Customer Engageent or Customer Enragement

Journal of Marketing CoMMuniCations
2019, Vol. 25, No. 8, 861–883

https://doi.org/10.1080/13527266.2018.1482559
Trialogue on Facebook pages of grocery stores: Customer

engagement or customer enragement?
Swaleha Peerooa , Martin Samyb and Brian Jonesc
a
Department of Management, Université des Mascareignes, Pamplemousses, Mauritius; bCSR and Effectiveness
Measurement, Leeds Beckett University, Leeds, UK; cDepartment of Accounting, Finance and Economics, Leeds
Beckett University, Leeds, UK
ABSTRACT ARTICLE HISTORY

The pervasiveness of social media is compelling businesses to review Received 21 October 2017
their way of managing customer experiences. Businesses use social Accepted 27 May 2018
media to interact and engage with customers. Several studies have
KEYWORDS
studied why businesses have adopted social media. However, there Social media; customer
is a dearth of research as to why customers interact with businesses engagement; relationship
on social media in the grocery sector. This paper aims to explore marketing; customer
how and why customers react to corporate messages on Facebook empowerment; grocery
pages of Tesco and Walmart. Netnography approach was adopted stores; Facebook
to gain an insight into the various ways customers engage with the
grocery stores on its Facebook pages. This study reveals that social
media empower customers, influence the relationships customers
have with grocery stores and generate customer engagement.
Findings also show that the social customer is both a curse and a
blessing to Tesco and Walmart when they create or destroy value for
the business. This paper contributes to knowledge by (1) uncovering
how customers react to corporate and customer posts on corporate
Facebook pages; (2) showing how value can be created and destroyed;
and (3) proposing a model illustrating how the main constructs of
the study are interconnected: social media, relationship marketing,
customer empowerment and customer engagement.
Introduction
The social media revolution has impacted the business world, urging companies to adapt
to a new social order (Arnaboldi and Coget 2016). By providing a two-way many-to-many
communication system, social media enable consumers to connect, produce and share
media content in an unprecedented manner (Daugherty and Hoffman 2014). Social media
have empowered customers by giving them a voice to spread their opinions on products
and services to a very wide audience and at an incredible speed (Constantinides, Romero,
and Boria 2008). The surge in popularity of social media platforms has multiplied and facil-
itated the online interactions between businesses and consumers (Goh, Heng, and Lin 2012).
Social media offer businesses new ways to talk to consumers (Thornhill, Xie, and Lee 2017)
and provide an online platform where customers can easily connect and interact with a
CONTACT Swaleha Peeroo speeroo@udm.ac.mu

© 2018 Informa UK Limited, trading as Taylor & Francis Group
862 S. PEEROO ET AL.
brand (Lovett and Staelin 2016). Businesses can also monitor consumers’ conversations and
attitudes towards a brand on social media (Srinivasan, Rutz, and Pauwels 2015).
The potential benefits of adopting social media platforms have appealed to businesses
of all sizes across several industries (Valerio Ureña et al. 2015). Dreading to lose the social
media battle, managers have hastily integrated social media within their business strategies
(Schultz and Peltier 2013). Businesses have strongly increased spending on social media,
from 5.6% of marketing budgets in 2009 to a forecasted growth of 20.9% by 2021 (Moorman
2016). However, many managers are still uncertain of the opportunities and threats relating
to social networks owing to the lack of knowledge of their structure and operation (Kaplan
and Haenlein 2010). In today’s digital era, marketers agree that social media are powerful
tools, which can spread and amplify word of mouth (Shamhuyenhanzva et al. 2016). Yet
most marketers ignore how to harness the power of social media (Divol, Edelman, and
Sarrazin 2012). Customers increasingly use social networking sites (SNSs) to discuss brands,
products and services, to seek or give advice, however it’s still a mystery for marketers to
know when, where and how to influence these online conversations (Divol, Edelman, and
Sarrazin 2012). Governments also understand the power of marketing via social media as
they support and guide local business to adapt to the new age of technology (Queensland
Government 2017).
Extant literature covers the field of social media as a marketing tool to build relationship
with customers; however there is a dearth of research on the use of social media in the
grocery sector though practitioners in this field are increasingly incorporating social media
in their marketing strategy (Tarnowski 2011). Building relationships in self-service outlets
like grocery stores have until now been challenging since there are reduced opportunities
for interpersonal interactions (Keeling, Keeling, and McGoldrick 2011). However, social media
offer the possibility to grocery stores to interact in real time with customers both inside and
outside the stores (Tarnowski 2011). Therefore, it is critical for retailers within this sector to
understand the opportunities and challenges offered by social media. Additionally, it is
becoming very difficult for grocery stores to ignore the social media revolution since accord-
ing to a survey carried out in the United Kingdom; only 15% of supermarket purchases were
the result of traditional advertising, while 25% of purchases were influenced by social plat-
forms and blogs (Snow 2012).
Research has been carried out to understand motivations of customers for interacting
with businesses in the apparel sector (Anderson et al. 2014) where customers are highly
involved in the purchase. These authors suggested further research to understand motiva-
tions of customers to connect with retailers in various sectors. This paper therefore aims to
fill this gap by analysing the motivations of customers to interact with grocery stores, which
sell mostly low involvement products by analysing responses of customers to customer and
company initiated messages.
This paper aims to uncover the reasons customers engage with grocery stores on social
media and to show how customer interactions on social media can be both a blessing and
a curse. Focusing on Facebook postings in a retail environment this paper furthers the debate
on marketing communications in and through a social media environment. This research is
significant in that it brings valuable information to managers as to the expectations of cus-
tomers who interact with companies via social media. This might enable companies to
reengineer their social media strategies to derive more meaningful conversations, gaining
higher levels of customer engagement and ultimately increasing sales and customer loyalty.
JOURNAL OF MARKETING COMMUNICATIONS 863
In this paper, we provide a brief literature of social media, and customer engagement. We
outline the netnographic method and present a model based on the findings of the study
focusing on the challenges and opportunities that these phenomena present to retailers of
the grocery sector. We then conclude, present the limitations and suggest future research
directions.
Literature review
Social media
Social media are a collection of Internet-based applications that build on the ideological
and technological foundations of Web 2.0 (Kaplan and Haenlein 2010) and mobile technol-
ogy (Kietzmann et al. 2011) and they allow the creation and exchange of user-generated
content (UGC). Being an open platform enabling multi-way communication, social media
are fast and affordable (Arnaboldi and Coget 2016). Social media empower customers and
virtual communities to send and broadcast information to a global audience cheaply and
instantaneously on the net (Arnaboldi and Coget 2016). Hailed as a societal revolution, social
media stem from the concepts of Web 2.0 and UGC (Kizildag et al. 2017). The proliferation
of UGC platforms (e.g., TripAdvisor, Yelp) and SNSs (e.g., Facebook, Twitter, Instagram) and
Web 2.0 outlets (e.g., Wikis, podcasts, blogs) has assisted businesses to customise their prod-
ucts and services, marketing strategies and customer relationship strategies to meet the
specific needs of consumer groups (Kizildag et al. 2017). Social media have transformed the
internal organisational structure of businesses by changing the way businesses communicate
to the world (Kizildag et al. 2017).
Customer empowerment in the social media age

Customer empowerment is defined as a ‘process in which [businesses and customers] sys-
tematically interact, learn, share information and integrate resources to jointly create value’
(van Dijk, Antonides, and Schillewaert 2014, 110). The ubiquity of Web 2.0 technologies and
social media has led online users to be exposed to various digital sources of information
that are initiated, produced, disseminated and consumed by online users as a way to educate
one another about products, services, brands and issues (Chauhan and Pillai 2013). Ease of
access to information and the ability for customers to communicate among themselves
provide them with a feeling of empowerment and a wish to play a bigger role in exchanging
ideas and viewpoints with businesses (Hoyer et al. 2010). Individuals also leverage social
networks and blogs to create, recommend and share information hence outspreading the
reach of marketing influence (Hanna, Rohm, and Crittenden 2011). Consumers in the digital
age use the Internet and social media platforms to find information about products and
services, to engage with the businesses they purchase from and to connect with other
customers who may provide valuable insights (Hanna, Rohm, and Crittenden 2011).
Traditional management methods can no longer be used with consumers on social media
as they expect firms to listen to them, engage and respond accordingly (Kietzmann et al.
2011).
When brands and consumers co-create brand stories, brand owners do not have full
control of their brands (Mangold and Faulds 2009) as consumer-generated brand contents
can spread as quickly as those created by companies (Yan 2011). In this social media era,
marketers find themselves at the mercy of customers who can post comments about their
brands. As this new marketing paradigm evolves, there is genuine excitement about the
potential of social media to add value for businesses, but also apprehension about the dif-
ficulty of seizing the full promise of this new medium (Lipsman et al. 2012).
Relationship marketing using social media

