MANAGING SPORT AND LEISURE, 2017

VOL. 22, NO. 1, 33–53

https://doi.org/10.1080/23750472.2017.1379883

Measuring social media marketing: moving towards a

relationship-marketing approach
Rebecca M. Achen
School of Kinesiology and Recreation, Illinois State University, Normal, IL, USA

ABSTRACT KEYWORDS
Because social media encourage two-way communication and interaction, they Measurement; social
are valuable relationship-building tools for the marketer who chooses to use networks; professional sport
them to build dialogue and engage customers. In sport, these tools are ideal
ways to improve customer relationships because consumers already have a
desire to connect with products. However, measurement of the effectiveness
of social media as marketing tools remains limited. From a relationship-
marketing standpoint, social media should be evaluated based on their
ability to improve relationship quality, which leads to a host of positive
business outcomes. To do this, sport marketers must measure the impacts of
social media engagement on customer relationships. The purpose of this
conceptual paper was to explicitly connect social media marketing to
relationship marketing and use relationship marketing as a framework for
understanding measurement of marketing on social media.

Introduction
The use of social media by professional sport
teams is ubiquitous, however, the measurement
of its effectiveness is challenging. In the current
business environment, marketing managers are
required to demonstrate the return on invest-
ment for marketing expenditures (Rishika,
Kumar, Janakiraman, & Bezawada, 2013). Unfor-
tunately, the evolving and constantly changing
environment of social media presents a chal-
lenge for marketers who must measure the
value of investments in these channels (Drury,
2008; Lipsman, Mud, Rich, & Bruich, 2012).
Little is understood about how online engage-
ment and types of posted content impact
business outcomes such as revenues, brand
equity, and relationship quality, and how these
can be measured. Additionally, very little is
known about how to encourage customers to
engage on social media, the ways in which cus-
tomers engage online, and how customer
engagement impacts business outcomes (Gum-
merus, Liljander, Weman, & Pihlstrom, 2012;
Schultz & Peltier, 2013).
Prior to measuring social media marketing, it
is essential to understand how social media
marketing strategy can connect consumers
and sport organisations, and how the goals of
social media marketing drive measurement.
From a broad strategy perspective, social
media meet relationship-marketing goals
when organisations use them to understand
customer needs, increase their satisfaction,
and enhance relationship value for customers
(Abeza, O’Reilly, & Reid, 2013; Williams &
Chinn, 2010). This is because relationship

CONTACT Rebecca M. Achen rmachen@ilstu.edu Illinois State University, Campus Box 5120, 250 McCormick Hall, Normal, IL
61790-5120, USA
© 2017 Informa UK Limited, trading as Taylor & Francis Group
34 R. M. ACHEN
marketing includes building relationships with
customers through interactions, two-way com-
munications, and added value (Grönroos,
2004). All interactions and communications
with customers are essential in creating and
nurturing long-term relational bonds.
Relationship marketing is beneficial because
it improves financial performance, increases
revenue, and reduces costs (Buhler & Nufer,
2010; Gummesson, 1999). In addition, relation-
ship marketing can improve customer retention
rates (Berry, 1995; Bush, Underwood, & Sherrell,
2007; Kim & Trail, 2011), which increases profit-
ability (Buhler & Nufer, 2010). Williams and
Chinn (2010) suggested relationship marketing
also could increase brand loyalty.
Marketing communications have been influ-
enced by social media, which are changing
the way consumers communicate and impact-
ing consumer purchase behaviour (Hutter,
Hautz, Dennhardt, & Füller, 2013). Marketing
online has moved from a flow of communi-
cations to a web of communications (Chaffey
& Smith, 2013). Specifically, social media have
changed integrated marketing communications
(IMC) strategy, and thus existing IMC frame-
works must be adjusted to account for the
differences between social media and tra-
ditional media channels (Valos, Habibi, Casidy,
Driesener, & Maplestone, 2016). Filo, Lock, and
Karg (2015) state social media are, “distinct
from traditional media or communications
tools” (p. 167). This is because social media
encourage interactivity, co-creation, customisa-
tion, and two-way communication; integrate
communication and distribution channels; and
increase the speed of information delivery, com-
munication, and feedback (Shilbury, Wester-
beek, Quick, Funk, & Karg, 2014; Valos et al.,
2016). Also, social media can be used for a
variety of marketing functions including adver-
tising, disseminating content, building a brand,
communicating one-on-one with customers,
generating leads, monitoring reputation,
encouraging loyalty, and cultivating engage-
ment (Dzamic, 2012). Meeting and interacting
with consumers on social media channels
allows companies to engage in more effective,
timely, and direct contact with them (Kaplan &
Haenlein, 2010). Essentially, these channels
provide more media types to accomplish IMC
objectives in a personalised, unique way (Batra
& Keller, 2016). Social media should be inte-
grated into the marketing communications
mix because of these unique characteristics,
and their ability to listen to customers and
other stakeholders, cultivating feedback that
will impact marketing decisions (Valos et al.,
2016). However, organisations should evaluate
their goals when choosing which communi-
cation types to use (Batra & Keller, 2016), and
choose social media channels that are aligned
with their strategic communications plans
(Killian & McManus, 2015).
Because of their uniqueness as marketing
channels, social media can be used within an
IMC campaign to engage and interact with cus-
tomers, instead of just as a tool to share infor-
mation (Rishika et al., 2013). A prominent
presence on social networks is important for
building strong brand relationships because
companies can participate in dialogue via custo-
mers’ preferred channels (Shen & Bissell, 2013).
However, to realise the benefits of social
media, sport teams should commit human,
financial, and time resources to building their
social media presence, interacting online, and
evaluating the pulse of fans (Abeza et al., 2013).
Sport is an exemplary setting for using social
media to build relationships with customers.
According to Barnes (2000), relationships are
more likely to be established when the customer
comes into face-to-face contact with the
company, where the service is personal or
characterised by high-involvement, and where
goals and interests of the parties are symmetric.
In spectator sport, customers are in contact with
team staff at each game attended, feel con-
nected with the team on a personal level, and
are already attached to the team’s success.
Because team performance is out of the control
of the sport marketer, strong customer

