• No results found

Bachelor Thesis It is not you; it is your social media behavior

N/A
N/A
Protected

Academic year: 2021

Share "Bachelor Thesis It is not you; it is your social media behavior"

Copied!
64
0
0

Loading.... (view fulltext now)

Full text

(1)

Bachelor Thesis

It is not you; it is your social media behavior

- An explorative research of what influences consumers’

perceptions of a brand within a social media context

Authors: Lina Hiltunen 930625

& Maya Strinnhed 950111 Tutor: Pär Strandberg Examiner: Frederic Bill Semester: Spring 2017 Degree: Bachelor Course: 2EB01E

(2)

Preface

This bachelor thesis has been written to fulfill the graduation requirements of the Enterprising and Business Development program at Linnaeus University in Växjö, Sweden. The research process began in March 2017 and was completed in May 2017;

now the authors are pleased to present the results of this research.

Several individuals have contributed and supported the authors of this bachelor thesis during the research process. These individuals have generated valuable input and

therefore the authors would like to address a special thank you to all of them.

Our tutor, Pär Strandberg, has throughout the process supported us with his knowledge and expertise and for this we are grateful. We would also like to thank our examiner,

Frederic Bill, for providing useful information during several seminars.

We would like to thank all participants within our focus groups; their participation and opinions has been valuable for this entire research. Lastly, we would like to thank all individuals who have supported us throughout the process of conducting this bachelor

thesis.

Signed by the authors at Linnaeus University May 2017

_________________________ _________________________

Lina Hiltunen Maya Strinnhed

(3)

Abstract

Bachelor Thesis in Enterprising and Business Development, School of Business and Economics – Linnaeus University, 2EB01E, Spring Semester 2017.

Authors: Lina Hiltunen and Maya Strinnhed

Tutor: Pär Strandberg

Examiner: Frederic Bill

Title: It is not you; it is your social media behavior - An explorative research of what influences consumers’

perceptions of a brand within a social media context Background: With the emergence of social media the communication

landscape has changed and consumers tend to rely on online social information in a larger extent. Interactions on social media are becoming more significant than ever to

companies, brands and consumers since it can change consumer’s perception of a company or brand.

Purpose: The purpose of this thesis is to explore the interaction between consumers and influencing aspects on the perception of a brand in a social media context.

Methodology: This is a qualitative research with a deductive approach where the empirical material was collected through two focus groups. A non-probability sampling has been used and the sampling parameters are based on social media users in Sweden.

Conclusion: This thesis concludes that certain interactions influence users and consumers, which leads to them changing their

perception of a company or brand. These interactions are mainly based on trust but the shared content is also a significant aspect.

Keywords: Social media, Content Generation, Trust, Interactions, Influencers, Buzz, Word-of-mouth, Reputation

(4)

Table of contents

1.0 Introduction _______________________________________________________ 1 1.1 Background ______________________________________________________ 1 1.2 Problem discussion ________________________________________________ 3 1.3 Research question _________________________________________________ 5 1.4 Purpose _________________________________________________________ 5 2.0 Literature review ___________________________________________________ 6 2.1 Trust ___________________________________________________________ 6 2.1.1 Online social trust _____________________________________________ 6 2.2 Content generation ________________________________________________ 8 2.3 Interactions ______________________________________________________ 9 2.3.1 Influencers __________________________________________________ 10 2.4 Reputation ______________________________________________________ 11 2.5 Literature review summarize ________________________________________ 11 3.0 Methodology _____________________________________________________ 13 3.1 Research strategy ________________________________________________ 13 3.2 Qualitative research _______________________________________________ 14 3.3 Ethical principles _________________________________________________ 14 3.4 Collection of material _____________________________________________ 15 3.5 Focus groups ____________________________________________________ 16 3.6 Interview guide __________________________________________________ 20 3.7 Sampling parameters ______________________________________________ 21 3.8 Recording of material _____________________________________________ 21 3.9 The analysis process of qualitative collected material ____________________ 22 3.10 Criteria for evaluating qualitative research ____________________________ 23 4.0 Empirical collection _______________________________________________ 24 4.1 Trust __________________________________________________________ 24 4.2 Content generation _______________________________________________ 28 4.3 Interactions _____________________________________________________ 30 4.4 Reputation ______________________________________________________ 35 5.0 Analysis _________________________________________________________ 37 5.1 Trust __________________________________________________________ 38 5.2 Content generation _______________________________________________ 40 5.3 Interactions _____________________________________________________ 42 5.4 Reputation ______________________________________________________ 45 6.0 Conclusion _______________________________________________________ 46 7.0 Research implications ______________________________________________ 48 7.1 Theoretical implications ___________________________________________ 48 7.2 Managerial implications ___________________________________________ 48 7.3 Future research __________________________________________________ 49

(5)

Appendix ____________________________________________________________ I Appendix 1: Operationalization _________________________________________ I Appendix 2: Translation of questions ____________________________________ III

(6)

1.0 Introduction

In this first chapter an introduction will be presented; this will be the foundation of the entire research. Firstly, the background of the research area will be presented followed by the problem discussion, which will lead to the research question and purpose of the research.

1.1 Background

With the emergence of social media the communication landscape has changed and consumers tend to rely more on online social information rather than traditional

commercial information (Kilgour, Sasser & Larke, 2015; Pavlou & Stewart, 2000; Kaul

& Chaudhri, 2015). Therefore, it will be argued in this thesis how different aspects within the concept of social media can influence consumers. Tuten & Solomon (2015) explain social media as the digital ways to communicate and interact with networks of people and corporations. Furthermore, Charlesworth (2014) describe social media as a term for different social networks that includes online communities such as Instagram and Facebook, where consumers can control the content to a larger extent than on a company’s website. The usage of social media is rapidly growing which creates new opportunities for all actors within the relatively new and successful medium (Khang, Ki

& Ye, 2012; Yan, Wu, Wu, Wang, Chen & Wei, 2016; Fan, Miao, Fang, Lin, 2013).

Social media is becoming a vital tool as a source of information for companies and consumers due to the ease of access for everyone. Furthermore, the usage of social media can impact and influence consumers’ perceptions and attitudes towards

companies and brands. (Khang et al., 2012; Fan et al., 2013). A brand is according to Armstrong, Brennan, Harker & Kotler (2015) a sign, symbol, design, name or a

combination of the mentioned. The brand is a central part of a product and it could add value to a product or service and benefit the consumers. Social media has a great dominance regarding a brand and its reputation, according to Kaul & Chaudhri (2015).

