Strategic Digital Marketing PDF

Sistema de Bibliotecas
DESCARGO DE RESPONSABILIDAD:
Estimado usuario:
Una vez usted reciba este documento se compromete a usarlo

únicamente con fines académicos, de docencia e investigativos.
Favor usarlo a modo personal y no publicarlo o compartirlo. No se
autoriza su venta, ni su reproducción masiva. El servicio está dirigido
sin fines de lucro y las restricciones legales están contempladas en el
Manual de Propiedad Intelectual, acuerdo No. 19 de septiembre 2 de
2015 y en la Ley 23 de 1982 sobre Derechos de Autor. Consulte el
Manual de Propiedad Intelectual en:
http://www.utadeo.edu.co/files/collections/documents/field_attached
_file/acuerdo_19_2015.pdf
Área de Servicios de Información

Sistema de Bibliotecas
Tel. 2427030 Ext. 1770-1773
Universidad Jorge Tadeo Lozano
Carrera 4 2-61
Bogotá, Colombia
International Journal of Wine Business Research
Social media: communication strategies, engagement and future research
directions
Rebecca Dolan, Jodie Conduit, John Fahy, Steve Goodman,
Article information:
To cite this document:
Rebecca Dolan, Jodie Conduit, John Fahy, Steve Goodman, (2017) "Social media: communication
strategies, engagement and future research directions", International Journal of Wine Business
Research, Vol. 29 Issue: 1, pp.2-19, https://doi.org/10.1108/IJWBR-04-2016-0013
Downloaded by Queen Mary University of London At 22:50 21 March 2018 (PT)
Permanent link to this document:

https://doi.org/10.1108/IJWBR-04-2016-0013
Downloaded on: 21 March 2018, At: 22:50 (PT)
References: this document contains references to 70 other documents.
To copy this document: permissions@emeraldinsight.com
The fulltext of this document has been downloaded 3094 times since 2017*
Users who downloaded this article also downloaded:
(2017),"Evaluation and decision making in social media marketing", Management Decision, Vol.
55 Iss 1 pp. 15-31 <a href="https://doi.org/10.1108/MD-10-2015-0450">https://doi.org/10.1108/
MD-10-2015-0450</a>
(2014),"Brand strategies in social media", Marketing Intelligence & Planning, Vol. 32 Iss
3 pp. 328-344 <a href="https://doi.org/10.1108/MIP-04-2013-0056">https://doi.org/10.1108/
MIP-04-2013-0056</a>
Access to this document was granted through an Emerald subscription provided by emerald-
srm:122143 []
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.

