Social Media Use in Creative Micro-Enterprise - Silent Solutions, Nov 2010

8/8/2019 Social Media Use in Creative Micro-Enterprise - Silent Solutions, Nov 2010

1/15

INTRODUCTION

The emergence of social media hasredefined the way business is conducted and profitsare realised. Gone are the days where the internetwas a platform exclusively for the 'Early Adopters'(Rogers, 1962) and 'Generation Y' the shift in onlineconsumption that generations 'Baby Boomer' and'Jones' (Strauss & Howe, 1991), have undergone isa product of the realisation that value (in it's many

forms) is readily available through the internet, oftenat a speed, depth and breadth unavailable fromtraditional media sources (Continuum Crew, 2009).The challenge that the Micro-Enterprise Owner(MEO) now faces, is how; in a world wheretraditional industry boundaries are disappearing, dothey compete in sectors increasingly characterisedby competing business models that are intrinsicallysocial media centric?

Chadwick Martin Bailey found that 67% ofconsumers who follow brands on Twitter are morelikely to buy those brands after becoming a follower,

and 51% of Facebook fans are more likely to buyafter becoming a fan. Such a conclusion has merit

only in its measure of consumer perceptions andrealised sales of major brands. The relativism thatpervades the MEO is how to effectively resource theutilisation of Social Media in a such a way that theirefforts are rewarded with meaningful sales.

The MEO's dilemma is most apparent in theArts & Design sectors, if only because the era of'on-demand' has accelerated a new paradigm forcreative industry business models becoming theartist as 'content broker'. Indeed, Vaknin stated that;

The very definition of artist will grow as creativepeople seek to brand themselves directly to endusers and consumers. (Vaknin, 2004) However, ina marketplace ever defined by 'likes' and 'shares'the irony resides in the artists ability to effectivelymarket them self in an online environment becomingincreasingly corporate (Kerrigan, Fraser, Ozbilgin,2009).

The argument this paper presents is that therelative success of a social media centric businessmodel within creative enterprise is defined by itsobjectives for utilisation.

Page 1 of15

Silent Solutions (UK) Copyright 2010

The Familiarity, Usage and Adoptionof Social Media within CreativeMicro-Enterprise.by Russell A.Kowalewski*

Abstract - The objective of this study was to investigate the influence of social media familiarity, usageand adoption upon the growth of micro-enterprise in the creative industries. Growth was defined as a

rise in gross-profit over a twelve-month period; businesses with fewer than 3 employees were consideredMicro. Negative Growth businesses were selected randomly and matched with Positive Growthoperations on the basis of age, size, industry and location. The sampling frame was businesses locatedwithin a three-mile radius of New Street Station, Birmingham, UK. A paired t-test was used to investigatedifferences between the Positive Growth micro-enterprises (PGMEs) and Negative Growth micro-enterprises (NGMEs). The main conclusion was that of all the respondents surveyed, social media wasat the forefront of their activities. However, NGMEs were less likely to consistently rejuvenate theirbusiness model to suit the medium than PGMEs, whom largely sought objectives based on creating newways of delivering and capturing value.

The author would like to thank the respondents of the surveys and threeanonymous reviewers for their comments which enhanced the quality of thisreport.

* Russell Kowalewski is owner & founder of Silent Solutions (UK) inBirmingham, United Kingdom. His research focuses on Small Business, SocialEnterprise, Strategic Planning, Marketing and Decision Support Systems.


2/15

METHODOLOGYSample

The research design for this study featuredpaired samples of 'growth' and 'non-growth' MEs inthe Birmingham locality of the United Kingdom. Thesampling frame was more than eight-hundredenterprises trading from 2-5 years, made availablefrom Michrome Limited, a marketing list company inGuildford, UK. A micro-enterprise was defined asone with fewer than 3 employees irrespective offormation structure and a turnover and/or balanceless than 100k per annum. (This is an extension ofthe definition used by the European Commission forEnterprise and Industry1.) A growth enterprise was