Social media is associated to share and forward content of a business and also their message to other consumers (Kilgour, Sasser & Larke, 2015; Tuten & Solomon, 2015).

(7)

consumers to engage and interact with companies. Content generation is vital for marketing within social media (Tuten & Solomon, 2015). Tuten & Solomon (2015) are furthermore describing the phenomenon content marketing as a technique to generate and exhibit valuable and consistent content to consumers in order to attract and provide a credible reputation.

It is important to uphold a trustworthy image and capture the consumer’s loyalty, by doing so companies could use different types of personal brands (Armstrong et al., 2016). Companies’ does not necessarily have to be the one who sends the message (Cho, Huh & Faber, 2014). According to Armstrong et al. (2015) these messages could be found on all digital platforms. It is easy for consumers to find information and reviews about a company and its products online, which means that consumers can easily find positive or negative reviews from other users, which can affect the

companies’ reputation. The concept of word-of-mouth (WOM) and buzz are examples of what could lead to these affects regarding companies’ reputation. WOM and buzz are two forms of communication between individuals when information is being shared from one person to another, mostly among people that know each other, according to Tuten & Solomon (2015). Trusov, Bucklin, Koen (2009) presents that WOM-

communication is a necessary approach to strive for when attracting new consumers and that WOM has a superior long-lasting effect compared to traditional marketing

activities. Tuten & Solomon (2015) states that WOM has a higher level of credibility compared to information passed on from the companies themselves. According to Trusov et al. (2009) does WOM include discussions related to the product and also to shared content regarding the whole brand. Berger (2014) and Tuten & Solomon (2015) states that WOM includes face- to-face discussions, ”word of mouse” and also online mentions and reviews, which impacts the consumer behavior greatly. Fan et al. (2013) discuss how important it is to focus on this since the electronic word-of-mouth (eWOM) influence consumers on a daily basis and has a major part regarding the credibility among consumers.

The consumer’s process when making a purchase is affected by the eWOM in a large extent since trust and credibility towards a company and its products are important for consumers (Fan et al., (2013). Kaur & Singh (2016) conclude that consumers are more likely to buy a product that has a good review online rather than a bad one because of its

(8)

greater trustworthiness towards the brand or product. Fan et al. (2013) argues that the quantity of eWOM gives a positive influence regarding the companies’ credibility according to the consumers. This is because a high number of reviews attract

consumer’s attention and affect their perception of a brand. Furthermore, Constantinides (2009) claims that consumers base their buying decisions on opinions and

recommendations from their peers instead of from the companies’ own marketing messages, therefore it is important for companies to have peers or consumers giving them good recommendations online.

Another type of approach is social media influencers (SMIs), which stands for an innovative and new type of marketing according to Freberg, Graham, McGaughey &

Freberg (2011). SMIs are independent endorsers, which main purpose is to affect the target audience and shape their opinions through social media tools (Freberg et al., 2011; Tuten & Solomon, 2015). Influencers exist in all types of online communities and their network is usually rather extended and reach a lot of different consumers (Tuten &

Solomon, 2015). The power that an influencer has over a brand, its reputation and perception is becoming significantly stronger due to the growth of social media,

according to Booth & Matic (2011). When receiving information from other consumers online, knowledge about the other individual is often dismissed (Anon, 2008). This is a setback for the trustworthiness of the shared information since people tend to interact and share incorrect information if they do not agree with it (Kaur & Singh, 2016), by creating relationships online with other individuals the risk of this happening could be reduced (Evans & McKnee, 2010). After creating these relationships it is important to build trust between the consumers in order to understand and interpret the shared information amongst them correctly (Evans & McKnee, 2010).

1.2 Problem discussion

From a user perspective is it crucial to explore how different aspects on social media influence the perception of a brand and its products in an advertising and

communication context. Information can nowadays flow faster and more efficient than ever due to the developing creation of social media (Tuten & Solomon, 2015;

Charlesworth, 2014). Social media is constantly growing and will keep growing in this

(9)

Ki & Ye, 2012; Tuten & Solomon, 2015; Fan et al., 2013; Yan et al., 2016). This leads to implications regarding the amount of information available and the interaction between consumers (Khang, Ki & Ye, 2012). Tuten & Solomon (2015) reveals that the quantity of information on social media is constantly increasing, which makes it harder to create an effective action strategy (Tuten & Solomon, 2015). By using social media as a channel in advertising can companies create attention and generate digital traffic to their business. It can also influence attitudes towards the brand and its image among consumers (Tuten & Solomon, 2015; Fan et al., 2013). Gensler, Völckner, Liu- Thompkins & Wiertz (2013) argues that the key factor when it comes to branding on social media is to see the consumers and their opinions as a part of the brand. This is difficult for companies since it makes it harder for companies to control and impact their reputation on social media where consumers can speak freely and share their opinions (Gensler et al., 2013; Charlesworth, 2014).

Constantinides (2009) states that the rising involvement within social media gives companies greater and more complex challenges than ever. Fan et al. (2013) argues that consumers often nowadays do not touch a physical product but rather search about the products online and therefore they put a large amount of trust in the reviews and eWOM when making purchase decisions. Furthermore, Tuten & Solomon (2015) states that consumers tend to assimilate negative comments and reviews online rather than positive ones. How consumers interact and use information is important to understand in order to comprehend why they react and respond the way they do (Pavlou & Stewart, 2000).

Tuten & Solomon (2015) identifies that the information shared among consumers can affect and change the perception about a company, its brand and products. The

challenges regarding the interactions within social media are however to ensure that the information that is being available is something that can develop positive buzz among consumers when it is being introduced for the first time. Buzz is considered being reliable among consumers because other consumers have generated the actual content (Solomon, Bamossy, Askegaard & Hogg, 2014). When information is being revealed on different types of social media channels it allows consumers to start talking about it and create this buzz (Yan et al., 2016). This leads to a flow of information that can spread fast due to the easy access, according to Tuten & Solomon (2015).

(10)

As stated before, SMIs are independent endorsers (Freberg et al., 2011; Tuten &

Solomon, 2015) called influencers, whom can create brand awareness and help to strengthening the reputation by reaching out to the target group and give positive vibes about that specific brand or product (Cho, Huh & Faber, 2014; Booth & Matic, 2011).