The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available on Emerald Insight at:
www.emeraldinsight.com/1751-1062.htm
IJWBR
29,1
Social media: communication
strategies, engagement and future
research directions
2 Rebecca Dolan
Department of Marketing, The University of Auckland,
Received 2 April 2016 Auckland, New Zealand
Revised 14 June 2016
Accepted 18 July 2016 Jodie Conduit
Adelaide Business School, University of Adelaide, Adelaide, Australia
John Fahy
Department of Management and Marketing, University of Limerick,
Limerick, Ireland, and
Steve Goodman
Adelaide Business School, University of Adelaide, Adelaide, Australia
Abstract
Purpose – This study aims to use social media data to identify brand communication strategies on
Facebook. The analysis uncovers trends and statistics regarding engagement rates. This research leads to the
development of a future research agenda for social media and engagement research.
Design/methodology/approach – The Facebook Insights data of 12 wine brands over a 12-month
period informed this study. Descriptive analysis was undertaken to examine the social media communication
strategies of these brands. The impact of these strategies on engagement metrics is also examined.
Findings – The findings demonstrate a low rate of engagement among the users of the wine brand Facebook
pages. A majority of Facebook fans rarely engage with the brands. The results demonstrate that user
engagement varies depending on the day of the week and hour of the day of the brand post.
Practical implications – Wine brands can use these findings as a guideline for effective practice and as
a benchmarking tool for assessing their social media performance. The paper provides implications for
marketing scholars through the development of a future research agenda related to social media, customer
engagement and wine marketing.
Originality/value – This paper fulfils an identified need by offering practical advice to wine producers on
the necessity to explore and understand social media strategy and customer engagement characteristics.
Keywords Marketing, Benchmarking, Social media, Facebook, Engagement, Facebook Insights,
Communication strategies, Social media data
Paper type Research paper
1. Introduction
Social media has become a mainstream media platform that connects one-third of the world’s
population (Nelson-Field and Taylor, 2012). Communication budgets are re-adjusting as
International Journal of Wine
advertisers move away from traditional media and invest greater resources into digital
Business Research advertising and social media. It is estimated that over 15 million brands globally are
Vol. 29 No. 1, 2017
pp. 2-19 registered with the social media site, Facebook (Koetsier, 2013), attempting to reach more
© Emerald Publishing Limited
1751-1062
than 1 billion consumers (Stieglitz et al., 2014). In line with an increased focus on research
DOI 10.1108/IJWBR-04-2016-0013 exploring customer engagement (Brodie et al., 2013; Maslowska et al., 2015), particularly in
the digital space (Hollebeek et al., 2014), practitioners are looking for guidance on how to Social media
build engagement using social media.
Social media sites are an increasingly popular touch point for wine consumers, with the
viral and social capabilities of online networks creating a new forum for customer interaction
with wine brands (Barber et al., 2008; Bulearca and Bulearca, 2010; Keller, 2009). While over
2,500 Australian and New Zealand wine brands have a presence on the social media site,
Facebook (Mastermind, 2015), little research has addressed how wine brands communicate
via social media platforms. Recent research has, however, indicated the importance of this 3
area, with social media network participation leading to enhanced business performance
(Quinton and Wilson, 2016), and improved product quality through access and knowledge of
the needs and expectations of customers (Fiore et al., 2016). While wine marketers have been
trying to understand how social media works and how their businesses can use them (Dean
and Forbes, 2016), there is little empirical research available to describe exactly how wine
consumers engage with brands in this forum.
Our research attempts to guide further academic investigation on the topics of social media
and engagement in the wine industry, through the use of rich and valuable social media data
available through Facebook. Our research contributes to knowledge in social media and
engagement in a number of ways. First, the research identifies the main communication
strategies used by wine brands on Facebook. Second, we identify valuable statistics and trends
regarding engagement rates on wine brand Facebook pages which can be used by both
practitioners and academics for benchmarking and further academic scrutiny. Third, we explore
the trends of engagement patterns across specific time periods. Finally, the paper sets out a future
research agenda for social media and engagement research by detailing five fundamental future
research questions.
2. Literature review
The rapid rise of social media channels over the past decade has attracted interest from both
academe and industry, keen to understand its nuances and how to strategically manage for
desired results. Social media has seen increased flexibility and visibility in marketing
content and a change in the way individuals and organisations interact. There has been a
shift in power to customers, as they move from passive receivers of marketing content to
active participants in the brand message (Mangold and Faulds, 2009). Interactive customer
experiences through social media act as a significant influencing factor of many consumer
behaviour aspects, including information acquisition, purchase behaviour and
post-purchase communication (Mangold and Faulds, 2009). Social media sites are an ideal
forum for product and brand-related advocacy (Chu and Kim, 2011; Riegner, 2007),
customer-led content generation (Vivek et al., 2012) and customer-created product
innovations (Hoyer et al., 2010; Sawhney et al., 2005). Therefore, there is a significant amount
of social and network value provided to both users and organisations through social media,
as users comment, review and share information online.
Social media has become a popular topic of academic enquiry, with scholars exploring the
concept from varying perspectives, including usage motivations of participants (Joinson,
2008; Raacke and Bonds-Raacke, 2008), social interactions, usage patterns (Golder et al.,
2007; Hsu and Lin, 2008; Lampe et al., 2006) and characteristics of users (Gjoka et al., 2008;
Hargittai, 2007). Scholars have also focused their attention on online and virtual brand
communities (Aksoy et al., 2013), online brand culture (Schembri and Latimer, 2016) and
anti-brand community behaviours (Dessart et al., 2016). Less academic attention has been
paid to the role of social media from a communications strategy perspective, particularly in
the wine industry. Practitioners have largely been at the forefront of efforts to advise
IJWBR businesses on the design of their social media content, with an inundation of industry blogs,
29,1 websites and guides on the best practice for marketing within the social network sphere
emerging in recent years (Steeves, 2013).
Looking towards the customer side of social media, academic attention has focussed on
categorising users of social media. Previous research has focussed on traditional
categorisations of “users” of online communities, distinguishing between users who create
4 content such as “posters”, compared to those who are members of a community but do not
post, referred to as “lurkers” (Nonnecke and Preece, 1999; Preece et al., 2004). This basic
categorisation of online users is limited in its general nature and fails to take into account the
diverse number of possible roles available to users in dynamic platforms. Previous research
categorised social media users who “like” brands on Facebook into groups based on their
brand loyalty, brand love, use of self-expressive brands and word of mouth (Wallace et al.,
2014). In an attempt to define customer engagement intensity within social media, scholars
have also characterised engagement behaviours on a continuum of low to high activity
(Muntinga et al., 2011). Muntinga et al. (2011) propose three social usage types: consuming
(low level of brand-related activity), contributing (medium level) and creating (highest level).
Malthouse et al. (2013) distinguish between two levels of engagement, lower and higher.
More recently, scholars have proposed that engagement behaviour, specifically in the social
media setting, can vary in valence (i.e. positively and negatively valenced) in addition to
intensity, as outlined within the construct of “social media engagement behaviour” (Dolan
et al., 2015, 2016).
Customers engage with various objects, including product or service offerings (Brodie
et al., 2011), media (Calder et al., 2009) and activities and events (Vivek et al., 2012).
While customers engage with an organisation through multiple touch-points and service
encounters, often the focal point of engagement remains ambiguous. This study therefore
takes a behavioural perspective of engagement within the context-specific environment of a
social media platform and provides greater insight into the behavioural manifestations of
engagement through that medium. We define social media engagement behaviour as “a
customer’s behavioural manifestations that have a social media focus beyond purchase,
resulting from motivational drivers” (Dolan et al. 2015, p. 5). Behaviour that reflects
engagement with social media includes customers’ creation of, contribution to, or
consumption of, brand-related content within a social network (Muntinga et al., 2011). The
degree of engagement varies, falling on a continuum from basic forms of engagement (e.g.
“liking” a page on Facebook) to higher forms of engagement depicting customer
participation in co-creation activities (e.g. writing reviews) (Malthouse et al., 2013; Muntinga
et al., 2011). Additionally, engagement behaviour can be negative, with customers using
social platforms to complain (Bijmolt et al., 2010) and co-destruct brand value (Harris et al.,
2010).
Wine marketing practitioners have been quick to recognise the value and potential of
social media engagement, rapidly integrating such platforms into the marketing mix
(Stelzner, 2014; Sinclair, 2014; Bergen, 2014). Wine is an experiential product (Bruwer and
Alant, 2009), and as wine brands compete to attract and retain consumers, many are
embracing social media to reach their consumers and communicate their brand experience,
quality and personality (Vinography, 2012). Social media is particularly effective among
wine consumers, as word of mouth is such an important driver of wine sales (Leigon, 2011).
The socialisation aspect of social media allows consumers to exchange information and
encourage others to try different wines (Wilson and Quinton, 2012). The fact that many
brands use social media to interact with customers is not surprising; however, many
practitioners have identified a lack of awareness and knowledge regarding effective social
media strategy. This includes a significant concern regarding understanding exactly how Social media
and when customers might engage with posts.
To contribute to a deeper understanding of social media strategies and user engagement
behaviours within the wine industry, this paper focusses on three main research objectives
and the resultant contributions surrounding social media strategy. Specifically, through this
research we:
(1) Identify the main communication strategies of wine brands on Facebook. 5
(2) Demonstrate engagement benchmarking statistics for which scholars can compare
Facebook engagement rates.
(3) Identify the trends of engagement patterns across specific time periods.
The paper contributes to our understanding of wine brand marketing efforts in social media,
as it provides insights into the nature of the data available, and greater detail surrounding
the design and delivery of social media content in the wine industry.
3. Research method
This study used Facebook Insights data from active Facebook brand pages in the Australian
wine industry. Facebook Insights is a tool accessible by administrators of Facebook brand
pages that enables high-level monitoring of the activities that occur on that page. It allows
administrators to download data concerning the performance of a post, such as the number
of people the post reached, the number of people who clicked the post and the number of
people who liked, commented on or shared the post. If the post is a video, Insights data also
shows the total number of video views, and length of video views. Insights data provides
page administrators with an “Engagement Rate” defined as the percentage of people who
saw a post (post reach) and liked, shared, clicked or commented on it (Facebook, 2015).
Facebook Insights provides the post-performance metrics used in this study (see Table I).
As access to Facebook page insights is restricted to page administrators, an introductory
email was sent to 50 Australian wine brands outlining the study and requesting access to the
required data. In all, 12 Australian wine brands were selected to participate in the study, and
each provided data for a 12-month period, beginning on 1 January and concluding on
31 December 2013. A range of brands was selected to ensure a representative sample,
Metric Description
Post type Status, link, photo, video

