Social Media Adoption in Business-to-Business: IT ...

572785

research-article2015

JOBXXX10.1177/2329488415572785International Journal of Business CommunicationVeldeman et al.

Original Research

Social Media Adoption in Business-to-Business: IT and Industrial Companies Compared

International Journal of Business Communication 1–23 © 2015 by the Association for Business Communication Reprints and permissions: sagepub.com/journalsPermissions.nav DOI: 10.1177/2329488415572785 jbc.sagepub.com

Céline Veldeman1, Ellen Van Praet1, and Peter Mechant1

Abstract This article investigates Belgian business-to-business (B2B) companies’ perceptions of and attitudes toward social media, matching the findings with existing U.S., U.K., and Dutch research. Using survey data from a nonrepresentative judgment sample of 92 Belgian B2B companies, we show that 85.9% of Belgian B2B companies that participated in our research use social media to ensure their influence on target groups. The survey also reveals that 40.8% of IT companies implement a social media strategy against only 26.7% of industrial B2B companies. Relying on the technology acceptance model, we argue that IT companies are more inclined to adopt social media because they evaluate social media’s usefulness higher than industrial enterprises. Qualitative follow-up research (in-depth interviews with 11 B2B enterprises) further explains the observed differences and similarities between both sectors, analyzing perceived benefits and risks, social media knowledge, and strategies. We conclude the article by listing various suggested actions that can help B2B companies effectively leverage social media. Keywords B2B, social media, technology acceptance model, TAM, adoption

B2B and Social Media: Understanding the Disconnect Increasingly, consumers are using social media to create, modify, share, and discuss Internet content. Whereas in the past companies were able to control the information 1Ghent

University, Ghent, Belgium

Corresponding Author: Ellen Van Praet, Ghent University, Groot-Brittanniëlaan 45, Ghent 9000, Belgium. Email: [email protected]

Downloaded from job.sagepub.com at Association for Business Communication on February 25, 2015

2

International Journal of Business Communication

available about them through strategically placed press announcements and welltrained public relations managers, today firms are increasingly banished to the sidelines as mere observers, having neither the knowledge nor the chance —or, sometimes, even the right— to alter publicly posted comments provided by their customers (Kaplan & Haenlein, 2010). The implication is that organizations no longer have complete control over what is disseminated about them (Schroeder, 2013): “Most of what is said about the company will not be said by the company” (AT&T, 2011). As Leboff (2011) observes, Web 2.0 and user-generated content have put the consumer in the driver’s seat. Overall, business-to-consumer (B2C) firms quickly adjusted to this rapidly changing climate and are starting to reap the benefits: social media is gaining weight as a sales tool and enjoys firm footing as a marketing and communications tool. Increasingly, B2C companies identify ways in which they can make profitable use of applications such as Instagram, Wikipedia, MySpace, LinkedIn, YouTube, Facebook, Second Life, and Twitter. Using data collected among 1,699 business-to-business (B2B) salespeople from over 25 different industries, Rodriguez, Peterson, and Krishnan (2012) have demonstrated social media’s positive impact on sales performance. Relying on a case study that included 54 communities of practice in a multinational engineering firm, Annabi and McGann (2012) have shown how social media can serve as the “missing link” connecting communities of practice to an organization’s business strategy. Other researchers have shown how using social media (e.g., a corporate blog) can lead to an increased sense of group cohesiveness, improved work processes, and stronger professional ties among employees in the organization (Baehr & Alex-Brown, 2010). However, despite encouraging signs of effective use of social media as part of corporate communication and corporate brand-building strategy, a recently published quantitative content analysis of the social media platforms of 60 major international corporate brands (Vernuccio, 2014) has highlighted the online corporate communication initiatives of more than a third of all investigated companies as cautious. What’s more, while social media start to break barriers of communication within organizations, and gradually serve to boost sales for B2C markets, recent research shows that B2B companies are hesitant in embracing Web 2.0 applications. For U.S. B2B companies, lack of resources turns out to be a crucial implementation obstacle (Hosford, 2012). Another frequently stated stumbling block is lack of insight in target audiences’ use of social media. According to recent Accenture Global Marketing Research (2011), only 11% of B2B businesses have the systems and analytic capabilities to measure and track the return on social media investments. More than 35% indicated they did see improvements in measurement as a factor in assisting them to be better handlers of social media. Board resistance still occurs within 22% of B2B companies, due to lack of resources, knowledge, and success metrics (Hosford, 2012). Many companies fear making the wrong investments because of unfamiliarity and lack of knowledge and experience with social media. Nonetheless, despite resistance, more than 80% of B2B U.S. companies find social media very challenging, showing a need for more knowledge, resources and confidence (Paulsen, 2011). However, while U.S. B2B companies find social media very


Veldeman et al.

3

important for their business, only 8% are actually reaping the benefits (Accenture Global Marketing, 2011). Similarly, many Dutch (28%) and U.K. (30%) B2B companies, active in social media, work without a strategy, missing out on several opportunities (SpotONvision, 2011). Overall, increasing brand awareness and brand building are listed as the most essential objectives for social media adoption, followed by customer engagement and increasing Web traffic (Paulsen, 2011). For Dutch companies, engagement turns out to be the single most important goal (71%), while online exposure and listening to market trends come in second (47%; SpotONvision, 2012). U.K. research demonstrates that U.K. companies have a contradictory attitude toward interacting with clients via social media. U.K. B2B companies use social media mainly to (1) attract new customers (91%), (2) build customer relationships (86%), and (3) increase brand awareness (73%). However, while maintaining customer relationships was listed as the number two reason for social media adoption, receiving feedback (46%) and interacting with suppliers (14%) were listed as less important reasons for using social media (Michaelidou, Siamagka, and Christodoulides, 2011). Prompted by the above findings (and lacunas) from existing research, the challenge for this article was double. Since most of the existing research on B2B social media adoption turned out to be quantitative, our first challenge was to map Belgian companies’ perceptions of and attitudes toward social media, not only from a quantitative perspective but also from a qualitative angle. A second challenge was urged by the observation that whereas B2B social media use is gradually on the rise, research reveals clear sectorial differences: While Forrester research (Marketo, 2010) estimated that in 2009, 77% of U.S. B2B IT companies actively used social media, the number of industrial companies was still well below 30% in 2011 (Capstone, 2011). Given that U.S. B2B IT companies seem to adopt social media faster than other sectors, our aim was to find out (1) whether Belgian B2B companies’ perceptions of the benefits and risks of using social media are different for IT companies on the one hand and industrial companies on the other, (2) whether both sectors have diverging knowledge of social media use and its effectiveness, and (3) whether this results in a different adoption degree.

