IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/nup/jrmdke/v1y2013i1p25-38.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Knowledge Strategies in Using Social Networks

Author

Listed:
  • Contantin BR?TIANU

    (Faculty of Business Administration, Bucharest University of Economic Studies, Bucharest, Romania)

  • Ivona ORZEA

    (Faculty of Business Administration, Bucharest University of Economic Studies, Bucharest, Romania)

Abstract

Knowledge strategy selection is a multiple criteria decision-making (MCDM) problem, and requires adequate methods to solve it appropriately. Knowledge strategies are also intrinsically linked to individuals and their ability to comprehend the world and leverage their intellectual assets to respond e!ectively to a fast changing environment. the essential features of social networking sites include but are not limited to: blogging, grouping, networking and instant messaging. Since the social networks facilitate communication and interaction among users, there is a continuous need of researches to examine what are the motives that a!ect the acceptance of usage of the social networks. This study aims at examining the role of the knowledge strategies that individuals employ in using social networks with respect to the overall objective of increasing the knowledge level. For this purpose we have used the Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP) mathematical model since it allows us a structuring of the overall objective on the main components. For the present research we considered a structure composed of three levels: L1 – the purpose of networking, L2 – strategies used to achieve that purpose, and L3 – activities needed for strategies implementation. At the upper level (L1), the main objective of a person in using social networks is to increase its knowledge level. To obtain the aforementioned objective we considered for the second level (L2) the following strategies: S1 – to learn from other persons; S2 – to make new friends; S3 – to increase the personal experience and visibility. the implementation of these strategies is realized through the following activities considered at the third hierarchy level (L3): A1– joining general social networks (e.g. Facebook, Google+, MySpace, Hi5 etc.); A2– joining professional social networks (e.g. LinkedIn etc.); A3– creating a personal blog (e.g. Blogster, Wordpress etc.); A4– joining online communities of practice. the study focused on students, as they hold very important percentage of the total users of social networks. A total of 700 questionnaires were distributed to 18-25 years old students and the rate of response was 42%. Based on the theory of eigenvalues, the AHP mathematical model provides the priority vectors for both the strategies and the activities levels, thus, underlining the main knowledge strategies employed in using social networks.

