The Impact of the
Invite-Only Strategy on Initial
User Adoption
An Exploratory Investigation of Social Networking Mobile
Applications
MASTER DEGREE PROJECT THESIS WITHIN: Business Administration NUMBER OF CREDITS: 30
PROGRAMME OF STUDY: Digital Business AUTHORs: Ronja Schoenberger & Stefanie Seeburger JÖNKÖPING May 2021
Master Thesis in Business Administration
Title: The Impact of Invite-Only on the Initial User Adoption – An Exploratory Investigation of Social Networking Mobile Applications.
Authors: Ronja Schoenberger & Stefanie Seeburger Tutor: Henry Nelson Lopez Vega
Date: 2021-05-24
Key terms: Invite-Only, App Adoption, Closed Social Networks, Artificial Scarcity, Technology Adoption, User Motivation, Initial App Adoption, Social Networking Mobile Applications
Abstract
Background: Social networking mobile applications are designed to socially connect
users among each other to consume but also to produce content. Especially because these apps represent a high potential to acquire revenue streams through advertisements, but also to gain customer insights, companies are interested in entering this market by creating new social networking apps. However, switching costs for users are high due to the varied user base of established social networking apps. Accordingly, marketing strategies need to be created to enter the market to target users’ interests. One concept to do so is distributing invitations for the social networking app that can be shared among users. The invite-only strategy has been successfully used to establish themselves in the market by for example Facebook, but also recently with the social networking app Clubhouse. To apply it effectively the motivators of the users to initially adopt invite-only social networking apps are important to understand.
Purpose: The purpose of this study is to generate an in-depth understanding of the
motivators that foster the initial user adoption of social networking mobile apps based on the invite-only strategy. To investigate the motivators, it is crucial for this study to gain knowledge from the user perspective. In that case, we will contribute our derived knowledge to the theory of technology acceptance, scarcity in digital marketing, and virtual social networking apps.
Research Question: Why do users initially adopt social networking mobile applications
using an invite-only strategy?
Method: Ontology – Relativism; Epistemology – Social Constructionism; Approach –
Inductive; Data Collection – 14 Semi-Structured In-Depth Interviews; Sampling – Purposive, Convenience, Snowball; Data Analysis – Grounded Analysis
Conclusion: As a result, a framework was derived depicting the main motivators for users
to initially adopt invite-only social networking apps. Through our empirical data, we found out that Artificial Scarcity, Closed Network, and Social Influence motivate users to initially adopt invite-only social networking apps. Additionally, Contributing Factors were identified to influence the initial adoption, although they are not directly influenced by the invite-only strategy. The framework further describes the interrelations between the identified sub-categories affecting the initial adoption. We conclude that the main motivators are desire- and fear-driven. The framework can be used by marketers to design invite-only strategies more effectively and consistently to attract a large group of initial users and establish themselves in the market.
Table of Contents
1
Introduction ... 1
1.1 Background ... 1
1.2 Problem Statement ... 3
1.3 Research Purpose and Research Question ... 4
1.4 Outline ... 5
2
Literature Review ... 6
2.1 Literature Review Procedure ... 6
2.2 Technology Acceptance ... 7
2.2.1 Technology Adoption Models ... 7
2.2.2 Technology Adoption Phase ... 8
2.2.3 Initial Phase of Adoption ... 9
2.3 Scarcity in Digital Marketing ... 11
2.3.1 Product Scarcity in Marketing ... 11
2.3.2 Artificial Scarcity of Digital Resources ... 12
2.3.3 Artificial Scarcity Through Invite-only... 14
2.4 Virtual Social Networking Apps ... 16
2.4.1 Social Networking Background ... 16
2.4.2 Social Networking Mobile Applications ... 17
2.4.3 Fear of Missing Out (FoMO) ... 19
2.4.4 Closed Social Networks ... 20
2.5 Connection of the Literature Topics ... 22
3
Methodology ... 24
3.1 Research Philosophy ... 24 3.2 Research Approach ... 25 3.3 Research Design ... 26 3.4 Data Collection ... 27 3.4.1 Sample Composition ... 27 3.4.2 Interview Design ... 29 3.5 Data Analysis ... 31 3.5.1 Grounded Analysis ... 313.5.2 Grounded Analysis Procedure ... 32
3.6 Research Quality ... 35
3.7 Ethical Implication... 38
4
Empirical Findings and Analysis ... 41
4.1 Artificial Scarcity ... 44
4.1.1 Desire for the Invitation ... 44
4.1.2 Limitation of Invitation ... 46 4.2 Closed Networks ... 49 4.2.1 Perceived Exclusivity ... 49 4.2.2 Community Perception ... 51 4.3 Social Influence ... 53 4.3.1 Impact by Others ... 53
4.3.2 Fear of Missing Out ... 56
4.4.2 Sources of Attention ... 58
4.4.3 Perception of Companies ... 59
4.4.4 Covid-19 Pandemic ... 59
4.5 Invite-Only Social Networking App Initial Adoption Framework ... 60
5
Conclusion ... 65
6
Discussion... 66
6.1 Technology Acceptance ... 67
6.2 Virtual Social Networking Apps ... 68
6.3 Scarcity in Digital Marketing ... 70
6.4 Practical Implications ... 71
6.5 Social Implications ... 72
6.6 Limitations ... 74
7
Future Research Directions ... 76
8
References ... 78
9
Appendix ... 87
9.1 Interview Guide ... 87
9.2 Coding Overview ... 91
List of Tables
Table 1: Participant Overview ... 29
Table 2: Excerpt of the Coding Process (full table in appendix 9.2). ... 34
List of Figures
Figure 1: Proposed Trial-to-Adoption Process... 10Figure 2: Illustration of the Research Gap (own elaboration). ... 23
Figure 3: Overview of the Emerging Categories (own elaboration). ... 35
Figure 4: Coding Tree (own elaboration) ... 42
Figure 5: Invite-Only Social Networking App Initial Adoption Framework (own elaboration). ... 61
Figure 6: Illustration of the Research Gap (own elaboration). ... 66
List of Abbreviations
App = Application
FoMO = Fear of Missing Out
MGC = Marketer-generated content SNS = Social Networking Sites
TAM = Technology Acceptance Model
UTAUT = Unified Theory of Technology Acceptance VPSN = Virtual Private Social Network
Definitions
To give a brief overview, we will define the most important concepts, that will be repeatedly used throughout this study. The definitions will be discussed and derived in the literature review but are outlined here to create a consistent understanding for the reader.
Invite-only:
Invite-only is stated as a strategy that aims at an increase of the desirability to access a certain product or service by restricting access to a limited group of people by requiring an invitation for access (Isaac, 2021).
