<b>What Factors Lead Companies to Adopt Social Media in their processes</b>: Proposal and Test of a Measurement Model

Araújo, Jozé Braz de; Zilber, Silvia Novaes

doi:10.15728/bbr.2016.13.6.5

Jozé Braz de Araújo

Doctor in Administration. Link: Nove de Julho University - UNINOVE. Address: Comendador Roberto Ugolini Street, 549, São Paulo - SP - Brazil. E-mail: jbraz67@gmail.com

Silvia Novaes Zilber

Doctor in Administration by the FEA-USP; Engineer by the POLI-USP. Link: Universidade Federal do ABC - UFABC; Centro dee Engenharia, Modelagem e Ciências Sociais Aplicadas - CECS. Address: UFABC - Campus São Bernardo Arcturus Street, 3 - Jardim Antares - São Bernardo do Campo - SP - Brazil. Cep: 09606-070. E-mail: silviazilber@gmail.com ou silvia.zilber@ufabc.edu.br

CONTRIBUTIONS BY THE AUTHORS

José Braz de Araújo contributed to the development of research.

Silvia Novaes Zilber supervised the thesis that originated article.

Variable	Construct	Indicators		Theoretical Source
Perceived Innovation Characteristics	Relative Advantage	VR1	The use of social media improves exposure to the company’s brand(s) or product(s)	Rogers (1983)ROGERS, E. M. Diffusion of innovations. New York: Free Press, 1983.; Frambach e Schillewaert (2002)FRAMBACH, R. T.; SCHILLEWAERT, N. Organizational innovation adoption: A multi-level framework of determinants and opportunities for future research. Journal of Business Research, v. 55, p. 163-176, 2002.; Tan e Thoen (2001)TAN, Y. H.; THOEN, W. Toward a generic model of trust for electronic commerce. International Journal of Electronic Markets, v. 5, n. 2, p. 61-74, 2001.; Teo e Pok (2003)TEO, T. S. H.; POK, S. H. Adoption of WAP-enabled mobile phones among Internet users. The International Journal of Management Science, v. 31, n. 6, p. 483-498, 2003.; Papiers e Clement (2008)
		VR2	The incorporation of social media into the company’s business processes differentiates the company from its competitors
		VR3	The use of social media produces an increase in company revenues
		VR4	The use of social media allows the company to operate in unexplored market niches
		VR5	The use of social media improves customer relationships
		VR6	The use of social media improves supplier relationships
		VR7	The use of social media improves employee relationships
		VR8	The use of social media improves the process of hiring new employees
		VR9	The use of social media increases the amount of information provided to customers about the products marketed
	Compatibility	CP1	The technology used by social media is compatible with the company’s technological environment	Rogers (1983)ROGERS, E. M. Diffusion of innovations. New York: Free Press, 1983.; Frambach e Schillewaert (2002)FRAMBACH, R. T.; SCHILLEWAERT, N. Organizational innovation adoption: A multi-level framework of determinants and opportunities for future research. Journal of Business Research, v. 55, p. 163-176, 2002.; Ilie et al. (2005)ILIE, V. C. et al. Gender differences in perceptions and use communication technologies: A diffusion of innovation approach. Information Resources Management Journal, v. 18, n. 3, p. 13-31, 2005.
		CP2	The use of social media is compatible with the need for speed in the execution of the company’s business process
		CP3	The use of social media is compatible with the way employees communicate with people outside the company
		CP4	The use of social media in company activities is consistent with the way employees communicate with coworkers
		CP5	The use of social media in company activities is compatible with the company’s need for information outside of the work environment
	Observability	PB1	The advantages obtained with the use of social media are widely commented on by the company’s customers	Rogers (1983)ROGERS, E. M. Diffusion of innovations. New York: Free Press, 1983.; Frambach e Schillewaert (2002)FRAMBACH, R. T.; SCHILLEWAERT, N. Organizational innovation adoption: A multi-level framework of determinants and opportunities for future research. Journal of Business Research, v. 55, p. 163-176, 2002.; Moore and Benbasat (1991)MOORE, G. C.; BENBASAT, I. Development of an instrument to measure the perceptions of adopting an information technology information. Information Systems Research, v. 2, n. 3, p. 173-191, 1991.
		PB2	The company began to use social media in its business processes because of the results their competitors obtained with this tool
