Content uploaded by Linda D. Hollebeek
Author content
All content in this area was uploaded by Linda D. Hollebeek on May 20, 2019
Content may be subject to copyright.
Brie, J., Ilic, A., Juric, B. & Hollebeek, L. (2013), Consumer Engagement in a Virtual Brand
Community: An Exploratory Analysis, Journal of Business Research, 66(1), 105
1
1
Consumer engagement in a virtual brand community: An exploratory analysis
Abstract
Despite the extensive use of the term "engagement" in the context of brand communities, the
theoretical meaning and foundations underlying this term remain underexplored in the literature
to-date. Drawing on a literature review, this study adopts netnographic methodology to explore
the nature and scope of consumer engagement in an online brand community environment. The
study reveals the complex multidimensional and dynamic nature of consumer engagement,
which may emerge at different levels of intensity over time, thus reflecting distinct engagement
states. Further, the consumer engagement process comprises a range of sub-processes reflecting
consumers’ interactive experience within online brand communities, and value co-creation
among community participants. Engaged consumers exhibit enhanced consumer loyalty,
satisfaction, empowerment, connection, emotional bonding, trust and commitment. The paper
concludes with a discussion of implications for practice and further research.
Keywords: Consumer engagement, brand, online community, co-created value, interactivity,
netnography
2
1. Introduction
The sophisticated information and communication technologies (ICTs), which have
developed in parallel with the rise of the Internet, have served as platforms facilitating
interaction with and amongst consumers, and the formation of brand communities (Muñiz and
O’Guinn, 2001; Muñiz and Schau, 2005, 2006). Central to discussions about brand communities
is the use of the terms “engage” and “engagement” to describe the nature of participants’ specific
interactions and/or interactive experiences. For example, in a pioneering article addressing the
social influence of brand communities, Algesheimer, Dholakia and Hermann (2005) use the
terms “engage” and/or “engagement” over fifty times. More recently Schau, Muñiz and
Arnould’s (2009) analysis of the contribution of brand communities to value creation, draws on
these terms seventy-five times. However, despite the increasing usage of these terms, marketing
scholars have paid relatively little attention to the theoretical development of the “engagement”
concept, and of “consumer engagement” in online brand communities to-date.
Recent business practice discourse, including reports on conferences, seminars, roundtables,
blogs, and organizational reports, also provides evidence of the increasing usage of the term
“engagement” in the context of business relationships and branding (Appelbaum, 2001).
Specifically, the discourse portrays consumer engagement as a vehicle for creating, building and
enhancing consumer relationships. Consumer engagement is seen both as a strategic imperative
for establishing and sustaining a competitive advantage, and as a valuable predictor of future
business performance (Sedley, 2008). Specifically, Neff (2007) views consumer engagement as a
primary driver of sales growth, while Voyles (2007) suggests consumer engagement enhances
profitability.
3
Since 2005 the term “engagement” has been increasingly used in the broader academic
marketing literature. However, despite this increasing use, scholarly enquiry into defining the
term, or examining how the term differs from similar relational terms, including “participation”
and “involvement,” has been limited to-date. The Marketing Science Institute’s 2010-2012
Research Priorities (MSI, 2010) emphasize the need for further research addressing the
consumer/customer engagement concept. Within the broader priority area of “Understanding
Customer Experience and Behavior,” the MSI identifies “customer engagement” as a key
research area contributing to enhanced academic insight into consumer behavior in complex,
interactive and/or co-creative environments. Further, the 2010 Journal of Service Research
Special Issue, which includes a number of papers addressing “customer engagement,” directly
responds to this MSI Research Priority. Nambisan and Baron (2009) provide further support for
the need to investigate consumer engagement in the context of online brand communities.
Recently De Valck, Van Bruggen and Wierenga (2009, p. 185) define “virtual brand
community” as “a specialized, non-geographically bound, online community, based on social
communications and relationships among a brand’s consumers.” The authors conclude the nature
of brand communities and their effect on consumer behavior remains nebulous to-date. Thus
research into the nature of brand communities and their effect on consumer behavior represents
an important area for research.
This paper responds to De Valk et al.’s (2009) observation regarding the need for further
empirical research addressing the nature of brand communities and their effect on consumer
behavior. By using netnographic methodology, this exploratory research aims to provide insight
4
into consumer engagement within a virtual brand community. The paper proceeds with a
literature review addressing the conceptual roots of consumer engagement in section 2.1, and
reviews definitions of consumer engagement and related concepts in section 2.2. Section 2.3
develops a working definition of “online consumer engagement,” while section 2.4 discusses the
expression of specific consumer behaviors within online brand communities, thus providing the
context for the empirical research. Section 3 outlines the research approach, including
netnographic methodology and the research setting. Section 4 presents the study’s findings by
first examining consumer engagement in the online community as a psychological state,
followed by the broader process, and constituent sub-processes, comprising consumer
engagement. Section 5 presents key implications arising from the research, and a future research
agenda, which takes into account the study’s limitations.
2. Literature Review
2.1 Consumer engagement: Theoretical foundations
i
The theoretical roots of the consumer engagement concept lie in what Vivek, Beatty and
Morgan (2010) refer to as the “expanded domain of relationship marketing.” Similarly, Ashley,
Noble, Donthu and Lemon (2011) suggest relationship marketing theory as the broader
conceptual lens through which to examine customer engagement. Further, from a service-
dominant (S-D) logic perspective, Vargo (2009) refers to this notion as “a transcending view of
relationships,” which contrasts with the more traditional view of marketing relationships labeled
a “goods-dominant” (G-D) perspective. This broader “transcending” relational perspective, in
particular, recognizes that consumer behavior is centered on customers’ and/or other
stakeholders’ interactive experiences taking place in complex, co-creative environments.
5
Vivek et al. (2010) elaborate on the “expanded domain of relationship marketing” by drawing
on Morgan and Hunt’s (1994), Vargo and Lusch’s (2004, 2008) and Prahalad and Ramaswamy
‘s(2004a/b) research. Within this broadened relationship marketing domain the firm’s focus is on
existing and prospective customers, as well as consumer communities and their organizational
value co-ceeative networks. As such, the consumer engagement concept centers on specific
interactive consumer experiences. Based on this analysis Vivek et al. (2010) posit consumer
engagement as a central concept within the marketing system. Similarily, Lusch and Vargo
(2010) suggest these, interactive consumer experiences co-created with other actors can be
interpreted as the act of “engaging.”
2.2 “Consumer/customer engagement” definitions
The relatively few authors who have defined “customer/consumer engagement” in the
academic marketing literature to-date provide a platform for the development of a working
definition of “consumer engagement” in a virtual brand community. Specifically, Patterson, Yu
and de Ruyter (2006) define “customer engagement” as “the level of a customer’s physical,
cognitive and emotional presence in their relationship with a service organization.” By contrast,
Vivek et al. (2010, p. 4) define “consumer engagement” as “the intensity of an individual’s
participation and connection with the organization’s offerings and activities initiated by either
the customer or the organization, while Hollebeek (2011, p. 6) views “customer brand
engagement” as “the level of a customer’s motivational, brand-related and context-dependent
state of mind characterized by specific levels of cognitive, emotional and behavioral activity in
brand interactions.”
