Post on 30-Mar-2023
Erkan 461
Volume 9, Number 4, December 2014
“Vine”: Do You Miss It?
Electronic Word of Mouth on
The Social Networking Site, Vine
Ismail Erkan
Brunel Business School
Brunel University,
Kingston Lane, Uxbridge, London, United Kingdom
ismail.erkan@brunel.ac.uk
ABSTRACT
The concept of electronic word of mouth (eWOM) has been diversified by the
advent of social networking websites. Because of this innovation, individuals are
now able to share their ideas and notions regarding brands, products, or services
with their friends through the Internet. For this reason, companies interested in
attracting more attention from consumers create their official accounts on social
networking websites such as Facebook and Twitter. This strategy provides instant
communication between companies and their current and potential customers.
These social networking sites, however, are not totally the same; they create
different customer engagement opportunities for companies. To define and
discuss the difference, this paper compares posts at Vine, Facebook, and Twitter
in terms of customer engagement. Results not only confirm that these three
websites have different customer engagement ratios, but also reveal that the ratio
of Vine is higher than the ratios of both Facebook and Twitter.
Keyword: Electronic word of mouth, social media, customer engagement, Vine
462 “Vine”: Do You Miss It?
Electronic Word of Mouth on
The Social Networking Site, Vine
International Journal of Business and Information
1. INTRODUCTION
In today`s advertising, customers are bombarded daily with hundreds of
messages regarding products and services from a variety of sources, which can
be classified as either marketer-generated or user-generated [Goh, Heng, and Lin,
2013]. Marketer-generated information consists of traditional advertisements
such as TV commercials, radio commercials, or ads on the Internet [Chu and Kim,
2011]. The information produced by marketers of companies is consumed by
customers. User-generated information, on the other hand, consists of
conversations between customers; and, in these conversations, the information is
both produced and consumed by customers.
User-generated information simply refers to word of mouth (WOM), which
is informal communication between people regarding the products and services
of a company [Anderson, 1988; Aydin, Ceylan, and Aydin, 2014]. Because this
type of information is shared by a customer who has no selling intent, it is often
considered more reliable [Lee and Youn, 2009; Bickart and Schindler, 2001].
Although the importance of word of mouth has long been recognized by
marketers and researchers, this type of communication has become more
indispensable because of increased access to and use of the Internet [Sun, Youn,
Wu, and Kuntaraporn, 2006; Lee and Youn, 2009].
Word of mouth has gained a new dimension in the age of the Internet. The
Internet has facilitated this form of communication by providing ever-increasing
space for consumers to share personal opinions and experiences. This new form
of exchange is called electronic word of mouth (eWOM) [Cheung and Thadani,
2012]. Because of content, accessibility, and speed, the Internet has also
prompted more and more people to use the Internet to search for information
rather than rely on traditional methods.
Internet users eagerly seek social networking websites, thus moving
eWOM to a new level. On these sites, consumers can talk about brands, products,
Erkan 463
Volume 9, Number 4, December 2014
and services with their friends and acquaintances through visual instruments. To
be able to speak on these sites with familiar people rather than anonymous
individuals is another opportunity that contributes to diversification of word of
mouth (Figure 1).
Word of Mouth
Electronic Word of Mouth
Electronic Word of Mouth on Social Networking Websites
Figure 1. The Diversification of Electronic Word of Mouth
Having discovered the opportunities afforded by social networking sites,
more and more marketers have begun to use these sites as a promotion tool
[Mangold and Faulds, 2009]. Because of the tremendous interest in social
networking websites by consumers, marketers feel obligated to use the sites to
engage with customers in order to understand their expectations and to avoid
being left behind other companies [Heinonen, 2011; Smith, 2009]. Savvy
companies recognize, however, that there are many different social networking
websites and that most of them provide different communication types, as
evident in the distinction between Facebook and Twitter [Smith, Fischer, and
Yongjian, 2012].
Because Facebook and Twitter are the two most popular social networking
websites [eBizMBA, 2014], companies prefer to use these sites to engage
464 “Vine”: Do You Miss It?
