Department Of Business Administration

Shah Abdul Latif University Khairpur

NAME: Sadia Bano

CLASS: BBA (IV)
ROLL N0: 17-68
SUBJECT: QTA
TOPIC: Research Paper
EMAIL: sadiaarain52@gmail.com
Customer Engagement Behaviors In Social
Media: Capturing Innovation Opportunities

INTRODUCTION
In this ongoing era of the world ,the business brands are making significant and
weighty investments at global level at social media in brand communities to better
engage with their customers . Because the social media platforms have become a
great source of engaging people globally so the business communities also use and
apply social media for better and proper engagement with their customers ,actually
the social media is using as a high source of measuring tool of customer
engagement where the business brands can get the ideas, shares, likes and views
about their online social media efforts, which can support their brand at worldwide
level and the business brands can contribute more in innovation of their brands and
can better serve their potential customers across the world. Most of the population
across the world is now available on social media plate forms like fb, WhatsApp,
twitter, Instagram etc. and spending most of their time on social media, being
engaged with the social media activities. The proper and successful management of
such type of interaction like social media engagement can help the business brands
to get better understandings in customer engagement behavior and which may
enhanced the value proposition and better communication with their targeted
audiences. If the business brands are applying powerful social networking tools ,it
can make comparatively easy to initiate conversations and capture user generated
input rapidly from a large number of participants and contestants. These are very
critical processes to achieve the competitive advantages and for innovation
purposes like product development and brand experience improvements. In spite of
this great and huge benefit of social media engagement in extracted brands and
providing more value for brand development , these expected positive results of
customer engagement through social media for innovation are not frequently
realized in practice by everyone because even now at that time many companies do
not know how to use social media for capturing innovation opportunities for their
brands.
This Paper Provides a study to make two important contributions: First we have to
extend the concept of CEB to examine the intention to provide feedback to
improve the brand and the intention to participate in collaboration with other
customers in the brand communicates. Second the innovation in related
characteristics of CEBs in brand pages is a result of stimulus organism response
because the environmental stimuli lead to an emotional reaction that in turns and
drives consumers behavioral response. The customer engagement through social
media has historically been a common measure and matric for evaluating social
media performance of any business brands through various and different social
media platforms.
Social Media Engagement: Basically the social media engagement
indicates a type of interaction between a user and a platform which is being
supported and provided by an organization to communicate and interact with their
target audience. The term engagement indicates a type of measurement and matric
that how people are interacting with your certain platforms.

LITERATURE REVIEW
Theoretical background
The S-O-R Model
In 1974,the Mehrabian and Russell developed the stimulus organism response
model in environmental psychology. “S-O-R model” contributes to an
understanding of audiences that how they respond towards their environment. The
stimulus- organism-response model shows that how individuals feels or interact
in the same environment or how the same environment influences on individuals
behavior. This model basically assumes an individual’s perception and
interpretation in the same environment.

The S-O-R model developed by Mehrabian and Russell.

