SavedAdd your journal

Journals / Dumlupınar Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi / 2018 / Sayı: 58

MEASURING STAKEHOLDER ENGAGEMENT THROUGH SOCIAL MEDIA: AN INVESTIGATION ON TURKISH LOGISTICS SERVICE PROVIDERS

SOSYAL MEDYA ARACILIĞIYLA PAYDAŞ KATILIMININ ÖLÇÜLMESİ: TÜRK LOJİSTİK HİZMET SAĞLAYAN İŞLETMELER ÜZERİNE BİR İNCELEME

Ebru Sürücü(CELÂL BAYAR ÜNİVERSİTESİ)0000-0002-1224-944X
Gül Denktaş Şakar(DOKUZ EYLÜL ÜNİVERSİTESİ)
Pages
107–129
Publication Date
2018-10-19
DOI
—
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

The contribution of this study is that it is considered as the first study that examines a specific industry where various actors are in intensive communication, such as the logistics sector, in terms of social media use and stakeholder participation.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:With the development of information and Internet technologies, many businesses have started to use social media extensively in reaching out to their customers, as well as their stakeholders.
📊
Key Findings & Data:The main aim of this study is to examine the relationship of B2B firms with their stakeholders through social media by a sample of Turkish logistics service providers.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:The contribution of this study is that it is considered as the first study that examines a specific industry where various actors are in intensive communication, such as the logistics sector, in terms of social media use and stakeholder participation.
🔬Design:Araştırma Makalesi
📍Scope:2017 Verileri
⚙️Variables:Sosyal Medya · Paydaş Katılımı · İşletmeden İşletmeye Pazarlar

Abstract

With the development of information and Internet technologies, many businesses have started to use social media extensively in reaching out to their customers, as well as their stakeholders. Although businesses give priority to their communication with their customers in social media, it is also known that their stakeholders are influenced by the social media messages as well. The main aim of this study is to examine the relationship of B2B firms with their stakeholders through social media by a sample of Turkish logistics service providers. In addition, this study analyses the most commonly used media and content type on social media posts. The research was based on a content analysis conducted on 739 Facebook posts through a sample of 30 logistics service providers analyzed in the time period between November 1, 2017, and January 31, 2018. This study examines the engagement of logistics service providers’ followers on Facebook considering activities on their corporate profiles. The contribution of this study is that it is considered as the first study that examines a specific industry where various actors are in intensive communication, such as the logistics sector, in terms of social media use and stakeholder participation.

Özet

Bilgi ve internet teknolojilerinin gelişimiyle, çoğu işletme gerek müşterilerine gerekse de ilgili paydaşlarına ulaşmada sosyal medyayı yaygın bir şekilde kullanmaya başlamıştır. Her ne kadar sosyal medyada işletmelerin müşterilerine yönelik iletişimleri ön planda olsa da paydaşlarının da işletmelerin sunmuş oldukları sosyal medya mesajlarından etkilendikleri bilinmektedir. Bu çalışmanın temel amacı, işletmeden işletmeye (B2B) firmalarının sosyal medya üzerinden paydaşlarıyla kurdukları ilişkiyi Türk lojistik hizmet sağlayan işletmeler örnekleminde incelemektir. Ayrıca, bu çalışma sosyal medya yayınlarında en çok kullanılan medya türü ve içerik türünü analiz etmektedir. Araştırma, 739 Facebook gönderisinde yapılan içerik analizine dayanmakta olup; örneklem olarak Facebook’ta aktif faaliyet gösteren 30 Türk lojistik hizmet sağlayan işletmenin 1 Kasım 2017 ve 31 Ocak 2018 arasındaki paylaşımları dikkate alınarak gerçekleştirilmiştir. Bu çalışma, Türk lojistik hizmet sağlayan işletmelerin kurumsal profilleri üzerindeki faaliyetleri göz önünde bulundurarak, Facebook'taki takipçilerinin katılımını incelemektedir. Bu yönüyle çalışmanın katkısı, lojistik sektörü gibi birden fazla tarafın birbiriyle yoğun iletişimde olduğu bir sektörü sosyal medya kullanımı ve paydaş katılımı açısından inceleyen ilk çalışma olmasıdır.