Technology Acceptance Model To compare the difference in social media adoption rate between IT and industrial B2B sectors, this study relies on the technology acceptance model (TAM; Davis, Bagozzi, & Warshaw, 1989). TAM was originally developed to predict who is most likely to accept new technologies at work, using two determinants: perceived usefulness and perceived ease of use (see Figure 1). Perceived usefulness is “the degree to which a person believes using a particular system would enhance his/her job performance,” while perceived ease of use is “the degree to which a person believes using a particular system would be free of effort” (Davis et al., 1989, p. 985).


4


Figure 1. Technology acceptance model (Davis, Bagozzi, & Warshaw, 1989).

TAM, as an intention-based model developed for explaining user acceptance of computer technology is one of the most influential theories in information systems. Compared to other models, one of the main merits of TAM is its IT-specificity, that is, it is specifically designed to address the acceptance of IS technology. What is more, the model has accumulated ample empirical support (Hu, Chau, Sheng, & Tam, 1999). However, TAM has also been widely criticized (Legris, Inghamb, & Collerette, 2003), leading the original proposers to attempt to redefine it several times, the two major upgrades being the TAM 2 (Venkatesh, 2000; Venkatesh & Davis, 2000) and the unified theory of acceptance and use of technology (Venkatesh, Morris, Davis, & Davis, 2003). A TAM 3 has also been proposed (Venkatesh & Bala, 2008). Criticism of TAM includes that it gauges only subjective/perceived usage by measuring behavioral intention, assuming one can infer technology acceptance by gauging the intention to use it. In fact, usefulness and ease of use explain only 40% of a system’s use (Legris et al., 2003). Moreover, recent research found TAM to be an inaccurate predictor of technology usage (Turner, Kitchenham, Brereton, Charters, & Budgen, 2010), and claims are that other significant factors for adoption are not included in TAM (e.g., organizational dynamics or social change processes; Legris et al., 2003). Unreceptive companies might, for example, still adopt social media due to pressure from active competitors. Still, despite its relative simplicity, and despite critiques, TAM has proven to be a useful theoretical model in helping understand and explain information system acceptance and implementation (Van Ittersum et al., 2006). Although social media can be looked on as much more than information systems, with unique properties and affordances, TAM serves as a guideline for polling B2B companies in this study, while nonetheless taking some of the above listed objections and difficulties into account.


Veldeman et al.

5

Table 1. Sampling Frame Industrial Divisions Drawn From the Belgian Maintenance Association Member’s List (http://www.bemas.be/). Automotive (manufacturing) industry Chemicals, plastics and rubber industries Construction industry Distribution and wholesale businesses (i.e., electronic equipment, office equipment, etc.) Energy industry (electricity, gas and oil) Food industry Manufacturing industry (i.e., electronic equipment, construction materials, etc.) Mechanical engineering & automation industries (producers and exporters of machineries) Metallurgical industry Steel industry Transportation & logistics industry Woodworking, pulp and paper industries

A Two-Dimensional Approach: Quantitative + Qualitative We compared the difference in social media adoption rate between IT and industrial B2B companies by integrating quantitative survey research with qualitative interviews. In what follows, we elaborate in detail on the aspects covered in the survey and the measures used and explain our methodological approach to the interview analysis.

Sampling and participants Stage 1. To zero in on the actual usage of social media among Belgian B2B enterprises, we used a judgment sampling: After consulting the expertise of Quadrant Communications —a Flemish PR agency working with B2B technology and industrial companies— a specific sampling frame was set up. Based on the criterion “Belgian industrial or IT B2B company, located in Flanders or Brussels,” we selected 374 IT companies and 125 industrial companies from the available Data News ICT Guide and the BEMAS (Belgian Maintenance Association; see Table 1) members’ list. While the IT sector comprises industries such as computers, biotechnology, and software, this research restricts the sector to enterprises specialized in software and Web services. In line with the Global Industry Classification Standard, we define the industrial sector as including manufacturers and distributors of capital goods such as aerospace & defense, building products, electrical equipment, and machinery and companies that offer construction & engineering services. It also


6


includes providers of commercial & professional services including printing, environmental and facilities services, office services & supplies, security & alarm services, human resource & employment services, and research & consulting services. It also includes companies that provide transportation services. All 499 companies received an e-mail in May 2012 explaining the study’s purpose and requesting their participation. In reaction to an initial low response rate, a reminder e-mail was sent out and a second screened sampling was applied. With the assistance of Quadrant Communications encouraging their clients and contacts to participate and to share the survey both online and offline, the survey was posted on Twitter and within LinkedIn groups such as Voka, Flanders’ Chamber of Commerce and Industry. In all, 140 companies completed the survey. To minimize the margin of error and to increase the results’ validity, 48 participants were removed from the analysis because they could not be grouped either in the industrial sector or in the IT B2B sector. Our final sample contained 92 companies (56.5% IT B2B, 43.5% industrial B2B). The majority of the answers from our sample were filled out by the general management of the company (30.3%), followed by 28.1% responsible for marketing, 15.7% for communication, and 11.2% for sales. The sample encompassed 50% smaller companies (250 employees). Of the 92 companies (10 industrial and 3 IT companies), 14.1% were not using social media, which shows that 85.9% of Belgian B2B companies that participated in our research use social media to ensure their influence on target groups. Stage 2. Interview respondents were selected through a convenience sample by asking companies that use social media and that participated in the survey if they were willing to be contacted through e-mail to plan an interview during June 2012. The final sample consists of 11 respondents (6 from IT B2B companies and 5 from industrial B2B companies). Of the 11 selected companies, only 1 company showed no interest in expanding its social media presence.

