the new boundary spanners: social media users, engagement, & public relations outcomes

The New

Boundary Spanners:Social Media Users, Engagement &

Public Relations Outcomes

Philip R. Johnson, Uyanga Bazaa, and Li ChenInternational Communication Association

2011 Virtual Conference

Introduction:

Social Media

Introduction:

Social Media

Social media is:

quick, constant, efficient, low cost, entertaining, personal, and interactive multi-directional.

new form of online communication allows free flow of conversation between publics.

provides timely information and ideas that creates, nurtures, and solidifies relationship between individuals and groups.

personalized niche communication for all media users to publish content and consume information from non-

Internet and social media have flattened the world (Friedman, 2000).

“More brands are prioritizing their Facebook page in ads over their own website.” -Steve Rubel, Senior Vice President, Edelman Digital

Platforms like Twitter and Facebook have quickly evolved into tools for marketing (Thomases, 2010).

Introduction:

Social Media

Introduction:

Boundary Spanning

Introduction:

Boundary Spanning

Introduction:

Boundary Spanning

Introduction:

Boundary Spanning

Introduction:

Boundary Spanning

Boundary spanning is to search out relevant information and disseminate it.

However Boundary Spanning also requires PR practitioners to understand and appreciate all sides of a relationship between their organization and public (Guth & Marsh, 2003).

Introduction:

Boundary Spanning & Social Media

Introduction:

Boundary Spanning & Social Media

Much has been written about how the influential few [an elite 10%] tells the rest of us what to buy, how to vote, etc. Duncan Watts, at Columbia and Yahoo! Research, says that it is not the elite few that matter but the connected many and they have to be ready to be influenced.

Introduction:

Boundary Spanning & Social Media

Introduction:

Boundary Spanning & Social Media

Users have become secondary gatekeepers by commenting on news posted online, favoring the stories or passing the link of coverage (Shoemaker & Vos, 2009).

Introduction:

Boundary Spanning & Social Media

Users have become secondary gatekeepers by commenting on news posted online, favoring the stories or passing the link of coverage (Shoemaker & Vos, 2009).

The use of blogs by organizations for PR purposes is beneficial in the building and maintenance of organization-public relationships (Yang, Kang, & Johnson, in press; Yang & Lim, 2009).

Introduction:

Boundary Spanning & Social Media

Users have become secondary gatekeepers by commenting on news posted online, favoring the stories or passing the link of coverage (Shoemaker & Vos, 2009).

The use of blogs by organizations for PR purposes is beneficial in the building and maintenance of organization-public relationships (Yang, Kang, & Johnson, in press; Yang & Lim, 2009).

Applicable to the use of blogs as a social media tool for PR practitioners, the concept of engagement has become a focal point in both the academic and professional fields(Paine, 2007).

Introduction:

Boundary Spanning & Social Media

Purpose of Study

Purpose of Study

Thus researchers believe consumers have become more than a target; instead they seek out product information, create buzz, identify themselves with the brand, and willing to engage with the organization and then share the information with others.

Purpose of Study

Thus researchers believe consumers have become more than a target; instead they seek out product information, create buzz, identify themselves with the brand, and willing to engage with the organization and then share the information with others.

The aim of this study is to find out if individuals engaged in social media have the characteristics of boundary spanners, and whether this engagement results in more positive public relations outcomes

Theory

TheorySocial media engagement is the extent to which social media communication elicits a sense of attachment in terms of interactivity, connectedness, positive attitudes, and word of mouth intentions regarding an organization (Yang & Kang, 2009).

TheorySocial media engagement is the extent to which social media communication elicits a sense of attachment in terms of interactivity, connectedness, positive attitudes, and word of mouth intentions regarding an organization (Yang & Kang, 2009).

Contingency interactivity. A familiar concept to internet research is the idea of interactivity, specifically contingency interactivity, defined as the degree to which an exchange of messages are related to each other and sequenced such that “subsequent messages are contingent or dependent on previous message” (Sundar, Kalyanarman, & Brown, 2003, p. 35).

