Social Media and Relationships

The International Encyclopedia of Digital
Communication and Society
Edited by
Peng Hwa Ang (Nanyang Technological University, Singapore)
Robin Mansell (London School of Economics and Political Science)

Chapter:
Social Media and Relationships
Brian S. Butler
University of Maryland
bsbutler@umd.edu

Sabine Matook
University of Queensland
s.matook@business.uq.edu.au

Social Media - embedded in our day-to-day relationships

Version 1 - January 2014

Butler and Matook (2014): Social Media
and Relationships

2

Definition of Social Media
• Social media are a collection of technologies and applications that
allow individuals to communicate, exchange information, and share
digital artifacts (e.g., photos and videos) with one another, often in
the context of larger groups, communities, or networks.
• Examples: wikis, micro and normal blogs, online
social networks (OSN) for personal and professional
use, virtual worlds, community and crowdsourcing
platforms.
• Characteristics:
– stand-alone or incorporated into larger multipurpose platforms
– can operate entirely within a single organization
– can support interaction and sharing across organizations and outside
any organizational context

Butler and Matook (2014): Social Media and Relationships

3

Importance of Relationships in Social Media
Systems
• All social media systems affect and are affected by the
relationships of their users
• Social media systems support:
1. explicit interactions based on the exchange of discrete
messages
2. indirect interaction through the construction and
discussion of shared artifacts

• Interactions are within different relationships:
friendships, family/kin relationships, work relationships,
acquaintance relationships, collaborations


4

Online and Offline Relationships and
Social Media
• Social media enabled online relationships:
relationships in which individuals interact entirely
through computer-mediated communications

• Offline relationships: relationships in which
interactions between individuals occur through
traditional media (e.g., telephone or face-to-face
conversation)


5

Relation between online and offline
relationships
(1) social media systems enable new relationships by
overcoming the limitations of offline relationships
(2) social media systems enable online relationships
that substitute for offline relationships
(3) social media systems enable online relationships
that complement offline relationships



6

(1) Online Relationships as New Opportunities
• Social media systems enable relationships that otherwise
would be impossible
• Social media systems bridge geographic, political, and
social boundaries
• People can ―meet‖, befriend,
and work with others across
time zones and continents



7

Examples for New Opportunities through
Online Relationships
1. Political activities in the Middle East during the Arab
Spring in 2012
2. Individuals with rare medical conditions can receive
health-related information and support from one another
3. Individuals living in geographically isolated communities
(e.g., Australian outback) can learn and collaborate
remotely
4. Employees in multi-national firms can develop
relationships they need to find and use expertise within
the larger organization


8

(2) Online Relationships as Substitutes
• Negative impacts of online relationships for offline
relationships
• Social media systems increase the homogeneity of
relationships
• Difference in quality between online – offline relationships
• Social media systems introduce conflict and
misunderstandings in long-distance relationships and
collaborations
• Online relationships can be insufficient
if physical touch or intensive
persuasion is necessary


9

(3) Online Relationships as Complements
• Social media systems complement online and offline
relationships
• Social media systems facilitate larger and more diverse
social networks
• Greater use of social networking sites and larger online
social networks  more social ties and higher levels of
social interaction offline
• Social media systems support
the ―rich-get-richer‖ phenomenon



10

Question the distinction between online and
offline relationships
• Distinction between online and offline relationships has become
problematic for theory and practice

WHY?
• Number and diversity of relationships supported and affected by
social media systems has grown
• Media convergence, emergence of mobile technologies,
availability of social media systems have reduced the barriers
between online and offline relationships
• Smooth transitions between online and offline media (phone,
tweets, texts, pokes, shares, likes, chats, and emails) to setup
meetings, arrange dates, continue conversations
• Simultaneous offline and online interactions using social media
systems with people who are physically co-present


11

Social Media and Types of Relationships
• Social media systems support communication, information
exchange, sharing of digital artifacts in different
relationships

• Affordances of social media systems appropriate the
technology:
– to create profiles,
– exchange information,
– make associations,
– see the ties that others have created and maintain.


12

Social Media and Types of Relationships
• Use and impact of social media system‘s capabilities on
relationships depends on the (1) objectives, (2) expectations,
and (3) nature of each type of relationship
• Social media systems redefine relationship:
– Facebook allows users to be identify as ―friends‖
– LinkedIn identifies others as ―classmates‖ or ―colleagues‖
– Twitter users become and acquire ―followers‖
• Development of alternative relationship types with their own
expectations, norms, and structures (i.e. real friends vs.
―Facebook friends‖)


13

Friendships
• Exists among people of all ages, cultures, and social contexts
• Voluntary, bidirectional, and reciprocal relationships in which
partners respond to each other personally to show communal
caring
• Vary in intensity and closeness (measure of relationship strength)
• Types: acquaintances, casual friends, and close friends
• Provide attachment, companionship, help, and emotional support
• Friendships provide a variety of benefits:
–
–
–
–
–

ego support,
self-affirmation,
security,
utility, and
stimulation.