Procedures and Measures Stage 1. The survey (see the appendix) contained closed-ended questions in Dutch with multiple answer possibilities and 5-point Likert-type scales. Companies were initially asked if they use social media. After that, their reasons for using (or not using) social media, their goals, and perceived (dis)advantages were polled based on questions derived from literature. Additionally, we questioned perceived usefulness and ease of use. To analyze the data, we relied on SPSS. Nominal and ordinal data frequency tables were used. Scale data, in the form of Likert-type scales, measuring respondents’ ideas were analyzed through means. To identify differences in social media use, strategies, and attitudes between both sectors, chi-square tests were performed for nominal data and t tests for scale data. Only relevant and significant associations are reported. We used a confidence interval of 95%. Cramer’s V values (chi-square) and eta values (t tests) higher than 0.2 were considered relevant


Veldeman et al.

7

associations. Survey questions and data can be consulted on simple request: Please mail the authors. Our survey study also holds some limitations. First, our sample was not randomly selected . Second, we used an online survey. Although Web-based survey research has reached a level of maturity, it encompasses some limitations and disadvantages. Several technical glitches can occur while a respondent is filling out a survey (e.g., the browser freezes or the Web server crashes). Ganassali (2008) stresses the influence of the design of Web survey questionnaires on the quality of responses. On a methodological level, issues such as self-selection, multiple submissions, nonserious responses, and dropouts are pointed out to be problematic (Gosling, Vazire, Srivastava, & John, 2004). However, due to our sample size and the nature of the subject, we believe these methodological issues had little or no impact on our study. Stage 2. Face-to-face interviews in Dutch followed in the second stage of this research. We conducted these interviews until a saturation point (no new answers were coming from the respondents) was reached. To minimize interviewer effects, we used a semistructured interview format with standardized questions and formulation but without real restricted answer possibilities or a limitation to a strict question sequence during the interviews. The interview guide incorporates several quantitative variables such as social media goals and (dis)advantages, and adds new topics such as perceived social media knowledge. First, interviewees were asked to describe the (dis)advantages, difficulties, and consequences of their social media presence. Next, perceived knowledge, as well as the strategies and social media activities, were questioned. Each interview was tape-recoded with permission, transcribed, and analyzed using NVivo software. We applied an inductive coding approach by systematically reading and coding all transcripts. After an open coding process, only those codes relevant in answering the research questions and in providing explanations for the quantitative research conclusions were applied. We identified four main categories: attitudes, knowledge, procedure, and application. The category attitudes covered mainly companies’ rationale for using social media (i.e., necessity and relevance), their opinions on social media’s usefulness (i.e., risks and advantages), and ease of use (i.e., challenges and easiness). Knowledge level and best practices constituted the category knowledge. Social media strategy and goals were used to break down the category procedure. Finally, the classification application consisted of the labels activities, monitoring, and actual measurement.

Survey: Findings IT Versus Industrial: What Is the Difference in Usage? As stated earlier, 85.9% of Belgian B2B companies in our sample use social media. Echoing existing research (Capstone, 2011; Marketo, 2010), IT companies turn out to be significantly more active on social media platforms than industrial enterprises Downloaded from job.sagepub.com at Association for Business Communication on February 25, 2015

8


Table 2. Social Media Goals. Goal Brand awareness Traffic building Recruiting Relationship building/maintenance Lead generation Monitoring Search engine optimization Social pressure because competitors are active Information exchange with partners, clients, etc.

Both sectorsa, %

ITa, %

Industrya, %

88.6 43.0 40.5 39.2 31.6 20.3 17.7

86.5 38.5 48.1 40.4 26.9 17.3 13.5

62.5 35.0 17.5 25.0 27.5 17.3 17.5

5.1 1.3

5.8 1.3

2.5 0.0

a. The table presents added percentages (respondents could indicate their three most important goals).

(χ² = 6.89, p = .009, Cramer’s V = 0.274). Most used media are LinkedIn (97.5%), Twitter (75.9%), Facebook (64.6%), YouTube (55.7%), blogs (39.2%), SlideShare (25.3%), and Google+ (20.3%). IT companies use these media considerably more than industrial companies (p < .05, Cramer’s V > 0.2). Of the sampled B2B companies, 54.4% have been active for less than 2 years and 31.6% for less than 6 months. Only 13.9% has a social media presence of more than 2 years. A total of 41.8% use social media multiple times a day and 30.4% several times a week.

Social Media Strategy: Yes or No? In line with existing research (e.g., SpotONvision, 2011), few companies have a social media strategy: 19% of B2B companies actively use a strategy (i.e., their social media activities are based on a plan of action/strategy), 35.4% are implementing their strategy (i.e., they are introducing a strategy within the social media team, to be actively used later on), and 41.8% are experimenting (i.e., using social media without a strategy or plan of action). Comparing both sectors, industrial companies are significantly more experimenting with social media (χ² = 12.39, p = .006, Cramer’s V = 0.396). While 56.7% of the industrial companies are experimenting with social media, only 32.7% of IT B2B companies are doing so. Furthermore, measuring agreement on the premise “Most B2B companies using social media don’t have a clear strategy” revealed that companies generally believe that B2B companies act without a strategy. Of the companies, 40% (highly) agree with the statement (M = 3.47, SD = 0.81).