defined as a rise in gross-profit over a twelve-monthperiod. The data collection procedure was to selectrandomly from the marketing list and send individualemails to 800 recipients using a standard massemail describing the study and asking the recipient(the owner or managing director) to anonymouslycomplete an online questionnaire (usingsurveygizmo.com cloud software) which waslinked and referred to within the email concerned.This approach was successful in solicitingresponses from 301 of the MEs targeted. The datawas then sorted into two groups; growth and non-

growth, and then further segmented by mining thedata to only present respondent ME's within theStandard Industrial Classification codes (SIC)concerning 'Creative' industry2. PGMEs were thenmatched with NGMEs that were similar in age, SICcode, size (turnover and number of employees) andlocation (Postcode derived from longitude & latitudedata provided by surveygizmo.com analytics).Statistics from the survey showed that there werefewer than thirty abandoned responses (followedthe link to survey and closed page withoutsubmitting any entries) against 301 completedsurveys, derived from a mailing list of 800;therefore, non-response bias is not an issue in thisstudy, although there could be differences in theMEs that could be contacted and those that couldnot be contacted. The survey took place over fiveworking days from October 25 th to October 29th 2010and yielded 53 matched pair-cases.

Summary statistics describing the sampleare presented in Table 1 and extended within

1Definition of Micro-Enterprise by the European Commission for

Enterprise and Industry: Headcount >10, Turnover/Balance Sheet

>2million Euros.2SIC classification codes that were deemed 'Creative' are listed as

Appendix I within this document.

Appendix II. Understandably, as is the nature of theindustry concered in this report, none of theenterprises were franchises, and the dominant

source of start-up capital was personal funds (74%).The average years of relevant industry experienceof the respondent was about five and a half years,and the average years of formal education of therespondents was slightly above 5 years (4 beingequal to sixth-form/AS-level).

Table 1Characteristics of Paired Sample of

Both, Positive-Growth (PG) and Non-Growth Enterprises (NG)Average age (in years) 2.98Maximum number of employees (median) 2(PG) / 3(NG)Average Annual Sales 22,449.00

Initial Investment, mode (74 percent) 3,116.00Predominant Legal Form, mode (56 percent)b Sole TraderGender of Enterprise owner (i.e. respondent) (male/female ratio)

1.0 : 2.0

b The choices were: Sole-trader, Partnership, Limited Company and Other (LLP etc)

QuestionnaireThe survey was developed after several

discussions with five 'creative' ME owners, whodesignated their opinion upon which SICclassifications to include. The entire questionnairewas then presented by the emailing of a call to

respond message to 800 ME's in the Birminghamlocality with 301 respondents who completed thesurvey in full. The resulting scheme featured 22simple questions designed over six sections.Respondents were also asked in every casewhether, (in their own opinion) their social mediaactivities were part of a business planningdocument, the implication being that to qualify assufficiently formal and substantive, the activityneeded to be part of their business model. Finally,the 11 questions from section 4 onwards werearranged in an order which presumed an increasingintensity and sophistication of use. The usage-of-social-media questions are available withinAppendix III.

RESULTS

Table 2 presents the results, which clearlyimply that social media is at the forefront of mostBirmingham based creative ME business models.The first significant observation which emerges fromthis data is that means of extent-of-use are quite low

in both cases. The frequency charts for this data arealso revealing. While both groups failed (PGME &

Page 2 of15



3/15

NGME) had a small number of 0 responsesmeaning no use, the NG group distinguished itselffrom the PG group in that there was a tendency to

do a moderately utilise the platform it; that is, tomove upward toward a score of 11. Therefore, thesecond significant observation is that the socialmedia activities that comprised the extent-of-useindex appear to constitute a logical set ofcomponent parts, such that if one of the activities itis engaged in, it is increasingly likely that the otherswill be undertaken as well. In other words, it may bethat micro-enterprise owners/managers tend to beusing social-media as an advanced marketingplatform to engage the market or use the platformas an advertising board, listing their services with no

social interaction. If they are 'advanced marketers',they tend to engage in multiple platform activitiessuch as the ones merated from the questions in thisstudy. The final observation is that the difference inmeans was statistically significant, suggesting thatthe extent-of-social-media-use is related to micro-enterprise growth3. While the explanatory power ofthis one variable taken in isolation is weak,4 thereare nevertheless strong indications here that social-media can make a difference and if used toeffectively engage its desired audience, can negatethe probability of enterprise failure.