6
Mollen and Wilson (2010, p. 5) define “brand engagement” within specific online contexts.
The authors describe consumers’ engagement as “the cognitive and affective commitment to
an active relationship with the brand as personified by the website or other computer-
mediated entities designed to communicate brand value.” The concept characterizes the
dimensions of “sustained cognitive processing”, the individual’s level of perceived
“instrumental value” (i.e. utility and relevance), and “experiential value” (i.e. the level of
emotional congruence with the narrative schema encountered in computer-mediated
entities). When conceptualizing online “brand engagement,” Mollen and Wilson (2010)
scrutinize how the concept differs from “involvement.” They suggest that a consumer’s
brand engagement extends beyond mere involvement, as it encompasses an interactive
relationship with the engagement object, and requires the emergence of the individual’s
perceived experiential value, in addition to instrumental value obtained from specific brand
interactions. This perspective is consistent with the view of consumer engagement having
theoretical roots within the expanded domain of relationship marketing, which emphasize the
notions of interactivity and customer experience (Vivek et al., 2010).
Bowden (2009a) views “customer engagement” as a “psychological process” comprising
cognitive and emotional aspects. Specifically, the author examines the differences in the
engagement of new, as opposed to existing, customers. Bowden’s (2009a) model illustrates
engagement as an iterative process commencing with customer satisfaction, and culminating in
customer loyalty, where the transitional pathway to customer loyalty encapsulates calculative
and affective commitment, trust, involvement and customer delight. While new customers’
7
“calculative commitment” is predominantly cognitive in nature, “affective commitment” is
relevant predominantly to repeat customers, and represents a more emotive basis for re-purchase.
By contrast, Van Doorn, Lemon, Mittal, Naβ, Pick, Pirner and Verhoef (2010), and Pham and
Avnet (2009) focus on “customer engagement behaviors,” by defining engagement primarily
with reference to specific customer activity types or patterns. Furthermore, the MSI (2010)
recognizes the potentially enduring nature of customer engagement from pre- through to post-
purchase contexts.
A number of researchers have considered the consequences of customer/consumer
engagement, which may include the concepts of trust (e.g. Casalo, Flavian, and Guinaliu, 2007;
Hollebeek, 2011), satisfaction (Bowden, 2009a), commitment, emotional connection/attachment
(e.g. Chan and Li, 2010), empowerment, consumer value (e.g. Gruen, Osmonbekov, and
Czaplewski, 2006; Schau et al., 2009), and loyalty (e.g. Bowden, 2009a/b). Amongst these, the
review reveals the concepts of loyalty (e.g. Andersen, 2005; Schouten, McAlexander and
Koenig, 2007; Casalo et al., 2007), commitment (e.g. Chan and Li, 2010) and empowerment
(e.g. Zimmerman and Warschausky, 1998; Cova and Pace, 2006; Füller, Mühlbacher, Matzler,
and Jawecki, 2009) to be prominent in online brand community contexts.
2.3 A working definition
Brodie, Hollebeek, Juric, and Ilic’s (2011) review, which addresses customer/consumer
engagement in the marketing literature, provides guidance for the development of a working
definition of “consumer engagement” in a virtual brand community. Specifically, the authors’
analysis identifies five themes,. The first is a fundamental theme, which recognizes the central
8
importance of the undertaking of specific interactive experiences between consumers and/or
other actors in the marketing and/or brand network. These interactive experiences include
consumer-to-consumer (C2C) interactions in brand-related chat rooms or blogs, and/or
firm/consumer interactions through online feedback forms (Van Doorn et al., 2010). A second
theme is that consumer engagement represents a highly context-dependent, motivational state
characterized by a specific intensity level at a given point in time. Nolan, Brizland and Macaulay
(2007), for instance, report on individuals’ motivation to engage with an online community
primarily when perceived utility value and interest outweigh the level of perceived risk.
Third, particular, transient engagement states occur within broader, dynamic, iterative
engagement processes (Bowden, 2009a). As such, aggregation of focal engagement states results
in broader processes describing individuals’ engagement with particular brands over time. A
fourth theme addresses engagement as a multidimensional concept comprising cognitive,
affective and behavioral dimensions. Patterson et al. (2006), for instance, define “customer
engagement” in terms of the cognitive “absorption,” emotional “dedication” and behavioral
“vigor” and “interaction” dimensions, as addressed in section 2.2.
Fifth, consumer engagement plays a central role in the process of relational exchange, where
other relational concepts (e.g. participation, involvement) act as engagement antecedents and/or
consequences (e.g. trust, commitment) in dynamic engagement processes occurring within the
brand community. The iterative nature of the consumer engagement process implies that specific
relational consequences of engagement may act as antecedents in subsequent engagement (sub-)
processes and/or cycles (Hollebeek, 2011).
9
The five themes lead to the development of a working definition for the investigation of
consumer engagement in this exploratory study. The working definition is:
Consumer engagement in a virtual brand community involves specific interactive
experiences between consumers and the brand, and/or other members of the community.
Consumer engagement is a context-dependent, psychological state characterized by
fluctuating intensity levels that occur within dynamic, iterative engagement processes.
Consumer engagement is a multidimensional concept comprising cognitive, emotional,
and/or behavioral dimensions, and plays a central role in the process of relational
exchange where other relational concepts are engagement antecedents and/or
consequences in iterative engagement processes within the brand community.
This working definition provides a broad direction for the undertaking of the exploratory
research in this paper. In particular, the definition parallels Bowden’s (2009a), Van Doorn et al.’s
(2010) and Hollebeek’s (2011) process perspective of customer engagement. The proposed
working definition also provides a broader conceptualization of online brand engagement, in
contrast to Patterson et al.’s (2006), and Vivek et al.’s (2010) definitions, which adopt more
specific descriptions of the behavioral, cognitive and emotional dimensions of engagement, as
well as Mollen and Wilson’s (2010) proposed definition of online brand engagement. The
nascent state of theoretical development of the customer/consumer engagement concept in the
marketing literature to-date necessitates an initial delineation of the key characteristics of
consumer engagement to precede the concept’s more context-specific scrutiny.
10
Central to the proposed working definition is that consumer engagement embodies specific
interactive consumer experiences. This theoretical perspective has its roots within the expanded
domain of relationship marketing (Vivek et al., 2010) and the S-D logic, as outlined in section
2.1. Within this theoretical framework other relational concepts (e.g. participation, involvement,
telepresence) act as engagement antecedents, whilst engagement consequences may include
commitment, trust, self-brand connections, consumers’ emotional brand attachment and brand
loyalty.
2.4 Consumer behavior in virtual brand communities
In the last two decades, the emergence and rise of the Internet as a communications medium
has enabled geographically-dispersed individuals with shared interests to gather online
(Thomsen, Straubhaar and Bolyard, 1998) culminating in radically new forms of customer/firm
interactions. For example, Hoffman and Novak (1996) highlight the Internet’s capability for
many-to-many (e.g. C2C) communications. The virtual world not only connects companies, but
also consumers, and thus provides access to online content, and communication through this
medium (De Valck, et al., 2009).
