Explaining the emergence of hedonic motivations in enterprise social networks and their impact on sustainable user engagement: A four-drive perspective

Abstract

Purpose: Enterprise social networks (ESNs) in organizations have become an increasingly important technology to support the exchange of information and knowledge. Many ESN projects fail due to insufficient engagement in the long run, leading to the high risk of sunk costs. The purpose of this paper is to investigate how hedonic motivations, along with normative motivations, play an important role in determining an employee's intention to continuously participate in ESN. Based on the Four-Drive Model and hence borrowing from behavioral economics, it is investigated how such hedonic motivations emerge in organizational ESNs.

Design/methodology/approach: This study is set within the context of a global enterprise of the logistics and courier industry. The authors first derived hypotheses from the Four-Drive Model to build the research model on the emergence of hedonic motivation. Then, the authors derived hypotheses from existing adoption literature regarding the impact of hedonic motivations and normative motivations on ESN use continuance. Following, a quantitative survey was conducted to test these hypotheses. In the study, structural equation modeling is applied, based on partial least squares.

Findings: The results show that the extent to which an ESN supports the drives to comprehend, acquire, bond and defend starkly influences an employee's hedonic motivations. In addition, it is shown that hedonic motivations have a much stronger influence on use continuance than normative motivations.

Originality/value: Research on hedonic motivations in the work context is still underrepresented, in management science as well as information systems (IS) research. Hence, theoretical approaches to explain and predict the emergence of hedonic motivations in IS usage are missing. With the study, the authors will close this theoretical gap. The study contributes to IS research not only by evaluating the role of hedonic motivation for ESN usage, but also by providing an approach to explain key drivers behind it. To the best of the authors' knowledge, this is the first study to empirically test the Four-Drive Model in a voluntary IS context, adding valuable knowledge about human behaviors in digital work environments.

Full text

Journal of Enterprise Information Management
Explaining the emergence of hedonic motivations in enterprise social networks
and their impact on sustainable user engagement: A four-drive perspective
Christian Meske, Iris Junglas, Stefan Stieglitz,
Article information:
To cite this document:
Christian Meske, Iris Junglas, Stefan Stieglitz, (2019) "Explaining the emergence of hedonic
motivations in enterprise social networks and their impact on sustainable user engagement: A four-
drive perspective", Journal of Enterprise Information Management, Vol. 32 Issue: 3, pp.436-456,
https://doi.org/10.1108/JEIM-08-2018-0177
Permanent link to this document:
https://doi.org/10.1108/JEIM-08-2018-0177
Downloaded on: 21 May 2019, At: 01:46 (PT)
References: this document contains references to 114 other documents.
To copy this document: permissions@emeraldinsight.com
Access to this document was granted through an Emerald subscription provided by
Token:Eprints:KK8B6PM3B6YHNK5SEVSH:
For Authors
If you would like to write for this, or any other Emerald publication, then please use our Emerald
for Authors service information about how to choose which publication to write for and submission
guidelines are available for all. Please visit www.emeraldinsight.com/authors for more information.
About Emerald www.emeraldinsight.com
Emerald is a global publisher linking research and practice to the benefit of society. The company
manages a portfolio of more than 290 journals and over 2,350 books and book series volumes, as
well as providing an extensive range of online products and additional customer resources and
services.
Emerald is both COUNTER 4 and TRANSFER compliant. The organization is a partner of the
Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) and also works with Portico and the LOCKSS initiative for
digital archive preservation.
*Related content and download information correct at time of download.
Downloaded by 88.128.80.48 At 01:46 21 May 2019 (PT)

Explaining the emergence of
hedonic motivations in enterprise
social networks and their impact
on sustainable user engagement
A four-drive perspective
Christian Meske
Department of Information Systems,
Freie Universität Berlin and Einstein Center Digital Future, Berlin, Germany
Iris Junglas
Department of Business Analytics, Information Systems and Supply Chain,
Florida State University, Tallahassee, Florida, USA, and
Stefan Stieglitz
Department of Computer Science and Applied Cognitive Science,
University of Duisburg-Essen, Duisburg, Germany
Abstract
Purpose –Enterprise social networks (ESNs) in organizations have become an increasingly important
technology to support the exchange of information and knowledge. Many ESN projects fail due to insufficient
engagement in the long run, leading to the high risk of sunk costs. The purpose of this paper is to investigate
how hedonic motivations, along with normative motivations, play an important role in determining an
employee’s intention to continuously participate in ESN. Based on the Four-Drive Model and hence borrowing
from behavioral economics, it is investigated how such hedonic motivations emerge in organizational ESNs.
Design/methodology/approach –This study is set within the context of a global enterprise of the logistics
and courier industry. The authors first derived hypotheses from the Four-Drive Model to build the research
model on the emergence of hedonic motivation. Then, the authors derived hypotheses from existing adoption
literature regarding the impact of hedonic motivations and normative motivations on ESN use continuance.
Following, a quantitative survey was conducted to test these hypotheses. In the study, structural equation
modeling is applied, based on partial least squares.
Findings –The results show that the extent to which an ESN supports the drives to comprehend, acquire,
bond and defend starkly influences an employee’s hedonic motivations. In addition, it is shown that hedonic
motivations have a much stronger influence on use continuance than normative motivations.
Originality/value –Research on hedonic motivations in the work context is still underrepresented, in
management science as well as information systems (IS) research. Hence, theoretical approaches to explain
and predict the emergence of hedonic motivations in IS usage are missing. With the study, the authors will
close this theoretical gap. The study contributes to IS research not only by evaluating the role of hedonic
motivation for ESN usage, but also by providing an approach to explain key drivers behind it. To the best of
the authors’knowledge, this is the first study to empirically test the Four-Drive Model in a voluntary IS
context, adding valuable knowledge about human behaviors in digital work environments.
Keywords Workplace, Technology acceptance, Enterprise social network, Enjoyment,
Hedonic motivation, Social influence
Paper type Research paper
1. Introduction
As public social media like Facebook and Twitter grew in popularity (Larosiliere et al., 2017), so
too have enterprise social media (Akoumianakis and Ktistakis, 2017; Karasti et al., 2018; Li,
Tung and Chang, 2015; Li, Guo, Chen and Luo, 2015; Limaj et al., 2016; Meske and Amojo, 2018;
Tan and Kim, 2015). Set within the boundaries of an organization, especially enterprise social
Journal of Enterprise Information
Management
Vol. 32 No. 3, 2019
pp. 436-456
© Emerald Publishing Limited
1741-0398
DOI 10.1108/JEIM-08-2018-0177
Received 15 August 2018
Revised 24 December 2018
11 January 2019
Accepted 22 January 2019
The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available on Emerald Insight at:
www.emeraldinsight.com/1741-0398.htm
436
JEIM
32,3
Downloaded by 88.128.80.48 At 01:46 21 May 2019 (PT)

networks (ESNs), such as Yammer, IBM Connections, Jive, Slack, Chatter, Socialcast or Tibbr,
provide employees with the ability to connect with fellow employees, ask questions, share news
or promote best practices –irrespective of roles, business units or geographies (Riemer et al.,
2015). Just like their counterpart in the personal space, ESNs are said to change how individuals
nurture relationships, communicate in the workplace and, similar to corporate wikis, for
example, ESNs provide a unique opportunity to build digital repositories with searchable
content (Riemer et al., 2015). They are often used to supplement ongoing corporate knowledge
management (Newell, 2015; Mäntymäki and Riemer, 2016) and internal crowdsourcing
initiatives (Zuchowski et al., 2016; Sharma and Bhatnagar, 2016) or to reduce the amount of
e-mail traffic that gets stuck in individual inboxes (Argyris and Ransbotham, 2016).
ESNs are also found to bypass organizational structures and even flatten organizational
hierarchies (Stieglitz et al.,2014;Riemeret al., 2015). They are said to lead to enterprise-wide
transformations (Kumar et al., 2016) that rewrite hierarchical communication structures. For
example, employees of a US-based restaurant chain used Yammer and communicated
internally that a newly introduced item on the menu was getting slammed by customers
(Li, 2015). The posted reviews found their way into the test kitchen and to the company’s
executives. Within a month, the problem was resolved –something that would have taken
more than a year with traditional means and communication lines (Li, 2015). Another
organization reported that their US-based CIO chats with help desk employees in Malaysia with
the help of ESN (Hackmann, 2013). A third organization discovered via ESN that two managers
in two distinct geographical areas were targeting the same client (Stieglitz et al., 2013).
However, employees have to make a conscious decision to participate in ESN. As
previous literature shows that ESNs are usually not mandated by the organization (e.g. Han
et al., 2016; Hanna et al., 2017; Aboelmaged, 2018), their usage is at the volition of the
employee who is either motivated or demotivated to do so. Those who are motivated often
spend both work and personal hours using and contributing to the network. While literature
has identified heightened social capital (Ellison et al., 2015; Leonardi, 2015) or advanced
innovative strength (Martins et al., 2016) as organizational advantages, it still remains
unclear what motivates individual employees in such organizations to continue using ESN,
particularly when no monetary reward can be gained. Therefore, investigating the needs of
employees is an important step to better understand the organizational and IT value
compatibility of innovations such as ESN.
This paper focuses on the role of hedonic and normative motivations in the context of
voluntary ESN usage and provides an overarching understanding of factors that drive
employees to continuously participate. More specifically, this study is interested in
understanding the parameters that have to be in place for an ESN to cause enjoyable
experiences in the workplace so that employees continue revisiting it, which is still
underrepresented in science but has an important impact on the employees’well-being.
The study is set within the organizational context of a global company where Yammer
has been successfully adopted by over 40,000 employees, despite the fact that its usage was
neither mandated nor rewarded and no use cases were defined by management. It is
demonstrated, how hedonic motivations along with normative motivations play a
significant role in determining employee intentions to participate and to continue the usage
of ESN. Borrowing from behavioral economics it is demonstrated how hedonic motivations
in the organizational context can emerge. Based on the Four-Drive Model of Lawrence and
Nohria (2002), both professors from Harvard Business School, we will be able to show that it
is important for information systems (IS) to support the following four human drives to elicit
enjoyment: the drive to acquire, the drive to bond, the drive to comprehend and the drive to
defend. With these findings, the study provides a new and comprehensive perspective on
drivers of hedonic motivation, which improve our understanding of human behaviors in
digital work environments.
437
Four-drive
perspective
Downloaded by 88.128.80.48 At 01:46 21 May 2019 (PT)