Once an influencer has decided to support a company his or hers network and followers will get affected by the information and in some extent follow the recommendations from the influencers (Tuten & Solomon, 2015). The use of influencers on social media have to generate a trustworthy message, which is authentic, otherwise the outcome could be that the company’s reputation gets affected negatively (Cho, Huh & Faber, 2014; Booth & Matic, 2011). Since the message needs to be trustworthy, it has to derive trust in the interaction between the parties. Galindo-Pérez-de-Azpillaga, Foronda- Robles & García-López (2014) argues that there are different kinds of trust that can arise depending on the relation and connections between the individuals and companies.

To date there have been limited exploratory research and analysis of how social media can affect the perception of a company from a user perspective and research within the topic has reached a certain level of limitation (Khang, Ki & Ye, 2012; Kaur & Singh, 2016). Therefore, more research is needed about the topic in order to understand how the phenomena can impact a brand’s reputation in a user-to-user dialogue. This research provides insight into how interactions on social media can affect a brand’s reputation amongst consumers and thereafter contribute to further findings.

1.3 Research question

What interactions influences consumer's perception of a brand within a social media context?

1.4 Purpose

The purpose of this research is to explore the interaction between consumers and influencing aspects on the perception of a brand in a social media context.

(11)

2.0 Literature review

In this following chapter the chosen areas of the theoretical framework will be presented. The topics presented below have been chosen in line with the research question and purpose of the research. The chapter ends with an illustration of the literature review summarize.

2.1 Trust

Trust is a complex phenomenon; it is a psychological understanding of a relation between two parties and the willingness but also expectations of how the other part should behave (Christoffersen & Robson, 2017). Trust enables communication within and between companies and individuals and broadens their ability to interact with each other more frequently (Galindo-Pérez-de-Azpillaga, Foronda-Robles & García-López, 2014). Reichheld (2003) argues that if a company does not convey a high sense of trust towards their consumers the consumers will not trust the company and therefore make their purchases elsewhere. Trust has become more important than ever, due to the increase of online social networks. Further, Reichheld (2003) states that it is not the actual price that rules on these social networks; trust is the most important factor. When companies have gained trust from consumers, the consumers are willing to share more personal information with the online vendors and companies. As a result of this trust that has been developed between the companies and consumers, the consumers are able to receive more specific offers and customized product and services. In the long run this leads to a closer bond between the different actors on the social networks, such as the companies, influencers and consumers. Online interactions create countless

opportunities for consumers to go search for and spread honest opinions about a company, its brand and products, Reichheld (2003).

2.1.1 Online social trust

Reichheld (2003) argues that trust is more important than ever due to the increase of online-usage. Since consumers do not interact physically with salespersons, cannot touch or see the physical product they are therefore bound to rely on promises given and

(12)

images uploaded by other consumers. Online social networks are explained as a

platform where people can share information and interact with other individuals within a social context and therefore create a virtual platform for communication, according to Kaur & Singh (2016) and Anon (2008). Within these virtual platforms people interact with each other but the problem regarding this is that the users usually do not know whom they are interacting with (Anon, 2008).

Online trust is related to both the target group and the content that is being revealed, according to Anon (2008). This trust is a result of people’s enthusiasm to share personal information virtually (Anon, 2008). People tend to share information online that is not accurate in order for them to express their disagreements, according to Kaur & Singh (2016). Anon (2008) states further that a consumer’s trust towards a company or a brand is based on the shared values and opinions they have with the company or the brand.

When a consumer does not agree with the company’s values or a product’s design, a negative atmosphere occurs within the virtual communication platform (Kaur & Singh, 2016). Further Kaur & Singh (2016) states that within these communities do both positive and negative interactions exist. Positive interactions are based on endorsement, support and connections and the negative ones are a contrast to this, which leads to a disconnected network. The negativity within these virtual platforms is becoming more significant due to the risk of it being untrue (Kaur & Singh, 2016).

Anon (2008) concludes that in order to generate online social trust, one have to provide the consumers with useful content. Further Anon (2008) states that by engaging the consumers in the interaction process trust will most likely occur between the two parties. It is significant to understand that in some cases more effort is needed than just engaging the consumers. Anon (2008) discloses that in order to generate trust, the effort put into the relationship has to be exposed for the consumers to understand the value of it. Sometimes is the effort more valuable than the content when cultivating trust (Anon, 2008). Ashley & Leonard (2009) reveal that by using undercover strategies, consumer’s trust towards a company may decline. If a consumer finds out about the hidden

strategies used to influence without them knowing, their loyalty and trust towards the company will most likely decrease since the trust has been damaged, according to Ashley & Leonard (2009).

(13)

2.2 Content generation

Daugherty, Eastin & Bright (2008) explains user-generated content (UGC) as media content that is produced and created by the individuals instead of by paid marketing professionals and it is most often distributed on the Internet. Shao (2009) argues that UGC is changing the traditional media landscape that the world used to have and attracts new individuals. Knoll & Schramm (2015) also argues that in the social online world that exists today, it is possible for a variety of interactions to occur between web users whom can produce content themselves that is available for everyone to see. UGC is being used by individuals in different approaches with different intentions, according to Shao (2009). The main reason to why consumers apply UGC is to maximize their information searching process to fulfill their needs in the best way possible. The results of online searching are being influenced by UGC in a large extent, since it has increased so rapidly, according to Shao (2009).

Further Shao (2009) states that consumers have a good use of UGC sites if the purpose is to interact with other consumers and enhance the social connections. UGC is what builds a virtual communication platform and therefore respond to content within these platforms is what creates credibility amongst users. When consumers express

themselves on user-generated communities they construct their individual online identity, and they fulfill needs regarding supporting other consumers to fulfill their individual needs by giving useful content. Knoll & Schramm (2015) states that UGC, which is present for all companies and consumers, is evidence that it is being used in a high extent when searching for information online.

Susarla, Oh & Tan (2012) investigates how the content of a message differs within social media and if the user-generated content is depending on whom delivers the message. The findings evokes that the message deliverer has an impact over when the content is being revealed and also the efforts put into it. Furthermore, Susarla, Oh &

Tan (2012) indicates that the structure of the information that is being shared has an impact on how it will be perceived by consumers. The interaction within the network might also impact and influence and these interactions play a role in how the content can be diffused and shared on social media (Susarla, Oh & Tan, 2012).