Social Networking Apps:
Social Networking Apps are one form of Social Media which are defined as applications that allow individuals to socially interact, consume, but also produce any user-generated content that is published (Conti, Hasani, & Crispo, 2013). Examples are Facebook, Instagram, or WhatsApp (Abril, 2007; Kemp, 2021).
Initial Adoption:
The Initial Adoption defines the pre-stage before the actual adoption/rejection of new technology occurs. If the initial phase is evaluated positive, adoption occurs in the long run (Antil, 1988).
Artificial Scarcity:
Artificial Scarcity is defined as the scarcity of digital goods that due to the digital occurrence needs to be artificially created by excluding others. Hence, it refers to technical designs within the software to limit or even restrict the core functions for the usage (Sullivan, 2016).
1 Introduction
__________________________________________________ ___________________
The purpose of this part is to introduce the reader to the social networking mobile application landscape and the particularities of the invite-only strategy. Furthermore, the purpose of this thesis is derived, and the research question that will guide this study is introduced.
1.1 Background
Smartphones and other portable devices have become part of everyday life of most people today. Worldwide, around 3.6 billion users, around half of the population, have already adopted smartphones (Gu, 2020). One regular activity of smartphone users is the usage of social networking mobile applications (apps) (Kemp, 2021). Social networks are a form of social media that focuses on connecting users (Kuss & Griffiths, 2017). Previously, social networking sites (SNS) were mostly used through web-browsers on computers or laptops, but with the rise of smartphones and other portable devices, nowadays the predominant use happens on apps. In fact, over 90% of users access previous SNS through mobile devices (Mohsin, 2021).
Some of the biggest companies in the world that operate social networking apps are Facebook, being the most dominant one, followed by WhatsApp, and Instagram (Kemp, 2021). Companies use social media as a digital tool to acquire potential customers but also to target advertisement placement (Saravanakumar & SuganthaLakshmi, 2012). The introduction of for example LinkedIn, Snapchat, or Tiktok added other social networking apps to the portfolio of the user. However, these are only a few compared to all the social networking apps trying to establish themselves on the market. Most new social networking apps are created by unknown smaller businesses, that do not have an established reputation (Arora et al., 2017). In Germany, it was found that on average users obtain six social media accounts. However, it is evaluated that users perform on different social media platforms for different purposes for example get informed about current events and news or simply sharing photos. While the average time spent using the internet shows 5 hours and 26 minutes each day, time spent on social media refers to 1 hour 24
minutes (Kemp, 2021), therefore, users eventually reach a limit to use all platforms simultaneously. In such instances, the predominant platforms such as Facebook, Instagram, and WhatsApp established high switching costs as users have already created a social network on these apps. This increases the barrier to make users switch to another social networking app (Kemp, 2021). Therefore, new app entrants need a convincing strategy to enter the social networking market to succeed. While for businesses a critical mass needs to be reached to make a social network run characterized by the network effect (Katz & Shapiro, 1994), users value people they can associate with (Sledgianowski & Kulviwat, 2009). Besides the low awareness of new social networking apps, the main reason for users to be hesitant about a new app is the high uncertainty about the quality and the fit of the app (Arora et al., 2017).
In January 2021, the second most downloaded app from the App Store in Germany was Clubhouse, an invite-only social networking app (Airnow, 2021). The invite-only strategy was not new but showed similar success as seen during the introduction of Facebook.com and Google Gmail (Macke, 2020). When Facebook launched in 2004 as one of the first social networks, it started in a closed setting where users could only join through an invitation, like Google Gmail. To illustrate, today’s examples for this kind of market entry are the dating app Raya with its launch in 2015 (Macke, 2020), Ello an ad-free social networking app with a launch in 2014 (Herbison, 2014; Newcomb, 2014), and Clubhouse with the launch in September 2020. For the German market, only Clubhouse is predominant. The download rate of Clubhouse has doubled from one million to over two million downloads within two weeks (Michaeli, 2021; Isaac, 2021). Even though access was limited by an invitation, Clubhouse entered the social networking app market with a tremendous growth rate which attracted even celebrities like Tesla CEO Elon Musk or Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg to participate (Gilbert, 2021; Bursztynsky, 2021).
1.2 Problem Statement
As established social networking apps are based on a varied and large user bases, the switching costs for users are quite high. This is the case because they already created their own social networks. Therefore, to counteract the mentioned high switching costs of the social networking app landscape, new ways of user attraction need to be found to enter the social networking app market. Especially since mobile apps refer to be digital goods designed to increase value depending on the user rate, called network effect. Therefore, a high user number increases the apps’ value, thus, the switching costs are high for users to change (Schwartz, 2017; Jetha et al., 2017).
Entering the social networking app market and sustaining a large user base is crucial as it offers high possibilities for marketers to obtain advertisement revenue and customer data insights. To illustrate, the advertisement revenue derived from social media within Germany was about 1.7 BN USD in 2020 (Statista, 2021). Further on, Facebook acquired a quarterly advertisement revenue of more than 7 BN USD within Q4 of 2020 in Europe (Facebook, 2021). The invite-only strategy has been proven to have a positive impact for companies like Facebook and Google, which entered the market using this strategy
(Evans & Schmalensee, 2010; Tatlow, 2017). Facebook is still ranked the most used social network worldwide (Kemp, 2021; Mohsin, 2021). Thus, this strategy with invite-only access to a social networking app presents a method to attract potential users and can be referred to as the concept of product scarcity in marketing where the value of a product increases because of its limited availability (Lynn, 1991). However, with the digital app environment, scarcity gains another importance as the limitation is rather artificial due to the digital occurrence of resources.
To foster the problem statement, research has generally been limited concerning product scarcity in digital marketing (Shi et al., 2020; Schwartz, 2017) and virtual social networking apps (Choi & Lee, 2017). It was argued that it is important to understand the specific motivators of scarcity marketing techniques, which are mostly reducing supply that results in scarce goods (Shi et al., 2020). However, especially digital goods represent a challenge in terms of scarcity due to the nature of being intangible, rival, non-excludable, and recombinant resources (Schwartz, 2017; Jetha et al., 2017; Nylén, 2015). This results in an artificially created scarcity, defined as:
“(...) technical restrictions purposefully designed into software structures that hinder or
otherwise degrade the core functionality of the software (...)” (Sullivan, 2016, p.72).
In relevance of digital goods, one needs to be aware that they are designed differently and therefore have different effects on the consumer. Concerning social networking apps as one type of digital goods, the production of a limited quantity is not possible, so developers must find other measures to simulate a product scarcity in this case, or only for specific operating systems. In that case, following the invite-only can be one way to implement the product scarcity to foster new ways to counteract the predominant player of the social networking app market. Hence, it is defined as a strategy that aims at increasing the desirability to access a certain product or service by restricting access to a limited group of people (Isaac, 2021). However, to execute this strategy successfully, marketers need to understand the driving motivators to apply this strategy appropriately to be able to access the social networking landscape to acquire potential user data, and thus higher revenue chances. Especially, the initial phase for adoption is crucial since that is where the attitude is shaped towards adoption in the long run (Antil, 1988).
