literature review of social media

7/27/2019 Literature Review of Social Media

1/18

A LITERATURE REVIEW ON THE TOPIC OF SOCIAL MEDIA

Doyle, Cathal, University College of Cork, O Rahilly Building, Cork, [email protected]

Abstract

Social Media has received a lot of attention from practitioners but little empirical research has beenconducted on the topic. This literature review highlights the current understanding of what practitioners and academics know about social media. It then identifies the characteristics inherent to social media and offersa definition. Further to this, the types of social media are identified, and classified. This leads to the Social

Media Classification Framework, which can be used to better understand the types of social mediaavailable. A research objective is proposed, and three research questions to help achieve this objective.

Finally the research contribution is outlined.

Keywords: Social Media, Web 2.0, Literature Review, Social Media Framework.


2/18


3/18

3 SOCIAL MEDIA AS A RESEARCH TOPIC

3.1 Relevance in IS Research

The contribution of IS research to practice today is underwhelming (Gill and Bhattacherjee 2009). ISresearch should help organisations understand IT's potential and impact, which will allow them to use thetechnology (Agarwal and Lucas 2005). Practitioners question the practical relevance of IS research that is

published in the leading IS journals as it is too often years behind current trends (Benbasat and Zmud 1999;Rosemann and Vessey 2008). IS researchers should look to practice to identify a topic to research, and thenlook at the academic literature available (Benbasat and Zmud 1999). By focusing on the current trends of

practice, an interesting topic for research can be chosen.

There is also a perception that if research is relevant it lacks rigor, and vice versa (Rosemann and Vessey2008). It is important IS research informs practitioners but often IS research fails to accomplish this(Agarwal and Lucas 2005; Gill and Bhattacherjee 2009). Table 1 presents eight recommendations that should

be used to increase the relevance of IS research (Benbasat and Zmud 1999).

Recommendations1. The foremost criterion to be applied in selecting research topics should be directly related to the future

interest that key stakeholders (journals, colleagues, and practitioners) are likely to hold in a topic2. IS researchers should look to practice to identify research topics and look to the IS literature only after a

commitment has been made to a specific topic3. More discussion on the core research issues of the IS field that have the potential to influence practice is

needed4. When deciding whether or not to begin a new research project or manuscript, IS researchers should focus

on the likely outcomes, rather than the inputs, of such efforts5. In order for IS researchers to be more proactive in a direct sense, it is imperative that the IS research

community produce cumulative, theory-based, context-rich bodies of research6. In order for IS research to be more relevant, it is important that authors develop frames of reference which

are intuitively meaningful to practitioners to organise complex phenomena and to provide contingencyapproaches to action

7. In order for IS research to be more relevant, IS academics should portray the outputs of their research inways such that it might be utilized by practitioners to justify and rationalize IT-related initiatives

8. The vast majority of IS research articles should be crafted in a clear, simple, and concise manner such thatthey are accessible by all the potential readership of a journal

Table 1. Suggestions for Increasing the Relevance of IS Research (Benbasat 1999).

By following these steps research can be relevant to practitioners, and by applying the chosen methodologyrigorously when doing the research,a high standard of rigor can be achieved (Benbasat and Zmud 1999;Rosemann and Vessey 2008).

3.2 Practitioner Literature

By reading articles published in practitioner journals, current trends can be highlighted, with the likelyoutcome of producing more topical and valued ideas (Hair, Money et al. 2007). By focusing on practitioner literature, it was observed that the phenomena of social media was receiving constant attention (Armano2009; Armano 2009; Baker 2009; Deragon 2009; Reid 2009; Soat 2010) The data in Table 2 indicates that the growth of users using social media tools has grown exponentially in recent years. Two thirds of internetusers visit social media sites, with ten percent of all internet activity occurring on these sites. Further to thishowever, is the fact that social media users believe that organisations should have a social media presence,

interacting with them to solve problems, and allow feedback on their products and services. These issueshave all led to organisations gaining an interest in social media.

3


4/18

1. 3 out of 4 Americans use social tools (Bernoff 2008)2. 2/3 of the global internet population visit social networks (Nielsen 2009)3. Time spent on social networks is growing at 3 times the overall internet rate, accounting for 10% of all

interent time (Nielsen 2009)4. 93% of social media users believe a company should have a presence in social media (Larrumbide 2008))5. 85% of social media users believe a company should not only be present but also interact with its

consumers via social media (Larrumbide 2008)6. 43% of social media users believe companies should use social networks to solve their problems

(Larrumbide 2008)7. 41% of social media users believe companies should solicit feedback on their products and services

(Larrumbide 2008)8. 37% of social media users believe companies should develop new ways for consumers to interact with

their brand (Larrumbide 2008)

Table 2. Reasons for Practitioners Interest in Social Media.

Organisations will increase their interest in social media in 2010 (Armano 2009). Table 3 presents six socialmedia trends for organisations in 2010 (Armano 2009). These six trends all highlight that organisations are

beginning to focus more on social media, and trying to find how they can use it. It also indicates thatorganisations must begin to introduce policies to ensure the social media tools are being used correctly, andnot to attract wrong types of media stories that could affect an organisations reputation.

Social Media Trends Explanation1. Social media begins to look

less socialWith groups, lists and niche networks becoming more popular, networkscould begin to feel more "exclusive"

2. Corporations look to scale There are relatively few big companies that have scaled social initiatives beyond one-off marketing or communications initiatives. Companies will

look to uncover cost savings or serve customers more effectively throughleveraging social technology3. Social business becomes

serious playAs businesses look to incentivize activity within their internal or external

networks, they may include carrots that encourage a bit of friendlycompetition. Therefore, participants are incentivized and rewarded throughhigher participation levels

4. Companies will have asocial media policy

If organisations don't already have a social media policy in place withspecific rules of engagement across multiple networks, it just might have onein the next year

5. Mobile becomes a socialmedia lifeline

With approximately 70 percent of organizations banning social networks and,simultaneously, sales of smartphones on the rise, it's likely that employeeswill seek to feed their social media addictions on their mobile devices. As aresult, we may see more and/or better mobile versions of social media toolscurrently available

6. Sharing no longer meanse-mail

Sharing functionalities in social media tools will allow users to easily broadcast an article across networks such as Facebook and Twitter. Manywebsites already support this functionality, but it's likely that we will see anincrease in user behaviour as it becomes more mainstream for people to sharewith networks what they used to do with e-mail lists.