TheorySocial media engagement is the extent to which social media communication elicits a sense of attachment in terms of interactivity, connectedness, positive attitudes, and word of mouth intentions regarding an organization (Yang & Kang, 2009).

Contingency interactivity. A familiar concept to internet research is the idea of interactivity, specifically contingency interactivity, defined as the degree to which an exchange of messages are related to each other and sequenced such that “subsequent messages are contingent or dependent on previous message” (Sundar, Kalyanarman, & Brown, 2003, p. 35).

User-organization connection. Previous research has shown that a person’s identification or connection with an organization through engagement has positive persuasive outcomes (Busselle & Bilandzic, 2009). Specifically, brand engagement has shown to represent a part of an individual’s self-concept and antecedent to attention, memory, and preference of an individual’s favorite brands (Sprott, Czellar, & Spangenberg, 2009). In our study, user-organization connection is defined as the degree to which an online user feels a connection to an organization through their social media use.

TheorySocial media engagement is the extent to which social media communication elicits a sense of attachment in terms of interactivity, connectedness, positive attitudes, and word of mouth intentions regarding an organization (Yang & Kang, 2009).

Contingency interactivity. A familiar concept to internet research is the idea of interactivity, specifically contingency interactivity, defined as the degree to which an exchange of messages are related to each other and sequenced such that “subsequent messages are contingent or dependent on previous message” (Sundar, Kalyanarman, & Brown, 2003, p. 35).

User-organization connection. Previous research has shown that a person’s identification or connection with an organization through engagement has positive persuasive outcomes (Busselle & Bilandzic, 2009). Specifically, brand engagement has shown to represent a part of an individual’s self-concept and antecedent to attention, memory, and preference of an individual’s favorite brands (Sprott, Czellar, & Spangenberg, 2009). In our study, user-organization connection is defined as the degree to which an online user feels a connection to an organization through their social media use.

Organizational attitude. In our study, organizational attitude is the degree to which a social media user has positive or negative feelings toward an organization. In public relations, positive attitudes toward an organization has an impact in how publics behave toward an organization (Ki & Hon, 2007). In the case of social media, positive attitudes toward an organization are more likely to elicit higher levels of engagement between social media users and the organization.

TheorySocial media engagement is the extent to which social media communication elicits a sense of attachment in terms of interactivity, connectedness, positive attitudes, and word of mouth intentions regarding an organization (Yang & Kang, 2009).

Contingency interactivity. A familiar concept to internet research is the idea of interactivity, specifically contingency interactivity, defined as the degree to which an exchange of messages are related to each other and sequenced such that “subsequent messages are contingent or dependent on previous message” (Sundar, Kalyanarman, & Brown, 2003, p. 35).

User-organization connection. Previous research has shown that a person’s identification or connection with an organization through engagement has positive persuasive outcomes (Busselle & Bilandzic, 2009). Specifically, brand engagement has shown to represent a part of an individual’s self-concept and antecedent to attention, memory, and preference of an individual’s favorite brands (Sprott, Czellar, & Spangenberg, 2009). In our study, user-organization connection is defined as the degree to which an online user feels a connection to an organization through their social media use.

Organizational attitude. In our study, organizational attitude is the degree to which a social media user has positive or negative feelings toward an organization. In public relations, positive attitudes toward an organization has an impact in how publics behave toward an organization (Ki & Hon, 2007). In the case of social media, positive attitudes toward an organization are more likely to elicit higher levels of engagement between social media users and the organization.

Word of mouth intentions. Additionally, positive word of mouth intentions are also indicative or increased social media engagement between users and an organization. Word of mouth intentions are defined as a user’s desire to share or tell information about an organization to others. Higher levels of word of mouth intentions are

Theory & Extension

Theory & Extension

Social Media Engagement

Interactivity Org. AttitudeUser-Org

ConnectionWord of Mouth

Intentions

Theory & Extension

Social Media Engagement

Interactivity Org. AttitudeUser-Org

ConnectionWord of Mouth

Intentions

Boundary Spanning

Enduring Involvement

Social Identity

Self Efficacy

Need for Cognition

Theory & Extension

Social Media Engagement

Interactivity Org. AttitudeUser-Org

ConnectionWord of Mouth

Intentions

Boundary Spanning

Enduring Involvement

Social Identity

Self Efficacy

Need for Cognition

Relational Commitment

Relational Satisfaction

Theory

Theory

Enduring involvement is defined as one’s personal interest in the organization (Baker & Lutz, 1988, 1996).

