2017

Literature Review

Aditya Rishi 40120

Alindip Datta 40125
Abhishek Gupta 40114
Amit Aseri 40127
Ajith KN 40121

SIBM PUNE

Online social networks conceptualization
Consumers mostly used the Internet to explore
content: reading, watching and buying products and
services. Increasingly, however, consumers are
utilizing platforms for activities such as sharing content
through sites and blogs, and using social networking in
the process of creating, modifying, sharing, and
discussing Internet content. This explains the
phenomenon of social media, which can now
significantly impact a firm's reputation, sales, and even
survival. (Kietzmann,2011).
Web 2.0 was conceptualized as a firm revolution due
to the use of applications that take benefit from the
collective intelligence, with the aim of improving users’
performance. (Wilson, David W, 2011). User can
participate in the contents generated in the web, which
it has not been usual, since customers has been
considered a passive recipient (Casaló et al., 2010;
Kaplan and Haenlein, 2010; Sigala et al., 2012). There
are a number of web-based services and applications
that demonstrate the importance of the Web 2.0
concept. These services and applications include
blogs, wikis, multimedia sharing services, content
syndication, podcasting and content tagging services.
These applications are not technologies as such, but
they are built using web technologies and open
standards.
Online social networks place the accent on the
socialization of internet (Sigala et al.,2012) and
facilitate the sharing of knowledge between users
(Sigala and Chalkiti, 2012). Online social networks
develop a communication channel that permits to
contact users that nowhere would have contacted
(Xiang and Gretzel, 2010; Lim and Palacios, 2011;
Carmichael et al., 2011).
Maximise crowdsourcing
Social networks provide a platform for all stakeholders
of an organisation to get involved with the decision-
making process. Therefore, ideas will be generated at
a striking rate and the provided input will assist while
Review of Literature
making important business decisions. (Scott, 2016)
With feedback now available on tap, they are used to
develop a new product or service by working in an agile
way with fast experimenting, instant reviews and
speedy amends. Get customers involved as early as
possible and cut development time as a result.
Ultimately, a company should be building a network of
collaborators who can continuously contribute to your
innovation output and consequently achieve consistent
business growth. (Scott, 2016)
Consumers are also adopting increasingly active roles
in co-creating marketing content with companies and
their respective brands. Companies and organizations
are also looking to online social marketing programs
and campaigns so that they can reach consumers
when they are live online. However, the main issue in
this which many companies face is that although they
recognize the need to be active in social media, but
they do not understand the process of doing it
effectively. (Hanna ,2011)
As companies are developing social media strategies,
platforms such as YouTube, Facebook, and Twitter are
too often treated as stand-alone elements rather than
part of an integrated eco system.
Thus the way forward is by means of a systematic way
of understanding and conceptualizing online social
media, and building an Ecosystem of related elements
involving both digital and traditional media.
(Rohm,2011)
Several organisations are either incorporating new
“social media teams” in their organisational structure,
or hiring social media experts to interact with bloggers,
Vloggers and manage online communities. Shirky
defines this external value production as “cognitive
surplus” (Shirky 2010), referring to a hundred billion
hours of human thought and free time of users, which
were before mainly fuelling media fruition and are now
channelled into interactive social media participation.
This “cognitive surplus”, when well directed and
organised around productive projects, can generate
wealth and audiences for organisations. In this
direction, social media offer new network-based
organisational models that are most capable of
engaging users and harnessing the power of the crowd
in solving problems.
Shirky (2010) uses the picture user-generated site
Flickr as an example, showing that all content
published on the platform has a real value for their
users. Tapscott and Williams (2011) names this mass
collaboration “wikinomics”, describing how thousands
of people collaborate in online projects such as
Wikipedia and co-create products and services,
actively contributing to the creation of social media
content. Tapscott and Williams (2011) analyse the way
innovative firms succeed in appropriating value and
rent from the social cooperation and crowdsourced
creativity enabled by Web 2.0 tools. This phenomenon
is described in the literature as a very significant
cultural change that goes beyond user-generated
content and forces companies to challenge their
business models and to innovate the way they produce
and distribute content and how they collaborate with
external stakeholders.
Bridging the expectation-assumption gap
Disruptive technologies are storming the halls of
business, with social media among the most
aggressive. Customers gain a platform for self-
expression; networks organized customer sentiment
and created active communities around interests and
experiences. This genre of connected consumerism
has given rise to a not so quiet consumer revolution.
Perhaps more importantly, businesses were given the
gift of feedback and an opportunity to listen and equally
engage. Social media represents the great bridging of
customer expectations and business assumptions.
(Savitz, 2012)
In 1999, P&G decided to change its approach to
innovation by creating an initiative called ‘connect and