Social Media: Goals Our results confirm U.S. Penton Marketing research (2011) that brand awareness is the most important goal. Traffic building and recruiting come second and third (Table 2). Downloaded from job.sagepub.com at Association for Business Communication on February 25, 2015

9

Veldeman et al. Table 3. Applied Social Media Metrics. Metric

No. of respondents

No. of followers No. of retweets No. of views/clicks/likes Traffic to the website Number of leads Number of reactions Traffic to the store

16 9 5 5 5 4 1

However, contrary to U.K. and U.S. literature (Michaelidou et al., 2011; Paulsen, 2011), relationship building and lead generation (generating consumer interest or inquiry) appear less important for Belgian B2B enterprises. Brand awareness (χ² = 7.18, p = 0.007, Cramer’s V = 0.279) and recruitment (χ² = 9.32, p = .002, Cramer’s V = 0.318) are significantly more important for IT than for industrial enterprises.

Social Media: Metrics Concerning return on investment (ROI) measurement, 29% of the companies scored neutral on the premise “Most B2B companies using social media do not receive measurable results” (M = 3.30, SD = 0.88). Of the companies, 50 measure ROI, of which 45 companies measure quantitatively, applying Web analytics provided by Google, Facebook, and LinkedIn. The five remaining companies measure qualitatively, through content tracking or feedback from clients. The number of followers and retweets are the most applied key performance indicators (Table 3).

Social Media: Perceived Usefulness B2B companies perceive social media mainly as a communication tool, facilitating a broader reach than other media. In general, networking is considered to be the second most important advantage, followed by thought leadership. While broader communication reach, thought leadership, and networking form the top three for IT companies, industrial companies see networking, broader communication reach, and low cost as the most important advantages (Table 4). IT B2B companies perceive broader communication reach, thought leadership, and customer engagement more often as advantages than industrial enterprises (p < .05, Cramer’s V > 0.25). Furthermore, industrial companies consider social media’s low cost significantly more often as an important advantage than B2B IT companies (χ² = 6.06, p = .014, Cramer’s V = 0.257).


10


Table 4. Perceived Social Media Advantages. Advantages Larger communication reach Networking Thought leadership Credibility Low cost Customer engagement Monitoring Feedback from target groups

Both sectors, %

IT, %

Industry, %

77.2 50.6 48.1 35.4 22.8 21.5 13.9 8.9

78.8 38.5 53.8 36.5 11.5 26,9 7.7 7.7

50.0 50.0 27.5 25.0 32.5 7.5 17.5 7.5

Table 5. Perceived Usefulness. Statement

Ma

Social media make it more difficult to bond employees to our companies.

2.16

We tell too much about our company on social media, allowing competitors to gain too much insight.

2.38

Some colleagues place too much nonsense about our company on social media.

2.30

Some colleagues place wrong information about our company on social media.

2.07

Social media can aid my company in quickly sharing information with customers, partners, and third parties.

4.32

Using social media improves the dialogue with clients and prospects.

3.43

a. The closer the mean to 5, the more companies agree with the statement.

Alongside questioning social media advantages, perceived usefulness was also measured through several Likert-type items (Table 5). In general, companies do not agree on the suggested negative side effects, namely, difficulties in employer bonding —making employees stick to an organization (M = 2.16, SD = 0.789)— protecting internal information (M = 2.38, SD = 0.73), and controlling wrong and inappropriate employees’ posts (M > 2.0, SD > 0.82). On the contrary, B2B companies perceive social media as relatively useful to their businesses: 69% of the companies (highly) agree with the premise that social media offer quick information sharing opportunities (M = 4.32, SD = 0.66). A total of 39% (highly) agree with the statement “Using social media improves the dialogue with clients and prospects” (M = 3.43, SD = 0.86).


Veldeman et al.

11

Social Media: Perceived Ease of Use B2B companies’ perception of social media’s ease of use was measured by two Likerttype items. According to 49% of the sampled B2B companies, social media are (very) practical to work with (M = 3.64, SD = 0.90). However, strategically determining best practices is considered to be more difficult. Only 15% of the companies agree with the statement “One can very easily work with social media, without careful deliberation” (M = 2.58, SD = 0.94). In conclusion, the B2B companies that participated in our research do not think their social media use will be free of effort. While they consider social media as tools easy to set up and execute, deciding how to use social media in the right way to achieve set goals is considered to be very hard.

In-Depth Interviews: Findings Social Media Attitudes By questioning interviewees on their rationale for adopting social media we detected that, overall, social media are seen as relevant and necessary in order to be able to respond to changing market trends and buying behaviors. Respondents state that target groups (clients, partners, etc.) and employees’ mentalities are changing, requiring new communication practices through social media that involve direct contact. B2B companies report that younger generations entering the job market are familiar with social media and expect them in business environments. Moreover, they feel obliged to use social media because peer-to-peer recommendations’ influence increases as content sharing and customer feedback on social media expand. Nevertheless, industrial enterprises are less motivated to use social media than IT companies. Two interviewees explicitly state, respectively, that social media only work in B2C and that industrial B2B professionals are not using it. IT companies believe that their target groups actively use social media and experience pressure from stakeholders expecting a quick integration of social media in the communication mix. They feel they need to be a forerunner in order to secure their credibility and reputation. The majority of interviewees presume that IT companies adopt social media earlier because of their innovativeness and affinity with Internet applications. Industrial companies’ traditional mind-set and lack of technological affinity hinder social media acceptance. Contrary to IT companies, industrial enterprises do not perceive social media to be essential: The majority believe that their target groups have limited interest in social media. Only one industrial interviewee explicitly acknowledges a need to reach influencers along with the press through social media, in order to inspire stakeholders’ perceptions. As can be expected from TAM, the analysis of the categories risks and advantages shows that more advantages than disadvantages were acknowledged and that IT companies’ respondents all enumerate more benefits than respondents from industrial companies.