Comments Total number of comments made in response to the page post
Likes Total number of likes received by the page post
Shares Total number of shares received by the page post
Created time Date, day and time that the post was created
Clicks to play Relevant to video post type only. Total number of times the video was clicked to play
Link click Total number of clicks on a link within the page post
Other click Number of clicks on the page post (excluding link clicks, clicks to play video and
photo view clicks)
Photo view Total number of times the page post photo was viewed
Post reach Post reach is the number of people who have seen the post. The post counts as
reaching someone when it’s shown in the “News Feed”. Figures are for the first 28
days after a post was created and include people viewing the post on desktops and Table I.
mobiles Metrics available from
Negative feedback Total number of negative feedback clicks, separated into four metrics: “hide post”, Facebook Insights
“hide all posts”, “report as spam” and “unlike page” data
IJWBR including consideration of the number of fans, region and/or location, ownership (family
29,1 owned and corporate) and frequency of posting. The brand profiles and number of posts
collected are presented in Table II. The total number of posts in the data set was 2,236. The
total number of fans across the 12 brand pages was 54,069. The number of fans was recorded
as the current, exiting number of fans at the time the data set was downloaded from the
Facebook Insights platform. In this paper, Facebook fans are referred to as “users”.
6 Each of the 12 Facebook Insights data files were collated into a master excel file and
prepared for analysis. The file, which contained all 2,236 posts from the 12 wine brands, and
the corresponding engagement metrics for each post were then uploaded into SPSS Statistics
v22 for further analysis. The descriptive results presented throughout the remainder of this
paper were generated using SPSS Statistics v22. Using the Neuendorf (2002) quantitative
content analysis process, and adopting the coding frame from Dolan et al. (2015), 2,236 posts
were coded for their level of each type of content. Descriptive results were generated using
the descriptive statistics function of SPSS Statistics v22.
4. Research results
4.1 Wine brand communication strategies on Facebook
The first research objective of this study was to identify the main communication strategies of
wine brands on Facebook. To achieve this, we use four social media content categories derived
from Uses and Gratifications Theory, which describe how social media users are motivated to
engage by content which stimulates informational, entertaining, remunerative or relational needs
(Dolan et al., 2015). Of the 2,236 posts, 82.6 per cent contained informational content, 50.7 per cent
contained entertaining content, 13.9 per cent contained remunerative content and 69 per cent
contained relational content. Many posts contained numerous types of content (for example, the
post contained an informative element in addition to an entertaining element). Further, posts
varied in the amount of content present. To illustrate, whilst some posts had just one element of
informational content, others had up to 11 different informational elements. These individual
elements are listed in Table III.
The results in Table III show that the most popular types of informational content used
were links to the website (observed in 18.9 per cent of posts), product images (observed in
17.7 per cent of posts) and details about the product (observed in 16.5 per cent of posts).
Regarding entertaining content, the most common type was the provision of images of
No. of page No. of posts

fans at time (1 January 2013-
Brand Region of data collection 31 December 2013)
A Barossa Valley, SA 916 25

B Barossa Valley, SA 1,348 355
C Yarra Valley, VIC 1,330 145
D Margaret River, WA 4,500 295
E McLaren Vale, SA 7,496 383
F McLaren Vale, SA 13,958 226
G McLaren Vale, SA 12,551 179
H McLaren Vale, SA 1,434 47
I McLaren Vale, SA 3,749 177
J Eden Valley, SA 3,684 191
K Barossa Valley, SA 1,495 106
Table II. L Margaret River, WA 1,608 107
Brand profiles Total 54,069 2,236
No. of No. of observation as % of
Social media
Social media content categories observations total posts (n ⫽ 2,236)
Informational content
Brand name 281 12.6
General information 61 2.7
Product image 397 17.7
Commercial partner image 2 0.1 7
Vineyard image 230 10.3
Winery image 282 12.6
Website 423 18.9
Price 81 3.6
Venue image 72 3.2
Review/Award image 94 4.2
Tasting and sampling 124 5.5

Product variety 276 12.3
Product details 369 16.5
Region 323 14.4
Winemaking/processing details 190 8.5
Vineyard/location 167 7.5
Opening hours 106 4.7
Year made 361 16.1
Contact details 64 2.9
Brand Fact/News 49 2.2
Service 108 4.8
Wine show, awards and reviews 160 7.2
Event 164 7.3
Product description 188 8.4
Entertaining content
Food/recipe 276 12.3
Emoticon 1 0.0
Weather 213 9.5
Humour 213 9.5
Interesting fact image 19 0.8
Scenic image 122 5.4
Event image 388 17.3
Food image 226 10.1
Celebrity image 21 0.9
Meme image 67 3.0
Animal image 101 4.5
Animal 27 1.2
Slang 63 2.8
Remunerative content
Deal/special offer 132 5.9
Purchase instructions 83 3.7
Competition image 53 2.4
Sale image 63 2.8
Competition details 56 2.8
Relational content
Ask question 360 16.1
Congrats/thanks 101 4.5
Quiz/game 24 1.1 Table III.
Holiday, event, special day 324 14.5 Social media post
(continued) content
IJWBR No. of No. of observation as % of
29,1 Social media content categories observations total posts (n ⫽ 2,236)
Affection 9 0.4
Ask for action 1 0.0
Child/baby image 15 0.7
Inspirational/motivational quote 5 0.2
8 Customer image 1 0.0
Employee image 7 0.3
Community involvement image 54 2.4
Friends and fans 55 2.5
Human name 236 10.6
Emotion 480 24.3
Table III. Family 634 23.9
events, which were evident in 17.3 per cent of total posts. Remunerative content was used to
a much lesser extent by the wine brands in the study; however, the most popular types of
remunerative content used in wine brand Facebook posts were deals and special offers,
observed in 5.9 per cent of total posts. Finally, wine brands commonly used relational content
within their posts, with the most popular type of relational content being the mention of
family, observed in 23.9 per cent of total posts.
In addition to considering the post content in terms of its amount and type of
informational, entertaining, remunerative and relational content, we investigated the trends
regarding the type of post. Types of posts categorised were text only posts (status updates),
photos and videos. Of the 2,236 posts collected over the 12-month period, the most common
type of post used by Australian wine brands was the use of photos. The wine brands
analysed shared a total of 1,500 photos (67.1 per cent of posts), 687 status updates (30.7 per
cent of posts) and only 49 posts were videos (2.2 per cent) (Table IV).
We compare how the engagement metrics provided through Facebook insights data vary
with regard to the three types of posts. Table V illustrates that posts which are photos have
the highest average number of comments (three comments), and the highest average number
of likes (28 likes). However, posts that are photos only have a slightly higher average number
of shares (two shares) than posts that are statuses or videos. On average, the number of
comments or shares per post are very low (a maximum of three on average), regardless of the
Post type Frequency (%)
Status/link 687 30.7

Photo 1,500 67.1
Table IV. Video 49 2.2
Social media post type Total 2,236 100.0
Average comments Average likes Average shares

Post type Frequency per post per post per post
Table V. Status 687 1 8 1

Average engagement Photo 1,500 3 28 2
actions by post type Video 49 1 6 1
type of post. This highlights significant challenges for marketing managers responsible for Social media
stimulating heightened engagement through their Facebook content.
4.2 Facebook engagement rates