(14)

2.3 Interactions

Interaction on social media include dialogues and conversation between users within their networks (Tuten & Solomon, 2016). Values, behaviors and attitudes are being spread and promoted by social interactions, according to Falk, Morelli, Welborn, Dambacher & Lieberman (2013). Interactions that creates an interest among consumers could be by electronic word-of-mouth (eWOM) and buzz. As mentioned before, eWOM stands for electronic-word-of-mouth (Fan et al., 2013) and includes an interaction of communication between individuals online, according to Tuten & Solomon (2015).

Further, Tuten & Solomon (2016) states that within this concept there has to be a certain authenticity in the reviews in order for consumers to rely on them. As the platform social media is becoming bigger and bigger the influences of the eWOM are constantly increasing. For this reason eWOM has become more effective regarding being an influential channel of online communication (Fan et al., 2013).

Buzz refers to the excitement, which is being spread around for example a product, brand or a company. This means that consumers actively must be motivated and interested in spreading their opinions for a buzz to be considered effective (Falk et al., 2013). Mattern, Huhn, Perrey, Dörner, Lorenz, & Spillecke (2012) states that the

companies have to see the worthiness of buzz regarding their brands and their offerings.

If companies do not focus on the buzz their consumers will in time leave their sites and stores, and spread their negative opinions about the brand on platforms where many consumers talk and post content (Mattern et al., 2012).

Companies should not ignore when a negative buzz creates about their brand since it often leads to drawn-out damage between the company and their consumers. A negative buzz has mostly to do with the fact that consumers are not satisfied with the customer service or that the expectations are not perceived (Mattern et al., 2012). These

interactions are considered to be viral marketing, which creates a wide spread among consumers (Armstrong et al., 2015). Sherman, Payton, Hernandez, Greenfield &

Dapretto (2016) states that within social media, people tend to react and interact more strongly with shared information that has received more attention online. Hence, it has a greater credibility and stronger influence amongst the consumers (Lee, 2015). These

(15)

be spread (Tuten & Solomon, 2016). Depending on which different medium that is being used, consumers will adapt to the information differently, according to Lee (2015). As an example, content sponsorship, which is a form of online promotion, are preferably being used and placed at targeted sites that already offer useful information to the consumers in order to maximize the value of the information (Armstrong et al., 2015).

2.3.1 Influencers

Influencers on social media aims to change user's opinions and behavior by delivering messages regarding companies’ products and services (Tuten & Solomon, 2016).

Consumers whom are active within social network communities are more likely to buy an advertised product and at the same time recommend the product to other consumers whom are active or members of the same group (Knoll & Schramm, 2015; Tuten &

Solomon, 2016). It is also common to use endorsements in different marketing campaigns, which could be either beneficial or risky, according to Armstrong et al.

(2015). Further, Carter (2016) concludes two different kinds of influencers on social media. Firstly, celebrities and their relationship to companies and how these factors together can influence consumers. Secondly, less exposed individuals whom willingly accept their role as an influencer whom put effort into changing consumer’s perception about a company.

Carter (2016) states that the influencer’s network is less important within the first type of influencer and plays a more vital matter for the second type of influencers, in that scenario is the quantity of the influencer’s network vital. However, Knoll & Schramm (2015) argues that whether the source of the product was well known to the user or it was unknown did not matter that much. Further Knoll & Schramm (2015) reveals that the social influence occurred anyways, as long as someone else within the common group interacted as well. Tuten & Solomon (2016) states however that consumers rely more on connections within their network rather than unknown sources of information.

This is problematic because consumer’s connections within their network do not always interact which makes the whole process useless (Tuten & Solomon, 2016).

(16)

2.4 Reputation

Gensler et al. (2013) states that social media challenges the protection of a company’s reputation if the focus does not shift from the company to the consumers. Kaul &

Chaudhri (2015) argues that the reputation assists companies’ transparency amongst their values and strategies. Lee (2015) concludes however, that companies can use social media as a tool to empower their reputation. It is described that a change in social media can be aligned with the reputation but that this change is not the only thing that affects the reputation, according to Carroll (2015). The interaction amongst consumers can arise information concerning a company and this information can also play a vital role for a company’s reputation (Kaul & Chaudhri, 2015). Further, Carroll (2015) explains that companies must offer a valuable content, which can contribute to a positive experience for the consumers on social media in order to gain trust from the consumers and thus maintain a good reputation. Tuten & Solomon (2016) argues that consumers trust each other and by benefit specific users online, they can help spread a positive word about a company and therefore create a better reputation for the company.

2.5 Literature review summarize

Interactions on social media is depending on the trustworthiness of the content that is being shared among consumers since it thereby affects their perception of a brand.

Online social trust is therefore of significant importance regarding these interactions that are taking place on social media among users and companies’ consumers.

Interactions demand various influencing aspects in order for users and consumers to perceive and trust the content correctly. In order to understand these influencing factors and interactions online, trust can therefore be created and built on social media so that companies can uphold a good reputation based on their social media activities. If there are low levels of trust and a negative buzz about companies and brands, this often leads to that the reputation is bad instead of good. See below for visual figure.

(17)

Figure 1.0 Illustration of literature review summarize, self-generated.

(18)

3.0 Methodology

This is a qualitative research with a deductive approach, which aims to explore what influences consumer’s perception of a brand within a social media context. In order to do so a selection of methods has been made. Further, the selection of methods is

presented. The main method used is focus groups, since the purpose of the research is to explore consumers’ thoughts about the researched area.

3.1 Research strategy

The research design of a study, is according to Malhotra (2010), the framework or guidelines for conducting the research. Different kinds of designs and approaches within a business research can be applied depending on how the subject is being studied (Bryman, 2016). Further, the research design specifies a detailed description of how the implementations and how a study should be conducted (Malhotra, 2010). There are two mainly approaches that are normally used, inductive and deductive (Bryman & Bell, 2011; Bryman, 2016). Inductive approach indicates that theory is derived from collected material whereby theory is the result of the study. In comparison, deductive strategy is when the theory controls the direction of the study and what material to collect. In this research the researchers chose to apply a deductive approach since the theory derived the material collection in order to answer the research question. When the material is being collected, it has to be in order to the theory since it is being tested in the research (Bryman, 2016). According to Bryman (2016) and Bryman & Bell (2011) is an

inductive approach more qualitative and a deductive approach is considered to be quantitative. However, in this research the researchers chose to apply a deductive approach even though this is a qualitative research, since the theory derived the collection of material. Furthermore, Bryman & Bell (2011) are discussing a

combination of the two approaches and are indicating that a qualitative research does not necessarily have to be inductive, as in this research. The reason for this was because focus groups were being used as the method for collecting material and in order for the researchers to be prepared, theory about the topic needed to be collected in beforehand and thus derived the collection of material.