Theory

Enduring involvement is defined as one’s personal interest in the organization (Baker & Lutz, 1988, 1996).

Social identity is that part of an individual’s self-concept derived from his or her membership in some social groups, along with the value and emotional significance of that membership (Tajfel, 1981).

Theory

Enduring involvement is defined as one’s personal interest in the organization (Baker & Lutz, 1988, 1996).

Social identity is that part of an individual’s self-concept derived from his or her membership in some social groups, along with the value and emotional significance of that membership (Tajfel, 1981).

Self-efficacy is defined as an individual’s belief about her/his capability to accomplish tasks and “to organize and execute the courses of action required to manage prospective situations” (1995, p. 2).

Theory

Enduring involvement is defined as one’s personal interest in the organization (Baker & Lutz, 1988, 1996).

Social identity is that part of an individual’s self-concept derived from his or her membership in some social groups, along with the value and emotional significance of that membership (Tajfel, 1981).

Self-efficacy is defined as an individual’s belief about her/his capability to accomplish tasks and “to organize and execute the courses of action required to manage prospective situations” (1995, p. 2).

Need for cognition is an individual’s tendency to engage in and enjoy effortful cognitive activity (Cacioppo & Petty, 1982, p. 116).

Theory

Theory

Theory

Relational commitment is defined as the extent to which “one party believes and feels that the relationship is worth spending energy to maintain and promote” (p. 14).

Theory

Relational commitment is defined as the extent to which “one party believes and feels that the relationship is worth spending energy to maintain and promote” (p. 14).

Theory

Relational commitment is defined as the extent to which “one party believes and feels that the relationship is worth spending energy to maintain and promote” (p. 14).

Relational satisfaction is defined as the extent to which “one party feels favorably toward the other because positive expectations about the relationship are reinforced” (p. 14).

H1: Social identification with an organization is positively related to

boundary-spanning behaviors.

H2: Self-efficacy is positively related to boundary-spanning behaviors.

H3: Need for cognition is positively related to boundary-spanning

behaviors.

H4: Enduring involvement is positively related to boundary-spanning

behaviors.

H5: Boundary-spanning behaviors are positively related to social media

engagement.

H6: Social media engagement is positively related to relational satisfaction.

Hypotheses

Proposed Model &

Hypotheses

H1

H4

H3

H2

H7

H6

H5

Methods

Online Survey: N = 403, Response rate 5.37%

2 organizations: Amazon and Starbucks

Pretest: N = 35 students to measures of all variables in the study for reliability, consistency, and which organizations are best suited for investigation.

Data Analysis:

Chronbach’s alpha will first be used to test scale items reliability for all variables.

confirmatory factor analysis was used to test model fit statistics of all latent variables.

Results are analyzed using structural equation modeling with the AMOS 18.0 statistical package to specify the structural model and assess

Measuring Enduring

Involvement

Q: Please rate the following word pairs when thinking about Starbucks/Amazon.

Not fun O O O O O O O Fun

Appealing O O O O O O O Unappealing

Uninteresting O O O O O O O Interesting

Fascinating O O O O O O O Not fascinating

Not exciting O O O O O O O Exciting

Valuable O O O O O O O Not valuable

Not essential need O O O O O O O Essential need

Important O O O O O O O Unimportant

Q: When thinking about Starbucks/Amazon, please rate your level of agreement with the following statements. (5-point scale Agree to Disagree)

I think Starbucks/Amazon has good reputation.

I am satisfied with products and services of Starbucks /Amazon.

I identify myself with Starbucks /Amazon.

I am a valuable customer of Starbucks /Amazon.

I am an important member of Starbucks /Amazon's brand community.

