PD

PD

F-

XC

h a n g e Vi e

F-

XC

h a n g e Vi e

er

er

O W

bu

to

lic

lic

to

bu

N
.c

O W
w
.d o
c u -tr a c k

.d o

c u -tr a c k

.c

contribute highly to the existing knowledge about social media engagement by providing a validated measurement scale for customer engagement in online social platforms. However, the research is still in progress and no results have been published to date. Thus, even though the new media present a number of significant opportunities and challenges for both researchers and practitioners (Hennig-Thurau et al., 2010), most of the existing research is primarily conceptual or qualitative (Cheung et al., 2011).

2.6 Problem statement

Academic literature highlights the importance of approaching the concept of engagement with consideration to its highly contextual nature, because engagement, separated from its () context, is a contradiction that ignores deeply embedded understandings about the purpose and nature of engagement itself (Vibert & Shields, 2003). Moreover, Brodie et al. (2011a) suggest that under different circumstances the importance of the cognitive, emotional, and behavioral customer engagement dimensions may vary. Therefore, it is likely that customer engagement in different contexts, such as online versus offline environments, would manifest in different expressions. The context of online social media has become of great interest to marketing practitioners as the new social media platforms quickly emerged as valuable tools central to their effort of customer engagement (WARC, 2012a). Despite the vast popularity of the concept among businesses, the push of engagement still misses the mark and fails to explain what it ultimately means to the brand. The behavioral measures of engagement currently available on online social media platforms such as number of fans, repeated visits or interactions with the brand page provide little information about the returns to be expected (Nelson-Field & Taylor, 2012). Hence, the lack of theory-guided empirical studies in order to better understand customer engagement with brands in the context of online social media points to a fault line between the practitioners who increasingly pursue the quest for their Holy Grail, and the scholars who yet mostly choose to focus their empirical research elsewhere.

16

w
w

w
w

PD

PD

F-

XC

h a n g e Vi e

F-

XC

h a n g e Vi e

er

er

O W

bu

to

lic

lic

to

bu

N
.c

O W
w
.d o
c u -tr a c k

.d o

c u -tr a c k

.c

Hence, the main objective of this study is to bridge this gap by conceptualizing customer brand engagement on online social media platforms and answering two important research questions: 1. What drives the customer to engage with brands on online social media platforms? 2. What are the outcomes of such engagement?

Identifying and validating the antecedents and consequences of customer brand engagement in this particular context is crucial in order to further advance the knowledge in the area. According to Hollebeek (2011b), the rising practitioner interest in the concept of customer brand engagement is mostly driven by the expected benefits and its explanatory and predictive power in customer relationship outcomes, such as loyalty in particular. Since it is more cost-effective to retain the existing as opposed to winning new customers, insights into customer brand engagement on online social media platforms may help businesses to capitalize on enhancing customer relationships, retention and loyalty through the use of social media.

2.7 A conceptual model of customer brand engagement on online social media platforms
The five fundamental propositions underlying the general concept of customer engagement suggested by Brodie et al. (2011a) provide suitable guidelines for framing the investigation of the nature and role of customer brand engagement on online social media platforms. These five themes were therefore applied in developing the working definition and building the conceptual model. The proposed working definition in this study is the following: The concept of customer brand engagement on online social media platforms is characterized by interactive customer experiences with the brand. It is a process of dynamic and iterative nature, which stems from the domains of S-D logic, relationship marketing and social exchange theory. Customer brand engagement on online social media platforms is the central element embedded in a broader network of other relational constructs serving as the antecedents and the consequences. The concept of 17