This paper is structured as follows. To develop the research model and derive the relevant
hypotheses, the theoretical background and related work on human motivation in knowledge-
intensive work environments is provided, followed by the introduction of the Four-Drive
Model of Lawrence and Nohria (2002) to explain the emergence of hedonic motivation.
Afterwards, the research design is explained, including information about the case company,
data collection and measurement instruments. Then, the results of the measurement model
analysis and research model analysis will be shown. The findings and their implications will
be discussed, followed by the conclusion and suggestions for further research.
2. Normative and hedonic motivations to use enterprise social networks
According to traditional management theories, and as reflected in the term homo
economicus, humans are rational beings (Brzezicka and Wisniewski, 2014). They are
primarily interested in their own benefit and in maximizing materialistic values (Brzezicka
and Wisniewski, 2014). They are also believed to decide and function with only few
emotional needs. However, a gradual change has taken place in management education that
shifted perspectives from a mainly mechanistic to a more humanistic one (Pirson and
Lawrence, 2010), distancing itself from a fictional homo economicus and seeking to uncover
the real “conditio humana”(Dierksmeier, 2015). This shift in perspectives also seems to be
apparent in IS research. Aspects, such as fun and pleasure, were not part of the originally
specified IS adoption model, including the technology adoption model (TAM) (Davis, 1989)
or the unified theory of acceptance and use of technology (UTAUT) (Venkatesh et al., 2003);
only later were they added, for example, to TAM 3 (Venkatesh and Bala, 2008) or UTAUT 2
(Venkatesh et al., 2012). The fact that experienced or expected pleasure was not part of the
originally specified models is not surprising as IS in work contexts were almost exclusively
mandated, and hedonic motivations were viewed as insignificant for predicting human
behavior (Brown et al., 2002). With the commoditization of IT, however, users have a choice
over which IT tool to use in the workplace. The premise of a mandate is no longer applicable.
Research in educational psychology has shown that inherent motivational factors, such
as enjoyment, play a crucial role for a sustainable engagement in knowledge-intensive
environments (Deci, 1971; Deci and Ryan, 1985; Ryan and Deci, 2000; Jena and Pradhan,
2018). Our study is based on this perspective and follows recent studies in the field of
organizational knowledge management. While those studies distinguish between
normative, hedonic and incentive-driven extrinsic motivations (Lam and Lambermont-
Ford, 2010), our paper solely focuses on the role of normative and hedonic motivations and
excludes extrinsic motivations, as in previous research there can no indication be found that
the use of ESN would be incentivized, for instance, via monetary rewards (e.g. Stieglitz et al.,
2014; Riemer et al., 2015; Han et al., 2016; Hanna et al., 2017; Aboelmaged, 2018).
Research on the impact of hedonic motivations on IS usage has mostly been conducted in
non-work contexts. An overarching explanation of how hedonic motivation can emerge in
work environments is hence missing. Only a few studies have investigated potential
antecedents of hedonic motivations, which include, for example, job autonomy (Ke et al.,
2012), information quality (Li, Tung and Chang, 2015; Li, Guo, Chen and Luo, 2015) or
perceived ease of use (van der Heijden, 2004). Perceived usefulness can also lead to a state of
satisfaction that influences an individual’s attitude and intentions to continue using an IS
(Bhattacherjee and Premkumar, 2004; Premkumar et al., 2008; Lowry et al., 2015). However,
an overarching theory on the emergence of IS-induced hedonic motivations is still missing.
To fill this gap, a research model will be provided that is based on the assumption that
employees have specific innate needs, whose fulfillment through the support of IS can cause
enjoyment, resulting in continued IS usage. In the following, such needs, or “drivers”
(Lawrence and Nohria, 2002), and their potential role for the emergence of hedonic
motivation are described in detail.
438
JEIM
32,3
Downloaded by 88.128.80.48 At 01:46 21 May 2019 (PT)

2.1 Antecedents of hedonic motivations: a four-drive perspective
Across the management, psychology and IS literature, there is no generally accepted
comprehensive model capturing what motivates human behavior. Hull (1943) stated that all
motivation is driven by physiological needs (also known as primary reinforcers) like food and
reproduction. This “homeostasis”-based approach influenced other theories, such as the
hierarchical pyramid of human needs (Maslow, 1943), which additionally includes an
individual’s need for safety, love and belonging, esteem, as well as self-actualization. Bandura
(1977) focused on an individual’s ability and introduced the construct “self-efficacy,”which
refers to an individual’s trust in his/her own capabilities to perform well. Deci and Ryan (1985)
stated that in learning contexts, for example, students have the tendency to strive for
autonomy, competence and relatedness, i.e., social relationships, in their actions.
Recently, scholars have used the principles of behavioral economics to construct a
behavioral model of human nature (Kenrick et al., 2003; Kock, 2004, 2009; Tooby et al., 2006;
Kock and Moqbel, 2016; Dai et al., 2015). A particular instantiation of such a motivational
model is the Four-Drive Model, postulating that human behavior in the workplace is
motivated to a greater or lesser extent by the drives to acquire, bond, comprehend and
defend (Lawrence and Nohria, 2002). The Four-Drive Model clusters mechanisms into a set
of four drives, based on what the mechanism seeks to satisfy (Abraham et al., 2016).
Lawrence and Nohria (2002) from Harvard Business School, specializing in behavioral
economics as well as organizational behavior, state that these generic drives evolved in
order to solve ancient adaptive problems and provide a stable influence for human behavior.
In consequence, these drives do not change over time (Abraham et al., 2013). The model was
built upon on a series of case study observations in organizational contexts (Lawrence and
Nohria, 2002).
In the IS domain, the Four-Drive Model has been introduced through qualitative studies,
discussing its potential role in technology acceptance research (Abraham et al., 2013), as well
as a study trying to explain IS usage for energy reduction (Malhotra et al., 2013). Most
recently, a study applied the Four-Drive Model to explain the continued usage of an IS
despite its unfavorable perception about its usefulness and ease of use (Abraham et al.,
2016). While these studies are vital, they are qualitative in nature. This study is set out to
apply the first quantitative and predictive approach in this context.
The drive to acquire captures an individual’s desire to procure significant amounts of
resources (Lawrence and Nohria, 2002). While some resources, such as food or housing, are
rather life-sustaining, others might entail an individuals’desire for tangible goods, such as
money, or intangible goods, such as travel experiences (Abraham et al., 2013). In the
organizational context, this drive is reflected in the level of competence an individual wants
to reach, the promotion he/she wants to achieve, or the professional image or status he/she
wants to portray (Abraham et al., 2016).
As individuals, we feel enjoyment when this drive is fulfilled, and we do feel the opposite
when it is not. The drive to acquire also explains why we want to advance in our
professional career, build our resumes, fall up the corporate ladder or make more money
with every new job (Lawrence and Nohria, 2002). Particularly, in our attempt to accomplish
and to perform well at work, the drive to acquire becomes most obvious, which is in line with
findings of traditional IS adoption literature (Venkatesh et al., 2016). ESN can help with that.
ESNs provide an outlet where employees are able to portray themselves and their skill set
(Kügler et al., 2015). Even though an individual’s accomplishments might be externally
triggered, its effect is often internalized via a so-called “crowding-in”effect (Amabile, 1997;
Frey and Jegen, 2001). Through this effect, an individual, triggered by external sources,
might seek to achieve some organizational goals put in front of him/her. Based on the actual
accomplishment of those goals, he/she might form, among other things, higher levels of
self-esteem, as shown, for example, by Lam and Lambermont-Ford (2010). As a result,
439
Four-drive
perspective
Downloaded by 88.128.80.48 At 01:46 21 May 2019 (PT)

