom motivational drivers” (van Doorn et al., 2010, p. 254).

Transferring the engagement construct to the context of a fan page, we define fan-pageengagement as an interactive and integrative participation in the fan-page community andwould differentiate this from the solely usage intensity of a member. We do not expectthese constructs to be independent from each other and would assume that fan-page usageleads to fan-page engagement. For instance, it is possible that a person is using a fan pageon a regular basis (e.g. receiving gratis coupons from the fan page) without becominghighly engaged with the fan page. We therefore propose the following hypotheses:

H1. Brand fan-page usage intensity influences brand fan-page engagementpositively.

To explain the fan-page usage behavior, we use the three gratification areas of U&Gtheory introduced above, and we apply them according to the context of the fan pages. Inthe content area, we differentiate between the functional and hedonic values that aredelivered (Hirschman and Holbrook, 1982). This is supported by previous empiricalstudies in the social media field, where several researchers have found that information(Raacke and Bonds-Raacke, 2008; Foster et al., 2010) and entertainment (Sheldon, 2008;Dholakia et al., 2004; LaRose et al., 2001) play important roles for social media users.Based on this we propose the following:

H2a. Higher functional value of the fan-page content leads to higher fan-page usageintensity.

Figure 1.Framework of

fan-page participation

Gratification Fan Page Participation Customer-Brand Relationship

BrandCommitment

BrandWOM

BrandPurchase

BrandLoyalty

H5a +

H1 +

H5b +

H3c +

H3b +

H3a +

H2b +

H2a +

Content-Oriented

Relationship-Oriented

Self-Oriented

Self-ConceptValue

Fan pageEngagement

FunctionalValue

Fan pageUsage Intensity

HedonicValue

SocialInteraction

Value

BrandInteraction

Value H3d+

H4 +

How totransform

consumers

349

Dow

nloa

ded

by J

ames

Mad

ison

Uni

vers

ity A

t 16:

02 2

1 O

ctob

er 2

014

(PT

)

H2b. Higher hedonic value of the fan-page content leads to higher fan-page usageintensity.

In the relationship area, we see two main kind of relationships where an interaction couldbe of value for a fan-page user: the interaction with other users, and the interaction withthe brand or company behind the brand. This is supported by social networking motiveliterature, which found growing, maintaining, and broadening relationships to others asmajor motivations for using a social networking site (Sheldon, 2008; Ellison et al., 2007;Dholakia et al., 2009). Furthermore, literature concerning brand relationship shows thatconsumers tend to invest in a relationship to a brand (Fournier, 1998; Algesheimer et al.,2005). Based on this we propose an effect on usage and engagement:

H3a. Higher social interaction value leads to higher fan-page usage intensity.

H3b. Higher brand interaction value leads to higher fan-page usage intensity.

H3c. Higher social interaction value leads to higher fan-page engagement.

H3d. Higher brand interaction value leads to higher fan-page engagement.

Finally, consumers can decide to participate in a fan page because they expect animpact on their image or status. In this case, consumers defer values for their ownpersonal identities by being members of a brand fan page. Similar Algesheimer et al.(2005) argued that group participation can be seen as an expression of personalvalues. Further, Peluchette and Karl (2009) showed that Facebook users use theirprofiles and postings consciously to portray images about themselves. Thus, fanpages can serve the purpose to portray the own self-concept. Based on this we proposethe following:

H4. Higher self-concept value of the fan-page membership leads to higherfan-page engagement.

After considering the value and fan-page behavior, we want to motivate the expectedrelationship to branding. We would assume that the participation in the community hasa positive effect for the user and the company (Rosenbaum, 2008). The central conceptfor relationship marketing is brand loyalty (de Ruyter et al., 1998). Oliver (1999, p. 34)defines loyalty as:

[. . .] a deeply held commitment to rebuy or re-patronize a preferred product/serviceconsistently in the future, thereby causing repetitive same-brand or same brand-set purchase,despite situational influences and marketing efforts having the potential to cause switchingbehavior.

This definition stresses the importance of two important components: an attitudinal(i.e. commitment) and a behavioral (i.e. purchase, patronage) component of loyalty. Thisis consistent with Dick and Basu (1994), who also sees “relative attitude” and “repeatpatronage” as central parts of loyalty relationships and many other conceptualizations(Bloemer and Kasper, 1995).

On the one hand, fan-page users that show high usage intensity, get in regularcontact with the brand, which in turn should have an effect on their brand relationshipand should increase their likelihood for repurchase, word-of-mouth, or their generalcommitment to the brand. On the other side, brands with high fan-page engagement

JOSM23,3

350

Dow

nloa

ded

by J

ames

Mad

ison

Uni

vers

ity A

t 16:

02 2

1 O

ctob

er 2

014

(PT

)

already have developed a strong relationship to the fan-page community.This emotional bond is also associated with the object of the fan page, the brand.Thus, we assume that an increase in brand loyalty is based on fan-page engagement.