Relationship marketing sets the company-customer relationship in the centre of attention
as it recognises long-term value of building relationships with customers (Bruhn 2003). Social
media are used to develop and nurture brand communities (Sheth 2017). Social networking
sites are increasingly being used by businesses to establish their marketing network, since
social media platforms facilitate the establishment of communication and ongoing real time
conversations (Coulter and Roggeveen 2012). Social media communication emanating from
the business is a key element of the company’s promotion mix (Mangold and Faulds 2009).
The growth of social media usage among consumers provides marketers the opportunity
to move forward relationships from dialogue to trialogue – in which consumers engage in
meaningful conversations and relationships with one another and with the company (Porter
et al. 2011). Social media offer both businesses and customers innovative ways of engaging
with one another (Schivinski and Dabrowski 2014). Marketers communicate through social
media to engage with loyal customers, pass on information, influence beliefs and attitudes
about products and monitor the conversations to learn about their users (Brodie et al. 2013).
These users consciously join groups of like-minded individuals who interact around a focal
brand in brand communities (Veloutsou 2009). Brand communities are ‘specialized, non-ge-
ographically bound community, based on a structured set of social relationships among
admirers of a brand’ (Muniz and O’Guinn 2001, 421).
Responding to this trend, businesses are setting up online brand communities to engage
with their customers (Ul Islam and Rahman 2017). With the advent of Internet technology,
communities of consumers shifted online and over 50% of the top 100 global brands have
an online brand community (Manchanda, Packard, and Pattabhitamaiah 2012). 97% of the
Fortune 500 companies used social media as a communication tool in 2013, with 83% of
these companies with an active Twitter account and 80% having a corporate Facebook page
(Barnes and Lescault 2014). Because of the significant presence of potential customers on
Facebook, businesses and brands invest in having a brand presence by establishing a brand
community on Facebook where consumers and fans can interact with the business using
the ‘like’, ‘share’ and ‘comment’ options (Ho 2014).
Online brand communities on Facebook

Corporate Facebook pages are online brand communities since fans who have ‘liked’ the
page share a common interest (Pöyry, Parvinen, and Malmivaara 2013). Research has iden-
tified that large companies use their Facebook pages to (1) promote their products and
services such as launching new products and announcing sales promotions; (2) promote
sponsored events for e.g., donations or sponsoring sports activities; (3) carry out surveys to
get feedback from their fans; (4) make informational announcements for e.g., new opening
hours or new business locations; and (5) post fun messages usually in a question style linked
to a recent or forthcoming event (Dekay 2012). A recent study in South Africa on Generation
Z revealed that they updated their profile regularly and this then is advantageous for mar-
keters to target the segment for their products or services (Duffett 2017).
Customers connect to a Facebook brand page because: (1) they consume the products
and services of the company; (2) they hope to get discounts and promotions; (3) they want
to show to others that they like a particular brand; (4) they want to get information about
the brand before others do; and (5) they wish to have access to exclusive content (Pereira,
Salgueiro, and Mateus 2014).
Four benefits that customers gain from using social networks are: (1) social benefits by
interacting with other members of the community; (2) informational benefits by accessing
information about the products and services of the company; (3) hedonic benefits by enjoy-
ing and having fun on the social network for e.g., games; and finally (4) economic benefits
by obtaining promotional deals. These benefits encourage community members to continue
visiting and being active on social networking sites, therefore offering opportunities to firms
to strengthen relationships with their customers (Park and Kim 2014).
Co-creation and co-destruction on social media platforms

Co-creation is one of the virtues of the new age marketing enabled by social media. The
evolution in connective technologies enables customers to actively participate in value
creation (Agrawal and Rahman 2017). Also, businesses provide consumers with tools and
technology to participate and co-create value for themselves and other customers (Agrawal
and Rahman 2017). Value co-creation is the joint value creation activity that occurs through
collaborative activities of firms and customers (Blasco-Arcas, Hernandez-Ortega, Jimenez-
Martinez 2014). However, for marketers who need to manage their brands, UGC and social
media do not only provide opportunities but also threats (Vanden Bergh et al. 2011). Social
media and UGC are a potential threat to the efforts of organisations to build, manage and
protect their brands because such content is outside their immediate control (Fournier and
Avery 2011). Interestingly, technologies and tools of Web 2.0 seem to ease the co-creation
of value by the company and the customer (Thackeray et al. 2008).
The open-comment platform of Facebook and the anonymity offered by the Internet
produce the ideal conditions for public outrage to be vented on corporate walls (Champoux,
Durgee, and McGlynn 2012). Furthermore, social media have empowered customers and
the public by giving them a voice and weakened the position of companies by rendering
them vulnerable to customer attacks, negative publicity and corporate reputation damage
(Schulze et al. 2015). The voice of the customer in brand communities may be a threat to the
organisation if it carries a negative content (Lee, Han, and Suh 2014). Social media users can
generate huge waves of outrage within a short period of time when reacting to a question-
able activity or statement of an organisation (Pfeffer, Zorbach, and Carley 2014). Such a
phenomenon is qualified as an online firestorm, which is ‘the sudden discharge of large
quantities of messages containing negative word of mouth and complaint behaviour against
a person, company, or group in social media networks’ (Pfeffer, Zorbach, and Carley 2014,
118).
Despite the threats posed by the democratisation of communication, marketers are
increasingly using social media to connect and engage with their customers. Customer
engagement is believed to be the key outcome of social media campaigns (Malhotra 2012).
The negative impact of posts that criticises the service or product can be used by organiza-
tions to gauge their performance and take advantage to promote new changes and or
explain their position.
Customer engagement
In this increasingly connected world, social media channels provide new opportunities to
engage customers (Alexander and Jaakkola 2016). By giving access to online content and
communication through virtual tools, social media enable and facilitate consumer experi-
ences, which may generate customer engagement with specific brands (Vivek and Beatty
2012). Though customer engagement has various interpretations, it is often viewed as a
motivational concept, with varying intensity. It encompasses an object (i.e., a brand) and a
subject (i.e., the customer) (Dessart, Veloutsou, and Morgan-Thomas 2015), and has either
a positive or negative valence (Brodie et al. 2011; Hollebeek and Chen 2014).
Customer engagement embraces the connection that users form with businesses, fol-
lowing their experiences with the products, services and activities of the business (Hollebeek
2011). Vivek and Beatty (2012) differentiate between customer-initiated and firm initiated
customer engagement. Customer-initiated engagement occurs primarily due to the internal
motivational state of customers without any clear company actions. While firm-initiated
customer engagement arises when businesses explicitly adopt strategies to trigger customer
engagement, for example, by encouraging customers to share a video or to ‘like’ the brand
on Facebook. Unlike conventional marketing actions, firm-initiated engagement initiatives
do not aim to sell but to build relationships with customers by being interactive and prompt-
ing participative experiences (Gill, Sridhar, and Grewal 2017).
Van Doorn et al. (2010, 253) define customer engagement behaviours as ‘the customer’s
behavioral manifestations toward a brand or firm, beyond purchase, resulting from motiva-
tional drivers’. Forms of engagement include posting a comment on a company’s Facebook
page, writing a review on TripAdvisor, interacting in a brand community, or referring a prod-
uct to another customer. Other researchers argued that customer engagement also incor-
porates the transactional behaviour i.e., buying (Kumar et al. 2010; Pansari and Kumar 2017).
Hollebeek (2011, 790) defines 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 behavioural activity in direct brand interactions’. In this
definition of customer engagement, there are the three dimensions that have been exten-
sively cited in the literature, namely the cognitive, emotional and behavioural perspectives
(Brodie et al. 2011; Hollebeek 2013). From a cognitive standpoint, engagement is a positive
state of mind that is represented by high commitment, energy and loyalty towards a firm
(Porter et al. 2011), for e.g., the person’s level of concentration or engrossment in the brand
(Hollebeek 2011). From a behavioural viewpoint, engagement refers to actions toward a
firm that go beyond transactions (Porter et al. 2011), for e.g., participation, vigour and inter-
action with the focal brand (Hollebeek 2013). From an emotional perspective, customer
engagement may be characterised by feelings of an individual towards a brand (Vivek and
Beatty 2012), for e.g., a customer’s level of brand-related inspiration and/or pride (Hollebeek
2011). A study by Leppäniemi, Karjaluoto, and Saarijärvi (2016) found that customers’ deci-
sions to share information with other customers are emotional in nature since these are
founded on former positive experiences with the grocery store. Hollebeek (2013) posits that
the level of engagement and the resulting customer value is different depending on whether
the brand is perceived as utilitarian or hedonic. Utilitarian value is increased when customers
gain functional and instrumental benefits with little or no emotion involved for example
when buying staple food or a washing machine. Hedonic value is experienced when a cus-
tomer buys a product/service for the affective gratifications that it brings to the user for
example entertainment, relaxation or escapism.
Unlike authors who have used multidimensional perspectives, van Doorn et al. (2010)
focus only on the behavioural dimension of customer engagement. According to these
scholars, customer engagement consists of behaviours, which go beyond transactions (van
Doorn et al. 2010). Customers engage in several behaviours that boost their relationship
with the brand. Behavioural manifestations do not only mean purchases, but also include
other activities of the customer such as word of mouth, customer co-creation and complain-
ing behaviour (Bijmolt et al. 2010), recommendations, helping other customers, blogging,
writing reviews and even engaging in legal actions (van Doorn et al. 2010). By moving along
the customer engagement cycle, value is generated both for the customer and the company.
However, when organisations fail to engage customers, they have to face the potential threat
of customer enragement (Leeflang et al. 2014), a situation where customers can easily
become value destroyers instead of value creators for companies (Verhoef, Beckers, and van
Doorn 2013). This forces businesses to be increasingly reactive, or even pro-active, to avoid
negative brand image consequences which in turn may lead to increased value co-destruc-
tion (Beckers, van Doorn, and Verhoef 2017). When seeking customer engagement, managers
need to consider the potential dark side of customer engagement, and be equipped to deal
with customer enragement in case the engagement campaign backfires (Beckers, van Doorn,
and Verhoef 2017).
Methodology
A netnographic study was undertaken to observe reactions of customers to company posts
on Facebook pages of grocery stores. Netnography is a participant-observation method
used for data collection to research the consumer behaviour of online communities and
cultures present on the Internet (Kozinets 2012). Kozinets (2009) states that netnography
attempts to provide understanding of a community and its interactions and communications
within that community. A non-participant netnography research similar to Colliander and
Wien (2013) was adopted. This netnographic research aims to analyse the reactions of cus-
tomers to messages posted by grocery stores on their official Facebook pages. Moreover,
netnography involves observing customers, supermarkets and hypermarkets on the Internet
unobtrusively and provides a ‘window into naturally occurring behavior’ that other marketing
research tools cannot do (Kozinets 2002, 62). For a rigorous and reliable research approach,
we have adhered to the five stages and recommended procedures: (1) making entrée, (2)
data collection and analysis, (3) providing trustworthy interpretation, (4) research ethics and
finally (5) member checks (Kozinets et al. 2010).
For the entrée, Tesco and Walmart were chosen, as they are the major grocery stores
worldwide according to the March 2013 Global Food Retail report. Additionally Tesco and
Walmart adopt an international strategy and have stores in several countries. Both grocery
stores have set up official Facebook pages where comments are posted in English and cor-
respond to the criteria set by Kozinets et al. (2010) to be considered as online communities.
Table 1. Customer reactions to company-initiated messages.
868
Themes for company-initi-