accomplishments can be internalized and may lead to heightened levels of pleasure (Lam
and Lambermont-Ford, 2010). It is therefore postulated:
H1. The extent to which an ESN supports the drive to acquire is positively correlated
with an employee’s hedonic motivation to use it.
The drive to bond captures an individual’s desire to form long-term relationships that are
mutually caring (Lawrence and Nohria, 2002). In our personal lives, we feel commitment and
pleasure when this drive is fulfilled; in our professional lives, we experience ourselves as a
valued member of the “organizational family”(Lawrence and Nohria, 2002). In contrast, if
the drive is not fulfilled, we experience loneliness and abandonment; we are unsatisfied and
demotivated. In the organizational context, the drive to bond explains why individuals view
work as their family (Gheorghiţa, 2014) and lose morale if the organization lets them down.
The existence of social relationships, or social presence (Hanna et al., 2017), is of highest
importance to make private and work life livable. ESNs support this aspect by providing a
platform that allows easy connections with peers across the entire organization. ESNs
transcend physical and even hierarchical boundaries by allowing employees to
communicate in an ad hoc and easy-to-do manner (Riemer et al., 2015). It is therefore stated:
H2. The extent to which an ESN supports the drive to bond is positively correlated with
an employee’s hedonic motivation to use it.
The drive to comprehend captures an individual’s desire to understand the world around us
and to make sense of it (Lawrence and Nohria, 2002), which has also intersections to
learning and dynamic capabilities of organizations (Eze and Chinedu-Eze, 2018). An
individual is interested in collecting information as to assess a situation, understand its
context and propose hypotheses about how things work. In other words, the drive to
comprehend is about one’s desire to learn and understand. It is fulfilled, if our curiosity is
appeased; if not, our life is perceived as senseless (Lawrence and Nohria, 2002). In the
organizational context, it explains why individuals seek out roles that allow them to learn
and grow as part of their respective career path, and why individuals are demotivated when
their job is void of new challenges or learning opportunities (Abraham et al., 2013). ESNs
provide an outlet for employees to learn from others who are not part of their immediate
work group (Choudrie and Zamani, 2016). Employees might learn about challenges that
others face in their respective work groups; they might learn about challenges that might
have an indirect, or even direct, impact for their own work (Engler and Alpar, 2017).
In consequence, ESNs allow employees to be better informed above and beyond what is
communicated by the company’s executives via traditional means. It is therefore stated:
H3. The extent to which an ESN supports the drive to comprehend is positively
correlated with an employee’s hedonic motivation to use it.
The drive to defend captures an individual’s desire to protect oneself and the ones dearest to
him or her from the outside world (Lawrence and Nohria, 2002). It also captures an
individual’s desire to defend his/her accumulated possessions, accomplishments, as well as
ideas and beliefs. The drive to defend is fulfilled if an individual experiences security, lives
in an environment that is void of threats and promotes justice instead (Abraham et al., 2013).
If the drive is not supported, an individual lives in constant anxiety and agony (Abraham
et al., 2016).
In the organizational context, the drive to defend explains why employees are often
resistant to change. In order to appease the drive to defend, employees seek out situations
and contexts that they are accustomed to and people that they feel comfortable with and
trust. The latter includes finding similarities between them and others. Employees hope that
others behave in a similar fashion and are willing to share personal information the same
440
JEIM
32,3
Downloaded by 88.128.80.48 At 01:46 21 May 2019 (PT)

way they do (Panahifar et al., 2018). ESNs help in identifying similarities among employees.
They can also help to establish cross-hierarchical alliances with colleagues to protect their
standing in the community (Riemer et al., 2015). Hence, ESNs provide an outlet for leveling
the playing field and create an atmosphere of stability. It is therefore stated:
H4. The extent to which an ESN supports the drive to defend is positively correlated
with an employee’s hedonic motivation to use it.
2.2 Normative and hedonic motivations to use enterprise social networks
Studies have shown that normative motivations play a significant role in activating the
intentions of an individual to use a technology (Ke et al., 2012; Junglas et al., 2013; Salehan
et al., 2017, Offong and Costello, 2017). Normative motivations are subjective norms
regarding acceptable behaviors; they are a function of an individual’s beliefs about what
others think should be done (injunctive norm), combined with one’s own willingness to
comply with those expectations (Liang, 1986; Yang et al., 2009). Normative motivations,
mostly represented through social influence, have been an integral part of TAMs (e.g.
Venkatesh et al., 2003, 2012; Aboelmaged, 2018) as well as post-adoption use continuance
models (e.g. Kim, 2011; Sun and Jeyaraj, 2013; Ke et al., 2012). Normative motivations have
shown to be an explaining factor for the use of technologies, including personal computing
(Thompson et al., 1991), computers in learning environments (Taylor and Todd, 1995),
internet applications (Cheung et al., 2000), participation in networks and small group-based
virtual communities (Dholakia et al., 2004), as well as social networking sites (Ifinedo, 2016).
In the organizational context, normative motivations have also helped to understand the
adoption of intranets (Barnes and Vidgen, 2012; Lee and Kim, 2009) and the centralized
usage of a recruitment repository (Eckhardt et al., 2009). Analogously, we expect normative
motivations to have a strong influence on the continued usage of ESN. Even if ESN usage is
voluntary, management might still expect employees to participate in order to avoid the
efforts for introducing a system to result in no organizational value at all (Maruping and
Magni, 2015). Also, external pressures stemming from colleagues who are already using
ESN might build up expectations and influence an individual’s intention to continue ESN
usage (Kügler et al., 2015). It is therefore stated that:
H5. Normative motivation is positively correlated with an individual’s intention of ESN
use continuance.
Literature has shown that hedonic motivations play an important role for the initial
adoption of technology (Salehan et al., 2017) and also for intentions of continued use in
post-adoption models (Schwarz and Schwarz, 2014; Lowry et al., 2015). Particularly in
personal contexts, such as shopping online (Stafford and Stafford, 2001), streaming music
(Chu and Lu, 2007) or videos (Kim et al., 2007), experiencing virtual worlds (Wu et al., 2008),
playing console games (Hsu and Lu, 2004) or online games and gamification (Penttinen et al.,
2010), participating in social networking or social blogging (Tscherning and Mathiassen,
2010), enjoyment, or hedonic motivation, has been found to be an important factor for IS
adoption and use continuance (Lowry et al., 2015).
However, compared to the plethora of studies in the personal context, surprisingly few
studies exist that look at hedonic motivations in work environments. For example, a study
of personal computer usage at work has shown that enjoyment has an influential role
(Davis et al., 1992). Likewise, a study has shown that perceptions of ERP systems as useful
or easy to use are determined by pleasurable experiences (Hwang, 2005; Vilpola, 2009), as
are intentions to explore features of a given enterprise system (Ke et al., 2012). While these
studies are valuable, they were conducted in settings that were not exclusively voluntary.
For instance, ERP systems, unlike ESN, capture a set of core business processes and are
441
Four-drive
perspective
Downloaded by 88.128.80.48 At 01:46 21 May 2019 (PT)

vital to the organization. In our case company, for example, the ESN was not vital to the
organization, nor did its deployment undergo a structured development process; the
ESN was used to fill a technological void –a void that was identified by its employees, not
the IT department.
The lack of studies about IS-induced enjoyment in work environments indicates a need for
additional research. Based on the previous literature and assuming that increased levels of
pleasure lead individuals to repeat and sustain corresponding activities (Li, Tung and Chang,
2015; Li, Guo, Chen and Luo, 2015; Lowry et al., 2015), we assert that hedonic motivations have
a positive impact on the intention to continue using ESN. It is therefore postulated:
H6. Hedonic motivation is positively correlated with an individual’s intention of ESN
use continuance.
The research model is summarized in Figure 1.
3. Research design
3.1 Context information
The case company examined in this study is one of the world’s largest courier companies,
headquartered in Germany. Its revenues surpassed EURO 57bn in 2017, produced by over
500,000 employees across more than 220 countries. Its primary divisions comprise mail and
express delivery, freight forwarding and supply chain.
In 2008, Yammer was introduced –not by its headquarters, but by a subsidiary in the
Netherlands. The subsidiary, unsatisfied with a provided Sharepoint solution, viewed
Yammer as a viable means to overcome some of its shortcomings. According to documents,
employees were missing a “social layer”and were in need of collaboration functionalities,
such as the versioning of documents, commenting on documents, or co-authoring
documents. The subsidiary initiated Yammer without the knowledge or the approval of
headquarters as revamping Sharepoint would have meant not only prolonged development
time, but also tremendous financial investments.
While Yammer was a shortcut, at least initially, it was soon sanctioned as a global
platform. From the experiences gathered in the Netherlands, the company understood that
the introduction of Yammer was easy, and more importantly, fast. It also understood that
Yammer would help to connect its increasingly global workforce. Central objective with the
usage of Yammer as the ESN of choice was the promise of making corporate knowledge
more transparent, and by doing so, enhancing individual productivity. As a result, Yammer
Drive to Bond
Drive to Defend
Drive to Comprehend
Drive to Acquire
Normative Motivation
Hedonic Motivation
ESN Use Continuance
Support of Drives
H1 (+)
H2 (+)
H3 (+)
H4 (+)
H6 (+)
H5 (+)
Figure 1.
Research model
442
JEIM
32,3
Downloaded by 88.128.80.48 At 01:46 21 May 2019 (PT)

was introduced company-wide in 2011. Headquarters even introduced a dedicated “digital
collaboration”unit responsible for supporting the appropriate collaborative infrastructure
and making sure its initiatives complemented existing knowledge management efforts. The
use of the ESN was completely voluntary. Management did not define business or use cases
and did not reward or punish ESN usage. Nowadays, the ESN spans over 40,000 employees.
Next steps include the integration with Sharepoint and the expansion with external partners
and customers as self-service portals.
3.2 Measurement instrument
A quantitative survey was advertised as part of the company’s international Yammer
community. Participation in the study was optional. Validated scales from prior research
were used for hedonic and normative motivations, as well as the four drives. For each
construct, a five-point Likert scale was used, ranging from “strongly disagree”(1) to
“strongly agree”(5). All measurement items are displayed in Table I.
Construct Source
Drive to acquire
DA1
DA2
DA3
Using Yammer helps me to accomplish things more quickly
Using Yammer has been beneficial to me
Using Yammer increases my productivity
Modified
from
Koivumäki
et al. (2008)
Drive to bond
DB1
DB2
DB3
There is a sense of human contact in Yammer
There is a sense of personal closeness with others in Yammer
There is a sense of human warmth in Yammer
Gefen and
Straub
(2004)
Drive to comprehend
DC1
DC2
DC3
DC4
Compared with other resources it is easier to access useful information via Yammer
Yammer helps me reach out to ask questions
Yammer helps me to learn more about internal news, such as events or products
Yammer helps me to learn more about industry trends and news
Modified
from
Zhang
et al. (2010)
Drive to defend
DD1
DD2
DD3
DD4
When I talk about my idea or opinion on Yammer, I expect similar responses from others
When others talk about themselves on Yammer, I believe that they expect me to do the same
Other Yammer users trust me to return the favor by sharing my personal information
People disclose information about themselves; therefore, it is only fair if I do the same
Posey and
Ellis (2007)
Hedonic motivation
HM1
HM2
HM3
HM4
Yammer gives me a good feeling
I love to go to Yammer
Yammer is fun
I have good experience with Yammer
Venkatesh
et al. (2012)
Normative motivation
NM1
NM2
NM3
NM4
NM5
People who are important to me think that I should use Yammer
People who influence my behavior think I should use Yammer
My direct superior thinks that I should use Yammer
I use Yammer because my colleagues use it
The company encourages employees to use Yammer
Venkatesh
et al. (2003)
ESN use continuance
UC1
UC2
UC3
I intend to use Yammer within the next six months
I predict I might use Yammer within the next six months
I plan to use Yammer within the next six months
Venkatesh
et al. (2012) Table I.
Measurement items
443
Four-drive
perspective
Downloaded by 88.128.80.48 At 01:46 21 May 2019 (PT)