Suggested Citation

  • Contantin BR?TIANU & Ivona ORZEA, 2013. "Knowledge Strategies in Using Social Networks," Management Dynamics in the Knowledge Economy, College of Management, National University of Political Studies and Public Administration, vol. 1(1), pages 25-38, May.
    • Handle: RePEc:nup:jrmdke:v:1:y:2013:i:1:p:25-38
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.managementdynamics.ro/index.php/journal/article/download/2/3
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: http://www.managementdynamics.ro/index.php/journal/article/view/2/3
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Saaty, Thomas L., 1994. "Highlights and critical points in the theory and application of the Analytic Hierarchy Process," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 74(3), pages 426-447, May.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Eduardo TOMÉ & Paula FIGUEIREDO, 2015. "Knowledge Management and Politics at the Highest Level: An Exploratory Analysis," Management Dynamics in the Knowledge Economy, College of Management, National University of Political Studies and Public Administration, vol. 3(2), pages 193-212, June.
    2. Malgorzata RUNIEWICZ-WARDYN, 2017. "Dynamic Externalities, Universities and Social Capital Formation in the EU Biotechnology Industry," Management Dynamics in the Knowledge Economy, College of Management, National University of Political Studies and Public Administration, vol. 5(1), pages 13-31, March.
    3. Cristian VIZITIU, 2014. "Conceptual Diagnosis Model Based on Distinct Knowledge Dyads for Interdisciplinary Environments," Management Dynamics in the Knowledge Economy, College of Management, National University of Political Studies and Public Administration, vol. 2(4), pages 71-86, April.
    4. Santos LÓPEZ-LEYVA & Miriam Liliana CASTILLO-ARCE & José David LEDEZMA-TORRES & Jesús Armando RÍOS-FLORES, 2014. "Economic Growth from a Theoretical Perspective of Knowledge Economy: An Empirical Analysis for Mexico," Management Dynamics in the Knowledge Economy, College of Management, National University of Political Studies and Public Administration, vol. 2(5), pages 217-239, August.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Banai, Reza, 2010. "Evaluation of land use-transportation systems with the Analytic Network Process," The Journal of Transport and Land Use, Center for Transportation Studies, University of Minnesota, vol. 3(1), pages 85-112.
    2. Levary, Reuven R. & Wan, Ke, 1999. "An analytic hierarchy process based simulation model for entry mode decision regarding foreign direct investment," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 27(6), pages 661-677, December.
    3. Sudhakar Yedla & Ram M. Shrestha, 2007. "Application of analytic hierarchy process to prioritize urban transport options: Comparative analysis of group aggregation methods," Indira Gandhi Institute of Development Research, Mumbai Working Papers 2007-011, Indira Gandhi Institute of Development Research, Mumbai, India.
    4. Kenneth David Strang, 2012. "Man versus math: Behaviorist exploration of post-crisis non-banking asset management," Journal of Asset Management, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 13(5), pages 348-367, October.
    5. Chao, Ching-Cheng & Yu, Po-Cheng, 2013. "Quantitative evaluation model of air cargo competitiveness and comparative analysis of major Asia-Pacific airports," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 30(C), pages 318-326.
    6. Banai, Reza & Wakolbinger, Tina, 2011. "A measure of regional influence with the analytic network process," Socio-Economic Planning Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 45(4), pages 165-173, December.
    7. Wiebke Mohr & Anika Rädke & Adel Afi & Franka Mühlichen & Moritz Platen & Annelie Scharf & Bernhard Michalowsky & Wolfgang Hoffmann, 2022. "Development of a Quantitative Preference Instrument for Person-Centered Dementia Care—Stage 2: Insights from a Formative Qualitative Study to Design and Pretest a Dementia-Friendly Analytic Hierarchy ," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(14), pages 1-21, July.
    8. Sato, Yuji, 2012. "Optimal budget planning for investment in safety measures of a chemical company," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 140(2), pages 579-585.
    9. Azam Abdolazimi & Mehdi Momeni & Majid Montazeri, 2015. "Comparing ELECTRE and Linear Assignment Methods in Zoning Shahroud-Bastam Watershed for Artificial Recharge of Groundwater with GIS Technique," Modern Applied Science, Canadian Center of Science and Education, vol. 9(1), pages 1-68, January.
    10. Şebnem Karul Tonka & Ismail Ekmekci, 2022. "A Model Proposal for Occupational Health and Safety Performance Measurement in Geothermal Drilling Areas," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(23), pages 1-24, November.
    11. Mukherjee, Krishnendu, 2014. "Analytic hierarchy process and technique for order preference by similarity to ideal solution: a bibliometric analysis from past, present and future of AHP and TOPSIS," MPRA Paper 59887, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    12. Dong, Yucheng & Xu, Yinfeng & Li, Hongyi & Dai, Min, 2008. "A comparative study of the numerical scales and the prioritization methods in AHP," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 186(1), pages 229-242, April.
    13. Alina Popa & Shahrazad Hadad & Robert Paiusan & Marian Nastase, 2018. "A New Method for Agricultural Market Share Assessment," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(1), pages 1-13, December.
    14. Madurai Elavarasan, Rajvikram & Pugazhendhi, Rishi & Irfan, Muhammad & Mihet-Popa, Lucian & Campana, Pietro Elia & Khan, Irfan Ahmad, 2022. "A novel Sustainable Development Goal 7 composite index as the paradigm for energy sustainability assessment: A case study from Europe," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 307(C).
    15. Raharjo, Hendry & Xie, Min & Brombacher, Aarnout C., 2009. "On modeling dynamic priorities in the analytic hierarchy process using compositional data analysis," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 194(3), pages 834-846, May.
    16. Iwaro, Joseph & Mwasha, Abrahams & Williams, Rupert G. & Zico, Ricardo, 2014. "An Integrated Criteria Weighting Framework for the sustainable performance assessment and design of building envelope," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 29(C), pages 417-434.
    17. Mohammad Karamouz & Sara Nazif & Mohammad Sherafat & Zahra Zahmatkesh, 2014. "Development of an Optimal Reservoir Operation Scheme Using Extended Evolutionary Computing Algorithms Based on Conflict Resolution Approach: A Case Study," Water Resources Management: An International Journal, Published for the European Water Resources Association (EWRA), Springer;European Water Resources Association (EWRA), vol. 28(11), pages 3539-3554, September.
    18. P Ji & R Jiang, 2003. "Scale transitivity in the AHP," Journal of the Operational Research Society, Palgrave Macmillan;The OR Society, vol. 54(8), pages 896-905, August.
    19. J. Hummel & John Bridges & Maarten IJzerman, 2014. "Group Decision Making with the Analytic Hierarchy Process in Benefit-Risk Assessment: A Tutorial," The Patient: Patient-Centered Outcomes Research, Springer;International Academy of Health Preference Research, vol. 7(2), pages 129-140, June.
    20. Michele Fedrizzi & Nino Civolani & Andrew Critch, 2020. "Inconsistency evaluation in pairwise comparison using norm-based distances," Decisions in Economics and Finance, Springer;Associazione per la Matematica, vol. 43(2), pages 657-672, December.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:nup:jrmdke:v:1:y:2013:i:1:p:25-38. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Cristian-Mihai VIDU (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/fmsnsro.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.