skip to main content
10.1145/2132176.2132196acmotherconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PagesiconferenceConference Proceedingsconference-collections
research-article

Forming and norming social media adoption in the corporate sector

Published:07 February 2012Publication History

ABSTRACT

Social media increasingly pervade the business context. Despite the widespread fascination with the transformative capabilities of these tools, and an increased observability of online social media practices in the corporate sector, the adoption process at the organizational level as well as its consequences on policies and strategies are currently less understood. To ameliorate this gap, this study sets out to examine adoption patterns and their resulting organizational policies and strategies that influence or are influenced by specific adoption behaviors. In doing so, this study builds on findings of an interpretive case analysis, that integrates insights from various social media strategists, purposively selected from multiple industries. Guided by several technology adoption frameworks -- primarily Orlikowski's structurational analysis - three distinct pathways of social media adoption emerged from the data: (1) early adopters, (2) internal mavericks and (3) bandwagon jumpers. Each pathway is driven by either internal or external social behaviors, and leads to distinct organizational social media practices. Our data shows that existing organizational polices and norms mediate social media adoption practices while in turn, innovative adoption practices transform and influence the emergence of policies and norms in the form of a reflexive feedback mechanism.

References

  1. Abrahamson, E. and Rosenkopf, L., 1993. Institutional and competitive bandwagons: Using mathematical modeling as a tool to explore innovation diffusion. Academy of management review, 487--517.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  2. Avgerou, C., 2002. The socio-technical nature of information systems innovation. In Information systems and global diversity, C. Avgerou Ed. Oxford University Press, USA.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  3. Barnes, N., G., 2010. The Fortune 500 and Social Media: A Longitudinal Study of Blogging, Twitter and Facebook Usage by America's Largest Companies The University of Massachusetts Dartmouth Center for Marketing Research http://www.umassd.edu/media/umassdartmouth/cmr/studiesandresearch/2010F500Final.pdf.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  4. Barnes, N., G. and Lescault, A., 2010. Social Media Adoption Soars as Higher-Ed Experiments and Reevaluates Its Use of New Communications Tools. The University of Massachusetts Dartmouth Center for Marketing Research http://www.umassd.edu/media/umassdartmouth/cmr/studiesandresearch/higherEd.pdf.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  5. Borgatti, S. P., Everett, M. G., and Freeman, L. C., 2002. UCINET 6 for Windows: Software for social network analysis, Version 6.102. Harvard, Massachusetts: Analytic Technologies.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  6. Bourdieu, P., 1977. Outline of a Theory of Practice. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  7. DeLuca, D., Gasson, S., and Kock, N., 2006. Adaptations that virtual teams make so that complex tasks can be performed using simple e-collaboration technologies. International Journal of e-Collaboration 2, 3, 65--91.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  8. DeSanctis, G. and Poole, M. S., 1994. Capturing the complexity in advanced technology use: Adaptive structuration theory. Organization science 5, 2, 121--147.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  9. DiMaggio, P. J. and Powell, W. W., 1983. The iron cage revisited: Institutional isomorphism and collective rationality in organizational fields. American sociological review, 147--160.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  10. George, B., 2010. How Social Networking Has Changed Business. HBR Blog Network http://blogs.hbr.org/hbsfaculty/2010/12/how-social-networking-has-chan.html, Dec 23.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  11. Giddens, A., 1979. Central problems in social theory: Action, structure, and contradiction in social analysis. University of California Press, Berkeley.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  12. Hinchcliffe, D., 2011. Social business holds steady gap behind consumer social media. ZDNet http://www.zdnet.com/blog/hinchcliffe/social-business-holds-steady-gap-behind-consumer-social-media/1695, Aug 27.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  13. Jarrahi, M. H., 2010. A structurational analysis of how course management systems are used in practice. Behaviour and Information Technology 29, 3, 257--275. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  14. Kaplan, A., 1964. The conduct of inquiry; methodology for behavioral science. Chandler Pub. C, San Fransisco.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  15. Keitt, T., Brown, M., and Dang, J., 2011. The State Of Collaboration Software Implementations. Forester Research http://www.forrester.com/rb/Research/state_of_collaboration_software_implementations_2011/q/id/58709/t/2, March 21.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  16. Mackrell, D., Kerr, D., and Von Hellens, L., 2009. A qualitative case study of the adoption and use of an agricultural decision support system in the Australian cotton industry: The socio-technical view. Decision Support Systems 47, 2, 143--153. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  17. Madden, M. and Zickuhr, K., 2011. 65% of online adults use social networking sites, Report published by Pew Internet & American Life Project. available online: http://pewinternet.org/Reports/2011/Social-Networking-Sites.aspx.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  18. McAfee, A., 2006. ENTERPRISE 2.0. MIT Sloan management review 47, 3, 21.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  19. Miles, M. B. and Huberman, A. M., 1994. Qualitative data analysis: An expanded sourcebook. Sage Pubs, Thousand Oaks.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  20. NVivo, 2011. NVivo qualitative data analysis software (Version 9). Melbourne: QSR International Pty Ltd.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  21. O'Reilly, T., 2005. What Is Web 2.0: Design Patterns and Business Models for the Next Generation of Software. Available online: http://www.oreillynet.com/pub/a/oreilly/tim/news/2005/09/30/what-is-web-20.html.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  22. Orlikowski, W. J., 2000. Using technology and constituting structures: A practice lens for studying technology in organizations. Organization science 11, 4, 404--428. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  23. Rodriguez, C. and Pozzebon, M., 2011. Understanding managerial behaviour during initial steps of a clinical information system adoption. BMC Medical Informatics and Decision Making 11, 1, 42.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  24. Skeels, M. M. and Grudin, J., 2009. When social networks cross boundaries: a case study of workplace use of facebook and linkedin. In Proceedings of the GROUP'09 (Sanibel Island, Florida, 2009), ACM New York, NY, USA, 95--104. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  25. Spencer, W., 2011. Facebook Reacts to Privacy Backslash as Competition Gears Up. Available online: http://www.tech-faq.com/facebook-reacts-to-privacy-backslash-as-competition-gears-up.html.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  26. Steinfield, C., DiMicco, J. M., Ellison, N. B., and Lampe, C., 2009. Bowling online: social networking and social capital within the organization. In Proceedings of the The fourth international conference on Communities and technologies (2009), ACM, 245--254. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  27. Wu, A., DiMicco, J. M., and Millen, D. R., 2010. Detecting Professional versus Personal Closeness Using an Enterprise Social Network Site. In Proceedings of the CHI 2010 (Atlanta, Georgia 2010). Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  28. Yin, R., 2009. Case study research: Design and methods. Sage publications, Thousand Oaks.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar

Index Terms

  1. Forming and norming social media adoption in the corporate sector

      Recommendations

      Comments

      Login options

      Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

      Sign in
      • Published in

        cover image ACM Other conferences
        iConference '12: Proceedings of the 2012 iConference
        February 2012
        667 pages
        ISBN:9781450307826
        DOI:10.1145/2132176

        Copyright © 2012 ACM

        Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than ACM must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected]

        Publisher

        Association for Computing Machinery

        New York, NY, United States

        Publication History

        • Published: 7 February 2012

        Permissions

        Request permissions about this article.

        Request Permissions

        Check for updates

        Qualifiers

        • research-article

      PDF Format

      View or Download as a PDF file.

      PDF

      eReader

      View online with eReader.

      eReader