(19)

3.2 Qualitative research

As already mentioned, this research is a qualitative research and Bryman (2016) describes qualitative research as a strategy that normally focuses on the quality of information rather than the quantity of words. In this research, the quality of the information was more significant than the quantity in order to have enough means to answer the research question. Further, a qualitative research approach is according to Jacobsen (2002) suitable when the researchers aims to collect knowledge regarding how individuals understand and interpret certain given situations. Since the purpose of this research is to explore the interaction between consumers and influencing aspects on the perception of a brand in a social media context, a qualitative approach was considered suitable. Additionally, a qualitative approach is to prefer over a quantitative approach when the researchers are open to unexpected results and outcomes and since this research does not have any expectations of desired result, openness can therefore be considered a keyword within this research approach, according to Jacobsen (2002).

Openness in a qualitative context is favorably because the process is interactive and flexible, which means that the research question and layout of the study can change during the research process (Jacobsen, 2002). The content and structure of this research changed many times before the researches were satisfied and felt confident with the layout. However, Jacobsen (2002) points out that it does not always have to change but the qualitative approach allows the possibility to do so if necessary.

3.3 Ethical principles

According to Bryman & Bell (2011) there are regulations and demands to take into consideration when conducting research. Firstly, the researchers have to provide the participants with the right information and also information regarding the following steps in the research (Bryman & Bell, 2011). Before the material was collected from the participants, they were informed about the research and what would happen further.

Another regulation to take into consideration is about the approval, this regards that the participants have to be aware of that their attendance is not mandatory and that they can quit the research whenever they want to (Bryman & Bell, 2011). All participants were being asked in beforehand if they wanted to participate and were at the same time

(20)

informed that it was voluntary. They were also asked for approval to record during the focus groups, which everyone agreed on. The third regulation considers confidential and anonymity for all the participants, this means according to Bryman & Bell (2011) that all the information regarding the participant's needs to be handled with strict caution so that no information leaks to unauthorized sources. In this research, all participants are anonymous and the transcribed material will not be included in the research. However, the transcribed material can be revealed to third party but will only be provided when contacting the researchers, which the participants has agreed on. The regulation regarding the usage is another important regulation, this means that the collected information shall not be used in other contexts than to the original research (Bryman &

Bell, 2011). The collected material of this research will not be used in any other but in this research. The fifth and final regulation is that the researchers shall not give false reflections regarding the information of the research (Bryman & Bell, 2011).

3.4 Collection of material

When collecting data to a research, there are two mainly types of data that can be collected, primary and secondary data, according to Bryman & Bell (2011). This research used both primary and secondary data. Secondary data refers to when the researcher does not collect the information directly from the primary source and

therefore rely his or hers implications on research from other sources (Jacobsen, 2002).

The theoretical framework of this research is based on secondary data since the

information is collected from already existing research. This means that the information of the secondary data has been collected with other purposes than what this research has (Jacobsen, 2002). Hence, data within the secondary approach can enforce each other if different sources states the same thing and therefore enhance the results, or it could be used to test results from different researches (Jacobsen, 2002). In this research, the secondary data has been used as theoretical framework to enforce the collection of the primary data. Primary data refers to when the researcher collects the data for the first time on their own through questionnaires, interviews, observations or group interviews (Jacobsen, 2002). The primary data of this research has been collected through focus groups. Further, Jacobsen (2002) states that the researcher goes directly to the primary source to gather information. Within this research the researchers have collected the

(21)

been analyzed by the same structure. This is because the researchers wanted to obtain a consistent and legible structure of the entire research.

3.5 Focus groups

As mentioned before, this research has used focus groups when collecting the primary material. Jacobsen (2002) argues that an interview with more participants than one is to prefer when the researchers wants to develop and find new knowledge. Since the researchers of this research wanted to gather information and knowledge about other individuals, it was considered being suitable to interview more than one participant.

These group interviews are referred to as focus groups (Jacobsen (2002; Bryman, 2016).

The differences between group interview and focus groups are however that focus groups normally refers to one specific theme and group interviews gives a wider overview of a topic (Bryman, 2016). The topic of this research was narrowed and therefore focus groups were chosen as the method since only one topic was being discussed. Further, focus groups allow an active discussion of the topic amongst the participants whilst group interviews are more individually but at the same time (Bryman

& Bell, 2011). A focus group includes interaction between participants that allows discussion of deeper meaning (Bryman, 2016). Henceforth, focus groups are to prefer when the theme to discuss is relatively limited, since if the theme is too wide it will lead to a too large spread among the participants’ opinions (Jacobsen, 2002). Bryman & Bell (2011) argues that focus groups are being used because of the participant’s knowledge about the relevant topic. The participant’s perception of how they use social media was of significant importance in this research.

Jacobsen (2002) states that focus groups are an appropriate approach since the aim of this research is to obtain the participant's point of view on public services or

experienced situations. This means that the participants needs to have a certain experience and perception about the specific topic (Bryman & Bell, 2011). In this research, the participant’s perception and point of view of social media needed to be discussed in order to answer the research question. Furthermore, focus groups offers a backup for all the participants, since one person could give their point of view on a certain event and other participants could say that they agree but that they could not express it in their own words (Jacobsen, 2002).

(22)

During the focus groups, many participants agreed with each other without explaining in their own words since others had already done that.

In order to ensure that the focus groups and the questions will operate well, a pilot can be done in beforehand, states Bryman & Bell (2011). A pilot tests the focus group as a whole so that any problems that may occur can be fixed before the “real” focus groups are being held. One pilot focus group was made in beforehand to ensure that the

questions were formulated well and that they were understandable. Some changes were made to make the questions more effective and easy to understand by the participants.

According to Bryman & Bell (2011) a focus group identifies problems and areas that does not seem to be understood by the participants, which gives the moderators a chance to improve it and also practice to hold in a focus group. The pilot that was being made facilitated the moderators to operate a well-planned focus group and make sure that the participants understood the questions and discussed topic.

Size of the focus groups

Within qualitative research it could be difficult to assemble enough people whom could contribute with useful information, according to Bryman (2016). If a focus group has a small amount of participants it will limit the range of opinions provided to the

researches. If a group on the other hand has too many participants it would mainly lead to that the discussion will lose its tread, according to Jacobsen (2002). Within this research there were two focus groups held, one with six participants and one with five participants.