Normative motivations capture the degree to which an individual feels that important
others, such as supervisors or colleagues, believe he/she should use the system; they are
measured by perceptions of social influence (Venkatesh et al., 2003). Hedonic motivations, or
the degree to which individual experiences positive emotions while using the system, are
measured as proposed by Venkatesh et al. (2012).
The drive to acquire, capturing the degree to which an individual perceives a system as
being supportive of his/her own accomplishments through an increase of efficiency or
effectiveness, is measured by the support to accomplish (modified from Koivumäki et al., 2008).
The drive to bond, capturing the degree to which an individual senses the awareness of others
in the system, a prerequisite for experiencing social relationships and bonding activities, is
measured by items of social presence (Gefen and Straub, 2004). The drive to comprehend,
capturing the degree to which an individual perceives the system as being helpful for
gathering information internal and external of the organization and to make sense of the
environment, is measured by items of informing and learning (modified from Zhang et al.,
2010). And finally, the drive to defend, capturing the extent to which an individual seeks
stability through predictable social behaviors of his/her peers and the protection of his/her and
others’accomplishments, is measured by items of reciprocity (Posey and Ellis, 2007). Since
collegial behaviors and the need for alliances may encourage individuals in their effort to seek
stability, reciprocal norms are vital (Ye and Feng, 2016). At the same time, reciprocity has
shown to positively influence hedonic benefits (Church et al., 2017).
4. Data analysis and results
4.1 Descriptive statistics
Overall, 107 employees participated in the survey, which is a reasonable sample size for
studies within organizations. This sample provided reasonable statistical power to test the
research model. As suggested by Chin (2010) and Ringle et al. (2012), a procedure to evaluate
the sufficiency of sample sizes in partial least squares (PLS) studies entails the use of power
tables for multiple regressions (e.g. Cohen, 1992). With four independent variables, the
recommended sample size of 84 to obtain a power of 0.80 has been exceeded, assuming a
medium effect size of 0.15 and an αof 0.05 (Cohen, 1992). The number of participating males
and females were almost even (55 vs 52). Regarding age, about 60 percent (n¼64) were up
to 39 years old, only one person stated to be older than 59. With regard to business units,
most participants worked for the communication’s department (32 or 29.9 percent), followed
by human resources (20 or 18.7 percent) and IT (14 or 13.1 percent). Table II provides a
detailed overview of the descriptive data.
Participants were also asked about the country they worked in. In total, 16 (or 15 percent)
named the USA, 15 (or 14 percent) named the UK and 12 (or 11.2 percent) worked in the
Netherlands. In total, 37 countries, spanning Europe, Asia, America and Africa, were reported.
4.2 Measurement model analysis
Partial least squares–structural equation modeling is applied, using SmartPLS 3.0 (Ringle
et al., 2015). All constructs were modeled as reflective measures of their respective indicators.
To evaluate the statistical validity of the constructs, the following two criteria to assess
convergent validity are analyzed (Fornell and Larcker, 1981). First, the average variance
extracted (AVE) for each construct is calculated; all exceeded the recommend level of 0.50 (see
Table III). Second, it was checked if items loaded higher than 0.70 on their respective
construct. All item loadings, except for NM1 (with 0.65), NM4 (with 0.66) and NM5 (with 0.59),
exceeded the recommended value (see Table IV). These items were not extracted for two
reasons. First, the scale is based on a validated stream of studies (Venkatesh et al.,2003),and
second, the AVE for the overall construct is still above 0.50 (Fornell and Larcker, 1981).
444
JEIM
32,3
Downloaded by 88.128.80.48 At 01:46 21 May 2019 (PT)

In terms of discriminant validity, it is confirmed that the square root of the AVE for each
construct is greater than its correlations, as recommended by Fornell and Larcker (1981).
Regarding reliability, the composite reliability (CR) of each construct is calculated; all
exceeded the recommended level of 0.70. In addition, the respective loadings were all higher
than their cross-loadings (Gefen and Straub, 2005) (see Table IV). Multicollinearity was not
an issue as the variance inflation factors ranged between 1.26 and 2.31 and were lower than
the suggested maximum value of 5.00 (Menard, 1995).
4.3 Structural model analysis
The support of the drive to acquire has a significant and positive effect (β¼0.24; po0.01)
on hedonic motivations, backing H1. Likewise, the support of the drive to bond has a
positive significant effect on hedonic motivations (β¼0.22; po0.05), backing H2. The
support of the drive to comprehend (β¼0.38; po0.001) also shows a significant and
positive effect on hedonic motivations, backing H3. And the support of the drive to defend
has a positive significant effect (β¼0.11; po0.05) on hedonic motivations, hence backing
H4. Overall, the drive to comprehend as well as the drive to acquire had the highest
standardized path coefficients, followed by the drive to bond. The drive to defend had the
lowest standardized path coefficient. The variance explained of hedonic motivations
n%
Gender
Male 55 51.4
Female 52 48.6
Age
o30 31 29
30–39 32 29.9
40–49 25 23.4
50–59 18 16.8
W59 1 0.90
Departments
Communication 32 29.9
Human resources 20 18.7
IT 14 13.1
Operations 6 5.6
Other (e.g. accounting, controlling, finance, legal, marketing, sales, etc.) 35 32.7
Table II.
Descriptive data
AVE CR DA DB DC DD HM NM UC
DA 0.85 0.94 0.92
DB 0.83 0.94 0.59 0.91
DC 0.61 0.86 0.68 0.66 0.78
DD 0.58 0.85 0.31 0.50 0.37 0.76
HM 0.73 0.92 0.67 0.66 0.73 0.43 0.86
NM 0.53 0.85 0.57 0.38 0.47 0.48 0.46 0.73
UC 0.94 0.98 0.58 0.52 0.56 0.25 0.69 0.50 0.97
Notes: CR, composite reliability; AVE, average variance extracted; DA, drive to acquire; DB, drive to bond;
DC, drive to comprehend; DD, drive to defend; HM, hedonic motivation; NM, normative motivation; UC,
use continuance
Table III.
Measurement model
analysis and inter-
construct correlations
445
Four-drive
perspective
Downloaded by 88.128.80.48 At 01:46 21 May 2019 (PT)

accounts for 62 percent, suggesting that a substantive amount of data variation is explained
by the four drives. Explaining 52 percent of the variance, normative (β¼0.23; po0.001)
and hedonic motivations (β¼0.58; po0.001) show significant and positive effects on use
continuance, supporting H5 and H6. Hedonic motivations had a substantive and much
higher effect on use continuance than normative motivations. All direct effects are higher
than their indirect effects (as shown in see Table V ).
DA DB DC DD IM EM UC
DA1 0.92 0.53 0.59 0.30 0.63 0.51 0.59
DA2 0.89 0.52 0.65 0.26 0.59 0.56 0.48
DA3 0.93 0.58 0.63 0.31 0.59 0.52 0.53
DB1 0.54 0.88 0.56 0.41 0.59 0.35 0.56
DB2 0.54 0.93 0.59 0.46 0.60 0.34 0.41
DB3 0.53 0.92 0.66 0.48 0.63 0.36 0.45
DC1 0.52 0.60 0.78 0.35 0.61 0.42 0.49
DC2 0.34 0.41 0.77 0.22 0.49 0.18 0.30
DC3 0.36 0.50 0.81 0.30 0.48 0.31 0.35
DD1 0.38 0.45 0.39 0.78 0.41 0.42 0.28
DD2 0.05 0.31 0.18 0.70 0.19 0.25 0.14
DD3 0.23 0.29 0.21 0.75 0.25 0.37 0.22
DD4 0.23 0.41 0.28 0.82 0.38 0.38 0.23
HM1 0.60 0.59 0.63 0.35 0.87 0.38 0.62
HM2 0.58 0.63 0.64 0.48 0.91 0.44 0.55
HM3 0.42 0.49 0.56 0.36 0.78 0.34 0.43
HM4 0.65 0.57 0.64 0.32 0.85 0.41 0.72
NM1 0.68 0.50 0.48 0.37 0.57 0.65 0.39
NM2 0.43 0.32 0.32 0.40 0.31 0.84 0.37
NM3 0.41 0.21 0.34 0.30 0.30 0.86 0.45
NM4 0.23 0.06 0.12 0.33 0.11 0.66 0.26
NM5 0.34 0.24 0.41 0.37 0.33 0.59 0.31
UC1 0.57 0.49 0.51 0.25 0.66 0.49 0.97
UC2 0.56 0.53 0.56 0.34 0.68 0.50 0.97
UC3 0.57 0.50 0.55 0.27 0.67 0.47 0.98
Notes: DA, drive to acquire; DB, drive to bond; DC, drive to comprehend; DD, drive to defend; HM, hedonic
motivation; NM, normative motivation; UC, use continuance
Table IV.
Item factor loadings
and cross-loadings
Predictor Outcome Standardized βSE t-Value p-Value
Direct effects
DA HM 0.24 0.09 2.67 0.004
DB HM 0.22 0.12 1.83 0.034
DC HM 0.38 0.08 4.71 0.000
DD HM 0.11 0.07 1.69 0.045
HM UC 0.58 0.06 9.18 0.000
NM UC 0.23 0.08 3.03 0.001
Indirect effects
DA UC 0.14 0.05 2.68 0.004
DB UC 0.13 0.07 1.77 0.039
DC UC 0.22 0.05 4.10 0.000
DD UC 0.07 0.04 1.65 0.049
Notes: DA, Drive to Acquire; DB, Drive to Bond; DC, Drive to Comprehend; DD, Drive to Defend; HM,
Hedonic Motivation; NM, Normative Motivation; UC, Use Continuance
Table V.
Direct and
indirect effects
446
JEIM
32,3
Downloaded by 88.128.80.48 At 01:46 21 May 2019 (PT)