relationships are essential in case of poor on-
court performance because devoted fans will
continue to attend games and purchase mer-
chandise (Bee & Kahle, 2006; Kim, Trail, Woo, &
Zhang, 2011; Neale, Georgiu, & Purchase, 2004).
There are multiple reasons why relationship
building is more important in the sport industry.
First, competition for consumers’ discretionary
dollars makes relationship building necessary
to encourage repeat attendance and purchases
(Neale et al., 2004). Second, many sport fans
differ from average consumers because they
are already more devoted to a team, which
facilitates attempts by the team to establish
relationships with them (Bee & Kahle, 2006;
Egan, 2004; Waters, Burke, Jackson, & Buning,
2011). For example, fans often are already pas-
sionate about sport, have family connections
to a team, or identify socially with a team, and
will choose to attend games or purchase mer-
chandise without much marketing effort from
the team. Once these fans are in the arena,
initial contacts at games and events can be cul-
tivated into long-term relationships. These long-
term relationships increase profitability and pur-
chases while also reducing costs (Kim et al.,
2011). In addition, successfully building relation-
ships through marketing serves as a bridge to
bind customers to a team and builds brand
loyalty (Shani, 1997). As fans become attached
to teams, they continue purchasing merchan-
dise and attending games regardless of team
performances (Gladden & Funk, 2001).
Sport is also an ideal setting to utilise social
media for marketing purposes as a team’s exist-
ing fan base renders social media ideal channels
to encourage interaction with players, coaches,
and the organisation (Wallace, Wilson, &
Miloch, 2011). Since many sport fans already
have an affinity for a specific team, teams
have a group of avid customers to interact
with online in an attempt to build stronger
relationships. These fans are already following
their favourite sport teams on social media net-
works by the millions. For example, Real Madrid
has the largest number of Twitter followers at
MEASURING SOCIAL MEDIA MARKETING 35
over 24 million. In the United States, the Los
Angeles Lakers have the greatest Twitter follow-
ing with over 6 million followers, followed by
the Miami Heat at over 4 million. The number
of followers is even greater for teams in the
United States, with the Los Angeles Lakers
having over 21 million fans, the Chicago Bulls
with over 18 million, and the Miami Heat with
more than 16 million. Internationally, follower
numbers are even greater as Real Madrid and
F.C. Barcelona have over 104 and 103 million
Facebook followers respectively. The instant
interaction on networks such as Facebook
gives sport organisations another chance to
engage with customers outside of games or
special events (Walsh, Clavio, Lovell, & Blaszka,
2013). If used properly, teams foster fans’
attachment to the team through consistent
communication and shared participation on
social media.
This paper begins by framing social media
marketing in relationship-marketing theory
and service-dominant (S-D) logic. Next, research
on effective use of social media as relationship-
building tools is discussed. These connections
underlie the main aim of this work, which is to
describe how social media marketing has
been measured and how relationship marketing
can provide a lens for measuring social media
that is most appropriate for sport marketers.
At the end of this paper, a conceptual model
is proposed for explicating the impacts of
social media engagement on relationship
quality in sport.
Significance of the conceptual paper
In many industries, the focus of measurement
on social media marketing has been its direct
impacts on behavioural outcomes. However,
this line of measurement alone is not congruent
with the inherent nature of social media, which
is to build relationships. If organisations sin-
cerely acquiesce to the social and relationship-
building nature of social media networks, then
their measurement should follow suit. This
36 R. M. ACHEN
paper adds to social media measurement litera-
ture because it organises the work completed
on social media marketing, relationship market-
ing, and engagement and utilises it to build a
model for measuring social media marketing
based on its ability to impact relationships,
which in turn impact consumer behaviour.
Thus far, research has not discussed this view
of measurement, instead primarily focusing on
purchase related outcomes of social media mar-
keting and omitting the importance of relation-
ship building on social media channels.
The model proposed at the end of this paper
can be used by sport marketing researchers to
examine the relationships between engage-
ment on social media, relationship quality, and
purchase and referral behaviours. Additionally,
the model allows for comparisons of the
impacts of different types of social media inter-
actions on relationship quality. For example,
researchers can test whether interaction or con-
sumption contribute more to engagement. The
model is a threshold for researchers to examine
the relational benefits of social media engage-
ment for sport teams and can be tested and
revised to further understanding of social
media marketing and its effectiveness in sport.
Literature review
Service-dominant (S-D) logic shifted the focus in
organisations from the goods, organisations,
networks, and money as dominant to services
(Lusch & Vargo, 2006). According to Lusch and
Vargo, “S-D logic suggests that marketing be
defined as the process in society and organis-
ations that facilitates voluntary exchange
through collaborative relationships that create
reciprocal value through the application of
complementary resources” (p. 408). Essentially,
S-D logic shifts the focus from goods to consu-
mers, thus suggesting organisations are in
service of the consumers and should strive to
create value with them, as opposed to market
to them (Lusch & Vargo, 2006; Merz, He, &
Vargo, 2009). Recognising there is involvement
with the consumer pre- and post-sale provides
opportunities for relationship development
and has the potential to impact customer
repurchase decisions (Ballantyne & Varey,
2008). If S-D logic is implemented, the market-
er’s role changes to one of managing communi-
cations and interactions with customers on a
variety of channels and facilitating relationships
with them (Ballantyne & Varey, 2008).
The S-D logic perspective has been identified
as a useful way to advance research in sport
management, especially because “service is
the fundamental basis of exchange in sport”
(Woratschek, Horbel, & Popp, 2014, p. 14). Wor-
atschek et al. (2014) contend sport is a platform
for co-creation. For example, they state fans
contribute to the stadium atmosphere as part
of the co-creation of value. They used ten core
principles of S-D logic to create the sport
value framework for examining co-creation of
value in sport networks. They suggest the
network be examined at three levels, including
at the level of relationships between sport
firms and customers. The interaction social
media encourage between sport organisations
and fans fits within the realm of S-D logic
because sport fans can play an active role in
value creation based on their participation (Shil-
bury et al., 2014).
Relationship marketing as a framework
for social media marketing
As part of the S-D logic, firms should try to
develop long-term relationships with customers
and look out for their best interests, especially
because exchange is inherently relational
(Lusch & Vargo, 2006). Since S-D logic is custo-
mer and relationship oriented (Vargo & Lusch,
2008), relationship marketing provides a stra-
tegic framework for marketers within the S-D
logic paradigm. As a customer-focused strategy,
relationship marketing advocates for using all
marketing activities to establish, develop,
enhance, and maintain customer relationships
(Morgan & Hunt, 1994). Egan (2004) explained

that relationship marketing, “ … focuses not on
what you can do to your customer but on what
you can do for your customer and what you can
do with your customer, to ensure customer sat-
isfaction” (p. 130). According to S-D logic,
relationships include value creation through
service exchange (Vargo, 2009). Relationship
marketing should guide the use of social
media as marketing tools because of their
ability to build relationships through interaction
and communication and engage customers in
co-creation of value.
Relationships between organisations and
consumers evolve through interactions
between parties and involve mutual exchanges
serving the goals of all involved (Ferrand &
McCarthy, 2009). As such, every interaction
between each customer and the organisation
serves to build relationships. When relationship
marketing is fully implemented, the customer
and organisation work collaboratively to meet
shared goals through communication, feed-
back, and engagement. For example, team mar-
keters and fans would both benefit from a
seamless season ticket referral and renewal
system. To implement a system that works for
both parties, team marketers would actively
ask season ticket holders which ways they
prefer to renew tickets and what benefits they
would like to see from a referral programme.
Implementing a system that works for both
parties can increase the number of renewals
and referrals, making the process easy for custo-
mers and increasing sales for the team.
Grönroos (2004) placed the management of
interactions at the core of relationship market-
ing. His theory stated customer relationships
could be built when an organisation encour-
aged and managed interactions, two-way com-
munications, and created added value that was
beneficial for consumers. In this model, all
contact with customers is important for creating
and maintaining long-term bonds. Online com-
munication mediums provide channels for two-
way communications and interactions where
companies can build social relationships with
MEASURING SOCIAL MEDIA MARKETING 37
customers (Abeza et al., 2013; Buhler & Nufer,
2010; Hennig-Thurau & Hansen, 2000). Thus,
social media networks can offer organisations
platforms for connecting with customers.
Relationship marketing can be measured by
relationship quality and consumer loyalty.
Research suggests relationship quality can be
measured by assessing customer satisfaction,
trust, and commitment (Buhler & Nufer, 2010;
Hennig-Thurau, 2000). When an organisation
meets and exceeds customer expectations, cus-
tomer satisfaction increases, and trust is built
(Buhler & Nufer, 2010; Westerbeek & Shilbury,
2003). As satisfaction increases, so does trust.
Commitment indicates a customer is attached
to the organisation based on his or her per-
ceived value of the relationship, and is unlikely
to discontinue doing business with the organis-
ation (Buhler & Nufer, 2010). Ultimately, buying
behaviour is impacted when commitment is
increased through customer satisfaction and
high levels of trust (Odekerken-Schröder, De
Wulf, & Schumacher, 2003).The more organis-
ations invest in using social media as a relation-
ship-building tool, the greater the impact on
customer relationships (Risius & Beck, 2015).
Social media play an important role in offer-
ing information and interacting with customers,
which builds trust and improves relationships
(Askool & Nakata, 2011). Sashi (2012) and
Drury (2008) identified social media as tools
for enhancing relationships and engaging in
conversations with consumers, suggesting
they should be used to connect with customers.
Researchers in sport have specifically identified
social media as relationship-marketing tactics
that build dialogue and enhance relationships
(Abeza et al., 2013; Kim et al., 2011; Williams &
Chinn, 2010). Additionally, using relationship-
building practices via social media can
enhance engagement and strengthen the con-
sumer-organisation connection (Pentina,
Gammoh, Zhang, & Mallin, 2013). From an S-D
logic perspective, social media channels
provide forums for sport teams to interact
with fans and engage in value creation
38 R. M. ACHEN
(Pronschinske, Groza, & Walker, 2012). Social
media are pushing marketers to adapt to consu-
mers’ desire to be included in the marketing
process (Pronschinske et al., 2012).
Personnel working for sport teams are recog-
nising fans want to communicate with the team
directly through social media platforms, and
teams’ active participation on platforms
improves fan-team relationships (Mahan, 2011;
Pronschinske et al., 2012). This is partially
because fans are already avid supporters of
the team, and thus desire to be connected to
the team by consuming media, engaging in dia-
logue, and pursuing interaction on social media
networks. Pronschinske et al. (2012) added
teams seemingly were aware of how represen-
tation on social media sites could attract fans,
increase awareness, and drive purchases.
For social media marketing to be most effec-
tive, it should embrace relationship-marketing
concepts, building an online environment allow-
ing consumers to connect with one another,
share information, and express opinions (Miller
& Lammas, 2010; Williams & Chinn, 2010). Social
media have changed communication and mar-
keting for companies in many ways. First, compa-
nies can consistently communicate with
customers without geographical boundaries or
time limits (Jahn & Kunz, 2012; Pöyry, Parvinen,
& Malmivaara, 2013). Second, social media are
different because they are two-way channels
where consumers can directly communicate
with companies and engage in conversations
with them (Drury, 2008; Sashi, 2012). Instead of
marketing communications consisting mainly of
push communications, consumers can partici-
pate in creating and spreading the marketing
message. For example, at the start of the
season, marketers can run a campaign where
they provide frames for fans to put around their
profile pictures. Third, these channels create
opportunities for organisations to monitor
praise and customer feedback and determine
customers’ perceived strengths of products and
services (Stauss, 2000). Organisations do not
need to wait for customer feedback via surveys.
By monitoring use of the company’s name on
social media networks, they can solve service or
product issues immediately and directly, or culti-
vate customers who are advocates for the brand
to provide testimonials. Fourth, social media
allow companies to communicate on customers’
preferred channels (Hutter et al., 2013). Compa-
nies are now required to meet consumers
where they are, and are expected to listen to
them and provide them with added value.
Finally, social media have changed marketing
communications because, as Kao, Yang, Wu,
and Cheng (2016) suggest, connections happen
through value co-creation, which they propose
is a five-step process including interact, engage,
propose, act, and realise. Value creation, which
is most often treated by the S-D logic literature
as co-creation, happens through actions by
both the service provider and the customer
(Grönroos & Voima, 2013). Social media channels
such as Facebook provide opportunities for sport
teams to participate in co-creation with fans in
the joint sphere (Uhrich, 2014).
Kao et al. (2016) suggest co-creation provides
more dynamic and meaningful connections
between consumers and organisations through
an interactive process. In the first step, the organ-
isation develops a plan for adopting social media.
Then, in the engage stage, they design activities
that allow consumers to create unique personal
experiences on social media. In this stage, affec-
tive bonds are created. In the third stage, the
organisation should encourage and facilitate the
open sharing of ideas and free discussion to
gain perspective on ideas from consumers. In
the act stage, the organisation encourages con-
sensus, and the review and revision of change
proposals. Finally, in the realise stage, organis-
ations utilise what they learned from consumers
to improve the business by matching products
to consumers’ needs and capitalising on consu-
mers’ ideas. This conceptualisation of value co-
creation also connects to relationship-marketing
theory as it focuses on learning and serving custo-
mer needs, which Grönroos (1996) opined was
essential for a relationship-marketing orientation