Table 3. Six Social Media Trends for 2010 (Armano 2009) .

Organisations are already embracing social media tools to achieve better results across their differentfunctions (Reid 2009). These functions include lead generation, customer service, brand value expansion,

competitive intelligence, and innovation management (Reid 2009). But there is a major pitfall organisationsmust avoid being social is just that, where organisations must continuously interact with other participants,and not just drop the conversation when information has been gathered (Reid 2009).

4


5/18

There are millions of users interacting with these social media tools (Armano 2009; Soat 2010). Byinteracting with these users, organisations can put forward new products they might have, get customer feedback, and ask for ideas (Baker 2009). This has led social media to be considered much more than justanother buzz word, and could be the most significant business enabler since the internet itself (Soat 2010).However organisations are still confused as to how they should use social media, and the benefits it can bring

them (Armano 2009; Deragon 2009). Table 4 presents a number of questions that organisations are askingabout social media (Soat 2010). It is evident from this data that research needs to be conducted to offer organisations guidance on the social media.

Questions1. Are my competitors continuing to invest in social networking?2. Where's the return on investment?3. Which way works best?4. How deep within my organization should social networking be allowed to penetrate?5. Is it necessary to have a corporate policy around social networking?6. What can social media teach me about internal collaboration?

Table 4. Organisation Questions About Social Media (Soat 2010).

3.3 Academic Literature

Despite this interest in social media, academic research is lacking in providing an understanding of the phenomena (Kaplan and Haenlein 2010). The data in Table 2 indicates that there is an excellent opportunityfor organisations to communicate with millions of social media participants, therefore they need to beinterested in creating an online presence (Kaplan and Haenlein 2010). However, organisations are lesscomfortable when the information on these social media websites is created and distributed by these

participants (Stenmark 2008; Kaplan and Haenlein 2010). This reduces an organisations control of theinformation available about them online (Kaplan and Haenlein 2010). But if organisations wish to be

participants themselves in the social media phenomenon, they have to embrace this loss of control, andunderstand it is better to have information ownership shared with all other participants (Stenmark 2008).

(Stenmark 2008) offers a framework of scenarios for when organisations introduce Web 2.0 technologies.This framework has been extended to include social media tools, and can be viewed in Table 5. Managementcan either be supportive or obstructive of social media tools, and their support or opposition can either beactive or passive (Stenmark 2008). This framework can be used to understand why management may or maynot introduce social media tools into their organisation.

Passive Management Active Management

Supportive Management Scenario 1:Management are unaware of or uninterested in theuse of social media tools and has no strategy for organisational use. Use is implicitly allowed but notactively encouraged

Scenario 2:Management are positive towards the useof social media tools, and decides toactively promote it and to foster corporateattitude of participation

Obstructive Management

Scenario 3:Management does not believe in social media tools,and do not want them to be used within theorganisation but takes no measures to activelyobstruct it

Scenario 4:Management are negative towards socialmedia tools and is actively devising

policies and regulations to prevent suchtools from being used

Table 5. Four Different Scenarios for Social Media Tools Being Introduced in Organisation

Environments (Stenmark 2008).

5


6/18

In scenario 1, management are passively supportive of social media tools in the organisation but they don'tintroduce them. It is up to employees to introduce them, and slowly they may gain momentum. Once thereare noticeable benefits, management will take a more proactive role in promoting their use. Management arelikely to be in this scenario when they are unsure of the benefits, or how to properly introduce social mediatools to the organisation.

In scenario 2, management introduce the social media tools, and are active users of them. This enthusiasmwill encourage other employees to participate in using the tools, ensuring a quicker uptake. Management arelikely to be in this scenario when they have seen how other organisations have successfully introduced socialmedia tools, and feel they can achieve the same or similar benefits from using the tools.

In scenario 3, management don't believe social media tools are going to improve the organisation. It is still possible however, for employees to introduce the tools, and possibly change managements views if benefitsare noticeable. Management are likely to be in this scenario is they have failed to notice any benefits thatsocial media tools can offer, or do not believe they will have an impact on their organisation.

In scenario 4, management do not want social media tools to be used, and prevent any attempt to introducethem. This prevention is caused by the fear of losing control of information, and how it is disseminated. Thisis a dangerous position, as not giving the tools any opportunity could lead to losing ground on competitorswho do make use of the tools. Management is likely to be in this scenario if they feel losing control of information dissemination will damage the organisation, or possibly lead to private information beingreleased to the public.

3.4 Motivation For This Research

There has been a call for further research to be conducted on the phenomena of social media (Pettersen ;Stenmark 2008). Current literature argues favourably for aligned, rigid, and highly standardised informationinfrastructures (Stenmark 2008). This literature is at odds with social media (Stenmark 2008). There needs to

be a focus on the innovative aspect of social media, and actual value it can stimulate for organisations(Pettersen).

The call for further research, as well as the interest that is being shown by practitioners in the phenomenon,and the lack of academic research currently available justifies the need for further research. As there is such alack of academic literature on the phenomena of social media, the proposed research will be in the top rightquadrant of the Risk Profile of a Research Topic in Table 6, provided by (Hair, Money et al. 2007). The

proposed research would be in a new field, but a previously tested method will be used to study it. This

should produce a satisfactory result, where the research will be adding to the body of IS knowledge, andcreating practical knowledge that practitioners can use.