ated messages Academic references Customer posts on Facebook pages of Tesco and Walmart
Conversations – engage in Members of the online community also drive the conversations (Colleoni 2013) I am on the site now and I am looking for what you are talking about and I am not seeing that
conversations with grocery option on here?
stores and with the other Dad you have turned into a Tesco whinge lol xxxx
customers of the grocery Users can easily set up communities of special interests within which they can share Wow Lauren by the sounds of it you were lucky x at least we know of one person who actually
store (trialogue) their knowledge and experience, and can also engage in a conversation with other got a bunny x x
people, or experts in the field (Constantinides, Romero, and Boria 2008) Just saw an advert for chicken breasts £4 a pack. Pack of 1, 2, 3, 4 or 1 or 2 kg. Why don’t the ad
S. PEEROO ET AL.
say?
The growth of social media usage among consumers provides marketers the Hey Wal-Mart I’m thinking of applying for a job with your company. Do you have health and
opportunity to move forward relationships from dialogue to trialogue – in which dental benefits? I’m guessing because of the large profits your company makes you pay above
consumers engage in meaningful conversations and relationships with one another minimum wage. How do I apply?
and with the company (Porter et al. 2011)
Emotions – Feelings of a Customers tend to express strong emotions on the Internet more readily and easily Excited to hear news this morning about your new organic line! And more excited to hear it will
customer towards a brand owing to the anonymity offered via this medium of communication (Champoux, be the same price as nonorganic items, any word on when this will be in stores?
Durgee, and McGlynn 2012) I have to say it eggcellent!!!
From an emotional perspective, customer engagement may be characterised by so you’re trying to tell me that I can eat flowers now? Ya, nice try Walmart. Feeling rather insulted
feelings of an individual towards a brand (Vivek and Beatty 2012), for e.g., a that you’re taking everyone for a ride with this promo
customer’s level of brand-related inspiration and/or pride (Hollebeek 2011). Chinese Organics? I wouldn’t trust Walmart to sell certified organics
Customers with strong emotional bonds can become advocates for sellers in
peer-to-peer interactions with other customers and non-customers and play an
important role in the value adding process as co-creators of value. (Sashi 2012)
Co-creation of value – Level of Value co-creation is defined as the mutual collaborative activities by stakeholders I’m having my first home delivery tonight for a pound. you’ve saved me standing and queuing
perceived value created in participating in direct interactions, aspiring to add to the value that materializes for with 2kids, arthritis and being pregnant with our third. My cousin recommended how good
the customer’s mind arising either one or both parties (Grönroos2012) your service is. Her husband works for you too but she said your never late for your time slot so
from interactive, joint, and/ Co-creation happens when the customer contributes through spontaneous, thought I’d give it a whirl. I just used to love going to the supermarket but life makes it harder
or personalised activities for discretionary behaviours that personalise the customer-to-brand experience (van these days
and with stakeholders Doorn et al. 2010) WalMart,you should sell Swiss muesli Familia in the stores vs online only.Not many consumers
are aware that there is better choice other than the processesed Cheerios
The supplier is at fault not Tesco …
Purchase my #SlowMeDown CD from my friends at Walmartand get a free digital copy, too! xoxo
http://www.walmart.com/ip/34608038 Purchase Sara Evans’ ‘Slow Me Down’ CD and get a free
digital copy, too
Co-destruction of value Value co-destruction is defined ‘as an interactional process between service systems Tesco huge fail. Again. Good luck. Why don’t you employ proper staff to deal with these things?
– Co-destruction of value that results in a decline in at least one of the systems’ well-being’ (Plé and Chumpitaz I’ve never known them to be very helpful past that. I surely know not to ask where anything is
occurs during interactions 2010, 431) located or for help at my local Walmart
between the company and No one would want their moms to be mistreated,no one would even want a new mother pig to
Co-destruction denotes the joint destruction, or impoverishment of value by businesses
its customers where instead be mistreated either, right? Walmart’s pork suppliers do just that every day by using pork
and customers (Echeverri and Skålén 2011)
of creating value for both gestation crates. Demand Walmart stop using these suppliers by buying your pork somewhere
parties, value is destroyed else!!!
either for all parties or for Chicken with some amazing seasoning … carrots, new potatoes and suede … all from Lidl!
one party Thanks for asking! Chicken was on a deal and veg is cheaper anyway’
Everyone should do this country a favor and quit shopping at wal mart. Start shopping
somewhere that is willing to pay there employees a decent wage give them benefits instead of
the ceos putting all the money in there pockets cause obviously they have more money then
they will ever need and there greed is disgusting please go away wal mart
Looks like Tesco are getting desperate! You’ve lost my custom. I’ll stick to Aldi thanks. I can get a
trolley full of gorgeous stuff for half the price of Tesco and fruit and veg that doesn’t go rotten
within a day, if it isn’t already grotty when it arrives
Table 2. Customer-initiated messages.
Themes for cus-
tomer-initiated
messages Academic references Customer comments posted on Facebook pages of Tesco and Walmart
Customer Consumers may post negative comments to complain about a negative Just been into tesco at Truro, what a fiasco getting a ticket to get out of the car park. What a
complaints customer experience with a brand (Jin, Fisher Liu, and Austin 2014) stupid, long winded, unfriendly system. Guess what I won’t be going back!
Complaints are rife on social media platforms and are a specific form of 409 N marketplace blvd in Lansing Michigan only had two cashiers working on a busy Friday night
negative word of mouth (Einwiller and Steilen 2015) (today). Our ice cream melted while waiting in line. The cashier in our line was extremely slow as
Most of the complaints posted on Facebook are product or service well. The lines went all the way to the clothes. I used to be a cashier at a different store,
related (Crecelius, Einwiller, and Himmelreich 2012) scheduling so few cashiers on a busy weekend night is poor management and poor customer
service
Customer With web technologies such as blogs, it is easy for brand critics to voice Is anyone else getting the impression that the right hand does not know what the left hand is
criticisms their frustration (Fournier and Avery 2011) doing, as far as Tesco is concerned, and this thread? They appear to be answering random
Repetitive and systematic customer attacks as shitstorm, a term which queries and points, and NO-ONE appear to know the answer to Angela’s question! Tesco clearly
denotes ‘emotional and often irrational criticisms carried out by many do not KNOW what is in the food they are selling us. Appalling
consumers. Rational negative opinions usually form the basis for I think it’s absolutely disgusting practice to sell ONLY halal meat, that non Muslim people now
shitstorms, which eventually grow through irrational and assertive have to eat meat slaughtered with Islamic prayers. As a Christian I do not want to eat meat
content added by other dissatisfied users.’ (Schulze et al. 2015; p.4) blessed in another religion! I hope you’re also aware of the barbaric nature in which the animal
is slaughtered, it gets it’s throat slit without stunning. The animal feels every centimetre of the
cut. It’s wrong! It’s cruel and it’s appeasement of a minority over the wishes of the majority who
do not want to eat this filth. You have lost my custom
Express A customer’s overall evaluation of the performance of an offering to I have been collecting the vouchers for the Thomas offer, Last week I purchased the knife block.
satisfaction date (Gustafsson, Johnson, and Roos 2005) The large santou knife would not fit. Returned block to stock with knife and the assistant Darren
was very helpful. Exchanged block. Knife fitted .One happy customer
Thank you so much for donating close code product toFeeding America Tampa Bay and for even
taking your boxes back. Really grateful. #farmergratitude
Post queries Customers connect to a Facebook brand page because they want to I used to buy a lot of Value items, many of which seem to be no longer available. Is there an up to
get information about the brand (Pereira, Salgueiro, and Mateus date list of what is available, please?
2014) Which stores will you be selling the Wild Oats products in? we desperately need these in our town!
Recommendation Individuals leverage social networks and blogs to create, recommend Go to Walmart!
of product or and share information hence outspreading the reach of marketing Tesco are the best
services influence (Hanna, Rohm, and Crittenden 2011)
Increasingly consumers are using social media to obtain recommenda-
tions, opinions and reviews from colleagues, family, friends, experts
and the collective social community before buying products and
JOURNAL OF MARKETING COMMUNICATIONS
services (Baird and Parasnis 2011)