in an organisation, and because it suggests
working with customers, as Egan (2004) identified
is the focus of relationship marketing. Addition-
ally, Gummesson (1999) explicated that the core
ideal of relationship marketing is long-term col-
laboration where both sides actively participate
and benefit.
While sharing information can build relation-
ships, it is because social media encourage
engagement that they are capable of cultivating
strong relationships (Jahn & Kunz, 2012;
Pronschinske et al., 2012). Also, engagement
also builds loyalty (Chaffey & Smith, 2013).
Because social media marketing should be
used to build relationships, measurement of
social media marketing also should embrace
relationship-marketing concepts, and the focus
of measurement should be on customer
relationships.
It is becoming widely accepted that social
media tools should be used to encourage par-
ticipation (Chaffey & Smith, 2013; Williams &
Chinn, 2010). In fact, Kaplan and Haenlein
(2010) stated, “Social media are all about
sharing and interaction, so ensure that your
content is always fresh and that you engage in
discussions with your customers” (p. 66).
According to Woodcock, Broomfield, Downer,
and Starkey (2011), the main purpose of social
media should be to post content that connects
with consumers and sparks conversations even-
tually leading to sales. Ideally, content on social
media elicits engagement, encourages discus-
sion, and builds conversation instead of
merely disseminating information (Sterne,
2010; Thackeray, Neiger, & Keller, 2012; Walsh
et al., 2013). Since interaction and two-way com-
munication are vital for relationship marketing
to be successful, it is necessary to measure the
ability of social media channels to encourage
these behaviours with customers.
Outcomes of social media marketing
Increasingly, the success of marketing techniques
must be measured by their impacts on business
MEASURING SOCIAL MEDIA MARKETING 39
outcomes (Rishika et al., 2013). Researchers have
suggested social media marketing has a direct
impact on many business outcomes. Askool and
Nakata (2011) concluded social media have the
ability to make an organisation more successful,
especially if the company engages in meaningful
conversations with customers. Additionally, Jahn
and Kunz (2012) indicated an organisation
should have a Facebook fan page because it
had measurable effects on brand relationships
with customers. Using social media to promote
a positive image leads to intentions to repurchase
by increasing customer satisfaction (Ferrand,
Robinson, & Valette-Florence, 2010). Additionally,
social media marketing can improve brand and
value equity (Kim & Ko, 2012).
Furthermore, social media directly impact
purchase behaviours (Mangold & Faulds,
2009). Dholakia and Durham (2010) examined
one café chain’s Facebook use and found Face-
book fans spent more money per visit, visited
more often, and generated more positive
word-of-mouth comments. They also were
more likely to choose the café over other estab-
lishments and refer friends to the café. Using
the case study approach, Hopkins (2013) exam-
ined the impact of an Australian rules football
franchise’s social media use. He suggested
that after making improvements to the club’s
Facebook and Twitter accounts the team’s
membership sales, attendance, merchandise
sales, television audiences, and ticket sales
increased.
Researchers also have examined the impact
of specific content and engagement strategies
on social media, often focusing on the impacts
of Facebook. For example, the emotional
impact of Facebook content influences the like-
lihood to participate on social media, leading to
intentions to purchase, and increases the likeli-
hood customers will refer a company’s products
(Smith, 2013). Customers who have positive
experiences with a brand’s content on Face-
book are more likely to share content or
comment on Facebook, make a future purchase,
and recommend the brand to others (Smith,
40 R. M. ACHEN
2013). Engaging customers on a Facebook page
also has been shown to lead to more frequent
shopping visits (Rishika et al., 2013) and
increased purchases (Goh, Heng, & Lin, 2013).
Content created by the organisation and
posted to social media has also been found to
positively impact transactions based on actual
in-store purchase data (Kumar, Bezawada,
Rishika, Janakiraman, & Kannan, 2016). Jang,
Olfman, Ko, Koh, and Kim (2008) found inter-
action and reward for activities positively influ-
enced commitment to the community, which
then positively impacted brand loyalty. In fact,
Smith (2013) stated engaging consumers on
Facebook likely increased brand equity. Jahn
and Kunz (2012) and Gummerus et al. (2012)
suggested Facebook page usage and engage-
ment led to increased customer loyalty, even if
a baseline level of loyalty already existed.
In sport, Watkins (2017) determined that
sport fans valued information they perceived
as useful, which was just as effective for
engaging fans and building relationships as
two-way dialogue. After studying how brand-
related content impacted interaction in the
English Premier League, Parganas, Anagnosto-
poulos, and Chadwick (2017) determined fans
positively responded to posts related to team
success, club history and tradition, and fans.
Sponsors and management were the least inter-
acted with types of content. Involvement on
Twitter and Facebook also increased fan identifi-
cation, brand relationship, and brand equity, but
the relationships were weak (Watkins, 2014).
Additionally, Park and Dittmore (2014) found
that consumption of social media had a positive
impact on team identification and referral inten-
tions, but not on intentions to attend games.
Gummerus et al. (2012) examined the effect of
behavioural engagement on relationship
benefits including practical benefits, social
benefits, social enhancement, entertainment,
and economic benefits in an online gaming Face-
book brand community. They reported customer
behavioural engagement, measured by likes,
comments, and reading content, positively
impacted relationship benefits. Similarly,
Hudson, Huang, Roth, and Madden (2016)
found that sport consumers who interacted
with their favourite brands on social media had
stronger relationships with the brands than
those who did not. Hutter et al. (2013) specifically
proposed customers’ interaction with a com-
pany’s Facebook page had a positive impact on
brand awareness, word-of-mouth activities, and
purchase intentions. These findings supported
more engaged individuals had a greater impact
on business outcomes as they had a greater
brand awareness, more positive word-of-mouth
comments, and increased intentions to purchase.
Additionally, engaging content can result in
an increased number of Facebook fans
(Pronschinske et al., 2012), which is valuable to
sport organisations because Facebook use
impacts business outcomes and increases
brand awareness, word-of-mouth comments,
and purchase intentions. The more Facebook
fans teams have, the more individuals reached
through those fans’ social networks. Through
actively engaging fans, marketers also capitalise
on the economic value of social media, includ-
ing increased visibility and improved brand
image (Goh et al., 2013).
The majority of research on the impacts of
social media marketing is focused on the
direct impacts on brand loyalty, purchases,
and purchase intentions. While direct impacts
provide insight into the effectiveness of social
media marketing, if relationship marketing is
truly driving social media marketing strategy,
then it should be measured based on its
ability to improve relationships. There is
support for this approach in the general
business literature as Rishika et al. (2013) deter-
mined the higher the level of activity on a com-
pany’s social media page, the greater the
positive influence on customer relationships.
Additionally, Kim and Ko (2012) determined
that social media marketing could improve
relationship equity.