Ninety-four percent of the respondents to ourstudy are using social media to promote theirbusinesses, with 22% posting daily or weeklyupdates to sites such as LinkedIn, Facebook, andTwitter. Of those whom post daily, 35% were fromthe PGME segment. Although only 17% of the totalpopulation used incentives to attract onlinefollowers, friends and fans, 92% credited socialmedia with positively impacting their businesses. Inaddition, 96% said their brand awareness hasincreased and 86% attracted new business as aresult of their social media efforts.

3The a priori hypothesis was that growth enterprises would

average a higher extent-of-use score compared to non-growthMEs. Therefore, a one-tailed test was applicable. The resultingvalue for p was 0.04 which indicates that the likelihood ofthese results occurring in a sample of this size taken from apopulation in which there is no relationship between extent-of-usage and non-growth was approximately 4 chances in 100.The author acknowledges that a statistical tool designedprimarily for use with ratio/interval dependent variables hasbeen put to unconventional use in the analysis of an ordinalvariable in the name of exploratory research and with the intentof pointing the way to more definitive and rigorous research in

the future when such means suffice.4 Pearsons rwas equal to 0.18 approx. 1 percent of the totalvariation was explained.

Interestingly, the three main distinctions thatstudy draws upon is the difference in social-mediaplatform between PGMEs and NGMEs. LinkedIn is

the most popular site for PGMEs, with 73% ofrespondents using the professional network.Facebook was the second most-used site, visited by64%, followed by Twitter, used by 63% of PGMErespondents. Conversely, NGMEs were found topredominantly use Facebook (82%) followed byTwitter (60%) and 30% using LinkedIn. The secondobservation was that, 71% of PGMEs had apersonal blog site that they used at least once aweek, compared with NGMEs that scored 43%. Thefinal key-point was that 45% of the total populationengaged in interactions with other blogs and related

forums, 92% of those being PGMEs.

Table 2Characteristics of Paired Sample of

Both, Positive-Growth (PG) and Non-Growth Enterprises (NG)

(PGME) (NGME)

(n = 52) (n=52)

Mean 9.04 6.14

Standard Dev./Std. Error 1.28 1.14

Number of 0 Scores 9 11

Number of 11 Scores 18 12

The majority of those surveyed 68%, use socialmedia for networking, 63% utilise these sites withintention of attracting new customers and 61%leverage social media to increase brand awareness.In addition, 14% use social media merely becauseothers are doing so, while 12% only use the sitesfor the sake of gathering followers. Results foundthat, 35% of those not using social media blamedlack of time, 31% claimed their customers do notuse these sites and 24% said they do notunderstand the technology.

The Australia Council for Arts (2009)investigated the use of online platforms within the'arts consumer' demographic finding that almost athird of arts consumers in Australia use the internetto research a show or event, buy tickets, view art,listen to music or write blogs and share thoughts onsocial media. A poll by Nielsen (2009),(commissioned by the Council) ascertained therewas a correlation of use between that of artist andconsumer; finding 90% of those surveyed used anonline platform to some degree. However, the

Nielsen poll did not measure the business turnoveror usage frame, and their sample had a mediannumber of employees of sixteen. If the focus of this

Page 3 of15



4/15

study is narrowed to the 12 NGMEs and 18 PGMEsthat scored an 11 on the extent of planningquestions, the median for maximum employment

rises from 7.59 to 10.11. This suggests that there islikely to be a minimum employment level (perhapsin the range of 2 to 3) below which consideration ofplanning has a marginal value (Kowalewski, 2010).Nevertheless communication of any marketingmessage, socially engaging or otherwise, would stillneed to be written as failure rates of MEs with nosocial media presence is increased by a ratio of18:1 against those with an active engagement in theplatform (McKinsey, 2010).