Further Jacobsen (2002) argues that an optimal focus group consist of five to eight participants and Bryman (2016) states that the minimal amount of participants should not be less than four and not more than ten. Regarding how many groups that should be conducted, expresses Bryman & Bell (2011) that just one group will not be enough.

Therefore, two focus groups were held in this research to create a wider range and variation amongst the material. The researchers also choose five participants in one of the focus groups and six participants in the other focus group, since more participants eliminate risks of that participants chooses to not show up (Bryman & Bell, 2011)

(23)

The composition of a group

Participants within a focus group should, according to Jacobsen (2002), have a required minimum of common experiences or criteria. This refers to whether the group should be considered homogeneous or heterogeneous. Regarding homogeneous groups the

participants are as alike as possible, since this will provide relatively common experiences for the participants. In this research, the common link between the participants were that they are all students, in their twenties whom are all active on social media. This often leads to an easier way to communicate within the group states Jacobsen (2002). A heterogeneous group on the other hand, refers to a group where all the participants have different experience and background. Groups of this type are, according to Jacobsen (2002), often more creative since they have different point of views. Due to this, it was important for the researchers to ensure that there were both similarities and differences amongst the participants, such as age, gender and study area.

Therefore, a mix of these groups were chosen, the participants were homogenous in some aspects but also heterogeneous in other aspects. In the figure below there are information about what makes the participants similar, which is their area of research such as their differences.

Figure 2.0 Participants summarize, self-generated.

(24)

The role of the researchers

Bryman & Bell (2011) states that the correct term for an interviewer is moderator.

Jacobsen (2002) discuss that moderators can maintain a passive or active role. A passive role means that the moderator is starting the discussion by presenting the theme, ask the questions when needed and listen to the discussion that occurs among the

participants.Within this research, one of the researchers had the role as a moderator meanwhile the other researcher had the role of reviewing the content and ensure that the questions were being answered. The other role a moderator could have is an active role.

In this approach the moderator asks specific and targeted questions and thereafter lets the discussion flow for a while until he/she asks a new question to be discussed, Jacobsen (2002). In this research the discussion flowed easier within one of the focus groups whereas the moderators could have a rather passive role. Meanwhile in the other focus group, the moderator needed to have a more active role and ask the questions more specific for the discussions to start.

Place for the focus groups

When creating a focus group it is, according to Jacobsen (2002), difficult to find a location that is a natural environment for all participants. Therefore the moderators should strive after choosing a neutral place, for example on a café or at an office where people tend to feel relaxed (Jacobsen, 2002). The focus group in this research were held at the University library in Växjö where a study room was booked in beforehand to make sure that the focus group would not get disrupted. It is according to Bryman &

Bell (2011) beneficial for the moderators to start the focus group discussion by welcome all participants and thank them for their time. Thereafter the theme should be presented along with a presentation of the estimated timescale, the reasons for recording the discussion and the main purpose of the research (Bryman & Bell, 2011). When all participants had gathered in the study room, the moderators welcomed all participants, thanked them for participating and gave an explanation of what would happen next.

Potential rules should also be presented before starting (Bryman & Bell, 2011). In this research, no rules were set however the moderators explained to the participants that they could speak freely and answer however they wanted to. The moderators did highlight the importance of asking for guidance if a question was not understandable.

(25)

What is trying to be brought to surface within the qualitative research approach is to keep the introduction as open as possible in order to close in on the actual information and results (Jacobsen, 2002). The introduction included a wide question for the

participant to think about for a few minutes in order to get their mind focused on the topic. Thereafter, the participants could focus on the relevant topic all the time during the focus groups. At the end, the moderators shall thank the participants and tell them what the collected material will be used for (Bryman & Bell, 2011), which the

moderators did and explained that they were grateful for the participants’ participation.

3.6 Interview guide

Before a focus group can be performed. the moderators have to decide whether to use themes or more detailed questions. By using a set of questions instead of themes it makes the focus group more structured, but that is not beneficial in every case and therefore does this need to be decided in beforehand (Bryman, 2016). In this research, the themes was presented for the participants in the beginning and then the moderators followed an interview guide to collect the material (see appendix 1).

The opening question to the focus groups should intend to make the participants relaxed and comfortable within the context (Bryman & Bell, 2011). The participants within this research sat down and had a post-it and pen in front of them, whereas the moderators started the whole focus groups with an opening question, which the participants could think freely about and write down their thoughts. The opening question was “How do you use social media and why?” This was asked in order to make the participants comfortable and familiar with the theme.

An interview guide contains a numerous of questions that can be constructed in different ways and depending on how the questions are phrased and in which format, the participants will answer differently (Bryman & Bell, 2011). There are two types of questions that can be asked, open or closed. Open questions gives the participants a chance to answer freely and closed questions comes with a set of alternatives for the participants to chose from (Bryman & Bell, 2011). In this research, open questions were used simply because the moderators wanted to start a discussion with each question and collect as much material as possible from each participant.

(26)

3.7 Sampling parameters

The sampling discussion can be rather complex since it includes a selection of people to conduct in the study. Within a qualitative research, non-probability sampling is mainly used, which includes a sampling method where some individuals have a greater chance of being selected (Bryman & Bell, 2016). Therefore, in this research, non-probability sampling was used since all participants had to be active on social media and therefore those individuals were more likely to be chosen. Snowball sampling is one method within non-probability sampling and is described as a method whereby small groups of people that have relevance to the research question is being selected and are asked to propose other individuals to also participate in the research (Bryman, 2016). In this research, Swedish users of social media were asked to participate and also bring people they knew whom would fit to that description. Furthermore, the sampling of this research was made with Swedish users of social media since 93 % of the Swedish population actively use Internet and social media every day and is therefore considered to be mature users of social media (Davidsson & Findahl, 2016). The whole point of snowball sampling is that the original group is supposed to suggest new participants, whom are further on asked to propose new participants. Jacobsen (2002) argues that the snowball approach is showing the flexibility that only exists within qualitative research methods. Since this is a qualitative research, snowball sampling was also chosen in order to stay flexible.

3.8 Recording of material

In order to collect and conduct everything being said during a focus group is it best to record the focus group (Bryman, 2016). Jacobsen (2002) argues that if the moderators want to understand the recorded content in the best possible way, it is necessary to listen to the tape over and over again. In the beginning of both focus groups the moderators asked if everybody were okay with the fact that the focus groups were going to be recorded and they all were. The moderators explained the purpose of the recording, that it would be easier for the moderators to analyze the material if they could listen to the discussions. It was also pointed out that the material would not be of public use and the

(27)

comments in the margin, easier chose quotes from participants and get a better overview of the content, according to Bryman (2016). The focus groups were held in Swedish and thereafter the researchers have translated the material into English for this research.