To assess the statistical power of the data, the effect size by calculating Cohen’sf
2
is
analyzed. Cohen (1988) suggests the following criteria for interpreting effect size:
0.02of
2
⩽0.15 for small effect sizes; 0.15 of
2
⩽0.35 for medium effect sizes; and f
2
W0.35
for large effect sizes. With regard to the variance explained of hedonic motivations, a
medium effect size was found for the drive to comprehend ( f
2
¼0.17). Small effect sizes were
found for the drive to acquire ( f
2
¼0.08), to bond ( f
2
¼0.06) and to defend ( f
2
¼0.03). The
effect size for hedonic motivations was large (0.55) and contributed much more to the
variance explained of ESN use continuance than normative motivations ( f
2
¼0.09).
In addition, the predictive relevance of the model by application of the Stone–Geisser test
(Q
2
) is analyzed, which indicates how well the data can be reproduced by the PLS model.
The Q
2
values for hedonic motivations (Q
2
¼0.41) as well as ESN use continuance
(Q
2
¼0.45) were positive, indicating predictive relevance (Fornell and Bookstein, 1982).
A summary of the estimated structural model is displayed in Figure 2.
5. Discussion and research synthesis
Multiple findings can be drawn from this study. First, we learn that hedonic motivations
take on the majority of explanatory power for sustainable engagement in ESN; normative
motivations, such as social influences, in contrast, explain only half of what hedonic
motivation is able to do. Hence, the study found that an individual’s urge to act –as
triggered by reasons outside the individual –plays a less significant role than innate factors.
Since ESNs are typically not incentivized, for example, through monetary rewards or as part
of annual performance objectives, this finding makes sense. The case company did not
mandate the use of Yammer, just promoted its use.
Second, while prior studies have shown that hedonic motivations are important for
personal IS use environments, they not only have missed to sufficiently investigate their
effects in work environments, but also to provide a comprehensive frame of what constitutes
relevant drivers for such motivations. Using the Four-Drive Model, it was found that
hedonic motivations are driven by ESN’s support of four human drives (in the order of
importance): the drive to comprehend, the drive to acquire, the drive to bond and the drive to
defend. While all four drives contribute to determining an individual’s intention to continue
using ESN, their strength is weighted differently within individuals.
Individuals (or employees) are primarily driven by their drive to comprehend, or their urge
to learn and absorb information. Their primary concern when using Yammer is about
Drive to Bond
Drive to Defend
Drive to Comprehend
Drive to Acquire
Normative Motivation
Hedonic Motivation
ESN Use Continuance
Support of Drives
0.24**
0.22*
0.38***
0.11*
0.58***
0.23***
R2=0.62
R2=0.52
Notes: *,**,***Indicate significance levels at 10, 5 and 1 percent, respectively
Figure 2.
Research
model results
447
Four-drive
perspective
Downloaded by 88.128.80.48 At 01:46 21 May 2019 (PT)

developing an understanding for the organization as a whole, and by doing so, absorbing
information that is pertinent not only to their own work task, but also beyond. An employee’s
focus is on sense-making and understanding the broader as well as narrower implications of
information posted by and about the organization. By participating in Yammer, employees feel
as part of an “information loop”that provides details about current topics. As stated by an
executive: while it is less important for an organizational member to send a photo of his/her
lunch, it is more important to share what he/she talked about at lunch with his/her peers (Van
Zoonen et al., 2016; Li, Tung and Chang, 2015; Li, Guo, Chen and Luo, 2015).
Understanding that the drive to comprehend is a fundamental driver in determining an
individual’s intention to contribute to ESN is an important finding for human resource
development. Literature in human resource has promoted the idea of an employee’scontinual
development for the longest time (Shah et al., 2017). The fact that ESNs activate the drive to
comprehend feeds into this picture and should be interpreted as a reason to provide employees
with the technological tools that enable learning and understanding above what is needed for
the job. This finding is also cross-validated by looking at the initial, rather pragmatics,
impetus behind the company’s adoption of Yammer. Employees were mostly interested in a
technology that could support the versioning of documents, commenting on documents and
co-authoring of documents –aspects that enhance learning and comprehending.
As another finding, the study has shown that the drive to acquire is second in line
predicting an individual’s hedonic motivations to use ESN technology. Apart from learning,
an employee’s motivations are driven by his/her desire to portray and achieve status on
Yammer. This finding is in line with literature on self-actualization (Fernando and
Chowdhury, 2015) and the traditional perspective of the homo economicus (Hălăngescu and
Pohoaţă, 2013). Also, it explains why, as of lately, knowledge management initiatives have
incorporated an ESN component (Antonius et al., 2015). As knowledge management
contributions are also instigated by an individual’s desire to portray and achieve status
(Kügler et al., 2015), it is not surprising that ESNs are motivated in the same way. For the
case company, where Yammer supported the versioning, commenting and co-authoring of
documents, the drive to acquire was fulfilled by the very fact that each of these activities
necessitates a contributor to leave his/her name. In other words, the initial adoption of the
Yammer provided employees with the opportunity to associate their name with the various
versions and comments of a document.
The drive to bond is third in rank predicting an employee’s intentions to use ESN. Bonding
among employees, and especially across geographical boundaries and hierarchies, is essential
for employees in while using Yammer. While listening and learning about the organization is
important, being heard by others, including upper management, for example, is equally
important. Yammer is viewed as an engagement tool for people sharing a common interest. It
therefore fits traditional theories in the realm of social presence (Han et al.,2016),socialcapital
(Huang and Liu, 2017) and communities of interest (Hu et al., 2015) as it provides a
technological platform that enables bonding. It also matches the initial request of employees at
the Dutch subsidy to add a “social layer”to Sharepoint. Yammer allowed this bonding to take
place over a shared work task. This shared experience not only fosters new (and old)
relationships, but also contributes to an increased level of productivity overall.
Last in line with regard to its influence on an individual’s intention to use Yammer is the
drive to defend. Protecting the status quo, and with it a familiar and routine frame, drives
the adoption of Yammer –however, to a lesser extent than the other drives. This is not
surprising as an individual has to acquire and comprehend things first and/or bond with
others before he/she can defend the newly found accomplishments. Defending entails the
continuation of a behavior, particularly if the behavior has proven successful. This finding
also shows that ESNs are primarily about learning, bonding and portraying status –more
so than they are about defending oneself and one’s accomplishments.
448
JEIM
32,3
Downloaded by 88.128.80.48 At 01:46 21 May 2019 (PT)

As a third finding from this study, it was found certain aspects are adjustable at the
individual level. In other words, certain aspects can be changed or trained when it comes to
ESN (and computer-mediated networks in general), while others are beyond the control of an
individual and are triggered by the outside. Observing peers using Yammer has certainly
contributed to an employee’s motivation. And organizations might be able to foster this
observation by promoting the image of employees using Yammer to others in the
organization. The biggest influence, however, an organization can exercise over an
employee without mandating ESN usage is to appeal to his/her hedonic motivations by
focusing on the set four drives, or a subset thereof.
For the drive to acquire, organizations might consider designing structures that ensure
contributions are honored. This could mean tying ESN contributions to accomplishments
or simply recognizing ESN contributions outside the ESN network, for example, through
internal marketing campaigns that promote ESN usage. For the drive to bond,
organizations might want to encourage teamwork more than in the past, and sponsor
events that bring together employees in a psychical space that have communicated with
one another in the virtual ESN space. For the drive to comprehend, the strongest predictor
among the four, organizations might consider designing jobs or work tasks that
emphasize learning and ongoing development. The very platform of ESN could become
part of these ongoing educational efforts. For the drive to defend, organizations might
want to promote ESN as a vehicle for transparency within the organization that enhances
levels of fair values and equality.
6. Conclusion and outlook to further research
In this paper, the importance of hedonic and normative motivations and their effects on
employees to continue using ESN were compared. Furthermore, it was investigated how
hedonic motivations emerge in ESN. In the following, we summarize the key lessons learned,
contribution to knowledge and implications for theory, implications for practice, limitations
and recommendations for future research.
6.1 Key lessons learned
The study showed that an employee’s motivation to partake in ESN, such as Yammer, is
primarily driven by himself/herself and only secondarily by external pressures. Moreover,
we were able to show that not only in private but also in work contexts hedonic motivations
can play a crucial role for user behavior in enterprise systems. In our study, such hedonic
motivations were mainly explained by the drives to comprehend, to bond and to acquire.
If an ESN can support these drives, users experience pleasure from its usage, resulting in an
increased intention to continue participating in the system. In comparison, normative
motivations only played a minor role regarding usage intentions, which highlights the
importance of intrinsic motivations in digital workplace environments.
6.2 Contribution to knowledge and implications for theory
We introduced the Four-Drive Model to explain a fundamental set of drives behind hedonic
motivations, therefore providing the first holistic perspective on the emergence of, e.g.
enjoyment in enterprise systems. Research on hedonic motivations in the work context is
still underrepresented, in management science as well as IS research. Hence, theoretical
approaches to explain and predict the emergence of hedonic motivations in IS usage are
missing. With our study, we close this theoretical gap. Our study contributes not only
by evaluating the role of hedonic motivation for ESN use in work contexts, but also by
providing an approach to explain key drivers behind it. To the best of our knowledge, we
are the first to empirically test the Four-Drive Model in a voluntary IS context, adding
449
Four-drive
perspective
Downloaded by 88.128.80.48 At 01:46 21 May 2019 (PT)