Customer A form of customer engagement behaviour is when customers make But as for bogof, they don’t benefit everyone. We are a family of six so get through a lot, but
suggestions suggestions as to how to enhance the customer experience (van people on their own, even storing food correctly, are likely to waste some. Half pricing things
Doorn et al. 2010) instead of offering bogof would do a lot to reduce food waste and keep customers happy
869
Customers at times make suggestions to the company and these Add a stores in Princeton and in wolf city and in Anna Texas and in surf side beac and in Galveston
suggestions turn customers into co-creators of value for the and in the city of west Texas
organisation (O’Cass and Viet Ngo 2011)
Kozinets et al. (2010) advise to select online communities which (1) entice many individuals
to actively post; (2) provide data that can be analysed; and (3) have interactions that are
relevant to the research questions. Facebook pages of Tesco and Walmart are appropriate
sources of data because of their wide popularity, pervasive nature and their interactive public
writing space, which allowed grocery stores to post information on their official pages for
customers to read, respond and interact with.
For data collection, we downloaded conversations occurring on the official Facebook
pages of Tesco and Walmart from 6 April 2014 to 6 May 2014. Similar to the study of Colliander
and Wien (2013), we opted for a non-participant observation netnography and collected
data during a one-month period. The data captured during a one-month period is used to
convey conversations at one particular point in time. This data provides a good baseline
study on which future retail netnographic studies can be built and will serve as good base
for a justifiable research method for comparative analysis. Saturation of data occurred during
that period (Kozinets 2002). The data were saved in word documents, the data added up to
8008 pages of texts using Arial font size 11. The data were analysed through the qualitative
software, NVivo. Qualitative content analysis was used to extract themes from the datasets
as recommended by Kozinets (2002). This netnographic qualitative study offers a compar-
ative analysis of Facebook postings linked to themes identified in Tables 1 and 2. Similar to
the study of Stavros et al. (2014), the unit of analysis consisted of the content of the Facebook
pages of Tesco and Walmart and the coding units were the individual posts and comments
by customers of these grocery stores. Constant comparative method was used to perform
the qualitative data analysis (Straus and Corbin 1990) in order to generate insights. We first
applied open coding (Miles and Huberman 1994) to bring meaning to the data, closely
examining and comparing data for similarities and differences. Each code represented a
distinct aspect of the phenomenon being studied. We then used axial coding (Miles and
Huberman 1994) to interconnect the various categories identified in the previous stage in
order to uncover any fundamental underlying trends and patterns. By interpreting the com-
ments posted by customers on the official Facebook pages of Tesco and Walmart, we were
able to identify the different ways customers reacted to company-initiated messages and
customer-initiated messages.
The third step of netnography is to provide trustworthy interpretation. Research is reck-
oned to be reasonable and trustworthy when conventional procedures of netnography are
followed while collecting and analysing data (Kozinets 2002). Triangulation of data was used
to enhance credibility of the study. Triangulation is achieved through the use of a large
number of customers who have posted comments (Lincoln and Guba 1985). We also col-
lected data from two different grocery stores to achieve site triangulation, which minimises
the impact of local factors pertaining to a specific grocery store on this research.
We adopted the ethical procedure recommended by Langer and Beckman (2005) for
non-participant netnography. Comments posted on the Facebook page of Tesco and Walmart
are publicly available data with no password restriction, therefore we did not need to obtain
permission before using these data. However, we respected the anonymity and privacy of
the participants.
Finally, the fifth step is carrying out member checks (Kozinets 2002). Member check is a
technique whereby part or all of the research findings are given to the participants of the
research in order to seek their comments (Lincoln and Guba 1985). However, we did not
carry out member checks since this research is conducted entirely unobtrusively, and Langer
and Beckman (2005) argue that in such conditions, member checks are not required.
Findings and discussions

When customers respond to company posts or initiate conversations on the Facebook pages
of Tesco and Walmart, they provide insights into the reasons why they engage with busi-
nesses on social media. Based on the themes identified in Tables 1 and 2, the reactions of
customers to company-initiated messages and customer-initiated messages were identified
as illustrated in Figure 1. The reactions of customers to posts on Facebook pages of Tesco
and Walmart reveal that social media empower customers, influence the relationships cus-
tomers have with grocery stores and generate customer engagement.
Empowered customers within the grocery sector

While interacting with Tesco and Walmart on their official Facebook page, customers perceive
that they have been empowered since they can voice out their opinions to the virtual brand
community and they can also add or destroy value for the business. Co-creation of products
and modification of products are not areas in which customers can add value in the grocery
sector, since grocery stores do not manufacture products but only source products from
their suppliers to sell to final customers. However, this study reveals that customers of Tesco
and Walmart add value to the relationship by suggesting products that they would like to
have, by informing the grocery stores of their needs and wants, by recommending products
to their peers, and by giving advice to other customers as illustrated by the following quote:
Let’s all go to tescos [sic] where allegra [sic] gets her best cloths [sic] their [sic] all half price she
thinks that’s nice
Additionally, Facebook has given a voice to the customer, which extends far beyond the
circle of relatives, friends and colleagues known to the customer. By giving a voice to the
customer, Facebook has empowered customers since it is easier for customers to post com-
plaints on the page, to criticise actions of the company, than to call the company or write a
letter of complaint. Einwiller and Steilen (2015) argue that nowadays the creation and
exchange of UGC on social media sites are rather easy and effortless. Moreover, customers
can observe other customers posting complaints on Facebook pages of other companies,
which may make it easier for them to complain (Einwiller and Steilen 2015). Relatedly, in this
study, over 65% of UGC on the Facebook page of Tesco and Walmart consisted of complaints
and criticisms. When a customer posts a complaint or a criticism, it creates a snowball effect
leading other customers to complain as well (Schulze et al. 2015). We find that when cus-
tomers of Tesco and Walmart complain on Facebook, they at times gain support from other
customers. This is in line with findings of Einwiller and Steilen (2015) who say that since the
complaint is publicly available on social media, the unsatisfied customer could spread his
or her dissatisfaction and potentially gain support from other dissatisfied parties. So just
one unhappy customer can cause a lot of harm to the corporate reputation of the organi-
sation and customers are aware of this power they hold as illustrated below
As a loyal employee and a loyal customer who can influence many other customers locally and
via FaceBook,I [sic] hope we DO NOT carry the G.M.O. salmon that many other stores/companies
are refusing to sell.
Figure 1. Customer reactions to messages posted on Facebook pages of Tesco and Walmart. (Source:
developed by the authors).
Relationship building within the grocery sector

As the modern food retail industry is booming worldwide and competition in this sector is
rife, grocery retailers aim to provide superior customer value to gain customer satisfaction.
To improve the satisfaction levels of customers, retailers are increasingly using social media
to enrich their shopping experience (Pookulangara and Koesler 2011). Tesco and Walmart
have set up their official Facebook pages to communicate, interact and engage their cus-
tomers to strengthen the relationship with them.
In this study, customers comment on the relationship they have with grocery stores by
posting comments in which they have expressed satisfaction and loyalty towards Tesco and
Walmart. This study reveals that customers tend to post positive comments in which they
inform the company and other customers about the product or service that they have bought
and how satisfied they are with the purchase as illustrated in the following quote:
Thanks for Tesco, And all the local & express Store’s [sic], i [sic] for one appreciate polite staff and
bargain prices every day thanks Tesco, I’me [sic] a BIG FAN !! [sic]
Emotional bonding is a prerequisite to strong brand relationships (Fournier and Avery 2011).
Customers of Tesco and Walmart have demonstrated their emotional commitment to the
firm by posting comments in which they express their affection and attachment to the firm
for e.g., by using the word ‘love’. These emotional bonds therefore provide a sustainable
competitive advantage (Harridge-March and Quinton 2009) as shown below.
Love tescos [sic] have shopped there for the last 29yrs [sic] since I had my first son. £1 delivery
slots will definitely make me shop on line!! [sic]
However, this study has also revealed numerous cases of dissatisfied customers who have
either complained about a product or service or criticised an action of the organisation and
who have vouched that they are terminating the relationship with the grocery stores as
illustrated by the following quote:
Why am I being plastered with ads from this miserable store? I hate wmart [sic]!!!!!
When retailers fail to meet expectations of customers, the relationship is broken and cus-
tomers turn to competitors (Zeithaml, Berry, and Parasuraman 1996). However, engaging
with customers on Facebook, Tesco and Walmart can help build and maintain relationships
with them.
Customer engagement within the grocery sector

