Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Customer Engagement and Social Media Revisiting The Past To Inform
Customer Engagement and Social Media Revisiting The Past To Inform
A R T I C L E I N F O A B S T R A C T
Keywords: Customer engagement (CE) is a marketing concept of great importance and the rise of social media has further
Brand engagement amplified the importance of this concept. Yet, our understanding of the progress of CE research remains limited
Business engagement due to the absence of a one-stop state-of-the-art overview of the concept that considers its manifestation on social
Consumer engagement
media. To address this gap, we review CE research on social media since the beginning of the present millennium
Customer engagement
Marketing
using the PRISMA protocol for systematic reviews. The outcome of our review reveals the antecedents, decisions,
Relationship marketing and outcomes; the theories, contexts, and methods; and the ways forward for advancing knowledge, improving
Social media representation, and enhancing rigor with respect to future research on CE and social media.
Systematic literature review
Systematic review
1. Introduction media platforms (Hride et al., 2022; Husain et al., 2022; Sajid et al.,
2022). Accordingly, their spending globally in the digital space have
Customers today expect brands to connect with them and do more for increased from $380.75 billion in 2020 to $491.70 billion in 2021 and
them than simply sell them a product—indicating a shift from trans this is forecasted to grow to an estimated $785.08 billion in 2025
actional to relationship marketing, which has occurred in the recent (Bhattacharjee, 2020; Cramer-Flood, 2021).
decades post the new millennium (Coviello et al., 2002; Dall’Olmo-Riley In essence, CE is a multidimensional concept that places a great
& De Chernatony, 2000; Islam et al., 2019; Rosenbaum et al., 2017; emphasis on cognitive, affective, and behavioral aspects of customer-
Vivek et al., 2012). Of particular interest in relationship marketing is the brand relationships (Brodie et al., 2011; Hollebeek, 2011a, 2011b;
concept of customer engagement (CE), which is widely regarded as a Hollebeek et al., 2014; Kumar, 2020; van Doorn et al., 2010). Many
vital agenda that marketers today must actively pursue if they wish to studies have reported that CE often functions as a brand’s desire to
build long-term customer interactions and relationships and solidify connect and relate with its customers (France et al., 2016), and when
customer loyalty for their brands (Lim, Kumar, Pandey, Rasul, & Gaur, present, customers have been reported to develop favorable attitudes
2022; Lim, Rasul, Kumar, & Ala, 2022; Kumar, 2020; Rosenbaum et al., toward that brand and form longer-term relationships with the brand
2017). In line with this, global professional marketing bodies such as the (Moliner et al., 2018; Pinto et al., 2019; Prentice et al., 2020).
Marketing Science Institute (2018) have included CE into their priority In research, CE is considered to be an emerging field of study (Lim,
list (Tier 1) for 2018 to 2020 to assist marketing professionals identify Rasul, Kumar, & Ala, 2022). Yet, in order for our understanding of CE to
the most effective strategies to build sustainable engagement with their progress, it is important to pursue a stock take of existing research in
customers. Having considered the importance of CE for brands in order for future research to gain an up-to-date understanding of the state
building customer loyalty, the Marketing Science Institute (2020) have of the literature and to build on past trajectories to continue to enrich
once again included CE into their priority list (Tier 1) for 2020 to 2022. our understanding of the concept (Lim, Kumar, & Ali, 2022). Indeed,
Brands around the world have also realized the significance of invest several reviews on CE have recently appeared in the literature—some
ment in the digital space, which mostly consists of a variety of social reviews were general (e.g., Barari et al., 2021; Islam & Rahman, 2016;
* Corresponding author.
E-mail addresses: lim@wengmarc.com, marclim@swin.edu.au, wlim@swinburne.edu.my (W.M. Lim), tareq.rasul@aib.edu.au, tfrasul@gmail.com (T. Rasul).
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2022.04.068
Received 13 May 2021; Received in revised form 22 April 2022; Accepted 30 April 2022
Available online 11 May 2022
0148-2963/© 2022 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Inc. This is an open access article under the CC BY license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
W.M. Lim and T. Rasul Journal of Business Research 148 (2022) 325–342
Lim, Rasul, Kumar, & Ala, 2022; Ng et al., 2020; Rosado-Pinto & (2022) and Paul et al. (2021) and the work of Lim, Yap, and Makkar
Loureiro, 2020), whereas others were reviewed in conjunction with (2021), the present review will take an integrated framework-based
sectoral domains, such as hospitality and tourism (e.g., Hao, 2020; So, approach using the antecedents, decisions, and outcomes (ADO)
Li, & Kim, 2020) and services (e.g., Chandni & Rahman, 2020). Some framework (Paul & Benito, 2018) and the theories, contexts, and
scholars such as Ajiboye et al. (2019) have attempted to systematically methods (TCM) framework (Paul et al., 2017) to answer the following
review CE on social media, but the resulting insights remain limited (e. research questions:
g., five uncategorized antecedents only). To this end, no review, to date,
has considered CE on social media in a holistic, rigorous, and systematic • What are the antecedents, decisions, and outcomes of CE on social
way using a well-structured framework, and we argue that a new review media?