14

Friendships and Social Media
• Social media systems‘ affordances enable creation and maintenance
of friendship relationships:
–
–
–
–

Creation of rich personal profiles
Identification of relationship partners
Interactions with one another
Traverse relational links in a variety of ways

• Social media systems support reciprocity:
– Facebook: recognition of a relationship through explicit acknowledgement
by both relationship partners
– Twitter: mutual acknowledgement not required

• Sharing of messages, images, information leads to reciprocal action
• Repeated reciprocity results in friendships to be maintained and
become closer over time


15

Friendships and Social Media
• Friendships in social media systems are equal in power and
status
• Friends of same status cannot impose demands
• Out-of-balance friendships lead to changes in behavior
(e.g., decreased levels of self-disclosure, dissolution of the
friendship)
• Hybrid form of friendships more common compared to
pure online and offline relationships
• Portfolio of friendships to satisfy different social needs



16

Kinship Relationships
• Kinship relationships: relationships of individuals with
members of their family by virtue of birth, marriage, or
adoption
• Kinship relationships are often not voluntary or reciprocal
• Kinship relationships are subject to status differences, social
norms, and expectations on each other
• Kinship relationships are enacted through
exchanges and interactions
• Kinship relationships vary in closeness,
strength, and importance



17

Romantic Kinship Relationships and
Social Media
• Social media systems have distinct
effects on kinship and family relationships
• In cases of marriage, dating, and other romantic
relationships
social media systems play an increasingly significant role
• Individuals discover, evaluate, and interact with potential
partners (boy/ girlfriend; husband/wife) formally through
social media services and informally through their social
contacts
• Social media systems‘ affordances enable:
1) Formation of long-term kinship relationships
2) Impression management on online dating sites
3) Opportunities for deceptive self-presentation


18

Benefits for Kinship Relationships from
Social Media
• Family members use photo sharing platforms, and group
communications technologies to remain connected with one
another across distance, time, and national borders
• Parents can monitor children‘s behavior and activities – spying on
Facebook
Half of Facebook parents joined to spy on kids?
Link: http://news.cnet.com/8301-17852_3-57569806-71/half-of-facebookparents-joined-to-spy-on-kids/ (February 17, 2013 )

• Older family members can continue to interact with other family
members even after their ability to travel becomes impaired
• Use of social media systems to find ‗lost‘ family members (online
genealogical communities)


19

Professional Relationships
• Professional relationships are critical for people and
organizations for their work and collaboration:
1. Job seekers find employment opportunities
2. Entrepreneurs discover and receive venture capital
3. Managers monitor and influence activities in their
organization
4. Team members coordinate their collaborative efforts

• Professional relationships vary with respect to their
strength, frequency, and diversity of interaction
• Professional relationships lack the emotional components of
friendships


20

Professional Relationships – Strong and Weak Ties
• People have a few strong but many more weak professional ties/
relationships
• Based on sociologist Granovetter (The Strength of Weak Ties, 1973)
• Strong ties/ relationships:
– frequent interactions
– conversations cover a wide range of topics
– evoke trust and interdependence
– critical for resolving problems during crises and internal conflicts
• Weak ties/ relationships: infrequent interaction, minimal dependence,
and limited personal conversations
• Weak ties are critical to individuals‘ ability to succeed in work settings
by sharing general information across groups (networks)
• Weak ties are valuable sources of exploratory information


21

Professional Relationships - LinkedIn
LinkedIn: platform for individuals to track and leverage their
relationships
– Officially launched on 5th May 2003. At the end
of the 1st month in operation, LinkedIn had
a total of 4,500 members.
– Operates the world‘s largest professional
Internet network with more than 259 million
members in over 200 countries and territories.
– Sign-up rate: more than two new members per second.
– 66% of LinkedIn members are located outside of
the USA
– Over 30 million students and recent university
graduates on LinkedIn representing its
fastest-growing demographic.
(http://press.linkedin.com/about)


22

Professional Relationships - Blurring of Boundaries
• Context collapse = Blurring of boundaries
• Blurring of boundaries between social contexts most unanticipated
consequences of social media systems for professional relationships
• Family and friends versus colleagues  individuals from different
spheres – normally do not know and do not interact with each other
• Social media systems bridge these spheres
• Relationships previously independent become interdependent
• Information and behavior previously semi-private becomes semipublic
• Composition of a persons‘ Facebook contacts:
–
–
–
–