The second research objective of this study was to demonstrate benchmarking statistics for
which scholars and practitioners can compare Facebook engagement rates.
Table VI presents the results for post engagement for the entire data set, irrespective of
9
the type of the post, post time of the day or post day of the week. The average number of times
a post is commented on is two times. To put this in to perspective, the average number of
people a post reached was 730, which means that less than 1 per cent of users who see the
Facebook post, make a comment. The highest number of comments a post received was 121.
In this particular post, the wine brand elicited comments by asking “Tell us what you would
do with a pallet of wine when it rocks up, and we will send you a raffle ticket”. Posts receive
on average 22 “likes”, which represented 3 per cent of people who saw the post in their news
feed. On average, posts are shared two times, within a maximum of 105 shares achieved. In
this particular post, the brand posted a humorous meme which referenced wine
consumption. On average, however, this is a very low level engagement, representing less
than 1 per cent of the total users reached (average reach ⫽ 730).
The figures in Table VI indicate that within our data, on average only 10 per cent of users
who see a post from a wine brand in their news feed engage by actions such as commenting,
liking, sharing, watching video, clicking on the post, viewing photos, hiding post, reporting
posts or un-liking the page. This could indicate a significant challenge for marketers,
regarding how to reduce the occurrence of dormant users. Dormant users are the “fans” who
saw the post in news feed (post reach) and did not engage through commenting, liking,
sharing, clicking to play video, clicking on link of photo, or giving negative feedback through
hiding all or one post, “un-liking” page, clicking “x” button or reporting post as spam. Other
research has shown similar, poor online engagement rates, with an average of 0.07 per cent
of Facebook fans interacting with a brand’s post (Gayomali, 2014). Similarly, up to 61 per
cent of consumers have stated that they do not see social media as a place to interact with
brands (Ritson, 2011). This further elaborates on the challenge marketers face to stimulate
higher engagement rates amongst fans.
Engagement action Minimum Maximum Average
Comments 0 121 2
Likes 0 629 22
Shares 0 105 2
Click to play video 0 36 0.1
Link click 0 76 2
Other click 0 491 27
Photo view 0 473 17
Dormancy (%)a 14 100 90
Hide all posts 0 6 0.2
Hide 1 post 0 2 0.04
Unlike page 0 3 0.05
X button 0 8 0.2
Report post as spam 0 2 0.01 Table VI.
Descriptive results for
a
Note: Dormancy denotes percentage of people who saw the post in news feed (post reach) and did not engage in any form post engagement
IJWBR 4.3 Post scheduling
29,1 4.3.1 Day of the week. Previous studies of temporal interaction patterns have shown that
most of the user activities on Facebook are undertaken during workdays (Golder et al., 2007).
Further, studies have shown that click through rates of online advertisements decrease
significantly on weekends, and people perform less internet searching during weekends than
on weekdays (Rutz and Bucklin, 2011). Our results indicate that the lowest level (4.8 per cent)
10 of activity in terms of number of posts delivered by wine brands over a seven-day period
occurred on Saturdays (with 107 occurrences), while the highest number of posts were shared
on Thursdays with 476 occurrences (21.1 per cent) as shown in Figure 1.
A comparison of engagement actions across each day of the week provides an
interesting insight for wine brands. Figure 2 shows the distribution of average
engagement actions across each day of the week. The average number of shares made on
a post is significantly higher on Fridays (49). The average number of comments made on
a post remains relatively stable across each day of the week. Similarly, the average
number of likes made on a post is relatively consistent across each day of the week, with
a slight peak on Wednesday (average ⫽ 26 likes). The average number of times a photo
is viewed is higher on a Monday (average of 15 times) and consistently low for the
remainder of the week. Similarly, the average number of times a link is clicked on is
consistently low regardless of the day of the week. The average number of “other clicks”
on a post is slightly higher on Wednesdays, compared to other days of the week.
4.3.2 Posting time. The distribution of posts by time was also included in the study. Social
media users have been found to engage less during the morning and early afternoon, with
increased engagement toward the evening, reaching a steady, high level during the night
(Golder et al., 2007). Hence, if a post is created in the period when Facebook users are more
active, there is a greater possibility for the brand post to be seen on the wall, resulting in
25
21.1
%Brand Posts
20 18.2 17.4
16 15.2
15
10 7.2
4.8
5
Figure 1. 0
Distribution of brand Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat Sun
posts over the week
Day of the Week
60
50
# ENGAGEMENT ACTIONS
Comments
40
Likes
30 Shares
Photo view
20
link click
Figure 2. other click
10
Average number of
engagement actions
0
across week
MON TUE WED THU FRI SAT SUN
greater potential engagement. Figure 3 shows the lowest level of activity in terms of number Social media
of posts shared by the wine brand across the day occurs from 4.00 am to 2.00 pm. The highest
number of posts was shared between peak times of 4.00 pm and midnight.
We further analyse the social media engagement actions by comparing them to the hour
of the day in which a social media post was made as shown in Figure 4. A comparison of
engagement actions depending on the time of the day provides an interesting insight for wine
brands, particularly with regard to post scheduling to enhance engagement. Figure 4 shows
a sharp increase in the average number of engagement actions between 8.00 am and 11.00 11
am. Interestingly, Figure 3 showed that wine brands rarely deliver Facebook posts at this
time of the day. This disconnect between post scheduling and peak engagement times
illustrates a potential lack of knowledge on the part of practitioners regarding the best
opportunities for building social media engagement.
5. Discussion
The first research objective of this study was to identify the main communication strategies
of wine brands on Facebook. To do this, we applied the four social media content categories
of informational, entertaining, remunerative and relational content from Dolan et al. (2015).
Over 80 per cent of wine brand posts include informational content. The most common type
of informational content posted by wine brands is information related directly to the product,
usually presented in the form of a photo of the product (e.g. photo of wine bottle/label),
information about their websites. Over half of all posts contained a form of entertaining
content, with the most common type related to the promotion of events. Further, a large
number of posts included entertaining content related to food or a recipe. Despite literature
Figure 3.
Distribution of brand
posts over the day
100.0
ENGAGEMENT ACTIONS
90.0
AVERAGE NUMBER OF
80.0
70.0
60.0
50.0
40.0
30.0
20.0
10.0
0.0
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23
Figure 4.
Average number of
HOUR OF DAY engagement actions
Comments Likes Shares Link Clicks Other Click Photo Views by hour
IJWBR discussing the use of social media to offer discounts and economic incentives (Muntinga
29,1 et al., 2011; Cvijikj and Michahelles, 2013), fewer posts (less than 15 per cent) contained
remunerative details. This finding indicates that wine brands are rarely using social media
updates to disseminate specific information related to the promotion and sale of their
products. Finally, almost 70 per cent of posts contained content with a relational focus. Wine
brands most frequently posted relational content by way of asking questions to the audience
12 and integrating discussion of holidays, events and special days into their posts.
Australian wine brands commonly use statuses and photos in their Facebook updates,
however very rarely use videos. Just 2.2 per cent of all posts made contained a video. This
may be due to a lack of expertise regarding filming processes or an uncertainty regarding
what to film. In previous social media research, scholars have explored post types by
applying the concepts of media richness and vividness. Vividness is most commonly
operationalised on a low to high scale (De Vries et al., 2012; Cvijikj and Michahelles, 2013).
Social media content which contains only text is categorised as low vividness, “moderately
vivid” content that is categorised as text with a picture or photo. Highly vivid social media
content is presented in the form of a video. High levels of vividness (videos) have been
significantly and positively related to the number of “likes” on the content (De Vries et al.,
2012; Cvijikj and Michahelles, 2013). Despite the positive outcomes of videos identified in this
