Search results

This study aims to propose a set of metrics in order to assess reactivity, dialogic communication and stakeholder engagement (popularity, commitment and virality): stakeholders' mood and social legitimacy on corporate Facebook pages. These metrics can offer a better understanding and measurability of this social media/social network/online communication management tool.

Three theories (dialogic, stakeholders and legitimacy) were considered in the development of these metrics. Empirical evidence was collected from a sample of 314 European companies. Then ten active companies were used to validate the proposed metrics on Facebook.

The constructed set of metrics was found to be valid and efficiently usable according to the principles of the applied theories. Moreover all the proposed metrics could be adapted for such sites as Google+.

Limitations can only be identified within the validation process as the metrics were only applied to ten representative companies from the Eurozone.

The proposed metrics will help users, marketing/PR/communication professionals and company managers to measure their and their competitors' popularity, commitment, virality (metrics which reflect stakeholder engagement), and the mood of stakeholders, and use content analysis in order to measure social legitimacy via CSR information disclosure on Facebook. Thus the online reputation of a company can be practically measured.

This paper is the first proposing metrics to assess stakeholder engagement and social legitimacy on a corporate Facebook page that can be used in both academic and professional circles to a gain a better understanding of corporate online communication via Facebook.

The purpose of this paper is to explore the utilization of the social network, Facebook, as an instrument of stakeholder engagement and dialogic accounting in American charitable foundations, specifically non-profit organizations that are dedicated to philanthropy.

The research motivation involves whether online interaction through Facebook could represent a channel of dialogic accounting that engages organizational stakeholders. This paper aims to understand if this dialogue is geared to generate a consensus necessary to deliberate over decisions that are shared between all stakeholders, or if a divergent and agonistic perspective, which highlights struggles and differences between actors, prevails. The present study employs a form of content analysis that takes into account the Facebook pages of the 100 largest American philanthropic foundations.

The primary goal of the analysis is to examine the discrepancies in terms of how (and how much) large organizations are using Facebook. The study wants to provide more details on which kind of information large organizations are willing to disclose and collect on Facebook, and to evaluate the level and type of interaction between foundations and users.

Further research could build on the present study by providing in-depth case studies and extending the analysis to other social media and other types of organizations.

Social media represent a powerful mechanism to engage stakeholders in a polylogic conversation. However, the scholarly literature confirms that further studies are necessary to understand how companies and organization can exploit this potential.