1.3 Research Purpose and Research Question
This study aims at generating an in-depth understanding of the motivators that foster the initial user adoption of social networking mobile apps based on the invite-only strategy. To investigate the motivators, it is crucial for this study to gain knowledge from the user perspective. In that case, we will contribute our derived knowledge to the theory of technology acceptance, scarcity in digital marketing, and virtual social networking apps. Furthermore, we deem to establish a framework to describe the motivators that influence the initial adoption of social networking apps using an invite-only strategy. To follow this purpose, we propose the following research question guiding our study:
RQ: Why do users initially adopt social networking mobile applications using an invite-only strategy?
1.4 Outline
To give the reader guidance, we will briefly give an outline of the structure of our study. To begin with, the following Chapter 2, Literature Review, will highlight the theoretical background within the fields of technology acceptance with a focus on the initial phase of adoption. Followed by product scarcity in digital marketing and virtual social networking apps, emphasizing the peculiarities of closed social networks, we then incorporate these three fields to outline our research gap. We are going to close this gap through this study by investigating why users initially adopt social networking apps using an invite-only strategy. Further on, Chapter 3, Methodology, outlines the methodological framework this study follows while further pointing out the data collection and analysis procedure complemented by the quality and ethical research assurances. Followed by Chapter 4, Empirical Findings and Analysis, we present the influences why users initially adopt invite-only social networking apps based on our findings and also propose our established framework. By that means, we will also link our findings of the specific influences on the initial adoption by assessing the predominant motivators. After giving a short summary of the study within Chapter 5, Conclusion, we will further incorporate our derived knowledge into the existing theories within Chapter 6, Discussion, by highlighting how we contribute and challenge the existing theories, thus also stating our theoretical and practical implications, and also social ethical implications. Finally, our study will be concluded by Chapter 7, future research directions.
2 Literature Review
______________________________________________________________________
The purpose of this chapter is to introduce the field of technology acceptance to understand the general motivations for users to adopt technology. Furthermore, the invite-only strategy as part of product scarcity marketing is discussed. Lastly, closed social networks will be reviewed to set the stage for the following research.
2.1 Literature Review Procedure
To identify relevant literature for this study, various topics within the literature had to be considered and reviewed. Furthermore, if already existing, the connections between the topics were relevant for the conduction of our literature review. In the beginning, we identified that there is very limited literature on the specific concept of the invite-only strategy, which is why we mainly focused on the related topics of app adoption, product scarcity in marketing, including the artificial scarcity for digital goods, and closed social networks.
To start a systematic approach of the literature review, the databases of Web of Science, Primo, and Google Scholar were used to find peer-reviewed articles that are most relevant to our search and state of the art within our research topic. To identify scientific literature search terms including “Technology Acceptance”, “Mobile Application Adoption”, “Closed Social Networks”, “Commodity Theory”, “Digital Scarcity” and “Product Scarcity Marketing” were used, as well as combinations of these. This was an iterative process, as we started reading journals and identified further topics of interest or relevant search terms. Also, we looked for specific sources of relevant journals within articles if they brought scientific insights into the topic of interest and to identify articles that were considered most relevant by other scholars.
To avoid missing out on relevant concepts within the literature, we started a broad literature review. From there we narrowed down to map correlated fields that are relevant for our study and identify the scholars considered most relevant in the state-of-the-art literature. Furthermore, to assure a high quality of our study, we also checked the journals for their score in the Academic Journal Guide and made sure the majority of the included
journals were ranked 3-4*. In the Academic Journal Guide journals are rated from 1-4* with 4* being the highest ranking given to journals of distinction.
2.2 Technology Acceptance
Companies are constantly under pressure to innovate to maintain a competitive advantage within the digital era, meaning creating something new is indispensable. Hence, the usage of information systems is essential to be built upon for such a digital innovation (Ciriello, Richter, & Schwabe, 2018; Nambisan et al., 2017). While some new products turn out to be successful, others do not (Antil, 1988). To get an understanding of why failures occur, one needs to obtain knowledge about the users’ attitude towards new products and adoption (Antil, 1988). Therefore, this chapter will outline the technology adoption with implications on the users’ motivations to initially adopt.
To begin with, we present the literature on technology adoption models that are predominantly used in mobile app adoption research. To serve the purpose of the invite-only app we then assess the individual phases of technology adoption. Lastly, we will discuss the impact of the initial adoption, which refers to technology acceptance, in more detail and set the frame for our research.
2.2.1 Technology Adoption Models
There is a variety of literature concerning mobile app adoption, as especially in the case of social networking apps the download and continuous usage of the app are the drivers of revenue stream. This form of adoption is depicted in technology adoption models that are currently predominantly used in mobile app adoption research. In the following paragraphs, we will discuss two of these models, namely the Technology Acceptance Model (TAM) and the Unified Theory of Acceptance and Use of Technology (UTAUT). The traditional Technology Acceptance Model (TAM) by Davis (1989) stresses the technology-oriented theory with perceived usefulness and perceived ease of use as key determinants to influence the intention to use a technology. This influences the actual adoption of technology. However, focusing on only two key determinants for the technology acceptance only explains a limited range of contexts, situations, and
technologies (Bagozzi, 2007). Although the model is quite old, it is still widely used. Current researchers used the TAM model to investigate the significant antecedents of technology acceptance (Al-Emran et al., 2018; Rafique et al., 2020; Salloum et al., 2019). The Unified Theory of Acceptance and Use of Technology (UTAUT) model by Venkatesh et al. (2003) defines determinants as social influence, facilitating conditions, performance, and effort expectancy. However, this model started to stress the impact of the usage of an IT system, more precisely the performance and ease of use during the interaction. This UTAUT model is also highly relevant for current research, as it is an essential model to investigate the technology adoption and the specific antecedents (Chao, 2019; Hoque & Sorwar, 2017; Al-Saedi et al., 2020).
While the just mentioned adoption models are essential to explain technology adoption, they lack the general contextual adaption. To clarify, while the TAM limits the key determinants for adoption by adjusting only two determinants, the UTAUT model stresses the actual system use. Overall, the models are focusing on the adoption impacted by the usage once the app was downloaded. The purpose of invite-only, however, is to bring potential adopters into the app and does not primarily impact the actual usage in terms of technology. Therefore, we will now discuss the different phases of adoption to evaluate where invite-only is situated in the process. However, it is important to be aware of the technology adoption models to detect differences and similarities affecting the user’s decision to adopt.
2.2.2 Technology Adoption Phase
In most cases, technology adoption is accompanied by a form of technological innovation that is presented to the potential users. In the following paragraphs, we will discuss the innovation adoption phases in more detail to generate an understanding of where the invite-only strategy is situated.