New Method Old Method New Field of Study High risk of criticism and possible failure Should produce a satisfactory result

Old Field of Study Should produce a satisfactory result May be of little value and notworthy of a degree

Table 6. Risk Profile of a Research Topic (Hair, Money et al. 2007).

6


7/18

4 SOCIAL MEDIA: CHARACTERISTICS AND A DEFINITION

4.1 Towards A Social Media Definition

The term social media is a broad term that is often used interchangeably with Web 2.0. It is important todistinguish between these two terms and offer a clear definition of social media. (O Reilly 2005) coined theterm Web 2.0 and defined it as:

Web 2.0 is the network as platform, spanning all connected devices; Web 2.0applications are those that make the most of the intrinsic advantages of that

platform: delivering software as a continually-updated service that getsbetter the more people use it, consuming and remixing data from multiple

sources, including individual users, while providing their own data and services in a form that allows remixing by others, creating network effectsthrough an "architecture of participation," and going beyond the pagemetaphor of Web 1.0 to deliver rich user experiences

This definition indicates that Web 2.0 is more than a tool or piece of technology (Stenmark 2008). It is anextremely broad definition that incorporates people, processes and technology, indicating that Web 2.0incorporates these components to deliver a richer user experience while on the internet. However socialmedia are internet-based tools built on the foundations of Web 2.0. (Kaplan and Haenlein 2010) offers thisdefinition of social media:

Social Media is a group of Internet-based applications that build on theideological and technological foundations of Web 2.0, and that allow thecreation and exchange of User Generated Content

This definition offers a clear understanding of how social media is built on the foundations of theunderstanding of Web 2.0. Therefore the term social media cannot be used interchangeably with the termWeb 2.0, but is an example of the tools Web 2.0 can provide. There is also a belief among some researchersand practitioners that Web 2.0 is just a buzz word (Stenmark 2008). This could lead to social media beingdescribed in similar terms. (Shaw 2005) states:

Web 2.0 is a marketing slogan. The problem I have with this "Web 2.0" slogan is that it is a contrivance, meant to imply a unified movement or wave toward a better Web

A concise definition of social media is needed to help researchers and practitioners understand the phenomenon and the characteristics that are inherent with it. This definition will reduce the perceived notionof the term social media being used as a buzz word.

4.2 Social Media Characteristics

To define social media it was necessary to determine and define characteristics that are inherent of the phenomena. The characteristics were accumulated by reviewing the literature, both practitioner and

academic, and also by observing the phenomena itself. These characteristics are presented and defined inTable 7.

7


8/18

Characteristic DefinitionLow Cost The cost of implementing social media tools is low, as the tools are free to use

InteractiveCommunication

Communication is multi-directional, where participants can respond to information thatothers provide. This interaction leads to relationships being formed

CollaborativeParticipation

Engaging with social media participants leads to increased collaboration efforts and participation by the users of social media

Reputation Having a strong social media reputation increases participants interaction, and beingaccountable for information that is provided gains their trust

AccumulativeInformation

Information is continuously generated through conversations that occur, with anelectronic record providing a copy of everything that has been said

Dissemination of Information

Information is no longer filtered but instead is in the open, creating a bottom-up approachto information dissemination

Table 7. Characteristics of Social Media.

4.3 Social Media Definition

Based on the characteristics that are outlined above, it is proposed that social media can be defined as:

a low cost form of communication, where participants interact throughonline conversations and form relationships with each other, wherereputation is increased by collaborating and contributing information.This information is permanently stored online and can be accessed byany participant, and can be freely distributed to any other participant

5 SOCIAL MEDIA CLASSIFICATION FRAMEWORK

5.1 Theoretical Foundation: Extension of Adaptive Structuration Theory

(DeSanctis and Poole 1994) developed the Adaption Structuation Theory (AST) to help understand the process of how people introduce technologies into an organisation. AST consists of two concepts: structuralfeatures and spirit (DeSanctis and Poole 1994). Structural features are specific types of rules, resources or capabilities offered by the system (Nagle and Sammon 2009). Spirit is defined as the general intent withregard to values and goals underlying a given set of structural features (DeSanctis and Poole 1994).

(Markus and Silver 2008) reviewed these two concepts, and extended them by offering three new concepts:technical objects, functional affordances, and symbolic expressions. Figure 1 is a representation of theseconcepts. (Markus and Silver 2008) state: The technical objects concept pertains to the IT artifactsthemselves; the functional affordances and symbolic expressions concepts refer to relations betweentechnical objects and users .

8


9/18

Figure 1. How Functional Affordances and Symbolic Expressions Relate Technical Objects toSpecified Users or User Groups (Markus and Silver 2008).

Technical Objects

We propose the concept of technical objects to denote IT artifacts and their components (Markus andSilver 2008). Any IT artifact has many technical objects, including the interface and its outputs, i.e. icons,

menu labels, documents and drawings (Markus and Silver 2008). Technical objects are viewed as being realthings that have properties, but just because they can be used in a certain way, does not mean they will not beused differently by other people (Markus and Silver 2008). The concepts of technical objects and their

properties can explain the outcomes observed when technology is used (Markus and Silver 2008).

Functional Affordances and Symbolic Expressions

Functional affordances are a type of relationship between a technical object and a specified user (Markusand Silver 2008). They identify what a user can do with an IT artifact, depending on the users capabilitiesand goals (Markus and Silver 2008). These uses are based on potential uses, rather than actual uses.Symbolic expressions are the communicative possibilities of a technical object for a specified user group

(Markus and Silver 2008). Like functional affordances, they are a relationship between a technical object and potential users (Markus and Silver 2008). These technical objects and their properties allow users to perceive, interpret, and interact with IT artifacts (Markus and Silver 2008).