This relationship is also supported by the involvement theory. Involvement can bedefined as “a person’s perceived relevance of the object based on inherent needs,values, and interests” (Zaichkowsky, 1985, p. 342). Fan-page usage and engagementare indicators for a high involvement with the brand. Prior studies have shown arelationship between involvement and product or brand loyalty (Quester and Ai, 2003;Olsen, 2007). Therefore, we propose the following hypotheses:

H5a. Fan-page usage intensity influences brand loyalty positively.

H5b. Fan-page engagement influences brand loyalty positively.

MethodologyTo test our framework, we applied a multi-step approach incorporating a series ofqualitative and quantitative analyses. First, we conducted a netnographic analysis(Kozinets, 2002) to understand members’ motives for usage and participation in afan-page community. For this, we analyzed all user-generated posts during one year onactive fan pages of different automobile brands (i.e. Audi: 821.175 fans; Volkswagen:365.990 fans; Mazda: 66.717 fans). Overall, we categorized 661 different posts from thethree fan pages (i.e. photos, videos included; Audi: 198 posts; Volkswagen: 227 posts;Mazda: 236 posts). We identified five main categories as usage motives:self-presentation, relationship to the brand, interaction with the brand, information,fun and entertainment, as well as social interaction. These results support our proposedvalue system in our proposed model.

In a second step, we used two focus groups with six active fan-page users to ensurethat the found motives are really relevant for fan-page usage and engagement.The participants were asked for their motives, their participation behavior, and thepotential changes in their relationship to the brand and the brand behavior since theybecame members of the fan page. The results confirmed the value system of thenetnographic analysis. Moreover, the discussion showed that fan pages are mainlyused passively, while some fans are really engaged with the fan pages. Some of theparticipants reported an effect of the fan page on their actual brand relationship.

In a third step, we executed a survey on Facebook to test our framework in a fieldenvironment. For the data collection, we invited members of different brand fan pages(e.g. Coca Cola, BMW, RedBull, Starbucks, McDonalds, Abercrombie & Fitch,WeightWatchers, Lufthansa, Red Hot Chili Peppers, Barack Obama, GameStar, FCBayern Munich) to participate in an online survey by posting the survey link on the fanpage. The incorporated fan pages represent a wide mix of product, service,organizational and personality fan pages. Through the survey, we obtained a sample of523 fully completed questionnaires of brand fan-page members. Gender is distributedevenly in the sample (51.7 percent female, 48.3 percent male). Age of fan-page membersin the sample follows a normal curve of distribution. Average age of the respondentswas 28.6. All participants were frequent fan-page users (more than 80 percent use theirfan pages at least once a week) and active Facebook members (76 percent use Facebooklonger than 20 minutes a day).

How totransform

consumers

351

Dow

nloa

ded

by J

ames

Mad

ison

Uni

vers

ity A

t 16:

02 2

1 O

ctob

er 2

014

(PT

)

MeasurementFor the constructs of our framework, we generated multi-item scales on the basis ofprevious measures, the qualitative pre-studies, and the theoretical foundation(a complete list of all items is presented in the Appendix, Table AI). The measurementof hedonic and functional value is based on a scale from Voss et al. (2003). Brandinteraction value describes the value that is derived from the communication with thebrand and is measured based on communication component of the web-interactivityscale (Song and Zinkhan, 2008). For the social interaction value we adapted the socialcomponent of the social networking sites gratification system of Barker (Barker, 2009).Measurement of the self-concept value is adapted from the social value component ofcustomer value system from Sweeney and Soutar (2001). It can be defined as utilityderived from the fan page’s ability to enhance social self-concept. The scale formeasurement engagement is developed based on the conceptualization of the constructof van Doorn et al. (2010) focusing on elements like community participation,identification, and integration. Brand loyalty is reflected by attitudinal and behavioralcomponents (Oliver, 1999; Dick and Basu, 1994). The attitudinal component is indicatedby brand commitment, understood as “enduring desire to maintain a valuedrelationship” (Moorman et al., 1992, p. 316) and measured through identification,interaction, and support. The behavioral component is measured by word-of-mouth andpurchase behavior ( Johnson et al., 2006). Finally as controlling construct, we alsomeasured brand attitude perceived as good, positive, likeable, and favorable (Coulter,1998; Day and Stafford, 1997; Stafford, 1996; Escalas and Stern, 2003).

All measures were rated on seven-point Likert scales (anchored by “I fully disagree”vs “I fully agree”). The measures were pretested in an offline pretest with 35 collegestudents and an online pretest with 106 fan-page members of different fan pages, andthey showed a high reliability in the analysis. The reliability results of the constructs areshown in Table AI and indicate acceptable psychometric properties for all constructs.Discriminant validity is proved by using Fornell-Larcker criteria (Fornell and Larcker,1981) (the Appendix, Table AII).

Results of the core modelWe tested the proposed hypotheses using a structural equation model. The fit statisticsindicate an adequate fit of the proposed model (i.e. x 2/df ¼ 2.99; CFI ¼ 0.92;RMSEA ¼ 0.062). The results of the model estimation are shown in Figure 2.