🔖

Cite This Article

Sürücü, E., Şakar, G. D. (2018). MEASURING STAKEHOLDER ENGAGEMENT THROUGH SOCIAL MEDIA: AN INVESTIGATION ON TURKISH LOGISTICS SERVICE PROVIDERS. Dumlupınar Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi, Sayı: 58, 107–129. https://ajindex.com/articles/1387066

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (76)

  1. Andrijasevic, I. (2017). Still not there where the people are: analysis of Facebook use by local government in Croatia. Teorijia in Praksa, 54(6), 1040-1063.
  2. Andriof, J., Waddock, S., Husted, B., ve Rahman, S. (2002). Unfolding stakeholder thinking: Theory responsibility and engagement. Sheffield, UK: Greenleaf Publishing.
  3. Arndt, J. (1967). Role of product-related conversations in the diffusion of a new product, Journal of Marketing Research, 4(3), 291-295. http://www.jstor.org/stable/3149462
  4. Ashley, C. ve Tuten, T. (2015). Creative strategies in social media marketing: An exploratory study of branded social content and consumer engagement. Psychology & Marketing, 32(1), 15-27, DOI: 10.1002/mar.20761
  5. Avery, E., Lariscy, R., Amador, E., Ickowitz, T., Primm, C., ve Taylor, A. (2010). Diffusion of social media among public relations practitioners in health departments across various community population sizes. Journal of Public Relations Research, 22, 336–358.
  6. Baden, D. (2010). CSR: An opportunity for SMEs. In C. Louche, S.O. Idowu and W.L. Filho (Eds.), Innovative CSR: From Risk Management to Value Creation (pp.84-101). Sheffield: Greenleaf Publishing Limited.
  7. Barnes, N.G. ve Mattson, E. (2009). Social media in the 2009 Inc. 500: new tools and new trends, Dartmouth Center for Marketing Research, University of MA, Dartmouth, MA, available at: www. umassd.edu/cmr/ (Erişim Tarihi: Şubat 2018).
  8. Berthon, P. R., Pitt, L. F., Plangger, K., ve Shapiro, D. (2012). Marketing meets web 2.0, social media, and creative consumers: Implications for international marketing strategy. Business Horizons, 55(3), 261–271. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.bushor. 2012.01.007.
  9. Bonsón Ponte, E., Carvajal Trujillo, E. ve Escobar Rodríguez, T. (2015). Corporate Facebook and stakeholder engagement, Kybernetes, 44(5), 771-787, https:// doi.org/10.1108/K-07-2014-0136
  10. Bonsón, E. ve Ratkai, M. (2013). A set of metrics to assess stakeholder engagement and social legitimacy on a corporate Facebook page. Online Information Review, 37(5), 787-803. https://doi.org/10.1108/OIR-03-2012-0054
  11. Bonson, E., Bednarova, M. ve Wei, S. (2016). Corporate Twitter use and stakeholder engagement: An empirical analysis of the Spanish hotel industry. European Journal of Tourism Research, 13, 69-83.
  12. Bonson, E., Royo, S. ve Raktai, M. (2015). Citizens’ engagement on local governments’ Facebook sites. An empirical analysis: the impact of different media and content types in Western Europe. Government Information Quarterly. 32, 52-62, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.giq.2014.11.001
  13. Bonson, E., Royo, S. ve Ratkia, M. (2017). Facebook practices in Western European Municipalities: An Empirical Analysis of activity and citizens’ engagement. Administration and Society, 49(3), 320-347, DOI: 10.1177/0095399714544945
  14. Botan, C. H., ve Taylor, M. (2004). Public relations: State of the field. Journal of Communication, 54(4), 645–661. doi:10.1111/j.1460-2466.2004.tb02649.x
  15. Boyd, D.M., ve Ellison, N.B. (2008). Social network sites: definition, history, and scholarship. Journal of Computer Mediated Communication, 13(1), 210–230, https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1083-6101.2007.00393.x
  16. Bruce, P., ve Shelley, R. (2010). Assessing stakeholder engagement. Communication Journal of New Zealand, 11, 30–48.