12


Broader communication reach is unanimously considered to be social media’s most important advantage, influencing (1) brand awareness, (2) image creation, and (3) recruiting. First, interviewees assume that companies present on social media platforms are more easily found by prospects, because they generate more brand awareness. Second, interviewees expect social media activities such as sharing company values to positively influence the company’s corporate image, and as a way to gain competitive advantage vis-à-vis competitors who refrain from using social media. While two interviewees state that using social media provides them with a “modern” reputation, another thinks social media creates an open and accessible image. Some interviewees also claim that sharing solid, business-related, and/or technical information (e.g., white papers) creates credibility and thought leadership. Third, the larger communication reach also sounds beneficial to several interviewees who seek to recruit through social media. To address the lack of programmers and IT engineers on the Belgian job market, three IT interviewees emphasize the growing importance of social media in employer branding to attract new staff: A B2B company also has an interest in getting itself well-known through social media among the general public to ensure people know the company, so they spontaneously apply or respond to posted job ads. (IT2)

Interviewees seem divided over social media’s effectiveness in lead generation and conversion. Weak believers are hesitant and believe that social media’s impact in sales will remain limited. Strong believers claim that content sharing through social media instigates reliable word of mouth, reaching and convincing interested prospects. Respondents also acknowledged that customer feedback on social media increases market insights. Three interviewees envision social media as a quick and relatively cheap means for ideation—that is, collecting ideas leading to new products or improvements. B2B companies acknowledge few social media risks, but industrial enterprises are more worried than IT enterprises. In contrast to our quantitative findings, qualitative interviews show that both sectors consider their own employees to pose the greatest threat. Interviewees express a fear for inappropriate or wrong social media messages that could damage corporate reputation. One interviewee, for example, recounts receiving stakeholder denouncements after an employee criticized a client on social media. Other threats to companies’ credibility are the lack of commitment, a shortage in valuable content, or not providing quick and correct feedback on social media platforms. Nevertheless, all interviewees believe being absent on social media poses even greater risks because one is ill-informed of positive/negative comments and unable to respond appropriately. Contrary to respondents in IT companies, industrial respondents fear losing control over communication as anyone can publicly post anything on social media. All IT enterprises, including one industrial company, mention that criticism uttered on social media can be an opportunity to improve the company’s corporate image, when handled appropriately: Downloaded from job.sagepub.com at Association for Business Communication on February 25, 2015

Veldeman et al.

13

Your reputation is on the line and everything changes quickly. Social media magnify the negative. You can have lots of positive aspects that no one reads. Negative aspects are seen by everyone. (Industry2) Some people state negative criticism is a risk. I don’t see it as a risk; it is an opportunity to show you are mature enough to deal with it. (IT5)

Confirming the quantitative results, our interviewees considered social media tools as easily applicable. However, many respondents struggle with shifting communication means and with allocating resources adequately to monitor and handle customer feedback. Contrary to U.S. research (Hosford, 2012), management resistance and difficulties in receiving resources to sustain social media communication appear sectorspecific: Industrial management is often unconvinced of social media’s benefits and, therefore, allocate limited capital. While interviewees believe that business and commercial messages must be balanced to provide followers with added value and to keep them interested, regularly delivering relevant and qualitative content adapted to media and audience is perceived as extremely difficult.

Social Media Knowledge By examining respondents’ ideas on their own social media knowledge and best practices, we found that both sectors think they have a moderate understanding of social media. Perceived knowledge appears not to be sector-determined. Industrial interviewees link knowledge to practical insights and skillfulness while IT refers to strategically understanding processes and opportunities to achieve predetermined goals. Industrial respondents assert that duration and extensiveness of social media activities determine knowledge. I think we are experts. The reasoning behind their usage determines for me whether you are an expert or not: considering the right ways to deal with those media and adopting a goal-oriented working attitude. (IT6) I have too little knowledge, I’m in apprenticeship. It’s all new for me, and we haven’t been using it long enough as a company. (Industry5)

Irrespective of knowledge, both sectors assume that best practices depend on the implementation phase and on company specificities such as target groups. While one company representative believes in firm professionalism, another emphasizes that its target audience appreciates playful but appropriate messages. Also, monitoring and exploring important topics for their business on social media become a necessity to secure quick response time to comments. Two respondents emphasize that monitoring remains a continuous process. Then, when sufficiently familiar with social media, companies must actively engage in activities and conversations. Although an important challenge, using social media to provide information on specific themes that seizes customers’ attention is perceived as a success factor.


14


Social Media Procedures Most participants consider a social media strategy a necessity to secure a coherent social media presence. They state that goals and key performance indicators must be put first to prevent aimless usage and to achieve predetermined benefits. However, consistent with our quantitative research, very few companies work strategically. Most industrial companies establish pilot periods to gauge whether social media fits their markets. IT companies work more systematically and believe that social media’s value cannot be estimated without clear objectives. I strongly support setting up a strategy and I proclaim it everywhere I go: you cannot and may not start with social media before clearly knowing what you want to achieve and how you want to achieve it. (IT3) Future-wise, it will be a lot of testing, trial & error: we are going to try, look and see what works and what doesn’t. (Industry2)

As goals are determined when setting up the strategy, this label was assigned to the category procedure. Analysis confirms that social media goals depend on companies’ specificities (see also Nair & Sidhu, 2010). For example, two companies struggle with unfilled vacancies and increasingly use social media for recruiting, while two other respondents, whose HR management heavily relies on outsourcing, stress social media as an important factor in strengthening employee-employer relationships. Overall, participants use social media at the beginning of a business cycle to increase visibility and corporate reputation. They perceive social media as a necessary cost-efficient means to maintain market exposure and influence the corporate image. Since B2B clients are also B2C consumers, creating visibility in consumer markets is perceived as equally important. Contrary to our quantitative findings, interviewees perceive lead generation only as an implicit goal: They rarely purposefully implement social media as direct sales channels to prospects because they judge their commercial impact as limited. By being active on social media, B2B companies hope prospects will find them more easily due to the larger communication reach. Two interviewees even consider social media as inappropriate for networking and lead generation.

Social Media Application Irrespective of a strategic or nonstrategic approach to social media, both sectors execute more or less the same activities and use the same ROI measurements. Interviewees believe that good content determines success and use social media to share press releases, white papers, and information on projects, products, and product launches. What is more, six interviewees recruit through job postings and status updates. Blog owners also try to gain thought leadership by displaying expertise. B2B companies monitor ROI based on sentiment analysis (i.e., analyzing negative/ positive comments on their social media profiles) or measuring the amount of followers, friends, likes, and so on. While most IT companies execute basic web analytics,


Veldeman et al.