The multiple squared correlations for brand loyalty are 0.28, which is reasonableconsidering that online fan pages are not the online influence factor for theconsumer-brand relationship. All coefficients of our proposed processing model (excepttwo) were highly significant ( p , 0.001). We have not found a significant effect from thesocial interaction value to fan-page usage. This might be because social interactionmainly focuses on elements related to membership exchange. By means of passiveconsumption of a media, social interaction value can hardly be gained. The effect frombrand interaction value on fan-page engagement is just significant on the 0.01 level.

Additionally, we tested several alternative model specifications to ensure thevalidity of our framework. First, considering our framework, one might argue that theproposed effects are an artifact of a general positive attitude towards the consideredbrand. We would also assume an influence of brand attitude on the constructs of theframework, but the general relationship within the framework should be not affected.

JOSM23,3

352

Dow

nloa

ded

by J

ames

Mad

ison

Uni

vers

ity A

t 16:

02 2

1 O

ctob

er 2

014

(PT

)

Therefore, we integrated brand attitude as a controlling variable for all fan-pageparticipation constructs (usage and engagement) and brand loyalty. All coefficients ofthe structural model were still significant ( p , 0.05) and none of the path coefficientschanged the direction. Second, we additionally tested for the effect of the personalidentity value on fan-page usage and for the effect of hedonic and functional value onfan-page engagement. All turned out as not significant ( p . 0.05). Thus, we can showaccording to U&G theory that different motivations affect fan-page behaviordifferently.

DiscussionIn our study, we analyzed the role of fan pages as a new online service for thecustomer-brand relationship, detected fan-page engagement as an important driver forthe consumer-brand relationship, and identified various influential factors for successfulbrand fan pages. Considering these results, we can infer multiple implications for themanagement of fan pages.

First of all, we can conclude that fan pages are an excellent tool for companies today:they have measurable effects on the customer-brand relationship. Brand managersshould embrace this new channel and understand how to work with it in a contemporaryfashion. Setting up a brand fan page and generating traffic data (e.g. visits, pageimpressions, etc.) is not enough to improve customer relationships. The goal of a brandfan-page strategy is to completely engage, integrate, and immerse users in a vivid andactive community. Besides that, the company needs to give users realistic reasons toengage in a fan-page community and foster the “we”-sense on the fan page. Relationshipbuilding based on real values for the consumer should be in the focus for the companybecause service companies can have many interaction points with the consumer,

Figure 2.Framework of fan-page

participation

Gratification Fan Page Participation Customer-Brand Relationship

BrandCommitment

BrandWOM

BrandPurchase

BrandLoyalty

Content-Oriented

Relationship-Oriented

Self-Oriented

Self-ConceptValue

Fan pageEngagement

FunctionalValue

0.38***

0.24***

0.26***

0.26***

0.25***

0.36***

0.43

0.280.69***

0.81***

0.80***

***

**

< 0,001

< 0,01< 0,05

N = 523

CFI = 0.92RMSEA = 0.062

CMIN/DF = 2.99

*

0.64

0.66

0.47

0.26***

0.37

0.14**

0.17***

n.s.

Fan pageUsage Intensity

HedonicValue

SocialInteraction

Value

BrandInteraction

Value

Signifinance level

Squared Multiple Correction

How totransform

consumers

353

Dow

nloa

ded

by J

ames

Mad

ison

Uni

vers

ity A

t 16:

02 2

1 O

ctob

er 2

014

(PT

)

and there are a lot of opportunities to foster this interaction and build up a meaningfulcommunity.

Further, from our empirical results, we see that valuable content, both hedonic andfunctional, on the fan page itself is one of the most important drivers for attracting usersto fan pages. Brand fan pages must deliver interesting, entertaining, and innovativecontent to its fans. Exclusive content, sweepstakes, online events, and contests are someof the means brand fan pages can use to achieve this. Another value driver is based oninteraction among fan-page members and between customers and the brand itself.Companies should therefore support as much interactivity as possible. Online events orcommunity games can trigger discussions about relevant topics. Beyond consumerinteractivity, companies must scan fan pages and be attentive to the happenings in theirfan-page communities. Fan pages are interactive channels. If the company is not(inter)active, their brand fan pages will not be successful. Beside the interaction betweenthe brand and the consumer it is very important to moderate the ongoing fan interaction.This implies new challenges for customer services (Van Bruggen et al., 2010). While inthe past they had to deal with one customer at a time (Kantsperger and Kunz, 2005),today they need to participate in a community on a public site visible for everyone. Theymust answer questions immediately and communicate proactively, even more so whencomments are negative (Kunz et al., 2012; Senecal and Nantel, 2004; Rao et al., 2011).

These implications show that successful social media management is stronglyrelated to the interactive relationship capabilities of a company. Our research verifieshow strongly modern social media management is shaped by the service-dominantlogic (Vargo and Lusch, 2004). Social media inherently implies a customer andrelational-oriented view. If the brand fan page does not deliver value for the communitymembers on a regular basis, they will abandon the page. Maybe the statistics of “likes”or “followers” is still high, but real consumer engagement will go down. The companyalone cannot deliver value or an experience on a brand page. They need the communityand the community (hopefully) needs the company.

