How social a social networking platform can be

846
-1

Published on

Presentation of my Master Thesis (Sept. 2011) giving an overview of my main conclusions concerning research performed on Mindz.com. Gives an insight into:
- The social factors at play in terms of design, collaborativeness and connectivity;
- The motivations behind sharing amonst multiple platforms due to collaborative features;
- The features needed in terms of design to drive Word-of-Mouth and letting this be the driver of adoption of a current/ new Social Networking Platform;
- Motivations to a strong advocation of a holistic view on social media and a platform approach for organizations.

Published in: Technology, Education
0 Comments
0 Likes
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Views
Total Views
846
On Slideshare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
0
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
4
Comments
0
Likes
0
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide

How social a social networking platform can be

  1. 1. If we build the people, they'll build the business<br />Stef Karakasis introduces:<br />A set of complimentary factors providing insights & applications for creating<br />Paths of value through Online knowledge sharing.<br />
  2. 2. Background + Focus<br />Social Networking has reached critical mass, how do we harness this for the business ?<br />Study a behavourial outcome in a particular context and provide linkage between people, processes and outcomes on a greater scale.<br />
  3. 3. Context of the study =<br />Big Question: What are the factors which influence the sharing of knowledge in Online Communities of Practice on a Social Networking Platform?<br />
  4. 4. Research approach<br />Weapons of choice<br /><ul><li> Online survey fuelled trough blogging @ Mindz.com & spreading updates via Twitter;
  5. 5. Over 2000 views on the 2 blogs describing the progress made resulting in collaboration with other 3 members of Mindz.com;
  6. 6. Regression Analyses + Path analysis (SPSS AMOS) to contrast results.</li></li></ul><li>Online trust drives on personal experiences and significantly impacts WOM behaviour.<br />Context is key for Content.<br />Online trust does not have a significant impact on satisfaction with regards to the platform.<br />
  7. 7. Interpersonal & Distributive justice matter the most for driving online trust.<br />We are socialpeople. This is not new.<br />You get what you give.<br />
  8. 8. User experience (Social & Design)<br />Satisfaction and greater Satisfaction leads to greater<br />Word-of-Mouth via (collaborative) features such as Weblogs.<br />
  9. 9. Most active members (Hubs) are those that are most likely to spread WOM and continue to share with others.<br />Human engagement for brand preference & Loyalty building.<br />
  10. 10. Like slide from scot CFA<br />Using an Social Networking Platform significantly impacts WOM behaviour online<br />“ ...tools don’t get socially interesting until they get technologically boring.”<br />- Clay Shirky<br />
  11. 11. Sharing is Caring<br />Privacy will become a bigger concern. Justice online<br />
  12. 12. <ul><li> Increase sample size through performing research across platforms;
  13. 13. Collaborate with data mining (Clipit, StatSoft) & research companies (InSites) when going after focal relationships;
  14. 14. Always go for the holistic view and iterate as much as you can;
  15. 15. Talk to as much people from different backgrounds/ disciplines to gather insights & opinions;
  16. 16. Most Social Networking Platforms amplify that what there are seeded with, whether this is</li></ul> promotional use (Mindz.com), social (Facebook) or transactional (Bitcoin);<br /><ul><li>WOM is the currency, since every customer is a potential journalist, brand spokesperson online.</li></ul>Get out of the Building!!!<br />
  17. 17. Back-up Slides<br />Tested research model;<br />Hypotheses<br />
  18. 18. Results Tested Model<br />SocialROI = (Gains – Investment) = Mindz.com<br />Investment<br />
  19. 19. Research Questions<br />Sub questions:<br /><ul><li>How does justice theory influence satisfaction within an OCoP?;</li></ul>Positive, significant effect of justice on trust whereas interpersonal and distributive<br /> justice showed having a positive significant impact on trust.<br /><ul><li>How does trust in community members influence SNP satisfaction?;</li></ul>Trust does not have a significant impact on satisfaction concerning the SNP but does have a significant effect on WOM behaviour.<br /><ul><li>How does SNP satisfaction influence Word of Mouth behaviour?;</li></ul> In this research the effects of WOM and the current ways in which members use the SNP were various but satisfaction regarding the SNP significantly impacts WOM behaviour.<br /><ul><li>How do the outcomes of SNP satisfaction influence the continuation of knowledge</li></ul> sharing within an OCoP?<br /> Communities and networks of practice reflect effects of social influence in that individuals adopt and continue using SNPs to enhance their existing social structures and generate new business. The way<br /> members use the SNP, which could be self-promotion or relational activities, and how people respond to their personal efforts does impact their willingness to keep contributing to dialogue and possible collaboration with others.<br />
  20. 20. Hypotheses<br />H1a: Justice is positively, significantly, related to SNP satisfaction - Accepted<br />H1b: Justice is positively, significantly, related to the intention to keep on sharingonline - Accepted<br />H1c: Distributive justice is positively, significantly, related to trust - Accepted<br />H1d:Procedural justice is positively, significantly, related to trust– Rejected*<br />H1e:Interpersonal justice is positively, significantly, related to trust – Accepted*<br />H1f: Informational justice is positively, significantly, related to trust - Accepted<br />H2a: Trust in members is positively, significantly, related to SNP satisfaction – Rejected**<br />H2b: Trust in members is positively, significantly, related to Word-of-Mouth behaviour - Accepted<br />H3: SNP satisfaction is positively, significantly, related to SNP uses - Accepted<br />H4a: SNP uses is positively, significantly related to the intention to keep on sharing online - Accepted<br />H4b: SNP uses is positively, significantly related to WOM behaviour - Accepted<br />H5a: SNP satisfaction is positively, significantly, related to SNP WOM behaviour - Accepted<br />H5b: SNP WOM behaviour is positively, significantly related to the intention to keep<br />on sharing online- Accepted<br />* Proc. (negative) & Interp. Justice turned out to be non-significant in the regression analysis.<br />** Justice  Continuance of sharing: weaker significant effect in regression then path analysis.<br />

×