The marketing researchers ,later on also adopted a framework for more analyzing
this prospective ,where they reveal and found the subsequently driven behavior of
customers towards the environmental stimuli(Baker et al., 1994). The online
market study also prove that the online services are providing such a type of
feature that highly interact and influence the consumer’s behavior like their
purchase behavior(Eroglu et al., 2003). This shows a consumer’s internal cognitive
and emotional state of behavior towards any stimuli. Furthermore Fang et
al.,(2017)The S-O-R model is applied to examine the social media environment
and the impacts of the technological environment’s cues on the consumer’s
effective(hedonic) ,cognitive(utilitarian)states in turn influence the consumer
response behaviors( satisfaction and purchase intentions).
Web-Based Characteristics As Environmental Stimuli(S)
Brand communication through online brand pages is considered as the most
essential tool to enable interactivity through online or web-based services with
customers where customers can moderate and evaluate services as per their choice
and demand by engaging with the brand communities and its communication. On
the basic of consumers perception ,the content quality, brand page interactivity and
brand page sociability are notices and examined in study. These are four basic and
critical characteristics of customers behavior for online services.
The business brands can capture the intention of customers and engage them with
their brands by developing an interesting and powerful content because the better
content quality provides an environmental cue in determine the customer behavior
in online service market. The brand pages should capture all the relevant
,complete and accurate information on the brand page so that the customers feel
comfortable with their decision to visit your brand page by getting a high quality of
information regarding their perception and according to your brand content. The
business brands should also provide their customers or audiences with a good
brand interactivity with their brand. According to the study it shows a customer’s
perception , that brand page environment can facilitate the interaction between
them, the brand and with the other brand communities, where they may acquire or
get help with the other customers experience about their specific brand or any
certain product. Any brand page can be best situated for their potential customers
to better manage and facilitate the entitativity perceptions.
Customer Perceived Value As a Customer’s Organism
States(o)
The effect of environmental stimuli on customer behavior are arbitrate through an
organism state which may be cognitive and emotional aspects in consumption
experience of customers. This statement refers to the S-O-R Model which suggests
and shows that it is critical to proper understand value delivery that comprises
the benefits derived from consumption experience of customers that directs
buying behavior(Sweeney and Soutar,2001;Carlson et al,2015).
Customers frequently participate in brand communities or virtual communities on
business brand pages and company website, because it has become a better source
of having specific brand information by interacting with the brand communities
instead of finding out of huge amount of information through different digital
sources. The customers considered and finding the brand communities on social
medial having a very pleasurable and interesting environment to interact with the
community and share or exchange information with each others(Zhang et
al,2015).Because on social media brand communities the customers may found and
interact with their same mentality people and there may be engaged with the
elements of enjoyment taken from brand information posted on brand pages by the
brand community members and the business brand itself. The brand pages usually
comprises the participating customers of the host business brand where the level of
interactivity among and the importance assigned to the customers engaged with
social media brand community, can persuade what we argue entitativity
perceptions.
Customer Feedback And Collaboration Intentions As
Response(R)
The customer’s higher level of affect towards the firm ,it may be positive and
negative feelings towards the firms, increase customer’s prospects to show CEBs
that well-being for the firm that comprises feedback and helping other customers.
The Algesheimer et al.(2005,p.21) first proposed the idea about people engagement
in brand communities ,where same minded people can interact with each other and
according to him community engagement as ‘members’ intrinsic motivation to
interact and cooperate with community members. The customer can reveal many
social media functions and tasks like posting questions, freely acquiring and
entertaining with brand information, receiving feedback from brand and other
community members, and also itself providing the feedback by taking part in
various kind of surreys and by posting suggestions about the business brand
,engaging and contributing in brand development and helping other potential or
willing customers of the brand derive greater product utility. These all functions
can boost up customers likeliness in engaging innovation related behavior in brand
community. The actual behavior of people is quite difficult to measure so we focus
on behavioral intentions to participate in customer feedback and collaborate with
the other members in the brand community. The customers feedback and
collaboration intention in the brand community can be considered as a form of
innovation related behavior on the brand pages of the business. Feedback
intentions of the customers can play a voluntarily solicited and unsolicited
evaluations of brand experience. This could include innovation activities initiated
by the business brand on their brand pages like inviting customers to complete a
survey ,responding to poll or questionnaires related to brand ideas or brand
development, in short engaging and participating in the activities that may support
the brand innovation efforts.
The customers may collaborate on brand pages by heling to solve the brand related
issues, exchange valuable information with the community through the brand page,
contributing in development of new innovation related to brand idea.
RESEARCH OBJECTIVES
The purpose of the study indicates the investigation of the effect of online service
design characteristics that can induce customer perceived value with perceptions
which later stimulate customer feedback and collaboration intentions towards
brand pages(Van Doorn et al., 2010; Verleye et al, 2014; George et al.,2016. This
study also extend the S-O-R model framework for understanding CEBs intentions
in social media and provide theoretically justification of various firm controllable
online service design characteristics as environmental stimuli in social media brand
pages.
Basically the main objective of the research is to prove that how can a business
consider social media as a measuring tool for their brands and how can a social
media can contribute in the value proposition of any brand through brand
communities for any business brand for their success. In fact the social media
brand communities are the best and high source to measure any brands success
because on social media brand communities there is a variety of different people
from different countries, cutlers in short people from all over the world engage and
communicate with themselves and share their ideas, views, knowledge and
experiences about the brand where the business brand can measure and scale out
their brand’s image and value towards the community and society and the business
brand use their customer’s or community members in their product development
and enhanced value proposition to target audience.
The interest for social media brand communities has been increased since 15 years.
Because according to research the people are more interested to join the groups in
which they interact with whole the world and can share their experience regards
the brand.
HYPOTHESIS
The S-O-R paradigm has proposes that the perception of consumers of online
service design characteristics of content quality, brand page interactivity, brand
page sociability and the contact of consumer quality represent stimulus(S) cues,
and then an organism state(O) entails and requires the customer perceived value
benefit consequences which comprises learning value of brand entitativity value
with the hedonic value of the business brand. The S-O-R model also proposes the
behavioral response (R) which includes the customer engagement behavior intent
or intentions represented by feedback intentions which helps to improve the brand
experience and the purpose to collaborate with brand page community like brand
communities which may reflect the final reaction to a stimulus.
Environmental stimulus and customer perceived value
Content quality
The social media websites which examines the retailing service quality(Carlson
and O’Cass,2010)and the virtual community websites (Nambisan and Baron,2009)
indicates in a research that the quality of the content of any business brand has a
very positive influence on consumer attitudes and behaviors. The consumers
interact with the particular brand on a brand page while searching for information
like brand attributes ,characteristics or benefits which may impact on consumer’s
experience towards particular brand which may be either favorable or
unfavorable(Ho and Wang,2015).The useful information obtained from the brand
pages may offer opportunities to enhance an individual’s learning(Hamilton et
al,2016).
Brand page interactivity
The customer brand interactivity with other members is quite critical in enhancing
a customer’s learning and sense of belongingness and attachment with that
particular brand on brand pages and virtual communities on websites(Mathwick et
al., 2008; Nambisan and Baron, 2009). The customer interact with the brand and
the other members with the consumption of content over a wide range in a brand
environment because on the brand pages the content is generated by various
sources like the content created by brand itself and generated by its members
where the member can increase their perception about brand with the depth
,breadth and mutual exchange of knowledge with a close interaction between them
and it may bring and intend to more excitement.
Brand page sociability
The perceived sociability with the particular brand page may facilitate its
customers to ascertain a social connection with their same likeminded people and
provide a chance to exchange their knowledge that helps them to enhance their
attitude towards that particular brand. According to a research the communication
and socialization between community members on social media is quite enjoyable
and meaningful for the customers(Alnawas and Aburub,2016; Vock et al., 2013).
The relative contact between customers on social media brand pages plays a vital
and important role in influencing a positive customer attitude and behavior. O’Cass
and Carlson (2012). An effective contact and judgement may create more
satisfaction among the members of the brand page towards the brand.
Customer-perceived value, customer feedback and
collaboration in social media
when customers experience fun, entertainment and learning and a sense of
belonging ness from interacting with the other members through a brand’s social
media presence they exhibit the greater behavioral intentions of eWoM, brand
advocacy, feedback to the brand and disclose personal information to the
brand(Jhan and Kunz,2012; de vries and Carlson,2014). The customers who have
achieved their learning goal by interacting with the social media brand
communities are more likely to engage with the brand for continuous
enhancement of their knowledge. The individuals who strongly perceived and
achieved value from the consumption of a brand page experience and learning
,they are more likely participate in customer feedback and collaboration with the
other community members in the brand page.