Limitations and further researchWe believe our study has interesting implications, but we are aware about itslimitations. Although our fan-page sample represents a wide area of different industries(i.e. over 40 different pages of goods, service, organization, or celebrity brands), they arenot representative for all fan pages existing on social networking sites. More research isneeded to understand the roles fan pages play in specific industries. Future researchcould focus on the difference between manufacturing industries and dominantlyservice industries, the differences between more hedonic or functional brands, or thedifference between company brands and human brands. Further, our study did notobserve personal traits (e.g. novelty seeking, extraversion or self-esteem) which couldinfluence the effects illustrated in our framework. The data for this study arecross-sectional. Further research could build up a database over a longitudinal timeframe with a constant panel sample to observe the dynamics of fan-page members’behavior over time.

Beyond our study further research is needed to understand the meaning of fan pagesand, indeed, social media in general for customer relationship management. Researchmight study also the effect of observed behavior of fan-page members on their Facebookfriends who are not fans but can follow what their friends are doing. Also the impact

JOSM23,3

354

Dow

nloa

ded

by J

ames

Mad

ison

Uni

vers

ity A

t 16:

02 2

1 O

ctob

er 2

014

(PT

)

of new technological possibilities like mobile application (Kleijnen et al., 2009) as well asthe limitations of online experiences (Picard, 2010) needs to be researched in more detail.Additionally, further study is needed for the effects of negative word-of-mouth on socialmedia platforms. It might also be interesting and important to look for best practices formanaging negative or defaming comments on fan pages and other social mediaplatforms.

ConclusionThe mixture of social and commercial aspects makes brand fan pages unique.Our study has shown the high potential of brand fan pages for the customer-brandrelationship as well as for relationship building. Ideally, fans would see brands as real“friends” in their social networks, which play an important part in their everyday lives.In this case, brand communication is no longer automatically perceived as disturbingadvertising but as interesting and reasonable conversation among friends.

If companies better understand the reasons for fan-page usage and engagement, theycan use this to interact with, integrate, and engage their customers as well as transformthem from ordinary users to real “fans” of their brands. Our study is a first step tounderstand brand fan pages; but there remains a broad field of discovery for a deeperunderstanding of this new social media channel as an effective relationship-buildingtool.

References

Acquisti, A. and Gross, R. (2006), “Imagined communities: awareness, information sharing, andprivacy on the Facebook”, International Workshop on Privacy Enhancing Technologies,Springer, Berlin.

Adjei, M.T., Noble, S.M. and Noble, C.H. (2010), “The influence of C2C communications in onlinebrand communities on customer purchase behavior”, Journal of the Academy of MarketingScience, Vol. 38, pp. 634-53.

Algesheimer, R., Dholakia, U. and Herrmann, A. (2005), “The social influence of brandcommunity: evidence from European car clubs”, Journal of Marketing, Vol. 69 No. 3,pp. 19-34.

Barker, V. (2009), “Older adolescents’ motivations for social network site use: the influence ofgender, group identity, and collective self-esteem”, CyberPsychology & Behavior, Vol. 12,pp. 209-13.

Bhattacharya, C.B., Rao, H. and Glynn, M.A. (1995), “Understanding the bond of identification: aninvestigation of its correlates among art museum members”, Journal of Marketing, Vol. 59,pp. 46-57.

Bloemer, J. and Kasper, H. (1995), “The complex relationship between consumer satisfaction andbrand loyalty”, Journal of Economic Psychology, Vol. 16, pp. 311-29.

Bolar, K.P. (2009), “Motives behind the use of social networking sites: an empirical study”,ICFAI Journal of Management Research, Vol. 8, pp. 75-84.

Borle, S., Dholakia, U., Singh, S. and Durham, E. (2012), “An empirical investigation of the impactof Facebook fan page participation on customer behavior”, Marketing Science, pp. 1-36(under review).

Boyd, D. and Ellison, N. (2007), “Social network sites: definition, history, and scholarship”,Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, Vol. 13 No. 1, pp. 210-30.

How totransform

consumers

355

Dow

nloa

ded

by J

ames

Mad

ison

Uni

vers

ity A

t 16:

02 2

1 O

ctob

er 2

014

(PT

)

Brodie, R.J., Hollebeek, L.D., Juric, B. and Illic, A. (2011), “Customer engagement: conceptualdomain, fundamental propositions, and implications for research”, Journal of ServiceResearch, Vol. 14, pp. 252-71.

Chung, C. and Austria, K. (2010), “Social media gratification and attitude toward social mediamarketing messages: a study of the effect of social media marketing messages on onlineshopping value”, Proceedings of the Northeast Business & Economics Association,pp. 581-6.

Coulter, K.S. (1998), “The effects of affective response to media context on avertisingevaluations”, Journal of Advertising, Vol. 27, pp. 41-51.

Day, E. and Stafford, M.R. (1997), “Age-related cues in retail services advertising: their effects onyounger consumer”, Journal of Retailing, Vol. 73, pp. 211-33.