in this direction is highly warranted in order to thoroughly consolidate • What are the theories, contexts, and methods used to study CE on
and advance knowledge in the field. This contention is in line with (1) social media?
the authoritative guides for systematic reviews by Lim, Kumar, and Ali • What are the pathways for advancing knowledge, improving repre
(2022) and Paul et al. (2021), which recommended reviews using sentation, and enhancing rigor with respect to future research on CE
organizing frameworks due to its ability to comprehensively provide a on social media?
structured representation of the literature and its utility for curating and
positioning new research in the field, as well as (2) the call by Lim, The rest of this article is organized as follows. First, we provide a
Rasul, Kumar, and Ala (2022) in the Journal of Business Research for new sharp and succinct overview of the emerging field of CE and social
reviews on CE that consider the theories, contexts, constructs (ante media, its key works, and leading approaches. Next, we describe the type
cedents, decisions, outcomes), and methods underpinning CE research and procedure of the review with reference to seminal reviews and
in emergent domains such as social media. A review of CE on social references. This is followed by a presentation of the major findings
media also has practical relevance given that the advent of the Internet covering the antecedents, decisions, and outcomes of CE on social media
and the proliferation of smart devices have been closely associated with and the theories, contexts, and methods employed by past studies to
the evolution of social media, holding great promise and immense po develop those findings. Finally, we present an agenda for future research
tential for curating and scaling CE (Carlson et al., 2018; Riley, 2020; on CE on social media.
Santini et al., 2020; Shawky et al., 2020).
In essence, “social media” has been defined as “tools for social 2. Theoretical background
interaction, using highly accessible and scalable communication tech
niques – such as web-based, mobile technologies – to turn communi 2.1. Customer engagement
cation into interactive dialogue” (Coulson, 2013, p. 1). The main
differences between traditional offline and contemporary online (i.e., Serious attention to CE, as well as its systematic conceptualization,
social media-based) CE processes are best appreciated by focusing on the began around 2010. The most widely acknowledged definitions of CE
differences in CE facilitated by analogue and digital communication were developed by scholars such as Brodie et al. (2011,2013), Hollebeek
(Eigenraam et al., 2018; Zook & Smith, 2016). Specifically, the tradi (2011a, 2011b), van Doorn et al. (2010), and Vivek et al. (2012). In
tional offline CE process relies on one-way or linear communication, particular, van Doorn et al. (2010, p. 253) approached CE as a behav
which enables brands to engage with customers but limits the ability of ioral construct, defining it as “the customers’ behavioral manifestation
customers to engage with brands (Greve, 2014), whereas the multi-way toward a brand or firm, beyond purchase, resulting from motivational
or non-linear communicative dynamics entailing social media reflect the drivers.” In contrast, Brodie et al. (2011, p. 260) defined CE as a psy
strength of the contemporary online (i.e., social media-based) CE chological state that “occurs by virtue of interactive, co-creative
strategy that allows brands and customers to reciprocally engage beyond customer experiences with a focal agent/object (e.g., a brand) in focal
location and time boundaries (Barari et al., 2021). Noteworthily, social service relationships.” Elaborating on the psychological nature of CE,
media allows brands to build CE quickly through direct and flexible Hollebeek (2011a, p. 790) explained CE as “the level of an individual
communication and provides them with analytical functions that enable customer’s motivational, brand-related, and context-dependent state of
them to assess the impact and efficacy of their communication in mind characterized by specific levels of cognitive, emotional, and
engaging with their target customers (Greve, 2014; Labrecque, 2014; behavioral activity in direct brand interactions.” Emphasizing the
Zook & Smith, 2016), thereby highlighting its potency for CE. participatory and experience-based aspect of CE, Vivek et al. (2012, p.