METHODOLOGY
Sample
The respondents answered the screening questions to ensure that they were
follower of their favorite brands on Facebook pages and had purchased their
favorite brands within the past six months. An email invitation by a link which
contains a brief introduction were to send to the eligible participants.

Measures
Measures for content quality was adopted from Mathwick et al(2008),brand page
interactivity and brand page sociability were adopted from (Jahn and Kunz(2012)
and customer contact quality were adopted from O’Cass and Carlson(2012). The
brand learning value were drawn from Algesheimer et al. (2005), entitativity
value from (Vock et al., 2013) and hedonic value from Jahn and Kunz (2012). The
collaboration intensions were adopted from Shi et al.(2016) and feedback
intensions were adopted from Hamilton et al.(2016). All these items were scaled
on seven point like art scale from (1) “strongly disagree” to (7) “strongly agree”.

Sample profile
There are total 654 responses were received which were 50.0 % male and 49.5%
female, average age 39.45 years and average income US 50,000 to 74,999 per
year. All the data were collected from a single source and also found one factor
which explained 47% variance out of the total variance (100%). As the date is
collected from only one source so this research is tested for common method bias.

Estimation procedure
The study evaluated two things first the reflective measurement model of validity
and reliability and the structural models of the hypothesized paths which were
examined in this study
 RESULTS & ANALYSIS
Evaluation Of Measurement Scales
In this research proposal SPSS software was used to validate the measurement
model. I was conducting survey on Customer Engagement Behaviors In Social
Media through 10 different brand’s social media E-Commerce platforms according
to consumer’s choice. Like Daraz, Khadi, Alkaram, Bonanza, Limelight, Gul
Ahmed, Amazon, OLX, Alibaba & AliExpress and I tried to analyze that how the
brands capture innovation opportunities through their online brand communities on
different social media platforms.
In total, 154 responses were received with the following characteristics: 73.4 per
cent male and 26.0 per cent female and 6 per centage of those respondents who did
not want show their gender with average age 26.4 years. With the help of SPSS
data analysis I found that cultural values and level or status(occupation) can
influence on Customer Brand Engagement Behavior. So the Descriptive Statistics
of the key constructs are given in Table:1.
Table :I
N=154 Statistics

Gender Age Occupation Qualification Marital E-commerce

Status Platform

Valid 154 154 154 154 154 154

Missing 0 0 0 0 0 0

Mean 1.305 1.058 1.766 1.032 1.916

1.273

Median 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000

Maximum 3.0 3.0 3.0 5.0 2.0 11.0

The study first evaluated the reflective measurement models for reliability and
validity of the sample. Second, the structural models of the hypothesized paths
were examined.
 Table: II
Reliability Results Analysis
Variables Cronbach Alpha Items
Content Quality .982 3
Brand Page Interactivity .957 3
Brand Page Sociability .969 3
Customer Contact Quality .972 3
Brand Learning Value .974 3
Entitativity Value .956 3
Hedonic Value .965 3
Feedback Intention .970 4
Collaboration Intention .972 3

The composite Reliabilities for all variables exceeded the cutoff value of 0.70,
which demonstrate that each Construct are Acceptable Psychometric Properties. As
research role the reliability Cronbach alpha value .7 is favorable for further
regression analysis.