Within the emerging Internet environment, consumers are increasingly active participants in
interactive processes comprising multiple feedback loops, and highly immediate (potentially
even real-time) communication (Hoffman and Novak, 1996; Prahalad and Ramaswamy, 2004b).
Examples of virtual interaction and communication tools include electronic discussion forums,
bulletin boards, list servers, chat rooms, newsgroups, email, personal Web pages, social networks
and blogs (De Valck et al., 2009). These tools enable and facilitate new and extended forms of
11
interactive consumer experiences, which may contribute to the development of customer and/or
consumer engagement with specific brands. Specifically, interactive customer/firm relationships
in virtual brand communities reflect Vivek et al.’s (2010) “expanded relationship marketing”
domain, and Vargo’s (2009) “transcending view of relationships” alike, which provide a
conceptual foundation for the consumer engagement concept, as addressed in section 2.1.
While Algesheimer et al. (2005) examine consumers’ “community engagement” in the offline
brand community context of a European car club their research highlights the interactive, two-
way nature of consumer engagement, which is pivotal in a virtual brand community context.
Further, Nambisan and Baron (2009) report that customer participation in business-to-consumer
(B2C) virtual product support communities is motivated primarily by a belief in the benefits of
engaging in such activities, thus implying that consumers find participating in reciprocal,
interactive communications and activities rewarding in specific ways. The undertaking of such
reciprocal behaviors concurs with the key findings presented in sections 2.1 and 2.2. Similarly,
in consumer-to-consumer (C2C) contexts individuals may find proximity, affiliation, social
interaction and bonding through virtual communities (Hoffman and Novak, 1996; Oldenburg,
1999).
Hennig-Thurau et al. (2004a/b) report eight specific factors, which motivate consumers to
make contributions to (i.e. engage with) online communities, including (1) venting negative
feelings, (2) concern for other consumers, (3) self-enhancement, (4) advice-seeking, (5) social
benefits, (6) economic benefits (e.g. cost savings), (7) platform assistance, and (8) helping the
company. Of these, social benefits influence consumers most strongly, thus concurring with
12
Oldenburg (1999) and Figallo (1998), and emphasizing the interactive, two-way nature of the
consumer engagement concept.
Wiertz and de Ruyter (2007) examine firm-hosted online communities, in which consumers
interactively engage to help solve each other’s service problems. The results suggest that the
highest-contributing community members, in terms of quantity and quality, act predominantly
out of commitment to the community. Additional key factors include individuals’ online
interaction propensity (i.e. an individual’s prevailing tendency to interact with relative strangers;
people they have never met offline, in an online environment), and the perceived informational
value of interacting with the community. Further, Mathwick, Wiertz and de Ruyter’s (2008)
investigation indicates the importance of voluntarism, reciprocity and social trust, which may
impact upon individuals’ consumer engagement levels, in peer-to-peer (P2P) problem solving
contexts.
Nolan et al. (2007) undertook a three-year longitudinal study into the development of a
particular online business community. Their findings show that individuals engage with an
online community when they perceive utility value and interest to outweigh the level of
perceived risk. In addition, engagement flourishes when consumers perceive the value and
authority of the interactive experience to exceed the perceived level of effort exerted in the
particular interaction (cf. Mollen and Wilson, 2010). This analysis shows an individual’s
perception of the “balance” between relevant cost/benefit factors accruing from a specific
interaction may influence their engagement intensity (Nolan et al., 2007).
13
The effects of electronic word-of-mouth (e-WOM) in virtual brand communities may also be
significant (De Valck et al., 2009), as recommendations can occur at virtually no cost and spread
rapidly, both within and beyond the virtual brand community. Chatterjee’s (2001) findings
support the applicability of specific word-of-mouth (WOM) dynamics in traditional, offline
contexts, in online environments. For instance, consumers are more likely to search for, and
accept, (negative) e-WOM when they lack information and experience (Richins and Bloch,
1991). For instance, Chevalier and Mayzlin (2006) report that reader numbers of online book
reviews may affect book sales, with negative reviews having a larger detrimental effect on sales,
than the positive effects accruing from positive reviews.
Brand community members share an interest, which produces affinity, may create a bond (De
Valck et al., 2009), and generate consumer feelings of empowerment (Cova and Pace, 2006).
These qualities, coupled with the level of perceived credibility of specific consumer evaluations,
make the virtual brand community a powerful, interactive engagement platform for consumer-to-
consumer (C2C) recommendations (Sawhney, Verona, and Prandelli, 2005). Furthermore, the
virtual brand community is an environment where the community members and visitors, through
individual and collaborative effort, create and co-create value for themselves, other members,
and/or organizations (Schau et al., 2009; Porter and Donthu, 2008).
While the majority of research addressing consumer behavior in virtual brand communities
fails to conceptualize the consumer/customer engagement explicitly, the literature provides a
foundation on which to base the empirical study.
3. Research approach
14
3.1 Netnography
The five themes and the working definition of consumer engagement in a virtual brand
community provide the basis to guide the empirical research that examines consumer
engagement in the online community in terms of a psychological state, followed by an
examination of the consumer engagement process and constituent sub-processes. The method
selected for this research is netnography, which Kozinets introduced in the late 1990s.
Netnography is a qualitative research methodology, which adapts ethnographic research
techniques to the study of online communities (Kozinets, 1998). Since this pioneering work a
number of studies have adopted netnographic methodology to investigate consumers’ online
discussions, and examine the behavior patterns of online user groups (e.g. Muñiz and O’Guinn,
2001).
This research uses a multi-method approach to the study of online communities (Kozinets
2002; Bryman and Bell, 2007). The first stage involves the observation of communication in the
community. Further, the second stage involves the use of qualitative depth-interviews with
community members. This second stage also allows for a more in-depth examination of the
meanings the participants ascribe to their experiences within the online community.
3.2 Research setting and observations
The authors selected the company Vibra-Train Ltd, with its online platform
www.vibrationtraining.net, as the research setting. Vibra-Train Ltd states on the website that the
objective of its online platform is to facilitate the availability of “expert information and frank
discussion on all aspects of Whole Body Vibration,” which the company describes as a relatively
15
innovative method of exercise aimed at improving individuals’ health and fitness levels. The
benefits of selecting this setting included the relatively extensive number of participants who
regularly posted messages about different aspects of vibration training. At the time of data
collection the community had a core of approximately ten to fifteen regular members (i.e.
consumers, studio owners and/or trainers, equipment manufacturers and/or retailers) who showed
elements of Muñiz and O’Guinn’s (2001) three markers of community: Shared consciousness,
shared rituals/traditions, and a sense of moral responsibility.
The investigation adopted theoretical sampling, where the researcher first collects, codes, and
analyzes data. Then, in order to refine the preliminary “consumer engagement”
conceptualization, a decision is made about which specific data to collect next and where to
collect this data. Bryman and Bell (2007) recommend this data collection process when the
research objective is to generate and/or refine theory.