Therefore, the material have been transcribed to create a higher credibility regarding the empirical material but as mentioned before, the transcribed material will not be included in this research. However, to see the questions asked translated into Swedish, see

appendix 2.

3.9 The analysis process of qualitative collected material

When analyzing qualitative collected material there are, according to Jacobsen (2002), three main steps to keep in mind. The first one is description, the second one is

systematization and categorization and the third is combination. The first step,

description, handles that the researchers should try their best to provide a detailed and thorough description of the collected material (Jacobsen, 2002). In this research, the researchers recorded and transcribed the material in order to get a fair and detailed description of the collected material. The second step, systematization and

categorization aims to sift among the thick descriptions and create a more focused content that is easier to present (Jacobsen, 2002). The transcribed material is not

presented in this research since it is too heavy of information and does not highlight the most important aspects. Therefore, the researchers have narrowed the collected material so that it focuses on the relevant topic. The third and final step, combination, means that it is time to interpret the collected material. Here the researchers try to find the hidden messages and bring the results forward (Jacobsen, 2002). In the empirical collection chapter, needless information has been sifted and the material has been processed and interpreted by the researchers in order to present the most relevant information. In the qualitative context it is important to keep in mind that the order of these steps could be shifting and changed over time if necessary, according to Jacobsen (2002).

(28)

3.10 Criteria for evaluating qualitative research

Qualitative research focuses more on quality rather than quantity, which requires different criteria within the two research types, according to Bryman & Bell (2011).

Trustworthiness and authenticity are two mainly criterions for evaluating a qualitative research. Trustworthiness consists of four underlying criteria that are (1) credibility that includes aspects of ensuring that the research is performed in a good manner and analyzing the results according to the participants. The second (2) criteria of

trustworthiness is transferability which refers to the intensive of a smaller group and its depth whereby the third (3) criteria is dependability that ensures a correct recording of the information. The fourth (4) and last criteria is conformability that does not allow personal values of the researchers to bias the results (Bryman & Bell, 2011). In this research the researchers has taken ethical principles in consideration when recording, transcribing and analyze the material. The researchers did not let their personal values affect the research and they had an open mind listening to the discussions within the focus groups.

(29)

4.0 Empirical collection

The following chapter presents the empirical material that was collected through two focus groups where the questions came from the operationalization found in appendix 1.

As previous stated in the methodology chapter, eleven participants contributed to the empirical material. The structure of this following chapter consists of relevant context and quotes collected from the focus groups and follows the same structure as the literature rewiev chapter.

4.1 Trust

Half of the participants from the two focus groups explained that they know whom they are interacting with on social media and the other half stated that they do not know whom they are interacting with. The ones that did not know whom they are interacting with, explained that they usually continue to interact if they find the exchange of information valuable, interesting and easy to assimilate. They do however read the information or content carefully since they know that it is not always trustworthy

information. The reason to why they continue to read information is because they find it interesting how different sources of information can depict same times of events in different ways. In order to do so, they added that you have to believe in your own ability regarding what is true and what is probably not and after a while you have created awareness on how to do that more easily. However, they stop interacting if they find out that the information is incorrect or if someone spam with information that is not of value for the participants.

“The worst thing is when someone provide you with incorrect information and you know that it is not true, it is so tiring and makes me want to unfollow that person”

Participant 2

The other half of the group whom stated that they usually do know whom they are interacting with thereafter explained that it sometimes can happen that they do not who they are interactiong with, for example if they see something funny and want to share it with their friends but they would not interact with more personal information. This is

(30)

because what you do online can be seen by everyone and you have to stand for what you do and what you share since everyone online can see it.

Regarding personal information, the participants had depicting thoughts regarding what personal information is, one participant stated that all information that comes from him/her is personal whilst many others argued that it has to do with contact information and other private form of information. Some distinguished personal information as physical and psychological and that they would not share psychological information about themselves if they feel unhappy but physical information is not as sensitive to share. All participants however agreed on that they do not want to share personal information about themselves since you never know whom can interact with you. It is not the platform itself but the people within the platform whom could be menacing.

”No you are very cautious with your own integrity”

Participant 9

Despite this, the participants all agreed on that they try not to share too personal information online but that they do however share personal information in some extent within their social media networks. They also added that it depends on which form of social media, some platforms are more socially acceptable to share personal information on and some are not. The reason to why they do share personal information online is however because they want to brag and show people a positive side of themselves. They argue that social media allows users to promote themselves and that you would not want to show off a bad side of yourself, you would then rather not share anything at all. If this positive information about yourself is true or not does not really matter, it just has to seem flawless from other’s point of view.

Trust towards companies

The participants had different point of views regarding what they base their trust towards a company on. Some stated that the content has to be relevant within the specific context in order for them to gain trust towards the company. If the revealed content shows that it has a motive, you will as a consumer see that the company has a clear strategy and henceforth trust will arise between the parties.

(31)

The participants resemble it as a form of relationship between a company and

consumers, which creates positive associations towards the company. Another aspect that was discussed was that trust towards a company would increase significantly if you, as a consumer would feel comfortable working for the company yourself. This is

something that all participants argued for. According to the participants, this is because you then have something in common. All participants agreed on that if you do not have anything in common with the company, you would most likely not have a strong trust towards the company.

“You can not trust a company if you do not have anything in common”

Participant 8

Furthermore, it was argued that trust towards a company increases if you share the same values and opinions as the given company. The majority of the participants stated that when you share values, trust towards the company would automatically increase, whilst one participant argued that the company’s values are not of high importance. The argument for that was that it takes time to search for information regarding a company’s values and opinions. However, the participant included in the argument that if a

company opposed his/hers values, he/she would not make a purchase from that company. A majority of the participants also discussed that trust will arise if they feel connected to the company and the brand since it implies that you like the same things and share the same values. The participants also added that it shows that the company values more than just maximize their sale, which increases trust towards the company.

Beyond shared values and opinions did two participants mention that their trust towards a company is based on story-telling. They stated that they want more than just a

product; they want the story behind it as well. This builds a relationship with the

company that makes it easier for consumers to interact with the company. Therafter, the company can create values for the consumers that are aligned with the consumer’s values and opinions.