		PB3	The results of corporate social media adoption are perceived by customers
		PB4	There is confidence in the use of social media in the company’s business processes because of results achieved in company tests using this tool	Rogers (1983)ROGERS, E. M. Diffusion of innovations. New York: Free Press, 1983.; Frambach e Schillewaert (2002)FRAMBACH, R. T.; SCHILLEWAERT, N. Organizational innovation adoption: A multi-level framework of determinants and opportunities for future research. Journal of Business Research, v. 55, p. 163-176, 2002.; Moore and Benbasat (1991)MOORE, G. C.; BENBASAT, I. Development of an instrument to measure the perceptions of adopting an information technology information. Information Systems Research, v. 2, n. 3, p. 173-191, 1991.
		PB5	Media coverage on the company’s use of social media promotes confidence in the use of this tool in company activities
		PB6	The acceptance of customers, suppliers or employees is visible through the company’s use of social media
	Uncertainty	IN1	The costs of adopting social media in company activities are difficult to measure	Frambach e Schillewaert (2002)FRAMBACH, R. T.; SCHILLEWAERT, N. Organizational innovation adoption: A multi-level framework of determinants and opportunities for future research. Journal of Business Research, v. 55, p. 163-176, 2002.
		IN2	The results obtained from the incorporation of social media into the company’s activities are little known
		IN3	Potential security and privacy risks hinder the use of social media in company activities
		IN4	There are important legal issues regarding the use of social media that remain unresolved
		IN5	There is no guarantee that currently available social media will be available in the future
		IN6	The current compatibility with the technological environment necessary for social media adoption may not exist in the future
		IN7	The use of social media in the company’s business processes can generate conflicts because of current organizational culture
Adopter Characteristics	Organization Size	TO1	Less than or equal to R$ 2.4 million	Rogers (1983)ROGERS, E. M. Diffusion of innovations. New York: Free Press, 1983.; Damanpour (1996)DAMANPOUR, F. Organizational complexity and innovation: developing and testing multiple contingency models. Management Science, v. 42, n. 5, p. 693-716, 1996.; Frambach e Schillewaert (2002)FRAMBACH, R. T.; SCHILLEWAERT, N. Organizational innovation adoption: A multi-level framework of determinants and opportunities for future research. Journal of Business Research, v. 55, p. 163-176, 2002.; Zhu, Kraemer e Xu (2006)ZHU, K.; KRAEMER, K. L.; XU, S. The process of innovation assimilation by firms in different countries: a technology diffusion perspective on e-business. Management Science, v. 52, n. 10, p. 1557-1576, 2006.
		TO2	Greater than R$ 2.4 million and less than or equal to R$ 9 million
		TO3	Greater than R$ 9 million and less than or equal to R$ 16 million
		TO4	Greater than R$ 16 million and less than or equal to R$ 150 million
		TO5	Greater than R$ 150 million and less than or equal to R$ 300 million
		TO6	Greater than R$ 300 million and less than or equal to R$ 1 billion
		TO7	Greater than R$ 1 billion
	Organizational Structure	EE1	The decision to adopt innovations is always centralized at the company’s highest decision level	Calantone, Cavusgil e Zhao (2002)CALANTONE, R. J.; CAVUSGIL, S. T.; ZHAO, Y. Learning orientation, firm innovation capability and firm performance. Industrial Marketing Management, v. 31, n. 6, p. 515-524, 2002.; Frambach e Schillewaert (2002)FRAMBACH, R. T.; SCHILLEWAERT, N. Organizational innovation adoption: A multi-level framework of determinants and opportunities for future research. Journal of Business Research, v. 55, p. 163-176, 2002.; Hult, Ferrell e Hurley (2002)HULT, G. T. M.; FERRELL, O. C.; HURLEY, R. F. Global organizational learning effects on cycle time performance. Journal of Business Research, v. 55, n. 5, p. 377-387, 2002.; Daft (2005)DAFT, R. L. Administration. 6. ed. São Paulo: Thomson, 2005.; Chen e Chang (2012)CHEN, S. T.; CHANG, B. G. The effects of absorptive capacity and decision speed on organizational innovation: a study of organizational structure as an antecedent variable. Contemporary Management Research, v. 8, n. 1, p. 27-50, 2012.