Table: III Correlation Matrix

N=154 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9

CQ 1

BP1 .961** 1

BPS .935** .930** 1

CCQ .975** .957** .908** 1

BLV .970** .962** .923** .979** 1

** ** ** **
EV .947 .948 .947 .942 .957** 1

HV .933** .916** .907** .931** .932** .920** 1

FI .950** .945** .939** .944** .951** 0.941 .926** 1

** ** ** ** ** ** **
CI .951 .923 .945 .937 .945 .936 .907 .952** 1

Mean 2.1082 2.0411 2.0065 2.1190 2.0671 1.9307 1.9805 1.9789 2.0476

SD 1.44614 1.37533 1.35787 1.46896 1.40358 1.23944 1.34269 1.31729 1.39218

The results shows the correlation coefficient for the variables. The correlation
results indicate each variable is correlated with each other because the value of
correlation coefficient is on (r =1). The result shows that there is significant
positive correlation occur between the variables.

EVALUATION OF THE STRUCTURAL MODEL

I examined path coefficients ( β ) and coefficient of determination (R square) to
evaluate the model.

Regression Result Analysis

Table 1 Model Summary

Mo R R Adjusted R Std. Error Change Statistics

del Square Square of the R Square F df1
Estimate Change Change
1 .950a .903 .902 .41206 .903 1411.6 1
21
2 .958b .918 .917 .37979 .015 27.924 1
a. Predictors: (Constant), Content Quality

b. Predictors: (Constant), Content Quality, Brand Learning Value

c. Dependent Variable: Feedback Intentions

Table:2 Coefficients

Model Unstandardized Standardize t Sig.

Coefficients d
Coefficient
s
B Std. Error Beta
1 (Constant) .154 .059 2.622 .010
Content Quality .865 .023 .950 37.572 .000
2 (Constant) .115 .055 2.100 .037
Content Quality .421 .087 .462 4.858 .000
Brand Learning Value .472 .089 .503 5.284 .000
Table 1 & Table 2 Present the regression result of relationship of Independent
variable Content quality and dependent variable feedback intentions through
mediating role of brand learning value. In Table 1 R square value of .918 shows
that 91.8% change in independent variable feedback intentions of Independent
variable content quality through mediating role of brand learning. In Table 2 beta
value .503 and significant value .000 indicate that there is significant and positive
impact of mediating variable between content quality and feedback intentions.
Table: 3 Model Summary
Mo R R Adjusted Std. Error Change Statistics
del Squar R Square of the R Square F df1
e Estimate Change Chang
e
1 .950a .903 .902 .41206 .903 1411.6 1
21
2 .959b .919 .918 .37756 .016 30.044 1

a. Predictors: (Constant), Content Quality

b. Predictors: (Constant), Content Quality, Entitativity Value
c. Dependent Variable: Feedback Intentions

Table: 4 Coefficients’
Model Unstandardized Standardize t Sig.
Coefficients d
Coefficients
B Std. Error Beta

1 (Constant) .154 .059 2.622 .010

Content Quality .865 .023 .950 37.572 .000
2 (Constant) .062 .056 1.096 .275
Content Quality .523 .066 .574 7.927 .000
Entitativity Value .422 .077 .397 5.481 .000

Table 3 & Table 4 Present the regression result of relationship of Independent

variable Content quality and dependent variable feedback intentions through
mediating role of Entitativity value. In Table 3 R square value of .919 shows that
91.9% change in independent variable feedback intentions of Independent variable
content quality through mediating role of Entitativity value. In Table 4 β value
.397 and significant value .000 indicate that there is significant and positive impact
of mediating variable between content quality and feedback intentions.

Table: 5 Model Summary

Mo R R Adjusted Std. Error Change Statistics
del Squar R Square of the R Square F df1
e Estimate Change Chang
e
1 .950a .903 .902 .41206 .903 1411.6 1
21
2 .957b .915 .914 .38620 .012 22.040 1

a. Predictors: (Constant), Content Quality

b. Predictors: (Constant), Content Quality, Hedonic Value

c. Dependent Variable: Feedback Intentions

Table:6 Coefficients
Model Unstandardized Standardized t Sig.
Coefficients Coefficients
B Std. Error Beta
1 (Constant) .154 .059 2.622 .010
Content .865 .023 .950 37.572 .000
Quality
2 (Constant) .107 .056 1.916 .057
Content .603 .060 .662 10.074 .000
Quality
Hedonic .303 .064 .309 4.695 .000
Value
Table 5& Table 4 6Present the regression result of relationship of Independent
variable Content quality and dependent variable feedback intentions through
mediating role of Hedonic value. In Table 5 R square value of .915 shows that
91.5% change in independent variable feedback intentions of Independent variable
content quality through mediating role of Hedonic value. In Table 6 β value .309
and significant value .000 indicate that there is significant and positive impact of
mediating variable between content quality and feedback intentions.