w
w

w
w

PD

PD

F-

XC

h a n g e Vi e

F-

XC

h a n g e Vi e

er

er

O W

bu

to

lic

lic

to

bu

N
.c

O W
w
.d o
c u -tr a c k

.d o

c u -tr a c k

.c

engagement is multidimensional and comprises the expressions of emotional, behavioral and cognitive engagement specific to this particular context. Based on this definition and the findings from the literature review, a conceptual model of customer brand engagement on online social media platforms was developed (see Figure 2). The framework portrays customer brand engagement on online social media platforms as the central element embedded in the network of other constructs, which are divided into two groups of potential antecedents and consequences. In principle, the structure of the framework relates to van Doorns et al. (2010) conceptual model of customer engagement behavior. However, instead of considering three types of factors that can affect engagement, the current model is focused on customer-based antecedents and consequences only. The customer-based perspective has been chosen, since not only it represents the inevitable focus of the business, but the consequences of engagement to the customer are also suggested to have an inherent effect on the ultimate business performance (Kumar et al., 2010). Furthermore, as suggested in the working definition, the conceptual framework does not only comprise the behavioral aspect of engagement, but addresses the concept in a broader sense by including the cognitive and emotional aspects as well. The group of potential antecedents portrayed in the model includes factors related to customer brand relationship quality and online social media platforms. The customer brand relationship quality related factors are further specified as involvement, satisfaction, commitment and trust. Brodie et al. (2011a) suggest involvement to be a required antecedent of customer engagement, whereas customer satisfaction, commitment and trust in relation to the brand represent the potential attitudinal antecedents also proposed by Bowden (2009) and Hollebeek (2011b). Because of the iterative nature of customer engagement, all three attitudinal factors have been found to have the potential of acting as both antecedents and consequences. The role of the factor will vary depending on whether the customer is new or existing (L. D. Hollebeek, 2011b). The structure of the conceptual model given in Figure 2, however, implies that it was chosen and built on the premise of existing customers in particular.

18

w
w

w
w

PD

PD

F-

XC

h a n g e Vi e

F-

XC

h a n g e Vi e

er

er

O W

bu

to

lic

lic

to

bu

N
.c

O W
w
.d o
c u -tr a c k

.d o

c u -tr a c k

.c

Figure 2. Conceptual model of customer brand engagement on online social media platforms
ANTECEDENTS CUSTOMER BRAND RELATIONSHIP RELATED INVOLVEMENT SATISFACTION COMMITMENT TRUST

CUSTOMER BRAND ENGAGEMENT ON ONLINE SOCIAL MEDIA PLATFORMS BEHAVIORAL

CONSEQUENCES

BRAND LOYALTY EMOTIONAL ONLINE SOCIAL MEDIA PLATFORM RELATED INVOLVEMENT PARTICIPATION TELEPRESENCE EASE OF USE WORD-OF-MOUTH COGNITIVE

Another sub-group of antecedents comprises online social media platform related factors, such as involvement, participation, telepresence and ease of use. Even though involvement has already been included to the relationship quality related factors, the latter case addresses the concept in terms of personal interest and relevance towards online social media platforms. Participation, according to Brodie et al. (2011a), is another prerequisite for customer engagement, as it determines customers propensity to participate on online social media platforms. Furthermore, the concept of telepresence is included in the model, since Mollen and Wilson (2010) suggest it to be a direct antecedent of online engagement. Hollebeek (2011b) and Brodie et al. (2011a) also suggested the concept of flow, which is related to telepresence and could also be considered relevant in this specific context. However, as no commonly accepted conceptualization or consensus regarding the operationalization of flow exists in the academic literature (Mollen & Wilson, 2010), it has been decided to leave the concept out of the model. Finally, ease of use has also been added 19

w
w

w
w

PD

PD

F-

XC

h a n g e Vi e

F-

XC

h a n g e Vi e

er

er

O W

bu

to

lic

lic

to

bu

N
.c

O W
w
.d o
c u -tr a c k

.d o

c u -tr a c k

.c

to the model as a potential contextual antecedent referring to the degree to which a customer perceives using online social media platforms to be free of effort (Davis, 1989). As for the consequences, two customer-based items were selected brand loyalty and word-of-mouth, which here refers to the intention to recommend the brand. Bowden (2009) addresses customer engagement as the superior predictor of customer loyalty as compared to other more traditional marketing constructs. On the other hand, Cheung et al. (2011) suggest that a customer willing to invest physical, cognitive and emotional effort into an online platform will also have a higher propensity to spread word-of-mouth communication about it. A customer valuation framework introduced by Kumar et al. (2010) suggests that the value of customer engagement is comprised of four dimensions: customer purchasing behavior, customer referral behavior, customer influencer behavior through customers influence on other existing or prospect customers, and finally, customer knowledge behavior via feedback provided to the firm. Thus, both customer loyalty and word-ofmouth have established grounds as potential engagement consequences in the literature.

