Customer Engagement, Social Media and the AFL An Applied Study

AMN406: APPLIED STUDY Customer Engagement, Social Media and the AFL

LECTURER: AMANDA BEATSON

TUTOR: EMMA KARANGES

STUDENT: ZACH FENTON

ID: N5690714

WORD COUNT: 4,851

1 Zach Fenton AMN406

Contents 1. Proposal and Literature Review Summary ...................................................................................... 2

2. Research .......................................................................................................................................... 3

Aim ...................................................................................................................................................... 3

Methodology ....................................................................................................................................... 3

Results ................................................................................................................................................. 5

3. Analysis ........................................................................................................................................... 8

Problem Review .................................................................................................................................. 8

RO1: Social Media as a multi-dimensional, cognitive, behavioural and emotional construct ........... 8

Behavioural Considerations ................................................................................................................ 8

Dimension choice and relation to engagement .................................................................................. 9

RO2: Cocreative Experiences .............................................................................................................. 9

4. Recommendations and Conclusion .............................................................................................. 13

Findings ............................................................................................................................................. 13

Contribution to Literature ................................................................................................................. 13

Implications for social media page administrators ........................................................................... 14

Research limitations and Future Research ....................................................................................... 15

5. References .................................................................................................................................... 17

6. Appendices .................................................................................................................................... 19

Appendix 1: Team Selection Criteria and Membership Performance .................................................. 19

Appendix 2: Terminology - Fanpage Karma .......................................................................................... 20

Appendix 3: Dimensions and Sub dimensions ...................................................................................... 21

Fan Interaction – Examples ................................................................................................................... 22

Data Collection………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………..23


1. Proposal and Literature Review Summary

In the highly competitive industry of professional sport, fans can turn on their own teams in a matter

of minutes of underperformance. Invariably however, one team must lose for one team to win. Being

a fan of a team and watching a game is more than a transaction based form of entertainment – it is a

highly emotional, passionate relationship that is ripe for feelings of loyalty, trust, satisfaction, identity

and between fan and sporting team. Add to this the fact that the sporting industry is built on repeat

customers - fans who view games week in week out and members who pay an annual fee year in year

out. It is apparent then, that a team who does not win on a consistent basis, is likely to fail – unless

fans are fans for more than just points and wins. Customer Engagement is an emerging field in

marketing literature that may be used to address the reasons for success (or failure) of these

organisations, irrespective of team performance on the field.

Customer Engagement (CE) considers the affective commitment of customers and their feelings

toward organisations (Bowden, 2009). It is proposed to be a multidimensional framework, based upon

three engagement dimensions – cognitive, behavioural and emotional (Brodie, Hollebeek, Juric, & Ilic,

2011). Through cocreative, highly interactive experiences, organisations can engage their customers

in unique ways to further develop the CE relationship (Brodie et al., 2011; van Doorn et al., 2010).

However, while CE should be considered an exciting and potentially revealing area of marketing

research, its nascent position in the marketing literature has led to multiple calls for further enquiry

into how CE is utilised in practice (Brodie et al., 2011; van Doorn et al., 2010). Specific calls are made

to review the proposed multi-dimensional nature of CE (Brodie et al., 2011; Dessart, Veloutsou, &

Morgan-Thomas, 2015; van Doorn, 2011) as well as the interactive nature of cocreation and how it is

utilised (Brodie et al., 2011; Cabiddu, Carlo, & Piccoli, 2014; Malthouse & Calder, 2011; van Doorn et

al., 2010) to develop CE.

This applied study aims to address these calls by applying theoretical constructs of CE against industry

practice, to further understanding of the subject. Simultaneously, the sporting industry could benefit

from a greater understanding of how customers (hereon in ‘fans’) do engage and can engage with

their sporting teams.

Specifically this study will review the Facebook pages of 3 AFL football teams – the Brisbane Lions,

Collingwood Magpies and Carlton Blues. Facebook has been chosen as the source of observational

data as the emergence of Customer Engagement as a field of study has been partly attributed to the

rise of Social Media (Sashi, 2012) and Social Media has been identified as one means to increase

Customer Engagement with customers (Cabiddu et al., 2014; Sashi, 2012; Yoshida & Gordon, 2014).


On this basis the following research question is proposed:

How do sporting organisations facilitate cocreative experiences

via social media to improve customer engagement?

2. Research

Aim

The purpose of this research is to observe CE and cocreation on social media, between football teams

and their respective fans. In line with the research question, and addressing current calls for a better

understanding of the multidimensional nature of CE and importance of cocreation, two research

objectives have been identified;

Research Objective 1 (RO1): Observe whether cognitive, behavioural or emotional dimensions are

evident in Facebook posts and whether these appear to elicit different responses amongst fans.

Research Objective 2 (RO2): Identify how organisations are developing cocreative activities on social

media platforms to interact with their fans.

Methodology

Team selection

The three teams have been chosen based on 2014 & 2013 annual membership and home game

attendance. Annual membership and home game tickets are a major source of revenue for clubs and

as such paid members and attendees could be considered as customers of the club. For 2014

Collingwood, Carlton and Brisbane ranked 1st, 8th and 16th out of 18 in the league, respectively for

annual membership (Appendix 1). For 2014 Collingwood, Carlton and Brisbane ranked 2nd, 6th and 16th

out of 18 in the league for home game attendance.