5.2 Classification of Social Media Types

There are many different types of social media (Tredinnick 2006; Kaplan and Haenlein 2010). These have been identified as blogs, collaborative projects, social networking sites, content communities, virtual socialnetworks, and virtual game worlds (Tredinnick 2006; Kaplan and Haenlein 2010). From the literature review,it was evident that two more types of social media were missing from this initial list: micro-blogging andlivecasting. The following section classifies each of these social media types.

Blogs

Blogs are the oldest form of social media (Tredinnick 2006; Kaplan and Haenlein 2010). They can beconsidered as a special type of website and when initially introduced they were seen as a way for users toeasily publish information to the web (Tredinnick 2006; Kaplan and Haenlein 2010). They were used as

public diaries by individuals, but have grown to other uses such as providing general information abouttopics the author wishes to discuss (Tredinnick 2006; Kaplan and Haenlein 2010). Blogs have introducedtools that have allowed publishing to the web to become easier and cheaper, as websites don't need to becreated to start a blog with tools such as Blogger and WordPress (Tredinnick 2006). A blog consists of the

post provided by the blogger, date-stamped in a chronological order, and a comments section underneath for feedback and discussion on the post (Godwin-Jones 2003; Kaplan and Haenlein 2010). Organisations can setup a blog to inform the public about its products and services, or individuals within the organisation can

9


10/18

blog. Microsoft's Larry Hryb, who is Director of Programming for Xbox Live, uses the pseudo name Major Nelson for his blog and he releases news about the Xbox and engages with the users that respond to his blog.

Micro-blogging

Micro-blogging is a new technology that has been derived from blogging (Java, Song et al. 2007; Holotescu

and Grosseck 2008). Users are allowed to publish information online about their activities, opinions andstatus, with a character limit on the message being between 140-200 characters (Java, Song et al. 2007;Holotescu and Grosseck 2008). Users can post or view comments through micro-blogging tools such asTwitter, Jaiku and Pownce (Java, Song et al. 2007). These tools can be accessed online, and through SMSmessaging (Holotescu and Grosseck 2008). This allows a user to create or read messages quickly and almostanywhere they wish. This faster mode of communication is one of the main differences between micro-

blogging and blogging. A second difference is how frequently users can update such a short message as lessthought and time is required (Java, Song et al. 2007). Users are therefore more likely to update their micro-

blog more frequently than their general blog. Users also use their micro-blog to draw peoples attention to posts they have made at their main blog, providing a link to the post.

Collaborative ProjectsCollaborative projects allow users to create content simultaneously (Kaplan and Haenlein 2010). There aredifferent types of collaborative projects; wikis, like blogs, have been in existence for a long time, and areintensely collaborative (Godwin-Jones 2003; Tredinnick 2006). The goal of wiki websites is to become ashared repository of knowledge, with the knowledge base growing over time (Godwin-Jones 2003). Userscan add, remove, and change text-based content (Tredinnick 2006; Kaplan and Haenlein 2010). This puts the

power of the information created with the users, rather than the information coming from a centralised source(Tredinnick 2006). Wikipedia is an example of a wiki, where users can edit information on any page, with allthe content generated by users. Social bookmarking tools are another type of collaborative project, wherethere is a collection of website links and media content that is generated by groups of users (Kaplan andHaenlein 2010). These links can be shared and accessed by any users. Delicious bookmarking is an example

of social bookmarking. An extension to these collaborative projects is social news tools. These are acollection of news stories, or sometimes other links, and users vote the most popular ones up and theunpopular ones down. This gives the users the power of choosing what links should be immediately visible.Reddit and Digg are examples of such tools. The main idea of collaborative projects is the input of manyusers can lead to a better outcome than an individual on their own, with more credible and stable content

being created (Godwin-Jones 2003; Tredinnick 2006; Kaplan and Haenlein 2010).

Social Networking Sites

Social networking sites are tools that allow users to create a personal profile of themselves containinginformation such as their age, location and interests (Boyd and Ellison 2007; Kaplan and Haenlein 2010).These personal profiles can than be connected with friends and colleagues, where information can be shared

between each other (Boyd and Ellison 2007; Kaplan and Haenlein 2010). These connections create a network of users, where anyone connected to the network can view everyone elses profile, and therefore interact withthem (Boyd and Ellison 2007). Social networks have started attracting organisations, where they can set up a

profile, and communicate with users who add them to their network. Popular social networking sites areFacebook, MySpace, and Bebo, which have attracted hundreds of millions of users, who use the sites on adaily basis (Boyd and Ellison 2007; Kaplan and Haenlein 2010).

Livecasting

Livecasting is sharing live content with the intent of interacting with a live audience (Grantham 2009).While this concept has been in use for many years in organisations with technologies like Group Decision

Support Systems, it is with the introduction of online tools that enable this concept to reach a much wider audience. Skype is one such tool that allows users to have live conversations over the internet (Baset andSchulzrinne 2006). These conversations can have many users interacting, and can include video

10


11/18

conferencing. Other forms include live podcasting, live blogging and videocasting (Gay, Cain et al. 2009).Journalists are currently using these tools to provide live content to users (Gay, Cain et al. 2009). Generalusers are also using the tools, with live videocasting websites such as Ustream.tv and Justin.tv.

Content Communities

Content communities consist of users sharing media content between one another (Kaplan and Haenlein2010). There is a wide range of different media types, including text, photos, videos, and presentations(Kaplan and Haenlein 2010). The content is uploaded by users to a specific website such as YouTube for videos, Flickr for photos and Slideshare for presentations, and can be viewed and shared with other users.Some content websites have had a negative impact on organisations as the content uploaded can be illegal,such as the sharing of music (Kaplan and Haenlein 2010). But because of the size of the communities thatexist with these websites there is great opportunities for organisations to interact with users.