27%
24%
24%
18%

… acquaintances
… co-workers and teammates
… close contacts such as best friends, romantic partners made up
… contacts come from the user‘s past (e.g. high school friends)



23

Consumer Relationships
• Social media systems affect relationships in retail marketing and
commerce
• Retail commerce: economic transactions that take place between
consumers who provide financial resources in exchange for products
or services
• Transactional, economic relationship are embedded in a social
context
• Consumers develop relationships with producers:
– Loyalty and trust of producers
– Interact with producers regularly
– Declare themselves as being affiliated with producers

• Benefit of producers are the implicit endorsement and visibility
– Consumer adds a company as a Facebook friend or signs up for a company‘s
online community / Facebook‘s Like button


24

Consumer Relationships - Word-of-Mouth
• Word-of-Mouth (WOM): Consumers rely on
their relationships with others to learn about
products, services, and providers
• Word-of-mouth marketing employs
professional marketing techniques to actively shape how individual
consumers use their relationships to share and acquire information
about products and services prior to making a purchasing decision
• Important sources of trustworthy information: close friends on
Facebook, other Facebook contacts, third-party blogs, and
independent review sites
• Less trusted sources: salespeople, retailers/producers, and celebrities
because of assumed self-interest to promote the product and highlight
its benefits


25

Consumer Relationships of Starbucks
Starbucks has three customer dialog management strategies:
1. Megaphone: Starbucks shares information directly with its customers via Twitter (3.5 million
followers), YouTube (Starbucks has his own YouTube channel), or Facebook to strengthen their
brand name and spread time-critical information.
2. Magnet: uses social media systems and relies on the existing consumer-producer relationships,
(operates in the opposite direction - form of inbound communication) to have customers share
information with Starbucks to capture customer feedback and identify potential innovations.
3. Monitor: involves using social media systems to observe consumer-consumer interactions of
interest for Starbucks (e.g., customer reviews at Yelp) which give Starbucks a knowledge
advantage that increases the chances that their marketing messages will be shared by WOM.

Gallaugher, J., & Ransbotham, S. (2010). Social media and customer
dialog management at Starbucks. MIS Quarterly Executive, 9(4), 197-212.



26

Consumer Relationships
• Social network analysis (SNA) used to identify the most
influential individuals in large networks
• People that bridge otherwise dispersed network = structural holes
based on Burt (1992)
• Difference between linked structures of social networks and
actual interactions/ meaningful relationships among people
• Consumers as co-producers: relationships between
companies and individuals in which consumers
coproduce innovations, value, and meaning
• Crowdsourcing and open innovation: companies create
knowledge-intensive relationships focused on formal
exchange of ideas for money and recognition


27

Social Media and Relationship Dynamics
• A social relationship exists when two partners have interactions
with and expectations for each other over a substantial length of
time.
• Relationships are not static but dynamic
• Relationships vary in intensity, visibility, and importance
• Relationships can be considered in phases:
1) Formation Phases
2) Maintenance and Development Phase
3) Dissolution Phase
• Social media systems are used differently by relationship
partners and have differing impacts on relationship
characteristics depending on the phase a relationship is at


28

Relationship Formation - Proximity
• Formation depends on: (1) proximity, (2) first impressions, (3)
similarity (homophily), and complementarity
• Social media systems support faster and broader relationship
formation
• Physical proximity is less important than media proximity
• Unlikely that a relationship forms between people who use different
social media systems
• Barriers to relationship formation due to media proximity:
1) corporate structure,
2) technology features, and
3) national policies.

• Need for integration of social media systems to overcome media
proximity


29

Relationship Formation - First Impression
• First impressions are based on physical appearance
• First impressions decide about the extent to which people want
to form a relationship with one another
• Social media systems have limited cues about potential
relationship partners  people need more time to reduce the
uncertainty about the partner
• Strategies to reduce uncertainty:
– Add personal details to their profiles, attach photos, and videos
– Use of personal profiles to be informed and then decide about
forming relationships

• Social media systems provide people with control of what they
wish to reveal about themselves


30

Relationship Formation – Similarity and
Complementarity
• Fit between the interests, skills, values, and resources of the
potential relationship partner
• Similarity (homophily): relationships are
formed with similar others
• Similarity in surface characteristics: race,
gender, or ethnicity
• Similarity in deep characteristics: values and beliefs
• Complementarity: relationships are formed based on diversity
of partners
• Relationship partners complement each other based on
interests, capabilities, and needs


