=Paper=
{{Paper
|id=Vol-1458/F09_CRC25_Durst
|storemode=property
|title=A Framework for Using Social Media Channels in
Knowledge Exchange With Customers
|pdfUrl=https://ceur-ws.org/Vol-1458/F09_CRC25_Durst.pdf
|volume=Vol-1458
|dblpUrl=https://dblp.org/rec/conf/lwa/DurstL15
}}
==A Framework for Using Social Media Channels in
Knowledge Exchange With Customers==
https://ceur-ws.org/Vol-1458/F09_CRC25_Durst.pdf
A framework for using social media channels in
knowledge exchange with customers
Susanne Durst1, Michael Leyer2*
1 University of Skövde, Skövde, Sweden
susanne.durst@his.se
2 University of Rostock, Rostock, Germany
michael.leyer@uni-rostock.de
Abstract. Social media channels become more and more important for service
providers in contacting customers. Given the variety of offers it is important to
understand the contribution of social media channels to knowledge exchange
with customers. We analyse the requirements of customer contact in service pro-
vision and develop a framework how different social media channels can be used
for knowledge exchange. In particular, we show from the perspective of service
providers how these organisations may apply different social media channels in
different stages of service processes.
Keywords: Knowledge exchange, social media channels, framework
1 Introduction
Knowledge exchange between customers and providers occurs through interaction
channels [1]. An interaction channel is described as medium or customer contact point
through which a customer contact takes place. Such interaction channels can be tradi-
tional (e.g. store, personal contact or mail) or modern (e.g. email, websites or social
media). Irrespective from the specific channels, multi-channel management is relevant
before, during and after service delivery as there are contact points between provider
and customer including suppliers [1].
Among these channels, social media channels are becoming more and more im-
portant as there has been a dramatic increase in using social media platforms for a va-
riety of communication purposes [2]. The advancements in the area of social media
applications have opened up a feeling of self-determination and co-determination of
customers [3]. Given the fact that there is a variety of social media channels available
[4] and activities are less controllable [5], which can lead to detrimental consequences
* Both authors contributed equally to this work and should be considered co‐first authors.
Copyright © 2015 by the paper’s authors. Copying permitted only for private and ac‐
ademic purposes. In: R. Bergmann, S. Görg, G. Müller (Eds.): Proceedings of the LWA
2015 Workshops: KDML, FGWM, IR, and FGDB. Trier, Germany, 7.‐9. October
2015, published at http://ceur‐ws.org
272
(“online firestorms”) [6], the research question is how knowledge exchange in a multi-
channel setting of different social media channels should take place. While for firms it
is necessary to analyse how customers react to service offering in terms of adoption or
satisfaction, the question how knowledge that may be critical for service innovation or
other areas of business development is exchanged across several channels is not well
understood so far [1]. The aim is to develop how knowledge exchange between cus-
tomers and service providers may take place through social media channels.
2 Theoretical background
2.1 Service delivery
Irrespective from the context, a service delivery process consists of a start event fol-
lowed by activities and an end event [7]. The start event is triggered by customers who
make the decision to buy the service and the end event occurs when the service delivery
has finished. The activities between are either performed by the provider (and eventu-
ally a supplier) or by the customer [8]. Service delivery processes can occur more than
once for a specific customer and are performed for different customers. Thus, service
delivery is characterised by customer integration which is heterogeneous, i.e. how this
integration takes place can differ between customers and each time a service is executed
for a customer [9].
Additionally, there can be processes before and after the service delivery that are
connected to the service delivery process [10]. Processes before are typically infor-
mation search, negotiation and contract conclusion [10] while within usage or enjoy-
ment of the result afterwards [11] customer complaints might occur for example. The
phases can be described as follows:
1. Information search: The first step towards a service delivery is to search for infor-
mation. Customers have a certain need and look for information how to fulfil it.
2. Negotiation: If a customer is demanding a service or product then potentially nego-
tiations can take place. This covers e.g. the price or characteristics of delivery.
3. Contract conclusion: If there is mutual agreement on the service offer, a contract
between buyer and seller is the result.
4. Integration during delivery: Customers are integrated during the service delivery
process. Knowledge is exchanged in terms of specific customer characteristics and
details regarding the delivery.
5. Usage, enjoyment: Once a service is delivered/ produced it will be used by custom-
ers. In this phase knowledge exchange can occur through complaints by customers
which have to be handled by service providers.
2.2 Knowledge exchange
Knowledge exchange incorporates the exchange of knowledge between customers,
suppliers and provider as well as within supplier and provider companies involved [8].
Such knowledge can be directly related to a specific service delivery, general
273
knowledge about services offered or regarding customer experience. The communica-
tion and thus the exchange of knowledge with the customer happens through a number
of different channels.
Thanks to the ICT advancements, it is easier than ever to find and share knowledge,
detached from time and space, and most individuals do it; also in their leisure time.