Virtual Worlds

Virtual worlds are 3D environments, where users appear as avatars that they design themselves, and interactwith other users like they would in real life (Kaplan and Haenlein 2010). Virtual worlds often have their owneconomies, where transactions occur between users in the worlds own currency, and can be exchanged for real monetary value. There are two types of virtual worlds; virtual game worlds consist of rules andregulations that the users must abide by (Kaplan and Haenlein 2010). These worlds are referred to asmassively multiplayer online role playing games (MMORPG) with World of Warcraft being the leader with11.5 million subscribed users. Virtual social worlds are more free than virtual game worlds, with less focuson rules and regulations except for real life ones such as gravity (Kaplan and Haenlein 2010). Users interactwith each other as they would in real life, and communities are built from relationships that are made.Second Life is the biggest virtual social world with millions of users.

5.3 A Social Media Classification Framework

The Social Media Classification framework in Figure 2 is proposed, based on the types of social media thatare available. This framework can be utilised for any type of social media to identify the functionalaffordances it offers users, and how these can be combined to increase their functional affordances. As(Markus and Silver 2008) proposes, each IT artifact has different technical objects, and can be useddifferently by users. The social media types are divided into low, medium and high, based on the functionalaffordances offered. These are determined based on the classifications of the social media proposed.

Figure 2. Social Media Classification Framework.

11


12/18

The functional affordances of the first block are set at low. This is a reflection of the capabilities of blogs,micro-blogging, and collaborative projects. Users are capable of providing a limited amount of information,and contribution. The functional affordances of the second block are set at medium. This is a reflection of thecapabilities of social networking sites, livecasting, and content communities. Users can offer moreinformation, and create networks of users. The functional affordances of the third block are set a high. This isa reflection of the capabilities of social virtual worlds. Users are immersed in a 3D world that they caninteract with.

However, these IT artifacts are not confined to one single block. From a users interpretation, they may feelthe social media type can be better utilised for their needs. To increase the functional affordances of the typeof social media, they can be combined with other types of social media, based on the needs and goals of theuser. An explanation of this would be the social media tool Twitter. This is a form of micro-blogging butintroduces elements of social networking sites by allowing users of the tool to create a detailed personal

profile, create a network of followers, and send and receive information between the users in this network.From the users perspective, this increases the functional affordances of Twitter from low to medium.

6 RESEARCH METHODOLOGY

6.1 Research Objective and Research Questions

A research objective and research questions are crucial components to help focus the research topic (Hair,Money et al. 2007). The research objective must explicitly state the aim of the research. As has beenhighlighted by the literature review, there is a lack of empirical research on social media so the objective of this study is:

to determine the influence of social media on organisations.

To ensure this objective is met, the following three research questions are proposed:

RQ1: What is the rationale for an organisation to introduce social media tools?

From the literature review in Section 3 it is evident that there is no clear understanding of the reasons whyorganisations introduce social media tools. As social media is believed to be a significant business enabler for the future, a framework has been provided to help understand managements attitude towards socialmedia tools. This can be utilised to understand their rationale for introducing social media tools.

RQ2: What impact on organisational processes and structures do implementing social media have?

This question is exploratory in nature, and focuses on the internal impacts that social media have onorganisations. The literature review in Section 3 highlights a lack of empirical research on the understandingof the processes and structures that are affected by social media. Therefore, it is of interest to know theinternal impacts that social media tools will have on an organisation.

RQ3: What impact does the introduction of social media have on external parties views of the organisation?

Again this question is exploratory in nature, and focuses on the external impacts that social media have onorganisations. The literature review in Section 3 indicates that there are millions of users using social media

tools. This question concentrates on how the communication channel that social media tools provide isaffecting relationships with external entities such as customers, possible customers, business partnerships,and potential business partnerships.

12


13/18

6.2 Research Method

Case studies can be viewed as a strategy for carrying out research (Yin 1981; Benbasat, Goldstein et al.1987; Eisendhardt 1989). Research questions are specified before the research starts and the researcher is anobserver rather than a participant (Benbasat, Goldstein et al. 1987). Case study research can be done usingqualitative or quantitative data gathering, or a mixture, and takes place in a natural setting (Yin 1981;

Eisendhardt 1989).

From the research questions that have been posed in Section 6.1, the case study approach is the mostappropriate method to use. Case studies are used to answer exploratory questions of how? and why? (Yin2009). The questions proposed are exploring the use of social media in organisations, and asking how andwhy they are using it. Multiple-case study improves the chances of doing a good case study due to theanalytical benefits of doing more than one case (Benbasat, Goldstein et al. 1987; Yin 2009). As such amultiple-case study approach was deemed the most appropriate method.

6.3 Data Collection Strategy

Careful planning of the data collection methods to be applied in a case study method is important to ensurethe right data is gathered, and time is not wasted on-site (Benbasat, Goldstein et al. 1987; Baskerville 1999).This planning will provide the researcher with a guide to work from, and can be revised as the researchevolves (Benbasat, Goldstein et al. 1987).

A number of different data collection methods can be used when using the case study method, such asdocumentation, archival records, interviews, direct observation, questionnaires and physical observation(Eisendhardt 1989; Darke, Shanks et al. 1998; Yin 2009). A good case study will want to use as many of these sources as possible (Yin 2009).

The data collection strategy will be conducted as follows:

Documentation regarding the organisation will be gathered from different sources such as theinternet, and newspaper articles.

An on-site visit will then be conducted, with semi-structured interviews on the personnel involvedwith the social media tools.

An on-site visit where personnel using the social media tools will be observed, and further documentation that might be required will be collected. This will include the information gatheredfrom the social media tool.

If necessary, follow-up interviews will be conducted to confirm the analysis that has been made, or to clarify data gathered from other data collection methods.

6.4 Instrument Validation

A pilot case will help you refine your data collection plans with respect to both the content of the data andthe procedures to be followed (Yin 2009). By conducting a pilot case study it should improve the reliabilityand validity of the proposed instruments.