DISCUSSION

Using the European Union definition ofmicro-enterprise as one with fewer than 10employees, 87 percent of the 1.6 million entitiesfiling a VAT return in the UK are micro-enterprises5.Consistent with the findings within this study,approximately 80% of the MEs have fewer than fiveemployees and 56% are sole traders.

By means of the median difference in growthbetween 2008/09 and 2009/10 for NGMEs the valueof growth equates to an annual loss of 745 (-4.5%)per respondent. Factored into the West Midlands

statistics of total MEs this figure would equate to asubstantial figure. In comparison, the PGME gainsagainst NGME losses do produce a regionaleconomy gain in excess of 5million. However,consideration of even a modest reduction in NGMElosses would yield some benefits to the region, andarguably the Creative Sector as a whole.Nevertheless, with a clearer understanding of thereliance upon social media marketing, somecommercially unsound propositions will not beinitiated and some ailing creative MEs can berescued.

Positive Growth versus Objectives of SocialMedia Utilisation

Whilst this study found a statisticallysignificant difference between the MEs objectivesfor utilising social media and annual growth, theexplanatory power of the relationship was relativelyweak. A possible explanation for the lack of strengthlies in the well considered thought that many inarts/creative trades under their own name, andtherefore may inherently blur the lines of market

interaction and personal social interaction. This is5

supported by the survey results illustrating asignificant difference in questions 5.1 & 5.2 betweenPG and NG segments. Indeed, previous studies

(Marketing-Sherpa, 2010 & Arthur, 2010) havesuggested that effective marketing must be aninteractive, organic process between brand &consumer (Marketing-Sherpa, 2010) and Levinsonstated Blogs suit an effective interactive marketingmodel well (Levinson, 2010). With thisconsideration in account, interaction upon externalblogs and/or forums is an obvious extension ofsuch. An examination of the data surrounding 5.1 &5.2 supports this notion when considering the top25% of PGMEs within this report. Therefore, futureresearch in the form of specific case-studies

focussed on PGMEs and NGMEs with a moresignificant variance in growth rate may prove data ofmore significance.

LIMITATIONS

The construct used to measureobjectives-of-use was certainly not as rigorous as itcould have been given consideration to thecomplexities of measurement in an activity (andsector) so broad. In addition, like most previousefforts in this field, this study relies on self-reported

data which is always subject to respondent biasessuch as the desire to create a favourable image ofoneself even subconsciously, given the surveywas anonymous (Summers, 1969). The mainthreats to validity with this research design wereinstrumentation and reactivity. Instrumentation wasa threat in that changes in the scorers (that is, thevarious ME owners/leaders responding to the onlinesurvey) could produce changes in themeasurements obtained. Reactivity could be aproblem to the extent that the process of measuringcould change that which is being measuredthat is,the act of responding to the survey could causerespondents to alter their responses in ways whichdiverge from the true facts. Second sourceverification of selected data was performed on asubset of the sample to estimate the extent to whichinstrumentation and reactivity were problems in thedata collected, and the data were found to beconsistent. In addition, tests of inter-rater and inter-coder reliability were performed with satisfactoryresults.

Similar future studies would arguably benefit

from adopting an approach led by the use ofsurveying a sample via a measurement program or

Page 4 of15



5/15

bot-style key tracker over a more prolonged period,similar to that of a key-stroke virus (with intent ofcourse) in its design.

GENERALISATIONS

Unlike previous similar studies that havebeen drawn randomly from a population that coversthe entire United Kingdom, the study results do notpermit national, or international generalisation.Practically speaking, the study results should besafely generalisable to Birmingham based creativeenterprise which engages in Social Media activities.Finally, this study endeavoured to discoverstatistically significant relationships and associations

of more than a trivial magnitude. It did not attempt torule out spuriousness, or to postulate theories orintervening mechanisms. Therefore, the study stopsshort of inferring causation and leaves that task tofuture research. However, one practitioner-orientedrecommendation flows logically from the findingsand conclusions: If your business model utilisessocial media, engaging with your market as well astalking to your market (in the marketing sense) akinto the Social Media Mix touched upon within 5.3.Because doing so may enhance your chances ofsales growth.