While many studies demonstrate that traditional offline CE is useful 133) view CE as “the intensity of an individual’s participation in and
(Gilpin, 2019; Harmeling et al., 2017; Shawky, Kubacki, Dietrich, & connection with an organization’s offerings or organizational activities,
Weaven, 2020), other studies report that many brands have benefitted which either the customer or the organization initiates.” France et al.
by enhancing their engagement with target customers using digital (2016) suggest that these works not only provide the theoretical foun
technologies, especially through social media, which is instantaneously dations for understanding CE but also offer a strong framework for
available, highly accessible, and widely used by society today (Brodie, model development. Indeed, subsequent works in the field have offered
Ilić, Jurić, & Hollebeek, 2013; Calder, Malthouse, & Schaedel, 2009; a range of models and scales that further specified, operationalized, and
Hennig-Thurau et al., 2010; Hollebeek et al., 2014; Lim, Ahmad, Rasul, validated CE dimensions (e.g., Bowden, 2009; Dessart et al., 2016;
& Parvez, 2021). In this regard, we contend that a review of CE on social Hollebeek & Chen, 2014; Hollebeek et al., 2014; Hollebeek et al., 2019;
media using a well-structured framework should produce new insights, Marbach et al., 2016).
thereby extending the contributions of past reviews (e.g., Lim, Rasul, In most instances, the dimensions of CE typically included cognitive,
Kumar, & Ala, 2022). That is to say, such a review as we will pursue affective, and behavioral aspects of engagement (Dessart et al., 2016;
herein should help to clarify how CE is manifested on social media, Islam & Rahman, 2017). However, in some instances, the dimensions of
including its antecedents and consequences. In doing so, we hope to CE appear to vary quite substantially. For example, the variant of CE by
contribute to a deeper understanding of CE from a social media van Doorn et al. (2010) differs from other works in the field as it pro
perspective, thereby advancing marketing theory and practice in this poses five dimensions in the form of valence, modality, scope, nature of
area. impact, and customer goals, whilst emphasizing the overall behavioral
To this end, the goal of this article is to review conceptual and manifestation of CE. Similarly, So et al. (2014, 2016) proposed five di
empirical studies on CE on social media published in academic journals mensions of CE in the form of identification, attention, absorption,
since the beginning of the current (or third) millennium spanning from enthusiasm, and interaction. As a result, the recognition of CE as
2000 to 2020. In line with the recommendations by Lim, Kumar, and Ali multidimensional has led to the call by Dwivedi (2015) to consider CE as
326
W.M. Lim and T. Rasul Journal of Business Research 148 (2022) 325–342
a second-order construct. More recently, Lim, Rasul, Kumar, and Ala 3. Methods
(2022, p. 441) have sought to reconcile the varied manifestations of CE,
noting that “CE is a concept that can accommodate and be approached 3.1. Review method
from diverse perspectives as long as the perspective captures and ex
plains the “nature of interaction” (e.g., type, characteristic) that cus A systematic review is an established method of study that aims to
tomers exhibit, which can then be extrapolated for scrutiny against consolidate existing knowledge to drive future agenda on a subject (i.e.,
marketing actions in the pursuit of encouraging desired (e.g., brand domain, theory, or method) in a logical and systematic way (Palmatier
loyalty) or discouraging undesired (e.g., brand switching) customer et al., 2018). The authoritative guide by Lim, Kumar, and Ali (2022)
behavior,” in which this article subscribes to due to its logic, inclusivity, stipulate a typology of review methods that could be undertaken to
recency, and relevance to the present review. achieve that goal, namely bibliometric, framework, thematic, meta-
Moving on to the application of CE, most marketing studies have analytical, and meta-systematic methods. Given that this article is
examined CE interactions with other customer-related concepts. Among interested to unpack the questions of “what do we know,” “how do we
the notable concepts that have attracted significant scientific attention know,” and “where we should be heading” with respect to CE on social
are brand attachment, commitment, involvement, loyalty, satisfaction, media, we have decided to adopt an integrated framework-based review
trust, and value (e.g., Alvarez-Milán et al., 2018; France et al., 2016; method in line with Lim, Yap, and Makkar (2021). In particular, we
Dwivedi, 2015; Hollebeek, 2011b; Kumar & Nayak, 2019; Leckie et al., adopt and integrate two frameworks typically used in systematic re
2016; Nysveen & Pedersen, 2014; Prentice et al., 2020; Solem, 2016; views in the form of the ADO framework (Paul & Benito, 2018), which
Thakur, 2016; Vivek et al., 2012). The empirical analysis and discussion grounds our review of the antecedents, decisions, and outcomes of (or
presented in these works make numerous attempts to decide which of what do we know about) CE on social media, and the TCM framework
the related marketing concepts should be considered as the antecedents (Paul et al., 2017), which underpins our review of the theories, contexts,
of CE and which ones should be seen as the consequences of CE. The and methods used to study (or how do we know about) CE on social
outcomes of research endeavors in this area are particularly relevant for media. Insights from the review predicated on these two frameworks
branding and marketing as they allow marketers to plan their activities will inform the extant gaps and the future research directions (or where
strategically based on an informed understanding of the chain of CE and we should be heading) with respect to CE on social media.