By focusing on a single case, or if the opportunity arises multiple-case studies, a pilot test can be conducted.This allows for instrumentation to be tested. Documents that need to be collected will be highlighted andgive a better understanding of the documents that may need to be collected for the actual case study. It will

13


14/18

also highlight the people who should be interviewed. The semi-structured interview guide can be tested, andaltered if necessary based on the responses of the interviewees. Finally experience can be gained in theobservation method, and highlight the areas that should be observed.

There are also three principles that can be followed to improve the validity and reliability of data that isgathered from case studies (Yin 2009):

1. Use Multiple Sources of Evidence

As it is planned to use three methods of data collection - documentation, interviews, and observation, it will be possible to corroborate data from the three different sources. By confirming the different data through thistriangulation, the findings of the case study will be more acceptable to the IS research community.

2. Create a Case Study Database

Setting up a case study data base will be of extreme importance. This will hold all documents, includingdocumentation collected throughout the study, interview recordings, and observation notes. This will be

important for any external observer who wishes to review how the data collected was before it was analysed.This process will greatly improve the reliability of the case.

3. Maintain a Chain of Evidence

Maintaining a chain of evidence will also be necessary to further increase the reliability of the informationcollected. This process will allow any external observer to follow a trail from the final report, to the casestudy database, to the case study questions.

By conducting the pilot case study, and adhering to the three principles offered by (Yin 2009), the

instruments that will be used, and the data gathered, will be validated to an acceptable standard by the IScommunity. The data will also be more reliable.

6.5 Data Analysis Strategy

As the research method to be used is multiple-case study, cross-case synthesis is the most appropriateanalytic technique that can be used for analysing the data (Yin 2009). This analysis technique is likely to

provide more robust findings than a single case (Yin 2009).

6.6 Summary

Selecting an appropriate research method is key to successful research. Multiple-case study approach waschosen due to the exploratory nature of the research, and to increase generalizability. The data collectionmethods of documentation, interviews, and observation will be used when doing the case study research.This leads to triangulation of the data, and allows it to be corroborated. To ensure validity and reliability of the chosen methods, a pilot case study will be conducted, and the three principles offered by (Yin 2009)utilised. Finally, cross-case synthesis will be used to analyse the data. By carrying out these steps in arigoress manor, it is believed the research will make a valuable contribution to the body of IS research.

7 RESEARCH CONTRIBUTION

A review of the practitioner literature has highlighted a new phenomenon that IS research needs to focus onand that is social media. Social media is a term that many academics believe to be a buzz word, which couldlead to a neglect of conducting research on the phenomenon. However, if IS research is to be relevant then it

14


15/18

should provide research on topics that practitioners express as being important. It is evident from this reviewthat practitioners require knowledge on the impact that social media can have on their organisations. The

proposed research aims to provide this knowledge by answering the research questions.

Despite the lack of academic literature available, a framework has been extended that (Stenmark 2008)offers, on the reasons why management may introduce social media tools into organisation. This framework can be used to determine if management are in favour of social media tools, actively using them to promotewidespread use in the organisation, or if they are against their use. It also indicates that sometimes it isorganisations employees who introduce the tools, and if they are found to be beneficial there use willincrease.

This review of academic and practitioner literature indicated some of the characteristics that are inherent insocial media. Further observation of different types of social media uncovered other characteristics. Theseare presented and defined. From these characteristics a social media definition has been created. Thisdefinition offers researchers and practitioners a clear understanding of what social media is, and how thecharacteristics are linked to each other. This should also reduce the belief of social media being a buzz word,and encourage researchers to consider investigating the phenomena further.

This review also indicates that there are many different types of social media available. To better understandthese types of social media, each one is classified. This provides an understanding of the capabilities of eachone, and the functions it affords to its users. This allows for any social media tool to be defined.

Based on the classifications of the different social media types, a social media classification framework isoffered. This framework can be utilised to understand the different functionalities that the different types of social media have. By providing users with the current functions of the social media tools, they can realisewhat functions they want from each, based on their own needs and goals. As users begin to mix these

functions to meet their needs and goals, they provide new social media tools. As these new tools becomeavailable, they can be classified using this framework. An example of this would be if Facebook introduced avirtual world to their social website. By reviewing the classification of social websites and virtual worlds, thefunctional affordances of these two social media types would be evident.

Finally, the research methodology is provided. The research objective and questions are informed from theliterature. Answering these questions will provide practitioners with the knowledge of the impact that socialmedia tools will have on their organisations. To answer these questions a multiple-case study method will beused. This will allow for generalizability of the research. By conducting a pilot case study, and following(Yin 2009) three principles, the data that is collected will be validated to a high standard, and therefore morereliable.

8 CONCLUSION

It is evident that social media is more than just a buzz word, and a phenomena that practitioners areinterested in. There is a clear lack of academic research on the topic and a call for further research to bedone. This review already provides a strong starting point for further research to be conducted. Thecharacteristics of social media have been explicitly stated and defined. A definition has been provided for theterm social media, and a classification framework provided. The research methodology has also beenoutlined, and the objective and research questions have been proposed.

15


16/18

REFERENCES

Agarwal, R. and H. C. Lucas (2005). "The Information Systems Identity Crisis: Focusing on High-Visibilityand High-Impact Research." MIS Quarterly 29 (3): 381-398.

Armano, D. (2009). Do You Live Social?, Blog Entry at Harvard Business Review. December 30. URL:http://blogs.hbr.org/cs/2009/12/do_you_live_social.html?cm_mmc=npv-_-WEEKLY_HOTLIST-_-JAN_2010-_-HOTLIST0104 .