Innovation Adoption is widely discussed in the literature. Rogers (2003) who advocates the innovation-decision process cites innovation adoption as:
Hence, innovation is stated as a project, idea, or practice that is perceived as something new by the potential adopter, however, it is set equal to technology (Rogers, 2003). While studying the technology adoption literature, it becomes apparent that it is discussed ambivalently (Antil, 1988; Rogers, 2003). To clarify, indeed, adoption/rejection is discussed at the final stage, however, to draw the line where adoption derives, some authors define adoption as the first purchase/trial (Rogers, 2003). However, others define this stage as trial whereas adoption results when the product evaluation turns out positive. In that case, adoption refers to behavioral and psychological commitment for continuous-/re-usage (Antil, 1988). To discuss, (Antil, 1988) argues that adoption setting equal to the first purchase or trial is critical as the consumer decision-making process can be misled, since not all users purchasing/using are directly adopting the new product. Therefore, Antil (1988) argues that adoption does not refer to the initial purchase or trial, rather it refers to a commitment over time that fosters a re-use/-purchase. In that case, the initial phase for adoption is the major phase where the evaluation for adoption is created or rejected to adopt/reject a new product (Antil, 1988).
2.2.3 Initial Phase of Adoption
As mentioned previously, the initial phase precedes the technology adoption before adoption occurs. To clarify, the five stages innovation-decision process by Rogers (2003) highlights the distinction of the initiation phase and implementation phase to aim for adoption or rejection (Ramdani & Kawalek, 2007; Lafreniere et al., 2011). Thus, the initiation phase stresses actions to shape the decision for adoption, while implementation refers to the usage. With that process Rogers (2003) points out where information searches and processing foster the motivation for the individual to reduce any uncertainty about the innovation while outweighing the advantages and disadvantages of the innovation. Facing the initiation, the pre-adoption steps are crucial since that is where the attitude is formed, and the decision is made. To clarify, (1) knowledge is the first process step where the awareness about the innovation is raised whereas information access is key to nurture the attitude towards adoption. Followed by the (2) persuasion stage, the cognitive attraction through the awareness becomes affectively shaped where individuals create a sensitive attitude whether it is favorable or not. While the awareness is more
thus, the individuals’ feelings and beliefs become essential. Subsequently, the (3) decision stage is where the individual decides whether to adopt or reject the innovation. A decision becomes more likely to be favorable if a trial is included as individuals first want to try it before adopting/rejecting it (Rogers, 2003). While Rogers (2003) implies behavioral commitment as adoption, Antil (1988) states that behavioral as well as psychological commitment will lead to adoption. Therefore, the product evaluation after the first purchase/trial is an essential step within the initial phase before adoption; more precisely the consequence of the product experience will be confirmed to prior expectations and shape the psychological commitment that will be either rejected or adopted within the confirmation step as illustrated in figure 1. The concept by Antil (1988) is still important today as it has been mentioned in recent research papers (Abayomi, et al., 2019; Pan & Tao, 2011).
To conclude, the initial phase before adoption is indispensable where the attitude towards technology is shaped. While Rogers (2003) and Antil (1988) both agree on the importance of the initiation within the adoption process, Antil (1988) incorporates two process steps, mainly consequences, and confirmation, since he argues that behavioral as well as psychological commitment leads to adoption. On the contrary, Rogers (2003) lacks the psychological view while just focusing on the behavior.
For this study, we will not build upon this process and distinguish the different phases. The framework is used to create a deeper understanding to identify the driving motivators that emerge within the initial phase of adoption introduced by Antil (1988) as seen in figure 1.
Figure 1: Proposed Trial-to-Adoption Process
Note. Adapted from “New product or service adoption: When does it happen?”. J.H. Antil, 1988, The Journal of Consumer Marketing, 5(2), p.9 (https://doi.org/10.1108/eb008221).
2.3 Scarcity in Digital Marketing
To encourage the initial adoption of digital technologies, and products in general, marketing strategies are used to persuade the user to adopt an app. In the case of mobile apps, these marketing strategies can be even more important as most new apps are created by unknown smaller businesses that have not established a reputation yet (Arora et al., 2017). Therefore, besides low awareness, potential users have high levels of uncertainty about the quality of the new app, making them more hesitant to adopt (Arora et al., 2017). Thus, companies utilize marketing strategies when launching new apps to create awareness and reduce customer uncertainty (Arora et al., 2017). The invite-only strategy is based on the concept of product scarcity, which is a commonly used practice in product marketing. Therefore, in the next chapter, product scarcity in marketing, and the underlying concept of commodity theory will be elaborated.
2.3.1 Product Scarcity in Marketing
The concept of using product scarcity in marketing is based on the Commodity Theory that was introduced by Brock in 1968. In commodity theory, the psychological effect of scarcity is evaluated. More precisely, the impact factor of scarcity on the value of a commodity is pointed out. In this context, a commodity is defined as something useful, like messages, objects, or experiences. Whereas value described the perceived utility or desirability created for the receiver. Essentially, the theory describes that any unavailable commodity will increase in value. (Brock & Brannon, 1992)
In 1991, Lynn introduced commodity theory into the field of marketing research (Lynn, 1991). Although product scarcity was already widely used in various terms like “limited to one per customer”, “this is the last one”, and “limited release”, Lynn (1991) used a quantitative review to bridge the gap between existing marketing literature and Brock’s Commodity Theory. First, Lynn (1991) identified that all marketable goods and services can be considered commodities as they meet the criteria to have utility to a person, are transferable, and can be possessed. Second, the concept of value is also transferable to marketing as marketers are mainly interested in increasing the desirability of their products and services, so the influence of scarcity on value creates a relevant goal for marketers (Lynn, 1991). Lastly, Lynn (1991) transferred the concept of unavailability to
sizes, or exclusive distribution outlets. The introduction to marketing is mainly based on the implication in Brock’s commodity theory that suggests that the possession of scarce commodities can be more desirable and convey a feeling of uniqueness or distinctiveness (Lynn, 1991). To analyze the applicability for marketing the author re-evaluated conducted quantitative studies concerning commodity theory and focused on economic commodities and the importance of value (Lynn, 1991). There was strong evidence suggesting that the marketers can “increase the perceived value of products, services, and
promotions by manipulating the perceived scarcity of those products, services, and promotions” (Lynn, 1991, p. 52). Another correlation Lynn (1991) identified was that
consumers with a greater need for uniqueness are more affected by scarcity tactics. The literature on product scarcity in marketing has not been much further elaborated. Shi et al. (2020) identified that literature about product scarcity in marketing requires further attention to distinguish between the different types of scarcity and to transfer the knowledge into the digital world. One example they are using is the Single’s Day promotion introduced by online retailer Alibaba, which is considered a time-limited promotional scarcity, which indicates the relevancy of scarcity also for the digital marketing context (Shi, Li, & Chumnumpan, 2020). Additionally, Shi et al. (2020) require a specific understanding of the underlying motivations of consumers concerning different product scarcity methods.