		EE2	The company has a rigid organizational structure
		EE3	The decision on how social media are used in the company is centralized at the company’s highest decision level
		EE4	The company has several units with different purposes (product, different services, etc.)
		EE5	The company has several organizational units, manufacturing plants or geographically distant offices
		EE6	The company has more than three managerial levels
		EE7	The company has formally established policies and procedures
		EE8	The company’s rules and procedures are tightly controlled
		EE9	The company encourages formal relationships between employees at different hierarchical levels
	Organizational Disposition Innovativeness	PI1	Innovation adoption is necessary for the company’s survival	Lumpkin e Dess (1996)LUMPKIN, G. T.; DESS, G. G. Clarifying the entrepreneurial orientation construct and linking it to performance. The Academy of Management Review, v. 21, n. 1, p. 135-72, 1996.; Frambach e Schillewaert (2002)FRAMBACH, R. T.; SCHILLEWAERT, N. Organizational innovation adoption: A multi-level framework of determinants and opportunities for future research. Journal of Business Research, v. 55, p. 163-176, 2002.; Carayannis e Provance (2008)CARAYANNIS, E. G.; PROVANCE, M. Measuring firm innovativeness: toward a composite innovation index built on firm innovative posture, propensity and performance attributes. International Journal of innovation and Regional Development, v. 1, n. 1, p. 90-107, 2008.
		PI2	Suggestions made by employees or clients are readily accepted by the management
		PI3	The company invests in employee training to produce creative solutions for business processes
		PI4	The company often seeks innovative ideas to apply to its activities
		PI5	The company’s culture constantly seeks to innovate
Environmental Influences	Competitive Pressures	PC1	The products marketed by the company are similar to others on the market	Porter (2001)PORTER, M. Strategy and the internet. Harvard Business Review, v. 79, n. 3, p. 63-78, 2001.; Frambach e Schillewaert (2002)FRAMBACH, R. T.; SCHILLEWAERT, N. Organizational innovation adoption: A multi-level framework of determinants and opportunities for future research. Journal of Business Research, v. 55, p. 163-176, 2002.; Zhu (2004)ZHU, K. Information transparency of business-to-business electronic markets: a game-theoretic analysis. Management Science, v. 50, n. 5, p. 670-685, 2004.; Zhu, Kraemer e Xu (2006)ZHU, K.; KRAEMER, K. L.; XU, S. The process of innovation assimilation by firms in different countries: a technology diffusion perspective on e-business. Management Science, v. 52, n. 10, p. 1557-1576, 2006.; Tapscott e Willians (2007)TAPSCOTT, D.; WILLIAMS, A. D. Wikinomics. Rio de Janeiro: Nova Fronteira, 2007.;
		PC2	There are many competitors in the industry in which the company operates
		PC3	There is great competition to sell products at a lower price than competitors in the market in which the company operates
		PC4	There is great competition to have a better quality product than competitors in the market in which the company operates
		PC5	There is great competition to have a larger variety of products than competitors in the market in which the company operates
		PC6	There is great competition to offer better after-sales service than competitors in the market in which the company operates
		PC7	The tools that the company makes available on the Internet are a differentiating factor between companies in the company’s segment
	Network Externalities	ER1	The company began to use social media that its competitors were using	Frambach e Schillewaert (2002)FRAMBACH, R. T.; SCHILLEWAERT, N. Organizational innovation adoption: A multi-level framework of determinants and opportunities for future research. Journal of Business Research, v. 55, p. 163-176, 2002.; Pindyck e Rubinfeld (2005)PINDYCK, R. S.; RUBINFELD, D. L. Microeconomia. 6. ed. São Paulo: Prentice Hall, 2005.; Ratten and Ratten (2007)RATTEN, V.; RATTEN, H. Social cognitive theory in technological innovations. European Journal of Innovation Management, v. 10, n. 1, p. 90-108, 2007.
		ER2	The company began to use social media that its customers were using
		ER3	The company began to use social media that its suppliers were using
		ER4	The company began to use social media that its employees were using