Electronic Word of Mouth on
The Social Networking Site, Vine
International Journal of Business and Information
customers. There are, however, some relatively new social networking websites,
such as Vine, which also provide a platform for companies to engage customers.
Although these new sites have fewer users, they have the potential to attract more
customers because of their posting structure. The question, then, is: Should
popularity be the only criterion used by companies when choosing which social
networking website to use? This paper seeks to answer the question by
comparing two established social networking websites (Facebook and Twitter)
with Vine, a promising new social networking site. The comparison is made in
the context of customer engagement ratio.
2. LITERATURE REVIEW
This review of the literature focuses on two topics: (1) eWOM and social
networking websites, and (2) social networking websites and customer
engagement.
2.1. eWOM and Social Networking Websites
The widespread popularity of the Internet and its increasing use worldwide
have focused attention on eWOM as a marketing tool in terms of both the
academic and business context. The main point in this concept is to create
opportunities for customers to exchange ideas and notions regarding the products
and services of companies. This kind of information has been considered vital
because of its influence on consumers` purchase intentions [Huang, 2010; Zhang,
Craciun, and Shin, 2010]. Because of the speed and convenience of the Internet,
customers can acquire eWOM information instantly with just a few clicks
[Cakim, 2009] from different types of sources, such as blogs, review websites,
and online discussion forums [Cheung and Thadani, 2012].
Social networking websites are another sort of online source providing
available space for eWOM. Through social media, consumers have the
Erkan 465
Volume 9, Number 4, December 2014
opportunity to talk about products, services, and their purchase decisions with
their friends [Kozinets, DeValck, Wojnicki, and and Wilner, 2010]. Although
social networking websites have a similar aim – which is to make connections
between people [Boyd and Ellison, 2007] – the way they connect people is
different [Smith, Fischer, and Yongjian, 2012]. For example, Twitter allows only
short posts with a limit of 140 characters, whereas YouTube focuses mainly on
videos. Facebook, on the other hand, has no limitations or specific focus on any
type of posting. This variety in content causes social networking websites to have
different customer engagement ratios.
2.2. Social Networking Websites and Customer Engagement
Consumers feel more engaged with companies when they can share their
opinions and experiences about products or services; and social networking
websites are very appropriate platforms for this engagement [Mangold and
Faulds, 2009]. For this reason, researchers have a growing interest in the
relationship between these websites and customer engagement [Sashi, 2012;
Wirtz, Schilke, and Ullrich, 2010]. Marketers try to define and to build their
engagement methods, because these websites are important tools to manage their
relationships with customers [Sashi, 2012; Verhoef, Reinartz, and Krafft, 2010].
Many social networking websites have different features to indicate
customer engagement. For companies that create posts to promote their products
and services, the most prominent indicators are the number of “likes,” the
number of “shares,” and the number of “comments” [DeVries, Gensler, and
Leeflang, 2012]. These numbers also express how the information inside the post
spread among customers through eWOM [Hoffman and Fodor, 2010]. Although
the aim is similar, customer engagement opportunities provided by these websites
are not entirely the same. Some have greater customer engagement ratios than
others. The current study examines these ratios for the benefit of both
marketers and researchers.
466 “Vine”: Do You Miss It?
Electronic Word of Mouth on
The Social Networking Site, Vine
International Journal of Business and Information
3. RESEARCH GAP AND RESEARCH QUESTIONS
Social networking websites are considered essential marketing tools for
companies, but, because of the large number of such sites, it is not easy to use all
of them with the same efficiency. For this reason, companies often choose only
a few sites to interact with their customers. The question is: How do companies
choose among the many social networking websites that are available? The most
prominent selection criterion is the popularity of the website as reflected in the
number of users. This paper posits, however, that customer engagement ratio is
one of the most important criteria that should be considered by companies. To
this end, the paper compares well-known social networking websites in order to
indicate the dimension of customer engagement in eWOM. In doing so, the
study addresses these questions:
1. Should the popularity of a social networking website or the number of
users be the only selection criterion for companies when they choose
social networking websites to promote themselves?
2. Are all social networking websites equal for companies in terms of
providing customer engagement?