Measuring social media marketing
Attitudinal measures
While there are many purported impacts of
social media marketing on business outcomes,
social media are different than traditional
media and require new metrics for measure-
ment (Peters, Chen, Kaplan, Ognibeni, &
Pauwels, 2013). Researchers in multiple indus-
tries have attempted to develop measurement
tools for social media use. Many of these tools
focus on attitudinal measures of engagement.
For example, Cheung, Lee, and Jin (2011) con-
ceptualised that engagement on social media
platforms included three constructs labelled
vigour (level of energy and willingness to
invest time and energy), absorption (fully con-
centrated and engrossed), and dedication
(sense of significance, pride, enthusiasm, inspi-
ration, and challenge towards the platform).
They suggested researchers consider using
this scale in their surveys to explore customer
engagement. Kim and Ko (2012) also created
an attitudinal scale measuring social media mar-
keting activities with five constructs including
entertainment, interaction, trendiness, customi-
sation, and word-of-mouth. In the tourism
industry, Leung, Bai, and Stahura (2015) used
structural equation modelling to examine how
customers’ interaction with organisational
social media pages, including Facebook and
Twitter, impacted purchase and referral inten-
tions. The scales used a series of statements
measured on Likert-type scales to measure cus-
tomers’ experiences on the page and attitudes
towards the page. While they found that custo-
mers having a positive social media experience
were more likely to intend to purchase and refer
others, the model did not measure interaction
with the social media pages. The scales used
in these studies did not measure users’ behav-
ioural interactions.
Smith (2013) measured the emotional
impacts of Facebook content on the individual
consumer’s purchasing, social media, and advo-
cacy intentions. From this study, he suggested
MEASURING SOCIAL MEDIA MARKETING 41
measuring the value of Facebook using two
metrics. The “value of experience metric”
measures the likelihood those having positive
experiences on Facebook pages say they are
likely to interact on social media, purchase pro-
ducts, or advocate for a brand. This metric
evaluates the overall experience a customer
has with the page and does not specifically
examine the content or measure actual social
media behaviours. The “value of a fan metric”
measures the likelihood that people who are
likely to participate in social media actions
also purchase a product or advocate for the
product. These metrics have not been tested
beyond this initial research and measure inten-
tions instead of actual behaviours. While poten-
tially valuable, these measures do not ask about
specific behaviours individuals engaged in but
instead focus on their overall experience on
the page. If it is most important to actively
engage fans as the literature on social media
advocates, then interaction is important piece
of measuring social media marketing.
Behavioural measures
In assessing professional sport teams’ use of
Facebook, Miranda, Chamorro, Rubio, and
Rodriguez (2014) used an objective measure
called the Facebook Assessment Index (FAI).
The FAI measures Facebook use on three
levels including popularity (the number of Face-
book fans), interactivity (average number of
posts made by the company, likes, comments,
shares, and consumer posts answered by the
company), and content. A benefit of the FAI is
the ability to compare the use of Facebook
across teams, leagues, and countries. However,
the index does not assess the impact of Face-
book marketing and communication on consu-
mer behaviours.
While likes and number of fans are popular
measures of the reach of an organisation, alone
they are not adequate measures of consumer
engagement or relationship strength (Jahn &
Kunz, 2012). Additionally, a large number of
followers is not as important as having an
42 R. M. ACHEN
audience that engages with your content (Cha,
Haddadi, Benevenuto, & Gummadi, 2010).
Research suggests page traffic, frequency of
visits, reach, number of followers, messages,
time spent on page, likes, posts, reads, page
visits, comments, and sharing content as
potential metrics of the impact of social
media (Jahn & Kunz, 2012; Lipsman et al.,
2012; Sterne, 2010; Thackeray et al., 2012).
Shares may be of additional importance as
they indicate a Facebook fan is willing to
align with the brand (Malhotra, Malhotra, &
See, 2013). When something is shared on Face-
book, it shows up in the news feed of the indi-
viduals’ friends. A share indicates the consumer
is willing to publicly show his or her allegiance
to or affinity for the brand. Abeza et al. (2013)
posited the level of fan involvement in a dialo-
gue with a team on social media as well as a
specific message’s flow, traffic, and frequency
indicated the strength of the fan’s relationship.
Additionally, they suggested sport teams could
use participation frequency and comment
content to gauge fan relationships. Monitoring
the rate of growth in followers and traffic is yet
another potential performance metric (Peters
et al., 2013).
In an attempt to utilise consumer behav-
ioural engagement, Bonsón and Ratkai (2013)
encouraged corporations to use likes, com-
ments, and shares as indicators of popularity,
commitment, and virality respectively to
measure the level of reactivity, dialogues, and
engagement on Facebook. They suggested,
because these measures are easily accessible
on the social networking site, corporations use
them to evaluate the influence of their
content and content of their competitors. In
their research, they determined these metrics
could be gathered simply and easily transferred
to the measurement of other networks with
slight variations.
Other measures
Sentiment analysis also is a suggested measure
of social media relationships (Malthouse,
Haenlein, Skiera, Wege, & Zhang, 2013; Peters
et al., 2013; Sterne, 2010; Thackeray et al.,
2012). Sentiment analysis examines the nega-
tive or positive feeling of user-generated
content. In advocating for this deeper analysis,
Peters et al. (2013) suggested organisations go
beyond the metrics of likes, shares, and com-
ments and delve into what fans were saying
and how they were saying it. Goh et al. (2013)
also encouraged marketers to turn to more
qualitative tools when examining social media
to get a better understanding of consumers’
thoughts, opinions, wants, and needs.
In an attempt to apply measurement of social
media to sport, Thompson, Martin, Gee, and
Eagleman (2014) used return on objective
(ROO) to measure the impact of marketing on
Facebook. Instead of focusing on monetary
value, ROO examines whether strategy met
organisational objectives. To measure this,
these authors used audience demographics,
number of followers, number of new followers,
impression count, page likes, new page likes,
likes on posts, comments, shares, and sentiment
of content.
Although relationship marketing has been
identified as an ideal framework to guide
social media marketing, little is understood
about how or if social media help organisations
meet relationship-marketing goals (Askool &
Nakata, 2011; Mangold & Faulds, 2009). The
goals of relationship marketing provide gui-
dance for the measurement of social media
impacts. If researchers and practitioners advo-
cate for using social media to build relation-
ships, then an important measured objective
should be return on relationships, meaning
researchers should develop a way to measure
whether social media marketing is improving
fan relationships. In fact, Hoffman and Fodor
(2010) suggested organisations focus on
measuring the long-term payoff of using social
media to build relationships with customers.
The objective of improving relationships,
coupled with the overwhelming literature that
puts customer interaction at the core of social