REFERENCES

Andrew Arthur (2010)Marketing Mix Modelling & media Inputs

Continuum Crew - (2009)CNBC Economic Impact Study

Chadwick Martin Bailey - (2010)Why Social Matters to Your Business

Everitt M. Rogers (1962)Diffusions of Innovations

F.Kerrigan, P.Fraser, M.Ozbilgin (2009)The Theory and Practice of Visual Arts Marketing

Gene F. Summers (1969)Toward a Paradigm for Respondent Bias in SurveyResearch

Jay Conrad Levinson (2010)

Guerrilla Social Media Marketing

Marketing-Sherpa (2010)Social Media Marketing Benchmark ReportEXCERPT

William Strauss & Neil Howe - (1991)Generations: The History of America's Future, 1584to 2069

McKinsey & Company - (2010)McKinsey Quarterly: Measuring the BusinessEffects of Web 2.0

Russell Kowalewski (2010)Perceptions of Planning & Analysis within Micro-Enterprise

Shmuel Vaknin (2004)The Disintermediation of Content

Page 5 of15


Silent Solutions (UK) is a proactive, forward-thinking accountancy and research practice,

serving creative & social enterprises throughoutthe West Midlands.

Specialists in Bid Writing, Strategic Planning,Feasibility Studies and Decision making systems,

SSUK offers a broad range of professional

services to ensure sustainable growth.

If you would like more information about ourservices, please contact Russell using the

information below.

[email protected]
mailto:[email protected]://www.silent.solutionsuk.blogspot.com/http://www.silent.solutionsuk.blogspot.com/mailto:[email protected]


6/15

Page 6 of15


SIC 2007 SIC 2003 Activity Study Clas'

90010 92311 Actors C

73110 74402 Advertising campaign creation and realisation B

74202 74813 Aerial photography (other than for cartographic and spatial activity purposes) B

74909 74879 Agents and agencies in placement of artworks with publishers D

59111 92111 Animated film production B

59112 92111 Animated video production B

47781 52486 Art (retail) A

94990 91330 Art clubs D

90030 92319 Art expert D

91020 92521 Art gallery (not dealer) D

85520 80429 Art instruction D

15120 19200 Art leather work (manufacture) B

25990 28750 Art metal work (manufacture) D

91020 92521 Art museums B

13923 17403 Art needlework (manufacture) B

23410 26210 Art pottery (manufacture) B

58190 22150 Art publishing D

91011 92510 Art work lending and storage D

85320 80220 Arts and crafts school D

90030 92319 Author B

90010 92311 Band (musical) C

74909 74879 Band agency D

58110 22110 Book publishing D

47610 52470 Books (retail) A

59111 92111 Cartoon film production B

59112 92111 Cartoon video production B

90030 92319 Cartoonists B

59120 92119 Cinematographic film colouring, developing, printing or repairing B

90010 92349 Circus C

14190 18249 Clothing accessories (manufacture) B

14200 18300 Clothing made of sheepskin (manufacture) B

14190 18249 Clothing pad (manufacture) B

73110 74402 Commercial artist B

18129 22220 Commercial printed matter printing (manufacture) B

74100 74872 Costume designing B

32130 36610 Costume jewellery (manufacture) B

32130 36610 Costume or imitation jewellery (manufacture) B

14132 18222 Costumes for women and girls (manufacture) B47789 52489 Craftwork (retail) A

85520 92341 Dancing school D

85520 92341 Dancing schools and dance instructor activities D

90030 92319 Designing (artistic) B

14132 18222 Dress and jacket knitted ensemble (manufacture) B

14190 18249 Dress belts (not made of leather or leather substitute) (manufacture) B

13990 17542 Dress binding (manufacture) B

13200 17210 Dress fabric (woven (not wool)) (manufacture) B

14190 18249 Dress gloves made of fabric (manufacture) B

13200 17220 Dress goods woollen weaving (manufacture) B

13200 17230 Dress goods worsted weaving (manufacture) B

14132 18222 Dresses for women and girls (manufacture) B

APPENDIX IStandard Industry Classification Codes (SIC) segmented into Arts defined sub-groups