Variable	Indicators		Variable Type
Social Media Adoption (dependent variable)	MS1	Social media are used extensively in the company’s marketing department	Proxy Variable
	MS2	Social media are used extensively in the company’s human resources department
	MS3	Social media are used extensively in the company’s sales department
	MS4	Social media are used extensively in the company’s logistics department
	MS5	Social media are used extensively in the company’s research and development (R&D) department
	MS6	Social media are used extensively in the company’s financial department
	MS7	Social media are used extensively in the company’s production department
	MS8	Social media are used extensively in the company’s communications department
	MS9	Social media are used extensively for product development
	MS10	Social media are used extensively in another of the company’s departments. Department:

Construct	AVE	√AVE	Reliability Composition	Commonality	Redundancy
Relative Advantage	0.54	0.73	0.85	0.54	0.00
Compatibility	0.77	0.88	0.94	0.77	0.00
Observability	0.81	0.90	0.96	0.81	0.00
Uncertainty	0.62	0.79	0.77	0.62	0.00
Organizational Structure	0.64	0.80	0.91	0.64	0.00
Organiz. Disposition Innovativeness	0.66	0.81	0.90	0.66	0.00
Competitive Pressure	0.65	0.81	0.92	0.65	0.00
Network Externality	0.81	0.90	0.90	0.81	0.00
Social Media Adoption	0.65	0.81	0.94	0.65	0.22

Construct	VR	CP	PB	IN	TM	EE	PI	PC	ER	MS
Relative Advantage	0.734
Compatibility	0.502	0.876
Observability	0.718	0.397	0.901
Uncertainty	0.148	0.265	0.315	0.788
Organization Size	0.407	0.193	0.419	0.140	1.000
Organizational Structure	0.558	0.160	0.643	0.166	0.699	0.799
Organiz. Disp. Innovativeness	0.617	0.631	0.718	0.272	0.398	0.550	0.810
Competitive Pressure	0.396	0.662	0.240	0.243	0.092	0.051	0.575	0.808
Network Externality	0.006	0.581	-0.078	0.228	-0.203	-0.375	0.231	0.620	0.902
Social Media Adoption	0.676	0.378	0.673	0.197	0.387	0.575	0.655	0.305	0.004	0.804

Paths	Original sample	Mean of bootstrapping samples	Standard deviation	Standard error	t-test	Significance
Adopter Char. ➔ Organization Size	0.724	0.728	0.031	0.031	23.127	p < 0.01
Adopter Char. ➔ Organizational Structure	0.925	0.927	0.011	0.011	83.935	p < 0.01
Adopter Char. ➔ Org. Disp. Innovativeness	0.818	0.822	0.023	0.023	35.525	p < 0.01
Adopter Char. ➔ Social Media Adoption	0.385	0.373	0.090	0.090	4.270	p < 0.01
Perc. Innov. Char. ➔ Uncertainty	0.383	0.398	0.072	0.072	5.305	p < 0.01
Perc. Innov. Char. ➔ Observability	0.870	0.873	0.014	0.014	62.978	p < 0.01
Perc. Innov. Char. ➔ Relative Advantage	0.891	0.892	0.015	0.015	59.027	p < 0.01
Perc. Innov. Char. ➔ Compatibility	0.750	0.744	0.039	0.039	19.406	p < 0.01
Perc. Innov. Char. ➔ Social Media Adoption	0.433	0.449	0.116	0.116	3.748	p < 0.01
Environmental Infl ➔ Competitive Pressures	0.972	0.973	0.004	0.004	281.647	p < 0.01
Environmental Infl. ➔ Network Externalities	0.786	0.791	0.039	0.039	20.232	p < 0.01
Environmental Infl ➔ Social Media Adoption	-0.041	-0.048	0.066	0.066	0.620	n.s.

[1] CONTRIBUTIONS BY THE AUTHORS

José Braz de Araújo contributed to the development of research.

Silvia Novaes Zilber supervised the thesis that originated article.

Brasil

Brasil

What Factors Lead Companies to Adopt Social Media in their processes: Proposal and Test of a Measurement Model

ABSTRACT

				p<0.05
Note:
I	Perceived Innovation Characteristics	E	Organizational Structure
R	Relative Advantage	I	Innovativeness
P	Compatibility	A	Environmental Influences
B	Observability	C	Competitive Pressure
N	Uncertainty	R	Network Externality
A	Adopter Characteristic	S	Degree of Social Media Adoption
M	Size		Square root of AVE of the constructs