  17. Cho, M., Furey, L.D. ve Mohr, T. (2017). Communicating corporate social responsibility on social media: strategies, stakeholders and public engagement on corporate Facebook. Business and Professional Communication Quarterly, 80(1), 52-69, DOI: 10.1177/2329490616663708
  18. Cho, M., Schweickart, T. ve Haase, A. (2014). Public engagement with nonprofit organizations on Facebook. Public Relations Review. 40, 565-567, http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.pubrev.2014.01.008
  19. Clulow, V. (2005). Futures dilemmas for marketers: can stakeholder analysis add value? European Journal of Marketing. 39(9/10), 978-997.
  20. Clutch (September, 2017). How Businesses Use social Media: 2017 Survey. https://clutch.co/agencies/social-media-marketing/resources/social-media-survey-2017 (Accessed Date: 28.02.2018)
  21. Cormode, G., ve Krishanmurthy, B. (2008). Key differences between Web 1.0 and Web 2.0. First Monday–Peer Reviewed Journal of the Internet, 13(6), 1-19. http://firstmonday.org/article/view/2125/1972 (Erişim Tarihi: Şubat 2018)
  22. Cvijikj, I., ve Michahelles, F. (2013). Online engagement factors on Facebook brand pages. Social Network Analysis and Mining, 3(4), 843-861. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s13278-013-0098-8
  23. Deniz Ticareti (2017). Dünyada ve Türkiye’de Lojistik Sektöründe Son Durum, http://www.denizticaretodasi.org.tr/Shared%20Documents/Deniz%20Ticareti%20Dergisi/kasim_ek_2017.pdf
  24. Drury, G. (2008). Social media: should marketers engage and how can it be done effectively?, Journal of Direct, Data and Digital Marketing Practice, 9(3), 274-277. https://doi.org/10.1057/palgrave.dddmp.4350096
  25. Dwyer, P. (2007). Measuring the value of electronic word of mouth and its impact in consumer communities. Journal of Interactive Marketing, 21(2), 63–79, https://doi.org/10.1002/dir.20078
  26. Engel, J.F., Blackwell, R.D. ve Kegerreis, R.J. (1969) How information is used to adopt an innovation. Journal of Advertising Research, 9(4), 3–8.
  27. Escobar-Rodriguez, T. ve Bonson-Fernandez, R. (2017). Facebook practices for business communication among fashion retailers, Journal of Fashion Marketing and Management: An International Journal, 21(1), 33-50, https://doi.org/10.1108/JFMM-11-2015-0087
  28. Feick, L.F. ve Price, L.L. (1987). The market maven: a diffuser of marketplace information. Journal of Marketing, 51(1), 83–97.
  29. Fronetics (2017). Social media and the logistics and supply chain Industries, http://info.fronetics.com/report-social-media-and-the-logistics-and-supply-chain-industries
  30. Gilly, M.C., Graham, J.L., Wolfinbarger, M.F. ve Yale, L.J. (1998) A dyadic study of interpersonal information search. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 26(2), 83–100.
  31. Go, E. ve You, K.H. (2016). But not all social media are the same: Analyzing organizations’ social media usage patterns. Telematics and Informatics, 33, 176-186, http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.tele.2015.06.016
  32. Hanna, R., Rohm, A., ve Crittenden, V.L., (2011). We’re all connected: the power of the social media ecosystem. Business Horizons 54(3), 265–273, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bushor.2011.01.007
  33. Heath, R. L. (2006). Onward into more fog: Thoughts on public relations’ research directions. Journal of Public Relations Research, 18(2), 93–114. doi:10.1207/s1532754xjprr1802_2
  34. Heath, R. L. (2014). Public relations’ role in engagement: Functions, voices, and narratives. Paper presented at the Engagement as strategy, theory and practice. ICA preconference 2014, Seattle, WA.
  35. Hennig-Thurau, T., Gwinner, K.P., Walsh, G. ve Gremler, D.D. (2004) Electronic word-of-mouth via consumer-opinion platforms: what motivates consumers to articulate themselves on the internet? Journal of Interactive Marketing, 18(1), 38–52. https://doi.org/10.1002/dir.10073