Armano, D. (2009). Six Social Media Trends for 2010, Blog Entry at Harvard Business Review. November 2. URL:

http://blogs.hbr.org/cs/2009/11/six_social_media_trends.html?cm_mmc=npv-_-WEEKLY_HOTLIST-_- NOV_2009-_-HOTLIST1109 .

Baker, S. (2009). "Beware Social Media Snake Oil." Business Week(4159): 48-51.

Baset, S. and H. Schulzrinne (2006). "An Analysis of the Skype Peer-to-Peer Internet Telephony Protocol."IEEE INFOCOM.

Baskerville, R. (1999). "Investigating Information Systems With Action Research." Communication of theAssociation for Information Systems 2(19): 1-32.

Benbasat, I., D. Goldstein, et al. (1987). "The Case Research Strategy in Studies of Information Systems."MIS Quarterly 11(3): 369 - 386.

Benbasat, I. and R. W. Zmud (1999). "Empirical Research in Information Systems: The Practice of Relevance." MIS Quarterly 23 (1): 3-16.

Bernoff, J. (2008). The Growth Of Social Technology Adoption, Blog Entry at Forrester. October 20. URL:http://www.forrester.com/rb/Research/growth_of_social_technology_adoption/q/id/44907/t/2 .

Boyd, D. and N. Ellison (2007). "Social Network Sites: Definition, History, and Scholarship." Journal of Computer Mediated Communication - Electronic Edition 13 (1): 210-230.

Darke, P., G. Shanks, et al. (1998). "Successfully Completing Case Study Research: Combining Rigour,Relevance and Pragmatism." Information Systems Journal 8(4): 273-289.

Deragon, J. (2009). 5 Things You Must Ask About Social Media, Blog Entry at The Relationship Economy.October 19. URL: http://www.relationship-economy.com/?p=6947 .

Eisendhardt, K. M. (1989). "Building Theories from Case Study Research." The Academy of ManagementReview 14 (4): 532-550.

16
http://blogs.hbr.org/cs/2009/12/do_you_live_social.html?cm_mmc=npv-_-WEEKLY_HOTLIST-_-JAN_2010-_-HOTLIST0104http://blogs.hbr.org/cs/2009/12/do_you_live_social.html?cm_mmc=npv-_-WEEKLY_HOTLIST-_-JAN_2010-_-HOTLIST0104http://blogs.hbr.org/cs/2009/11/six_social_media_trends.html?cm_mmc=npv-_-WEEKLY_HOTLIST-_-NOV_2009-_-HOTLIST1109http://blogs.hbr.org/cs/2009/11/six_social_media_trends.html?cm_mmc=npv-_-WEEKLY_HOTLIST-_-NOV_2009-_-HOTLIST1109http://blogs.hbr.org/cs/2009/11/six_social_media_trends.html?cm_mmc=npv-_-WEEKLY_HOTLIST-_-NOV_2009-_-HOTLIST1109http://www.forrester.com/rb/Research/growth_of_social_technology_adoption/q/id/44907/t/2http://www.relationship-economy.com/?p=6947http://blogs.hbr.org/cs/2009/11/six_social_media_trends.html?cm_mmc=npv-_-WEEKLY_HOTLIST-_-NOV_2009-_-HOTLIST1109http://blogs.hbr.org/cs/2009/11/six_social_media_trends.html?cm_mmc=npv-_-WEEKLY_HOTLIST-_-NOV_2009-_-HOTLIST1109http://www.forrester.com/rb/Research/growth_of_social_technology_adoption/q/id/44907/t/2http://www.relationship-economy.com/?p=6947http://blogs.hbr.org/cs/2009/12/do_you_live_social.html?cm_mmc=npv-_-WEEKLY_HOTLIST-_-JAN_2010-_-HOTLIST0104http://blogs.hbr.org/cs/2009/12/do_you_live_social.html?cm_mmc=npv-_-WEEKLY_HOTLIST-_-JAN_2010-_-HOTLIST0104


17/18

Gay, P., F. Cain, et al. (2009). "Live Casting: Bringing Astronomy to the Masses in Real Time."Communicating Astronomy with the Public Journal 6: 26-29.

Gill, G. and A. Bhattacherjee (2009). "Whom Are We Informing? Issues and Recommendations for MISResearch from an Informing Sciences Perspective." MIS Quarterly 33 (2): 217-235.

Godwin-Jones, R. (2003). "Blogs and Wikis: Environments for On-line Collaboration." Language Learning& Technology 7(2): 12-16.

Grantham, C. (2009). What is Livecasting? Podcamp Nashville 2009, Blog Entry. March 7.http://www.christiangrantham.com/2009/03/07/what-is-livecasting-podcamp-nashville-2009/ .

Hair, J. F., A. H. Money, et al. (2007). Research Methods for Business, Wiley, Chichester.

Holotescu, C. and G. Grosseck (2008). Using Microblogging in Education. Case Study: Cirip.ro. The 4thInternational Scientific Conference eLSE "eLearning and Software for Education". Bucharest.

Java, A., X. Song, et al. (2007). Why We Twitter: Understanding Microblogging Usage and Communities.Proceedings of the 9th WebKDD and 1st SNA-KDD 2007 Workshop on Web Mining and Social Network Analysis, ACM.

Kaplan, A. and M. Haenlein (2010). "Users of the World, Unite! The Challenges and Opportunities of SocialMedia." Business Horizons 53 (1): 59-68.

Larrumbide, A. (2008). Cone Finds That Americans Expect Companies to Have a Presence in Social Media,Blog Entry at Cone Inc. September 25. URL: http://www.coneinc.com/content1182 .

Markus, L. and M. Silver (2008). "A Foundation for the Study of IT Effects: A New Look at DeSanctis andPoole's Concepts of Structural Features and Spirit." Journal of the Association for Information Systems9(3/4): 609-628.