3. Methodology 3.1 Data collection

In order to collect the data and test the proposed model of customer brand engagement on online social media platforms an online survey was conducted using a convenience sample of Facebook2 account holders. With 901 million active monthly users Facebook is currently worlds largest online social network (Facebook, 2012) and a highly relevant platform for this study. Among many various online services offered by Facebook, there is also something called Facebook Pages. Facebook Pages are public profiles meant to promote brands, products, artists, web sites or organizations. Once registered Facebook users visit a Page, they are able to 'become fans' by clicking on the 'Like' button. The owners of the Page can then post informational content, which consequently will appear in the news feed of their fans. The fans can choose to react to the posts in few different ways such as liking, commenting or sharing it with their own networks. In other words,
2

www.facebook.com

20

w
w

w
w

PD

PD

F-

XC

h a n g e Vi e

F-

XC

h a n g e Vi e

er

er

O W

bu

to

lic

lic

to

bu

N
.c

O W
w
.d o
c u -tr a c k

.d o

c u -tr a c k

.c

Table 1: Characteristics of the respondents (N1=112, N2=307)

Fans Non-fans (N1) % (N2) % 2 X (7) = 4.43, = 0.729 7 4 37 33 33 38 11 15 4 4 4 2 2 1 3 3 2 X (1) = 0.70, = 0.401 58 53 42 47 2 X (4) = 10.51, = 0.033 8 9 32 43 35 35 23 12 2 1 2 X (4) = 15.92, = 0.003 12 26 22 25 33 26 16 14 17 8 2 X (4) = 13.97, = 0.007 19 36 29 27 27 23 14 9 11 6

Age Younger than 20 20 24 25 29 30 34 35 39 40 44 45 49 50 and older Gender Male Female Use of other online social media platforms No other 1-2 others 3-5 others 6-9 others 10 and more others Time spent on online social media platforms per day Less than 30 mins 30 mins 1 hour 1 hour 2 hours 2 hours 3 hours More than 3 hours Time spent on Facebook per day Less than 30 mins 30 mins 1 hour 1 hour 2 hours 2 hours 3 hours More than 3 hours

3.2 Measurement of constructs

The survey instrument comprised of 62 items measuring the constructs mentioned in the model the antecedents, the consequences, and the customer brand engagement on online social media platforms itself. There were two groups of constructs representing the potential antecedents customer brand relationship quality related and online social media platform related. The customer 23

w
w

w
w

PD

PD

F-

XC

h a n g e Vi e

F-

XC

h a n g e Vi e

er

er

O W

bu

to

lic

lic

to

bu

N
.c

O W
w
.d o
c u -tr a c k

.d o

c u -tr a c k

.c

brand relationship quality related constructs (involvement, satisfaction, commitment and trust) have been widely discussed in academic marketing literature and the choice of scales for these constructs has therefore been based on the findings of previously published research. Brand involvement has been operationalized via five items measuring an individuals level of interest, importance and personal relevance in relation to the brand (Beatty & Talpade, 1994). Commitment has been measured with a six item scale valuing an ongoing relationship between the customer and the brand as well as willingness to make efforts in order to maintain it (Aaker, Fournier, & Brasel, 2008). The satisfaction scale included three items focusing on the general performance of the brand (Gustafsson, Johnson, & Roos, 2005). Finally, the construct of trust has been measured with four items relating to an individuals perceptions and beliefs regarding the safety and security of interacting with the brand (Chaudhuri & Holbrook, 2001). The suggested antecedents related to online social media platform were involvement, participation, ease of use and telepresence. Involvement in online social media platform has been measured with the same five item scale adapted from the paper by Beatty & Talpade (1994). The construct of participation in an online social media platform has been approached as the frequency and the intensity of participation as suggested by van Doorn et al. (2010), and measured with three self-constructed items. The ease of use scale has been adapted from a research paper by Davis (1989) and included six items. Even though telepresence has been discussed in the literature and defined as the psychological state of being there in the computed-mediated environment (Mollen & Wilson, 2010), there is no actual measuring instrument developed for telepresence in the online social media platform context yet. Therefore, a set of four relevant items from an originally eight item scale by Kim & Biocca (1997) meant to measure telepresence in the context of television has been adapted and used in this survey. Customer brand engagement on online social media platforms has been split into three dimensions behavioral, emotional and cognitive. The emotional and cognitive engagement scales have been used as suggested by Cheung et al. (2011), where both constructs are measured with six items each. The behavioral dimension, however, only included two relevant items of those suggested by Cheung et al. (2011) and has been 24