Deighton, J. and Kornfeld, L. (2009), “Interactivity’s unanticipated consequences for marketersand marketing”, Journal of Interactive Marketing, Vol. 23, pp. 4-10.

de Ruyter, K., Wetzels, M. and Bloemer, J. (1998), “On the relationship between perceived servicequality, service loyalty and switching costs”, International Journal of Service IndustryManagement, Vol. 9, pp. 436-53.

Dholakia, U.M. and Durham, E. (2010), “One cafe chain’s Facebook experiment”,Harvard Business Review, Vol. 88, p. 26.

Dholakia, U.M., Bagozzi, R.P. and Pearo, L.K. (2004), “A social influence model of consumerparticipation in network- and small-group-based virtual communities”, InternationalJournal of Research in Marketing, Vol. 21, pp. 241-63.

Dholakia, U.M., Blazevic, V., Wiertz, C. and Algesheimer, R. (2009), “Communal service delivery:how customers benefit from participation in firm-hosted virtual P3 communities”, Journalof Service Research, Vol. 12, pp. 208-26.

Dick, A.S. and Basu, K. (1994), “Customer loyalty: toward an integrated conceptual framework”,Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, Vol. 22, pp. 99-114.

Ellison, N.B., Charles, S. and Lampe, C. (2007), “The benefits of Facebook ‘friends’: social capitaland college students’ use of online social network sites”, Journal of Computer-MediatedCommunication, Vol. 12, pp. 1143-68.

Escalas, J.E. and Stern, B.B. (2003), “Sympathy and empathy: emotional responses to advertisingdramas”, Journal of Consumer Research, Vol. 29, pp. 566-78.

Fornell, C. and Larcker, D.F. (1981), “Evaluating structural equation models with unobservablevariables and measurement error”, Journal of Marketing Research, Vol. 18, pp. 39-50.

Foster, M.K., Francescucci, A. and West, B.C. (2010), “Why users participate in online socialnetworks”, International Journal of E – Business Management, Vol. 4, pp. 3-19.

Fournier, S. (1998), “Consumers and their brands: developing relationship theory in consumerresearch”, Journal of Consumer Research, Vol. 24, pp. 343-73.

Hennig-Thurau, T., Malthouse, E.C., Friege, C., Gensler, S., Lobschat, L., Rangaswamy, A. andSkiera, B. (2010), “The impact of new media on customer relationships”, Journal of ServiceResearch, Vol. 13, pp. 311-30.

Hirschman, E.C. and Holbrook, M.B. (1982), “Hedonic consumption: emerging concepts, methodsand propositions”, Journal of Marketing, Vol. 47, pp. 92-101.

Hoffman, D. and Novak, T. (2009), “Flow online: lessons learned and future prospects”, Journal ofInteractive Marketing, Vol. 23, pp. 23-4.

Johnson, M.D., Herrmann, A. and Huber, F. (2006), “The evolution of loyalty intentions”, Journalof Marketing, Vol. 70, pp. 122-32.

JOSM23,3

356

Dow

nloa

ded

by J

ames

Mad

ison

Uni

vers

ity A

t 16:

02 2

1 O

ctob

er 2

014

(PT

)

Kantsperger, R. and Kunz, W. (2005), “Managing overall service quality in customer care centers:empirical findings of a multi-perspective approach overall service quality in customer carecenters”, International Journal of Service Industry Management, Vol. 16, pp. 135-51.

Kaplan, A.M. and Haenlein, M. (2010), “Users of the world, unite! The challenges andopportunities of social media”, Business Horizons, Vol. 53, pp. 59-68.

Katz, E. (1959), “Mass communication research and the study of culture”, Studies in PublicCommunication, Vol. 2, pp. 1-6.

Kim, J.W., Choi, J., Qualls, W. and Kyesook, H. (2008), “It takes a marketplace community to raisebrand commitment: the role of online communities”, Journal of Marketing Management,Vol. 24, pp. 409-31.

Kleijnen, M., Lievens, A., de Ruyter, K. and Wetzels, M. (2009), “Knowledge creation throughmobile social networks and its impact on intentions to use innovative mobile services”,Journal of Service Research, Vol. 12, pp. 15-35.

Ko, H., Cho, C.-H. and Roberts, M.S. (2005), “Internet uses and gratifications”, Journal ofAdvertising, Vol. 34, pp. 57-70.

Kozinets, R.V. (2002), “The field behind the screen: using netnography for marketing research inonline communities”, Journal of Marketing Research, Vol. 39 No. 1, pp. 61-72.

Kozinets, R.V., de Valck, K., Wojnicki, A.C. and Wilner, S.J.S. (2010), “Networked narratives:understanding word-of-mouth marketing in online communities”, Journal of Marketing,Vol. 74, pp. 71-89.

Kunz, W. and Hogreve, J. (2011), “Toward a deeper understanding of service marketing: the past,the present, and the future”, International Journal of Research in Marketing, Vol. 28,pp. 231-47.

Kunz, W., Munzel, B. and Jahn, B. (2012), “Serving in an online world – how to react on negativeelectronic word-of-mouth?”, paper presented at American Marketing Association SummerEducators Conference, Chicago, IL.