Tesco and Walmart aim to engage customers on their official Facebook pages. This study
reveals that the three most extensively cited dimensions of customer engagement occur on
the Facebook page of Tesco and Walmart: cognitive, emotional and behavioural. Cognitive
engagement occurs at Tesco and Walmart, whenever customers post comments in which
they provide information and help to other customers, or when they give advice to other
customers. Another form of cognitive engagement is when customers post comments about
their satisfaction and loyalty towards the stores. Customers express their satisfaction in terms
of utilitarian value gained by engaging with the stores as illustrated below:
Walmart the best store in the whole world, everything that I need is there, yeah [sic] because
after looking in the other stores website comparing prices at end Walmart is the [sic] my favourite
and I finished my day in Walmart.
In this statement, the customer explicitly states the utilitarian values she gains while shop-
ping at Walmart and these utilitarian values reinforce the relationship with the grocery store.
The perceived increase in utilitarian value increases the level of customer engagement of
the customer who feels the need to communicate her satisfaction with the other community
members. Similarly Hollebeek (2013) found that customer engagement increases utilitarian
value.
Emotional engagement also occurs whenever customers post comments about their
feelings and emotions. Customers use four main ways of expressing emotions on the
Facebook pages of Tesco and Walmart: enthusiasm, humour, sarcasm and scepticism.
Enthusiasm and humour bring hedonic value to the online community as depicted by the
following quote:
No golden egg for me but I had a lovely virtual walk around Kensington gardens, Kew Gardens,
Loch Ness, Snowden and many other places. So thank you for giving me a couple of fun hours
visiting places that I might not have seen xxx TY [sic]
In this quote, the customer refers to the hedonic value she has while interacting on the
Facebook page of Tesco. This finding is consistent with Hollebeek (2013) who argues that
customer engagement boosts hedonic value.
While sarcasm and scepticism destroy value and even damage the image of the store as
represented by the following quote:
So all this advert is really telling us is that you have been ripping us off for years. Thank you for
that, [sic] after all Every Little Helps … your shareholders.
Emotional engagement influences the nature of the relationship between the customer and
the business (Brodie et al. 2011).
Behavioural engagement occurs when customers request for more information, enter-
tainment, additional incentives and when they participate by responding to posts of the
stores. This study reveals that customers converse with other customers on Facebook, share
advertisement, give advice to other customers, get or provide feedback to other customers,
criticise other customers, help other customers, make themselves or someone else known
to other customers and also provide support and encouragement to other customers as
shown in Table 3.
When customers are engaged, the levels of utilitarian and hedonic value that they per-
ceive to experience increase (Hollebeek 2013). However, findings reveal that engaged cus-
tomers also post negative comments, which may harm the organisation. When this occurs,
instead of engaging customers, retailers generate customer enragement (Leeflang et al.
2014). This study reveals that customers destroy value when they post comments to com-
plain, to criticise, to provide information about competitors, to warn customers against a
product/service and to boycott a store as illustrated in Table 3. When UGC contains negative
brand information, it may damage a brand (Cheong and Morrison 2008).
Influence of social media on the grocery sector

From the findings of this study, it can be concluded that the four main constructs of the
study are interconnected: social media, relationship marketing, customer empowerment
and customer engagement. In the retail sector, more specifically the grocery sector, Facebook
generates online customer engagement which influences the relationships customers have
with Tesco and Walmart. Empowered customers use Facebook to convey their satisfaction
or dissatisfaction to Tesco and Walmart as well as to the members of the community by
posting comments. The interconnectedness of the constructs is depicted in Figure 2.
Table 3. Customer posts on Facebook pages of Tesco and Walmart.

Customer’s comment posted on Facebook pages of Tesco and
Occurrences of behavioural engagement Walmart
Request for more information What type of baby clothes you have?? I need some new ones
Seeking entertainment this game is so fun ahahaha
Request for additional incentives B [sic], Do i [sic] get a free pack ?[sic]
C2C (customer to customer) conversations No golden egg for me Frazer, unfortunately. I’m going to stay so skinny,
ha ha ! [sic]
Giving advice to other customers I found a better way for them to last longer, put them in a bowl of water
and a cup of vinegar and soak for 10 min. and then rinse off and put in
refrigerator. They stay fresh LONGER AND THEY ARE CLEAN AND
PESTICIDE FREE!!! [sic]
Criticising other customers, Why do people like wal-mart [sic] on facebook [sic] and then get on here
and just gripe? Get a life people. There are many issues in the world
bigger than the wages wal-mart [sic] pays their associates
Helping other customers click on the link provided (it worked for me) and search on that site
Complaining Well would have had lamb but not open today,also [sic] have 25quids
[sic] worth of 5pound off vouchers that run out today,so [sic] thanks
tesco i [sic] can afford to lose all that money. Thanks once again (NOT)!!!
[sic]
Criticising What a bunch of hog wash [sic]!!!! Walmart you are one of the hugest
reasons the working poor stay poor!!!! Shame on u!!! Pay living wages
and give health benefits and then you can make claims like this!!!!
Providing information about competitors Wouldn’t shop at tesco [sic] ever again … quality of food has dropped!
Rather shop at morrisons [sic] now. At least they stock FRESH fruit n veg
[sic]
Warning customers against a product/ I recommend getting your ham just about anywhere other than Walmart.
service The pigs in Walmart’s supply chain are kept in gestation crates for most
of their lives
Asking to boycott a store It’s sad that I live in American [sic] and get blocked for voicing my
opinion. You lost a customer. I will be boycotting all walmarts. I know
this will not effect [sic] your financial state but I will spread the word! I
know a lot of people who value my opinion. I will spend money else
where [sic]
The model depicts the reactions of customers to messages posted on the Facebook pages
of Tesco and Walmart. This study shows that customers interact with the grocery stores by
‘liking’, ‘sharing’ and ‘commenting’ posts on the Facebook page. By using Facebook to com-
municate with their customers, Tesco and Walmart compensate for the lack of interpersonal
interactions within the store. Customers use the Facebook page to post queries, to complain,
to criticise and to make suggestions to the grocery stores. These interactions enhance the
relationship between the two parties and give rise to the personification of the brand, a
situation in which the grocery store acts as a human friend of the store’s fans on Facebook.
This study also reveals that online customer engagement can either create value or
destroy value. Positive online customer engagement results in co-creation of value, which
leads to a stronger relationship between the grocery stores and their customers. While neg-
ative online customer engagement also known as online customer enragement leads to
co-destruction of value, which weakens the relationship between the parties.
In this social media era, whether the customer is satisfied or dissatisfied with the products
and services of the grocery stores, the customer feels empowered as Facebook and social
media offer a voice to the customer. When the customer has a positive customer experience,
he/she wants to share this experience with the other members of the virtual community.
Therefore, the happy and satisfied customer goes back to the Facebook page and posts a
positive message, which may eventually positively influence the members of the online
Figure 2. Creation and Destruction of value on Facebook pages of Tesco and Walmart. (Source: developed
by the authors).
community. Conversely, when the customer experiences a negative outcome resulting in

online customer enragement, he/she wants to share his/her experience with the other mem-
bers of the virtual community. Hence, the disgruntled and angry customer posts a negative
comment on the Facebook page. This customer backlash may damage the image of the
grocery stores and negatively influence the other members of the online community. Online
customer enragement brings co-destruction of value, which damages the relationship
between the two parties.
Within the social media realm, customers feel empowered, as social media platforms have
given them a voice. Whether the customers are satisfied or not, they feel empowered since
they can influence the other community members. Satisfied customers post positive com-
ments to share their positive experience, while disgruntled customers turn to Facebook to
complain or to express their discontent. Therefore, it is vital that retailers understand how
to harness social media to enhance the shopping experience of customers.
Conclusion
Social media have profoundly transformed the marketing landscape by providing opportu-
nities to businesses to communicate and interact with their customers, but also challenging
them by giving a voice and more power to customers. The aim of this paper was to analyse
the reactions of customers on Facebook pages of Tesco and Walmart. Exploring the rich and
complex world of social media through Facebook postings has served to demonstrate
the shifting landscape in which marketing communications operate. This paper shows the
various ways customers engage with grocery stores as illustrated in Tables 1 and 2. When
customers engage positively with the grocery store, value is created and the relationship is
enhanced. However, when customer enragement occurs, customers destroy value by taking
actions, which harm the business such as posting complaints and criticisms or asking cus-
tomers to boycott the store, thus endangering the relationships with customers. Social media
have empowered customers who use Facebook to express their satisfactions or dissatisfac-
tions on the official Facebook pages of Tesco and Walmart.
This research makes several contributions to the literature on the use of social media,
more specifically Facebook in the grocery sector. However, few studies have attempted to
analyse customer perceptions on the relationship building potential of social media. This
research has analysed customer reactions to both company initiated messages and customer
initiated messages on the Facebook pages of grocery stores, bridging the gap between
social media literature and relationship marketing literature within the grocery sector from
the customers’ perspectives. This paper is unique in that it shows the interconnectedness of
social media, relationship marketing, customer empowerment and customer engagement
in the grocery sector. It has also identified ways customers co-create and co-destroy value
in the grocery sector.
This paper has brought to light several implications for retailers. This study suggests that
online brand community members want to interact with brands, and this interaction moti-
vates them to pursue a relationship with the brand. Facebook fan pages should be designed
to encourage conversations among consumers about marketing messages. Retailers should
closely monitor the trialogue on social media platforms to identify the best time to partici-
pate in the conversation and respond to customers’ comments to strengthen the bonds
between the brand and its customers. Additionally, retailers should encourage customer
co-creation on their Facebook page and should also harness customer relationship man-
agement (CRM) 2.0 by using all the information provided by customers in their comments
to personalise the communication with them.
Retailers need to be aware that in this digital era, customers view social media platforms
as a direct communication channel with the brand. These customers are looking for con-
venience and expect retailers to respond in ‘real-time’ to their queries. It is obvious from this
study that customers perceive the official Facebook page of Tesco and Walmart as a customer
service channel. Therefore, retailers should attend to the queries and complaints of customers
efficiently on Facebook, so that unsatisfied customers can be turned into loyal customers.
As social media have made it easier for customers to complain, retailers should use this as
an opportunity to positively influence the perceptions of customers by showing to them
how they listen and resolve customer issues.
Retailers need to be cautious when starting conversations on social media platforms. In