2.3.2 Artificial Scarcity of Digital Resources
After outlining product scarcity in marketing, we will now distinguish the scarcity of digital goods. Generally, digital goods are defined as intangible and non-excludable meaning that the exclusion from consuming is impossible without any purposeful barrier (Rayna, 2008; Toledano, 2018; Schwartz, 2017). Further, digital goods are non-rival and recombinant. In other words, digital goods do not inhibit the consumption by others while facilitating recombination in several ways (Raya, 2008; Nylén, 2015).
Prior to the digital era, the analog world was dominated by physical goods that were being characterized by rival resources. With the transition to the digital world, the transformation of digital artifacts was fostered, thus, being defined as intangible, non-excludable, non-rivalrous, and recombinant by its nature (Toledano, 2018; Schwartz,
2017). Due to the limitless re-production, consuming digital goods is stated as neither declining the utilization nor inhibiting others during the usage. As an example, consuming music as a form of digital media does not inhibit the enjoyment of others as it is accessible for everyone simultaneously (Sullivan, 2016; Schwartz, 2017). Nevertheless, it raises concerns about intellectual property rights as the internet enables the unlimited reproduction of digital goods, such as digital distribution and storage (Toledano, 2018; Harper, 2009). In fact, through the rise of digital media, software became ubiquitous which is an essential intermediate between end-users and the content that enables users to access media content independently whether it is being run on a mobile phone, desktop computer, or another portable device. Due to the open architecture of the digital environment, access to information became simpler compared to the analog world (Sullivan, 2016). By that means, the reproduction costs for consumption are nearly zero due to the digital nature. However, the initial production costs remain for producing digital media content. In that case, scarcity as a form of barrier gains importance to justify the ease of re-production as the digital occurrence is highly replicable by nature (Schwartz, 2017).
Controversially, digital goods also represent a challenge in terms of scarcity. It is argued that digital goods are beyond non-rival resources. In other words, it is discussed that the circulation even increases value due to the so-called network effect. That means the value increases depending on the user rate whereas switching costs are created. Hence, the importance of open access is pointed out (Schwartz, 2017; Jetha et al., 2017). Nevertheless, fully open access concerns the intellectual property of the owner, thus restrictions are justified (O’Dwyer, 2020; Toledano, 2018). By that means, the creation of an artificial scarcity enables digital media distribution to a limited extent. To clarify, artificial scarcity is understood as:
“(...) technical restrictions purposefully designed into software structures that hinder or
otherwise degrade the core functionality of the software (...)” (Sullivan, 2016, p.72).
In such instances, artificial scarcity can be established by either the government, software developers, or any other corporation (Sullivan, 2016). Implementing barriers to aim at scarcity can be achieved by restricting access through regulating the production, the establishment of a centralized control instance, or the facilitation of copyright which means juridically exclusion of others (O’Dwyer, 2020). Besides, applying subscription
models, or other payment walls support an artificially created scarcity (Sullivan, 2016). To clarify, the streaming platform Netflix utilizes a paid subscription model to permit the usage to ensure scarcity to protect any copyrights. However, also a freemium approach that aims at maximizing the user base is another method referred to as scarcity as users can limitedly use the app for free, however, essential functionalities are excluded. Thus, only after upgrading for example through any payment system, the full range of functionalities can be applied (Sullivan, 2016).
All in all, considering the ubiquitous digital era, artificial scarcity is an essential topic to overcome digital abundance by limiting access (Toledano, 2018). To justify the relevance, the above-mentioned literature discusses artificial digital scarcity from the perspective of the owner, meaning how to exclude others from consuming digital resources and protecting them. However, the literature lacks to conceptualize the meaning of digital scarcity from the marketing perspective. More precisely, the effects of artificial scarcity from a users’ perspective. Thus, we will elaborate on the digital marketing side based on the invite-only strategy.
2.3.3 Artificial Scarcity Through Invite-only
The literature on specific types of digital product scarcity marketing strategies is limited (Shi, Li, & Chumnumpan, 2020), as in the case of the invite-only strategy. To introduce the mechanics of the strategy and provide usage examples, grey literature in the form of websites and other blogs was used. The specific motivations triggered by the invite-only are the subject of this study, and therefore the gap in literature identified here is in line with the purpose we are trying to provide.
In the case of apps, the production of a limited quantity is not possible, so developers must find other measures to simulate a product scarcity in this case, or only for specific operating systems. Invite-only is stated as a strategy that aims at an increase in the desirability to access a certain product or service by restricting access to a limited group of people (Isaac, 2021). In that case, the entrance for usage is only possible through an exclusive invitation, strengthening the aspiration to access the app (Kraaijenbrink, 2019). The invitation strategy is utilized by inviting others to join their social network or specific groups, yet the invitation is anchored as a part of the product (Pabarcus, 2011). This
strategy is not new and has been used by even one of the first social networks, Facebook. While being launched in 2004 as Facbeook.com, it targeted the Harvard College students to serve as a virtual space to meet and communicate. In 2006, Facebook opened its social networking beyond the Harvard-only membership to the public which exponentially grew up to 110 million users within approximately two years (Evans & Schmalensee, 2010). Also, Gmail which is publicly open today used to be guided by the invite-only entry strategy. In 2004, Google launched its e-mail service Gmail which could only be accessed by an invitation (Tatlow, 2017). However, there are also concerns associated with the perception of invite-only apps. By that means, utilizing the invite-only strategy by fully restricting access to others without an invitation can be counterproductive. In that case, it can be risky to strive for the invite-only strategy as everyone who wants to join should be able to join rather than being excluded (Kraaijenbrink, 2019).
As at that time, the examples of Facebook and Gmail were mainly used as desktop versions, we will now have a more precise look at the mobile app context. We created knowledge about the adoption of mobile apps using the invite-only approach by pointing out three different mobile apps within the social networking context.
Firstly, the mobile dating app called Raya which was launched in 2015 and focuses on the exclusivity of its members stresses the acquisition of like-minded people who can join through an exclusive invitation (Macke, 2020). Secondly, Ello the ad-free social networking app with a launch in 2014 (Herbison, 2014; Newcomb, 2014). Thirdly, Clubhouse the social networking app accelerated with the invite-only network a major growth within four months since September 2020, this one was the predominant invite-only app for the German market. Clubhouse represents the latest social networking app that uses the invite-only strategy. The download rate has shortly doubled from one million to over two million downloads within two weeks after Elon Musk has held his talk on the app in February 2021 (Michaeli, 2021; Isaac, 2021). Besides, within the app, different “rooms” are represented where like-minded people gather to talk about different topics that are being hosted by an expert within this field (O'Connor, 2021). However, to join Clubhouse, an exclusive invitation from an existing member is necessary. As Clubhouse offers the opportunity to engage with celebrities such as singer Drake, Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg, or Tesla CEO Elon Musk who executed a talk, the exclusivity for
entering increases which in parallel gives also certain security for such “high-profiles” to attend as only limited people can join (Gilbert, 2021; Bursztynsky, 2021).