media marketing strategy, indicate this can be
done by measuring the investments customers
make in the social media relationship through
their interactions.
The overview of measurement tools for social
media marketing underscores the current need
for researchers to expand on measuring
engagement on social media. One difficulty
with measuring engagement is the lack of defi-
nition of what customer engagement really
means (Brodie, Hollebeek, Juric, & Ilic, 2011).
While Brodie et al. (2011) define customer
engagement more broadly as a psychological
state with cognitive, emotional, and behavioural
dimensions, this paper focuses on the actual
participation or interaction of consumers with
organisations’ social media platforms as a defi-
nition of engagement on social media. Thus in
this context, measuring the impact of engage-
ment on relationship quality and consumer
behavioural outcomes means measuring consu-
mers’ behavioural engagement on social media
platforms. While it is acknowledged that there
are cognitive, emotional, and behavioural
aspects to customer engagement, the goal of
this paper is to provide actionable insights for
practitioners who desire ways to measure
social media strategy by focusing on customers’
behavioural engagement with these channels.
Towards the development of a conceptual
model
Researchers suggest that social media be evalu-
ated for their impact on customer relationships,
which literature supports can be improved
through engagement and interaction on social
media. Taken together, these attempts to
measure the impacts of social media marketing
can be used to build a model for empirical
testing to determine if engagement on social
media results in increased relationship quality,
making platforms valuable relationship-market-
ing tools. While much of this research has taken
place outside of sports, the culture of sports and
the intense fandom of the customer base
support using social media as a relationship-
MEASURING SOCIAL MEDIA MARKETING 43
building strategy. Sport fans are likely to use
social media to connect with sport teams
because they already have desire a connection
with their favourite teams and other fans, and
they often adopt new media and technology
quickly (Phua, 2012). Also, sport fans identify
with their favourite sport teams, and often see
themselves as part of the team. If sport market-
ers use social media to encourage communi-
cation, interaction, and co-creation of value,
they can further cement these bonds. For pro-
fessional sport teams, determining whether
interaction on these channels does improve
fan-team relationships is vital for continued
resource support.
In the sport industry, relationship quality has
received attention as a measure of relationship
marketing. Kim and Trail (2011) reviewed the lit-
erature and created a conceptual model for
measuring relationship quality that included
trust, commitment, intimacy, self-connection
(identification), and reciprocity. Kim, Trail, and Ko
(2011) evaluated relationship quality and sport
consumption behaviours using this model and
reported general relationship quality increased
intentions to attend, consume media related to
the team, and buy team-licensed merchandise.
Building on the work of Kim and Trail (2011)
and Kim, Trail, and Ko (2011), Kim et al. (2011)
developed the Sports Consumer-Team Relation-
ship Quality Scale (SCTRQS) to measure relation-
ship quality and consumption behaviours in
sport, as well as the effectiveness of relation-
ship-marketing strategies. The scale measured
five constructs including trust, commitment,
intimacy, self-connection, and reciprocity. The
previous discussion on trust and commitment,
and the broad acceptance of their importance
in relationship marketing as reported by Kim
and Trail (2011), precipitate their inclusion as
measures of relationship marketing. Intimacy
focuses on the distance between consumers
and organisations, and how connected they
feel to the business (Kim & Trail, 2011). Kim
and Trail (2011) defined intimacy “as the
degree of familiarity, closeness, and openness
44 R. M. ACHEN
to relationship partners” (p. 61). Meng and
Elliott (2008) and Aaker, Fournier, and Brasel
(2004) suggested intimacy was essential in
relationship quality. According to Kim and Trail
(2011), self-connection is similar to team identi-
fication, which has far-reaching impacts in sport.
Self-connection and identification is the degree
to which an individual connects their own per-
sonality or self with the identity of the brand
(Fournier, 1998). Finally, reciprocity is an impor-
tant aspect of relationship quality covered in
Kim and Trail’s conceptual model. This is the
degree to which individuals feel the organis-
ation gives back in the relationship. Reciprocity
connects to the ideas espoused by relationship-
marketing scholars, in that relationships must
be mutually beneficial and based in meeting
the needs of both sides.
The scale was tested for reliability and validity
and demonstrated internal consistency, con-
struct reliability, discriminant validity, criterion
validity, and robustness. The SCTRQS could be
used to explore the impacts of relationship
quality on consumer behaviours. In addition,
this scale helps sport marketers measure
relationship quality to inform relationship-mar-
keting strategy, measure relationship-marketing
efforts across time, segment consumers, and
assess problematic areas of relationships.
The second piece of measurement requires
examining the relationship between engage-
ment on social media sites and customers’
relationship quality. While engagement is not
well defined in the marketing literature, most
definitions have two things in common. First,
engagement includes emotional, cognitive, and
behavioural involvement, and two, customer’s
co-creation of value and interaction with brands
are important to engagement (Zhang, Guo, Hu,
& Liu, 2017). The focus of this model is on the
behavioural measure of engagement because it
focuses on actual reported consumer behaviour,
as opposed to attitudes and feelings towards
sport organisations’ social media pages, and this
interaction is the essential piece for co-creation
of value within S-D logic. To measure behavioural
engagement on social media, researchers should
look to measures such as likes, page visits, com-
ments, reads, shares, re-tweets, mentions, and
other behavioural engagement metrics on
social media sites. Measuring and understanding
the impacts of these behaviours is important for
practitioners who can directly target specific
behaviours to encourage. For example, if com-
menting on posts is indicative of strong customer
relationships, then a sport organisation can
improve relationships by posting content that
elicits comments because it is interesting or valu-
able to fans. This gives organisations a starting
point for reaching out to customers to determine
what types of content they are interested in com-
menting on and engaging with. Once this
relationship is examined, the impacts of relation-
ship quality on purchase behaviour, referral
behaviour, and brand loyalty can be investigated.
The conceptual model for measuring social
media marketing presented in Figure 1 is
based on previous research on relationship mar-
keting, measurement of relationship marketing,
relationship quality and loyalty, marketing on
social media, and measurement of social
media. The major goal of this conceptual
model is to measure the impact of social
media behavioural engagement on relationship
quality to measure if they are effective channels
for relationship marketing. While there are cer-
tainly other variables that marketing on social
media can impact, such as brand awareness,
the focus here is on customer relationship build-
ing. Increased brand loyalty, another potential
outcome of social media marketing, is believed
to be redundant if added separately because it
is believed to be represented in the referral
and purchase behaviours, and relationship
quality constructs.
The model presented here includes four
major constructs. The first is social media
engagement, which consists of three sub-con-
structs including interaction, consumption, and
integration. Interaction includes those engage-
ment metrics that can be seen such as likes,
comments, shares, re-tweets, and favourites.

Figure 1. Conceptual model for measuring the impacts of social media marketing.
Consumption is used to measure those beha-
viours that cannot easily be seen, such as
reading a post, visiting a link, or watching a
video. Finally, integration includes the use of
information seen on social media in daily life.
For example, this construct would include
using information in conversations with others
or sending photos of posts to others via text
messaging. The items used to measure these
three sub-constructs of engagement will differ
somewhat based on the social media platform
studied, as the utility and features of each plat-
form differ. It is important for researchers to
adapt this model to the platform being
measured as different social media networks
have different capabilities and purposes, and
teams likely will have different strategies on
different networks.
The second major construct is relationship
quality. Because social media should be used
as a relationship-marketing tool, then platforms
should be measured based on their ability to
impact relationships. Additionally, research has
suggested that social media engagement can
improve and build relationships with customers.
In this model, it is suggested that relationship
MEASURING SOCIAL MEDIA MARKETING 45
quality be measured using the SCTRQS devel-
oped by Kim et al. (2011).
The final two constructs are measures of con-
sumer behaviours. Since relationship marketing
and social media marketing have been shown
to influence purchase behaviour (Goh et al.,
2013; Hutter et al., 2013; Kim et al., 2011;
Smith, 2013) and referral and word-of-mouth
behaviour (Buhler & Nufer, 2010; Dholakia &
Durham, 2010; Lachowetz, McDonald, Sutton,
& Clark, 2001; Ramsaran-Fowdar & Fowdar,
2013), purchase behaviours and referral beha-
viours are included as outcomes. In the model,
it is acknowledged that impacts of engagement
on these outcomes could be direct, however,
the model also tests the path from engagement
to purchase and referral behaviours as
mediated by relationship quality.
Implications
Theoretical
This conceptual paper advances theory in
social media marketing in sport by providing
a S-D logic foundation for the use of social
46 R. M. ACHEN
media channels and the study of the effective-
ness of social media marketing. Through value
co-creation, social media can be used to build
and enhance relationships with fans. Research-
ers have suggested that it is because social
media improve relationships that they are ben-
eficial marketing tools (Jahn & Kunz, 2012).
This paper attempts to synthesise the literature
on relationship marketing and social media
marketing and provide a direct explanation
of how relationship marketing can guide the
testing of social media marketing effective-
ness, within the perspective of S-D logic. By
testing this model, researchers can provide
support for the relationship-marketing theory
Grönroos (2004) espouses, which considers
two-way communications and interactions
essential for building relationships. Addition-
ally, the model provides theoretical support
for the use of relationship marketing in sport,
because of the tendency for fans to already
be solidly connected to their favourite sport
team, which makes them an ideal population
for relationship-building campaigns (Wallace
et al., 2011).
Managerial
The discussion presented here should encou-
rage sport marketers to build social media strat-
egy around building relationships. One way to
do so would be to ensure teams are adding
value for customers on social media networks,
the third piece of Grönroos (2004) relation-
ship-marketing theory, by determining the
types of information fans find valuable, interest-
ing, and engaging on social media. This could
be done by surveying customers at games
using intercepts, or by sending out a survey
via their social media pages. Additionally,
team marketers should expand their idea of
engagement on social media to include not
only measures of interaction such as likes, com-
ments, and shares, but also consumption of
articles and videos, and off-line integration of
social media content. This potentially
complicates the measurement of successful
content (since analytics alone will not tell the
whole picture), but nonetheless is an important
consideration for sport teams, highlighting
again the need to ask fans about their engage-
ment with social media content. Finally, market-
ers should capitalise on the identification of
sport fans with their favourite teams by enga-
ging them in co-creation on social media net-
works. This may involve asking fans to post
user-generated content on the teams’ pages,
such as pictures of them in team merchandise
and interesting parts of the world. Another
way to co-create value might be to engage
fans in conversations using trivia or polls.
Valos et al. (2016) suggested marketers must
consider social media an integral part of their
IMC strategies, and implement this during
their marketing planning process. Essentially,
IMC means integrating different communication
tools and presenting a consistent and unified
message to consumers (Smith & Taylor, 2002).
The proposed model will help sport marketers
reveal the value in social media marketing,
thus encouraging senior members of their
organisation to buy into including social media
strategically within their marketing communi-
cation plans as more than just another one-
way channel to push information to consumers.
While not always easy, integrating marketing
communications helps build relationships with
customers, which eventually leads to loyalty,
by communicating image, creating a dialogue,
and helping customers through the buying
process (Smith & Taylor, 2002).
Additionally, sport marketers are encouraged
to value social media marketing strategies for
their abilities to increase relationship quality,
instead of only their ability to drive sales or
improve brand awareness. Essentially, social
media are people, and are all about building
connections. Therefore, sport teams, who
already have avid fan bases, should evaluate
their success based on the ability to build con-
nections between fans and the team on social
media.