stream of literature, they are very rarely used in Facebook posts. Videos have the unique
ability to provide large amounts of information and multiple cues to engage users; however,
in this case, videos appear to be under-used.
The high average dormancy rate demonstrates that there is a significant challenge for
marketers who seek to stimulate engagement amongst their brand users within social media.
Other research has shown preliminary and somewhat contradictory findings (Lee et al., 2013;
Cvijikj and Michahelles, 2013; De Vries et al., 2012); however, engagement literature is still
maturing and there is a need for more strategic research to examine the drivers of online
engagement. Our findings indicate that a majority (90 per cent) of wine brand users remain
dormant, and hence, we observe very low average engagement scores across all engagement
actions. This result is consistent with the concerns of previous scholars such as Nelson-Field
and Taylor (2012) who have suggested that many brands fail to stimulate high levels of
engagement within social media platforms. Such results provide an important implication
for marketing practitioners, with the low level of engagement identified in this study
indicating that social media managers may not have been successful in stimulating high
levels of engagement amongst their users. These figures are important for managers to
understand, as they can provide benchmarking figures through which future research and
engagement rates can be compared.
The results of this study were somewhat consistent with previous studies of temporal
interaction patterns which have shown that most of the user activities on Facebook are
undertaken during workdays (Golder et al., 2007). Further, studies have shown that click
through rates of online advertisements decrease significantly on weekend days, and people
perform less internet searching during weekends than on weekdays (Rutz and Bucklin,
2011). Our results demonstrated that engagement actions of clicking, liking posts and
viewing photos were undertaken more on weekdays than weekends. However, we show that
post sharing behaviour occurs most often on Fridays, Saturdays and Sundays, compared to
the rest of the week. Marketing practitioners are seeking guidance as to when the most
effective time for post scheduling is regarding time of the day and day of the week. The
findings in our study provide an important practical implication, demonstrating evident
“peak” and “low” posting times. The results show that whilst wine brand posts are most
commonly made on Thursdays, the engagement actions of consumers are at their peak on
Fridays. It is important for the wine industry to take into consideration when consumers Social media
make purchases and consume wine, and schedule their content to be delivered at the relevant
time. The Australian Bureau of Statistics reported that consumption of wine is greatest on
weekends (Friday, Saturday and Sunday) (ABS, 2015), which is consistent with the current
scheduling strategy. However, managers may also wish to consider the avoidance of peak
times to stand out and avoid the “clutter” of other wine brands posting around these hours or
days of the week.
13
6. Directions for future research
This article provides a foundation for further theoretical and empirical research in the
emerging area of social media, particularly with a focus on the wine industry. Within this
article, we identify that wine brands adopt a broad and diverse range of social media
communication strategies in their efforts to engage consumers. Despite this, the engagement
rates of wine consumers are significantly low, with a majority of wine brand “users”
remaining dormant. This finding is surprising, given the social connotations often
associated with wine consumption (Charters, 2006; Mouret et al., 2013) and hence the
importance of word of mouth advertising within the wine industry (Bruwer and Thach, 2013;
Bruwer and Reilly, 2006). While this study provides some interesting insights into the nature
of social media engagement, the findings are limited to the insights from a small number of
participating wine brands. There are many avenues for further research which will lead to
valuable insights for both marketing practitioners and academics. Based on our study, we
offer some key future research opportunities.
6.1 What are the conceptual and empirical relationships between social media content and
engagement?
Further research is required to determine a theoretical and empirical relationship between
social media communication strategies and social media engagement behaviours of wine
brand “fans”. In this paper, we show that wine brands deliver a diverse range of social media
content, across various times of the day and days of the week. Further scholarly scrutiny is
required to determine the empirical effect of these posting strategies on the engagement of
users. Further research within this area could demonstrate how an organisation can enhance,
mitigate or neutralise different forms of engagement behaviour through strategic
development of social media content. This would provide further understanding of how
marketers structure and deliver communication content in such a way that it promotes
engagement. Research of this nature would be valuable in guiding managers and designers
of social media content toward an understanding of which characteristics of content to place
within posts to elicit favourable engagement amongst fans.
The establishment of conceptual and empirical linkages of social media content with
engagement will provide interesting insights whilst contributing to the academic
conversation regarding what factors act as antecedents to engagement. Throughout recent
customer engagement literature, scholars have proposed a range of antecedents to
engagement such as identification (Nambisan and Baron, 2007; Tsai et al., 2012), identity
(van Doorn et al., 2010; Eisenbeiss et al., 2012), hedonism (Nambisan and Baron, 2007;
Gambetti et al., 2012), interaction (Hollebeek, 2011), rapport (Hollebeek, 2011), satisfaction
(van Doorn et al., 2010) and trust (Bowden, 2009). To the best of our knowledge, no academic
research has considered the important question of to what extent social media content may
act as an antecedent to engagement, and how this may interplay with other proposed
antecedents to engagement.
IJWBR 6.2 What drives social media engagement?
29,1 The second area warranting further academic scrutiny arising from this research concerns
the drivers of engagement within social media. For example, customer expressions of
negative engagement behaviour (e.g. negative word of mouth) may arise as a result of a
brand-related experience outside of the social media platform such as a poor service
experience when visiting a cellar door. A negative product or service experience may drive
14 customers to create destructive content within social media platforms to disseminate their
dissatisfaction. Theoretical and empirical investigation of the factors which may facilitate
both positive and negative social media engagement will add a valuable understanding of
the engagement concept.
6.3 How can social media content be further conceptualised and measured?
The development of a more comprehensive conceptualisation of social media content would
provide further insight into the strategies used by and available to wine brands for
communication via social media. Further examination of content gratifications beyond those
measured within this article (informational, entertaining, remunerative and relational), in
line with an empirical analysis of their subsequent effect on engagement behaviour would
perhaps extend our knowledge regarding UGT and its ability to explain user motives to
engage with social media content. Leung (2009) theorised that users are also motivated by
uses and gratifications such as instrumentality, psychological reassurance, fashion/status
and mobility. Moreover, Grellhesl and Punyanunt-Carter (2012) propose motives including
relaxation, escape and status seeking. Motivations to engage online may also include
“personal identity”, which involves individuals finding reinforcement for personal values,
finding models of behaviour and gaining insight into one’s self (Calder et al., 2009). The
extent to which these more personal and intrinsic needs may drive online engagement
behaviour provides an interesting platform for further investigation.
Further research will provide a more detailed categorisation of social media content
through incorporation of additional content gratifications. Moreover, social media
gratifications sought by online users may vary depending on the time of day, day of the week
or time of the year. Within this article, it was identified that social media user’s engagement
behaviours varied significantly depending on the day of the week and time of the day in
which the content was delivered to them. Further research should investigate how the
gratifications sought by social media users may vary across time frames and hence effect
their expressions of engagement.
6.4 How can social media engagement be measured?