Table:7 Model Summary

M R R Adjusted Std. Error Change Statistics
od Squar R Square of the R Square F df1
el e Estimate Change Chang
e
1 .945a .893 .892 .43313 .893 1263.2 1
03
2 .958b .917 .916 .38200 .024 44.417 1

a. Predictors: (Constant), Brand Page Interactivity

b. Predictors: (Constant), Brand Page Interactivity, Brand Learning Value

c. Dependent Variable: Feedback Intentions

Table:8 Coefficients

Model Unstandardized Standardize t Sig.

Coefficients d
Coefficients
B Std. Error Beta
1 (Constant) .132 .063 2.107 .037
Brand Page Interactivity .905 .025 .945 35.542 .000
2 (Constant) .098 .055 1.762 .080
Brand Page Interactivity .380 .082 .397 4.647 .000
Brand Learning Value .535 .080 .570 6.665 .000

Table 7& Table 8 Present the regression result of relationship of Independent

variable Brand Page Interactivity and dependent variable feedback intentions
through mediating role of Brand Learning Value. In Table 7 R square value of .917
shows that 91.7% change in independent variable feedback intentions of
Independent variable Brand Page Interactivity through mediating role of Brand
Learning Value. In Table 8 β value .570 and significant value .000 indicate that
there is significant and positive impact of mediating variable between Dependent
and independent Variable.
Table:9 Model Summary
Mo R R Adjusted R Std. Error Change Statistics
del Square Square of the R Square F df1
Estimate Change Change
1 .945a .893 .892 .43313 .893 1263.2 1
03
2 .957b .916 .915 .38458 .023 41.800 1

a. Predictors: (Constant), Brand Page Interactivity

b. Predictors: (Constant), Brand_ Page Interactivity, Hedonic Value

c. Dependent Variable: Feedback Intentions

Table: 10 Coefficients
Model Unstandardized Standardize t Sig.
Coefficients d
Coefficient
s
B Std. Error Beta
1 (Constant) .132 .063 2.107 .037
Brand Page .905 .025 .945 35.542 .000
Interactivity
2 (Constant) .074 .056 1.310 .192
Brand Page .572 .056 .597 10.179 .000
Interactivity
Hedonic Value .372 .058 .379 6.465 .000

Table 9 & Table 10 Present the regression result of relationship of Independent

variable Brand Page Interactivity and dependent variable feedback intentions
through mediating role of Hedonic Value. In Table 9 R square value of .916 shows
that 91.6% change in independent variable feedback intentions of Independent
variable Brand Page Interactivity through mediating role of Hedonic Value. In
Table 10 β value .379 and significant value .000 indicate that there is significant
and positive impact of mediating variable between Dependent and independent
Variable.
Table:11 Model Summary
Mode R R Adjusted Std. Error Change Statistics
l Squar R Square of the R Square F df1
e Estimate Change Chang
e
1 .93 .883 .882 .45287 .883 1142.5 1
9a 05
2 .95 .908 .907 .40270 .025 41.233 1
3b

a. Predictors: (Constant), Brand Page Sociability

b. Predictors: (Constant), Brand Page Sociability, Entitativity Value
c. Dependent Variable: Feedback Intentions

Table:12 Coefficients
Model Unstandardized Standar t Sig.
Coefficients dized
Coeffici
ents
B Std. Beta
Error
1 (Constant) .150 .065 2.302 .023
Brand Page .911 .027 .939 33.80 .000
Sociability 1
2 (Constant) .047 .060 .783 .435
Brand Page .456 .075 .470 6.080 .000
Sociability
Entitativity Value .527 .082 .496 6.421 .000
Table 11 & Table 12 Present the regression result of relationship of Independent
variable Brand Page Sociability and dependent variable feedback intentions
through mediating role of Entitativity Value. In Table 11 R square value of .908
shows that 90.8% change in independent variable feedback intentions of
Independent variable Brand Page sociability through mediating role of
Entitativity Value. In Table 12 β value .496 and significant value .000 indicate that
there is significant and positive impact of mediating variable between Dependent
and independent Variable.
Table:13 Model Summary
Mo R R Adjusted Std. Error Change Statistics
del Squar R Square of the R Square F df1
e Estimate Change Chang
e
1 .939a .883 .882 .45287 .883 1142.5 1
05
2 .965b .930 .929 .34995 .048 103.55 1
8

a. Predictors: (Constant), Brand Page Sociability

b. Predictors: (Constant), Brand Page Sociability, Brand Learning Value
c. Dependent Variable: Feedback Intentions

