View
892
Download
0
Embed Size (px)
DESCRIPTION
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.
Citation preview
If we build the people, they'll build the business
Stef Karakasis introduces:
A set of complimentary factors providing insights & applications for creating
Paths of value through Online knowledge sharing.
Background +
FocusSocial Networking has reached critical mass, how do we
harness this for the business ?
Study a behavourial outcome in a particular context
and provide linkage between people, processes and
outcomes on a greater scale.
Big Question: What are the factors which influence the sharing of knowledge in Online Communities of Practice on a Social Networking Platform?
Context of the study =
Research approach
Weapons of choice
Online survey fuelled trough blogging @ Mindz.com & spreading updates via Twitter;
Over 2000 views on the 2 blogs describing the progress made resulting in
collaboration with other 3 members of Mindz.com;
Regression Analyses + Path analysis (SPSS AMOS) to contrast results.
Online trust drives on personal experiences and significantly impacts WOM behaviour.
Online trust does not have a significant impact on satisfaction with regards to the platform.
Context is key for Content.
Interpersonal & Distributive justice matter the most for driving online trust.
We are social people. This is not new.You get what you give.
User experience (Social & Design)
Satisfaction and greater Satisfaction leads to greater
Word-of-Mouth via (collaborative) features such as Weblogs.
Most active members (Hubs) are those that are most likely to spread WOM and continue to share with others.
Human engagement for brand preference & Loyalty building.
Like slide from scot CFA
“ ...tools don’t get socially
interesting until they get
technologically boring.”
- Clay Shirky
Using an Social Networking Platform significantly impacts WOM behaviour online
Sharing is Caring
Privacy will become a bigger concern. Justice online
Get out of the Building!!!
Increase sample size through performing research across platforms;
Collaborate with data mining (Clipit, StatSoft) & research companies (InSites) when going after focal
relationships;
Always go for the holistic view and iterate as much as you can;
Talk to as much people from different backgrounds/ disciplines to gather insights & opinions;
Most Social Networking Platforms amplify that what there are seeded with, whether this is
promotional use (Mindz.com), social (Facebook) or transactional (Bitcoin);
WOM is the currency, since every customer is a potential journalist, brand spokesperson online.
Back-up Slides
Tested research model;Hypotheses
SocialROI = (Gains – Investment) = Mindz.comInvestment
Results Tested Model
Research QuestionsSub questions:
• How does justice theory influence satisfaction within an OCoP?;Positive, significant effect of justice on trust whereas interpersonal and distributivejustice showed having a positive significant impact on trust.
• How does trust in community members influence SNP satisfaction?;Trust does not have a significant impact on satisfaction concerning the SNP but does have a significant effect on WOM behaviour.
• How does SNP satisfaction influence Word of Mouth behaviour?; 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.• How do the outcomes of SNP satisfaction influence the continuation of knowledge sharing within an OCoP?
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
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.
HypothesesH1a: Justice is positively, significantly, related to SNP satisfaction - AcceptedH1b: Justice is positively, significantly, related to the intention to keep on sharingonline - AcceptedH1c: Distributive justice is positively, significantly, related to trust - AcceptedH1d: Procedural justice is positively, significantly, related to trust – Rejected*H1e: Interpersonal justice is positively, significantly, related to trust – Accepted*H1f: Informational justice is positively, significantly, related to trust - AcceptedH2a: Trust in members is positively, significantly, related to SNP satisfaction – Rejected**H2b: Trust in members is positively, significantly, related to Word-of-Mouth behaviour - AcceptedH3: SNP satisfaction is positively, significantly, related to SNP uses - AcceptedH4a: SNP uses is positively, significantly related to the intention to keep on sharing online - AcceptedH4b: SNP uses is positively, significantly related to WOM behaviour - AcceptedH5a: SNP satisfaction is positively, significantly, related to SNP WOM behaviour - AcceptedH5b: SNP WOM behaviour is positively, significantly related to the intention to keep
on sharing online- Accepted
* Proc. (negative) & Interp. Justice turned out to be non-significant in the regression analysis.** Justice Continuance of sharing: weaker significant effect in regression then path analysis.