The researchers, with the help of the web administrator, selected all end-users of vibration
training products and services commenting in the blog. Bloggers who made only a small number
of comments would not be likely to provide insights into consumer engagement within the
specific brand community. Thus, the research scope is narrowed to six information-rich end-
users (consumers), as characterized by these individuals’ high frequency of visits to the online
community, as well as the length of their visits. According to the blog’s statistics, 176 consumers
made 808 (out of 2,370) comments in the blog prior to March 1, 2008. More than fifty percent
(i.e. 427/808) of these consumers’ postings were made by six members (i.e., the most frequent
contributors in the community), who therefore became the focus of this research. Table 1
16
provides further detail about the length of specific user comments, and the specific participation
intervals for these particular highly engaged, information-rich participants.
Table 1 here
The Vibration Training online community provided the researchers with an abundance of text.
The data consisted of 427 posts (56,804 words), which the participants posted in the period from
November 2006 to March 2008, and was processed using NVivo 7.0 software. Part of the data
collection effort involved observing all the vibration training blog activities to reduce the gap
between the text and the text’s interpretative framework, and to align the participants’ narratives
in their experiential contexts.
Two coders initially coded and categorized all contributions. After successive readings, and
discussions between the two coders, the researchers decided to modify the interpretations and
codes. This iterative process is in line with what Denzin (1978) refers to as “investigator
triangulation” – that is, using several different researchers to interpret the same body of data. The
process of open coding revealed the basic themes, such as consumer engagement objects and
sub-processes, and the axial coding resulted in the development of a conceptual model.
The researchers conducted follow-up interviews with a sub-sample of four of the six highly-
engaged participants. Specifically, the researchers undertook a total of over twelve hours of face-
to-face, Skype and phone interviews, with each lasting at least one hour. The researchers
prepared and pre-tested an interview guide to provide direction for the semi-structured interview
process, and which permitted the emergence of key themes of “consumer engagement” (Fontana
17
and Frey, 2000). For example, when the participants mentioned they engaged through
“socialization,” they were asked to discuss this aspect of their engagement in greater depth.
These in-depth interviews served as an effective means of data triangulation, and of improving
the credibility of findings and the interpretation of the analysis (Bryman and Bell, 2007).
4. Findings
Brodie et al.’s (2011) five themes underpinning the working definition of “consumer
engagement” guided the analysis of the data. The first sub-section of the findings examines the
nature of the consumer engagement concept by focusing on consumers’ specific interactive
experiences, engagement objects, motivational states and engagement dimensionality within the
context of the Vibration Training brand community. The second sub-section examines the
process of consumer engagement, while the third sub-section addresses focal consumer
engagement sub-processes. The final section examines the key consequences of consumer
engagement.
4.1 Consumer engagement and engagement objects
The analysis and interpretation first led to the development of a conceptual model illustrating
the facets of consumer engagement, as shown in Figure 1. The model reveals established
relationships between the cognitive, emotional and behavioral aspects of consumer engagement
and the specific engagement objects characterizing the level of complexity of focal consumer
engagement states. The findings also reveal the interplay between the emotional, cognitive and
behavioral aspects of engagement generating differing levels of engagement intensity.
18
Figure 1 here
For example, emotional engagement may generate increased levels of cognitive and/or
behavioral engagement, as illustrated by one of the interview respondents:
“The blog eventually meant so much to me that I would do anything to assist anyone
connected to it in any way I can.”
The respondent’s post to the blog further illustrates the individual’s heightened levels of
cognitive and/or behavioral engagement:
“My thanks to A for all the knowledge selflessly imparted and looking forward to
learning further from him. I have been able to help a colleague and last night, my wife,
with back injuries using the stretch exercise suggested by A.”
The analysis identifies numerous engagement objects in specific postings to the blog.
Specifically, participants engage with the themes discussed, including brands, products and
services associated with exercise programs, organizations and/or the industry; and with the
online community, their community roles and other community members. Consumers, typically,
engage initially with specific inanimate object(s) of interest (e.g. a brand), and then progress to
two-way interactions with other members of the online community, thus serving to impact upon
their specific consumer engagement states and/or levels.
Discussions about brand-related topics are the most prevalent area of interest comprising
approximately one-third of the 2,370 blog postings. Further, participants “earned the “right” to
discuss specific brands in the online community. Specifically, the following ways illustrate this
19
observation: (a) Only the members who engage in the community are able to discuss brands in
their posts; and (b) only the brands, which the highly engaged members consider to be “ethical”
are able to receive favorable reviews in the blog. The brands “permitted” for the community
members’ recommendation are brands, which have met relevant perceived industry standards, as
illustrated by one of the interviewees:
“The only brands really that are allowed to be talked about on the forum… it’s
more of an earned right. You'd notice that [brand name] is mentioned a few
times. It’s because they’re one of the only companies that has signed a
declaration.”
Also, a considerable amount of discussion occurs about prices, quality, performance (i.e.
safety and benefits), and personal experiences with specific brands. Of particular interest are the
discussions addressing the development of relevant industry standards and/or a code of
practice/ethics for the emerging fitness sector, how to monitor specific standards and how to
establish an industry regulating body, thus illustrating consumers’ empowerment and value co-
creation within the brand community, resulting in a potential impact for the industry at large.
The highly engaged members show all three elements of brand community, including shared
consciousness, shared rituals and traditions, and a sense of moral responsibility (Muñiz and
O’Guinn, 2001; Schau et al., 2009). Members also engage with their own personal roles within
the community, and with fellow members and their respective roles. These behaviors include the
roles of learners, of members sharing their experience and knowledge, brand advocates,
20
companies and/or co-developers of ideas with relevance not only within the online community,
but across the broader health and fitness industry.
The emotional aspect of consumers’ online brand engagement emerged as polar
negative/positive, low/high-intensity and short/long-term affective attitudes directed towards
specific engagement objects (e.g. a brand). The emotional gratification participants feel from
engaging in the community stems from feelings of gratitude, empathy, trust, feeling safe, and
from a sense of belonging to the group, thus highlighting the importance of the social aspect of
consumer engagement. Further, the researchers were able to identify a cognitive dimension of
consumer engagement as the members built value-laden relationships by sharing information and
experiences. The members’ participation in the community, their online activities in the blog and
their offline actions reported in the online community (i.e. postings about offline activities
related to the community purpose) display the behavioral dimension of their engagement.
Further, while specific consumer engagement behaviors are positive in nature (e.g. providing
social support), others reflect more negative expressions of consumer engagement (e.g.
criticizing the brand, giving misleading brand-related advice).
4.2 Consumer engagement process
Figure 2 shows the dynamic conceptual model derived from the researchers’ analysis and
interpretation of the blog posts. First, the model shows that specific triggers, such as a need to
reduce information search cost and perceived risk, may prompt an individual to join, and/or
participate in, the online community. This observation parallels de Chernatony and
Christodoulides’ (2004) analysis pertaining to the nature and functions of brands in an interactive
21
environment. Other triggers for joining the community may include a perceived lack of
information about the organizations offerings (i.e., consumer/firm information asymmetry), as
well as consumer perceptions of the bias inherent in the nature of commercial information. The
following interviewee’s statement illustrates this observation:
“I think consumer engagement in the blog starts by somebody needing some
information. And so they come, they find the site maybe through Google. They
read about it, but they don't want to read it all, or it’s just easier to come in and
ask a question, and they’re welcome to do that. It goes from there. They might
stay engaged for a period of time.”