Table:14 Coefficients
Model Unstandardized Standard t Sig.
Coefficients ized
Coefficie
nts
B Std. Beta
Error
1 (Constant) .150 .065 2.302 .023
Brand Page Sociability .911 .027 .939 33.801 .000
2 (Constant) .069 .051 1.352 .178
Brand Page Sociability .401 .054 .414 7.393 .000
Brand Learning Value .534 .053 .569 10.176 .000
Table 13 & Table 14 Present the regression result of relationship of Independent
variable Brand Page Sociability and dependent variable feedback intentions
through mediating role of Brand Learning Value. In Table 13 R square value
of .930 shows that 90.8% change in independent variable feedback intentions of
Independent variable Brand Page sociability through mediating role of Brand
Learning Value. In Table 14 β value .569 and significant value .000 indicate that
there is significant and positive impact of mediating variable between Dependent
and independent Variable.
Table:15 Model Summary
M R R Adjusted Std. Error Change Statistics
od Squar R Square of the R Square F df1
el e Estimate Change Chang
e
1 .939a .883 .882 .45287 .883 1142.5 1
05
2 .956b .914 .913 .38960 .031 54.379 1

a. Predictors: (Constant), Brand Page Sociability

b. Predictors: (Constant), Brand Page Sociability, Hedonic Value
c. Dependent Variable: Feedback Intentions

Table:16 Coefficients
Model Unstandardized Standardize t Sig.
Coefficients d
Coefficient
s
B Std. Error Beta
1 (Constant) .150 .065 2.302 .023
Brand Page .911 .027 .939 33.801 .000
Sociability
2 (Constant) .076 .057 1.331 .185
Brand Page .543 .055 .560 9.854 .000
Sociability
Hedonic Value .411 .056 .419 7.374 .000
Table 15 & Table 16 Present the regression result of relationship of Independent
variable Brand Page Sociability and dependent variable feedback intentions
through mediating role of Hedonic Value. In Table 15 R square value of .914
shows that 91.4% change in independent variable feedback intentions of
Independent variable Brand Page sociability through mediating role of Hedonic
Value. In Table 16 β value .419 and significant value .000 indicate that there is
significant and positive impact of mediating variable between Dependent and
independent Variable.
Table: 17 Model Summary
Mod R R Adjusted R Std. Error of Change Statistics
el Square Square the Estimate R Square F df1
Change Change
1 .944a .891 .890 .43622 .891 1243.19 1
2
2 .953b .909 .908 .39998 .018 29.794 1

a. Predictors: (Constant), Customer Contact Quality

b. Predictors: (Constant), Customer Contact Quality, Brand Learning Value
c. Dependent Variable: Feedback Intentions

Table:18 Coefficients
Model Unstandardized Standardize t Sig.
Coefficients d
Coefficients
B Std. Error Beta
1 (Constant) .185 .062 2.994 .003
Customer Content .846 .024 .944 35.259 .000
Quality
2 (Constant) .133 .058 2.309 .022
Customer Contact .272 .107 .304 2.533 .012
Quality
Brand Learning Value .614 .112 .654 5.458 .000
Table 17 & Table 18 Present the regression result of relationship of Independent
variable Customer Contact Quality and dependent variable feedback intentions
through mediating role of Brand Learning Value. In Table 17 R square value of
.909 shows that 90.1% change in independent variable feedback intentions of
Independent variable Customer Contact Quality through mediating role of Brand
Learning Value. In Table 18 β value .654and significant value .000 indicate that
there is significant and positive impact of mediating variable between Dependent
and independent Variable.
Table:19 Model Summary
Mo R R Adjusted Std. Error Change Statistics
del Squar R Square of the R Square F df1
e Estimate Change Chang
e
1 .944a .891 .890 .43622 .891 1243.1 1
92
2 .956b .915 .913 .38754 .024 41.594 1

a. Predictors: (Constant), Customer Contact Quality

b. Predictors: (Constant), Customer Contact Quality, Entitativity Value
c. Dependent Variable: Feedback Intentions

Table:20 Coefficients
Model Unstandardized Standardize t Sig.
Coefficients d
Coefficient
s
B Std. Error Beta
1 (Constant) .185 .062 2.994 .003
Customer Contact .846 .024 .944 35.259 .000
Quality
2 (Constant) .065 .058 1.127 .261
Customer Contact .459 .064 .512 7.209 .000
_Quality
Entitativity Value .487 .076 .458 6.449 .000
Table 19 & Table 20 Present the regression result of relationship of Independent
variable Customer Contact Quality and dependent variable feedback intentions
through mediating role of Entitativity Value. In Table 19 R square value of .915
shows that 91.5% change in independent variable feedback intentions of
Independent variable Customer Contact Quality through mediating role of
Entitativity Value. In Table 20 β value .458 and significant value .000 indicate that
there is significant and positive impact of mediating variable between Dependent
and independent Variable.
Table: 21 Model Summary
Mo R R Adjusted Std. Error Change Statistics
del Squar R Square of the R Square F df1
e Estimate Change Chang
e
1 .944a .891 .890 .43622 .891 1243.1 1
92
2 .953b .908 .907 .40168 .017 28.264 1

a. Predictors: (Constant), Customer Contact Quality

b. Predictors: (Constant), Customer Contact _Quality, Hedonic Value
c. Dependent Variable: Feedback Intentions