particular, retailers should be aware of the ‘wild west’ nature of social media (Tench and
Jones 2015) and be ready to counteract customer enragement or any online firestorms
(Pfeffer, 2013) to avoid co-destruction of value.
The limitation of the paper is related to the nature of the netnography method, which
constrained the analysis to those customers who have commented on Facebook, therefore
neglecting other sources such as offline customer feedback or anti brand communities.
Future research might consider these other online sources where customers exchange infor-
mation on brands. This paper has focused on two businesses, which are active on social
media, and therefore it could be interesting to compare between a passive and an active
company on social media. Another avenue for future research could be to focus on one
grocery store operating in several countries to identify differences and similarities between
social media communication in different country contexts. This will provide the opportunity
to look at how communication is customised to specific locations i.e., the influence of place
and culture.
Disclosure statement
No potential conflict of interest was reported by the authors.
Notes on contributors
Swaleha Peeroo is a lecturer in Marketing at the Université des Mascareignes, Mauritius. She holds a
Maitrise Administration Economique et Sociale mention Administration et Gestion des Entreprises
from the Université des Sciences Sociales, Toulouse, France and a PhD from Leeds Beckett University,
United Kingdom. Her research interests are marketing, social media, relationship marketing, customer
engagement and corporate social responsibility.
Martin Samy was a Professor of CSR and Effectiveness Measurement at Leeds Beckett University for
over 8 years. He received his PhD from Monash University, Australia where he was a Lecturer for 7 years.
Prior to being an academic, Martin had commercial experience as a financial manager of corporations in
Singapore and Australia. He has been recognised in the Marquis Who’s Who in the World in 2007 for his
research in establishing a Quality Effectiveness Instrument. His research interests are Corporate Social
Responsibility and Financial Performance research, where he has undertaken studies in Australia, UK,
Indonesia, Bangladesh and Nigeria. He has published in international journals such as the Corporation
Reputation Review, Journal of Global Responsibility, Sustainability Accounting, Management and Policy
Journal and Journal of Accounting & Organisational Change. In 2013, he was awarded the prestigious
Innovation and Initiative Excellence Award by Leeds Metropolitan University. He is now a Visiting
Professor at Kedge Business School, France.
Brian Jones is Senior Lecturer at Leeds Business School, Leeds Beckett University, UK. He has a BA
(Hons) in Sociology from the University of Durham; a MA in Industrial Relations from the University of
Warwick and a PhD from the University of Bradford. Brian’s research areas of interest are wide ranging
and cut across the business management and social sciences.
ORCID
Swaleha Peeroo http://orcid.org/0000-0003-4456-7124
Brian Jones http://orcid.org/0000-0001-9173-1201
References
Agrawal, A. K., and Z. Rahman. 2017. “CCV Scale: Development and Validation of Customer Co-Created
Value Scale in E-Services.” Current Psychology, 1–17. doi:10.1007/s12144-017-9639-z.
Alexander, M., and E. Jaakkola. 2016. “Customer Engagement Behaviours and Value Co-Creation.” In
Customer Engagement: Contemporary Issues and Challenges, edited by R. J. Brodie, L. D. Hollebeek
and J. Conduit, 3–20. London: Routledge.
Anderson, K., D. Knight, S. Pookulangara, and B. Josiam. 2014. “Influence of Hedonic and Utilitarian
Motivations on Retailer Loyalty and Purchase Intention: A Facebook Perspective.” Journal of Retailing
and Consumer Services 21 (5): 773–779.
Arnaboldi, M., and J. F. Coget. 2016. “Social Media and Business. We’ve Been Asking the Wrong Question.”
Organizational Dynamics : A Quarterly Review of Organizational Behavior for Professional Managers
45 (1): 47–54. doi:10.1016/j.orgdyn.2015.12.006.
Baird, C., and G. Parasnis. 2011. “From Social Media to Social Customer Relationship Management.”
Strategy & Leadership 39 (5): 30–37. doi:10.1108/10878571111161507.
Barnes,N.G.,andA.M.Lescault.2014. The2014Fortune500andSocialMedia:LinkedInDominatesasUseofNewer
Tools Explodes. http://www.umassd.edu/cmr/socialmediaresearch/2014fortune500andsocialmedia/.
Beckers, S. F. M., J. F. van Doorn, and P. C. Verhoef. 2017. “Good, Better, Engaged? The Effect of Company-
Initiated Customer Engagement Behavior on Shareholder Value.” Journal of the Academy of Marketing
Science, 1–18. doi:10.1007/s11747-017-0539-4.
Bijmolt, T. H. A., P. S. H. Leeflang, F. Block, M. Eisenbeiss, B. G. S. Hardie, A. Lemmens, and P. Saffert.
2010. “Analytics for Customer Engagement.” Journal of Service Research 13 (3): 341–356.
doi:10.1177/1094670510375603.
Blasco-Arcas, L., B. Hernandez-Ortega, and J. Jimenez-Martinez. 2014. “The Online Purchase as a Context
for Co-creating Experiences. Drivers of and Consequences for Customer Behavior.” Internet Research
24 (3): 393–412. doi:10.1108/IntR-02-2013-0023.
Brodie, R. J., L. D. Hollebeek, B. Juric, and A. Ilic. 2011. “Customer Engagement: Conceptual Domain,
Fundamental Propositions, and Implications for Research.” Journal of Service Research 14 (3): 252–271.
doi:10.1177/1094670511411703.
Brodie, R. J., A. Ilic, B. Juric, and L. Hollebeek. 2013. “Consumer Engagement in a Virtual Brand
Community: An Exploratory Analysis.” Journal of Business Research 66 (8): 105–114. doi:10.1016/j.
jbusres.2011.07.029.
Bruhn, M. 2003. Relationship Marketing: Management of Customer Relationships. Harlow: Pearson
Education.
Champoux, V., J. Durgee, and L. McGlynn. 2012. “Corporate Facebook Pages: When ‘Fans’ Attack.” Journal
of Business Strategy 33 (2): 22–30. doi:10.1108/02756661211206717.
Chauhan, K., and A. Pillai. 2013. “Role of Content Strategy in Social Media Brand Communities: A
Case of Higher Education Institutes in India.” Journal of Product & Brand Management 22 (1): 40–51.
doi:10.1108/10610421311298687.
Cheong, H., and M. Morrison. 2008. “Consumers’ Reliance on Product Information and Recommendations
Found in UGC.” Journal of Interactive Advertising 8 (2): 1–29. doi:10.1080/15252019.2008.10722141.
Colleoni, E. 2013. “CSR Communication Strategies for Organizational Legitimacy in Social Media.”
Corporate Communications: An International Journal 18 (2): 228–248. doi:10.1108/13563281311319508.
Colliander, J., and A. Wien. 2013. “Trash Talk Rebuffed: Consumers’ Defense of Companies Criticized
in Online Communities.” European Journal of Marketing 47 (10): 1733–1757. doi:10.1108/EJM-04-
2011-0191.
Constantinides, E., C. Romero, and M. Boria. 2008. “Social Media: A New Frontier for Retailers?.” European
Retail Research, 22: 1–28. doi:10.1007/978-3-8349-8099-1_1.
Coulter, K. S., and A. Roggeveen. 2012. “Like It or Not: Consumer Responses to Word-of-Mouth
Communication in on-Line Social Networks.” Management Research Review 35 (9): 878–899.
doi:10.1108/01409171211256587.
Crecelius, I., S. Einwiller, and S. Himmelreich. 2012. “Complaint Management in Social Media: How
Companies Deal with Critical Comments on Facebook.” In ECREA 2012 – 4th European Communication
Conference, 24–27, Istanbul, Turkey, October.
Daugherty, T., and E. Hoffman. 2014. “EWOM and the Importance of Capturing Consumer Attention
within Social Media.” Journal of Marketing Communications 20 (1–2): 82–102. doi:10.1080/135272
66.2013.797764.
Dekay, S. H. 2012. “How Large Companies React to Negative Facebook Comments.” Corporate
Communications: An International Journal 17 (3): 289–299. doi:10.1108/13563281211253539.
Dessart, L., C. Veloutsou, and A. Morgan-Thomas. 2015. “Consumer Engagement in Online Brand