This research shows how social media engagement behaviour can be observed through the
use of Facebook Insights data. An array of technological metrics and measures have
emerged in recent times, provide future scholars with an enhanced insight into the broader
nature of engagement behaviour online. Future exploration should include a holistic
approach to online engagement measurement. A range of tools for measuring engagement is
available through built-in analytics platforms within social media. These include Facebook
Insights as used within this research, in addition to Twitter Analytics, Pinterest Analytics,
LinkedIn Analytics and Google⫹ Insights. Further, recent tools have emerged, such as
Iconosquare (Instagram engagement analytics), ViralWoot (Pinterest analytics), Quintly
(Facebook analytics) and Beevolve (ROI tracking). Future research adopting a range of these
tools would provide an insightful and holistic insight into online engagement behaviour
across multiple platforms.
6.5 Does engagement increase customer value? Social media
Future research should also investigate the consequences of social media
communication strategy, beyond engagement. Whilst within this article we show that
engagement rates are relatively low, an interesting area of future research is to
determine the effects of achieving greater engagement among users. This will enable
both scholars and practitioners to fully encapsulate the true value of developing an
“engaged” consumer base. In this article, we show that through social media, users
engage in a variety of ways including writing comments, clicking “like” and “share”, 15
viewing photos and videos and reading posts. The extent to which these various types of
engagement exhibited by users will result in outcomes such as future purchase intention
and behaviour, brand loyalty, word of mouth and satisfaction would add to the literature
on both customer engagement and social media marketing. To answer this research
question, a holistic approach to social media research would be valuable. This would
include specific investigation of other popular social media platforms, such as Twitter,
Instagram, Snapchat and LinkedIn, and their relationship with resultant relationships
with customer engagement and enhanced customer value.
Previous engagement scholars have theorised a number of consequences of engagement,
focussing commonly on positive outcomes such as loyalty (Brodie et al., 2011; Hollebeek,
2011; Bowden, 2009), customer value and word of mouth (Vivek et al., 2012) and product
innovation (Hoyer et al., 2010; Sawhney et al., 2005). Future research is recommended to
explore the consequences that may emerge as a result of various expressions of engagement
in the social media forum.
7. Conclusion
This study contributes to knowledge in social media and engagement in a number of ways.
We identify the main communication strategies used by wine brands on Facebook. We
provide valuable statistics and trends regarding engagement rates on wine brand Facebook
pages which can be used by both practitioners and academics for benchmarking and further
academic scrutiny. We explore the trends of engagement patterns across specific time
periods. Finally, the paper sets out a future research agenda for social media engagement
research by detailing five fundamental future research questions.
The research addressed three main objectives, demonstrating that wine brands
communicate through four main types of social media content: informational,
entertaining, relational and remunerative. The most common type of post used by
brands was photos. Analysis of post distribution across the week showed that wine
brands post most frequently on Thursdays, and rarely on Saturdays. This was compared
to an analysis of how the average number of engagement actions made by users changes
across the week, which showed that engagement actions occur more often on Fridays
and Wednesdays. A similar analysis was conducted to investigate the number of posts
made by hour. A large number of wine brand posts are made between 4 pm and 9 pm.
However, we show that the average number of engagement actions is higher for posts
made between 8 am and 10 am.
The study leads to the development of a future research agenda for scholars in the areas
of social media marketing and engagement. The agenda sets out five general research
questions as points of guidance. These include the importance of establishing theoretical and
empirical links between social media content and engagement, analysis of drivers of
engagement, further conceptualisation and measurement of social media content and,
finally, investigation of the extent to which online engagement may result in increased
customer value. Ultimately, in conjunction, the insights from this study and the suggestions
IJWBR for future research will enhance our understanding of how wine brands can strategically
29,1 deliver social media content to facilitate increased engagement amongst users, and how this
leads to enhanced customer value.
References
16 ABS (2015), “Australian health survey – Alcohol”, available at: www.abs.gov.au/ausstats/abs@.nsf/L
ookup/4363.0.55.001Chapter4102011-13 (accessed 21 June 2015).
Aksoy, L., Van Riel, A., Kandampully, J., Wirtz, J., Den Ambtman, A., Bloemer, J., Horváth, C.,
Ramaseshan, B., Van De Klundert, J. and Gurhan Canli, Z. (2013), “Managing brands and
customer engagement in online brand communities”, Journal of Service Management, Vol. 24
No. 3, pp. 223-244.
Barber, N., Dodd, T. and Ghiselli, R. (2008), “Capturing the younger wine consumer”, Journal of Wine
Research, Vol. 19 No. 2, pp. 123-141.
Bergen, M. (2014), “Ad age survey: how advertisers are spending on Facebook, Twitter and YouTube”,
Ad Age, available at: http://adage.com/article/digital/ad-age-reader-survey-twitter-facebook-
youtube/293923/2014 (accessed 14 September 2015).
Bijmolt, T.H., Leeflang, P.S., Block, F., Eisenbeiss, M., Hardie, B.G., Lemmens, A. and Saffert, P. (2010),
“Analytics for customer engagement”, Journal of Service Research, Vol. 13 No. 3, pp. 341-356.
Bowden, J.L.H. (2009), “The process of customer engagement: a conceptual framework”, The Journal of
Marketing Theory and Practice, Vol. 17 No. 1, pp. 63-74.
Brodie, R.J., Hollebeek, L., Jurić, B. and Ilić, A. (2011), “Customer engagement conceptual domain,
fundamental propositions, and implications for research”, Journal of Service Research, Vol. 14
No. 3, pp. 252-271.
Brodie, R.J., Ilic, A., Juric, B. and Hollebeek, L. (2013), “Consumer engagement in a virtual brand
community: an exploratory analysis”, Journal of Business Research, Vol. 66 No. 1, pp. 105-114.
Bruwer, J. and Alant, K. (2009), “The hedonic nature of wine tourism consumption: an experiential
view”, International Journal of Wine Business Research, Vol. 21 No. 3, pp. 235-257.
Bruwer, J. and Reilly, M. (2006), “The power of word-of-mouth communication as an information source
for winery cellar door visits”, Australian and New Zealand Wine Industry Journal, Vol. 21 No. 1,
pp. 43-51.
Bruwer, J. and Thach, L. (2013), “Wine tourists’ use of sources of information when visiting a USA wine
region”, Journal of Vacation Marketing, Vol. 19 No. 3, pp. 221-237.
Bulearca, M. and Bulearca, S. (2010), “Twitter: a viable marketing tool for SMEs?”, Global Business &
Management Research, Vol. 2, pp. 296-309.
Calder, B.J., Malthouse, E.C. and Schaedel, U. (2009), “An experimental study of the relationship between
online engagement and advertising effectiveness”, Journal of Interactive Marketing, Vol. 23
No. 4, pp. 321-331.
Charters, S. (2006), Wine and Society: The Social and Cultural Context Of A Drink, Elsevier, Oxford.
Chu, S.C. and Kim, Y. (2011), “Determinants of consumer engagement in electronic word-of-mouth
(eWOM) in social networking sites”, International Journal of Advertising, Vol. 30 No. 1, pp. 47-75.
Cvijikj, I.P. and Michahelles, F. (2013), “Online engagement factors on Facebook brand pages”, Social
Network Analysis and Mining, Vol. 3, pp. 843-861.
De Vries, L., Gensler, S. and Leeflang, P.S. (2012), “Popularity of brand posts on brand fan pages: an
investigation of the effects of social media marketing”, Journal of Interactive Marketing, Vol. 26,
pp. 83-91.
Dean, D.L. and Forbes, S.L. (2016), “Are customers having e-conversations about your wine? The importance
of online discussion forums as electronic word of mouth for wine marketers”, Successful Social Media
and Ecommerce Strategies in the Wine Industry, Springer, New York, NY.
Dessart, L., Morgan-Thomas, A. and Veloutsou, C. (2016), “what drives anti-brand community Social media
behaviours: an examination of online hate of technology brands”, Let’s Get Engaged! Crossing
the Threshold of Marketing’s Engagement Era, Springer, New York, NY.
Dolan, R., Conduit, J. and Fahy, J. (2016), “social media engagement: a construct of positively and
negatively valenced engagement behaviours”, in Brodie, R.J., Hollebeek, L. and Conduit, J. (Eds),
Customer Engagement: Contemporary Issues and Challenges, Routledge, New York, NY.
Dolan, R., Conduit, J., Fahy, J. and Goodman, S. (2015), “Social media engagement behaviour: a uses and
gratifications perspective”, Journal of Strategic Marketing, Vol. 13 No. 4, pp. 1-17. 17
Eisenbeiss, M., Blechschmidt, B., Backhaus, K. and Freund, P.A. (2012), “‘The (real) world is not
enough’: motivational drivers and user behavior in virtual worlds”, Journal of Interactive
Marketing, Vol. 26 No. 1, pp. 4-20.
Facebook (2015), “Page post metrics”, available at: www.facebook.com/help/336143376466063/
(accessed 31 January 2016).