valuable knowledge about human behaviors in digital work environments. The Four-Drive
Model not only provides a framework to understand the antecedents of hedonic motivations,
but also promotes researchers to re-visit, and even re-classify, how previously identified
constructs fit this overarching framework. In addition, regarding the development of our
understanding of the Four-Drive Model itself, we showed that the four drives may not only
influence our actions directly: the support to satisfy the drives can lead to hedonic
motivations that in consequence impact human behavior.
In terms of implications for practice, the results provide a useful source of what needs
to be in place for hedonic motivations, such as enjoyment, to emerge in ESN and hence
improve the chance of consistent user engagement as well as users’well-being.
Practitioners need to be aware of the four drives, because only if those are supported,
hedonic motivations can emerge, which consequently increase intentions for continued IS
use. In more detail, our results show that practitioners are best advised to make sure that
employees perceive their drives to acquire, bond, comprehend and defend to be supported
through the use of IS. IT artifacts like ESN should therefore be open to all employees and
provide features that allow users to access and transfer not only information (e.g.
addressing the drives to acquire and comprehend), but also a sense of social presence
(e.g. addressing the drive to bond and defend).
6.3 Limitations
As any other research, this study comes with limitations. The results are derived from one
company only, impacting the study’s generalizability. However, by looking at one company
more closely, it was possible to eliminate confounding factors that might otherwise have
impacted the statistical results, such as cross-industry aspects. Overall, the company can be
viewed as a prototypical case for a knowledge-intensive organization. Also, it is important to
note that the company had a positive attitude toward ESN which is not necessarily given in
other organizations. In addition, the study only relies on a quantitative survey.
6.4 Recommendations for future research
Future studies may focus on testing the model in different companies of the same industry,
between different industries and varying cultural settings. Also, further research may focus
on contexts where ESN usage is mandatory or monetary incentives are directly related to
using the system. In such settings, future studies might examine if hedonic motivations are
still more important to explain ESN usage when compared to management controls and
rewards. Further research should also include content analyses of usage data to better
understand voluntary participation in ESN and explore the exchanged content, which may
have different characteristics when supporting different drives. Future investigations can,
in turn, improve our understanding, how other IS, which are not ESNs, need to be designed
to enhance employees’enjoyment and well-being.
References
Aboelmaged, M.G. (2018), “Knowledge sharing through enterprise social network (ESN) systems:
motivational drivers and their impact on employees’productivity”,Journal of Knowledge
Management, Vol. 22 No. 2, pp. 362-383.
Abraham, C., Boudreau, M.C., Junglas, I. and Watson, R. (2013), “Enriching our theoretical repertoire:
the role of evolutionary psychology in technology acceptance”,European Journal of Information
Systems, Vol. 22 No. 1, pp. 56-75.
Abraham, C., Junglas, I., Watson, R.T. and Boudreau, M.C. (2016), “Explaining the unexpected and
continued use of an information system with the help of evolved evolutionary mechanisms”,
Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology, Vol. 67 No. 1, pp. 212-231.
450
JEIM
32,3
Downloaded by 88.128.80.48 At 01:46 21 May 2019 (PT)

Akoumianakis, D. and Ktistakis, G. (2017), “Digital calendars for flexible organizational routines”,
Journal of Enterprise Information Management, Vol. 30 No. 3, pp. 476-502.
Amabile, T.M. (1997), “Motivating creativity in organizations: on doing what you love and loving what
you do”,California Management Review, Vol. 40 No. 1, pp. 39-58.
Antonius, N., Xu, J. and Gao, X. (2015), “Factors influencing the adoption of enterprise social software in
Australia”,Knowledge-Based Systems, Vol. 73, pp. 32-43.
Argyris, Y.A. and Ransbotham, S. (2016), “Knowledge entrepreneurship: institutionalising wiki-based
knowledge-management processes in competitive and hierarchical organisations”,Journal of
Information Technology, Vol. 31 No. 2, pp. 226-239.
Bandura, A. (1977), “Self-efficacy: toward a unifying theory of behavioral change”,Psychological
Review, Vol. 84 No. 2, pp. 191-215.
Barnes, S.J. and Vidgen, R. (2012), “User acceptance and corporate intranet quality: an evaluation with
iQual”,Information and Management, Vol. 49 Nos 3-4, pp. 164-170.
Bhattacherjee, A. and Premkumar, G. (2004), “Understanding changes in belief and attitude toward
information technology usage: a theoretical model and longitudinal test”,MIS Quarterly, Vol. 28
No. 2, pp. 229-254.
Brown, S.A., Massey, A.P., Montoya-Weiss, M.M. and Burkman, J.R. (2002), “Do I really have to? User
acceptance of mandated technology”,European Journal of Information Systems, Vol. 11 No. 4,
pp. 283-295.
Brzezicka, J. and Wisniewski, R. (2014), “Homo oeconomicus and behavioral economics”,Contemporary
Economics, Vol. 8 No. 4, pp. 353-364.
Cheung, W., Chang, M.K. and Lai, V.S. (2000), “Prediction of internet and World Wide Web usage at
work: a test of an extended Triandis model”,Decision Support Systems, Vol. 30 No. 1, pp. 83-100.
Chin, W.W. (2010), “How to write up and report PLS analyses”, in Esposito Vinzi, V., Chin, W., Henseler, J.
and Wang, H. (Eds), Handbook of Partial Least Squares. Springer Handbooks of Computational
Statistics, Springer, Berlin and Heidelberg.
Choudrie, J. and Zamani, E.D. (2016), “Understanding individual user resistance and workarounds of
enterprise social networks: the case of Service Ltd”,Journal of Information Technology, Vol. 31
No. 2, pp. 130-151.
Chu, C.-W. and Lu, H.-P. (2007), “Factors influencing online music purchase intention in Taiwan: an empirical
study based on the value-intention framework”,Internet Research, Vol. 17 No. 2, pp. 139-155.
Church, E.M., Thambusamy, R. and Nemati, H. (2017), “Privacy and pleasure: a paradox of the hedonic
use of computer-mediated social networks”,Computers in Human Behavior, Vol. 77, pp. 121-131.
Cohen, J. (1988), Statistical Power Analysis for the Behavioral Sciences, 2nd ed., Lawrence Erlbaum
Associates Publishers, Hillsdale, NJ.
Cohen, J. (1992), “A power primer”,Psychological Bulletin, Vol. 112 No. 1, pp. 155-159.
Dai, W., Han, D., Dai, Y. and Xu, D. (2015), “Emotion recognition and affective computing on vocal
social media”,Information & Management, Vol. 52 No. 7, pp. 777-788.
Davis, F.D. (1989), “Perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, and user acceptance of information
technology”,MIS Quarterly, Vol. 13 No. 3, pp. 319-340.
Davis, F.D., Bagozzi, R.P. and Warshaw, P.R. (1992), “Extrinsic and intrinsic motivation to use
computers in the workplace”,Journal of Applied Social Psychology, Vol. 22 No. 14, pp. 1111-1132.
Deci, E.L. (1971), “Effects of externally mediated rewards on intrinsic motivation”,Journal of
Personality and Social Psychology, Vol. 18 No. 1, pp. 105-115.
Deci, E.L. and Ryan, R.M. (1985), Intrinsic Motivation and Self-Determination in Human Behavior,
Plenum Press, New York, NY.
Dholakia, U.M., Bagozzi, R.P. and Pearo, L.K. (2004), “A social influence model of consumer
participation in network- and small-group-based virtual communities”,International Journal of
Research in Marketing, Vol. 21 No. 3, pp. 241-263.
451
Four-drive
perspective
Downloaded by 88.128.80.48 At 01:46 21 May 2019 (PT)