Table:22 Coefficients
Model Unstandardized Standardize t Sig.
Coefficients d
Coefficient
s
B Std. Error Beta
1 (Constant) .185 .062 2.994 .003
Customer Contact .846 .024 .944 35.259 .000
Quality
2 (Constant) .123 .058 2.108 .037
Customer Contact .548 .060 .611 9.077 .000
_Quality
Hedonic Value .351 .066 .358 5.316 .000
Table 21 & Table 22 Present the regression result of relationship of Independent
variable Customer Contact Quality and dependent variable feedback intentions
through mediating role of Hedonic Value. In Table 21 R square value of .953
shows that 95.3% change in independent variable feedback intentions of
Independent variable Customer Contact Quality through mediating role of
Hedonic Value. In Table 22 β value .358 and significant value .000 indicate that
there is significant and positive impact of mediating variable between Dependent
and independent Variable.
Like this The mediation impact of Brand learning value between
content quality and Collaboration intentions(second dependent variable) result
shows that there is significance and positive mediation exist between content
quality and Collaboration intentions with Beta value (β=.385) and significant value
(Sig=.000) and R square value (R2 =.912) is indicate the 91.2% change in
Collaboration intentions due to change in content quality through the mediation of
Brand learning value. In mediation regression result R square value (R2 =.915),
Beta value (β=.346) and significant value (Sig=.000) shows that there is 91.5%
change in collaboration intentions due to change in content quality through positive
and significant entitativity value mediation. In mediation analysis R Square value
(R2 = .906) shows the mediating effect of hedonic value between content quality
and collaboration Intentions. It indicate that 90.6% change in collaboration
Intentions by content quality through mediating effect of hedonic value. In
Coefficient table beta value (β=.154) and significance value is (sig=.026) shows
there is significant and positive mediating effect of hedonic value.
In mediation regression result R square value (R2 =.894), Beta value
(β=.758) and significant value (Sig=.000) shows that there is 89.4% change in
collaboration intentions due to change in Brand Page Interactivity through positive
and significant Brand Learning value mediation. Regression result the mediation
impact of Entitativity Value between Brand Page Interactivity and Collaboration
intentions result shows that there is significance and positive mediation exist
between Brand Page Interactivity and Collaboration intentions with Beta value
(β=.603) and significant value (Sig=.000) and R square value (R 2 =.888) is indicate
the 88.8% change in Collaboration intentions due to change in Brand Page
Interactivity through the mediation of Entitativity Value. In mediation analysis R
Square value (R2 = .874) shows the mediating effect of hedonic value between
Brand Page Interactivity and collaboration Intentions. It indicate that 87.4%
change in collaboration Intentions by Brand Page Interactivity through mediating
effect of hedonic value. In Coefficient table beta value (β=.381) and significance
value is (sig=.00) shows there is significant and positive mediating effect of
hedonic value.

Regression result the mediation impact of Brand learning value between

Brand Page Sociability and Collaboration intentions result shows that there is
significance and positive mediation exist between Brand Page Sociability and
Collaboration intentions with Beta value (β=.489) and significant value (Sig=.000)
and R square value (R2 =.928) is indicate the 92.8% change in Collaboration
intentions due to change in Brand Page Sociability through the mediation of Brand
learning value. In mediation regression result R square value (R2 =.908), Beta
value (β=.398) and significant value (Sig=.000) shows that there is 90.8% change
in collaboration intentions due to change in Brand Page Sociability through
positive and significant entitativity value mediation. In mediation analysis R
Square value (R2 = .906) shows the mediating effect of hedonic value between
Brand Page Sociability and collaboration Intentions. It indicate that 90.6% change
in collaboration Intentions by Brand Page Sociability through mediating effect of
hedonic value. In Coefficient table beta value (β=.279) and significance value is
(sig=.000) shows there is significant and positive mediating effect of hedonic
value. Regression result the mediation impact of Brand learning value between
customer content quality and Collaboration intentions result shows that there is
significance and positive mediation exist between customer content quality and
Collaboration intentions with Beta value (β=.659) and significant value (Sig=.000)
and R square value (R2 =.897) is indicate the 89.7% change in Collaboration
intentions due to change in customer content quality through the mediation of
Brand learning value.

In mediation regression result R square value (R2 =.902), Beta value

(β=.474) and significant value (Sig=.000) shows that there is 90.2% change in
collaboration intentions due to change in Customer content quality through
positive and significant entitativity value mediation .In mediation analysis R
Square value (R2 = .886) shows the mediating effect of hedonic value between
Customer Content Quality and collaboration Intentions. It indicate that 88.6%
change in collaboration Intentions by Customer Content Quality through mediating
effect of hedonic value. In Coefficient table beta value (β=.260) and significance
value is (sig=.001) shows there is significant and positive mediating effect of
hedonic value.