w
w

w
w

PD

PD

F-

XC

h a n g e Vi e

F-

XC

h a n g e Vi e

er

er

O W

bu

to

lic

lic

to

bu

N
.c

O W
w
.d o
c u -tr a c k

.d o

c u -tr a c k

.c

supplemented with seven other self-constructed items referring to the frequency of the different forms of behavioral engagement. Nelson-Field & Taylor (2012) suggest that in social media, and particularly on Facebook, engagement takes the form of all kinds of direct interaction with the fan page. The inclusion of seven additional Facebook specific items was also based on this premise. Thus, the self-constructed items refer to the frequency of various interactions with a particular fan page, such as visiting the page, noticing, reading, liking, commenting and sharing its contents as well as creating and posting contents on the fan page yourself. The response format chosen for these seven items has been a seven point frequency scale (1=Never, 2=Almost never, 3=Rarely, 4=Sometimes, 5=Often, 6=Almost all the time, 7=All the time). The response format used for the rest of the items in the questionnaire was a seven point Likert scale anchored by 1=Strongly disagree, 7=Strongly agree. The consequences of customer brand engagement on online social media platforms have been measured in terms of behavioral brand loyalty and word-of-mouth. The scale for behavioral brand loyalty contained two items relating to future purchase intentions (Chaudhuri & Holbrook, 2001). Word-of-mouth, which can also be defined as the intention to recommend the brand to others, has been measured with three items suggested by Zeithaml, Berry & Parasuraman (1996). In addition to the 62 mentioned items, there were also three control variables included in the questionnaire and measured by two self-constructed items each. These were goals, resources, and the perceived cost/benefit of interacting with the brand pages on Facebook specifically. These control variables have been included in the survey as the literature suggests that they can also be expected to influence how customers engage with brands (van Doorn et al., 2010). The two specific goals accounted for in the questionnaire were: 1) maximizing the consumption benefits (e.g. interacting with the brand on Facebook out of interest); 2) maximizing the relational benefits (e.g. becoming a member of a brand community). The resource items referred to the time available for browsing on Facebook fan pages and the effort that it takes. Finally, the perceived cost/benefit items were focusing on the respondents perceived levels of enjoyment while browsing on Facebook fan pages and its value in comparison to the time and effort spent on it. A summary of all the 25

w
w

w
w

PD

PD

F-

XC

h a n g e Vi e

F-

XC

h a n g e Vi e

er

er

O W

bu

to

lic

lic

to

bu

N
.c

O W
w
.d o
c u -tr a c k

.d o

c u -tr a c k

.c

mentioned questionnaire items including the sources of reference and the resulting Cronbachs alpha for each scales are displayed in Table 2 below. Table 2: Construct measurement items, sources and scale reliabilities
Measure/Source Items Antecedents Customer brand relationship quality related Involvement 1.In general I have a strong interest in [BN]5 (Beatty & Talpade, 2.[BN] is very important to me 1994) 3.[BN] matters a lot to me 4.I get bored when other people talk to me about [BN]*6 5.[BN] is relevant to me Satisfaction 6.Overall I am satisfied with [BN] (Gustafsson et al., 7.[BN] exceeds my expectations 2005) 8.The performance of [BN] is very close to the ideal brand in the product category Commitment 9.I am very loyal to [BN] (Aaker, Fournier, 10.I am willing to make small sacrifices in order to keep & Brasel, 2008) using the products of [BN] 11.I would be willing to postpone my purchase if the products of [BN] were temporarily unavailable 12.I would stick with [BN] even if it would let me down once or twice 13.I am so happy with [BN] that I no longer feel the need to watch out for other alternatives 14.I am likely to be using [BN] one year from now Trust 15.I trust [BN] (Chaudhuri & 16.I rely on [BN] Holbrook, 17.[BN] is an honest brand 2001) 18.[BN] is safe to use Online social media platform related Involvement 19.In general, I have a strong interest in Facebook (Beatty & Talpade, 20.Facebook is very important to me 1994) 21.Facebook matters a lot to me 22.I get bored when other people talk to me about Facebook* 23.Facebook is relevant to me Participation 24.I consider myself an active user of Facebook (Self-constructed) 25.I log on to Facebook everyday 26.I spend long periods of time on Facebook Reliability

0.80

0.75

0.84

0.81

0.83

0.82

The abbreviation BN stands for brand name, as different respondents have answered the questions with a different brand name in mind. 6 The items marked with * were reverse scored.