Social Media Channel Selection

Facebook has been selected as Fan reactions (Likes, Comments and Shares) are readily available

publicly. Because Facebook limits characters to 60,000, a wide amount of content can be posted, and

subsequently analysed. Conversely, Twitter limits posts to 140 characters, forcing administrators to

generally keep posts very short or redirect to external sites. This is not conducive to observational,

qualitative data research and as such was excluded. YouTube was considered, however after reviewing

the YouTube accounts of the teams and their respective websites, it was noted that most video was

posted to the team’s respective website and only some videos were posted to YouTube. Further, only

Likes and Comments are available publically for YouTube content.


Research Method

As this is an observational study, this research will utilise methodology that can be readily applied to

publicly available on Facebook. In addressing cocreation between sports fans (Uhrich, 2014) utilised

the observational method of netnography to study fan interactions on social media platforms. This is

supported by (Brodie, Ilic, Juric, & Hollebeek, 2013) who, in addressing customer engagement in a

virtual brand community, also adopted netnography as a research method.

A netnographic approach will be suitable, as it will allow for an interpretation of the cognitive,

behavioural and emotional dimensions (CBE Dimensions) as well as a qualitative assessment of

cocreative experiences observed on the Facebook pages.

Research data has been sourced from Facebook using social networking analytics software available

at Fanpage Karma (Fanpage Karma, 2015). The Top 30 posts, from May 5, 2015-May 25, 2015, have

been chosen based on reactions per fan, divided by page fans (to account for fan number variance).

The Bottom 5 posts from each team have also been considered, giving a sample of 45 posts in total.

Reactions (See Appendix 2 for terminology definitions) have been used as the measurement of fan

engagement, adapted from the Facebook Metrics for Fan engagement, put forward by Ángeles

Oviedo-García, Muñoz-Expósito, Castellanos-Verdugo, & Sancho-Mejías (2014). It should be noted

that as reach, click-through rates and impressions are unavailable, the reaction measurement of fan

engagement is not precisely the same as the metrics proposed by Ángeles Oviedo-García et al. (2014).

However this approach is still the closest possible, based on the limitations of an observational

research method.

In addressing RO1, posts have been assessed as being unidimensional or multidimensional and if

multidimensional, the dominant dimension is noted. In examining posts, the 7 sub-dimension

framework of CBE dimensions, presented by Dessart et al. (2015) (Appendix 3) has been utilised to

predict which CBE dimension the post is anticipated to elicit.

The aim of RO2 is to identify the purpose of the post, from the team’s perspective. In addressing RO2

the Top 30 posts, plus the 5 lowest performing posts from each team have been assessed and classified

across common themes.


Results

RO1: CBE Dimensions

From analysis of the Top 30 and Bottom 15 posts a number of things have been observed. Firstly, there

is an equal divide between unidimensional and multidimensional structured posts (Figure 1). The

dominant CBE Dimension for all posts is behavioural, with 22 out of 45 being behavioural dominant

(Figure 2). When secondary dimensions are considered as well as dominant, behavioural dimensions

are evident in 30 of 45 of posts.

All teams are posting behavioural posts most often (Figure 3), however Brisbane is posting more

emotional posts than cognitive posts, compared to Carlton and Collingwood who are posting more

cognitive, than emotional posts.

In completing a comparison of the best and worst performing posts and CBE dimensions, the count of

30 Top posts was divided by 2 to give a comparable analysis, based on count of CBE dimension,

between the top and worst performing posts (Figure 4). Overall, the top performing posts tend to

have a focus on behavioural or emotional dimensions, whereas the worst performing posts are

predominantly behavioural focussed. Further to this, there were no emotional orientated posts

observed in the worst performing posts.


Finally, in analysing the engagement levels between the different CBE dimensions, a reaction weighted

analysis (Figure 5) was conducted. Overall, the total number of behavioural posts generated higher

levels of reaction, than cognitive or emotional (Figure 5). However, as can be seen above, there are

many more behavioural posts than cognitive or emotional, so the total weighted reaction score was

divided by total number of dominant posts of that kind, to give a comparable comparison (Figure 6)

As is seen above, when adjusted for number of posts, emotional posts have a higher level of

engagement than behavioural or cognitive posts.

RO2: Cocreative Posts

After a preliminary review of the posts four key themes have been identified;

Facilitative: used to increase interactivity or generate a response between the team and fans or

fans amongst themselves.

Insightful: provides deeper information about the team or player (past or present) – either

personal information about a player or behind the scenes look at the team. Tends to be more

emotional than informative theme

Informative: much like a noticeboard, the primary purpose of this is to deliver information to fans.

Includes scores, times and game reviews. Tends to be more factual, than the insightful theme.

Promotional: highlighting an upcoming event/cause/the team etc. Used as a promotional channel

When determining whether a posts was cocreative or not, a focus was put on the interactivity of the

post (Brodie et al., 2011) and the uniqueness of the experience for the fan (van Doorn et al., 2010).


The outcomes of the analysis suggest that facilitative (15) and insightful (14) posts are most

commonly used, followed by promotional (10) and informative (6) (Figure 7).

Overall, the bottom 15 posts are predominantly made up of promotional (8) and insightful (5) posts,

whereas the Top 30 (adjusted to account for difference in number) tend to facilitative (7) and insightful

(4.5). The Brisbane Lions and Collingwood both produce facilitative posts (6) most commonly, whereas

Carlton produces insightful posts (5) most often. Finally, facilitative posts deliver the highest level of

engagement, whereas promotional posts deliver the least.

Figure 7 Theme analysis Overall Figure 8 Theme analysis used in Best and Worst Performing posts


3. Analysis

Problem Review

If a team is to be financially viable over the long term, it is reliant upon repeat purchase from its fans.