Fiore, M., Vrontis, D., Silvestri, R. and Contò, F. (2016), “Social media and societal marketing: a path for
a better wine?”, Journal of Promotion Management, Vol. 22 No. 2, pp. 268-279.
Gambetti, R.C., Graffigna, G. and Biraghi, S. (2012), “The grounded theory approach to consumer-brand
engagement”, International Journal of Market Research, Vol. 54 No. 5, pp. 659-687.
Gayomali, C. (2014), “Brands are wasting time and money on Facebook and Twitter”, available at:
www.fastcompany.com/3038801/brands-are-wasting-time-and-money-on-facebook-and-
twitter-report-says (accessed 20 June 2015).
Gjoka, M., Sirivianos, M., Markopoulou, A. and Yang, X. (2008), “Poking Facebook: characterization of
osn applications”, Proceedings of the First Workshop on Online Social Networks, ACM, pp. 31-36.
Golder, S.A., Wilkinson, D.M. and Huberman, B.A. (2007), “Rhythms of social interaction: messaging
within a massive online network”, Communities and Technologies, Springer, New York, NY.
Grellhesl, M. and Punyanunt-Carter, N.M. (2012), “Using the uses and gratifications theory to
understand gratifications sought through text messaging practices of male and female
undergraduate students”, Computers in Human Behavior, Vol. 28 No. 1, pp. 2175-2181.
Hargittai, E. (2007), “Whose space? Differences among users and non-users of social network sites”,
Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, Vol. 13 No. 1, pp. 276-297.
Harris, L., Russell-Bennett, R., Plé, L. and Chumpitaz Cáceres, R. (2010), “Not always co-creation:
introducing interactional co-destruction of value in service-dominant logic”, Journal of Services
Hollebeek, L.D. (2011), “Demystifying customer brand engagement: exploring the loyalty nexus”,
Journal of Marketing Management, Vol. 27 Nos 7/8, pp. 785-807.
Hollebeek, L.D., Glynn, M.S. and Brodie, R.J. (2014), “Consumer brand engagement in social media:
conceptualization, scale development and validation”, Journal of Interactive Marketing, Vol. 28
No. 2, pp. 149-165.
Hoyer, W.D., Chandy, R., Dorotic, M., Krafft, M. and Singh, S.S. (2010), “Consumer cocreation in new
product development”, Journal of Service Research, Vol. 13 No. 3, pp. 283-296.
Hsu, C.L. and Lin, J.C.C. (2008), “Acceptance of blog usage: the roles of technology acceptance, social
influence and knowledge sharing motivation”, Information & Management, Vol. 45 No. 1,
pp. 65-74.
Joinson, A.N. (2008), “Looking at, looking up or keeping up with people?: motives and use of facebook”,
Proceeding of the Twenty-Sixth Annual SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing
Systems, ACM, Florence.
Keller, K.L. (2009), “Building strong brands in a modern marketing communications environment”,
Journal of Marketing Communications, Vol. 15 No. 2, pp. 139-155.
Koetsier, J. (2013), Facebook: 15 Million Businesses, Companies, and Organizations Now Have A
Facebook Page, VentureBeat, San Francisco, CA.
IJWBR Lampe, C., Ellison, N. and Steinfield, C.A. (2006), “Face (book) in the crowd: social searching vs social
browsing”, Proceedings of the, 20th Anniversary Conference on Computer Supported
29,1 Cooperative Work, ACM, pp. 167-170.
Lee, D., Hosanagar, K. and Nair, H. (2013), “The effect of advertising content on consumer engagement:
evidence from Facebook”, available at: www.researchgate.net/publication/257409065 (accessed
10 September 2014).
18 Leigon, B. (2011), “Grape/wine marketing with new media and return of the boomer”, Practical Winery
& Vineyard Journal, CA.
Leung, L. (2009), “User-generated content on the internet: an examination of gratifications, civic
engagement and psychological empowerment”, New Media & Society, Vol. 11 No. 8,
pp. 1327-1347.
Malthouse, E.C., Haenlein, M., Skiera, B., Wege, E. and Zhang, M. (2013), “Managing customer
relationships in the social media era: introducing the social CRM house”, Journal of Interactive
Mangold, W.G. and Faulds, D.J. (2009), “Social media: the new hybrid element of the promotion mix”,
Business Horizons, Vol. 52 No. 4, pp. 357-365.
Maslowska, E., Malthouse, E. and Collinger, T. (2015), “The customer engagement ecosystem”,
available at SSRN, 2694040.
Mastermind (2015), “State of the Australian and New Zealand wine industry on Facebook”, available at:
www.mastermindconsulting.com.au/marketingresources/whitepapers/facebookwine/ (accessed
12 November 2015).
Mouret, M., Monaco, G.L., Urdapilleta, I. and Parr, W.V. (2013), “Social representations of wine and
culture: a comparison between France and New Zealand”, Food Quality and Preference, Vol. 30
No. 2, pp. 102-107.
Muntinga, D.G., Moorman, M. and Smit, E.G. (2011), “Introducing COBRAs”, International Journal of
Advertising, Vol. 30 No. 1, pp. 13-46.
Nambisan, S. and Baron, R.A. (2007), “Interactions in virtual customer environments: implications for
product support and customer relationship management”, Journal of Interactive Marketing,
Vol. 21, pp. 42-62.
Nelson-Field, K. and Taylor, J. (2012), “Facebook fans: a fan for life?”, Admap: Warc.
Neuendorf, K.A. (2002), The Content Analysis Guidebook, Sage Publications, Thousand Oaks, CA.
Nonnecke, B. and Preece, J. (1999), “Shedding light on lurkers in online communities”, Ethnographic
Studies in Real and Virtual Environments: Inhabited Information Spaces and Connected
Communities, Edinburgh, pp. 123-128.
Preece, J., Nonnecke, B. and Andrews, D. (2004), “The top five reasons for lurking: improving
community experiences for everyone”, Computers in Human Behavior, Vol. 20 No. 2, pp. 201-223.
Quinton, S. and Wilson, D. (2016), “Tensions and ties in social media networks: towards a model of
understanding business relationship development and business performance enhancement
through the use of LinkedIn”, Industrial Marketing Management, Vol. 54 No. 1, pp. 15-24.
Raacke, J. and Bonds-Raacke, J. (2008), “MySpace and Facebook: applying the uses and gratifications
theory to exploring friend-networking sites”, Cyber Psychology & Behavior, Vol. 11 No. 2,
pp. 169-174.
Riegner, C. (2007), “Word of mouth on the web: the impact of web 2.0 on consumer purchase decisions”,
Journal of Advertising Research, Vol. 47 No. 4, pp. 436-447.
Ritson, M. (2011), “Hard evidence of social media’s failings”, available at: www.marketingritson.com/
hard-evidence-of-social-medias-failings/
Rutz, O.J. and Bucklin, R.E. (2011), “From generic to branded: a model of spillover in paid search
advertising”, Journal of Marketing Research, Vol. 48 No. 1, pp. 87-102.
Sawhney, M., Verona, G. and Prandelli, E. (2005), “Collaborating to create: the Internet as a platform for Social media
customer engagement in product innovation”, Journal of Interactive Marketing, Vol. 19 No. 4,
pp. 4-17.
Schembri, S. and Latimer, L. (2016), “Online brand communities: constructing and co-constructing
brand culture”, Journal of Marketing Management, Vol. 66 No. 1, pp. 1-24.
Sinclair, L. (2014), “Spending on digital marketing to outstrip traditional channels: study”, The
Australian, Sydney.
Steeves, N. (2013), “Best practices: posting and analyzing effective facebook content”, available at:
19
www.nimble.com/blog/posting-and-analyzing-on-facebook/2014
Stelzner, M. (2014), “Social media marketing industry report”, available at: www.socialmediaexaminer.
com/report/
Stieglitz, S., Dang-Xuan, L., Bruns, A. and Neuberger, C. (2014), “Social media analytics”, Business &
Information Systems Engineering, Vol. 6, pp. 89-96.