  36. Hertz, S. ve Alfredsson, M. (2003). Supply chain orchestration leveraging on MNC networks and local resources: approach strategies, Industrial Marketing Management, 32, 139-149, http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0019-8501(02)00228-6
  37. Hull, E., Dick, J., ve Jackson, K. (2011). Requirements Engineering. London: Springer.
  38. Hung, K.H., ve Li, S.Y. (2007) The influence of eWOM on virtual consumer communities: social capital, consumer learning, and behavioral outcomes. Journal of Advertising Research, 47(4), pp. 485–495. DOI: 10.2501/S002184990707050X
  39. Järvinen, L., Sheehan D., ve Järvinen, M. (2012) Application of core science concepts using digital video: A “hands-on” laptop approach. Journal of College Science Teaching. 41, 16–24.
  40. Jawahar, I. ve Mclaughlin, G. (2001). Toward a descriptive stakeholder theory: an organizational life cycle approach, The Academy of Management Review, 26(3), DOI 10.2307/259184
  41. Jussila, J., Kärkäinen, H. and Leino, M. (2011). Benefits of Social Media in Business-to-Business Customer Interface in Innovation, Proceedings of the 15th International Academic MindTrek Conference: Envisioning Future Media Environments, September 29-30, 2011, Tampere, Finland
  42. Kaplan, A. M., ve Haenlein, M. (2009). Consumers, companies, and virtual social worlds: A qualitative analysis of second life. Advances in Consumer Research, 36, 873-874.
  43. Katz, E., ve Lazarsfeld, P.F., (1955). Personal Influence: The Part of Played by People in the Flow of Mass Communications. The Free Press, New York.
  44. Kelleher, T., ve Miller, B. M. (2006). Organizational blogs and the human voice: Relational strategies and relational outcomes. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 11, 395-414. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1083-6101.2006.00019.x
  45. Kelly, L., Kerr, G., ve Drennan, J. (2010). Avoidance of advertising in social networking sites: The teenage perspective. Journal of Interactive Advertising, 10, 16–27. https://doi.org/10.1080/15252019.2010.10722167
  46. Kozinets, R., de Valck, K., Wojnicki, A.C., ve Wilner, S.J.S. (2010), Networked narratives: understanding word-of-mouth marketing in online communities. Journal of Marketing, 74,71–89 https://doi.org/10.1509/jmkg.74.2.71
  47. Krumay, B. ve Geyer, S., (2016). The role of social media for stakeholder involvement: A literature review. BLED Proceedings eConference.
  48. Kwok, L. ve Yu, B. (2012). Spreading social messages on Facebook: an analysis of restaurant business-to-consumer communications. Cornell Hospitality Quarterly, 54(1), 84-94. DOI 10.1177/1938965512458360
  49. Li, Y.M. ve Shiu, Y.L. (2012). A diffusion mechanism for social advertising over micro-blogs, Decision Support Systems, 54(1), 9-22.
  50. Lieb, R.C., Miller, R.A. ve Wassenhove, L.N.V. (1993). Third party logistics services: A comparison of experienced American and European manufacturers, International Journal of Physical Distribution and Logistics Management, 23(6), 35-44.
  51. Linvill, D.L., McGee, S.E. ve Hicks, L.K. (2012). Colleges’ and universities’ use of Twitter: A content analysis. Public Relations Review. 38, 636-638, http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.pubrev.2012.05.010
  52. Luarn, P., Lin, Y.F. ve Chiu, Y.P. (2015). Influence of Facebook brand-page posts on online engagement, Online Information Review, 39(4), 505-519, https://doi.org/10.1108/OIR-01-2015-0029
  53. Maloni, M. ve Carter, C. (2006). Opportunities for Research in Third-Party Logistics. Transportation Journal, 45(2), 23-38.
  54. Manetti, G. Bellucci, M. ve Bagnoli, L. (2017). Stakeholder engagement and public information through social media: a study of Canadian and American public transportation agencies, American Review of Public Administration, 47(8), 991-1099, DOI: 10.1177/027507h4t0tp1s6:/6/d4o9i.2o6rg0/