Communities: A Social Media Perspective.” Journal of Product & Brand Management 24 (1): 1–33.
doi:10.1108/JPBM-06-2014-0635.
Divol, R., D. Edelman, and H. Sarrazin. 2012. “Demystifying Social Media.” McKinsey Quarterly 2 (12):
66–77.
Duffett, R. G. 2017. “Influence of Social Media Marketing Communications on Young Consumers’
Attitudes.” Young Consumers 18 (1): 19–39. doi:10.1108/YC-07-2016-00622.
Echeverri, P., and P. Skålén. 2011. “Co-Creation and Co-Destruction: A Practice-Theory Based Study of
Interactive Value Formation.” Marketing Theory 11 (3): 351–373. doi:10.1177/1470593111408181.
Einwiller, S. A., and S. Steilen. 2015. “Handling Complaints on Social Network Sites – An Analysis of
Complaints and Complaint Responses on Facebook and Twitter Pages of Large US Companies.”
Public Relations Review 41 (2): 195–204. doi:10.1016/j.pubrev.2014.11.012.
Fournier, S., and J. Avery. 2011. “The Uninvited Brand.” Business Horizons 54 (3): 193–207. doi:10.2139/
ssrn.1963056.
Gill, M., S. Sridhar, and R. Grewal. 2017. “Return on Engagement Initiatives (RoEI): a Study of a Business-
to-Business Mobile App.” Journal of Marketing 81 (4): 45–66. doi:10.1509/jm.16.0149.
Goh, K.-Y., C. S. Heng, and Z. Lin. 2012. “Social Media Brand Community and Consumer Behavior:
Quantifying the Relative Impact of User- and Marketer Generated Content.” Information Systems
Research 24 (1): 88–107. doi:10.1287/isre.1120.0469.
Grönroos, C. 2012. “Creating a Relationship Dialogue: Communication, Interaction and Value.” The
Marketing Review 1 (1): 5–14. doi:10.1362/1469347002523428.
Gustafsson, A., M. D. Johnson, and I. Roos. 2005. “The Effects of Customer Satisfaction, Relationship
Commitment Dimensions, and Triggers on Customer Retention.” Journal of Marketing 69 (4): 210–218.
doi:10.1509/jmkg.2005.69.4.210.
Hanna, R., A. Rohm, and V. L. Crittenden. 2011. “We’re All Connected: The Power of the Social Media
Ecosystem.” Business Horizons 54 (3): 265–273. doi:10.1016/j.bushor.2011.01.007.
Harridge-March, S., and S. Quinton. 2009. “Virtual Snakes and Ladders: Social Networks and the
Relationship Marketing Loyalty Ladder.” Marketing Review 9 (2): 171–181. doi:10.1362/14693470
9X442692.
Ho, C. 2014. “Consumer Behavior on Facebook.” EuroMed Journal of Business 9 (3): 252–267. doi:10.1108/
EMJB-12-2013-0057.
Hollebeek, L. 2011. “Demystifying Customer Brand Engagement: Exploring the Loyalty Nexus.” Journal
of Marketing Management 27 (7/8): 785–807. doi:10.1080/0267257X.2010.500132.
Hollebeek, L. D. 2013. “The Customer Engagement/Value Interface: An Exploratory Investigation.”
Australasian Marketing Journal 21 (1): 17–24. doi:10.1016/j.ausmj.2012.08.006.
Hollebeek, L., and T. Chen. 2014. “Exploring Positively- versus Negatively-Valenced Brand Engagement:
A Conceptual Model.” Journal of Product and Brand Management 23 (1): 62–74. doi:10.1108/JPBM-
06-2013-0332.
Hoyer, W. D., R. Chandy, M. Dorotic, M. Krafft, and S. S. Singh. 2010. “Consumer Cocreation in New
Product Development.” Journal of Service Research 13 (3): 283–296. doi:10.1177/1094670510375604.
Jin, Y., B. Fisher Liu, and L. Austin. 2014. “Examining the Role of Social Media in Effective Crisis
Management: The Effects of Crisis Origin, Information Form, and Source on Publics’ Crisis Responses.”
Communication Research 41 (1): 74–94. doi:10.1177/0093650211423918.
Kaplan, A., and M. Haenlein. 2010. “Users of the World, Unite! the Challenges and Opportunities of
Social Media.” Business Horizons 53 (1): 59–68. doi:10.1016/j.bushor.2009.09.003.
Keeling, K., D. Keeling, and P. McGoldrick. 2011. “Retail Relationships in a Digital Age.” Journal of Business
Research 66 (7): 847–855. doi:10.1016/j.jbusres.2011.06.010.
Kietzmann, J. H., K. Hermkens, I. McCarthy, P. Silvestre, and S. Bruno. 2011. “Social Media? Get Serious!
Understanding the Functional Building Blocks of Social Media.” Business Horizons 54 (3): 241–251.
doi:10.1016/j.bushor.2011.01.005.
Kizildag, M., M. Altin, O. Ozdemir, and I. Demirer. 2017. “What Do We Know about Social Media and Firms’
Financial Outcomes So Far?” Journal of Hospitality and Tourism Technology 8 (1): 39–54. doi:10.1108/
JHTT-10-2016-0074.
Kozinets, R. V. 2002. “The Field behind the Screen: Using Netnography for Marketing Research in Online
Communities.” Journal of Marketing Research 39 (1): 61–72. doi:10.1509/jmkr.39.1.61.18935.
Kozinets, R. 2009. Netnography: Doing Ethnographic Research Online. London: Sage.
Kozinets, R. 2012. “Marketing Netnography: Promulgating a New Research Method.” Methodological
Innovations Online 7 (1): 37–45. doi:10.4256/mio.2012.004.
Kozinets, R., K. de Valck, A. Wojnicki, and S. Wilner. 2010. “Networked Narratives: Understanding Word-
of-Mouth Marketing in Online Communities.” Journal of Marketing 74 (2): 71–89. doi:10.1509/
jmkg.74.2.71.
Kumar, V., L. Aksoy, B. Donkers, R. Venkatesan, T. Wiesel, and S. Tillmanns. 2010. “Undervalued or
Overvalued Customers: Capturing Total Customer Engagement Value.” Journal of Service Research
13 (3): 297–310. doi:10.1177/1094670510375602.
Langer, R., and S. C. Beckman. 2005. “Sensitive Research Topics: Netnography Revisited.” Qualitative
Market Research: An International Journal 8 (2): 189–203. doi:10.1108/13522750510592454.
Lee, H., J. Han, and Y. Suh. 2014. “Gift or Threat? An Examination of Voice of the Customer: The Case of
MyStarbucksIdea.Com.” Electronic Commerce Research and Applications 13 (3): 205–219. doi:10.1016/j.
elerap.2014.02.001.
Leeflang, P. S. H., P. C. Verhoef, P. Dahlström, and T. Freundt. 2014. “Challenges and Solutions for
Marketing in a Digital Era.” European Management Journal 32 (1): 1–12. doi:10.1016/j.emj.2013.12.001.
Leppäniemi, M., H. Karjaluoto, and H. Saarijärvi. 2016. “Customer Perceived Value, Satisfaction, and
Loyalty: The Role of Willingness to Share Information.” The International Review of Retail, Distribution
and Consumer Research 27 (2): 164–188. doi:10.1080/09593969.2016.1251482.
Lincoln, Y. S., and E. G. Guba. 1985. Naturalistic Inquiry. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.
Lipsman, A., G. Mudd, M. Rich, and S. Bruich. 2012. “The Power of “like” How Brands Reach (and Influence)
Fans through Social-Media Marketing.” Journal of Advertising Research 52 (1): 40–52. doi:10.2501/
JAR-52-1-040-052.
Lovett, M. J., and R. Staelin. 2016. “The Role of Paid, Earned, and Owned Media in Building Entertainment
Brands: Reminding, Informing, and Enhancing Enjoyment.” Marketing Science 35 (1): 142–157.
doi:10.1287/mksc.2015.0961.
Malhotra, A. 2012. “Defining Purpose and Meaning in Social Media.” Vikalpa: The Journal for Decision
Makers 37 (4): 102–105.
Manchanda, P., G. Packard, and A. Pattabhitamaiah. 2012. “Social Dollars: The Economic Impact of
Consumer Participation in a Firm-Sponsored Online Community.” Marketing Science Institute, MSI
Report 11: 115.
Mangold, W. G., and D. J. Faulds. 2009. “Social Media: The New Hybrid Element of the Promotion Mix.”
Business Horizons 52 (4): 357–365. doi:10.1016/j.bushor.2009.03.002.
Miles, M., and M. Huberman. 1994. A Qualitative Data Analysis: An Expanded Sourcebook. Thousand
Oaks, CA: Sage.
Moorman, C. 2016. “The Social Media Spend-Impact Disconnect”. Accessed February 16. http://
www.forbes.com/sites/christinemoorman/2016/02/16/the-social-media-spendimpact-
disconnect/#1ebc377d417b
Muniz, A., and T. O’Guinn. 2001. “Brand Community.” Journal of Consumer Research 27 (4): 412–432.
doi:10.1086/319618.
O’Cass, A., and L. Viet Ngo. 2011. “Achieving Customer Satisfaction in Services Firms via Branding
Capability and Customer Empowerment.” Journal of Services Marketing 25 (7): 489–496.
doi:10.1108/08876041111173615.
Pansari, A., and V. Kumar. 2017. “Customer Engagement: The Construct, Antecedents, and Consequences.”
Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science 25 (3): 294–311. doi:10.1007/s11747-016-0485-6.
Park, H., and Y. K. Kim. 2014. “The Role of Social Network Websites in the Consumer–Brand Relationship.”
Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services 21 (4): 460–467. doi:10.1016/j.jretconser.2014.03.011.
Pereira, H. G., M. F. Salgueiro, and I. Mateus. 2014. “Say Yes to Facebook and Get Your Customers Involved!
Relationships in a World of Social Networks.” Business Horizons 57 (6): 695–702. doi:10.1016/j.
bushor.2014.07.001.
Pfeffer, J., T. Zorbach, and K. M. Carley. 2014. “Understanding Online Firestorms: Negative Word-of-
Mouth Dynamics in Social Media Networks.” Journal of Marketing Communications 20 (1–2): 117–128.
doi:10.1080/13527266.2013.797778.
Plé, L., and C. Chumpitaz. 2010. “Not Always Co-Creation: Introducing Interactional Co-
Destruction of Value in Service Dominant Logic.” Journal of Services Marketing 24 (6): 430–437.
doi:10.1108/08876041011072546.
Pookulangara, S., and K. Koesler. 2011. “Cultural Influence on Consumers’ Usage of Social Networks and
Its’ Impact on Online Purchase Intentions.” Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services 18 (4): 348–354.
doi:10.1016/j.jretconser.2011.03.003.
Porter, C., N. Donthu, W. MacElroy, and D. Wydra. 2011. “How to Foster and Sustain Engagement in
Virtual Communities.” California Management Review 53 (4): 80–110. doi:10.1525/cmr.2011.53.4.80.
Pöyry, E., P. Parvinen, and T. Malmivaara. 2013. “Can We Get from Liking to Buying? Behavioral Differences
in Hedonic and Utilitarian Facebook Usage.” Electronic Commerce Research and Applications 12 (4):
224–235. doi:10.1016/j.elerap.2013.01.003.
Queensland Government. 2017. Accessed October 4. https://www.business.qld.gov.au/running-
business/marketing-sales/marketing-promotion/online-marketing/social-media
Sashi, C. 2012. “Customer Engagement, Buyer-Seller Relationships, and Social Media.” Management
Decision 50 (2): 253–272. doi:10.1108/00251741211203551.
Schivinski, B., and D. Dabrowski. 2014. “The Effect of Social Media Communication on Consumer
Perceptions of Brands.” Journal of Marketing Communications 22 (2): 189–214. doi:10.1080/13527
266.2013.871323.
Schultz, D. E., and J. Peltier. 2013. “Social Media’s Slippery Slope: Challenges, Opportunities and Future
Research Directions.” Journal of Research in Interactive Marketing 7 (2): 86–99. doi:10.1108/JRIM-12-
2012-0054.
Schulze, Horn I., T. Taros, S. Dirkes, L. Huer, M. Rose, R. Tietmeyer, and E. Constantinides. 2015. “Business
Reputation and Social Media – A Primer on Threats and Responses.” IDM Journal of Direct, Data and
Digital Marketing Practice 16 (3): 193–208. doi:10.1057/dddmp.2015.1.
Shamhuyenhanzva, R. M., E. van Tonder, M. Roberts- Lombard, and D. Hemsworth. 2016. “Factors
Influencing Generation Y Consumers’ Perceptions of EWOM Credibility: A Study of the Fast-Food
Industry.” The International Review of Retail, Distribution and Consumer Research 26 (4): 435–455. do
i:10.1080/09593969.2016.1170065.
Sheth, J. 2017. “Revitalizing Relationship Marketing.” Journal of Services Marketing 31 (1): 6–10.
doi:10.1108/JSM-11-2016-0397.
Snow, T. 2012. “The Power of Social Media”. Fmcg, 18 (7); 14, Business Source Premier, EBSCOhost,
viewed 4 February 2013.
Srinivasan, S., O. Rutz, and K. Pauwels. 2015. “Paths to and off Purchase: Quantifying the Impact of
Traditional Marketing and Online Consumer Activity.” Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science
44 (4): 1–14. doi:10.1007/s11747-015-0431-z.
Stavros, C., M. Meng, K. Westberg, and F. Farrelly. 2014. “Understanding Fan Motivation for Interacting
on Social Media.” Sport Management Review 17 (4): 455–469. doi:10.1016/j.smr.2013.11.004.
Straus, A., and J. Corbin. 1990. Basics of Qualitative Research: Grounded Theory Procedures and Techniques.
Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Tarnowski, J. 2011. “Social Studies.” Progressive Grocer 90 (7): 85–130.
Tench, R., and B. Jones. 2015. “Social Media: The Wild West of CSR Communications.” Social Responsibility
Journal 11 (2): 290–305. doi:10.1108/SRJ-12-2012-0157.
Thackeray, R., B. I. Neiger, C. L. Hanson, and J. F. McKenzie. 2008. “Enhancing Promotional Strategies
within Social Marketing Programs: Use of Web 2.0 Social Media.” Health Promotion Practice 9 (4):
338–343. doi:10.1177/1524839908325335.
Thornhill, M., K. Xie, and Y. J. Lee. 2017. “Social Media Advertising in a Competitive Market: Effects of
Earned and Owned Exposures on Brand Purchase.” Journal of Hospitality and Tourism Technology 8
(1): 87–100. doi:10.1108/JHTT-10-2016-0068.
Ul Islam, J., and Z. Rahman. 2017. “The Impact of Online Brand Community Characteristics on Customer
Engagement: A Solicitation of Stimulus-Organism-Response Theory.” Telematics and Informatics 34
(7): 96–109. doi:10.1016/j.tele.2017.01.004.
Valerio Ureña, G. V., D. Herrera Murillo, N. Herrera Murillo, and F. J. Martínez Garza. 2015. “Purposes of the
Communication between Companies and Their Facebook Followers.” Revista Latina De Comunicación
Social 70: 110–121. http://www.revistalatinacs.org/070/paper/1037mx/07en.html. doi:10.4185/RLCS-
2015-1037en
Van Dijk, J., G. Antonides, and N. Schillewaert. 2014. “Effects of Co-Creation Claim on Consumer Brand
Perceptions and Behavioural Intentions.” International Journal of Consumer Studies 38 (1): 110–118.
doi:10.1111/ijcs.12071.
Vanden Bergh, B., M. Lee, E. Quilliam, and T. Hove. 2011. “The Multidimensional Nature and Brand
Impact of User-Generated Ad Parodies in Social Media.” International Journal of Advertising 30 (1):
103–131. doi:10.2501/IJA-30-1-103-131.
van Doorn, J., K. N. Lemon, V. Mittal, S. Nass, D. Pick, P. Pirner, and P. C. Verhoef. 2010. “Customer
Engagement Behavior: Theoretical Foundations and Research Directions.” Journal of Service Research
13 (3): 253–266. doi:10.1177/1094670510375599.
Veloutsou, C. 2009. “Brands as Relationship Facilitators in Consumer Markets.” Marketing Theory 9 (1):
123–126. doi:10.1177/1470593108100068.
Verhoef, P., S. Beckers, and J. van Doorn. 2013. “Understand the Perils of Co-Creation.” Harvard Business
Review 91 (9): 28–32.
Vivek, S., S. Beatty, and R. Morgan. 2012. “Customer Engagement: Exploring Customer Relationships
beyond Purchase.” Journal of Marketing Theory & Practice 20 (2): 122–146. doi:10.2753/MTP1069-
6679200201.
Yan, J. 2011. “Social Media in Branding: Fulfilling a Need.” Journal of Brand Management 18 (9): 688–696.
doi:10.1057/bm.2011.19.
Zeithaml, V., L. Berry, and A. Parasuraman. 1996. “The Behavioral Consequences of Service Quality.”
Journal of Marketing 60 (2): 31–46. doi:10.2307/1251929.
Copyright of Journal of Marketing Communications is the property of Routledge and its
content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the
copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email
articles for individual use.

Customer Engageent or Customer Enragement

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Customer Engageent or Customer Enragement

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Customer Engageent or Customer Enragement

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Journal of Marketing CoMMuniCations

2019, Vol. 25, No. 8, 861–883

Trialogue on Facebook pages of grocery stores: Customer

ABSTRACT ARTICLE HISTORY

CONTACT Swaleha Peeroo speeroo@udm.ac.mu

Customer empowerment in the social media age

Relationship marketing using social media

Online brand communities on Facebook

Co-creation and co-destruction on social media platforms

Themes for company-initi-

services (Baird and Parasnis 2011)

Findings and discussions

Empowered customers within the grocery sector

Relationship building within the grocery sector

Customer engagement within the grocery sector

Influence of social media on the grocery sector

Table 3. Customer posts on Facebook pages of Tesco and Walmart.

community. Conversely, when the customer experiences a negative outcome resulting in

Retailers need to be cautious when starting conversations on social media platforms. In

You might also like