LaRose, R., Mastro, D. and Eastin, M.S. (2001), “Understanding internet usage”, Social SciencesComputer Review, Vol. 19, pp. 395-413.

Libai, B., Bolton, R., Bugel, M.S., de Ruyter, K., Gotz, O., Risselada, H. and Stephen, A.T. (2010),“Customer-to-customer interactions: broadening the scope of word of mouth research”,Journal of Service Research, Vol. 13, pp. 267-82.

McAlexander, J., Schouten, J. and Koenig, H. (2002), “Building brand community”, Journal ofMarketing, Vol. 66 No. 1, pp. 38-54.

Maslach, C., Schaufeli, W. and Leiter, M.P. (2001), “Job burnout”, Annual Review of Psychology,Vol. 52, pp. 397-422.

Moorman, C., Zaltman, G. and Deshpande, R. (1992), “Relationships between providers and usersof market research: the dynamics of trust within and between organizations”, Journal ofMarketing Research, Vol. 24, pp. 314-28.

Muniz, A. Jr and O’Guinn, T. (2001), “Brand community”, Journal of Consumer Research, Vol. 27,pp. 412-32.

Oliver, R.L. (1999), “Whence consumer loyalty?”, Journal of Marketing, Vol. 63, pp. 33-44.

Olsen, S.O. (2007), “Repurchase loyalty: the role of involvement and satisfaction”,Psychology & Marketing, Vol. 24, pp. 315-41.

Peluchette, J. and Karl, K. (2009), “Examining students’ intended image on Facebook: ‘what werethey thinking?!’”, The Journal of Education for Business, Vol. 85 No. 1, pp. 30-7.

How totransform

consumers

357

Dow

nloa

ded

by J

ames

Mad

ison

Uni

vers

ity A

t 16:

02 2

1 O

ctob

er 2

014

(PT

)

Picard, W. (2010), “Agile professional virtual community inheritance via the adaptation of socialprotocols”, International Journal of Services and Operations Management, Vol. 6, p. 362.

Quester, P. and Ai, L.L. (2003), “Product involvement/brand loyalty: is there a link?”, Journal ofProduct & Brand Management, Vol. 12, pp. 22-38.

Raacke, J. and Bonds-Raacke, J.B. (2008), “MySpace and Facebook: applying the uses andgratifications theory to exploring friend-networking sites”, CyberPsychology & Behavior,Vol. 11, pp. 169-74.

Rao, S., Griffis, S.E. and Goldsby, T.J. (2011), “Failure to deliver? Linking online order fulfillmentglitches with future purchase behavior”, Journal of Operations Management, Vol. 29,pp. 692-703.

Rosenbaum, M.S. (2008), “Return on community for consumers and service establishments”,Journal of Service Research, Vol. 11, pp. 179-96.

Ruggiero, T.E. (2000), “Uses and gratifications theory in the 21st century”, Mass Communication& Society, Vol. 3, pp. 3-37.

Senecal, S. and Nantel, J. (2004), “The influence of online product recommendations onconsumers’ online choices”, Journal of Retailing, Vol. 80, pp. 159-69.

Sheldon, P. (2008), “The relationship between unwillingness-to-communicate and students’Facebook use”, Journal of Media Psychology: Theories, Methods, and Applications, Vol. 20,pp. 67-75.

Song, I., LaRose, R., Eastin, M.S. and Lin, C.A. (2004), “Internet gratifications and internetaddiction: on the uses and abuses of new media”, CyberPsychology & Behavior, Vol. 7,pp. 384-94.

Song, J.H. and Zinkhan, G.M. (2008), “Determinants of perceived web site interactivity”, Journalof Marketing, Vol. 72, pp. 99-113.

Stafford, M.R. (1996), “Tangibility in services advertising: an investigation of verbal verus visualcues”, Journal of Advertising, Vol. 25, pp. 13-28.

Sweeney, J.C. and Soutar, G.N. (2001), “Consumer perceived value: the development of a multipleitem scale”, Journal of Retailing, Vol. 77, pp. 203-20.

Tufekci, Z. (2008), “Grooming, gossip, Facebook and Myspace”, Information, Communication& Society, Vol. 11, pp. 544-64.

Van Bruggen, G.H., Antia, K.D., Jap, S.D., Reinartz, W.J. and Pallas, F. (2010), “Managingmarketing channel multiplicity”, Journal of Service Research, Vol. 13, pp. 331-40.

van den Bulte, C. (2010), “Opportunities and challenges in studying customer networks”,in Wuyts, S., Dekimpe, M.G., Gijsbrechts, E. and Pieters, R. (Eds), The ConnectedCustomer, Taylor & Francis Group, New York, NY.

van Doorn, J., Lemon, K., Mittal, V., Nass, S., Pick, D., Pirner, P. and Verhoef, P. (2010),“Customer engagement behavior: theoretical foundations and research directions”, Journalof Service Research, Vol. 13, pp. 253-66.

Vargo, S. and Lusch, R. (2004), “Evolving to a new dominant logic for marketing”, Journal ofMarketing, Vol. 68, pp. 1-17.