To conclude, the invite-only strategy is a possibility to apply the digital product scarcity to the app landscape and has been used especially in the introduction phase of social networking platforms as in the case of Facebook or Gmail. Although the invite-only strategy has been used by several SNS, there is very limited literature. Therefore, we had to include also grey literature in this part but see this as an opportunity to contribute to this field. To elaborate the connection with social networks in more detail, we will elaborate the peculiarities of social networking apps in the next chapters.
2.4 Virtual Social Networking Apps
In this chapter, we will first look at social networks in general and the impact social networking apps currently have. Then, we will elaborate the underlying assumption of fear of missing out as motivation for users to join and associate with social networks. Lastly, the literature on closed social networks is reviewed to describe the type of social networking app that is created by using the invite-only strategy.
2.4.1 Social Networking Background
To get an understanding of how to classify social networking mobile apps, we will first briefly outline the significance of virtual communities while focusing on the social space and narrowing it down to mobile applications.
Generally, virtual communities are anchored within the digital environment. They represent different types such as personal interests, a demographic and geographic type of virtual community, or as business-to-business. The key element of virtual communities is communication which includes user attention and building a relationship. From a business perspective this is beneficial for product placement and receiving product improvement ideas from users. (Hagel, 1999)
To adopt virtual communities towards the social space is rooted within social media where users can virtually engage within a social surrounding to create content but also to network with each other (Hossain et al., 2020). Therefore, businesses can engage to
increase the popularity and trust by letting users interact and communicate with each other which strengthens the reliability and value of the products. The communication and engagement of social communities become essential from the business context to interact with the audience (Hossain et al., 2020; Bailey et al., 2021).
One of the first approaches to a social networking site was SixDegrees.com with a launch in 1996 (Press, 2018). The website was open for everyone to join; thus, it gained a growth rate of three million users within three years. However, since the content was not serving the users’ expectations and features were limited, the participation declined and the network shut down in 2000 (Evans & Schmalensee, 2010). In 2003, MySpace.com was launched as another social networking site which was overtaken by the launch of
Facebook.com which shortly became the most used network (Press, 2018).
Social Networks benefit from the network effect, meaning that their value increases the more people participate (Katz & Shapiro, 1994). Therefore, the more people engage within a social network, the more interesting it gets for the public. Thus, the number of users is indispensable to gain exponential growth and to make the network run from a business perspective (Katz & Shapiro, 1994). To adopt social networking sites, it has been investigated that besides the perceived playfulness also the perceived critical mass is a major driver (Sledgianowski & Kulviwat, 2009). Hence, the critical mass from a user perspective is perceived when a certain number of users participate one can associate with, e.g. based on common interests or friendship (Sledgianowski & Kulviwat, 2009).
2.4.2 Social Networking Mobile Applications
In the year 2020, over 50% of the global population possessed a smartphone (Rotar, 2020). Hence, one purpose of using a smartphone is participating in social media, more precisely social networks. To illustrate, the social media user rate was identified as 4.2 billion in January 2021 users which shows an increase of 13% compared to the previous year. To put this into relation to the world’s total population which was evaluated as about 7.83 billion at the beginning of 2021, the social media user rate makes approximately 53% of the total population. Narrowing it down, 1.3 million users joined social media every day during 2020. Compared to previous years, we can see a major growth rate of social media users as the user rate has doubled compared to 2016. Besides, users spend
about 1 hour 24 minutes on social networking sites such as Facebook, Twitter, or WhatsApp. Further, the reasons for using social media were mainly to stay up-to-date regarding events or news, but also to experience entertaining content or to keep up with friends and stay in touch with them. (Kemp, 2021)
Thus, we identified social media as a crucial platform where users meet and engage with each other which has tremendously increased throughout the last year, yet the mobile application is an essential medium for the execution. However, since social media is a medium for broadcasting information that includes various forms such as social networks, blogs, media-sharing, forums, etc., we identified that social media integrates even more than just the connection among the users that refers to social networks (Saravanakumar & Sugantha Lakshmi, 2012; Conti et al., 2013). Therefore, we narrow it down to focus on social networking among each other. More precisely, social networks are a form of social media that is particularly focusing on connecting the users (Kuss & Griffiths, 2017). Conti et al. (2013) define social networking sites as:
“(…) Internet-based applications that allow for user-generated content to be published
and accessed easily by a global audience.” (p.2).
Social networking apps are the most common and fast-growing within social media (Conti et al., 2013), examples are Facebook, Instagram, or WhatsApp (Abril, 2007; Kemp, 2021). To connect in such a network, an invitation needs to be sent out to others to add them into the own personal network which is the key driver to enhance the social network (Abril, 2007; Trusov et al., 2009).
With the introduction of social networking apps also new forms of social awareness were created. Nowadays, all online and offline activities of social contacts can be monitored with ease (Przybylski et al., 2013). This creates the crucial motivation for users to engage in social networking apps based on the fear of missing out (FoMO). This concept will therefore be discussed in the following chapter.
2.4.3 Fear of Missing Out (FoMO)
In this chapter, FoMO is discussed as a motivator for users to engage in social networking apps. To understand FoMO, the concept of social contagion in the context of social networking apps is essential to understand. This is the case because FoMO is mainly created by the perception of society and the fear of missing out on belonging to a social group. Both will be introduced in the following paragraphs.
Social networking apps are generally impacted by the consumption of others. This is explained by the concept of social contagion (Langley et al., 2012). In this concept the impact of others on an individual’s consumption is elaborated (Langley et al., 2012). This is especially influential in the case of social networks, as the consumption by others in form of user-generated content is mainly why users are adopting a social networking app. Furthermore, the feeling of belonging to a social group, as is the case for social networking apps, is essential for individuals (Abrams & Hogg, 2006). The social identity a person has in a group is quite different from the individual personal identity of a person (Abrams & Hogg, 2006). Social identity is, however, an enhancing factor on self-esteem (Abrams & Hogg, 2006). People use social group belongings to decrease their uncertainty on how they should behave by accepting the norms of the groups (Abrams & Hogg, 2006). This level of identification with the group makes the individual want to be involved in the social groups (Abrams & Hogg, 2006). Furthermore, group members are likely to feel more secure with others perceived to be in the same group (Hogg et al., 2004).