Tsai, H.T., Huang, H.C. and Chiu, Y.L. (2012), “Brand community participation in Taiwan: examining
the roles of individual-, group-, and relationship-level antecedents”, Journal of Business Research,
Vol. 65 No. 5, pp. 676-684.
Van Doorn, J., Lemon, K.N., Mittal, V., Nass, S., Pick, D., Pirner, P. and Verhoef, P.C. (2010), “Customer
engagement behavior: theoretical foundations and research directions”, Journal of Service
Research, Vol. 13 No. 3, pp. 253-266.
Vinography (2012), “Social media and the wine industry: a new era”, available at: www.vinography.
com/archives/2012/02/social_media_and_the_wine_indu.html (accessed 3 April 2014).
Vivek, S.D., Beatty, S.E. and Morgan, R.M. (2012), “Customer engagement: exploring customer
relationships beyond purchase”, Journal of Marketing Theory & Practice, Vol. 20 No. 2,
pp. 122-146.
Wallace, E., Buil, I., De Chernatony, L. and Hogan, M. (2014), “Who likes you and why? A typology of
Facebook fans”, Journal of Advertising Research, Vol. 54 No. 1.
Wilson, D. and Quinton, S. (2012), “Let’s talk about wine: does Twitter have value?”, International
Journal of Wine Business Research, Vol. 24 No. 4, pp. 271-286.
Corresponding author
Rebecca Dolan can be contacted at: rebecca.dolan@auckland.ac.nz
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
This article has been cited by:
1. Rebecca Dolan, Steve Goodman. 2017. Succeeding on social media: Exploring communication
strategies for wine marketing. Journal of Hospitality and Tourism Management 33, 23-30. [Crossref]
2. NaumannKay, Kay Naumann, Lay-Hwa BowdenJana, Jana Lay-Hwa Bowden, GabbottMark, Mark
Gabbott. 2017. Exploring customer engagement valences in the social services. Asia Pacific Journal
of Marketing and Logistics 29:4, 890-912. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
3. 2017. The alchemy of social media engagement. Strategic Direction 33:7, 14-16. [Abstract] [Full
Text] [PDF]

Strategic Digital Marketing PDF

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

Strategic Digital Marketing PDF

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Sistema de Bibliotecas

Una vez usted reciba este documento se compromete a usarlo

Área de Servicios de Información

Permanent link to this document:

*Related content and download information correct at time of download.

Post type Status, link, photo, video

No. of page No. of posts

A Barossa Valley, SA 916 25

Tasting and sampling 124 5.5

Post type Frequency (%)

Status/link 687 30.7

Average comments Average likes Average shares

Table V. Status 687 1 8 1

4.2 Facebook engagement rates

Engagement action Minimum Maximum Average

6.4 How can social media engagement be measured?

(accessed 31 January 2016).

Information Systems Engineering, Vol. 6, pp. 89-96.

You might also like