Verhoef, P.C., Reinartz, W.J. and Krafft, M. (2010), “Customer engagement as a new perspective incustomer management”, Journal of Service Research, Vol. 13, pp. 247-52.

Voss, K.E., Spangenberg, E.R. and Grohmann, B. (2003), “Measuring the hedonic and utilitariandimensions of consumer attitude”, Journal of Marketing Research ( JMR ), Vol. 40,pp. 310-20.

JOSM23,3

358

Dow

nloa

ded

by J

ames

Mad

ison

Uni

vers

ity A

t 16:

02 2

1 O

ctob

er 2

014

(PT

)

Woisetschlager, D.M., Hartleb, V. and Blut, M. (2008), “How to make brand communities work:antecedents and consequences of consumer participation”, Journal of RelationshipMarketing, Vol. 7, pp. 237-56.

Zaichkowsky, J.L. (1985), “Measuring the involvement construct”, Journal of Consumer Research,Vol. 12, pp. 341-52.

(The Appendix follows overleaf.)

About the authorsBenedikt Jahn is a PhD Student at the Institute of Marketing at theLudwig-Maximilians-University in Munich and is also currently completing his Master ofBusiness Research. His research interests are in the area of social media marketing, especially onbrand communication on fan pages on social networking sites.

Werner Kunz is an Assistant Professor of Marketing at the University of Massachusetts inBoston. He received his Doctorate from Ludwig-Maximilians-University Munich. His researchinterests are in social media, consumer networks, innovation, and service marketing. He haspublished in various marketing and service research journals, for instance, the InternationalJournal of Research in Marketing. Werner Kunz is the corresponding author and can be contactedat: werner.kunz@umb.de

To purchase reprints of this article please e-mail: reprints@emeraldinsight.comOr visit our web site for further details: www.emeraldinsight.com/reprints

How totransform

consumers

359

Dow

nloa

ded

by J

ames

Mad

ison

Uni

vers

ity A

t 16:

02 2

1 O

ctob

er 2

014

(PT

)

Appendix

Construct a a EFAb CRc AVEd SRMRe CFIf

Functional valueThe content of the fan page is helpful for me 0.94 0.91 0.96 0.78 0.032 0.95The content of the fan page is useful for me 0.91The content of the fan page is functional for me 0.92The content of the fan page is practical for me 0.91Hedonic valueThe content of the fan page is fun 0.88 0.86 0.88 0.66 0.032 0.97The content of the fan page is exciting 0.84The content of the fan page is pleasant 0.85The content of the fan page is entertaining 0.89Social interaction valueI can meet people like me on this fan page 0.92 0.88 0.92 0.75 0.018 0.99I can meet new people like me on this fan page 0.92I can find out about people like me on this fan page 0.91I can interact with people like me on this fan page 0.90Brand interaction valueI can interact with the brand on this fan page 0.93 0.92 0.93 0.78 0.015 0.99I can communicate with the brand on this fan page 0.95I can give feedback to the brand on this fan page 0.90I can get answers from the brand on this fan page 0.90Self-concept value[. . .] I can make a good impression on others 0.91 0.80 0.90 0.69 0.057 0.92[. . .] I can improve the way I am perceived 0.82[. . .] I can present others who I am 0.75[. . .] I can present others who I want to be 0.74Fan-page usage intensityI frequently use (e.g. watching/reading) this fan page 0.90 0.90 0.89 0.74 – –I often use (e.g. watching/reading) this fan page 0.94I regularly use (e.g. watching/reading) this fan page 0.90Fan-page engagementI am an integrated member of this fan-page community 0.94 0.90 0.94 0.76 0.028 0.96I am an engaged member of this fan-page community 0.93I am an active member of this fan-page community 0.94I am a participating member of this fan-page community 0.84I am an interacting member of this fan-page community 0.90Brand attitudeIn my opinion this brand is good 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.79 0.010 1.00In my opinion this brand is positive 0.92I like this brand 0.94I think favorably about this brand 0.89Brand commitmentI feel I am part of a community around this brand 0.87 0.88 0.87 0.68 – –I am an active supporter of this brand 0.90I interact with this brand 0.88Word-of-mouthI recommend this brand to other people 0.90 0.94 0.92 0.80 – –I introduce this brand to other people 0.93I say positive things about this brand to other people 0.91PurchaseI intend to remain loyal to this brand in the future 0.91 0.92 0.91 0.78 – –I will not stop buying/supporting this brand 0.92I think of myself as a loyal consumer/supporter of this brand 0.93

Notes: aCronbach’s a; bexploratory factor analysis; ccomposite reliability; daverage varianceextracted; estandardized root mean residual; fcomparative fit index

Table AI.Scale items and reliabilitymeasurement

JOSM23,3

360

Dow

nloa

ded

by J

ames

Mad

ison

Uni

vers

ity A

t 16:

02 2

1 O

ctob

er 2

014

(PT

)