26

w
w

w
w

PD

PD

F-

XC

h a n g e Vi e

F-

XC

h a n g e Vi e

er

er

O W

bu

to

lic

lic

to

bu

N
.c

O W
w
.d o
c u -tr a c k

.d o

c u -tr a c k

.c

Ease of use 27.Learning to use Facebook is/was easy for me (Davis, 1989) 28.It is easy to get Facebook to do what I want it to do 29.It is clear and understandable how to use Facebook 30.Facebook is flexible to interact with 31.It is easy to become skillful at using Facebook 32.In general, I find Facebook easy to use Telepresence While browsing on Facebook.. (Kim & Biocca, 33 I feel like my mind is in a different world created 1997) by Facebook 34 I forget about the real world around me 35 I feel like my mind is more present in the Facebook world than the real world 36.After I am done browsing on Facebook, I feel like my mind comes back to the real world Customer brand engagement on online social media platforms Behavioral How often do you... (Self-constructed) 37.visit the Facebook FP7 of [BN]? 38notice the posts by [BN] in your news feed? 39read posts by [BN]? 40like posts by [BN]? 41comment on posts by [BN]? 42share posts by [BN] with your friends? 43post on the Facebook FP of [BN] yourself? (Cheung, Lee, & 44.I can continue browsing on the Facebook FP of [BN] Jin, 2011) for long periods at a time 45.I devote a lot of energy to the Facebook FP of [BN] Emotional 46.I am enthusiastic about the Facebook FP of [BN] (Cheung, Lee, & 47.The Facebook FP of [BN] inspires me Jin, 2011) 48.I find the Facebook FP of [BN] full of meaning and purpose 49.I am excited when browsing on and interacting with the Facebook FP of [BN] 50.I am interested in the Facebook FP of [BN] 51.I am proud of being a fan of [BN] Cognitive 52.Time flies when I am browsing on the Facebook FP of (Cheung, Lee, & [BN] Jin, 2011) 53.Browsing on the Facebook FP of [BN] is so absorbing that I forget about everything else 54.I am rarely distracted when browsing on the Facebook FP of [BN] 55.I am immersed in browsing on and interacting with the Facebook FP of [BN] 56.My mind is focused when browsing on the Facebook FP of [BN] 57.I pay a lot of attention to the Facebook FP of [BN]

0.90

0.89

0.89

0.89

0.90

The abbreviation FP stands for fan page.

27

w
w

w
w

PD

PD

F-

XC

h a n g e Vi e

F-

XC

h a n g e Vi e

er

er

O W

bu

to

lic

lic

to

bu

N
.c

O W
w
.d o
c u -tr a c k

.d o

c u -tr a c k

.c

Consequences Behavioral brand loyalty (Chaudhuri & Holbrook, 2001) Word-of-mouth (Zeithaml, Berry, & Parasuraman, 1996) Control variables Goals (Self-constructed)

58.I will buy [BN] the next time I buy food/drinks 59.I intend to keep purchasing [BN]

0.61

60.I say positive things about [BN] to other people 61.I often recommend [BN] to others 62.I encourage friends to buy [BN]

0.89

Resources (Self-constructed) Perceived cost/benefit (Self-constructed)

63.I browse on Facebook FPs because I am interested in the brands 64.I browse on Facebook FPs because I am interested in being a part of a brand community 65.I have enough time to browse on Facebook FPs 66.Browsing on Facebook FPs does not take too much effort 67.I enjoy browsing on Facebook FPs 68.I think that browsing on Facebook FPs is not worth the time and effort*

0.59

0.53

0.56

The coefficient reliability analysis revealed that all the scales consisting of more than two items exceeded the recommended Cronbachs alpha benchmark of 0.70 (Nunnally, 1978). However, the construct of behavioral brand loyalty measured by two items only has performed an internal consistency of 0.61, which is considered to be questionable (George & Mallery, 1999). In addition, the same happened to be the case with the three control variables that were also operationalized by two items each and did not meet the 0.70 benchmark. However, the nature of the Cronbachs alpha dictates that its value is determined not only by the mean of inter-item correlations, but also depends on the number of the items in the scale, which implies that the scales with fewer items will generally be expected to yield lower reliability coefficients. Therefore, the four underperforming two item scales were not eliminated and used further in the analysis.

3.3 Statistical analysis

The approach applied in the data analysis of this study is called structural equation modeling, which is a powerful framework for estimating causal models and systems of simultaneous equations with measurement error. The structural model was established of seven key constructs: customer brand relationship related antecedents (CBRR), online 28

w
w

w
w