As can be seen in (Appendix 1) it is unlikely a team will win games every week and as such teams must

engage with their fans to ensure they remain committed. This analysis considers the collected data,

in light of the literature, to assess whether current industry practice is congruent with literary

expectations.

RO1: Social Media as a multi-dimensional, cognitive, behavioural and emotional

construct

In attempting to identify the most successful CBE dimensions to employ, when aiming to increase CE,

it is important to note the existence of the theoretical CBE dimensions first. Brodie et al. (2011)

identified that the CE literature tends to focus on a mix of behavioural, emotional and cognitive

dimensions. Comparatively, van Doorn (2011) and van Doorn et al. (2010) suggests that CE is

predominantly constructed of the behavioural dimension, although suggests the two theories put

forth need not be exclusive (van Doorn, 2011).

In line with Brodie et al. (2011;2013) and Dessart et al. (2015) this analysis of social media posts found

that all three CBE dimensions were present across posts. However, an even divide of multidimensional

and unidimensional constructs has been observed. Within the 22 unidimensional posts, the

behavioural dimension is most common (14 of 22), followed by emotional (7 of 22) CBE dimension.

This suggests support for Fundamental Proposition 4, as put forward by Brodie et al. (2011), whereby

CBE dimensions will vary under a set of specific situational contingencies.

Behavioural Considerations

In considering the Best (Top 30) and Worst (Bottom 15) performing posts, the behavioural dimension

is overwhelming dominant, in that it occurs as either a dominant or secondary dimension in 30 of 45

posts. All three teams utilised behavioural posts most often.

Social media channels such as Facebook are inherently behaviourally orientated - a like, share or

comment can be classed as a behavioural manifestation towards the post (Ángeles Oviedo-García et

al., 2014; Dessart et al., 2015). Although not tested in this research, simply viewing or reading a post

could be classed as learning, and as such considered a behavioural manifestation (Ángeles Oviedo-

García et al., 2014).

These findings, within the context of social media consumption and sport, find support for van Doorn,

(2011) in that the behavioural dimension may play an important role within CE. Conversely, this


research endorses the multi-dimensional nature of CE and refutes the unidimensional proposition put

forth.

Dimension choice and relation to engagement

Understanding CBE dimensions and engagement are important, as this helps teams to understand

which types of posts are likely to elicit the highest level of engagement. When weighted reaction rates

are adjusted for the number of posts, the emotional (also known as affective) dimension performed

much better than behavioural or cognitive posts.

This is in line with Sashi (2012) who suggests that when emotional bonds and relational exchange are

high, customer engagement occurs. All emotional posts were amongst the top performing posts,

suggesting these posts elicit a much better response than cognitive or behavioural posts.

However, it is suspected, but not confirmed, that as emotional posts tend to be posted on game day,

more fans are engaging with these particular posts. Comparatively, cognitive and behavioural

dominant posts occur throughout the week as well as during game day. This suggestion is supported

by Yoshida & Gordon (2014) who confirm that in the instance of a fans team winning a game, they will

engage in BIRGing (basking in reflected glory) behaviour. A Facebook reaction would be an example

of BIRGing behaviour on social media. Simultaneously however, CORFing (cutting off reflected failure)

behaviour would also increase engagement levels, based on the metrics adopted in this research. This

is evident on the Carlton page, whereby fans criticise the team and/or coach for losing. This further

highlights the necessity for further research into positive and negative valence in regards to CE (van

Doorn, 2011; van Doorn et al., 2010).

RO2: Cocreative Experiences

Cocreative experiences have been determined as an integral component of the CE process (Brodie et

al., 2011; Sashi, 2012; van Doorn et al., 2010; Yoshida & Gordon, 2014). Importantly for teams

however, is what types of posts elicit the strongest CE response. In analysing the data, a number of

themes have been identified and compared to the literature to address post effectiveness.

In reviewing the posts on team pages, four key themes were identified, that loosely group posts into

the objective of the post, from the teams’ perspective. These four themes are Facilitative, Insightful,

Informative and Promotional and are addressed in detail in Results: RO2: Cocreative Posts.

Facilitative Posts

Facilitative posts are those that aim to improve interaction between the team and fans and fans

amongst themselves – these posts are utilised to build the online community. Of the four identified


themes, facilitative is the most engaging and is the closest linked theme to a truly interactive

cocreative experience. Facilitative posts add to the consumption experience of the fan (van Doorn et

al., 2010), in that they can create a virtual crowd, during game times and develop an online community

to discuss current events surrounding their team at other times (Brodie et al., 2013) (Appendix 4).

Facilitative posts are important as they help to customise the fan consumption experience, which

leads to improved customer engagement (van Doorn et al., 2010). This is supported by Vivek, Beatty,

& Morgan (2012) who propose that “CE will be positively associated with greater brand community

involvement with the brand that is the focus of his or her engagement”.

Given the importance of facilitative posts in building brand communities it is unsurprising that

facilitative post are the dominant post type on team pages. Supporting this, facilitative posts are the

most used post in the best performing posts, whereas facilitative posts are the least used in the worst

performing. Common sense might suppose that it would be unwise to post a facilitative post after a

team has lost – however Brisbane do so successfully by focussing on team highlights, such as “Who do

you think performed best at the Lions tonight?” rather than focussing on the loss itself. Conversely,

Carlton, posted “Fulltime at Etihad Stadium” and “What can you say?” following two dramatic losses.