Fu

nct

ion

alv

alu

eH

edon

icv

alu

e

Soc

ial

inte

ract

ion

val

ue

Bra

nd

inte

ract

ion

val

ue

Sel

f-co

nce

pt

val

ue

Usa

ge

inte

nsi

tyF

an-p

age

eng

agem

ent

Bra

nd

atti

tud

eB

ran

dco

mm

itm

ent

Bra

nd

wor

d-o

f-m

outh

Bra

nd

pu

rch

ase

Fu

nct

ion

alv

alu

e0.88

Hed

onic

val

ue

0.27

0.81

Soc

ial

inte

ract

ion

val

ue

0.30

0.27

0.87

Bra

nd

inte

ract

ion

val

ue

0.37

0.27

0.45

0.88

Sel

f-co

nce

pt

val

ue

0.27

0.27

0.44

0.28

0.83

Usa

ge

inte

nsi

ty0.

460.

370.

260.

380.

260.86

Fan

-pag

een

gag

emen

t0.

360.

240.

450.

420.

380.

390.87

Bra

nd

atti

tud

e0.

250.

280.

120.

290.

140.

290.

070.89

Bra

nd

com

mit

men

t0.

330.

210.

420.

390.

420.

310.

630.

200.82

Wor

d-o

f-m

outh

0.27

0.18

0.21

0.38

0.29

0.27

0.28

0.47

0.51

0.89

Bra

nd

pu

rch

ase

0.30

0.21

0.22

0.39

0.25

0.31

0.23

0.52

0.44

0.64

0.95

Notes:

Ital

icn

um

ber

son

the

dia

gon

alsh

owth

esq

uar

ero

otof

the

AV

E,

nu

mb

ers

bel

owth

ed

iag

onal

rep

rese

nt

con

stru

ctco

rrel

atio

n

Table AII.Correlation matrix and

discriminant validity

How totransform

consumers

361

Dow

nloa

ded

by J

ames

Mad

ison

Uni

vers

ity A

t 16:

02 2

1 O

ctob

er 2

014

(PT

)

This article has been cited by:

1. Goetz Greve. 2014. The Moderating Effect of Customer Engagement on the Brand Image – Brand LoyaltyRelationship. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences 148, 203-210. [CrossRef]

2. Robert Davis, Inna Piven, Michael Breazeale. 2014. Conceptualizing the brand in social media community:The five sources model. Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services 21, 468-481. [CrossRef]

3. Natalie Jane De Vries, Jamie Carlson. 2014. Examining the drivers and brand performance implicationsof customer engagement with brands in the social media environment. Journal of Brand Management .[CrossRef]

4. Tommy K H Chan, Xiabing Zheng, Christy M K Cheung, Matthew K O Lee, Zach W Y Lee. 2014.Antecedents and consequences of customer engagement in online brand communities. Journal of MarketingAnalytics 2, 81-97. [CrossRef]

5. Carla Ruiz-Mafe, Jose Martí-Parreño, Silvia Sanz-Blas. 2014. Key drivers of consumer loyalty to Facebookfan pages. Online Information Review 38:3, 362-380. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

6. Alexander Muk, Christina Chung. 2014. Driving Consumers to Become Fans of Brand Pages: ATheoretical Framework. Journal of Interactive Advertising 14, 1-10. [CrossRef]

7. Benedikt Jahn, Markus Pfeiffer. 2014. Die digitale Revolution — Neue Geschäftsmodelle statt (nur) neueKommunikation. Marketing Review St. Gallen 31:1, 79. [CrossRef]

8. Irena Pletikosa Cvijikj, Florian Michahelles. 2013. Online engagement factors on Facebook brand pages.Social Network Analysis and Mining 3, 843-861. [CrossRef]

9. Irena Pletikosa Cvijikj, Erica Dubach Spiegler, Florian Michahelles. 2013. Evaluation framework for socialmedia brand presence. Social Network Analysis and Mining 3, 1325-1349. [CrossRef]

10. Kristina Heinonen, Maria Holmlund, Tore Strandvik, Carla Sofia Martins, Lia Patrício. 2013.Understanding participation in company social networks. Journal of Service Management 24:5, 567-587.[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

11. Lerzan Aksoy, Allard van Riel, Jay Kandampully, Bart Larivière, Herm Joosten, Edward C. Malthouse,Marcel van Birgelen, Pelin Aksoy, Werner H. Kunz, Ming‐Hui Huang. 2013. Value fusion. Journal ofService Management 24:3, 268-293. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

12. Ronald E. Goldsmith, Margherita Pagani, Xiaojing Lu. 2013. Social network activity and contributingto an online review site. Journal of Research in Interactive Marketing 7:2, 100-118. [Abstract] [Full Text][PDF]

13. Huanhuan Cao, Jinhu Jiang, Lih‐Bin Oh, Hao Li, Xiuwu Liao, Zhiwu Chen. 2013. A Maslow's hierarchyof needs analysis of social networking services continuance. Journal of Service Management 24:2, 170-190.[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Dow

nloa

ded

by J

ames

Mad

ison

Uni

vers

ity A

t 16:

02 2

1 O

ctob

er 2

014

(PT

)