Some technologies can be considered as better drivers or facilitators of these activities
than other ones [12], social media have shown their enormous potential. At the same
time, boundaries between work related knowledge sharing and private knowledge shar-
ing are increasingly blurred, since the different social media sites can easily be assessed
and used through computers and mobile devices. Furthermore, an increasing number of
organisations apply social media with different groups of stakeholders and thus expand
their scope of knowledge sharing [13].
2.3 Social media channels
The communication and thus the exchange of knowledge with the customer can occur
through different channels [1]. While traditional interaction channels such as branches,
telephone or the own website are highly under control of service providers, this does
not hold true for social media channels. Here, service providers have a user status of a
third-party program in a similar way as their customers. Customers have more possi-
bilities to interact and make their knowledge public the latter being rarely the case for
traditional channels. To better cope with the variety of social media channels [4, pp. 8-
12] grouped them into four zones:
1. Zone 1 Social community: Social communities refer to channels that focus on rela-
tionships and the gathering of people that share the same interest or identification.
Examples are social networking sites (SNS), forums, and wikis.
2. Zone 2 Social Publishing: Social publishing sites support the dissemination of con-
tent to a target group. Examples are blogs and media sharing sites.
3. Zone 3 Social Entertainment: These channels aim at offering opportunities for play
and enjoyment. Examples are social games and entertainment communities.
4. Zone 4 Social Commerce: Social commerce is about the usage of social media for
online buying and selling of physical goods and services. The channels in this zone
also cover review sites, deal sites, social shopping markets, and social storefronts.
3 Social media channel usage in service processes
In line with the research question, we develop a conceptual framework that is displayed
in Table 1. The framework links knowledge exchange in the phases of service processes
(Section 2.1) with the four social media zones. More precisely, our aim is to show how
different forms of knowledge exchange (i.e. information search, negotiation, contract
conclusion, integration during delivery and usage/enjoyment) can be realised by apply-
ing social media channels.
274
Zone 1 Zone 2 Zone 3 Zone 4
Information search X X X
Negotiation X X
Contract conclusion X X X
Integration during delivery X X X
Usage/Enjoyment X X X X
Table 1. Usage of social media channels for knowledge exchange in different phases of
service processes
Table 1 clarifies that depending on the form of knowledge exchange taking place during
service processes different social media zones are affected:
Information search: Using social media channels, information in this phase can be
obtained from other individuals active in social communities. Here, customers seek
for information such as how to solve a possible problem, which service offers other
people may know and which experiences others have been made with the services
offered. Thus, individuals can look for information or offer information/experience
to others. A provider can step in this phase and also provide information.
Another way of knowledge exchange in this phase is via social publishing, i.e. an
individual or company provides a special blog on a specific solution. Additionally,
information can be distributed through websites which aim at social commerce. So-
cial entertainment channels are not relevant here, as these are typically not used for
information search by customers.
Negotiation: Next to direct negotiations between a customer and a company, it can
happen online as well, e.g. in the case of online auctions. Within such social com-
mercial websites, information exchanges within bidding processes take place be-
tween a company and many bidders.
Furthermore, offers can be negotiated through social communities, in that case using
them as communication channel. Such a type of communication is not feasible for
social publishing as feedback is not possible, and does not represent the aim of social
entertainment channels.
Contract conclusion: As this phase also requires communication between the parties,
execution via social publishing channels is not suitable. Yet, in addition to social
communities and social commerce channels, offers can also be accepted in social
entertainment environments. Examples are social online games (e.g. World of
Warcraft) in which digital items can be bought.
Integration during delivery: As in the prior phase, social publishing channels are not
suitable. If a personal contact between customers and service providers is not re-
quired during service delivery (e.g. hair cutting), knowledge can also be exchanged
through the other social media channels. Customers can provide specific character-
istics on their own or these are already stored in applications within the social chan-
nels. Additionally, information provided on social networks or observed behaviour
can be extracted.
Usage/enjoyment: After a service is delivered and experienced by the customers,
they can share the experiences within every social media channel. Such knowledge
dissemination can include the description of features, benefits, weaknesses, opinions
or complaints. Service providers can be present with their own accounts and actively
275
seek and accept inputs from customers (i.e. social commerce channels). However,
customers may also complaint about or praise products with their social peers or
visible to everyone (social publishing). Here, providers need to continuously monitor
relevant social channels to pick up reactions to their services.
It should be emphasised that the separate description of channels does not implicate
that knowledge exchanges regarding a specific service take place within one channel
only. In fact, several social channels can be used stepwise, at the same time and in
combination with other channels such as email, phone or a branch.
4 Influence on knowledge exchange
The usage of social media channels in the different phases of knowledge exchange
will also have implications for the parties involved. Next, we highlight a number of
implications, taking the perspective of a service provider.