While these pots by Carlton generated a lot of comments, a large number were negative.

It appears some teams have identified particular comments, questions or pieces of content that are

likely to elicit a reaction from fans. Brisbane focus on generic statements like “Game Time” or “How

good is this?”, whereas Collingwood appear to focus on achievements of the teams Players, e.g. “Our

captain. A champion. A milestone.” This may suggest that fans of different teams respond differently

to different post themes and should be considered when posting.

Finally, in considering CBE dimensions, Facilitative posts tend to be emotional dominant in dimension

(9 of 15), followed by behavioural (5 of 15). While not researched it is suggested this may be because

page administrators believe emotional posts elicit greater CE response or because most facilitative

posts are posted on Game day.

Insightful Posts

Vivek et al. (2012) suggest that an important component of CE is the existence of a two-way

communication channel. Insightful posts look beyond simply communicating across two-way channels

and engage fans by offering a behind the scenes experience. Examples include locker room chats with

players, posting players birthdays and delivering content that is interesting and non-commercial.

Insightful posts are cocreative in nature, in that they allow fans to develop relational value from the

post (Vasquez-parraga, Flores, & Vasquez-parraga, 2015). Fans develop a personal understanding of

their favourite players and in turn may relate to these players on a personal level. As an example, the


Brisbane Lions attend players’ homes and talk about the dogs the player owns. This type of post has

little to do with football, other than developing fan/team relationships, which in turn develops CE

(Vivek et al., 2012).

Research conducted indicates that, when engagement scores are weighted for post frequency,

insightful posts are placed third in respects to reactions produced (Figure 7). This is surprising,

considering informative posts, discussed below, are deemed to be less cocreative than insightful posts.

Unlike facilitative posts, insightful posts are generally cognitive dominant (8 of 14) or behaviour

dominant (5 of 14). This is likely due

to the fact that most insightful posts

are linked to content such as articles

or videos that lend themselves to

attention (cognitive) or sharing

(behaviour) dimensions.

Informative Posts

Informative posts are those that

deliver facts and figures to fans.

They generally represent themselves

as a news post i.e “HALF TIME: The Lions go into the main break leading 7.6.48 – Port 3.9.27”. The key

CE difference between informative and insightful posts is the fact that more people, per post, like and

comment on informative posts. Shares, which are deemed as the highest level of engagement

(Ángeles Oviedo-García et al., 2014), are even between informative and insightful posts.

Initially, informative posts do not appear to meet the definition of cocreative, based on the literature.

The literature suggests that cocreative experiences are interactive (Brodie et al., 2011) and create a

unique experience for the fan (van Doorn et al., 2010). Informative posts can be passively consumed

and unlike insightful posts, there is no opportunity for relational value to occur during consumption.

However, in the action of liking or commenting on an informative post, the fan cocreates an

experience that is both interactive and unique to them. This relates back to the inherent behavioural

construct of social media, as discussed in RO1 – and distinguishes social media channels from other

channels that could deliver information, such as television. With television, there is no opportunity to

cocreate a unique experience with the information presented.

Figure 7. CBE Weighted Engagement Score based on Number of posts


Promotional posts

Promotional posts are the worst performing posts of all the themes identified. Of the 15 worst

performing posts reviewed, 8 were promotional. Further, only 1 of 30 of the top posts were

promotional.

Current promotional posts do not meet the definition of cocreation according to the literature,

particularly interactivity (Brodie et al., 2011) and opportunity to cocreate a unique experience (van

Doorn et al., 2010), and the levels of CE developed through promotional posts reflects this. The biggest

issue with current promotional posts is the fact that they do not offer the opportunity for the fan to

cocreate an experience – rather they must passively consume the teams’ promotional message.

A second issue with promotional post effectiveness is drawn from the social media literature, which

states that content must be relevant and interesting for the pages fans (Kaplan & Haenlein, 2010).

Overall, it would appear the page administrator is not posting content that interests fans, as evidenced

by low reaction rates.


4. Recommendations and Conclusion

In addressing the poor financial performance of clubs in the Australian Football League, revenue was

linked to repeat customers, defined as fans. As one team must lose, in order for one team to win

teams must look to organisational strategies independent of team performance on the field, to

improve revenue. One potential strategy is development of customer engagement, which lead to the

following question, How do sporting organisations facilitate cocreative experiences

via social media to improve customer engagement? Supporting research objectives were identified to

address this question and have been addressed as in the findings.

Findings

In regards to RO1, all three CBE dimensions are evident across all three team pages on Facebook.

Emotional responses appear to elicit the strongest levels of CE, however additional factors such as

time of posting and valence were not assessed and could have an impact on the level of CE

experienced by fans. Behavioural posts are the most dominant and, acknowledging the fact that the

nature of social media influences behavioural manifestations, this is unsurprising. This research

supports the multi-dimensional construct put forth by Brodie et al. (2011) and Dessart et al. (2015)

and lends conditional support to van Doorn et al. (2010) for consideration of the behavioural

dimension playing an important role in CE.

RO2 objectives grouped posts based on Facilitative, Insightful, Informative or Promotional

organisational aims. Overwhelmingly, facilitative posts deliver the greatest level of CE response.

Facilitative posts are supported by the literature as being cocreative experiences that support CE.

Insightful and informative posts also deliver CE, however not as strongly as facilitative posts.

Promotional posts are amongst the worst performing posts observed in the research. The main reason

being is a lack of relevance to fans of the page (Kaplan & Haenlein, 2010) and the fact that messages

are not interactive (Brodie et al., 2011) nor do they create unique experiences for fans (van Doorn et

al., 2010).