In the digital age, with the increasing importance of SNS, the social association is broadened from just the immediate circle of contact. Additionally, SNS made it easier to know about all online and offline activities one is missing out on (Przybylski et al., 2013). Therefore, people increasingly have FoMO. FoMO is already being used as a commercial tactic, especially to increase product and service sales (Hodkinson, 2019). Although it is a common practice in advertisement there is limited literature attention which creates a lack of understanding of the precise effects on the customers (Hodkinson, 2019; Przybylski et al., 2013). Przylbylski et al. (2013) define FoMO as:
“a pervasive apprehension that others might be having rewarding experiences from which one is absent, FoMO is characterized by the desire to stay continually connected
The interest in FOMO developed simultaneously with the rise of mobile phones and social media and is often connected to the overuse of interconnectivity due to the extensive use of smartphones (Hodkinson, 2019). One important contribution in literature was the robust difference measure derived by Przylbylski et al. (2013) that made the levels of FoMO more accessible and understandable. Therefore, the main items reflecting FoMO were identified and clustered to receive a more in-depth insight on the motivators created by FoMO (Przybylski et al., 2013). The study found that the main factors impacting FoMO are the perception (fears, anxieties, worries) associated with missing out on conversations, experiences, and events of their social environment (Przybylski et al., 2013).
To conclude, FoMO and generally the social impact described in social contagion theory can have an impact on the willingness of users to adopt social networking apps. This has not been discussed in the literature for the specific case of closed social networks that the invite-only strategy is creating. To understand the peculiarities of closed social networks and the relation to the invite-only strategy more in-depth the topic will be discussed in the next chapter.
2.4.4 Closed Social Networks
To understand the impact of the invite-only strategy on the social networking app, we will now continue the literature review with closed social networks. The term closed social networks is not uniformly defined in literature with authors using it for different purposes. In the following paragraphs, we will evaluate the different levels of closedness, and the impact it has on the perception of the user.
One level of closed social networks is the private profiles and conversations users can have on existing social networking sites such as Facebook (Carpenter et al., 2018). This entails for example private messages between two individual members of a social networking site in contrast to sharing content as a status update for all users (Carpenter et al., 2018). Additionally, to some extent, private profiles that only display information like age or location to direct followers are sometimes also considered closed (Zheleva & Getoor, 2009). There are two factors connected to this type of closed communication between individual members of a social network. First, users feel some sort of special value if messages are shared exclusively with them or before others (Carpenter et al.,
2018). Additionally, exclusive messages also increase the perception of connection with the other user (Carpenter et al., 2018).
The second level is closed social networks in the sense of smaller groups that share content as a community. These types of closed social networks can be accessed by invitation or other forms like membership applications. The lower user numbers of closed SNS increase the perceived connection between users. They are argued to be an important alternative to open SNS in the future as privacy concerns are increasing. Although marketers can address fewer users on closed SNS Choi & Lee (2017) identified that marketer-generated content (MGC) receives a higher level of trust on closed SNS. This is mainly driven by the perception that these marketers also need to be invited to join the group, increasing their credibility. (Choi & Lee, 2017)
Lastly, Virtual Private Social Networks (VPSNs) are another form of closed SNS with the highest degree of closedness. In this type of network, the architecture of the existing SNS is used but no information is shared with the provider. Additionally, no minimum of personal information, e.g. name or profile picture, is shared with the whole community but privacy settings allow only specific users to view personal content. The main motivation to use VSPNs are privacy concerns, mainly that users do not want their information to be used or distributed by the provider of the SNS or accessed by any user of the network. (Conti et al., 2013)
One interesting distinction is that closed social networks are perceived to have a higher group identification as in all cases the relationship through the selective membership increases the sense of privacy and trust described by the authors. Invite-only apps are part of the second-level closed social networks where a limited number of users interact in a social group that has some access criteria. This type of closed social network has been used successfully by several SNS, like Clubhouse, Google Gmail, or Facebook. In the case of this study, we will only evaluate the access option of invite-only by investigating the motivators to initially adopt social networking apps.
2.5 Connection of the Literature Topics
To conclude our literature review, we identified a literature gap by connecting the three fields of technology acceptance, scarcity in digital marketing, and virtual social networking apps literature. Understanding these three theoretical fields is important to derive the justification of our research gap. This gap is investigated as to why users initially adopt social networking mobile applications using an invite-only strategy, which can be found at the center of figure 2 below.
To get a holistic understanding of our research gap, we firstly focused on the initial adoption of an app, considering the technology acceptance literature that refers to the first field of literature found at the upper left of figure 2. More precisely, we identified the initial phase of adoption to be crucial since it is put as an antecedent of actual adoption. In other words, it is the essential stage to define whether users remain using the app, thus adopting it or not (Antil, 1988; Rogers, 2003). The invite-only strategy is mainly affecting this initial stage of adoption because it enables users to enter the social networking app. One field that has been researched is the general adoption of technology, of which models have often been adopted to research the adoption of mobile applications (Davis, 1989; Venkatesh et al., 2003). However, these models are largely focusing on the continuance intention to use apps and not the initial attraction that is created by a strategy like invitation-only while lacking the holistic view on the initial phase.
Secondly, the invite-only strategy was identified to be a form of product scarcity marketing. This field of product scarcity in marketing was studied to create a more profound understanding. Further, the impact of digital goods, creating artificial scarcity was elaborated. All these connecting fields are illustrated at the upper right of figure 2. The concept of increasing value for an unavailable product applies to marketing in general according to Lynn (1991). Although the impact of digital goods is discussed, there is no transition made explicitly for apps. Furthermore, there is a gap identified in the current literature to generate a better understanding of the specific approaches of digital product scarcity marketing (Shi et al., 2020). The literature of artificial scarcity is currently focusing on the owner’s rights perspective (Toledano, 2018; Sullivan, 2016), not the user perspective. The insights why users initially adopt products using these approaches will also generate more insights into how to use them more effectively and especially how this strategy can be used as a digital marketing tool.
Thirdly, by using the invite-only strategy, a closed social network is created and due to the importance of the social contagion concept, we are looking for a general understanding of this connection referring to the field of virtual social networking apps found at the bottom of figure 2. Therefore, closed social networks (Choi & Lee, 2017), and the feeling of belonging referring to the social contagion theory (Langley et al., 2012) but also the fear of missing out (Przybylski et al., 2013) are a relevant case for the invite-only strategy. Furthermore, there is diverse literature on the various forms of closed social networks that exists, but it is largely focusing on the interaction and participation within these networks and not the initial attraction associated with them that needs to be distinguished by the invite-only strategy (Choi & Lee, 2017).
3 Methodology
______________________________ ________________________________________
The purpose of this chapter is to provide the philosophical assumption for this study to assess the nature of reality and how knowledge is developed to highlight the role of our research. Further, it represents the methods and techniques of how data is being collected and analyzed.