15

industrial companies do this to a lesser extent. Both sectors struggle to find the right metrics that measure if awareness led to leads, activities to competitive advantage, and content to added value (see also Nair & Sidhu, 2010). Some interviewees reckon they apply the wrong measurements and therefore only receive indications of social media’s effectiveness. In general, most companies use quantitative metrics. Due to intangible aspects on social media (e.g., conversations’ tone of voice), they judge qualitative measuring to be too difficult. Only one company is confident about its ROI metrics: measuring yields by allocating monetary values to specific actions (e.g., retweets) and executing qualitative top of mind research to measure thought leadership.

Conclusion: B2B Social Media Marketing: A Road Map In this article, we showed that 85.9% of the Belgian B2B companies that participated in our research use social media to ensure their influence on target groups at times when markets and buying processes are changing. Paralleling research by Michaelidou et al. (2011), our analysis confirmed that IT B2B companies are more inclined to adopt social media than their industrial counterparts as they perceive less disadvantages, are more familiar with new technologies, and believe that their stakeholders already use social media. In contrast, industrial companies postpone thorough and systematic social media activities. A total of 40.8% of the sampled IT companies implement a social media strategy against only 26.7% of the industrial B2B companies (Table 1). By questioning perceived usefulness and ease of use, this article showed how TAM can serve as a model for investigating B2B companies’ social media adoption. In particular, the model helped explain why industrial enterprises fall behind on IT businesses and helped unravel the differences between both groups’ social media use. Overall, social media are of interest to B2B enterprises because B2B companies perceive few risks and multiple advantages. Yet industrial companies evaluate social media’s usefulness lower than IT enterprises and perceive negative comments or inappropriate messages as a risk and disadvantage. However, quantitative research did not suffice to explain why industrial companies are less likely to use social media. Qualitative in-depth interviewing helped us further unravel the differences between both sectors and gain insight into practice constraints such as limited ability, time, environmental or organizational limits, or unconscious habits. Similar to U.K. research results (Michaelidou et al., 2011), our interviews showed that Belgian IT B2B companies are more motivated to use social media than industrial enterprises because of their innovativeness and affinity with technology. Belgian IT companies are more likely to materialize the benefits of increasing brand awareness and the probability of finding prospects. Our interviews suggest that IT companies’ communication mix is more effective through social media. Contrary to U.S. research (ThomasNet, 2011), Belgian industrial companies do not expect their target audience to be present on social media platforms, stating this as their main reason for nonadoption of social media. Future research should investigate the overall possible economic consequences of social media adoption in B2B markets, such as changes in communication investments


16


and purchasing processes. B2B enterprises are in apprenticeship on how to achieve the benefits from social media’s broader communication reach. While most industrial enterprises discover by practice what works for their companies, IT enterprises operate significantly more strategically. Future research, with a single focus on attitudes, knowledge, or implementation strategies, is needed to obtain better insight into these differences. Based on the research results discussed above, we conclude this article by listing various suggested actions that can help B2B companies effectively leverage social media. First, since B2B buyers increasingly use social media for third-party feedback (Base One, 2011), companies should apply social media at the beginning of the buying cycle. By creating more market exposure through spontaneous and accessible media channels, enterprises will be more easily detected and approached by prospects. Essential here is to understand the businesses in the target group. Then, by actively engaging in activities and conversations, one may increase word of mouth, customer ideation, and corporate reputation. Here, providing good and relevant content and responding quickly to comments determine success. In this context, we want to argue that social media platforms are too often treated by B2B companies as discrete and separate channels. As stated in Business Horizons’ special issue on social media, B2B companies should not incorporate social media as stand-alone elements in their activities but should “consider both social and traditional media as part of an ecosystem whereby all elements work together toward a common objective” (Hanna, Rohm, & Crittenden, 2011, p. 272). Linked to this suggestion is the prerequisite not to treat social media as a whole but to recognize their properties and unique affordances. In that respect, clearly social media “is neither a perfect substitute for traditional marketing, nor is it one-size-fits-all” (Weinberg & Pehlivan, 2011, p. 281). Finally, adopting social media in a B2B environment requires, as argued by Kietzmann, Hermkens, McCarthy, and Silvestre (2011), letting go of many established —but ill-suited— management methods. Businesses need to be willing to operate in an unstable and dynamic context where few things are established (e.g., measuring the ROI of social media) but where creative and expressive affordances are abound. This article has shown that almost 86% of the 92 Belgian B2B companies that were sampled have adopted these affordances.

Appendix Online Survey Social Media Usage 1. Does your company use social media for commercial or other purposes? By social media we mean applications such as LinkedIn, Twitter, Facebook, YouTube, Wikis, and blogs. E-mail is not concluded in the group of social media.


Veldeman et al.

17

a. Yes, our company uses social media, but we do not actively monitor what our competitors and customers do on social media. b. Yes, our company uses social media, and we follow what our competitors and customers do on those media. c. No, our company does not use social media, but we do follow what our competitors and customers do on those media. d. No, our company does not use social media, and we do not follow what our competitors and customers do on those media. For those who have answered a or b to the first question 1A.1. Which of the following social media does your company use? ○ A company blog ○ Facebook ○ Flickr ○ Foursquare ○ Google+ ○ LinkedIn ○ Scribd ○ SlideShare ○ Twitter ○ Wikipedia ○ YouTube ○ Other:___ 1A.2. Which statement fits your company best? ○ We’re experimenting with social media. ○ We are implementing a social media strategy. ○ The implementation of the strategy is behind us, and we are using social media following our plan. ○ No answer, we do not know. 1A.3. How long has your company already been using social media for commercial or other purposes? ○ Less than 6 months ○ Less than 2 years ○ More than 2 years 1A.4. How often does your company use social media? ○ Several times a day ○ Once a day ○ Several times a week