develop’. The company’s rationale was very simple:
although P&G has more than 8,600 scientists
advancing the industrial knowledge to enable new
offerings, there are 1.5 million scientists outside this
company; so why try to invent everything internally?
Conversely, P&G tried to move its own ideas further,
so that the ideas that P&G generates in its labs that
were not picked up by its internal businesses are
available to other firms (even direct competitors) after
three years. (Degen, 2014)
Another example of innovation taken from outside an
organization is the approach of Starbucks (2013), who
asked for innovations from its consumers over the
website ‘My Starbucks Idea’. According to Shih (2009,
p. 112), the social network community managers for
Starbucks do not simply ask for ideas from customers;
they have structured categories to classify client ideas,
and encourage others to vote and comment on these
existing ideas. The Dell Computer (2011) website
‘Ideastorm’ is another such example of a website
where ideas from consumers are invited by category.
This website also invites comments on the company’s
own ideas and advertising. This is how company
creates specific virtual communities to suit their
purpose. (Degen, 2014)
Technology acceptance Model 3 (TAM3)
(TAM) is one among most generally used models to
elucidate users' activity intention to use a
technological innovation. By treating social networking
as a technology system and also
the shopper victimization the social networking
websites as a human, we are able to apply tam-o'-
shanter and take a look at however well it predicts user
intention to use the technology, i.e., the social
networking sites. TAM, tailored from the speculation of
Reasoned Action (TRA) (Koesler,2011) and
originally projected by Davis, assumes that a
human info systems acceptance is decided by 2 major
variables:
(1) Perceived quality (PU) and (2)
Perceived simple Use (PEOU). TAM3 (Venkatesh and
Bala, 2011) is associate integrated model of
technology acceptance that mixes TAM2 and also
the model of the determinants of perceived simple use
(Venkatesh, 2000).
Venkatesh associated Davis (2000) projected an
extension of – TAM2 – by distinguishing and
theorizing regarding the final determinants of
perceived quality – that's, subjective norm, image,
job connectedness, output, quality, result
unquestionable ness, and perceived simple use –
and 2 moderators—that is, expertise and
voluntariness. TAM3 emphasizes the distinctive role
and processes associated with perceived quality and
perceived simple use and theorizes that the
determinants of perceived quality won't influence
perceived simple use. (Pookulangara, 2011).
References
 Casaló, L.V., Flavián, C. and Guinalíu, M. (2010),
“Determinants of the intention to participate in firm-
hosted online travel communities and effects on
consumer behavioral intentions”, Tourism
Management, Vol. 31 No. 6, pp. 898-911.
 Carmichael, F., Palacios, D. and Gil, I. (2011),
“How to create information management
capabilities through Web 2.0”, Service Industries
Journal, Vol. 31 No. 10, pp. 1613-1625.
 Degen, R.J. (2009) “Social network driven
innovation”, WORKING PAPER No. 47/2009,
Outubro 2009.
 Kaplan, A. and Haenlein, M. (2010), “Users of the
world, unite! The challenges and opportunities of
social media”, Business Horizons, Vol. 53 No. 1,
pp. 59-68.
 Lim, S. and Palacios, D. (2011), “Culture and
purpose of Web 2.0 service adoption: a study in
the USA, Korea and Spain”, Service Industries
Journal, Vol. 31 No. 1, pp. 123-131.
 Scott, S. (2016) “How to drive innovation with
social media”, Idea Drop.
 Savitz, E. (2012) “How Social Media Can Spur
Organizational Transformation”, Forbes.
 Shirky, C. 2010. Cognitive Surplus, Creativity and
Generosity in a Connected Age. Penguin Books,
New York.
 Sigala, M. and Chalkiti, K. (2012), “Knowledge
management and web 2.0: preliminary findings
from the Greek tourism industry”, in Sigala, M.,
Christou, E. and Gretzel, U. (Eds), Web 2.0 in
Travel, Tourism and Hospitality: Theory, Practice
and Cases, Ashgate Publishers.
 Sigala, M., Christou, E. and Gretzel, U. (2012),
Web 2.0 in Travel, Tourism and Hospitality:
Theory, Practice and Cases, Ashgate Publishers.
 Tapscott, D. and Williams, A.D. (2006)
“Wikinomics: How Mass Collaboration Changes
Everything”,ISBN 1591841380.
 Xiang, Z. and Gretzel, U. (2010), “Role of social
media in online travel information search”,
Tourism Management, Vol. 31 No. 2, pp. 179-188.
 J. Ignacio Criadoa, Rodrigo Sandoval-Almazanb,
J. Ramon Gil-Garcia (2013), “Government
innovation through social media”
 Andrea L. Kavanaugha, Edward A. Foxa, Steven
D. Sheetzb, Seungwon Yanga, Lin Tzy Lid,
Donald J. Shoemakerc, Apostol Natsevf, Lexing
Xie, (2012) “Social media use by government:
From the routine to the critical”
 Jimmy Huanga, Joao Baptista, Robert D. Galliers
(2013) “Re-conceptualizing rhetorical practices in
organizations: The impact of social media on
internal communications”.
 Alton Y.K Chua, Snehasish Banerjee, (2013)
"Customer knowledge management via social
media: the case of Starbucks", Journal of
Knowledge Management, Vol. 17 Issue: 2,
pp.237-249
 Dennis Linders, (2012) “From e-government to
we-government: Defining a typology for citizen
coproductionin the age of social media”
 Frank T. Piller, Alexander Vossen, Christoph Ihl,
(2011), “From Social Media to Social Product
Development: The Impact of Social Media on Co-
Creation of Innovation”.
 Bhanot, Sandeep (2012), “Use of Social Media by
Companies to Reach their Customers.”
 Fiona Maria Schweitzer, Walter Buchinger, Oliver
Gassmann, (2015) “Crowdsourcing: Leveraging
Innovation through Online Idea Competitions”
 Anders Gustafsson, Per Kristensson, Lars Witell
(2012), “Customer co‐creation in service
innovation:a matter of communication?", Journal
of Service Management, Vol. 23 Issue: 3, pp.311-
327