3.1 Research Philosophy
The philosophical assumption for this study is important to distinguish since it defines how the nature of reality is being created (ontology) and how knowledge is developed to inquire into the nature of reality (epistemology) (Easterby-Smith et al., 2018). To follow the suitable research philosophy for our study, we need to be in line with the way we assess the research and give meaning to it (Easterby-Smith et al., 2018). Therefore, it is essential to choose a suitable philosophical approach, mainly ontology and epistemology which will be elaborated in the following (Saunders et al., 2016).
In the first place, we need to define ontology to face the nature of reality. Since the aim of this study is to investigate why users initially adopt invite-only social networking mobile applications to understand the relevance of the field of scarcity within digital marketing our chosen ontology is Relativism. To clarify, with the nature of reality defined to be the relativism approach, multiple truths exist while it depends on different observations being made by the individuals (Easterby-Smith et al., 2018). Therefore, we want to evaluate different opinions by the individuals to gain heterogeneity to get deep insights into different perspectives. Hence, we believe different truths exist depending on how the individuals experience the initial adoption of invite-only social networking mobile apps, thus including the driver to initially adopt it. Yet, we are convinced that individuals experience the initial adoption differently while representing diverse key drivers and motivation. In that case, we want to acquire different standpoints, which makes the relativist ontology the most suitable approach (Saunders et al., 2016). On the contrary, we discard the Realism and Internal Realism as there does not just exist one reality. Besides, meanings and experiences are significant to access the nature of reality rather than approaching a theory-testing where numbers are predominant (Easterby-Smith et al., 2018; Saunders et al., 2016).
In the second place, we need to face the nature of knowledge creation (epistemology), which we defined as Social Constructionism. This is in line with our chosen ontology of Relativism. To justify, the human interaction rather than objectivity becomes essential to follow our purpose of this study. The users perceive the initial adoption of invite-only social networking apps differently. To foster the individual experiences and let users express their differing opinions on invite-only social networking apps, social constructionism is the most appropriate epistemology to serve our purpose. The epistemology assumption is important as it leads the research on how to obtain the knowledge to face the reality and how to make sense of the collected data (Easterby-Smith et al., 2018). Therefore, our focus is mainly on words whereas different interpretations and perspectives were evaluated to obtain the corresponding nature of reality. Thus, we decided to take an explorative interpretation of different observations.
3.2 Research Approach
Following our research philosophy, we are now discussing the research approach to define the way and method the study is conducted. We need to distinguish the following three approaches: deductive, abductive, and inductive (Easterby-Smith et al., 2018; Saunders et al., 2016).
Since our research purpose relies upon different observations whereas words are predominant to give meaning, we rejected a deductive approach as we are not testing any theory nor assessing one reality rather several realities depending on the observer. Although we identified the UTAUT and TAM model as predominant within the technology adoption literature, we assessed that these models lack specific motivators in terms of the invite-only strategy. Besides, the focus on the initial phase for adoption is crucial for this study which these models do not evaluate holistically. Therefore, we decided against the deductive approach for this study.
Facing the abduction which is between the deduction and induction that refers to going back and forth between the theory and data starts with the “surprising facts” derived from the data analysis (Saunders et al., 2016). We concluded that abduction would not be a suitable approach because no obtained theory is facing the context of social networking apps within the closed setting as mentioned within our literature review. Therefore, we
did not want to be limited on existing theories that are not anchored within our contextual approach, thus, would not answer our research question in-depth.
In consequence, we decided to explore our research purpose to identify emerging patterns to establish a grounded theory. Hence, we decided to take upon an inductive research approach which is anchored as qualitative research to define new patterns and establish new insights and knowledge into the socially constructed reality. This is being created by the individual views of the research participants and the researcher (Easterby-Smith et al., 2018). As presented in the literature review, this study combines different fields of research that have not been connected before. Therefore, there is no established framework concerning this research gap leading us to start an inductive approach to generate knowledge on this topic. One example is Hui et al. (2018) who used a qualitative and inductive research design to evaluate why specifically users are, or are not, adopting a health-supporting app.
3.3 Research Design
As we are following the qualitative research, we identified the need to investigate deeper about our research purpose because literature is scarce. Therefore, we identified a high demand to foster primary data based in an exploratory manner. With the aim of a grounded theory, we want to understand the socially constructed reality to answer our research purpose in-depth. While grounded theory occurs in a different version, such as the Classic, Straussian, or Constructivist Grounded Theory (Kenny & Fourie, 2015), we assessed the Constructivist Grounded Theory approach as the most suitable one. While all versions have the same goal of identifying a theory grounded in data, they differ in diverse aspects. To highlight, the major differentiation we identified while rejecting both other approaches, was the philosophical approach and the prerequisite theory. To justify, the Classic approach by Glaser & Strauss requires to fully ignore prior literature while the Straussian version of grounded theory opposes prior knowledge gained from the literature but facing it with skepticism (Mills et al., 2006). However, both versions of grounded theory support a more positivist view. Therefore, as we fostered a constructivist paradigm where reality depends on a different perspective to follow the manifold social realities is aligned with Charmaz's (2014) view. She argues that the researcher is within the research process rather than being separately, thus gaining experience of all data rather
than just data fragments (Easterby-Smith et al., 2018). In that case, bias was not created by prior knowledge through the literature review. The prior literature review helped to generate knowledge about the study’s research purpose to aim for grounded theory. Aligned with the approach by Charmaz (2008) of the constructionist grounded theory, we conducted semi-structured interviews to discover meanings of the individual’s experiences, therefore quality is predominant to quantity to give in-depth meanings to the individual's experience (Kenny & Fourie, 2015). Besides, it is argued that the interview execution needs to be more open-ended and rather conversational whereas fewer interviewees enable rigor and intensive interview. Therefore, the interviewee rate is rather low compared to quantitative and statistical research approaches (Alemu et al., 2017; Saunders et al., 2016).
3.4 Data Collection
In the following chapter, the collection process of the data for this study is explained. More precisely, in the following, we will focus on the sample composition and the design of the interview.
3.4.1 Sample Composition
To serve the purpose of the study, we followed a purposive sampling which refers to a non-probability sampling. Hence, predetermined criteria define the choice of the sample composition (Easterby-Smith et al., 2018). This specific sampling enables us to define the samples that fit best to investigate our research purpose. Samples that did not suit our research purpose were rejected. To give an example, we rejected non-social networking app users since we want to investigate the initial adoption and these users have not gone through the process of initial adoption. Consequently, non-users could not serve the research purpose. Therefore, the prerequisite criteria which needed to be fulfilled for this study were first users of social networking apps in general. In the beginning, we also included social networking app users that did not yet adopt invite-only social networking apps to get a holistic view if the effect on them differs and if we are missing relevant insight that could contribute to the study. After interviewing three users who had not previously initially adopted an invite-only social networking app we did not see any major