Q: Please rate your level of attachment and belongingness to each organization. (7-point scale Very much, moderate, not at all)

How attached are you to Starbucks /Amazon?

How strong would you say your feelings of belongingness are toward Starbucks /Amazon?

Measuring Social Identity

Q: Please rate your level of agreement on each of the following statements. (5-point scale Agree to Disagree)

I can solve most problems if I invest the necessary effort.

It is easy for me to stick to my aims and accomplish my goals.

I can usually handle whatever comes my way.

Thanks to my resourcefulness, I know how to handle unforeseen situations.

When I am confronted with a problem, I can usually find several solutions.

I can always manage to solve difficult problems if I try hard enough.

If someone opposes me, I can find the means and ways to get what I want.

I am confident that I could deal efficiently with unexpected events.

I can remain calm when facing difficulties because I can rely on my coping abilities.

If I am in trouble, I can usually think of a solution.

Measuring Self Efficacy

Q: For each statement below, please indicate to what extent the statement is characteristic of you, from extremely uncharacteristic to extremely characteristic. (5-point scale)I find satisfaction in deliberating hard and for long hours.

The notion of thinking abstractly is appealing to me.

I would prefer complex to simple problems.

Thinking is not my idea of fun.

I feel relief rather than satisfaction after completing a task that required a lot of mental effort.

I only think as hard as I have to.  

The idea of relying on thought to make my way to the top appeals to me.

I usually end up deliberating about issues even when they do not affect me personally.

I really enjoy a task that involves coming up with new solutions to problems.

I like to have the responsibility of handling a situation that requires a lot of thinking.

I prefer to think about small, daily projects to long-term ones. etc.,

Measuring Need for

Cognition

Q: For each statement below, please indicate to what extent the statement is characteristic of you, from extremely uncharacteristic to extremely characteristic. (5-point scale)

I do persuade others.

I reach out to those who are in need.

I do support my standpoint.

I am a good contact for critical evaluation.

I proactively seek advice from others I prevent myself from overload.

I am a good contact for new ideas.

I am a good contact for external information.

I can be out of my comfort zone.

Measuring Boundary

Spanning Behavior

Q: Please rate your level of agreement with the following statements when thinking about Starbucks/Amazon. (7-point scale Agree to Disagree)

It is likely that I would link to Starbucks' social media content from my own web site, blog, Facebook, or Twitter page.

I am interested in reading social media content by Starbucks.

I feel connected to Starbucks' ideas and thoughts.

I would feel comfortable if Starbucks asked me to interact through social media.

Measuring Social Media

Engagement - Interactivity

Q: Please rate your level of agreement with the following statements when thinking about Starbucks/Amazon. (7-point scale Agree to Disagree)

I can feel a personal connection to Starbucks.

I think Starbucks helps me become the type of person I want to be.

I can identify with Starbucks. Starbucks reflects who I am.

I use Starbucks to communicate who I am to other people.

Starbucks suits me well.

I consider Starbucks to be "me" (if it reflects who I consider myself to be or the way that I want to present myself to others).

Measuring User-

Organization Connection

Q: Please rate your level of agreement with the following statements when thinking about Starbucks/Amazon. (7-point scale Agree to Disagree)

I would recommend Starbucks products to someone who asked my advice.

I would say positive things about Starbucks and its products to other people.

I would encourage family members or relatives to buy products from Starbucks.

I would encourage friends to buy products from Starbucks.

Measuring Word of Mouth

Intentions

Q: Please rate the following word pairs when thinking about Starbucks/Amazon.

Unreputable O O O O O O O Reputable

Responsible O O O O O O O Irresponsible

Financially unstable O O O O O O O Financially stable

Fly by night O O O O O O O Established

Long-run oriented O O O O O O O Short-run oriented

Measuring Organizational

Attitude

Please rate your level of agreement with the following statements. (7-point scale Agree to Disagree)

Starbucks fails to satisfy the needs of people like me.

Most people enjoy dealing with Starbucks.

Both Starbucks and people like me benefit from the relationship.