3. Does the social networking site Vine provide more customer engagement
opportunities by having a different sort of posting structure?
4. RESEARCH METHOD
To address the research questions, the current study chooses three social
networking websites: Facebook, Twitter, and Vine. The first two are chosen
because they are the most popular social networking websites in the world
[eBizMBA, 2014]. Vine is chosen because it has a different sort of posting
structure, which has the potential to attract more users.
Erkan 467
Volume 9, Number 4, December 2014
The company Trident GUM is selected as a case for this study because it
actively uses all three social networking websites. Their official Facebook,
Twitter, and Vine accounts are examined in the context of customer engagement.
More specifically, this study has collected their last five posts on each of the
three social networking websites as of June 24, 2014. These 15 posts, which are
related to the products and services of the companies, are then examined and
compared in terms of number of the “likes,” “shares,” and “comments” [DeVries,
Gensler, and Leeflang, 2012].
5. RESULTS
This study includes only 15 posts from social networking websites. They
may not be enough to generalize the results; however, the main goal of this study
is to introduce the customer engagement ratio as a substantial dimension of
eWOM. Small samples can yield critical results as long as they are purposeful
and strategic [Patton, 2002]. Tables 1, 2, and 3 show the customer engagement
values for Vine, Twitter, and Facebook, respectively. Table 4 compares average
ratios for Vine, Twitter, and Facebook. The data clearly show that Vine has a
better customer/engagement ratio than either Twitter or Facebook.
Table 1
Customer Engagement Values for Vine
Platforms
& Posts
No. of
“Likes”
No. of
“Shares”
No. of
Comments
No. of
Followers
Ratio of
“Likes” /
Followers
Ratio of
“Shares” /
Followers
Ratio of
Comments
/ Followers
Vine / 1 570 160 34 65.2 K 0.0087423 0.0024539 0.00052147
Vine / 2 782 269 9 65.2 K 0.011993 0.0041257 0.00013803
Vine / 3 611 178 3 65.2 K 0.0093711 0.0027300 0.000046012
Vine / 4 542 155 12 65.2 K 0.0083128 0.0023773 0.00018404
Vine / 5 972 414 34 65.2 K 0.014907 0.0063496 0.00052147
Average - - - - 0.01066524 0.0036073 0.0002822044
468 “Vine”: Do You Miss It?
Electronic Word of Mouth on
The Social Networking Site, Vine
International Journal of Business and Information
Table 2
Customer Engagement Values for Twitter
Platforms
& Posts
No. of
“Likes”
No. of
“Shares”
No. of
Comments
No. of
Followers
Ratio of
“Likes” /
Followers
Ratio of
“Shares” /
Followers
Ratio of
Comments
/ Followers
TW / 1 12 7 1 33 K 0.00036363 0.00021212 0.000030303
TW / 2 537 1100 37 33 K 0.016272 0.033333 0.0011212
TW / 3 7 3 2 33 K 0.00021212 0.000090909 0.000060606
TW / 4 3 3 1 33 K 0.000090909 0.000090909 0.000030303
TW / 5 4 2 3 33 K 0.00012121 0.000060606 0.000090909
Average - - - - 0.0034119738 0.0067575088 0.0002666642
Table 3
Customer Engagement Values for Facebook
Platforms
& Posts
No. of
“Likes”
No. of
“Shares”
No. of
Comments
No. of
Followers
Ratio of
“Likes” /
Followers
Ratio of
“Shares” /
Followers
Ratio of
Comments /
Followers
FB / 1 45 0 3 13 M* 0.0000034521 0 0.00000023014
FB / 2 118 1 20 13 M* 0.0000090523 0.000000076713 0.0000015343
FB / 3 103 1 4 13 M* 0.0000079016 0.000000076713 0.00000030685
FB / 4 40 0 29 13 M* 0.0000030686 0 0.0000022247
FB / 5 210 13 29 13 M* 0.00001611 0.00000099728 0.0000022247
Average - - - - 0.00000791692 0.0000002301412 0.000001304138
*13.035.381
Erkan 469
Volume 9, Number 4, December 2014
Table 4
Comparison of Vine with Twitter and Facebook
Comparison
In Terms of
“Likes”
In Terms of
“Shares”
In Terms of
Comments
Vine / Twitter Vine - 3x Better Vine - 0.5x Better Vine - 3x Better
Vine / Facebook Vine - 1347x Better Vine - 15674x Better Vine - 216x Better
As shown in Table 4, Vine is three times better than Twitter in terms of
“Likes” and “Comments” and 0.5 times better than Twitter in terms of “Shares.”