Figure 2 here
Further analysis of the data results in the identification of five specific consumer engagement
sub-processes including “learning,” “sharing,” “advocating,” “socializing” and “co-developing.”
Section 4.3 defines these terms. The data also suggest that the consumer engagement process
generates consumer loyalty, satisfaction, empowerment, connection, commitment and trust.
Finally, the consumer engagement process may include a transitory state of dormancy, and/or
termination, at particular points in time. “Dormancy” is a temporary state of inactive, passive
engagement by individual consumers who have previously been more actively engaged with the
online community. “Termination” represents a state of more permanent disengagement, and as
such, refers to the conclusion of a consumer’s engagement with a particular brand community.
22
The analysis reveals that the consumer engagement process does not follow an orderly,
sequential progression of phases over time. Rather, consumer engagement is an interplay, or
iteration, of relevant sub-processes (cf. Resnick, 2001), which is consistent with the findings
reported by Customer Engagement Strategies, Inc. (2006). Figure 2 thus includes bidirectional
arrows representing the two-way, iterative nature of the consumer engagement concept.
4.3 Consumer engagement sub-processes
The triggers prompting the onset of specific consumer engagement states occur when the
consumer recognizes a need to solve a specific problem or satisfy a want, performs a search,
identifies a specific online community, and begins an interactive relationship with the
community by posting a comment. The triggers lead to the interplay of the five consumer
engagement sub-processes identified in Figure 2.
Learning characterizes the vicarious acquisition of cognitive competencies that consumers
apply to purchase and consumption decision-making. The online community member most
highly engaged through the process of learning posted the following messages:
“B and C, I’m not promoting anything. I’m just at the learning stage.
Thanks B and C. Could you inform those of us still learning about the different ranges
and their proper use? Again, thanks.”
Sharing of personal relevant information, knowledge and experiences through the process of
active contributions to the co-creation of knowledge within the online community, reflects the
behavioral and/or cognitive dimensions of consumer engagement:
23
“There’s not a lot I can add to the debates on this site as I am not a professional or
employed in the industry but as I have 7 months experience of using wbv machines
and learning about them I can add to the discussions, especially when newcomers ask
simple questions.”
“I was shown a great website in the weekend to help people get active and on a
great nutritional plan....It mainly gives you a great aerobic exercise plan tailored
to you, which will work in very well to see results faster when you combine it
with Vibration training for strength training. ... OH AND ITS FREE!! let me
know what you think, my partner and I just signed up.”
Advocating is an expression of consumer engagement, which occurs when consumers actively
recommend specific brands, products/services, organizations, and/or ways of using products or
brands:
“I think that the [brand name] is suitable for you. Very powerful and very
underpriced.”
“This site doesn’t show where people live but If you are looking at that auction, then
maybe you are in X, so I suggest you go to a quality vibration studio ([brand name] is
my preferred one) and see if that works for you. The people there will talk with you
about Vibration training and what you want to achieve.”
24
Socializing denotes two-way, non-functional interactions through which consumers acquire
and/or develop attitudes, norms and/or community language (Longmore, 1998). One of the
interview respondents provided supporting evidence for this contention:
“…because the community had a small number of regular members (10-15), we all have
a feeling of knowing each other.”
Co-developing is a process where consumers contribute to organizations and/or organizational
performance by assisting in the development of new products, services, brands or brand
meanings. The following post illustrates the participant’s active engagement in the development
of a new product, namely a DVD containing the vibration training exercises:
“I’ve mentioned to A some time ago to consider doing a short wbv exercise video with
voice over as it would be so much more like being in a studio with a real instructor.
I’m sure it would make the top 20 and I for one and a lot of others I’m sure would be
definite buyers. Come on D use your influence.”
Further, consumers engaging with the community may contribute to the development of the
online community by virtue of establishing specific rules and/or regulations. Further, consumers
may recruit new community members. Additionally, members may exhibit high levels of
engagement with the specific industry as a whole, and help to develop industry codes and
standards, and monitoring compliance.
4.4 Consumer engagement consequences
25
The analysis identifies a number of outcomes, which may arise as a result of a level of
perceived value co-creation through specific consumer engagement processes. These outcomes
include “consumer loyalty” and “satisfaction,” “consumer empowerment,” “connection,”
“emotional bonding,” “trust” and “commitment.”
Consumer loyalty and satisfaction emerge in a number of ways. Almost all of the participants
expressed their loyalty to the brand and community by recommending and expressing
satisfaction with their preferred brand:
“[…] I believed after all the questions I asked on this forum and comparing many
makes of machine that the [brand name] was the best buy and best value for money.
That and the confidence given me by A and D was the final persuader. Regrets?
Absolutely none!”
“Hey D [...] How is your [brand name] going? The 2 I imported to X are going great.
Couldn’t be happier, with the help of you guys I definitely made the right choice. I’ve
achieved more with body shape in 6 months with wbv than with a year in the gym.”
Consumer empowerment also occurs in a number of ways. For example, a
participant first blogged:
“Some players are falling especially here in (country X). I’ve just heard of one
who had a studio and has now retreated into the corner of a local gym and isn’t
doing well. Others are being forced to rebrand to remove themselves from bad
publicity (or is that to escape from the truth about their machines), others have
26
closed down. Let’s hope the ‘scary’ [the blog] pushes the honest players to
embrace the ‘exciting’ and get ready for the influx!”
An additional post appears eight days later, which states:
“The last of the original [brand name] labelled studios in (country X) has closed
its doors. The public face of this threat to our industry has been wiped out.[…]
[brand name] will still try to promote its product along with its lack of ethics,
and we will encourage people to stand up to them at every turn.”
In an interview with another participant two days later the respondent states:
“If we in the blog write bad reviews about some brand - the company will lose money,
lose profit […] It was when I found this blog and after I was totally involved that I began
thinking about wider and higher things. We can change something through our blog! We
can change the face of the industry! […] I am fighting with my gym, A is fighting with
many more people and companies but mostly with [brand name], and one by one wbv
inch, we are improving this industry.
Connection and emotional bonding also emerge in a number of ways. For example:
“It’s difficult not to become emotional when you receive that sort of connection
from perfect strangers. And you would have to be made of stone not to feel
something. […] I just feel that I want to give others the same sort of help that I
received.”
27
Finally, the analysis identifys trust and commitment as consumer engagement outcomes. The
highly engaged members report their trust in A (an expert), who helps these members by sharing
knowledge and recommending brands in vibration training:
“Thanks a lot A. I will try your options […] Thanks again, because you are the
only person I trust in WBV industry.”
“[…] Someone in these blogs said ‘throw away the poster that comes with the
machine and use A basic positions.’ I’ve accordingly downloaded and printed
both the illustrations and the printed instructions from his site.”
“Back to the Sheep comment, as that’s what my country is famous for. Sheep
follow! So if we consumers are Sheep, then we need trustworthy Shepherds. I’m
going to give praise to A. He’s not the only one worthy of trust but he is the one
that I have met.”