Contribution to Literature

This research contributes to the literature by assessing the multi-dimensional CBE nature of CE across

social media posts of three professional sporting organisations, thereby partly increasing the

generalisability of CE across different organisations and industries. It highlights the importance and

relevance of the behavioural dimension, particularly within the context of CE and social media. Further

it analyses the types of cocreative experiences that can be produced on social media channels, through

four themes of facilitative, insightful, informative and promotional and observes the relative levels of


CE developed through each theme. Due to cocreation being highly subjective and inherently difficult

to quantify, this research identified interactivity (Brodie et al., 2011) and customer unique experience

(van Doorn et al., 2010) as qualifiers for whether a theme was considered cocreative or not.

Implications for social media page administrators

The purpose of the research was not to identify particular failings of the observed teams of this

research, rather identify pitfalls and opportunities that can be addressed across the social media

channels of professional sporting organisations, in the pursuit of improving CE. Importantly, it should

be highlighted that team performance does not appear to be an indicator of post performance or CE

on social media. As at Round 8 Collingwood was placed 5th and Brisbane was placed 16th on the AFL

competition ladder, each had 12 and 11 posts respectively, in the top 30 best performing posts.

Emotional posts appear to be the most responsive when trying to encourage CE in a post. Coupled

with a facilitative theme these types of posts have been observed as being highly effective, especially

on game day, when fans are assumed to be most active on the teams social media page. Practically,

asking questions in the post could encourage fan interaction. E.g. “Game Day Lions Fans! How much

do you think we’ll win by?” Importantly however, much like general marketing principles, the page

administrator must understand what type of content the fans want. For example Collingwood fans

tend to respond to posts about players, whereas Brisbane fans respond to generic, enthusiastic posts.

Irrespective of the performance of promotional posts in this research, promotional posts still play an

obvious role in the broader integrated marketing communications mix and as such cannot be ignored.

It is suggested that page administrators look to mixing insightful or informative posts with promotional

posts and incorporating messages into these posts. One such instance was observed in a Brisbane

Lions insightful post about one of the players’ dogs – in the dialogue Vero (an insurer) was casually

mentioned regarding pet insurance. While the merits of product placement need to be considered, it

may offer a solution to poor reaction rates currently attributable to promotional posts.

Finally, in line with the above recommendations, it must be recognised that as part of the augmented

sports entertainment experience, a team’s social media channels enhances the fan experience-

particularly it strengthens the community association a fan feels with the team, which inherently leads

to improved CE. By ensuring post content is interactive and allows for fans to cocreate unique

experiences, a page administrator will closer to improving CE on social media channels.

Therefore, in a broadly practical sense, for sporting organisations to facilitate cocreative experiences

via social media to improve customer engagement, they should focus on delivering emotive,

facilitative posts that develop and foster the team’s online community. Teams should avoid treating


social media channels as a marketing promotions channel and aim to find the balance between

entertaining fans and meeting commercial interests, particularly those of the team’s sponsors. This

does not suggest however, that teams should cease using social media as a channel for delivering

information to fans, rather it suggests that the most impactful types of posts, when trying to induce

CE, have been observed as being emotional, facilitative posts.

Research limitations and Future Research

A number of limitations exist regarding this research. Firstly observational research may provide an

opportunity to review current industry practice and apply this against expected literary outcomes,

however results are not statistically reliable nor are they generalisable. Furthermore, while

quantitative data has been used from observed data, this data is not statistically accurate and as such

no causal relationships can be confirmed.

CE is still in its infancy and as such appropriate measures of CE are still to be determined. The metrics

used in this research are based on the formulas produced by (Ángeles Oviedo-García et al., 2014), but

lack the privately owned impressions, clicks and reach statistics that are only available to the page

administrator.

In reviewing the CBE dimensions, the results are estimated based on what the fans are anticipated

they would say, as primary research was not conducted. Because of this, actual fan results may vary,

if the same CBE Dimensions assessment were to be conducted with a primary research component.

Finally, the themes of facilitative, insightful, informative and promotional have been used to identify

and group post types, but these construct have not been verified against the literature. While these

were loosely based on current constructs, these themes cannot be relied upon as being reliable,

without future research.

Future research should focus on assessing the CBE dimensions, with access to internal Facebook

metrics, so that the formulas put forth by (Ángeles Oviedo-García et al., 2014) can be tested in full.

Building on this, alternate social media channels, such as Twitter should be reviewed, to assess

whether the same principles apply across channels. It would be interesting to see if Twitter, with its

limit of 140 characters per post is conducive or prohibitive to a particular CBE dimension or theme.

Valence should also be addressed when considering CE – the metrics used in this research did not

distinguish between positive or negative attitudes and consequently a high CE score could occur from

multiple negative comments.

Furthermore, to improve generalisability of CE and its use in social media, further studies should occur

across different sporting organisations or industries.


Finally, this research has attempted to reveal how CE can be improved using social media, using a

qualitative approach. A quantitative approach that is statistically reliable should be encouraged to

validate observations made in this paper. This could provide clarity around the links between CBE

dimensions, the relevance of the behavioural dimension to CE and the validity of the proposed

themes.


