IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/sae/globus/v21y2020i4p1127-1152.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Interactions and Participation on Social Commerce Websites: Exploratory Study

Author

Listed:
  • Rohit Yadav
  • Tripti Mahara

Abstract

An increasing number of organizations are adopting social commerce (SC) to engage and occupy customers in product development, sales and support activities. Therefore, it is imperative for retailers and marketers to know customers’ adoption behaviour towards SC websites and the benefits they gain through voluntary contribution of information on these websites. The study attempts to identify customer participation through development of a conceptual framework based on the uses and gratification (UG) approach. The importance of non-altruistic motives, that is, benefits shape member’s participation on SC websites, is confirmed by results. According to the results, two interaction characteristics, that is, human interactivity and member identity are essential for building trust in SC website. Findings of the study also conclude that interaction characteristics strongly affect three benefits, that is, personal integrative, social integrative and hedonic. Hence, it is implied that benefits gained by members on SC website interactions shape their participation intentions. Therefore, SC websites must be designed keeping in view both usage and benefits by members.

Suggested Citation

  • Rohit Yadav & Tripti Mahara, 2020. "Interactions and Participation on Social Commerce Websites: Exploratory Study," Global Business Review, International Management Institute, vol. 21(4), pages 1127-1152, August.
    • Handle: RePEc:sae:globus:v:21:y:2020:i:4:p:1127-1152
    DOI: 10.1177/0972150918779270
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/0972150918779270
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1177/0972150918779270?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Gefen, David & Straub, Detmar W., 2004. "Consumer trust in B2C e-Commerce and the importance of social presence: experiments in e-Products and e-Services," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 32(6), pages 407-424, December.
    2. Catherine Baethge & Julia Klier & Mathias Klier, 2016. "Social commerce—state-of-the-art and future research directions," Electronic Markets, Springer;IIM University of St. Gallen, vol. 26(3), pages 269-290, August.
    3. Harhoff, Dietmar & Henkel, Joachim & von Hippel, Eric, 2003. "Profiting from voluntary information spillovers: how users benefit by freely revealing their innovations," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 32(10), pages 1753-1769, December.
    4. Yi, Youjae & Gong, Taeshik, 2013. "Customer value co-creation behavior: Scale development and validation," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 66(9), pages 1279-1284.
    5. Margaret Peteraf & Mark Shanley, 1997. "Getting To Know You: A Theory Of Strategic Group Identity," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 18(S1), pages 165-186, July.
    6. Hertel, Guido & Niedner, Sven & Herrmann, Stefanie, 2003. "Motivation of software developers in Open Source projects: an Internet-based survey of contributors to the Linux kernel," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 32(7), pages 1159-1177, July.
    7. Lars Bo Jeppesen & Lars Frederiksen, 2006. "Why Do Users Contribute to Firm-Hosted User Communities? The Case of Computer-Controlled Music Instruments," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 17(1), pages 45-63, February.
    8. Franke, Nikolaus & Shah, Sonali, 2003. "How communities support innovative activities: an exploration of assistance and sharing among end-users," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 32(1), pages 157-178, January.
    9. Peter M. Bentler, 2016. "Covariate-free and Covariate-dependent Reliability," Psychometrika, Springer;The Psychometric Society, vol. 81(4), pages 907-920, December.
    10. Ananda Das Gupta, 2014. "Social Impact Management," India Studies in Business and Economics, in: Business Ethics, edition 127, chapter 0, pages 189-195, Springer.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Adrián Kovács & Bart Looy & Bruno Cassiman, 2015. "Exploring the scope of open innovation: a bibliometric review of a decade of research," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 104(3), pages 951-983, September.
    2. Rullani, Francesco & Haefliger, Stefan, 2013. "The periphery on stage: The intra-organizational dynamics in online communities of creation," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 42(4), pages 941-953.
    3. Konstantin Fursov & Thomas Thurner, 2016. "God Helps Those Who Help Themselves! A Study of User-Innovation in Russia," HSE Working papers WP BRP 59/STI/2016, National Research University Higher School of Economics.
    4. de Jong, Jeroen P.J. & Gillert, Nils Lennart & Stock, Ruth M., 2018. "First adoption of consumer innovations: Exploring market failure and alleviating factors," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 47(2), pages 487-497.
    5. Alexander Brem & Volker Bilgram & Adele Gutstein, 2021. "Involving Lead Users in Innovation: A Structured Summary of Research on the Lead User Method," World Scientific Book Chapters, in: Alexander Brem (ed.), Emerging Issues and Trends in INNOVATION AND TECHNOLOGY MANAGEMENT, chapter 2, pages 21-48, World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd..
    6. Ebbing, Tobias & Lüthje, Christian, 2021. "Pricing decisions of consumer innovators," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 50(8).
    7. Ruo-Yu Liang & Wei Guo & Ling-Hao Zhang & Lei Wang, 2019. "Investigating Sustained Participation in Open Design Community in China: The Antecedents of User Loyalty," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(8), pages 1-19, April.
    8. Zaggl, Michael A., 2017. "Manipulation of explicit reputation in innovation and knowledge exchange communities: The example of referencing in science," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 46(5), pages 970-983.
    9. Lettl, Christopher & Rost, Katja & von Wartburg, Iwan, 2009. "Why are some independent inventors 'heroes' and others 'hobbyists'? The moderating role of technological diversity and specialization," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 38(2), pages 243-254, March.
    10. Alfonso Gambardella & Christina Raasch & Eric von Hippel, 2017. "The User Innovation Paradigm: Impacts on Markets and Welfare," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 63(5), pages 1450-1468, May.
    11. Henkel, Joachim, 2006. "Selective revealing in open innovation processes: The case of embedded Linux," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 35(7), pages 953-969, September.
    12. Pollok, Patrick & Amft, André & Diener, Kathleen & Lüttgens, Dirk & Piller, Frank T., 2021. "Knowledge diversity and team creativity: How hobbyists beat professional designers in creating novel board games," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 50(8).
    13. Powell, J.P., 2010. "The limits of economic self-interest : The case of open source software," Other publications TiSEM fc6d2aa1-8b29-40be-b888-5, Tilburg University, School of Economics and Management.
    14. Nikolaus Franke & Peter Keinz & Katharina Klausberger, 2013. "“Does This Sound Like a Fair Deal?”: Antecedents and Consequences of Fairness Expectations in the Individual’s Decision to Participate in Firm Innovation," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 24(5), pages 1495-1516, October.
    15. Fuller, Johann & Jawecki, Gregor & Muhlbacher, Hans, 2007. "Innovation creation by online basketball communities," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 60(1), pages 60-71, January.
    16. Jeppesen, Lars Bo, 2021. "Social movements and free innovation," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 50(6).
    17. Jeppesen, Lars Bo, 2021. "Reprint of: Social movements and free innovation," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 50(8).
    18. Ann Majchrzak & Arvind Malhotra, 2016. "Effect of Knowledge-Sharing Trajectories on Innovative Outcomes in Temporary Online Crowds," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 27(4), pages 685-703, December.
    19. Julia Bauer & Nikolaus Franke & Philipp Tuertscher, 2016. "Intellectual Property Norms in Online Communities: How User-Organized Intellectual Property Regulation Supports Innovation," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 27(4), pages 724-750, December.
    20. Carlota Lorenzo-Romero & Efthymios Constantinides, 2019. "On-line Crowdsourcing: Motives of Customers to Participate in Online Collaborative Innovation Processes," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(12), pages 1-16, June.

    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:sae:globus:v:21:y:2020:i:4:p:1127-1152. 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: SAGE Publications (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.imi.edu/ .

    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.