Furthermore, the following participant statement provides an example of the individual’s
commitment to the online community and the industry:
“I am indebted and grateful for their help […] They are altruistic and selfless
people giving freely their time and effort. They wholeheartedly broadcast their
passion all over the ‘community’, to everybody in need. This is why I want to
contribute – with whatever I’m able to. This blog indeed meant a lot to me after
I’ve spent some time involved in it. Now I passionately fight to improve the
industry… And this is but one of the results of my active membership in the
blog.”
5. Discussion
28
5.1 Empirical findings
This pioneering empirical study examines consumer engagement in a virtual brand
community. From the literature five themes emerge, which serve as a basis for a working
definition of consumer engagement in a virtual brand community context. Using netnographic
methodology this study explores the proposed conceptualization. The exploratory research
findings provide strong evidence to support the five underlying themes as the basis for the
proposed working definition.
In particular, the research highlights consumer engagement as an interactive, experiential
process, based on individuals’ engagement with specific objects (e.g. brands, organizations),
and/or other brand community members. This finding provides support for Brodie et al.’s (2011)
fundamental theme addressing the interactive, experiential nature of the engagement concept,
and distinguishes consumer engagement from other relational concepts, including involvement
and participation. The findings highlight consumer engagement as a context-dependent,
psychological state with specific levels of intensity, thus providing exploratory support for
Brodie et al.’s (2011) second theme.
Consumer engagement is an interactive process, which may emerge at different intensity
levels over time reflecting distinct engagement states. This observation provides evidence to
support Brodie et al.’s (2011) third theme, which states that transient engagement states occur
within broader, dynamic, iterative engagement processes. In addition, the research provides
evidence that consumer engagement is a multi-dimensional concept comprising cognitive,
29
emotional and behavioral dimensions, thus supporting the fourth proposed theme of consumer
engagement.
Further, the analysis shows that the consumer engagement process is initiated largely by
consumers’ need for information. Further, the consumer engagement process is highly
interactive, experiential, and based on a number of sub-processes, including “learning,”
“sharing,” “advocating,” “socializing” and “co-developing” (cf. Figure 2). By sharing personal
experiences and influencing others, advocating focal brands, suggesting ways to exercise and/or
improve skills in using the exercise equipment relating to Vibration Training - consumers may
influence value-in-exchange and value-in-use (Lusch and Vargo, 2006; Schau et al., 2009).
Finally, the analysis identifies a number of consequences of the consumer engagement
process, which arise as a result of the perceived co-created value by virtue of the engagement
process. Key consumer engagement consequences include consumer loyalty and satisfaction,
consumer empowerment, connection and emotional bonding, trust and commitment. This
observation provides evidence to support Brodie et al.’s (2011) fifth theme, which states that
consumer engagement plays a central role in the process of relational exchange where other
relational concepts are antecedents and/or consequences in specific, iterative engagement
processes.
5.2 Managerial implications
From a managerial perspective, the research findings demonstrate the importance of
understanding how consumers engage in specific brand communities, and the consequences of
30
this engagement. The research indicates consumer engagement enhances loyalty and satisfaction,
empowerment, connection, emotional bonding, trust and commitment. The study also illustrates
how the level of control over specific brands is shifting within online communities by
highlighting the role of consumer engagement and empowerment in co-creating brand meanings.
Specifically, online communities welcome marketers only if they are contributing to the
community. Thus, businesses need to listen to and “engage in engaging” consumers in brand
communications, which consumers perceive to be “non-commercially driven” (i.e. more
objective), within brand communities. As such, knowledge sharing, educating, and enabling
consumers to co-develop, become important tasks for marketers (Andersen, 2005; Ramaswamy,
2009).
Sawhney et al.’s (2005) and Ramaswamy’s (2009) notion of “engagement platforms”
provides a useful avenue to explore managerial applications of the consumer engagement
concept, as does Payne, Storbacka and Frow’s (2008), and Payne, Storbacka, Frow and Knox’
(2009) recent research on managing the co-creation of value. Further managerial attention needs
to be given to the relationships among relevant variables linked to the consumer engagement
process, including specific engagement antecedents and consequences, and the relative
importance and/or existence of any interactions amongst the dimensions of consumer
engagement. Further, Kumar, Aksoy, Donkers, Venkatesan, Wiesel and Tillmans (2010) extend
the customer value management framework to “Total Customer Engagement Value,” which
represents an important advance in managerial thinking that has implications for managing
online brand communities. Finally, the modeling of the consumer engagement process generates
challenges, which include both the development and dissolution of focal consumer engagement
31
states. Bijmolt, Leeflang, Block, Eisenbeiss, Hardie, and Lemmens (2010) provide an excellent
classification of the models available to analyze these behaviors.
5.3 Limitations and further research
Due to its exploratory nature, this research has a number of limitations, which provide a
platform for the undertaking of further theoretical and empirical research in this emerging area.
At a theoretical level, the roots of consumer engagement lie within the expanded domain of
relationship marketing, and the service-dominant (S-D) logic. However, further theoretical
research needs to integrate other relevant theoretical perspectives within this emerging
viewpoint. For example, the linkages between the service perspective and consumer culture
theory (CCT) provide an important avenue for research (Cova and Salle, 2008). Further, relevant
links with other, consumer behavior theories that address individual and/or social identity
(Kozinets, 1999) are also important within this emerging integrative perspective.
This exploratory study is based on a relatively small online community, which comprises six
members forming the core “highly engaged” respondent base. While the research offers initial
insight into the nature of consumer engagement within a virtual brand community, further
research needs to incorporate studies examining larger online groups across different product
categories, and/or drawing on larger samples of consumers. Specifically, the adoption of this
approach will lead to more generalizable findings.
The role of focal engagement platforms, employee interactions and the co-creation of value
are also important areas warranting further research (Ramaswamy, 2009). Further, the dyadic
32
and/or networked aspects of engagement within specific consumer-to-consumer (C2C)
interactions, consumer-to-business (C2B), business-to-business (B2B), and business-to-
consumer (B2C) interactions (Kothandaraman and Wilson, 2001; Forsström, 2004) merit further
attention. Also, the specific interactive experiences between consumers, business, government
and/or other agencies merit further scrutiny. Given the complexity of this emerging research area
in the marketing discipline, future empirical research employing a pluralistic approach,
integrating the use of interpretative and quantitative methods, is appropriate.
Further research also needs to pay attention to the specific roles of different engagement
objects. While the brand and the associated community have been important objects of
engagement in this research, other types of engagement objects may be equally important,
including the roles of specific people, organizations and/or institutions. Consumer engagement
takes place within broader intra- and extra-organizational networks, and as such, generates a
need for future work on consumer engagement in network settings. Additionally, the dynamic
nature of focal consumer engagement processes and/or sub-processes, including examinations of
focal consumer engagement antecedents and consequences, and/or the iterative, cyclical nature
of such processes requires further attention. Van Doorn et al.’s (2010) theoretical model, which
links customer engagement behaviors to specific customer-, firm- and contextual antecedents and
consequences, provides a useful framework to guide future research in this area.