18 ○ ○ ○ ○ ○

International Journal of Business Communication Once a week Several times a month Once a month Less than monthly No answer, we do not know

1A.5. What are the main reasons to use social media (tick up to 3 answer possibilities)? ○ To discover new sales opportunities (lead generation) ○ To increase awareness of our company (brand awareness) ○ To monitor which conversations are going on about our company, our products, and our market ○ We are active because our competitors are more and more active on those media ○ To recruit new personnel ○ To maintain relationships with customers and partners ○ To attract visitors to our website (traffic building) ○ Search engine optimization ○ Other: ___ 1A.6. What are the main benefits for your business (tick up to 3 answer possibilities)? ○ Better engagement with customers (customer engagement) ○ To be able to build more relationships ○ Quick feedback on our business and innovations ○ Larger communication reach ○ Monitoring ○ To position oneself as an expert (thought leadership) ○ Low cost ○ To create credibility among partners, customers, and other third parties ○ Other: ___ 1A.7. Do you agree or disagree with the following statements (indicate strongly agree, agree, neutral, disagree, or strongly disagree)? ○ Thanks to social media my company can respond more adequate to market developments. ○ The dialogue with customers and prospects will be facilitated through the use of social media. ○ Social media can help my company share more quickly information with customers, partners, and other external parties. ○ Social media are easy to use. ○ On social media we actually give too much information about our company, allowing competitors to gain a lot of insight.


Veldeman et al.

19

○ We try to avoid it, but some colleagues place too much nonsense about our company on social media. ○ We try to avoid it, but some colleagues post wrong information about our company on social media. ○ Most B2B companies using social media do not have a clear strategy. ○ Most B2B companies using social media do not obtain measurable results. ○ Social media have become an integral part of the B2B sales process. ○ Due to social media it has become more difficult to tie personnel to our company. ○ The use of social media requires little mental effort. 1A.8. How do you measure the results of your activities on social media? (= open question) ○ For those who have answered c or d to the first question 1B.1. Does your company consider to start using social media in the near future? ○ Yes ○ No 1B.1A.1. If yes was answered When are you planning to start using social media for your company? ○ Still in 2012 ○ In the course of 2013 ○ Later 1B.1A.2. What are the main reasons to use social media (tick up to 3 answer possibilities)? ○ To discover new sales opportunities (lead generation) ○ To increase awareness of our company (brand awareness) ○ To monitor which conversations are going on about our company, our products, and our market ○ We are active because our competitors are more and more active on those media ○ To recruit new personnel ○ To maintain relationships with customers and partners ○ To attract visitors to our website (traffic building) ○ Search engine optimization ○ Other: ___ 1B.A.3. Do you agree or disagree with the following statements (indicate strongly agree, agree, neutral, disagree, or strongly disagree)?


20


○ Thanks to social media my company can respond more adequate to market developments. ○ The dialogue with customers and prospects will be facilitated through the use of social media. ○ Social media can help my company share more quickly information with customers, partners, and other external parties. ○ Social media are easy to use. ○ On social media we actually give too much information about our company, allowing competitors to gain a lot of insight. ○ We try to avoid it, but some colleagues place too much nonsense about our company on social media. ○ Most B2B companies using social media do not have a clear strategy. ○ Most B2B companies using social media do not obtain measurable results. ○ Social media have become an integral part of the B2B sales process. ○ The use of social media requires little mental effort. 1B.1B. When no was answered Why is your company not using social media? ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○

Social media have no added value for our company. Social media channels are not easy to set up and ask a big time investment. Our target groups are not using these media. The use of social media is only a waste of time. We do not have enough knowledge to use social media. The profitability of such activities cannot to be measured. There is too much risk of false information spreading out. We are still looking into how social media can help us. We do not have enough budget. We want to protect personal information about employees. Social media is a hype, it’s not worth to invest in it. Other: ___

Profile 2. In which department are you employed? ○ Sales ○ Communication ○ Marketing ○ Personnel management ○ Research and development (R&D) ○ General management ○ Other: ___ 2.1. Which is your sector?


Veldeman et al.

21

○ IT ○ Industry ○ Other: ___ 2.2. How many employees does your company count? ○ 1-9 ○ 10-49 ○ 50-250 ○ ≥251 Qualitative Research 3. Are you willing to participate in the qualitative part of this study in June 2012 (a personal interview of 45 minutes)? ○ No ○ Yes: My phone number is ___ Declaration of Conflicting Interests The author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Funding The author(s) received no financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

References Accenture Global Marketing. (2011). Making social media pay: Rethinking social media’s potential to bolster B2B interactions, customer loyalty, revenues and brand reputation. Retrieved from http://www.accenture.com/us-en/Pages/insight-making-social-media-pay. aspx?c=mc_othrposts_10000036&n=sm_0910 Annabi, H., & McGann, S. T. (2012). Social media as the missing link: Connecting communities of practice to business strategy. Journal of Organizational Computing and Electronic Commerce, 23, 56-83. AT&T. (2011). The business impacts of social networking. A white paper in cooperation with Early Strategies Consulting. Retrieved from http://www.business.att.com/content/whitepaper/ WP-soc_17172_v3_11-10-08.pdf Base One. (2011). Buyersphere report 2011. The annual changing B2B buyer behaviour. Retrieved from http://www.slideshare.net/EspaceDirect/buyersphere-report-2011-theannual-survey-of-changing-b2b-buyer-behaviour Baehr, C., & Alex-Brown, K. (2010). Assessing the value of corporate blogs: A social capital perspective. IEEE Transactions on Professional Communication, 53, 358-369. Capstone. (2011). B2B social media “slow to take-off in industrial sector.” Retrieved from http://www.capstonemedia.com/social-media-use-slow-to-take-off-in-industrial-sector/ Davis, F., Bagozzi, R. P., & Warshaw, P. (1989). User acceptance of computer technology: A comparison of two theoretical models. Management Science, 35, 982-1003.