Dierksmeier, C. (2015), “Human dignity and the business of business”,Human Systems Management,
Vol. 34 No. 1, pp. 33-42.
Eckhardt, A., Laumer, S. and Weitzel, T. (2009), “Who influences whom analyzing workplace referents’
social influence on IT adoption and non-adoption”,Journal of Information Technology, Vol. 24
No. 1, pp. 11-24.
Ellison, N.B., Gibbs, J.L. and Weber, M.S. (2015), “The use of enterprise social network sites for
knowledge sharing in distributed organizations: the role of organizational affordances”,
American Behavioral Scientist, Vol. 59 No. 1, pp. 103-123.
Engler, T. and Alpar, P. (2017), “Contribution and consumption of content in enterprise social media”,
Information Systems Management, Vol. 35 No. 1, pp. 2-14, available at: https://doi.org/10.1080/
10580530.2017.1416935
Eze, S. and Chinedu-Eze, V. (2018), “Examining information and communication technology (ICT)
adoption in SMEs”,Journal of Enterprise Information Management, Vol. 31 No. 2, pp. 338-356.
Fernando, M. and Chowdhury, R. (2015), “Cultivation of virtuousness and self-actualization in the
workplace”, in Sison, A.J.G. (Ed.), Handbook of Virtue Ethics in Business and Management,
Springer, Dordrecht, pp. 1-13.
Fornell, C. and Bookstein, F.L. (1982), “Two structural equation models: LISREL and PLS applied to
consumer exit-voice theory”,Journal of Marketing Research, Vol. 19 No. 4, pp. 440-452.
Fornell, C. and Larcker, D.F. (1981), “Structural equation models with unobservable variables and
measurement error: algebra and statistics”,Journal of Marketing Research, Vol. 18 No. 3,
pp. 382-388.
Frey, B.S. and Jegen, R. (2001), “Motivation crowding theory”,Journal of Economic Surveys, Vol. 15
No. 5, pp. 589-611.
Gefen, D. and Straub, D.W. (2004), “Consumer trust in B2C e-commerce and the importance of social
presence: experiments in e-products and e-services”,Omega, Vol. 32 No. 6, pp. 407-424.
Gefen, D. and Straub, D.W. (2005), “A practical guide to factorial validity using PLS-GRAPH: tutorial
and annotated example”,Communications of the Association for Information Systems, Vol. 16
No. 5, pp. 91-109.
Gheorghiţa, N. (2014), “Workaholism: a new challenge for organisation management”,Procedia –Social
and Behavioral Sciences, Vol. 109, pp. 295-300.
Hackmann, J. (2013), “Kann Social Business Hierarchien aufbrechen?”,Computerwoche, available at:
www.computerwoche.de/a/kann-social-business-hierarchien-aufbrechen,2525955 (accessed
February 12, 2019).
Hălăngescu, C. and Pohoaţă, I. (2013), “Paradigms and conceptual metamorphoses in the relation homo
oeconomicus vs homo academicus”,Procedia –Social and Behavioral Sciences, Vol. 92 Lumen,
pp. 377-384.
Han, S., Min, J. and Lee, H. (2016), “Building relationships within corporate SNS accounts through social
presence formation”,International Journal of Information Management, Vol. 36 No. 6, pp. 945-962.
Hanna, B., Kee, K.F. and Robertson, B.W. (2017), “Positive impacts of social media at work:
job satisfaction, job calling, and Facebook use among co-workers”, in Mohamad, B. and
Abu Bakar, H. (Eds), SHS Web of Conferences, Vol. 33, Elsevier Science Publishers B.V.,
Amsterdam, pp. 191-196.
Hsu, C.L. and Lu, H.P. (2004), “Why do people play on-line games? An extended TAM with social
influences and flow experience”,Information and Management, Vol. 41 No. 7, pp. 853-868.
Hu, C., Zhao, L. and Huang, J. (2015), “Achieving self-congruency? Examining why individuals
reconstruct their virtual identity in communities of interest established within social network
platforms”,Computers in Human Behavior, Vol. 50, pp. 465-475.
Huang, L.V. and Liu, P.L. (2017), “Ties that work: investigating the relationships among coworker
connections, work-related Facebook utility, online social capital, and employee outcomes”,
Computers in Human Behavior, Vol. 72, pp. 512-524.
452
JEIM
32,3
Downloaded by 88.128.80.48 At 01:46 21 May 2019 (PT)

Hull, C.L. (1943), “Principles of behavior: an introduction to behavior theory”,The Journal of Abnormal
and Social Psychology, Vol. 39, pp. 377-380.
Hwang, Y. (2005), “Investigating enterprise systems adoption: uncertainty avoidance, intrinsic
motivation, and the technology acceptance model”,European Journal of Information Systems,
Vol. 14 No. 2, pp. 150-161.
Ifinedo, P. (2016), “Applying uses and gratifications theory and social influence processes to
understand students’pervasive adoption of social networking sites: perspectives from the
Americas”,International Journal of Information Management, Vol. 36 No. 2, pp. 192-206.
Jena, L.K. and Pradhan, S. (2018), “Workplace spirituality and employee commitment: the role of
emotional intelligence and organisational citizenship behaviour in Indian organisations”,Journal
of Enterprise Information Management, Vol. 31 No. 3, pp. 380-404.
Junglas, I., Goel, L., Abraham, C. and Ives, B. (2013), “The social component of information
systems –how sociability contributes to technology acceptance”,Journal of the Association for
Information Systems, Vol. 14 No. 10, pp. 585-616.
Karasti, H., Pipek, V. and Bowker, G.C. (2018), “An afterword to ‘infrastructuring and collaborative
design’”,Computer Supported Cooperative Work, Vol. 27 No. 2, pp. 267-289.
Ke, W., Tan, C.-H., Sia, C.-L. and Wei, K.-K. (2012), “Inducing intrinsic motivation to explore the
enterprise system: the supremacy of organizational levers”,Journal of Management Information
Systems, Vol. 29 No. 3, pp. 257-290.
Kenrick, D.T., Li, N.P. and Butner, J. (2003), “Dynamical evolutionary psychology: individual decision
rules and emergent social norms”,Psychological Review, Vol. 110 No. 1, pp. 3-28.
Kim, B. (2011), “Understanding antecedents of continuance intention in social-networking services”,
Cyberpsychology, Behavior, and Social Networking, Vol. 14 No. 4, pp. 199-205.
Kim, S., Na, E.K. and Ryu, M.H. (2007), “Factors affecting user participation in video UCC (user-created
contents) services”,Proceedings of the 3rd Communities and Technologies Conference,
pp. 209-224.
Kock, N. (2004), “The psychobiological model: towards a new theory of computer-mediated
communication based on Darwinian evolution”,Organization Science, Vol. 15 No. 3, pp. 327-348.
Kock, N. (2009), “Information systems theorizing based on evolutionary psychology: an
interdisciplinary review and theory integration framework”,MIS Quarterly, Vol. 12 No. 3,
pp. 139-145.
Kock, N. and Moqbel, M. (2016), “A six-stage framework for evolutionary IS research using path
models”,Journal of Systems and Information Technology, Vol. 18 No. 1, pp. 64-88.
Koivumäki, T., Ristola, A. and Kesti, M. (2008), “The perceptions towards mobile services: an empirical
analysis of the role of use facilitators”,Personal and Ubiquitous Computing, Vol. 12, pp. 67-75.
Kügler, M., Smolnik, S. and Kane, G. (2015), “What’s in IT for employees? Understanding the
relationship between use and performance in enterprise social software”,The Journal of
Strategic Information Systems, Vol. 24 No. 2, pp. 90-112.
Kumar, V., Loonam, J., Allen, J.P. and Sawyer, S. (2016), “Exploring enterprise social systems &
organisational change: implementation in a digital age”,Journal of Information Technology,
Vol. 31 No. 2, pp. 97-100.
Lam, A. and Lambermont-Ford, J. (2010), “Knowledge sharing in organisational contexts: a motivation‐
based perspective”,Journal of Knowledge Management, Vol. 14 No. 1, pp. 51-66.
Larosiliere, G.D., Carter, L.D. and Meske, C. (2017), “How does the world connect? Exploring the global
diffusion of social network sites”,Journal of the Association for Information Science and
Technology, Vol. 68 No. 8, pp. 1875-1885.
Lawrence, P.R. and Nohria, N. (2002), Driven: How Human Nature Shapes Our Choices, 1st ed.,
Jossey-Bass, San Francisco, CA.
Lee, S. and Kim, B.G. (2009), “Factors affecting the usage of intranet: a confirmatory study”,Computers
in Human Behavior, Vol. 25 No. 1, pp. 191-201.
453
Four-drive
perspective
Downloaded by 88.128.80.48 At 01:46 21 May 2019 (PT)

Leonardi, P.M. (2015), “Ambient awareness and knowledge acquisition: using social media to learn
‘who knows what’and ‘who knows whom’”,MIS Quarterly, Vol. 39 No. 4, pp. 747-762.
Li, C. (2015), “Why no one uses the corporate social network”,Harvard Business Review.
Li, E.Y., Tung, C.Y. and Chang, S.H. (2015), “User adoption of wisdom of crowd: usage and performance
of prediction market system”,International Journal of Electronic Business, Vol. 12 No. 2,
available at: https://hbr.org/2015/04/why-no-one-uses-the-corporate-social-network (accessed
February 15, 2019).
Li, N., Guo, X., Chen, G. and Luo, N. (2015), “Reading behavior on intra-organizational blogging
systems: a group-level analysis through the lens of social capital theory”,Information and
Management, Vol. 52 No. 7, pp. 870-881.
Liang, T.P. (1986), “Critical success factors of decision support systems: an experimental study”,ACM
SIGMIS Database, Vol. 17 No. 2, pp. 3-16.
Limaj, E., Bernroider, E. and Choudrie, J. (2016), “The impact of social information system governance,
utilization and capabilities on absorptive capacity and innovation”,Information & Management,
Vol. 53 No. 3, pp. 380-397.
Lowry, P.B., Gaskin, J.E. and Moody, G.D. (2015), “Proposing the Multimotive Information Systems
Continuance Model (MISC) to better explain end-user system evaluations and continuance
intentions”,Journal of the Association for Information, Vol. 16 No. 7, pp. 515-579.
Malhotra, A., Melville, N.P. and Watson, R.T. (2013), “Spurring impactful research on information
systems for environmental sustainability”,MIS Quarterly, Vol. 37 No. 4, pp. 1265-1274.
Mäntymäki, M. and Riemer, K. (2016), “Enterprise social networking: a knowledge
management perspective”,International Journal of Information Management, Vol. 36 No. 6,
pp. 1042-1052.
Martins, J., Gonçalves, R., Oliveira, T., Cota, M. and Branco, F. (2016), “Understanding the determinants
of social network sites adoption at firm level: a mixed methodology approach”,Electronic
Commerce Research and Applications, Vol. 18, pp. 10-26.
Maruping, L.M. and Magni, M. (2015), “Motivating employees to explore collaboration technology in
team contexts”,MIS Quarterly, Vol. 39 No. 1, pp. 1-16.
Maslow, A.H. (1943), “A theory of human motivation”,Psychological Review, Vol. 50 No. 4, pp. 370-396.
Menard, S. (1995), “Applied logistic regression analysis”, Sage University Paper Series on Qualtitative
Applications in the Social Sciences No. 07-106, Sage, Thousand Oaks, CA.
Meske, C. and Amojo, I. (2018), “Social bots as initiators of human interaction in enterprise social
networks”,29th Australasian Conference on Information Systems, Paper No. 35,Sydney,December.
Newell, S. (2015), “Managing knowledge and managing knowledge work: what we know and what the
future holds”,Journal of Information Technology, Vol. 30 No. 1, pp. 1-17.
Offong, G.O. and Costello, J. (2017), “Enterprise social media impact on human resource practices”,
Evidence-based HRM: A Global Forum for Empirical Scholarship, Vol. 5 No. 3, pp. 328-343.
Panahifar, F., Byrne, P.J., Salam, M.A. and Heavey, C. (2018), “Supply chain collaboration and firm’s
performance”,Journal of Enterprise Information Management, Vol. 31 No. 3, pp. 358-379.
Penttinen, E., Rossi, M. and Tuunainen, V.K. (2010), “Mobile games: analysing the needs and
values of the consumers”,Journal of Information Technology Theory and Application, Vol. 11
No. 1, pp. 1-12.
Pirson, M.A. and Lawrence, P.R. (2010), “Humanism in business –towards a paradigm shift?”,Journal
of Business Ethics, Vol. 93 No. 4, pp. 553-565.
Posey, C. and Ellis, S. (2007), “Understanding self-disclosure in electronic communities: an exploratory
model of privacy risk beliefs, reciprocity, and trust”,Proceedings of Americas Conference on
Information Systems, pp. 1-11.
Premkumar, G., Ramamurthy, K. and Liu, H.N. (2008), “Internet messaging: an examination of the
impact of attitudinal, normative, and control belief systems”,Information and Management,
Vol. 45 No. 7, pp. 451-457.
454
JEIM
32,3
Downloaded by 88.128.80.48 At 01:46 21 May 2019 (PT)