Issues also exist with regard to the extent that organizations are able to manage, or influence,
focal consumer engagement processes, and the extent that these are self-managing. Related to
this discussion, the application of concept of “customer brand equity” (Keller, 1993) to online
33
brand communities appears important (Central to this discussion is the extent to which specific
social networks co-create value; Schau et al., 2009; Mertz, He and Vargo, 2009). Further
research may also wish to investigate the managerial applicability, within specific online
environments, of Sawhney et al.’s (2005) and Ramaswamy’s (2009) notion of “engagement
platforms.” Furthermore, Kumar et al.’s (2010) concept of “Total Engagement Value” and
specific models available to analyze these behaviors (e.g. Bijmolt et al., 2010) require further
research.
Finally, virtual communities are becoming increasingly prevalent. However, this virtual
community prevalence does not imply the substitution of online, for offline, activity (Ward,
1999). Thus, there is the need for ccomparative research, which focuses both on consumer
engagement in offline, “physical world,” and in online “virtual” settings.
34
References
Algesheimer R. Dholakia U.M. Hermann A. The social influence of brand community: evidence
from European car clubs. Journal of Marketing 2005; 69 (July): 19-34.
Andersen PH. Relationship marketing and brand involvement of professionals through web-
enhanced brand communities: The case of Coloplast. Industrial Marketing Management
2005; 34 (1): 39-51.
Appelbaum A. The constant consumer. Gallup Management Journal 2001; Available at
http://gmj.gallup.com/content/745/Constant-Customer.aspx [Accessed 24 May 2010].
Ashley C, Noble SM, Donthu N, Lemon K. Why customers won't relate: Obstacles to
relationship marketing engagement. Journal of Business Research 2011; 64, 749-756.
Bijmolt, THA, Leeflang Peter SH, Block F, Eisenbeiss M, Hardie BGS and Lemmens A.
Analytics for Customer Engagement. Journal of Service Research 2010; 13 (3): 341-356.
Bowden JLH. The process of customer engagement: a conceptual framework. Journal of
Marketing Theory and Practice 2009a; 17(1): 63-74.
Bowden JLH. Customer engagement: A framework for assessing customer-brand relationships:
the case of the restaurant industry. Journal of Hospitality Marketing and Management
2009b; 18 (6): 574-596.
Brodie RJ, Hollebeek L, Juric B, Ilic A. Customer engagement: conceptual domain, fundamental
propositions and implications for research. Journal of Service Research 2011;
Forthcoming (November).
Bryman A, Bell E. Business research methods. Oxford University Press, 2nd edition, 2007.
35
Casalo L, Flavian C, Guinaliu M. The impact of participation in virtual brand communities on
consumer trust and loyalty: The case of free software. Online Information Review 2007;
34 (6): 775-792.
Chan KW, Li SY. Understanding consumer-to-consumer interactions in virtual communities:
The salience of reciprocity. Journal of Business Research 2010; 63: 1033-1040.
Chatterjee P. Online reviews: Do consumers use them? In: Gilly, M.C. Myers-Levy, J. (Eds.).
Provo, UT: Advances in Consumer Research 2001; 28.
Chevalier JA, Mayzlin D. The effect of word-of-mouth on sales: Online book reviews. Journal of
Marketing Research 2006; 43 (August): 345-354.
Cova B, Pace S. Brand community of convenience products: New forms of customer
empowerment - The case "My Nutella" community. European Journal of Marketing
2006; 40 (9/10): 1087-1105.
Cova B, Salle R. Marketing solutions in accordance with the S-D logic: Co-creating value with
customer network actors. Industrial Marketing Management 2008; 37: 270-277
Customer Engagement Strategies Inc. (2006). Available at http/www.customerengagement.com/
[Accessed 31 March 2010].
de Chernatony L, Christodoulides G. Taking the brand promise online: challenges and
opportunities. Interactive Marketing 2004; 5(3): 238-251.
De Valck K, Van Bruggen G, Wierenga B. Virtual communities: A marketing perspective.
Decision Support Systems 2009; 47: 185-203.
Figallo C. Hosting Web Communities: Building Relationships, Increasing Customer Loyalty,
and Maintaining a Competitive Edge, New York: John Wiley & Sons, 1998.
36
Forsström B. Value co-creation in industrial buyer-seller partnerships: creating and exploiting
interdependencies. 20th IMP Conference 2004: Copenhagen, Available at
http://www.impgroup.org/uploads/dissertations/dissertion_19.pdf [Accessed 3 May
2010].
Füller J, Mühlbacher H, Matzler K, Jawecki G. Consumer empowerment through Internet-based
co-creation. Journal of Management Information Systems 2009; 26 (3): 71-102.
Gruen TW, Osmonbekov T, Czaplewski AJ. EWOM: The impact of customer-to-customer
online know-how exchange on customer value and loyalty. Journal of Business Research
2006; 59 (4): 449-456.
Hennig-Thurau T, Walsh G. Electronic word-of-mouth: Motives for and consequences of
reading customer articulations on the Internet. International Journal of Electronic
Commerce 2004a; 8 (2): 51-74.
Hennig-Thurau T, Gwinner KP, Walsh G Gremler D.D. Electronic word-of-mouth via consumer
opinion platforms: What motivates consumers to articulate themselves on the Internet?.
Journal of Interactive Marketing 2004b; 18 (1): 38-52.
Hoffman DL, Novak TP. Marketing in hypermedia computer-mediated environments:
conceptual foundations. Journal of Marketing 1996; 60 (July): 50-68.
Hollebeek LD. Demystifying customer brand engagement: Exploring the loyalty nexus. Journal
of Marketing Management 2011; Forthcoming, DOI: 10.1080/0267257X.2010.500132.
Keller KL. Conceptualizing, measuring, and managing customer-based brand equity’, Journal of
Marketing 1993; 57(1): 1–22.
Kothandaraman P, Wilson DT. The future of competition value-creating networks. Industrial
Marketing Management 2001; 30 (4): 379-389.
37
Kozinets RV. I want to believe: A netnography of the X-Files subculture of consumption.
Advances in Consumer Research 1997.
Kozinets RV. E-tribalized marketing?: The strategic implications of virtual communities of
consumption. European Management Journal 1999; 17(3): 252-264.
Kozinets RV. The field behind the screen: Using netnography for marketing research in online
communities, Journal of Marketing Research 2002; 39 (February): 61-72.
Kumar V, Aksoy L, Donkers B, Venkatesan R, Wiesel T, Tillmans S. Undervalued or
overvalued customers: capturing total customer engagement value. Journal of Service
Research, 2010; 13(3): 297-310.
Lincoln YS, Guba EG. Naturalistic enquiry. Beverly Hills: Sage Publications, 1985.
Longmore MA. Symbolic interactionism and the study of sexuality. The Journal of Sex Research
1998; 35 (1): 44-58.
Lusch RF, Vargo SL. The service-dominant logic of marketing: Reactions, reflections, and
refinements. Marketing Theory 2010; 6 (3): 281–288.
Lusch RF. Vargo SL. S-D logic: Accommodating, integrating, transdisciplinary, Grand Service
Challenge, University of Cambridge, 2010; September 23.
Mathwick C, Wiertz C, de Ruyter K. Social capital production in a virtual P3 community.
Journal of Consumer Research 2008; 34 (April): 832-849.