Future research
Abeza, O’Reilly, Seguin, and Nzindukiyimana
(2015) encourage sport management research-
ers to conduct more empirical analyses and
move beyond descriptive analyses in sport.
Future research should utilise the model
above to examine how engagement on social
media impacts relationship quality and
whether it has direct impacts on purchase and
referral behaviours, or if these impacts are
mediated by relationship quality. First, a scale
for social media engagement should be
created by completing qualitative research to
build scale items and determine if the three
factor social media engagement construct
holds. The psychometric qualities of the scale
should be tested. Then, researchers can utilise
survey research to explore how engagement
impacts relationship quality (measured by the
SCTRQS) and consumer behaviours. This
model also provides the means for studies to
explore differences across different sports, pro-
fessional leagues, and different levels of sport.
Potentially, researchers can compare how
social media networks impact relationship
quality and consumer behaviours differently.
Also, this model could be used to compare
season ticket holders and non-season ticket
holders to determine if social media has
impacts on relationship quality for both
groups, and whether social media impacts
retention for individual season ticket holders.
Finally, this model could be used to measure
how engagement and relationship quality
change over time, especially as social media
strategy in sport evolves. It should be noted
that not all social media channels are used for
the same reasons or in the same ways. This
model should be tested across channels to
determine if it is viable for multiple channels.
While this model is recursive as represented in
Figure 1, it is possible that relationships are non-
recursive, and the relationship between con-
structs is bi-directional. Research should
attempt to isolate the impacts of a social media
MEASURING SOCIAL MEDIA MARKETING 47
marketing campaign and engagement levels
on relationship quality and consumer behav-
ioural intentions. This could be done in
cooperation with a social media manager
within sport. For example, a researcher could
measure relationship quality, purchase, and
referral behaviours or intentions at the beginning
of a season for fans that are social media users
and non-users. Then, with the help of a team’s
social media manager, a campaign designed to
encourage interaction, integration, and con-
sumption could be designed. At the end of the
season, these measures could be taken again.
This could help to elucidate whether engage-
ment increased relationship quality. Additionally,
longitudinal studies would help to better explain
the direction of these relationships as the
changes in all variables could be tracked over
time for individuals in four groups, high-social
media engagers and high-relationship quality,
high-social media engagers and low-relationship
quality, low-social media engagers and high-
relationship quality, and low-social media enga-
gers and low-relationship quality. A researcher
could examine changes in these individuals to
determine if those who were low engagers had
consistent relationship quality and if those who
had high-relationship quality had consistent
engagement levels.
From a broader standpoint, this conceptual
paper should encourage both marketers and
researchers to consider their social media mar-
keting strategy, and the context of their social
media research. If the purpose of social media
is to facilitate relationships, then their use
should be studied from the perspective of
their ability to do so. For example, when
researching engagement on social media in
sport, researchers should consider the impor-
tance of fans in the relationship and attempt
to define and study engagement from the
fans’ perspective. Future research should
acknowledge the connection between relation-
ship marketing and social media marketing by
making fans the centre of research, and effec-
tively asking them to explain how they interact,
48 R. M. ACHEN
why they interact, and what it means to them.
Additionally, sport teams should design their
strategy towards building relationships,
instead of merely disseminating information or
trying to sell tickets and merchandise.
The changes in new media have impacted
how sport is produced and consumed (Santo-
mier, 2008), which has in turn impacted the
sport industry on a global level. Sport marketers
should be attuned to the opportunities new
media provide for reaching fans globally, while
continually tracking trends as technology and
marketing communications continues to
develop and change.
Also, sport marketers need to stay well-
informed of trends in digital and social media
marketing, because as Valos et al. (2016)
explained, integrating social media into the
overall marketing communications strategy at
an organisation is complicated by the rapid
evolution of digital marketing and the need
for significant organisational internal collabor-
ation. Even in 2002, Smith and Taylor were
noting how the marketing communications
mix was changing because of new tools,
insights, opportunities, and challenges. This is
partially because individuals were becoming
more accessible (Smith & Taylor, 2002), a trend
that has continued in the new century as
social media channels have pervaded our
society. Chaffey and Ellis-Chadwick (2012)
detailed the changes in technologies, noting
that since 2000, society has moved from Web
1.0 (file servers) to Web 2.0 (blogs, social net-
working), to Web 3.0 (semantic search,
widgets), and will soon move to Web 4.0. As
technology continues to change, sport market-
ers must continue to assess new platforms for
integration into the marketing communications
mix and avoid simply adding new forums.
Additionally, the fragmentation of media
creates challenges for integrating marketing
communications as users have multiple chan-
nels in local and national markets to choose
from, and media are targeting more specific
groups of consumers (Pickton & Broderick,
2001). This also is happening in the realm of
social media as new channels for interaction,
co-creation, and communication are created
each year. While integration across marketing
communications is not always easy, it is worth
the effort (Pickton & Broderick, 2001).
Conclusion
Studying consumer behaviour on social media
networks reveals what behaviours connect to
business outcomes and which types of behav-
iour an organisation should encourage to posi-
tively impact sales (Pöyry et al., 2013). Thus,
since sport is an ideal setting for using social
media marketing because of an already loyal,
avid fan base, sport organisations must deter-
mine how to measure marketing on social
media sites to determine if it is a valuable use
of resources. While many of the studies and dis-
cussion in this paper focused on Facebook and
Twitter, which are immensely popular social
media sites in the United States, sites such as
QQ and Weibo are popular in China, a country
where the NBA and AFL have aggressively
expanded to. These digital platforms should
also be measured based on their ability to
enhance relationships between sport properties
and fans. The model presented here can be
used to measure interactions on these social
media sites, which include actions similar to
liking, reading, or sharing posts. Vkontakte,
popular in Eastern Europe, also allow users to
engage in similar types of interactions.
However, researchers examining these net-
works should immerse themselves in the
fabric of the networks to better understand
what other types of interaction and consump-
tion might exist there. Additionally, based on
the aforementioned numbers of followers on
Twitter and Facebook for soccer teams across
the world, these networks should be examined
from an international sport perspective.
Measuring the impacts of social media market-
ing is not easy, but it is necessary if marketing
resources are going to be used for these channels.