5. References

AFL. (2013). AFL Annual Report 2013. AFL. Retrieved March 10, 2015, from

http://s.afl.com.au/staticfile/AFL%20Tenant/AFL/Files/Annual%20Report/2013%20AFL%20A

nnual%20Report.pdf

AFL. (2014). AFL Annual Report 2014. Retrieved May 15, 2015, from AFL: http://www.afl.com.au/afl-

hq/annual-reports

AFL. (2015, May 21). Toyota AFL Premiership Season Ladder. Retrieved 21 May, 2015, from The

Official Website of the Australian Footbal League: www.afl.com.au

Ángeles Oviedo-García, M., Muñoz-Expósito, M., Castellanos-Verdugo, M., & Sancho-Mejías, M. (2014). Metric proposal for customer engagement in Facebook. Journal of Research in Interactive Marketing, 8(4), 327–344. doi:10.1108/JRIM-05-2014-0028

Bowden, J. (2009). The Process of Customer Engagement: A Conceptual Framework. The Journal of Marketing Theory and Practice. doi:10.2753/MTP1069-6679170105

Brodie, Hollebeek, L., Juric, B., & Ilic, A. (2011). Customer Engagement: Conceptual Domain, Fundamental Propositions, and Implications for Research. Journal of Service Research, 14, 252–271. doi:10.1177/1094670511411703

Brodie, Ilic, A., Juric, B., & Hollebeek, L. (2013). Consumer engagement in a virtual brand community: An exploratory analysis. Journal of Business Research, 66(1), 105–114. doi:10.1016/j.jbusres.2011.07.029

Cabiddu, F., Carlo, M. De, & Piccoli, G. (2014). Social media affordances: Enabling customer engagement. Annals of Tourism Research, 48, 175–192. doi:10.1016/j.annals.2014.06.003

Dessart, L., Veloutsou, C., & Morgan-Thomas, A. (2015). Consumer engagement in online brand communities: a social media perspective. Journal of Product & Brand Management, 24(1), 28–42. doi:10.1108/JPBM-06-2014-0635

Kaplan, A. M., & Haenlein, M. (2010). Users of the world, unite! The challenges and opportunities of Social Media. Business Horizons, 53, 59–68. doi:10.1016/j.bushor.2009.09.003

Malthouse, E. C., & Calder, B. J. (2011). Comment: Engagement and Experiences: Comment on Brodie, Hollenbeek, Juric, and Ilic (2011). Journal of Service Research, 14(3), 277–279. doi:10.1177/1094670511414584

Sashi, C. M. (2012). Customer engagement, buyer-seller relationships, and social media. Management Decision, 50, 253–272. doi:10.1108/00251741211203551

Uhrich, S. (2014). Exploring customer-to-customer value co-creation platforms and practices in team sports. European Sport Management Quarterly, 14(1), 25–49. doi:10.1080/16184742.2013.865248

Van Doorn, J. (2011). Comment: Customer Engagement: Essence, Dimensionality, and Boundaries. Journal of Service Research, 14(3), 280–282. doi:10.1177/1094670511414585


Van Doorn, J., Lemon, K. N., Mittal, V., Nass, S., Pick, D., Pirner, P., & Verhoef, P. C. (2010). Customer Engagement Behavior: Theoretical Foundations and Research Directions. Journal of Service Research, 13, 253–266. doi:10.1177/1094670510375599

Vasquez-parraga, J. F. A. Z., Flores, J., & Vasquez-parraga, A. Z. (2015). The impact of choice on co-produced customer value creation and satisfaction. Journal of Consumer Marketing, 32(1), 15–25. doi:10.1108/JCM-04-2014-0931

Vivek, S. D., Beatty, S. E., & Morgan, R. M. (2012). Customer Engagement: Exploring Customer Relationships Beyond Purchase. The Journal of Marketing Theory and Practice, 20(2), 122–146. doi:10.2753/MTP1069-6679200201

Yoshida, M., & Gordon, B. (2014). Conceptualization and Measurement of Fan Engagement : Empirical Evidence From a Professional Sport Context, (2001), 399–417. doi:10.1123/jsm.2013-0199


Appendices

Appendix 1: Team Selection Criteria and Membership Performance

Team Total 2013 Attendance (out of 18)

Total Paid Members (out of 18)

Position on League Ladder at end of season 2013

Total 2014 Attendance (out of 18)

Total Paid Members (out of 18)

Position on League Ladder at end of season 2014

Position on League Ladder as at Round 5 (out of 18) 5 May 2015

Brisbane 231,909 (16th)

14,964 (16th)

12th 217,718

(16th ) 15,048 (16th)

15th 18th

Carlton 485,968 (4th)

32,019 (5th)

8th 433,563

(6th) 29,887 (8th )

13th 17th

Collingwood 610,357 (1st)

53,693 (1st)

6th 528,099

(2nd) 51,881

(1st) 11th 2nd

Source: (AFL, 2015)

Position on Ladder: Round 5 – Round 8

Source: (Australian Football League, 2015)


Appendix 2: Terminology - Fanpage Karma Engagement The Engagement shows an average amount of how often a fan interacts with the posts of a page. It is calculated by dividing the daily amount of likes, comments and shares by the number of fans. If you are looking at a longer period of time it takes the average of the daily Engagement rates.

Weighted Engagement The weighted engagement is calculated like the regular engagement, but gives a score to the user reactions.

Post Interaction The post interaction shows how active the fans engage with posts of a page. It shows the average amount of all interactions (likes, shares, comments) per fan per post. As opposed to the Engagement Rate, the Post Interaction ignores days without any posts.

Weighted Post Interaction The weighted post-interaction is calculated like the regular post-interaction, but gives a score to the user posts. Shares are assumed to be three times, comments two times more valuable than likes.