Mertz MA, He Y, Vargo SL. The evolving brand logic: a service-dominant perspective, Journal
of the Academy of Marketing Science 2009; 37 (3): 328-44.
Mollen A, Wilson H. Engagement, telepresence and interactivity in online consumer experience:
Reconciling scholastic and managerial perspectives. Journal of Business Research 2010;
63: 919-925.
38
Morgan RM, Hunt S. The commitment-trust theory of relationship marketing. Journal of
Marketing 1994; 58 (3): 20-38.
MSI - Marketing Science Institute. 2010-2012 Research Priorities. 2010; Available at
http://www.msi.org/pdf/MSI_RP10-12.pdf [Accessed 16 May 2010].
Muñiz AM, Jr., O'Guinn TC, Brand community. Journal of Consumer Research 2001; 27 (4):
412-432.
Muñiz AM Jr., Schau HJ. Religiosity in the abandoned Apple Newton brand community. Journal
of Consumer Research 2005; 31 (March): 737-747.
Muñiz AM Jr., Schau HJ. A tale of tales: the Apple Newton narratives. Journal of Strategic
Marketing 2006; 14 (March): 19-33.
Nambisan S, Baron RA. Interactions in virtual customer environments: implications for product
support and customer relationship management. Journal of Interactive Marketing 2007;
21 (2): 42-62.
Neff J, OMD proves the power of engagement. Advertising Age 2007; 78, Available at
http://www.fipp.com/News.aspx?PageIndex=2002&ItemId=13735 [Accessed 17 May
2010].
Nolan T, Brizland R, Macaulay L. Individual trust and development of online business
communities. Information Technology & People 2007; 20 (1): 53-71.
Oldenburg R. The Great Good Place: Cafes, Coffee Shops, Bookstores, Bars, Hair Salons, and
Other Hangouts at the Heart of the Community, 3rd ed. New York: Marlowe & Company,
1999.
39
Patterson P, Yu T, de Ruyter K. Understanding Customer Engagement in Services. Advancing
Theory, Maintaining Relevance, Proceedings of ANZMAC 2006 Conference, Brisbane,
4-6 December.
Pham MT, Avnet T. Rethinking regulatory engagement theory. Journal of Consumer
Psychology, 2009; 19: 115-123.
Porter CE, Donthu N. Cultivating trust and harvesting value in virtual communities.
Management Science 2008; 54 (1): 113-128.
Payne A, Storbacka K, Frow P. Managing the co-creation of value. Journal of the Academy of
Marketing Science 2008; 36 (1), 83-96.
Payne A, Storbacka K, Frow P. Knox S. Co-creation: Diagnosing the brand relationship
experience. Journal of Business Research 2009; 62 (3), 379-389.
Prahalad CK, Ramaswamy V. Co-creating unique value with customers. Strategy & Leadership
2004a; 32 (3): 4-9.
Prahalad CK, Ramaswamy V. Co-creation experiences: The next practice in value creation.
Journal of Interactive Marketing 2004b; 18 (3): 5-14.
Ramaswamy V. Leading the transformation to co-creation of value. Strategy & Leadership 2009;
37 (2): 32 -37.
Resnick E. Defining engagement. Journal of International Affairs 2001; 54 (2): 551-566.
Richins ML, Bloch PH. Post-purchase satisfaction: incorporating the effects of involvement and
time. Journal of Business Research 1991; 23: 145-158.
Sawhney M, Verona G, Prandelli E. Collaborating to create: The Internet as a platform for
customer engagement in product innovation. Journal of Interactive Marketing 2005; 19
(4): 4-17.
40
Schau HJ, Muñiz AM Jr., Arnould EJ. How brand community practices create value. Journal of
Marketing 2009; 73 (September): 30-51.
Schouten JW, McAlexander JH, Koenig HF. Transcendent Customer experience and brand
community. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 2007; 35 (3): 357-368.
Sedley R. Six theses on digital customer engagement in a troubled economy. 2008. Available at
http://richard-sedley.iuplog.com/default.asp?item=298747 [Accessed 21 February 2010].
Thomsen SR, Straubhaar JD, Bolyard DM. Ethnomethodology and the study of online
communities: exploring the cyber streets. Information Research 1998; 4 (1): Available at
http://informationr.net/ir/4-1/paper50.html?ref=BenimShopum.com [Accessed 30 April
2010].
Van Doorn J, Lemon KE, Mittal V, Naβ S, Pick D, Pirner P, Verhoef PC. Customer engagement
behavior: Theoretical foundations and research directions. Journal of Service Research
2010; 13 (3): 253-266.
Vargo SL. Toward a transcending conceptualization of relationship: A service-dominant logic
perspective. Journal of Business and Industrial Marketing 2009; 24 (5/6): 373-379.
Vargo SL, Lusch RF. Evolving to a new dominant logic for marketing. Journal of Marketing
2004; 68 (1): 1-17.
Vargo SL, Lusch RF. Service-dominant logic: continuing the evolution. Journal of the Academy
of Marketing Science 2008; 36: 1-10.
Vivek SD. A Scale of Consumer Engagement. Doctor of Philosophy Dissertation, Department of
Management & Marketing, Graduate School - The University of Alabama, 2009. UMI
Microform 3369775.
41
Vivek SD, Beatty SE. Morgan RM. Consumer engagement: Exploring customer relationships
beyond purchase. Working paper under review for Marketing Theory and Practice.
Voyles B. Beyond loyalty: meeting the challenge of customer engagement, Economist
Intelligence Unit 2007. Available at http://www.adobe.com/engagement/pdfs/partI.pdf
[Accessed 31 January 2010].
Ward KJ. The cyber-ethnographic (re)construction of two feminist online communities.
Sociological Research Online 1999; 4 (1): Available at
http://www.socresonline.org.uk/socresonline/4/1/ward.html [Accessed 20 February
2010].
Wiertz C, de Ruyter K. Beyond the call of duty: why consumers contribute to firm-hosted
commercial online communities. Organization Studies 2007; 28 (3): 347-376.
Zimmerman MA, Warschausky S. Empowerment theory for rehabilitation research: conceptual
and methodological issues. Rehabilitation Psychology 1998; 43 (1): 3-16.
42
Figure 1: Consumer engagement and objects in a virtual brand community
43
Figure 2: Consumer engagement process in a virtual brand community
Sharing
Co-developing
SocialisingAdvocating
Learning
Consumer Engagement Sub Process
Diplomacy
Disengagement
Loyalty &
Satisfaction
Empowerment
Connection &
Emotional Bonds
Trust &
Commitment
Triggers
initiating
engagement
44
Table 1: Details about participation of six highly engaged consumers
a. Length of blog posts (comments)
Participant
Number
Number of words
Average length
comments (b)/(a)
A
177
33,744
191
B
85
5,118
60
C
60
5,652
94
D
51
5,549
109
E
27
2,212
82
F
27
4,529
168
Total
427
56,804
117
b. Participation intervals
Participant
Initial post
Final post
Number of days
A
17 March 2007
19 February 2008
332
B
19 October 2006
19 August 2007
300
C
20 September 2006
4 May 2007
224
D
29 July 2007
4 December 2007
125
E
30 July 2007
25 December 2007
145
F
26 December 2006
7 February 2007
41