This paper has described how social media mar-
keting fits into the broader theory of relationship
marketing, which is a viable and profitable strat-
egy. Shifting the focus from pushing marketing
messages to fans encouraging one-time trans-
actions to building a dialogue and two-way
relationship with fans can be facilitated by the
use of social media marketing in sport.
However, if social media are going to be used to
build relationships with customers, as researchers
have suggested they should, then they should be
measured by their ability to do so. Connecting the
literature on relationship-marketing measure-
ment to the research on best practices for social
media use, which suggest organisations build
conversation and interact with customers, pro-
vides a potential answer to how sport organis-
ations should measure social media use
outcomes. Using engagement with sport teams’
social media accounts as a measure of behav-
ioural engagement and determining the impact
of this engagement on relationship quality, as
measured by the SCTRQS, can provide real assess-
ment data of social media as marketing tools.
Disclosure statement
No potential conflict of interest was reported by the
author.
References
Aaker, J., Fournier, S., & Brasel, S. A. (2004). When good
brands do bad. Journal of Consumer Research, 31
(1), 1–16.
Abeza, G., O’Reilly, N., & Reid, I. (2013). Relationship
marketing and social media in sport. International
Journal of Sport Communication, 6, 120–142.
Abeza, G., O’Reilly, N., Seguin, B., & Nzindukiyimana,
O. (2015). Social media scholarship in sport man-
agement research: A critical review. Journal of
Sport Management, 29, 601–618.
Askool, S., & Nakata, K. (2011). A conceptual model for
acceptance of social CRM systems based on a
scoping study. AI & Society, 26, 205–220.
Ballantyne, D., & Varey, R. J. (2008). The service-domi-
nant logic and the future of marketing. Journal of
the Academy of Marketing Science, 36, 11–14.
MEASURING SOCIAL MEDIA MARKETING 49
Barnes, J. G. (2000). Closeness in customer relation-
ships: Examining the payback from getting closer
to the customer. In T. Hennig-Thurau, & U.
Hansen (Eds.), Relationship marketing: Gaining com-
petitive advantage through customer satisfaction
and customer retention (pp. 89–105). New York,
NY: Springer.
Batra, R., & Keller, K. L. (2016). Integrating marketing
communications: New findings, new lessons, and
new ideas. Journal of Marketing, 80(6), 122–145.
Bee, C. C., & Kahle, L. R. (2006). Relationship marketing
in sports: A functional approach. Sport Marketing
Quarterly, 15, 102–110.
Berry, L. L. (1995). Relationship marketing of services –
growing interest, emerging perspectives. Journal
of the Academy of Marketing Science, 23, 236–245.
Bonsón, E., & Ratkai, M. (2013). A set of metrics to
assess stakeholder engagement and social legiti-
macy on a corporate Facebook page. Online
Information Review, 37, 787–803. doi:10.1108/OIR-
03-2012-0054
Brodie, R. J., Hollebeek, L. D., Juric, B., & Ilic, A. (2011).
Customer engagement: Conceptual domain, fun-
damental propositions, and implications for
research. Journal of Service Research, 14, 252–271.
doi:1094670511411703
Buhler, A., & Nufer, G. (2010). Relationship marketing in
sports. Burlington, MA: Butterworh-Heinemann.
Bush, R. P., Underwood, III, J. H., & Sherrell, D. L. (2007).
Examining the relationship marketing, marketing
productivity paradigm: Establishing an agenda
for current and future research. Journal of
Relationship Marketing, 6(2), 9–32.
Cha, M., Haddadi, H., Benevenuto, F., & Gummadi, P. K.
(2010). Measuring user influence in twitter: The
million follower fallacy. Proceedings of the Fourth
International AAAI Conference on Weblogs and
Social Media, 10, 10–17.
Chaffey, D., & Ellis-Chadwick, F. (2012). Digital market-
ing: Strategy, implementation, and practice (5th ed.).
Boston, MA: Pearson.
Chaffey, D., & Smith, P. R. (2013). Emarketing eXcellence:
Planning and optimizing your digital marketing (4th
ed.). New York, NY: Routledge.
Cheung, C. M., Lee, M. K., & Jin, X. (2011). Customer
engagement in an online social platform: A concep-
tual model and scale development. Paper presented
at the Thirty Second International Conference on
Information Systems, Shanghai.
Dholakia, U. M., & Durham, E. (2010). One café chain’s
Facebook experiment. Harvard Business Review, 88
(3), 26.
Drury, G. (2008). Opinion piece: Social media: Should
marketers engage and how can it be done
50 R. M. ACHEN
effectively? Journal of Direct, Data and Digital
Marketing Practice, 9, 274–277.
Dzamic, L. (2012). The hunt for the red herring:
Measuring commercial effects of social media.
Journal of Direct, Data and Digital Marketing
Practice, 13, 198–206. doi:10.1057/dddmp.2011.46
Egan, J. (2004). Relationship marketing: Exploring rela-
tional strategies in marketing. Boston, MA: Pearson
Education.
Ferrand, A., & McCarthy, S. (2009). Marketing the sports
organisation: Building networks and relationships.
New York, NY: Routledge.
Ferrand, A., Robinson, L., & Valette-Florence, P. (2010).
The intention-to-repurchase paradox: A case of the
health and fitness industry. Journal of Sport
Management, 24, 83–105.
Filo, K., Lock, D., & Karg, A. (2015). Sport and social
media research: A review. Sport Management
Review, 18, 166–181. doi:10.1016/j.smr.2014.11.001
Fournier, S. (1998). Consumers and their brands:
Developing relationship theory in consumer
research. Journal of Consumer Research, 24, 343–
373.
Gladden, J. M., & Funk, D. C. (2001). Understanding
brand loyalty in professional sport: Examining the
link between brand associations and brand
loyalty. International Journal of Sports Marketing &
Sponsorship, 3, 67–94.
Goh, K.-Y., Heng, C.-S., & Lin, Z. (2013). Social media
brand community and consumer behaviour:
Quantifying the relative impact of user- and mar-
keter-generated content. Information Systems
Research, 24, 88–107. doi:10.1287/isre.1120.0469
Grönroos, C. (1996). Relationship marketing: Strategic
and tactical implications. Management Decision, 34
(3), 5–14.
Grönroos, C. (2004). The relationship marketing
process: Communication, interaction, dialogue,
value. Journal of Business & Industrial Marketing,
19, 99–113.
Grönroos, C., & Voima, P. (2013). Critical service logic:
Making sense of value creation and co-creation.
Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 41
(2), 133–150.
Gummerus, J., Liljander, V., Weman, E., & Pihlstrom, M.
(2012). Customer engagement in a Facebook
brand community. Management Research Review,
35, 857–877. doi:10.1108/01409171211256578
Gummesson, E. (1999). Total relationship marketing:
Rethinking marketing management: From 4ps to
30rs. Boston, MA: Butterworth.
Hennig-Thurau, T., & Hansen, U. (2000). Relationship
marketing – some reflections on the state-of-the-
art of the relational concept. In T. Hennig-Thurau,
& U. Hansen (Eds.), Relationship marketing:
Gaining competitive advantage through customer
satisfaction and customer retention (pp. 3–27).
New York, NY: Springer.
Hennig-Thurau, T. (2000). Relationship marketing
success through investments in customers. In T.
Hennig-Thurau, & U. Hansen (Eds.), Relationship
marketing: Gaining competitive advantage through
customer satisfaction and customer retention (pp.
127–146). New York, NY: Springer.
Hoffman, D. L., & Fodor, M. (2010). Can you measure
the ROI of your social media marketing. MIT
Sloan Management Review, 52(1), 41–49.
Hopkins, J. L. (2013). Engaging Australian rules foot-
ball fans with social media: A case study.
International Journal of Sport Management and
Marketing, 13, 104–121.
Hudson, S., Huang, L., Roth, M. S., & Madden, T. J.
(2016). The influence of social media interactions
on consumer–brand relationships: A three-country
study of brand perceptions and marketing beha-
viours. International Journal of Research in Marketing,
33(1), 27–41.
Hutter, K., Hautz, J., Dennhardt, S., & Füller, J. (2013).
The impact of user interactions in social media
on brand awareness and purchase intention: The
case of MINI on Facebook. Journal of Product &
Brand Management, 22, 342–351. doi:10.1108/
JPBM-05-2013-0299
Jahn, B., & Kunz, W. (2012). How to transform consu-
mers into fans of your brand. Journal of Service
Management, 23, 344–361. doi:10.1108/
09564231211248444
Jang, H., Olfman, L., Ko, I., Koh, J., & Kim, K. (2008). The
influence of on-line brand community character-
istics on community commitment and brand
loyalty. International Journal of Electronic
Commerce, 12(3), 57–80.
Kao, T.-Y., Yang, M.-H., Wu, J.-T. B., & Cheng, Y.-Y. (2016).
Co-creating value with consumers through social
media. Journal of Services Marketing, 30(2), 141–151.
Kaplan, A. M., & Haenlein, M. (2010). Users of the
world, unite! The challenges and opportunities of
social media. Business Horizons, 53(1), 59–68.
Killian, G., & McManus, K. (2015). A marketing com-
munications approach for the digital era:
Managerial guidelines for social media integration.
Business Horizons, 58, 539–549.
Kim, A. J., & Ko, E. (2012). Do social media marketing
activities enhance customer equity? An empirical
study of luxury fashion brand. Journal of Business
Research, 65(10), 1480–1486.
Kim, Y. K., Trail, G., & Ko, Y. J. (2011). The influence of
relationship quality on sport consumption