Reaction A reaction is the response from a fan, such as a Like, Comment or Share - linked to a particular Post.

Weighted Reaction A weighted reaction is the response from a fan, such as a Like, Comment or Share - linked to a particular Post and has been weighted. Shares are assumed to be three times, comments two times more valuable than likes.

Academic Interpretation Fanpage Karma place a weighting on different reactions – Likes have a weighting of 1, Comments have a weighting of 2, Comments have a weighting of 3. This is in line with the assumptions made by (Ángeles Oviedo-García et al., 2014), who suggest weighting reactions, but do not offer values in terms of weightings. For this project, Weighted Reaction has been used as the measure of engagement. While this does not consider time factors, it allows for a simple assessment of a posts engagement level, based on observational research. This is an adjusted approach taken from (Ángeles Oviedo-García et al., 2014), based on the limitations of this observational research method.


Appendix 3: Dimensions and Sub dimensions

Source: (Dessart et al., 2015)

Example of assessing a post for Dominant and secondary Dimensions

A hypothetical post “Woohoo Brisbane, first Win of the Season!!!” is predicted to elicit Enthusiasm, a

sub-dimension of the Affective (Emotional) dimension. This same post could also be considered as

Endorsing, a sub-dimension of the Behavioural dimension. In this instance this post would be classed

as multidimensional, Affective Dominant and Behavioural (Endorsing) would be noted as a secondary

dimension.


Fan Interaction – Examples

Source: (Facebook, 2015)

Source: (Facebook, 2015)

5.1. Data Collection

Date Message Team Type Likes Comments Shares Weighted Reaction

(Engagement)

RO1:

Dominant

CEB

RO2:

Theme

23 May 2015

Pendlebury was ALL class tonight. 200 games. 35 disposals. 3 goals. We salute Sir Scott.

Collingwood photo 14681 442 855 18130 Behavioural Facilitative

17 May 2015

FULL TIME! The Lions have beaten Port 15.12.102 - 8.17.65! Dayne Beams had 32 touches and kicked one goal! 3 goals each to Josh Green and Mitch Robinson! Match report at http://www.lions.com.au/news/2015-05-17/lions-cause-power-outage

Brisbane photo 7750 763 871 11889

Behavioural Facilitative

23 May 2015

Our captain. A champion. A milestone. Collingwood photo 8191 222 527 10216 Emotional Facilitative

10 May 2015

FULL TIME!!! LIONS WIN!!!! Great win by the boys over the Blues 12.12.84 - 11.9.75. D Beams was great with 29 touches while McStay and Green were a handful up forward with 4 and 3 goals each! Match report at https://www.facebook.com/ads/manage/powereditor/

Brisbane photo 6050 697 630 9334

Behavioural Facilitative

20 May 2015

He's one of the biggest names on the Internet in 2015. But did you know the star of Angry Dad played for Collingwood? STORY - http://magpi.es/1AkHvvq

Collingwood link 3510 1663 294 7718 Cognitive Insightful

19 May 2015

Some called him the shock pick of the 2005 draft. 9 years + 199 games later, no one's surprised any more. Congratulations on 200 GAMES, Pendles - http://magpi.es/1dgV5Gf

Collingwood photo 6255 329 249 7660 Cognitive Insightful

25 May 2015

He might be retired, but he will always be one of US. Happy 31st Birthday, Bally! Collingwood photo 6879 163 117 7556 Behavioural Insightful

05 May 2015

Elliott signs on. The Magpie Army goes crazy. You'll never believe how the fans REACTED - http://magpi.es/1ABp0h1

Collingwood photo 6470 249 188 7532 Cognitive Informative

10 May 2015

What can you say? #AFLBluesLions #NAVYBLUES Carlton photo 1032 2975 158 7456 Emotional Facilitative


09 May 2015

A message for our Magpie MOTHERS. Happy Mother's Day! #SIDEBYSIDE

Collingwood video 4072 228 611 6361 Behavioural Facilitative

08 May 2015

Mission: To go 5-1 after 6 rounds. Do we accept it? Let's find out! GO PIES.

Collingwood photo 2644 1249 111 5475 Emotional Facilitative

16 May 2015

Full-time at Etihad Stadium. #AFLBluesGiants #NAVYBLUES Carlton photo 956 1909 161 5257 Emotional Informative

10 May 2015

How good is it to finally hear this? Go Lions!! Brisbane link 3370 284 246 4676 Emotional Facilitative

21 May 2015

HE. IS. BACK. Two changes for Saturday + Steele is one of them. FULL TEAM - http://magpi.es/1IMCXB2

Collingwood link 3808 240 128 4672 Emotional Facilitative

07 May 2015

The good news just keeps on coming - http://magpi.es/1H1jitF Tom Langdon has signed on until the end of 2018. It's a great time to be a Magpie.

Collingwood photo 3722 144 70 4220 Cognitive Informative

20 May 2015

Take a bow, Mr. Chris Judd. Enjoy some of our No.5's heroics as we celebrate his impending AFL Life Membership: http://cfcblu.es/Judd300 #NAVYBLUES

Carlton video 2470 407 310 4214 Cognitive Facilitative

05 May 2015

Join us in wishing Kade Simpson a very happy 31st #birthday! #NAVYBLUES

Carlton photo 3515 274 46 4201 Behavioural Insightful

08 May 2015

At 4-1, things are going well. But they can still get so much better. Let's keep the momentum going. GO PIES.