Riemer, K., Stieglitz, S. and Meske, C. (2015), “From top to bottom: investigating the changing role of
hierarchy in enterprise social networks”,Business and Information Systems Engineering, Vol. 57
No. 3, pp. 197-212.
Ringle, C.M., Sarstedt, M. and Straub, D. (2012), “A critical look at the use of PLS-SEM in MIS
quarterly”,MIS Quarterly, Vol. 36 No. 1, pp. iii-xiv.
Ringle, C.M., Wende, S. and Becker, J.-M. (2015), “SmartPLS 3”, SmartPLS GmbH, Bönningstedt.
Ryan, R.M. and Deci, E.L. (2000), “Intrinsic and extrinsic motivations: classic definitions and new
directions”,Contemporary Educational Psychology, Vol. 25 No. 1, pp. 54-67.
Salehan, M., Kim, D.J. and Kim, C. (2017), “Use of online social networking services from a theoretical
perspective of the motivation-participation-performance framework”,Journal of the Association
for Information Systems, Vol. 18 No. 2, pp. 141-172.
Schwarz, A. and Schwarz, C. (2014), “An exploration of the individual-level post-adoption
choice decision”,Journal of Information Technology Theory and Application, Vol. 15 No. 3,
pp. 5-29.
Shah, N., Irani, Z. and Sharif, A.M. (2017), “Big data in an HR context: exploring organizational
change readiness, employee attitudes and behaviors”,Journal of Business Research, Vol. 70,
pp. 366-378.
Sharma, A. and Bhatnagar, J. (2016), “Enterprise social media at work: web-based solutions
for employee engagement”,Human Resource Management International Digest, Vol. 24 No. 7,
pp. 16-19.
Stafford, T.F. and Stafford, M.R. (2001), “Identifying motivations for the use of commercial web sites”,
Information Resources Management Journal, Vol. 14 No. 1, pp. 22-30.
Stieglitz, S., Riemer, K. and Meske, C. (2014), “Hierarchy or activity ? The role of formal and informal
influence in eliciting responses from”,ECIS, pp. 1-14.
Stieglitz, S., Schallenmuller, S. and Meske, C. (2013), “Adoption of social media for internal usage in a
global enterprise”,Proceedings of the 27th International Conference on Advanced Information
Networking and Applications Workshops, pp. 1483-1488.
Sun, Y. and Jeyaraj, A. (2013), “Information technology adoption and continuance: a longitudinal
study of individuals’behavioral intentions”,Information & Management, Vol. 50 No. 7,
pp. 457-465.
Tan, X. and Kim, Y. (2015), “User acceptance of SaaS-based collaboration tools: a case of Google Docs”,
Journal of Enterprise Information Management, Vol. 28 No. 3, pp. 423-442.
Taylor, S. and Todd, P.A. (1995), “Understanding information technology usage: a test of competing
models”,Information Systems Research, Vol. 6 No. 2, pp. 144-176.
Thompson, R.L., Higgins, C.A. and Howell, J.M. (1991), “Personal computing: toward a conceptual
model of utilization”,MIS Quarterly, Vol. 15 No. 1, pp. 125-143.
Tooby, J., Cosmides, L. and Price, M.E. (2006), “Cognitive adaptations for n-person exchange: the
evolutionary roots of organizational behavior”,Managerial and Decision Economics, Vol. 27,
pp. 103-129.
Tscherning, H. and Mathiassen, L. (2010), “Early adoption of mobile devices –asocial
network perspective”,Journal of Information Technology Theory and Application, Vol. 11
No. 1, pp. 23-42.
van der Heijden, H. (2004), “User acceptance of hedonic information systems”,MIS Quarterly, Vol. 28
No. 4, pp. 695-704.
Van Zoonen, W., Verhoeven, J.W.M. and Vliegenthart, R. (2016), “How employees use Twitter to talk
about work: a typology of work-related tweets”,Computers in Human Behavior, Vol. 55,
pp. 329-339.
Venkatesh, V. and Bala, H. (2008), “Technology acceptance model 3 and a research agenda on
interventions”,Decision Sciences, Vol. 39 No. 2, pp. 273-315.
455
Four-drive
perspective
Downloaded by 88.128.80.48 At 01:46 21 May 2019 (PT)

Venkatesh, V., Thong, J. and Xu, X. (2012), “Consumer acceptance and user of information technology:
extending the unified theory of acceptance and use of technology”,MIS Quarterly, Vol. 36 No. 1,
pp. 157-178.
Venkatesh, V., Thong, J.Y.L. and Xu, X. (2016), “Unified theory of acceptance and use of technology: a
synthesis and the road ahead”,Journal of the Association for Information Systems, Vol. 17 No. 5,
pp. 328-376.
Venkatesh, V., Morris, M., Davis, G. and Davis, F. (2003), “User acceptance of information technology:
toward a unified view”,MIS Quarterly, Vol. 27 No. 3, pp. 425-478.
Vilpola, I. (2009), “Development and evaluation of a customer-centered ERP implementation method”,
Journal of Information Technology Theory and Application, Vol. 9 No. 4, pp. 1-21.
Wu, J., Li, P. and Rao, S. (2008), “Why they enjoy virtual game worlds? An empirical investigation”,
Journal of Electronic Commerce Research, Vol. 9 No. 3, pp. 219-230.
Yang, H.-D., Moon, Y.J. and Rowley, C. (2009), “Social influence on knowledge worker’s adoption of
innovation information technology”,The Journal of Computer Information Systems, Vol. 50
No. 1, pp. 25-36.
Ye, H. and Feng, Y. (2016), “Why do you return the favor in online knowledge communities? A study of
the motivations of reciprocity”,Computers in Human Behavior, Vol. 63, pp. 342-349.
Zhang, J., Qu, Y., Cody, J. and Wu, Y. (2010), “A case study of micro-blogging in the enterprise: use,
value, and related issues”,Proceedings of the Conference on Human Factors in Computing
Systems (CHI), pp. 123-132.
Zuchowski, O., Posegga, O., Schlagwein, D. and Fischbach, K. (2016), “Internal crowdsourcing: conceptual
framework, structured review, and research agenda”,Journal of Information Technology,Vol.31
No. 2, pp. 166-184.
About the authors
Christian Meske is Assistant Professor at the Department of Information Systems, Freie Universität
Berlin, and Member of the Einstein Center Digital Future (Berlin), Germany. He was Coordinator of the
Graduate School “User-Centered Social Media”at the Department of Computer Science and Applied
Cognitive Science at University of Duisburg-Essen. His research on digital collaboration and future of
work has been published in the Business & Information Systems Engineering,Business Process
Management Journal,Information Systems Frontiers,Journal of the Association for Information Science
and Technology and various others. Amongst others, he has been recognized with the AIS Best
Information Systems Publication of the Year Award. Christian Meske is the corresponding author and
can be contacted at: christian.meske@fu-berlin.de
Iris Junglas is Associate Professor at Florida State University, USA. Her research interest captures
technology innovation and business analytics. Her research has been published in Computers in
Human Behavior,European Journal of Information Systems,Information Systems Journal,Journal of
Strategic Information Systems,Journal of the Association of Information Systems,Management
Information Systems Quarterly and various others. Iris is also Senior Associate Editor for the European
Journal of Information Systems and Editorial Board Member of the Journal of Strategic Information
Systems. In 2017, she has been recognized with the AIS Best Information Systems Publication of
the Year Award.
Stefan Stieglitz is Associate Professor at University of Duisburg-Essen, Germany. His research
interest includes user behavior in information systems. His work has been published in journals
including Journal of Management Information Systems,Management Information Systems Quarterly
Executive and International Journal of Social Research Methodology. Amongst others, Stefan has been
recognized with the AIS Best Information Systems Publication of the Year Award.
For instructions on how to order reprints of this article, please visit our website:
www.emeraldgrouppublishing.com/licensing/reprints.htm
Or contact us for further details: permissions@emeraldinsight.com
456
JEIM
32,3
Downloaded by 88.128.80.48 At 01:46 21 May 2019 (PT)