7/15

Group A Predominantly Retail / Artist Sale Functions

Group B Creation or manufacture of tangible product

Group C Performance based artist

Group D Creative Consultant / Creation or production of intangible product

Page 7 of15


32120 36220 Engraving (personalised) on precious metal (manufacture) B

18130 22240 Engraving for printing (manufacture) B

32120 36220 Engraving of personal non-precious metal products (manufacture) B

23190 26150 Fancy articles and goods made of glass (manufacture) B

14310 17710 Fancy hosiery (manufacture) B

15120 19200 Fancy leather goods (manufacture) B

14132 18222 Fashion (manufacture) B

82990 74879 Fashion agent D

82990 74879 Fashion artist B

74100 74872 Fashion designing B

32130 36610 Fashion jewellery (manufacture) B

74209 74819 Fashion photography B

18129 22220 Fashion printing (manufacture) B

59120 92119 Film editing D

59120 92119 Film sound track dubbing and synchronisation D

59111 92111 Film studios D

90030 92319 Fine art expert D

85520 80429 Fine arts schools (except academic) D

16290 20510 Frames for artists canvases (manufacture) B

90030 92400 Freelance journalist D

74100 74872 Furniture designing D

23190 26150 Glassware used in imitation jewellery (manufacture) B

74100 74872 Graphic designer B

90030 92319 Lithographic artist (own account) B

90030 92319 Music composer D

90010 92311 Musicians C

90030 92319 Painters (artistic) B

96090 93059 Pavement artist B

74201 74812 Photographic studio A

74209 74819 Photographing of live events such as weddings, graduations, conventions, fashion shows, etc. B

74209 74819 Photography for commercials, publishers or tourism purposes B

85520 80429 Photography schools (except commercial) D

74201 74812 Portrait photographer B

74201 74812 Portrait photography B

90030 92319 Scenic artist B

90010 92311 Street musician or singer C

90030 92319 Wood engraver (artistic) B


8/15

Partial Responses 52 10.40%

Abandoned Responses 26 5.20%

No Response Rate 197 39.40%

Total Full Responses 225 45.00%Total Non-CountedEntries

119 52.89%Invalid Non-CountedEntries

78Valid Non-CountedEntries

41

Total Counted Re-

sponses106 47.11%

Population Sample 500 100.00%

PGME NGME Total % of Counted Responses

SIC Group A 18 18 36 33.96%

SIC Group B 17 17 34 32.08%

SIC Group C 12 12 24 22.64%

SIC Group D 6 6 12 11.32%

Total Samples Paired 106

APPENDIX IIExtended Summary of Sample Population


9/15

Section 1

Owner Details

1.1Age

Manual Numerical Value

1.2 Gender

Male / Female

1.3 Education Level

None / GCSE / A-Level / Degree / Post-Grad'

1.4 Relevant Years of Industry Experience


Section 2

Business Details

2.1 Business Activity

Manual Text Value

2.2 Years Trading


2.3 Employee Headcount


2.4 Legal Form

Sole-trader / Partnership / Limited Company / Other (LLP etc)

Section 3

Start-up & Turnover

3.1 Investment Source

None / Own Funds / Bank / Venture Capital / Grant

3.2 Investment Amount


3.3 Gross-Profit 2008/9


3.4 Gross-Profit 2009/10


Section 4

Social Media Use I

4.1 Is the use of Social Media part of your Business Plan / Business Model?

Yes / No

4.2 How often do you use the following Social Media Platforms?

(rated question of radio buttons)

Facebook / Twitter / LinkedIn / Myspace / Flickr / YouTube

Daily / Weekly / Monthly / Occasionally / Never

4.3 What is your PRIMARY motivation for using social media?

to gain new customers

networking

APPENDIX IIISurvey Outline


10/15

brand awareness

because others do

gathering followers, friends, likes

4.4 Do you use incentives (free or otherwise) to attract 'likes', 'friends', 'followers'?

Yes / No

Section 5

Social Media Use II

5.1 How often do you post upon forums of related blogs or websites?

Daily / Weekly / Monthly / Occasionally / Never

5.2 Do you have a blog site or website for your business?

Yes / No

5.3 If 'yes' to the above, what is your PRIMARY reason for having such?

online portfolio of work

to look professional

because others do

to gain new customers

to interact with customers / other businesses

Section 6

Social Media Results

6.1 Do you feel that the use of social media provided any of the following results?

(rated question of radio buttons)