  55. Mangold, W. G., ve Faulds, D. J. (2009). Social media: The new hybrid element of the promotion mix. Business Horizons, 52, 357–365. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bushor.2009.03.002
  56. Men, L.R. ve Tsai, W.H.S. (2013). Beyond liking or following: understanding public engagement on social networking sites in China, Public Relations Review, 39(1), 13-22.
  57. Mishne, G. ve Glance, N. (2006). Leave a reply: an analysis of weblog comments. Paper presented at the Third Annual Workshop on the Weblogging Ecosystem, May 22-26, Edinburgh.
  58. Muntinga, D.G., Moorman, M., ve Smit, E.G. (2011). Introducing COBRA’s: exploring motivations for brand-related social media use. International Journal of Advertising, 30(1),13–46, https://doi.org/10.2501/IJA-30-1-013-046
  59. Nelson, J. and Zadek, S. (2000). Partnership Alchemy: New Social Partnerships in Europe. Copenhagen: Copenhagen Centre.
  60. Özen, Y. ve Gül, A. (2007). Sosyal ve eğitim bilimleri araştırmalarında evren-örneklem sorunu. Kazım Karabekir Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 15, 394-422.
  61. Paine, K.D. (2011). Measure what matters: Online tools for understanding customers, social media, engagement, and key relationships. Hoboken, New Jersey: John Wiley & Sons.
  62. Perreault, W.D. ve Leigh, L.E. (1989). Reliability of nominal data based on qualitative judgments. Journal of Marketing Research, 26(2), 135-148. http://www.jstor.org/stable/3172601
  63. Phelps, J.E., Lewis, R., Mobilio, L., Perry, D. ve Raman, N. (2004) Viral marketing or electronic word-of-mouth advertising: examining consumer responses and motivations to pass along email. Journal of Advertising Research, 44(4), pp. 333– 348, https://doi.org/10.1017/S0021849904040371
  64. Ponte, E.B., Carvajal-Trukillo, E., ve Escobar- Rodriguez, T. (2015). Corporate Facebook and stakeholder engagement, Kybernetes, 44(5), 771- 787.
  65. PwC (2010). Transportation and Logistics 2030. https://www.pwc.com/gx/en/transportation-logistics/tl2030/emerging-markets/pdf/tl2030_vol3_final.pdf
  66. PwC (2016). Shifting patterns. The future of the logistics industry, https://www.pwc.com/gx/en/transportation-logistics/pdf/the-future-of-the-logistics-industry.pdf (Accessed Date: 01.03.2018)
  67. Sahay, B.S. ve Mohan, R. (2006). 3PL practices: An Indian Perspective, International Journal of Physical Distribution & Logistics Management, 36(9), 666-689, https://doi.org/10.1108/09600030610710845
  68. Sen, S., Bhattacharya, C. B., ve Korschun, D. (2006). The role of corporate social responsibility in strengthening multiple stakeholder relationships: A field experiment. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 34(2), 158–166.
  69. Smith, N.C., Ansett, S. ve Erez, L. (2011). How Gap Inc. engaged with its stakeholders. MIT Sloan Management Review, 52(4), 69-76.
  70. TBOS (2017). Impact of social media on logistics industry, https://offshoringtbos.com/impact-of-social-media-on-logistics-industry/
  71. Thorson, K., ve Rodgers, S. (2006). Relationships between blogs as EWOM and interactivity, perceived interactivity and parasocial interaction. Journal of Interactive Advertising, 6, 34–44. https://doi.org/10.1080/15252019.2006.10722117
  72. Vollmer, C., ve Precourt, G. (2008). Always on: Advertising Marketing and Media in an Era of Consumer Control. McGraw-Hill, New York.
  73. Waddock, S. (2005). Leading Corporate Citizens: Vision, Values and Value Added. New York: McGraw-Hill.
  74. Waters, R.D. ve Jamal, J.Y. (2011). Tweet, tweet, tweet: A content analysis of nonprofit organizations’ Twitter updates. Public Relations Review, 37, 321-324, doi:10.1016/j.pubrev.2011.03.002
  75. Whyte, W. H., Jr. (1954). The web of word of mouth. Fortune, 50, 140-212.
  76. Wigley, S. ve Lewis, B.K. (2012). Rules of engagement: Practice what you tweet. Public Relations Review. 38, 165-167, doi:10.1016/j.pubrev.2011.08.020