The integration of customers in the service delivery process provides service provid-
ers the opportunity of getting access to outside knowledge and thereby expanding or
updating their own knowledge base. Ideally, the combination of customers’ knowledge
and service provider’s knowledge results in new or improved services. In order to do
so, virtual reality labs may be considered as promising tools of service creation. Service
providers and customers (e.g. lead users) can collaborate in real time and across geo-
graphical boundaries. They can pick up questions from and concerns of customers by
answering via the same social media channel in a fast and detailed way.
Customers are searching for information on products and services using different
social media channels, but are also using these channels to share information on their
preferences and market trends [14]. In addition, they will also share their positive and
negative experience with the service. Thus, customers act as boundary spanners be-
tween the firms and the market.
Provision of information and knowledge to potential customers about the attributes
of products can take place where the customer is. Thus, a switch between channels is
not necessary which reduces the risk of customers switching to other providers.
Information and (explicit) knowledge is not only shared through social media chan-
nels but can also easily be stored and then processed for later usage. This allows service
providers to continuously develop their knowledge base. However, knowledge from
different social channels is mainly stored with the provider of the social channel. A
service provider has to export such knowledge to its own systems and combine
knowledge on customers to enable internal reporting. Next to the direct communication
with a customer, this can also be e.g. information on how well the last Facebook-cam-
paign performed or how the number of followers develop. Furthermore, other custom-
ers can add their experience and knowhow to knowledge exchanges between customer
and service providers that take place openly to the public. Such knowledge can also be
accessed, stored, used to improve a service offer or to develop new ones.
276
5 Conclusions and Outlook
The challenge for service providers will lie in their capability of combining
knowledge per customer over different channels. This is difficult as information is typ-
ically stored with other providers offering platforms for social media channels. More-
over, analytics often rely on the provider offerings and are not standardised across them.
The present study provides practitioners’ insights and ideas how best use could be made
of different social media channels for information and knowledge exchange.
From a theoretical point of view, this study provides novel insights into the study of
interactions between providers and customers as it draws particular attention to the con-
tribution of social media channels in these interactions. These insights thus expand our
body of knowledge regarding multi-channel management activities.
Future work should especially shed light on the following topics to strengthen our
understanding of knowledge exchange within social media channels:
Are there specific types of customers demanding specific combinations of social
media channels which can be described in a standard knowledge exchange?
Are there significant differences or similarities between industries regarding
knowledge exchange via social media channels?
How can service providers make use of knowledge which cannot be transferred to
the own systems in order to develop a conjoint knowledge datasheet per customer?
How should algorithms be designed to analyse customer knowledge if it is drawn
from different social media channels with various formats?
Does a company have to be present in at least four channels one for each zone to
gather all possible feedback from potential and existing customers?
References
1. Neslin, S.A., Grewal, D., Leghorn, R., Shankar, V., Teerling, M.L., Thomas, J.S., Verhoef,
P.C.: Challenges and opportunities in multichannel customer management. Journal of Service
Research 9, 95-112 (2006)
2. Whiting, A., Williams, D.: Why people use social media. A uses and gratifications approach.
Qualitative Market Research. An International Journal 16, 362-369 (2013)
3. Weiber, R., Wolf, T.: Disruptive Empowerment. Auswirkungen von Kundeninteraktionen auf
den Social-Media-Erfolg. Marketing Review St. Gallen 4, 42-47 (2012)
4. Tuten, T.L., Solomon, M.R.: Social Media Marketing. Sage, Thousand Oaks (2015)
5. Mangold, W.G., Faulds, D.J.: Social media. The new hybrid element of the promotion mix.
Business Horizons 52, 357-365 (2009)
6. Pfeffer, J., Zorbach, T., Carley, K.M.: Understanding online firestorms. Negative word-of-
mouth dynamics in social media networks. Journal of Marketing Communications 20, 117-
128 (2014)
7. Davenport, T.H., Short, J.E.: The New Industrial Engineering. Information Technology and
Business Process Redesign. Sloan Management Review 31, 11-27 (1990)
8. Wynstra, F., Spring, M., Schoenherr, T.: Service triads. A research agenda for buyer-supplier-
customer triads in business services. Journal of Operations Management 35, 1-20 (2015)
9. Leyer, M., Moormann, J.: A method for matching customer integration with operational con-
trol of service processes. Management Research Review 35, 1046-1069 (2012)
277
10.Williamson, O.E.: The economic institutions of capitalism. Firms, markets, relational con-
tracting. Free Press, New York (1985)
11.Vargo, S.L., Lusch, R.F.: Evolving to a new dominant logic for marketing. Journal of Mar-
keting 68, 1-17 (2004)
12.Sicilia, M.-A., Lytras, M.D.: The semantic learning organization. The Learning Organization
12, 402-410 (2005)
13.Kaplan, A.M.: If you love something, let it go mobile. Mobile marketing and mobile social
media 4x4. Business Horizons 55, 129-139 (2012)
14.Cheung, F.Y.M., To, W.M.: Do task- and relation-oriented customers co-create a better qual-
ity of service? An empirical study of customer-dominant logic. Management Decision 53,
179-197 (2015)
278