Collingwood photo 3246 177 146 4038 Emotional Facilitative

20 May 2015

Yet another accolade for our champion. Congratulations to Chris Judd, who will qualify for AFL Life Membership on Friday night. Here's why: http://cfcblu.es/Judd300


17 May 2015

1⃣0⃣0⃣ games for Nathan Brown. Now to bank the 4⃣ points. GO PIES.

Collingwood photo 3161 274 76 3937 Behavioural Promotional


17 May 2015

GAME TIME! GO LIONS!!! Brisbane photo 3125 208 114 3883 Emotional Facilitative

12 May 2015

#OnThisDay 30 years ago, Stephen Silvagni made his Carlton debut in the win over Sydney at the Sydney Cricket Ground (SCG). This is why "SOS" is the greatest full-back of all time: http://cfcblu.es/SOSHighlights #NAVYBLUES

Carlton photo 2766 320 146 3844

Cognitive Insightful

17 May 2015

Watch the boys sing the song after our first win at the Gabba for 2015! Brisbane link 2300 149 269 3405 Emotional Insightful

17 May 2015

Here are some of the best photos from tonights win against Port Adelaide! See the full gallery here: http://bit.ly/photosrd7port

Brisbane photo 2580 143 92 3142 Cognitive Informative

13 May 2015

Wishing a happy #birthday to Matthew Kreuzer, who turns 26 today. Can't wait to see you back in action in the Navy Blue, "Kreuzzzz"!


17 May 2015

HALF TIME: The Lions go into the main break leading 7.6.48 - Port 3.9.27. Lewy Taylor and Dan Rich both have 15 disposals each. Josh Green and Allen Christensen both have 2 goals. Only half the job is done, can our boys keep up the good work after Half Time?

Brisbane photo 1911 151 74 2435

Behavioural Informative

18 May 2015

Happy Birthday Bundy! How good is it to have this guy in Lions colours?! Brisbane photo 1629 96 23 1890 Behavioural Insightful

10 May 2015

GAME TIME! GO LIONS!!! Brisbane photo 1316 84 31 1577 Emotional Facilitative

24 May 2015

Game Time!! GO LIONS!!! Brisbane photo 1240 63 43 1495 Emotional Facilitative

21 May 2015

We've broken through the 25,000 member barrier for the first time since 2010! Here is a special message from the Players to our Members!

Brisbane link 1182 61 39 1421 Behavioural Promotional

20 May 2015

Don’t miss the Women of the Pride Inaugural Lunch on Thursday 28 May. Hearfrom 2015 Australian Business Network Hall of Fame Inductee, Cathie Reid.Brisbane Convention & Exhibition Centre, Thursday 28 May, 12pm-3pm



13 May 2015

Our annual member function to say thanks to our most loyal members –Goldand Silver members –is this Sunday at the Port match.Check your emails for event information, invitation and RSVP date and#GetToTheGabba! Get in quick as it’s filling fast!

Brisbane photo 58 2 9 89 Behavioural Promotional

06 May 2015

Keep up to date with the Lions injuries with this weeks BUPA RecoveryReport.Brett Burton gives an update on how Rockliff and Staker are going after thegame agains the Suns on the weekend. Find out more here:lions.com.au/news/2015-05-06/stick-to-the-plan

Brisbane link 57 2 14 103 Cognitive Insightful

05 May 2015

Lions Defensive Skills & Backline Coach Mitch Hahn gives this weeks VeroCoaches Wrap after our Round 5 QClash loss.

Brisbane link 59 5 18 123 Cognitive Insightful

13 May 2015

It’s all about the kids this week and we have a new range just in! Check itout and gear them up to cheer them up!


18 May 2015

(Post intentionally Blank) Carlton photo 6 0 0 6 Behavioural Facilitative

07 May 2015

Andrejs Everitt. (Photo: Carlton Football Club) Carlton photo 12 1 2 20 Behavioural Promotional

14 May 2015

Catch the latest episode of The Two Tones -the podcast for allBluebaggers... Carlton link 89 5 5 114 Behavioural Promotional

22 May 2015

PODCAST: A preview for tonight's duel with Geelong and a tribute tomilestone-man Chris Judd are on the agenda in this week's episode of TheTwo Tones. Carlton link 90 6 5 117

Behavioural Promotional

06 May 2015

Watch the latest edition of Blues News for all you need to know ahead of#AFLBluesLions: http://cfcblu.es/NewsRd6#NAVYBLUES

Carlton link 116 9 25 209 Cognitive Insightful

25 May 2015

One man had one of the BEST games of his career.Another notched 35 disposals in game 200.Nick Maxwell's REVIEW -http://magpi.es/1Aokfgx


21 May 2015

OPEN TRAINING on the Gold Coast.Join us at Metricon Stadium.Details -http://magpi.es/1QZfEVW Collingwood link 165 10 39 302 Behavioural Promotional

17 May 2015

VFL UPDATE.Collingwood 10.7 (67) leads Richmond 6.3 (39).FOLLOW LIVE -http://magpi.es/1KTBZjA Collingwood link 230 4 9 265 Behavioural Informative


14 May 2015

Your sporting club could earn TICKETS to our clash with the Kangaroos inround 9.How? http://magpi.es/1kf0wB9 The Victorian Responsible Gambling Foundationmakes it possible.

Collingwood link 247 3 9 280 Behavioural Promotional

11 May 2015

MONDAYS WITH MAXY.Our expert panel analyses our loss to Geelong -http://magpi.es/1H8MdvSScroll to 4.57min to view Maxy's shop special.


Documents

Customer Engagement, Social Media and the AFL An Applied Study