22


Ganassali, S. (2008). The influence of the design of web survey questionnaires on the quality of responses. Survey Research Methods, 2, 21-32. Gosling, S. D., Vazire, S., Srivastava, S., & John, O. P. (2004). Should we trust web-based studies? A comparative analysis of six preconceptions about Internet questionnaires. American Psychologist, 59, 93-104. Hanna, R., Rohm, A., & Crittenden, V. L. (2011). We’re all connected: The power of the social media ecosystem. Business Horizons, 54, 265-273. Hosford, C. (2012). “BtoB” study shows surge in social media marketing. Retrieved from http:// www.btobonline.com/article/20120514/SOCIAL06/305149941/btob-study-shows-surgein-social-media-marketing Hu, P. J., Chau, P. Y. K., Sheng, O. R. L., & Tam, K. Y. (1999). Examining the technology acceptance model using physician acceptance of telemedicine technology. Journal of Management information Systems, 16, 91-112. Kaplan, A. M., & Haenlein, M. (2010). Users of the world, unite! The challenges and opportunities of Social Media. Business Horizons, 53, 59-68. Kietzmann, J. H., Hermkens, K., McCarthy, I. P., & Silvestre, B. S. (2011). Social media? Get serious! Understanding the functional building blocks of social media. Business Horizons, 54, 241-251. Leboff, G. (2011). Sticky marketing: Why everything in marketing has changed and what to do about it. London, England: Kogan Page. Legris, P., Inghamb, J., & Collerette, P. (2003). Why do people use information technology? A critical review of the technology acceptance model. Information & Management, 40, 191-204. Marketo. (2010). The definitive guide to B2B social media. San Mateo, CA: Author. Michaelidou, N., Siamagka, N. T., & Christodoulides, G. (2011). Usage, barriers and measurement of social media marketing: An exploratory investigation of small and medium B2B brands. Industrial Marketing Management, 40, 1153-1159. Nair, A., & Sidhu, J. (2010). Social media for B2B marketing. B2B Bento, 1. Retrieved from http://www.b2bento.com/2010/01/social-media-for-b2b-marketing-free-whitepaper/ Paulsen, K. (2011). Truth from the trenches: Insights from Penton Marketing Services’ 2011 B-to-B marketing needs survey. Washington, DC: Penton Marketing Services. Retrieved from http://preview.insidepenton.com/registeredrep/PMSmarketingwhitepaper.pdf Rodriguez, M., Peterson, R. M., & Krishnan, V. (2012). Social media’s influence on businessto-business sales performance. Journal of Personal Selling and Sales Management, 32, 365-378. Schroeder, H. (2013). The art of business relationships through social media. Ivy Business Journal Online. Retrieved from http://iveybusinessjournal.com/topics/the-organization/ the-art-of-business-relationships-through-social-media#.U0UK3Z1CTDc SpotONvision. (2011). Ontwikkelingen in B2B marketing: TNS Nipo. Retrieved from http:// www.tns-nipo.com/pages/pdf/TNS%20NIPO%20B2B%20Marketing%20Barometer%20 2011.pdf SpotONvision. (2012). B2B marketing barometer 2012. Amsterdam, Netherlands: TNS Nipo. Steyn, P., Salehi-Sangari, E., Pitt, L., Parent, M., & Berthon, P. (2010). The social media release as a public relations tool: Intentions to use among B2B bloggers. Public Relations Review, 36, 87-89. ThomasNet. (2011). Using social media to source industrial products/services. Retrieved from http://promoteyourbusiness.thomasnet.com/ipb/201107_social_media.html


Veldeman et al.

23

Turner, M., Kitchenham, B., Brereton, P., Charters, S., & Budgen, D. (2010). Does the technology acceptance model predict actual use? A systematic literature review. Information and Software Technology, 52, 463-479. Van Ittersum, K., Rogers, W. A., Capar, M., Caine, K. E., O’Brien, M. A., Parsons, L. J., & Fisk, A. D. (2006). Understanding technology acceptance: Phase 1: Literature review and qualitative model development. Retrieved from https://smartech.gatech.edu/jspui/ bitstream/1853/40580/1/HFA-TR-0602_TechAccept%20PROPRIETARY.pdf Venkatesh, V. (2000). Determinants of perceived ease of use: Integrating control, intrinsic motivation, and emotion into the technology acceptance model. Information Systems Research, 11, 342-365. Venkatesh, V., & Davis, F. D. (2000). A theoretical extension of the technology acceptance model: Four longitudinal field studies. Management Science, 46, 186-204. Venkatesh, V., Morris, M. G., Davis, G. B., & Davis, F. D. (2003). User acceptance of information technology: Toward a unified view. MIS Quarterly, 27, 425-478. Venkatesh, V., & Bala, H. (2008). Technology acceptance: Model 3 and a research agenda on interventions. Decision Sciences, 39, 273-315. Vernuccio, M. (2014). Communicating corporate brands through social media: An exploratory study. International Journal of Business Communication, 51, 211-233. doi:0.1177/2329488414525400 Weinberg, B. D., & Pehlivan, E. (2011). Social spending: Managing the social media mix. Business Horizons, 54, 275-282.

Author Biographies Céline Veldeman is a communication specialist at LUON, a customer relationship marketing agency located in Mechelen. She specializes in developing and implementing online and offline brand marketing and communication programs. Ellen Van Praet is an assistant professor at Ghent University, where she teaches business communication skills to master’s students of multilingual communication. She has published several articles in the field of business communication and media discourse in journals such as Journal of Business Communication, Text & Talk, Journal of Pragmatics, Journal of Language and Politics, Discourse, and Context & Media. Peter Mechant (PhD in communication sciences) works at the research group for iMindsMICT at Ghent University. He has been involved in research projects focusing on e-culture, Web 2.0, and online communities and has published in journals such as Observatorio, International Journal of Web-Based Communities, Contemporary Social Science, New Media & Society, Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, and Cyberpsychology, Behavior, and Social Networking.