31

Relationship Formation – Similarity and
Complementarity
• Nature of relationship impacts on combination or dominance of
similarity or complementarity
• Resource and need complementarity important in the formation
of utility-oriented relationships
– Example: Professional affiliation or work-related collaboration
systems – e.g. LinkedIn – provide recommendations, discussions of
job openings, and introductions to otherwise unreachable people

• Interest and value similarity important in the formation of none
utility-oriented relationships
– Example: Social media system – e.g., Facebook – can be used to
give Word-of-Mouth recommendations on products and services,
help with searches, and provide social support



32

Indicators for Relationship Development and
Maintenance
1) Reduced social distance
• Social Exchange Theory or Social Comparison Theory:
Expectations of positive rewards motivate relationship
development
– Rewards: pleasant communications, the exchange of photos, and
the sharing of news

• Social media systems provide features for exchange of rewards
(e.g., digital gifts, supportive comment, Like it Button)
2) Increased self-disclosure
• Generalized reciprocity leads to mutual self-disclosure
• Different motivation to disclose personal information:
Convenience, the ability to build relationships
and received value from them, recognition,
enjoyment of interpersonal relationships


33

Relationship Maintenance and Development
• Social media systems important for the mobile workforce and
tele-workers
• Physically separated from their family, friends, and co-workers
• Challenged to maintain relationships
• Negative social outcomes: social isolation, loneliness, depression
• Social media systems increase feelings of belonging and social
integration
• Use of active and passive features of social media systems:
– Active features: posting messages, chatting, playing games, sending
digital gifts
– Passive features: reading, listening, viewing of a contact‘s content
(photos, postings, videos), searching for people


34

Relationship Dissolution
• Triggers for relationship dissolution: deceptions, false or
misleading information, purposefully omit certain information,
information overload, and creation of false representations in
social media system
TEDx talk: Jeff Hancock on social media and deception
Link: http://www.cornell.edu/video/tedx-talk-jeff-hancock-on-socialmedia-and-deception

• Ending a relationship within a social media system:
– less confrontational
– less emotionally stressful for the relationship partners
– requires less effort or personal involvement

• Actions to end a relationship:
– change features (visibility and privacy) for the relevant person
– blocking the person


35

Summary - Social Media and Relationships
“Social media isn't something that you "do",
instead you have to "be" social.”
Reference: Peter Thomson: Tickle: Digital marketing for tech companies

• Diverse collection of technologies and applications
• Allow people to communicate, exchange information, and share
digital artifacts with one another
• Enable new relationships, substitute and complement offline
relationships
• Multi-facet impact on different relationships: friendships,
kinship, professional relationships, consumer relationships, and
coproduction relationships
• Influence on the formation, maintenance and development, and
dissolution of relationships


36

Author biographies
Brian S. Butler is an Associate Professor in the College of Information Studies and in the
Robert H. Smith School of Business at the University of Maryland where is he is the
Director of the Master of Information Management (MIM) Program and the Director of
the Center for the Advanced Study of Communities and Information (CASCI). His work,
which has appeared in Information Systems Research, MIS Quarterly, Organization
Science, Journal of Biomedical Informatics, and the Journal of Medical Internet
Research, combines theories and methods from organizational theory and management to
better understand how emerging technologies alter the way teams, communities, and
organization function. Recent projects include studies of policy formation and application
in Wikipedia, social media use in local food systems, the design of online communities for
large-scale education initiatives, and models and metrics for systems of online groups.
Sabine Matook, Ph.D., is a senior lecturer in Information Systems at the UQ Business
School, University of Queensland. She received her doctoral degree from the Technische
Universität (TU) Dresden, Germany. Her research interests are on the IT artifact, social
media, and agile IS development. Her work has appeared in the European Journal of
Information Systems, Information & Management, Journal of Strategic Information
Systems, the International Journal of Operations & Production Management, and
Decision Support Systems. Dr Matook has presented research papers at a variety of
international conferences, including the International Conference on Information Systems.
Her areas of teaching include courses on systems analysis and design, management
information systems, and IS research methodologies.


37

Copyright
This PowerPoint presentation is provided under a Creative Commons
Attribution—NonCommercial—NoDerivs license.
Following terms :
Attribution — You must give appropriate credit, provide a link to the
license, and indicate if changes were made. You may do so in any
reasonable manner, but not in any way that suggests the licensor
endorses you or your use.
NonCommercial — You may not use the material for commercial
purposes.
NoDerivatives — If you remix, transform, or build upon the material,
you may not distribute the modified material.
For details on this license conditions, you are referred to the Creative
Commons website: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/


38

Social Media and Relationships

Recommandé

Recommandé

Contenu connexe

Tendances

Tendances (20)

Similaire à Social Media and Relationships

Similaire à Social Media and Relationships (20)

Dernier

Dernier (20)

Social Media and Relationships