Increase in Sales / Improved Brand Awareness / New Professional Contacts

Yes / No

6.2 Overall, has the use of social media benefited your business?

Yes / No

6.3 How much approximately do you spend on upon social media per year?



11/15

NOTE: Questions are listed below with scoring values beneath each. Manual numerical entries were taken as entered, manual text for 2.1 was classified manually and segmented into appropriate SIC sub-group.

1.1 Manua l Numerica l Va lue

N/A

1.2 Male Female

1 2

1.3 None GCSE A-Level Degree Post-Grad

0 years 2 years 4 years 8 years 10 years

1.4 Manua l Numerica l Va lueN/A

2.1 Manual Text Value

N/A


N/A


N/A

2.4 Sole Trader Partnership Limited Company Other

1 2 3 4

3.1 None Own Funds Bank Venture Capital Grant

1 2 3 4 5


N/A


N/A

3.4 Manua l Numerica l Va lueN/A

4.1 Yes No

1 2

4.2 Facebook Twitter LinkedIn Myspace Flickr / Youtube or other

A B C D E

Daily Weekly Monthly Occasionally Never

1 2 3 4 5

4.3 to gain new customers networking brand awareness because others do gathering followers, friends, likes

1 2 3 4 5

APPENDIX IVScoring Outline


12/15

4.4 Yes No

1 2

5.1 Daily Weekly Monthly Occasionally Never

1 2 3 4 5

5.2 Yes No

1 2

5.3 online portfolio of work to look professional because others do to gain new customers to interact with customers / other businesses

1 2 3 4 5

6.1 Increase Sales Improve Brand Awareness New Professional Contacts

1 2 3

Yes No

A B

6.2 Yes No

1 2


N/A


13/15

SIC Group A SIC Group B SIC Group C SIC Group D All Groups Median

PGME NGME PGME NGME PGME NGME PGME NGME PGME NGME Population

1.1 35.00 32.50 29.50 29.00 30.00 28.50 35.00 34.50 32.38 31.13 31.75

1.2 1.45 1.6 1.8 1.6 1.2 1.1 1.1 1.4 1.39 1.43 1.41

1.3 4.20 4.40 6.50 5.00 3.00 3.20 8.50 6.20 5.55 4.70 5.13

1.4 6.10 6.00 5.80 5.50 4.20 4.20 6.00 6.10 5.53 5.45 5.49

2.2 3.50 2.00 3.20 2.50 2.00 3.50 3.60 3.50 3.08 2.88 2.98

2.3 2.50 3.00 1.50 1.20 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.50 1.50 1.68 1.59

