Sage Journals: Discover world-class research

Abstract

This article investigates Belgian business-to-business (B2B) companies’ perceptions of and attitudes toward social media, matching the findings with existing U.S., U.K., and Dutch research. Using survey data from a nonrepresentative judgment sample of 92 Belgian B2B companies, we show that 85.9% of Belgian B2B companies that participated in our research use social media to ensure their influence on target groups. The survey also reveals that 40.8% of IT companies implement a social media strategy against only 26.7% of industrial B2B companies. Relying on the technology acceptance model, we argue that IT companies are more inclined to adopt social media because they evaluate social media’s usefulness higher than industrial enterprises. Qualitative follow-up research (in-depth interviews with 11 B2B enterprises) further explains the observed differences and similarities between both sectors, analyzing perceived benefits and risks, social media knowledge, and strategies. We conclude the article by listing various suggested actions that can help B2B companies effectively leverage social media.

Keywords

B2B social media technology acceptance model TAM adoption

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Accenture Global Marketing. (2011). Making social media pay: Rethinking social media’s potential to bolster B2B interactions, customer loyalty, revenues and brand reputation. Retrieved from http://www.accenture.com/us-en/Pages/insight-making-social-media-pay.aspx?c=mc_othrposts_10000036&n=sm_0910

Annabi

McGann

S. T.

(2012). Social media as the missing link: Connecting communities of practice to business strategy. Journal of Organizational Computing and Electronic Commerce, 23, 56-83.

AT&T. (2011). The business impacts of social networking. A white paper in cooperation with Early Strategies Consulting. Retrieved from http://www.business.att.com/content/whitepaper/WP-soc_17172_v3_11-10-08.pdf

Base One. (2011). Buyersphere report 2011. The annual changing B2B buyer behaviour. Retrieved from http://www.slideshare.net/EspaceDirect/buyersphere-report-2011-the-annual-survey-of-changing-b2b-buyer-behaviour

Baehr

Alex-Brown

(2010). Assessing the value of corporate blogs: A social capital perspective. IEEE Transactions on Professional Communication, 53, 358-369.

Capstone. (2011). B2B social media “slow to take-off in industrial sector.” Retrieved from http://www.capstonemedia.com/social-media-use-slow-to-take-off-in-industrial-sector/

Davis

Bagozzi

R. P.

Warshaw

(1989). User acceptance of computer technology: A comparison of two theoretical models. Management Science, 35, 982-1003.

Ganassali

(2008). The influence of the design of web survey questionnaires on the quality of responses. Survey Research Methods, 2, 21-32.

Gosling

S. D.

Vazire

Srivastava

John

O. P.

(2004). Should we trust web-based studies? A comparative analysis of six preconceptions about Internet questionnaires. American Psychologist, 59, 93-104.

10.

Hanna

Rohm

Crittenden

V. L.

(2011). We’re all connected: The power of the social media ecosystem. Business Horizons, 54, 265-273.

11.

Hosford

(2012). “BtoB” study shows surge in social media marketing. Retrieved from http://www.btobonline.com/article/20120514/SOCIAL06/305149941/btob-study-shows-surge-in-social-media-marketing

12.

P. J.

Chau

P. Y. K.

Sheng

O. R. L.

Tam

K. Y.

(1999). Examining the technology acceptance model using physician acceptance of telemedicine technology. Journal of Management information Systems, 16, 91-112.

13.

Kaplan

A. M.

Haenlein

(2010). Users of the world, unite! The challenges and opportunities of Social Media. Business Horizons, 53, 59-68.

14.

Kietzmann

J. H.

Hermkens

McCarthy

I. P.

Silvestre

B. S.

(2011). Social media? Get serious! Understanding the functional building blocks of social media. Business Horizons, 54, 241-251.

15.

Leboff

(2011). Sticky marketing: Why everything in marketing has changed and what to do about it. London, England: Kogan Page.

16.

Legris

Inghamb

Collerette

(2003). Why do people use information technology? A critical review of the technology acceptance model. Information & Management, 40, 191-204.

17.

Marketo. (2010). The definitive guide to B2B social media. San Mateo, CA: Author.

18.

Michaelidou

Siamagka

N. T.

Christodoulides

(2011). Usage, barriers and measurement of social media marketing: An exploratory investigation of small and medium B2B brands. Industrial Marketing Management, 40, 1153-1159.

19.

Nair

Sidhu

(2010). Social media for B2B marketing. B2B Bento, 1. Retrieved from http://www.b2bento.com/2010/01/social-media-for-b2b-marketing-free-whitepaper/

20.

Paulsen

(2011). Truth from the trenches: Insights from Penton Marketing Services’ 2011 B-to-B marketing needs survey. Washington, DC: Penton Marketing Services. Retrieved from http://preview.insidepenton.com/registeredrep/PMSmarketingwhitepaper.pdf

21.

Rodriguez

Peterson

R. M.

Krishnan

(2012). Social media’s influence on business-to-business sales performance. Journal of Personal Selling and Sales Management, 32, 365-378.

22.

Schroeder

(2013). The art of business relationships through social media. Ivy Business Journal Online. Retrieved from http://iveybusinessjournal.com/topics/the-organization/the-art-of-business-relationships-through-social-media#.U0UK3Z1CTDc

23.

SpotONvision. (2011). Ontwikkelingen in B2B marketing: TNS Nipo. Retrieved from http://www.tns-nipo.com/pages/pdf/TNS%20NIPO%20B2B%20Marketing%20Barometer%202011.pdf

24.

SpotONvision. (2012). B2B marketing barometer 2012. Amsterdam, Netherlands: TNS Nipo.

25.

Steyn

Salehi-Sangari

Pitt

Parent

Berthon

(2010). The social media release as a public relations tool: Intentions to use among B2B bloggers. Public Relations Review, 36, 87-89.

26.

ThomasNet. (2011). Using social media to source industrial products/services. Retrieved from http://promoteyourbusiness.thomasnet.com/ipb/201107_social_media.html

27.

Turner

Kitchenham

Brereton

Charters

Budgen

(2010). Does the technology acceptance model predict actual use? A systematic literature review. Information and Software Technology, 52, 463-479.

28.

Van Ittersum

Rogers

W. A.

Capar

Caine

K. E.

O’Brien

M. A.

Parsons

L. J.

Fisk

A. D.

(2006). Understanding technology acceptance: Phase 1: Literature review and qualitative model development. Retrieved from https://smartech.gatech.edu/jspui/bitstream/1853/40580/1/HFA-TR-0602_TechAccept%20PROPRIETARY.pdf

29.

Venkatesh

(2000). Determinants of perceived ease of use: Integrating control, intrinsic motivation, and emotion into the technology acceptance model. Information Systems Research, 11, 342-365.

30.

Venkatesh

Davis

F. D.

(2000). A theoretical extension of the technology acceptance model: Four longitudinal field studies. Management Science, 46, 186-204.

31.

Venkatesh

Morris

M. G.

Davis

G. B.

Davis

F. D.

(2003). User acceptance of information technology: Toward a unified view. MIS Quarterly, 27, 425-478.

32.

Venkatesh

Bala

(2008). Technology acceptance: Model 3 and a research agenda on interventions. Decision Sciences, 39, 273-315.

33.

Vernuccio

(2014). Communicating corporate brands through social media: An exploratory study. International Journal of Business Communication, 51, 211-233. doi:0.1177/2329488414525400

34.

Weinberg

B. D.

Pehlivan

(2011). Social spending: Managing the social media mix. Business Horizons, 54, 275-282.