Compared with Facebook, Vine is 1,347 times better in terms of “Likes”; 15,647
times better in terms of “Shares” (which is quite high and shows that people do
not like sharing marketer-generated content on Facebook); and 216 times better
in terms of “Comments.” The ratios for Facebook have been found remarkably
low in comparison with other social networking sites. Although Facebook has a
huge number of followers, estimated at approximately 13 million, the number of
people who interacted with posts made by companies is quite low. This fact
makes Facebook incomparably weak with regard to customer engagement ratio.
The findings of the current study regarding Facebook correspond with
previous negative criticisms by practitioners [Lake, 2011]. This issue is still
being discussed among researchers [Naylor, Lamberton, and West, 2012]. The
results of the current study show that the participation of users with regard to
company content is not similar among Facebook, Twitter, and Vine. The results
show that the customer engagement ratio for Vine is higher than the ratios for
both Facebook and Twitter. In other words, people are more involved with the
posts of companies on Vine. However, the difference between Vine and Twitter is
not as high as the difference between Vine and Facebook.
470 “Vine”: Do You Miss It?
Electronic Word of Mouth on
The Social Networking Site, Vine
International Journal of Business and Information
6. CONCLUSION
Companies wish to participate in social networking websites because of the
growing interest of customers in these websites. Marketers generally decide to
place their official accounts on the most popular websites such as Facebook and
Twitter. However, as indicated by the results of the current study, popularity as
measured by the number of users should not be the only selection criterion;
customer engagement ratios should also be considered. This means that the new
social networking websites that provide higher customer engagement ratios
should not be underestimated by companies.
Although the current study presents only initial insights because of the use
of small samples, it provides two useful implications for both marketers and
researchers:
1. Customer engagement ratio is a dimension of eWOM that should be
considered by marketers when choosing a social networking website for
the purpose of interacting with customers.
2. Some relatively new social networking websites such as Vine can
provide valuable opportunities in terms of customer engagement and
eWOM. The fact that posts created on Vine are eye-catching encourages
eWOM, a factor that ensures that a company’s message can spread
faster on the Internet among customers.
For further research, the size of the samples used in the current study can
be increased, or interviews with social media users can be added in order to
obtain stronger and more expanded results. In addition (thanks to a reviewer for
offering the following two suggestions), all posts examined in this study included
positive statements about the brand. The results, however, might change if
posts containing negative statements were included. The influence of negative
statements should therefore be tested in further studies. Moreover, the current
Erkan 471
Volume 9, Number 4, December 2014
study did not take into consideration the IDs of users who engage a company
through “likes,” “shares,” or “comments.” Although the three categories were
analyzed separately, this factor should be considered as a limitation of this study.
REFERENCES
Anderson, E.W. 1998. Customer satisfaction and word of mouth, Journal of Service
Research 1(1), 5-17.
Aydin, S.; H.H. Ceylan; and E. Aydin. 2014. A research on reference behavior trends
according to Horney's personality types, Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences
148, 680-685.
Bickart, B.. and R. Schindler. 2001. Internet forums as influential sources of
consumer information, Journal of Interactive Marketing 15(3), 31-40.
Boyd, D.M., and N.B. Ellison. 2007. Social network sites: Definition, history, and
scholarship, Journal of Computer‐Mediated Communication 13(1), 210-230.
Cakim, I.M. 2009. Implementing Word of Mouth Marketing: Online Strategies to
Identify Influencers, Craft Stories, and Draw Customers, New York: John Wiley &
Sons.
Cheung, C.M., and D.R. Thadani. 2012. The impact of electronic word of mouth
communication: A literature analysis and integrative model, Decision Support
Systems 54(1), 461-470.