Meister, J. and K. Willyerd (2009). How Twitter and Crowdsourcing Are Reshaping Recruiting, Blog Entryat Harvard Business Review. September 25. URL:

http://blogs.hbr.org/cs/2009/09/how_twitter_and_crowdsourcing.html?cm_mmc=npv-_-TOPICEMAIL-_-OCT_2009-_-TECHNOLOGY1 .

Melville, N., K. Kraemer, et al. (2004). "Review: Information Technology and Organizational Performance:An Integrative Model of IT Business Value." MIS Quarterly 28 (2): 283-322.

Nagle, T. and S. Sammon (2009). A Theoretical Lens to Examine the Structural Impact of Adopting Web 2.0.

Napier, N., M. Keil, et al. (2009). "IT Project Managers Construction of Successful Project ManagementPractice: A Repertory Grid Investigation." Information Systems Journal 19 : 255282.

17
http://www.christiangrantham.com/2009/03/07/what-is-livecasting-podcamp-nashville-2009/http://www.coneinc.com/content1182http://www.coneinc.com/content1182http://blogs.hbr.org/cs/2009/09/how_twitter_and_crowdsourcing.html?cm_mmc=npv-_-TOPICEMAIL-_-OCT_2009-_-TECHNOLOGY1http://blogs.hbr.org/cs/2009/09/how_twitter_and_crowdsourcing.html?cm_mmc=npv-_-TOPICEMAIL-_-OCT_2009-_-TECHNOLOGY1http://www.christiangrantham.com/2009/03/07/what-is-livecasting-podcamp-nashville-2009/http://www.coneinc.com/content1182http://blogs.hbr.org/cs/2009/09/how_twitter_and_crowdsourcing.html?cm_mmc=npv-_-TOPICEMAIL-_-OCT_2009-_-TECHNOLOGY1http://blogs.hbr.org/cs/2009/09/how_twitter_and_crowdsourcing.html?cm_mmc=npv-_-TOPICEMAIL-_-OCT_2009-_-TECHNOLOGY1


18/18

Nielsen (2009). Global Faces and Networked Places, Blog Entry at Nielsen Online. October. URL:http://blog.nielsen.com/nielsenwire/wp-content/uploads/2009/03/nielsen_globalfaces_mar09.pdf .

O Reilly, T. (2005). Web 2.0: Compact Definition?, Blog Entry at O'Reilly Radar. October 1. URL:

http://radar.oreilly.com/archives/2005/10/web-20-compact-definition.html .

Pettersen, L. The Impact of Social Media for Business : 1-9. URL:

http://www.antropologi.info/blog/anthropology/pdf/LenePettersen-SocialMedia.pdf .

Reid, C. (2009). Should Business Embrace Social Networking?, Blog Entry at EContent Mag. Jun 15. URL:http://www.econtentmag.com/Articles/Editorial/Feature/Should-Business-Embrace-Social-Networking-54518.htm .

Rosemann, M. and I. Vessey (2008). "Toward Improving the Relevance of Information Systems Research toPractice: The Role of Applicability Checks." MIS Quarterly 32 (1): 1-22.

Shaw, R. (2005). Web 2.0? It Doesn't Exist, Blog Entry at ZDnet.com. December 17. URL:http://blogs.zdnet.com/ip-telephony/?p=805 .

Soat, J. (2010). 7 Questions Key To Social Networking Success Blog Entry at Information Week. January 16.URL: http://www.informationweek.com/news/internet/social_network/showArticle.jhtml?articleID=222301011 .

Stenmark, D. (2008). Web 2.0 in the Business Environment: The New Intranet or a Passing Hype? EuropeanConference on Information Systems, Galway.

Tredinnick, L. (2006). "Web 2.0 and Business: A Pointer to the Intranets of the Future." Business InformationReview 23 (4): 228-234.

Webster, J. and R. T. Watson (2002). "Analyzing the Past to Prepare for the Future: Writing a LiteratureReview." MIS Quarterly 26 (2): XIII-XXIII.

Yin, R. (1981). "The Case Study Crisis: Some Answers." Administrative Science Quarterly 26 (1): 58-65.

Yin, R. (2009). Case Study Research: Design and Methods, Sage Publications Inc.

18
http://blog.nielsen.com/nielsenwire/wp-content/uploads/2009/03/nielsen_globalfaces_mar09.pdfhttp://radar.oreilly.com/archives/2005/10/web-20-compact-definition.htmlhttp://www.antropologi.info/blog/anthropology/pdf/LenePettersen-SocialMedia.pdfhttp://www.antropologi.info/blog/anthropology/pdf/LenePettersen-SocialMedia.pdfhttp://www.econtentmag.com/Articles/Editorial/Feature/Should-Business-Embrace-Social-Networking-54518.htmhttp://www.econtentmag.com/Articles/Editorial/Feature/Should-Business-Embrace-Social-Networking-54518.htmhttp://blogs.zdnet.com/ip-telephony/?p=805http://www.informationweek.com/news/internet/social_network/showArticle.jhtml?articleID=222301011http://www.informationweek.com/news/internet/social_network/showArticle.jhtml?articleID=222301011http://blog.nielsen.com/nielsenwire/wp-content/uploads/2009/03/nielsen_globalfaces_mar09.pdfhttp://radar.oreilly.com/archives/2005/10/web-20-compact-definition.htmlhttp://www.antropologi.info/blog/anthropology/pdf/LenePettersen-SocialMedia.pdfhttp://www.econtentmag.com/Articles/Editorial/Feature/Should-Business-Embrace-Social-Networking-54518.htmhttp://www.econtentmag.com/Articles/Editorial/Feature/Should-Business-Embrace-Social-Networking-54518.htmhttp://blogs.zdnet.com/ip-telephony/?p=805http://www.informationweek.com/news/internet/social_network/showArticle.jhtml?articleID=222301011http://www.informationweek.com/news/internet/social_network/showArticle.jhtml?articleID=222301011