behaviours: An empirical examination of the
relationship quality framework. Journal of Sport
Management, 25, 576–592.
Kim, Y. K., Trail, G. T., Woo, B., & Zhang, J. (2011). Sports
consumer-team relationship quality: Development
and psychometric evaluation of a scale. International
Journal of Sports Marketing & Sponsorship, 12,
254–271.
Kim, Y. K., & Trail, G. (2011). A conceptual framework
for understanding relationships between sport
consumers and sport organisations: A relationship
quality approach. Journal of Sport Management, 25,
57–69.
Kumar, A., Bezawada, R., Rishika, R., Janakiraman, R., &
Kannan, P. K. (2016). From social to sale: The effects
of firm-generated content in social media on cus-
tomer behaviour. Journal of Marketing, 80, 7–25.
doi:10.1509/jm.14.0249
Lachowetz, T., McDonald, M., Sutton, W., & Clark, J. (2001).
The National Basketball Association: Application of
customer lifetime value. Sport Marketing Quarterly,
10, 181–184.
Leung, X. Y., Bai, B., & Stahura, K. A. (2015). The mar-
keting effectiveness of social media in the hotel
industry a comparison of Facebook and Twitter.
Journal of Hospitality & Tourism Research, 39, 147–
169.
Lipsman, A., Mud, G., Rich, M., & Bruich, S. (2012). The
power of “like”: How brands reach (and influence)
fans through social-media marketing. Journal of
Advertising Research, 52, 40–52. doi:10.2501/JAR-
52-1-040-052
Lusch, R. F., & Vargo, S. L. (2006). Service-dominant
logic as a foundation for a general theory. In R. F.
Lusch, & S. L. Vargo (Eds.), The service-dominant
logic of marketing: Dialog, debate, and directions
(pp. 406–420). Armonk, NY: ME Sharpe.
Mahan, III, J. E. (2011). Examining the predictors of
consumer response to sport marketing via digital
social media. International Journal of Sport
Management and Marketing, 9, 254–267.
Malhotra, A., Malhotra, C. K., & See, A. (2013). How to
create brand engagement on Facebook. MIT Sloan
Management Review, 54(2), 18–20.
Malthouse, E. C., Haenlein, M., Skiera, B., Wege, E., &
Zhang, M. (2013). Managing customer relationships
in the social media era: Introducing the social CRM
house. Journal of Interactive Marketing, 27, 270–280.
doi:10.1016/j.intmar.2013.09.008
Mangold, W. G., & Faulds, D. J. (2009). Social media:
The new hybrid element of the promotion mix.
Business Horizons, 52, 357–365. doi:10.1016/j.
bushor.2009.03.002
MEASURING SOCIAL MEDIA MARKETING 51
Meng, J. G., & Elliott, K. M. (2008). Predictors of
relationship quality for luxury restaurants. Journal
of Retailing and Consumer Services, 15, 509–515.
Merz, M. A., He, Y., & Vargo, S. L. (2009). The evolving
brand logic: A service-dominant logic perspective.
Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 37,
328–344.
Miller, R., & Lammas, N. (2010). Social media and its
implications for viral marketing. Asia Pacific Public
Relations Journal, 11, 1–9.
Miranda, F. J., Chamorro, A., Rubio, S., & Rodriguez, O.
(2014). Professional sports teams on social net-
works: A comparative study employing the
Facebook Assessment Index. International Journal
of Sport Communication, 7(1), 74–89.
Morgan, R. M., & Hunt, S. D. (1994). The commitment-
trust theory of relationship marketing. Journal of
Marketing, 58(3), 20–38.
Neale, L., Georgiu, T., & Purchase, S. (2004). Membership
retention within the sporting industry: Factors affect-
ing relationship dissolution. Morgantown, WV:
Fitness Information Technology.
Odekerken-Schröder, G., De Wulf, K., & Schumacher,
P. (2003). Strengthening outcomes of retailer-con-
sumer relationships: The dual impact of relation-
ship marketing tactics and consumer personality.
Journal of Business Research, 56, 177–190.
Parganas, P., Anagnostopoulos, C., & Chadwick, S.
(2017). Effects of social media interactions on
brand associations: A comparative study of
soccer fan clubs. International Journal of Sports
Marketing and Sponsorship, 18(2), 149–165.
Park, J.-A., & Dittmore, S. (2014). The relationship
among social media consumption, team identifi-
cation, and behavioural intentions. Journal of
Physical Education and Sport, 14, 331–336.
Pentina, I., Gammoh, B. S., Zhang, L., & Mallin, M.
(2013). Drivers and outcomes of brand relationship
quality in the context of online social networks.
International Journal of Electronic Commerce, 17
(3), 63–86.
Peters, K., Chen, Y., Kaplan, A. M., Ognibeni, B., &
Pauwels, K. (2013). Social media metrics: A frame-
work and guidelines for managing social media.
Journal of Interactive Marketing, 27, 281–298.
doi:10.1016/j.intmar.2013.09.007
Phua, J. (2012). Use of social networking sites by
sports fans: Implications for the creation and main-
tenance of social capital. Journal of Sports Media, 7
(1), 109–132. doi:10.1353/jsm.2012.0006
Pickton, D., & Broderick, A. (2001). Integrated market-
ing communications. New York, NY: Pearson
Education.
52 R. M. ACHEN
Pöyry, E., Parvinen, P., & Malmivaara, T. (2013). Can we
get from liking to buying? Behavioural differences
in hedonic and utilitarian Facebook usage.
Electronic Commerce Research and Applications,
12, 224–235. doi:10.1016/j.elerap.2013.01.003
Pronschinske, M., Groza, M. D., & Walker, M. (2012).
Attracting Facebook ‘fans’: The importance of
authenticity and engagement as a social network-
ing strategy for professional sport teams. Sport
Marketing Quarterly, 21, 221–231.
Ramsaran-Fowdar, R. R., & Fowdar, S. (2013). The
implications of Facebook marketing for organis-
ations. Contemporary Management Research, 9,
73–83. doi:10.7903/cmr.9710
Rishika, R., Kumar, A., Janakiraman, R., & Bezawada, R.
(2013). The effect of customers’ social media par-
ticipation on customer visit frequency and profit-
ability: An empirical investigation. Information
Systems Research, 24, 108–127. doi:10.1287/isre.
1120.0460
Risius, M., & Beck, R. (2015). Effectiveness of corporate
social media activities in increasing relational out-
comes. Information & Management, 52, 824–839.
doi:10.1016/j.im.2015.06.004
Santomier, J. (2008). New media, branding and global
sports sponsorship. International Journal of Sports
Marketing and Sponsorship, 10, 9–22.
Sashi, C. M. (2012). Customer engagement buyer-
selling relationships, and social media.
Management Decision, 50, 253–272. doi:10.1108/
00251741211203551
Schultz, D. E., & Peltier, J. (2013). Social media’s slip-
pery slope: Challenges, opportunities and future
research directions. Journal of Research in
Interactive Marketing, 7, 86–99. doi:10.1108/JRIM-
12-2012-0054
Shani, D. (1997). A framework for implementing
relationship marketing in the sport industry. Sport
Marketing Quarterly, 6, 9–16.
Shen, B., & Bissell, K. (2013). Social media, social me: A
content analysis of beauty companies’ use of
Facebook in marketing and branding. Journal of
Promotion Management, 19, 629–651. doi:10.
1080/10496491.2013.829160
Shilbury, D., Westerbeek, H., Quick, S., Funk, D., & Karg,
A. (2014). Strategic sport marketing (4th ed.).
Sydney: Allen & Unwin.
Smith, S. (2013). Conceptualising and evaluating expe-
riences with brands on Facebook. International
Journal of Market Research, 55, 357–374. doi:10.
2501/IJMR-2013-034
Smith, P. R., & Taylor, J. (2002). Marketing communi-
cations: An integrated approach (3rd ed.). Milford,
CT: Kogan Page.
Stauss, B. (2000). Using new media for customer inter-
action: A challenge for relationship marketing. In T.
Hennig-Thurau, & U. Hansen (Eds.), Relationship
marketing: Gaining competitive advantage through
customer satisfaction and customer retention (pp.
233–253). New York, NY: Springer.
Sterne, J. (2010). Social media metrics: How to measure
and optimize your marketing investment. Hoboken,
NJ: John Wiley & Sons.
Thackeray, R., Neiger, B. L., & Keller, H. (2012).
Integrating social media and social marketing: A
four-step process. Health Promotion Practice, 13,
165–169. doi:10.1177/1524839911432009
Thompson, A.-J., Martin, A. J., Gee, S., & Eagleman, A.
N. (2014). Examining the development of a social
media strategy for a national sport organisation.
Journal of Applied Sport Management, 6(2), 42–63.
Uhrich, S. (2014). Exploring customer-to-customer
value co-creation platforms and practices in team
sports. European Sport Management Quarterly, 14,
25–49.
Valos, M. J., Habibi, F. H., Casidy, R., Driesener, C. B., &
Maplestone, V. L. (2016). Exploring the integration
of social media within integrated marketing com-
munication frameworks: Perspectives of services
marketers. Marketing Intelligence & Planning, 34,
19–40.
Vargo, S. L., & Lusch, R. F. (2008). Service-dominant
logic: Continuing the evolution. Journal of the
Academy of Marketing Science, 36, 1–10.
Vargo, S. L. (2009). Toward a transcending conceptu-
alization of relationship: A service-dominant logic
perspective. Journal of Business & Industrial
Marketing, 24, 373–379.
Wallace, L., Wilson, J., & Miloch, K. (2011). Sporting
Facebook: A content analysis of NCAA organis-
ational sport pages and Big 12 conference athletic
department pages. International Journal of Sport
Communication, 4, 422–444.
Walsh, P., Clavio, G., Lovell, M. D., & Blaszka, M. (2013).
Differences in event brand personality between
social media users and non-users. Sport Marketing
Quarterly, 22, 214–223.
Waters, R. D., Burke, K. A., Jackson, Z. J., & Buning, J. D.
(2011). Using stewardship to cultivate fandom
online: Comparing how National Football League
teams use their web sites and Facebook to
engage their fans. International Journal of Sport
Communication, 4, 163–177.
Watkins, B. A. (2017). Full length article: Experimenting
with dialogue on Twitter: An examination of the
influence of the dialogic principles on engagement,
interaction, and attitude. Public Relations Review, 43,
163–171. doi:10.1016/j.pubrev.2016.07.002

Watkins, B. (2014). An integrated approach to sports
branding: Examining the influence of social
media on brand outcomes. International Journal
of Integrated Marketing Communications, 6(2),
30–40.
Westerbeek, H. M., & Shilbury, D. (2003). A conceptual
model for sport services marketing research:
Integrating quality, value and satisfaction.
International Journal of Sports Marketing &
Sponsorship, 5, 11–31.
Williams, J., & Chinn, S. J. (2010). Meeting relationship-
marketing goals through social media: A concep-
tual model for sport marketers. International
Journal of Sport Communication, 3, 422–437.
MEASURING SOCIAL MEDIA MARKETING 53
Woodcock, N., Broomfield, N., Downer, G., & Starkey,
M. (2011). The evolving data architecture of social
customer relationship management. Journal of
Direct, Data and Digital Marketing Practice, 12,
249–266. doi:10.1057/dddmp.2010.45
Woratschek, H., Horbel, C., & Popp, B. (2014). The sport
value framework – a new fundamental logic for
analyses in sport management. European Sport
Management Quarterly, 14, 6–24.
Zhang, M., Guo, L., Hu, M., & Liu, W. (2017). Influence of
customer engagement with company social net-
works on stickiness: Mediating effect of customer
value creation. International Journal of Information
Management, 37, 229–240.
Copyright of Managing Sport & Leisure is the property of Routledge and its content may not
be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's
express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for
individual use.