CONCLUSION
The purpose of this study was to investigate the effect of online service design
characteristics that can induce customer perceived value perceptions which then
stimulate customer feedback and collaboration intentions towards brand pages. By
doing so, the research is the first to explicitly examine forms of CEBs related to
innovation in the brand page environment. The findings provide empirical evidence
that contributes to the emerging CEB management literature by examining
consumption mechanisms in social media that unlock different forms of CEBs that
captures the knowledge resource of customers for innovation purposes And this
research shows that brand engagement not only adds a new dynamic to the
enhancement of brand innovation, but also exerts a powerful force turning
customers into brand champions. The stronger customers participations of the
ownership of a brand, the greater their internal motivation to engage in behaviors
that support the firm’s brand building efforts and helps to capture innovation
opportunities.
 LIMITATIONS OF THE RESEARCH
This examined research study has various different limitations , like the two
diverse of customer participation like feedback and customer collaboration
intensions in innovation related customer engagement behavior. The additional
factors which capture the conceptual richness of customer engagement behavior
can extend by the models in future research. Influencing augmenting, mobilizing
and market or brand co creating behaviors are conceptualized by Jaakkola and
Alexander (2014) and Groeger et al.(2016). This study is also capturing a
limitation by the cross sectional nature of the research which adopts the subjective
survey data to assess and eliminate the consumer’s innovation related perception in
social media where the respondents might be biased through their answers and
even can be conflicting with their actual behavior and opinion. Thus the future
study can be explore and generate the generalizability of the framework to the
setting of other countries and the social media platforms which comprises the
YouTube and Instagram in western market and Weibo and WeChat in china.

REFERENCES
• 9Mehrabian and Russell)“ The S-O-R Model, Journal of service marketing,
emeraldinsight vol”.

• (Baker et al., 1994). “The subsequently driven behavior of customers

towards the environmental stimuli”.

• (Eroglu et al., 20030 ” consumer’s internal cognitive and emotional state

of behavior towards any stimuli, Journal of service marketing”.

• (Fang et al.,(2017) “The social media environment and the impacts of the
technological environment’s cues on the consumer’s effective(hedonic) and
cognitive(utilitarian)states, Journal of service marketing”.

• (Sweeney and Soutar,2001;Carlson et al,2015). “consumption experience

of customers that directs buying behavior, Journal of service marketing”.

• (Zhang et al,2015). “ Customer’s pleasurable and interesting interact with

the community and share or exchange information with each others,
Journal of service marketing”.

• (Algesheimer et al.(2005,p.21) “first proposed the idea about people

engagement in brand communities ,where same minded people can interact
 with each other and according to him community engagement as
‘members’ intrinsic motivation to interact and cooperate with community
members, Journal of service marketing”.

• ”customer perceived value with perceptions which later stimulate customer

feedback and collaboration intentions towards brand pages, , Journal of
service marketing”. (Van Doorn et al., 2010; Verleye et al, 2014; George et
al.,2016).

• (Carlson and O’Cass,2010) (Nambisan and Baron,2009) “The social media

websites and the virtual community websites which examines the retailing
service quality, emeraldinsight, Journal of service marketing”.

• (Ho and Wang,2015) “consumer’s experience towards particular brand

which may be either favorable or unfavorable, Journal of service
marketing, volume.1”.
• “The brand pages may offer opportunities to enhance an individual’s
learning”. (Hamilton et al,2016).

• (Mathwick et al., 2008; Nambisan and Baron, 2009). “The customer brand
interactivity with other members, Journal of service marketing, volume.1”.

• “Communication and socialization between community members on social

media is quite enjoyable and meaningful for the customers”. (Alnawas and
Aburub,2016; Vock et al., 2013).

• (O’Cass and Carlson (2012). “Social media brand pages plays a vital and
important role in influencing a positive customer attitude and behavior,
Journal of service marketing”.
• (Jhan and Kunz,2012; de vries and Carlson,2014) “Customer-perceived
value, customer feedback and collaboration in social media,
emeraldinsight, Journal of service marketing”.

• (Mathwick et al(2008),Measures for content quality, “Journal of service

marketing”.

• “Measure of brand page interactivity and brand page sociability, Journal

of service marketing”. (Jahn and Kunz(2012).

• (O’Cass and Carlson(2012). ), “Journal of service marketing,

vol.1,Measure of customer contact quality”.
• (Algesheimer et al. (2005), “Journal of service marketing emerald insight
vol.1, Measure of brand learning value”.

• (Vock et al., 2013) ), “Journal of service marketing,Measure of

entitativity value from”.

• (Jahn and Kunz (2012). ), “ emerald insight Journal of service marketing,

Measure of hedonic value”.

• (Shi et al.(2016) ), “Journal of service marketing vol.1 Measure of

collaboration intensions”.

• (Hamilton et al.(2016), “Journal of service marketing,“Measure of

feedback intensions”.

• (Jaakkola and Alexander (2014) and (Groeger et al.(2016), “Journal of

service marketing, volume.1, conceptualized augmenting, mobilizing and
market or brand co creating behaviors”.