Generally speaking, I am pleased with the relationship Starbucks has established with people like me.

In general, I believe that nothing of value has been accomplished between Starbucks and people like me.

Most people like me are happy in their interactions with Starbucks.

I am happy with Starbucks.

I feel people like me are important to Starbucks.

Measuring Relational

Satisfaction

Please rate your level of agreement with the following statements. (7-point scale Agree to Disagree)

I feel a sense of loyalty to Starbucks.

I would rather work together with Starbucks than not.

I can see that Starbucks wants to maintain a relationship with people like me.

I could not care less about Starbucks.

Compared to other organizations, I value my relationship with Starbucks more.

I feel that Starbucks is trying to maintain a long-term commitment to people like me.

There is a long-lasting bond between Starbucks and people like me.

Measuring Relational

Commitment

Descriptives

N = 403

Age ➔ M = 24.26

GPA ➔ M = 3.58

Gender ➔ Over 60% female

65% White, 14% Asian/Pacific Islander, 5.8% Black

Nearly 60% income $0-74,999, mode = $0-24,999

Students ➔ nearly 75%

Bivariate Results

Starbucks

Boundary Spanning (DV)

Self-Efficacy

Need for Cognition

Social Identity

Enduring Involvement

.37*

.20*

ns

ns * p < .01N = 403

Bivariate Results

Starbucks

Relational Satisfaction (DV)

Relational Commitment (DV)

Interactivity

User-Organization Connection

WOM Intentions

Organizational Attitude

.50* .61*

.51* .67*

.74* .71*

.53* .41** p < .01N = 403

Bivariate Results

Amazon

Boundary Spanning (DV)

Self-Efficacy

Need for Cognition

Social Identity

Enduring Involvement

.37*

.20*

.16*

ns * p < .01N = 403

Bivariate Results

Amazon

Relational Satisfaction (DV)

Relational Commitment (DV)

Interactivity

User-Organization Connection

WOM Intentions

Organizational Attitude

.34* .49*

.31* .56*

.68* .58*

.53* .43** p < .01N = 403

Bivariate Results

PR Outcomes

Starbucks

Relational satisfaction <—> Relational commitment

r = .77, p < .01

Amazon

Relational satisfaction <—> Relational commitment

r = .70, p < .01

!"#$%&'$#(

)$%*+$,%&'

!"#$%&'$#(

-&../0."'1)"#+234,$,5

)&,/$#(67"'%15

)&,/$#(8"7/$(

3'9$9"."'1

:""7(+&;(

-&9'/%&'

<&='7$;5(

)>$''/'9(

6'1";$,%?/15

@*";2

A;9$'/B$%&'(

-&''",%&'

A;9$'/B$%&'$#(

CD1=7"

EA8(

6'1"'%&'*

H1

H2

H3

H5

H6

H7

3'7=;/'9(

6'?&#?"."'1

H4

Hypothesized Model

Hypotheses

DV Boundary Spanning

H1 Social identity ➔ Boundary spanning – supported

H2 Self-efficacy ➔ Boundary spanning – supported

H3 Need for cognition ➔ Boundary spanning – not supported

H4 Enduring involvement ➔ Boundary spanning – not supported

Hypotheses

DV Social Media Engagement

H5 Boundary spanning ➔ Social media engagement – Amazon only

Hypotheses

DV PR Outcomes

H6 Social media engagement ➔ Relational satisfaction – supported

H7 Social media engagement ➔ Relational commitment – supported

Social Media Engagement

Starbucks

Social Media Engagement

Amazon

Hypothesized Model

Starbucks

Hypothesized Model

Amazon

Alternative ModelsPost-Hoc

Alternative Model 1

Starbucks

Alternative Model 1

Amazon

Discussion

Social media engagement has a strong, positive effect on PR outcomes

Verifies importance of org’s fostering user engagement via social media

Enduring involvement & social identity’s effect on social media engagement

Org’s should focus on recruiting/attracting/nurturing those online users w/high levels of enduring involvement & social identity

Boundary spanning ➔ not a good mediator in our study, but its importance still unknown