“You get more than just the product which creates a relationship with the company and you feel that you get something of value from the company”

Participant 2

(32)

All participants agreed on the effect of word-of-mouth and that a lot of the trust towards a company comes from other individuals whom are sharing their personal opinions about the company. Along with that, the individual whom is sharing something about a company online, needs to be reliable in order for the trust to occur. If this happens, companies will easily gain trust amongst consumers.

Information from the company’s own website does not increase trust since almost everything there available is positive and therefore not trustworthy, according to one participant. However, reliable influencers can help companies increase their trust since they are considered to have knowledge about the given area and therefore ensure that the product or company is trustworthy.

“I need to know people that has purchased something there before and are satisfied”

Participant 10

If you are close to and know the person whom is recommending a product, trust towards the company will more easily arise, according to one participant. The further away the person whom is recommending the product is, the harder it gets for the company to gain trust. Another participant adds that it is easier to arise trust towards a company if other within your own network has interacted with the company and the more people within the network that have done it, the better.

If you buy a product from a company and does not get satisfied, you will not go back since your dissatisfaction decreased the trust towards that company, according to one participant. The other participants explained further that they would not recommend a product if themselves have experienced a negative event at the given company. The participants also stated that they would also contact the company and inform customer service about their dissatisfaction and depending on how upset they are, they would also inform other consumers about this event or product so that they will not have to

experience the same. All participants claimed that they could contribute to a negative word-of-mouth if they are unsatisfied but that they however would never share incorrect information. One participant confessed however that he/she could distort the truth if

(33)

he/she is really upset in order to prove a point. Another participant explained that he/she tries not to engage in negativity online since it seldom generates something of value.

Advertising experiments

Regarding advertising experiments and being involved without knowing it, had depicted opinions. Approximately half of the participants defended that it was an effective way to market a company and at the same time prove a point. The other half argued against it and claimed that it harms the trust towards the company and that you, as a consumer, feel betrayed.

Therefore, they conceded that companies can use another, less damaging strategy to prove the same kind of message by admitting that it is an experiment but not what kind or with what company for example, so that consumers know what they are getting themselves into without feeling betrayed.

“I believe that you can generate the same message in a different way without damaging the trust at all”

Participant 9

Half of the participants that disliked advertising experiments did however express that if it does not harm anyone, it is acceptable but that it does affect the trust towards that company. Another participant added that it could harm trust towards a third party if they did not detect it either, such as experts within the area.

4.2 Content generation

A majority of the participants explained that they use social media to get inspiration and to communicate with other, which enables their information searching process. This is because communicating with others inspires them and therefore they base their

information searching process on what has inspired them. They all agreed on that their information searching process is based on their connections within their own social network and whom they have integrated with since it is visible for them and they can therefore search for the same thing and by that discover new forms of information they would never have found on their own.

(34)

Some of the participants mentioned that they get reminded by their previously

information searching process and that it affects what they search for and can therefore miss out on new information. One participant stated that he/she base his/hers searching process on how to get valuable content by using advanced searching methods such as filtering for example. By using these filter functions, the system can help to sort the information online so that it matches with your searching criteria. All participants claimed further that it is a good idea to help other’s information searching process online by provide useful information to them. However, the participants confessed that it would take a lot of effort to do it themselves.

“My aim is not to improve someone else’s searching process”

Participant 2

Even though all participants said that they interact with other consumers on social media some explained that it is because they want to brag with their knowledge about something or because they are a part of a loyalty program where they get rewarded when interacting or helping other consumers. They added that when they do this, it is because of the wrong reasons and it therefore affects the trustworthiness of the content.

However, a majority of the participants claimed that they would support other consumers if they were unsatisfied with something because they wanted to help and prevent others from the same bad experience. In order for this to work, the information has to be trustworthy and come from a reliable source.

”It has to be a reliable source behind the information that is being delivered”

Participant 6

It does not have to be a person whom delivers the information but companies,

corporations and other sources can stand behind the information as well. It is important that a trustworthy source is behind the information in order for it to be reliable.

However, almost all participants stated that it does not matter when the information is being delivered to them since they receive information from all around the world and that we have different time zones that makes it difficult for the time to matter. One

(35)

something, such as a critical event. He/she then argued that information that is being delivered close to the event is less reliable since it has probably not been confirmed to be true that close to the event.

4.3 Interactions

Within this area of interactions on social media the opinions were divided but the common link was that all participants, in some extent, interacted with others but with different purposes. Some did it to boost others and some did it to make themselves feel good. On a daily basis, all participants of the focus groups interacted on social media, mostly several times per day.

“I interact when I want to brag about something, share information about things I have knowledge about”

Participant 1

Some of the participants claimed that they mostly interact with people they know very well, whom they have a shared interest with and therefore honestly want to like or comment their posts. Two of the participants stated that it is important for them to have things in common in order to interact with each other. Another participant claimed that he/she do not aim to make friends through interactions on social media, he/she already has a group of friends and integrate only with them. A couple of the participants although thought it is important to interact regarding giving honest reviews on public forums, but that it is anonymous and aims to just help others in their purchasing decisions. Further one participant stated that the he/she likes posts on social media because that is what you do nowadays.

“If I like something on social media I do not do it to show my friends, I do it to show the company that I am satisfied with them”

Participant 10

A majority of the participants agreed on that social media is a good way to

communicate with companies. If the participants are pleased with, for example a visit at a restaurant, they do not hesitate to share these positive thoughts on the social media

References

Related documents

Regarding reluctant consumers, a deviation from Norton’s definition (2015) is noticeable. Norton points out that reluctant users are gradually getting more open

Taking basis in the fact that the studied town district is an already working and well-functioning organisation, and that the lack of financial resources should not be

question cannot stand alone,” and that it is important to also study consumers’ consumption from affective and cognitive processes (‘how’), consumption behaviours

The aim of the thesis is to examine user values and perspectives of representatives of the Mojeño indigenous people regarding their territory and how these are

Regarding the questions whether the respondents experience advertising as something forced or  disturbing online, one can examine that the respondents do experience advertising

When asked to define PR events, participant C answers with no hesitation that it is an aspect of the marketing strategy. “PR events, PR along with advertising along with

Facebook, business model, SNS, relationship, firm, data, monetization, revenue stream, SNS, social media, consumer, perception, behavior, response, business, ethics, ethical,

When Stora Enso analyzed the success factors and what makes employees "long-term healthy" - in contrast to long-term sick - they found that it was all about having a