Chu, S.C., and Y. Kim. 2011. Determinants of consumer engagement in electronic word
of mouth (eWOM) in social networking sites, International Journal of Advertising
30(1), 47-75.
De Vries, L.; S. Gensler; and P.S. Leeflang. 2012. Popularity of brand posts on brand fan
pages: An investigation of the effects of social media marketing, Journal of
Interactive Marketing 26(2), 83-91.
eBizMBA Guide. 2014. The top 15 most popular social networking websites - June 2014,
Downloadable form website:
http://www.ebizmba.com/articles/social-networking-websites (accessed 6/23/14).
472 “Vine”: Do You Miss It?
Electronic Word of Mouth on
The Social Networking Site, Vine
International Journal of Business and Information
Goh, K.Y.; C.S. Heng; and Z. Lin. 2013. Social media brand community and consumer
behavior: Quantifying the relative impact of user-and marketer-generated content,
Information Systems Research 24(1), 88-107.
Heinonen, K. 2011. Consumer activity in social media: Managerial approaches to
consumers' social media behavior, Journal of Consumer Behaviour 10(6), 356-364.
Hoffman, D.L., and M. Fodor. 2010. Can you measure the ROI of your social media
marketing? Sloan Management Review 52(1) 41-49.
Huang, L. 2010. Social contagion effects in experiential information exchange on
bulletin board systems, Journal of Marketing Management 26(3-4), 197-212.
Kozinets, R.V.; K. DeValck; A.C. Wojnicki; and S.J. Wilner. 2010. Networked
narratives: Understanding word-of-mouth marketing in online communities, Journal
of Marketing 74(2), 71-89.
Lake, Amielle. 2011. Why Facebook Fans Are Useless, iMedia Connection.
Available at: www.imediaconnection.com/content/30235.asp
(accessed June 26, 2014).
Lee, M., and S. Youn. 2009. Electronic word of mouth (eWOM): How eWOM
platforms influence consumer product judgment, International Journal of
Advertising 28(3), 473-499.
Mangold, W.G., and D.J. Faulds. 2009. Social media: The new hybrid element of the
promotion mix, Business Horizons 52(4), 357-365.
Naylor, R.W.; C.P. Lamberton; and P.M. West. 20012. Beyond the “like” button: The
impact of mere virtual presence on brand evaluations and purchase intentions in
social media settings, Journal of Marketing 76(6), 105-120.
Patton, M.Q. 2002. Qualitative Research & Evaluation Methods, Sage Publications.
Sashi, C.M. 2012. Customer engagement, buyer-seller relationships, and social media,
Management Decision 50(2), 253-272.
Erkan 473
Volume 9, Number 4, December 2014
Smith, A.N.; E. Fischer; and C. Yongjian. 2012. How does brand-related
user-generated content differ across YouTube, Facebook, and Twitter? Journal of
Interactive Marketing 26(2), 102-113.
Smith, T. 2009. The social media revolution, International Journal of Market
Research 51(4), 559-561.
Sun, T.; S. Youn; G. Wu; and M. Kuntaraporn. 2006. Online word‐of‐mouth (or
Mouse): An exploration of its antecedents and consequences, Journal of
Computer‐Mediated Communication 11(4), 1104-1127.
Verhoef, P.C.; W.J. Reinartz; and M. Krafft. 2010. Customer engagement as a new
perspective in customer management, Journal of Service Research 13(3), 247-252.
Wirtz, B.W.; O. Schilke; and S. Ullrich. 2010. Strategic development of business
models: Implications of the Web 2.0 for creating value on the internet, Long Range
Planning 43(2), 272-290.
Zhang, J.Q.; G. Craciun; and D. Shin. 2010. When does electronic word-of-mouth
matter? A study of consumer product reviews, Journal of Business Research 63(12),
1336-1341.
ABOUT THE AUTHOR
Ismail Erkan completed his master’s degree at Istanbul University Business
School in 2012 and started his Ph.D. at Brunel University Business School in 2013.
He worked at Gebze Institute of Technology as a research assistant. Currently, he is
working on electronic word of mouth marketing and social media.