2.4 2.50 2.25 1.20 1.50 1.00 1.00 2.60 3.00 1.83 1.94 1.88

3.1 1.56 2.50 1.55 1.89 1.00 1.00 2.75 2.80 1.72 2.05 1.88

3.2 6,250 8,200 2,750 1,600 1,125 1,500 1,250 2,250 2,844 3,388 3,116

3.3 26,500 22,000 18,500 19,500 11,650 11,360 32,660 31,240 22,328 21,025 21,676

3.4 29,410 21,000 22,985 19,110 11,766 10,790 40,495 30,220 26,164 20,280 23,222

4.1 1.24 1.62 1.44 1.54 1.64 1.80 1.18 1.46 1.38 1.61 1.49

4.2 Err:509 Err:509 Err:509 Err:509 Err:509 Err:509 Err:509 Err:509


4.4 1.40 1.25 1.68 1.80 1.42 1.75 1.70 1.90 1.55 1.68 1.61

5.1 0.45 1.24 0.68 1.10 0.82 0.95 1.20 1.60 0.79 1.22 1.01

5.2 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.50 1.00 1.13 1.00 1.06

5.3 2.20 1.80 1.80 1.50 2.50 1.80 3.50 3.25 2.50 2.09 2.29


6.2 1.10 1.12 1.50 1.40 1.00 1.10 1.40 1.60 1.25 1.31 1.28

6.3 225.00 405.00 101.00 118.00 92.00 106.00 205.00 325.00 155.75 238.50 197.13

# Respondents

18 18 17 17 12 12 6 6 13.25 13.25 13.25

NOTE: Question 2.1 excluded as this was used prior to manually segment responses into relevant SIC groups.

Questions 4.2, 4.3 & 6.1 explored upon separate sheet

APPENDIX VSurvey Results


14/15

Question 4.2

Group A

1 2 3 4 5

PG NG PG NG PG NG PG NG PG NGA 36% 33% 24% 27% 21% 20% 12% 13% 7% 7%

B 34% 33% 26% 27% 22% 20% 14% 13% 4% 7%

C 21% 20% 34% 33% 28% 27% 13% 13% 4% 7%

D 5% 7% 11% 13% 19% 20% 25% 27% 40% 33%

E 4% 7% 9% 13% 22% 20% 42% 33% 23% 27%

Group B

1 2 3 4 5

PG NG PG NG PG NG PG NG PG NG

A 34% 32% 28% 27% 18% 21% 16% 13% 4% 7%

B 32% 33% 26% 27% 22% 20% 12% 13% 8%7%

C 36% 20% 21% 33% 22% 27% 19% 13% 2% 7%

D 1% 7% 1% 13% 1% 2% 42% 27% 55% 33%

E 6% 7% 9% 13% 1% 2% 78% 33% 6% 27%

Group C

1 2 3 4 5


A 29% 33% 26% 27% 18% 20% 16% 13% 11% 7%

B 33% 33% 29% 29% 17% 20% 12% 11% 9% 7%

C 22% 20% 28% 33% 20% 22% 21% 18% 9% 7%

D 1% 7% 8% 8% 16% 13% 36% 39% 39%33%

E 36% 33% 26% 19% 20% 28% 10% 13% 8% 7%

Group D

1 2 3 4 5


A 30% 27% 39% 37% 21% 20% 9% 13% 1% 3%

B 31% 41% 35% 33% 18% 16% 10% 4% 6% 6%

C 42% 33% 29% 31% 18% 19% 6% 14% 5% 3%

D 4% 7% 11% 13% 11% 20% 52% 47% 22% 13%

E 9% 7% 18% 13% 19% 21% 42% 48% 12% 11%


15/15

Question 4.3

Group A Group B Group C Group D MedianPG NG PG NG PG NG PG NG PG NG P

1 42% 45% 25% 27% 10% 9% 27% 28% 26% 27% 27%

2 17% 6% 42% 33% 19% 18% 46% 35% 31% 23% 27%

3 33% 36% 33% 36% 14% 16% 18% 26% 25% 29% 27%

4 0% 8% 0% 2% 29% 26% 9% 8% 10% 11% 10%

5 8% 5% 0% 2% 28% 31% 0% 3% 9% 10% 10%

Question 6.1

Group A Group B

PG NG PG NG PG NG PG NG

A B A B

1 98% 92% 2% 8% 1 98% 92% 2% 8%

2 92% 98% 8% 2% 2 92% 98% 8% 2%

3 98% 98% 2% 2% 3 98% 92% 2% 8%

Group C Group D

PG NG PG NG PG NG PG NG

A B A B

1 96% 98% 4% 2% 1 98% 92% 2% 8%

2 92% 98% 8% 2% 2 96% 98% 4% 2%

3 96% 98% 4% 2% 3 98% 97% 2% 3%

Population Median

PG NG PG NG

A B

1 97.50% 93.50% 2.50% 6.50%

2 93.00% 98.00% 7.00% 2.00%

3 97.50% 96.25% 2.50% 3.75%

Documents

Social Media Use in Creative Micro-Enterprise - Silent Solutions, Nov 2010