its implications for brands. To this end, it is clear that there are multiple
ways of approaching CE. Thus, the manifestations of CE will need to be 3.2. Review procedure
systematically reported, which we will endeavor to do through our
systematic review. The review in this article adopts the widely used PRISMA protocol
for reporting items for systematic reviews (Moher et al., 2009). The
PRISMA protocol was originally developed for reviews in healthcare
2.2. Customer engagement and social media research, but the protocol has been proven to be equally useful for re
views in other fields, including marketing studies (Huurne et al., 2017;
The proliferation of new technologies in general and the ever-rising Lim, Yap, & Makkar, 2021). In essence, the protocol recommends four
popularity of social media in particular have played a significant role in stages for developing a transparent and rigorous scientific review. The
the emergence and evolution of relationship marketing (Steinhoff et al., stages are identification, screening, eligibility, and inclusion. The steps
2019; Thaichon et al., 2020). On the one hand, the adoption of smart taken in each of these stages (Fig. 1), including their rationale, will be
devices and the accessibility to high-speed Internet have enabled cus explained in the next sections.
tomers to access brand-related information within their fingertips
(Lamberton & Stephen, 2016; Papakonstantinidis, 2017). On the other 3.2.1. Identification
hand, the ease of setting up and using social media have allowed cus In the identification stage, we searched for articles from 2000 to
tomers today to easily and openly express their attitudes and opinions 2020 using Google Scholar as a search engine. The period of review was
toward various brands—be it through comments, likes, or shares (Buzeta limited to two decades—and more specifically, up to the time of search
et al., 2020; Hennessy, 2018). Such instances indicate the need for (i.e., October 20, 2020). In order to account for the most recent de
marketers to search for innovative ways to connect with customers, with velopments of CE on social media, Google Scholar was chosen as the
CE poised to play a prominent role in the online environment, most search engine. It is one of the most comprehensive and sophisticated
notably via social media. Indeed, existing research has demonstrated search engines that indexes and returns articles in a very timely manner
that CE in the online environment has a positive impact on numerous (Gusenbauer, 2019). It is in line with a similar timeframe criterion
brand- and customer-related outcomes, such as brand evaluations, loy employed in prior studies by Lim (2021) and Paul and Mas (2020).
alty, and trust, as well as customer purchase intentions and satisfaction In order to conduct the search, we chose (1) “customer engagement”
(Brodie et al., 2013; Harrigan et al., 2017, 2018; So et al., 2014, 2016; and “social media”, (2) “consumer engagement” and “social media”, (3)
Tsai & Men, 2013). “brand engagement” and “social media”, and (4) “business engagement”
In practice, social media is a popular and widely-used tool for and “social media” as exact keywords for the search because of the
building customer-brand relationships. Facebook, Instagram, Pinterest, centrality of these concepts to our review (i.e., customer = consumer,
Snapchat, TikTok, and Twitter are among the social media that brands business). We checked the “title of the article” option in “advanced
commonly use to engage with their customers (Arora et al., 2019; Phua search” in order to produce finer-grained search results. The keywords
et al., 2017). Facebook, in particular, has emerged as the main channel were consistent in both American and British English, and thus, alter
for many brands for customer-brand interactions (Brodie et al., 2013; native spellings were not considered. Moreover, the decision to use only
Simon & Tossan, 2018). Nonetheless, social media has made CE more four combinations of keywords for the search (i.e., one combination for
complex and dynamic as it allows not only direct customer-brand ex one search) is in line with the recommendation of a recent systematic
changes but also exchanges between customers themselves (Carlson review by Lim, Yap, and Makkar (2021). This echoed the adequacy,
et al., 2018; Cova & Pace, 2006; Prentice et al., 2020; Sawhney et al., appropriateness, and logic of using few but meaningful combinations of
2005). In this regard, social media has also contributed to the trans keywords. In total, 155 articles (i.e., 97 articles from “customer
formation of customers into active participants (Hollebeek et al., 2014) engagement” and “social media” and “brand engagement” and “social
and co-creators of brand stories (de Vries & Carlson, 2014), all of which media”, 58 articles from “consumer engagement” and “social media,”
are relevant insights on CE that we will endeavor to explore in greater and zero articles from “business engagement” and “social media”) were
detail through our review, which we will describe in the next section. returned from the search. We then progressed to the screening stage.
327
W.M. Lim and T. Rasul Journal of Business Research 148 (2022) 325–342
Fig. 1. Review procedure based on the PRISMA protocol. Note: * = up to October 20, 2020.
328
W.M. Lim and T. Rasul Journal of Business Research 148 (2022) 325–342
16
14
14
12
11
10
Article(s)
4
2 2 2
2 1 1 1
0 0
0
Year(s)
329
W.M. Lim and T. Rasul Journal of Business Research 148 (2022) 325–342
330
W.M. Lim and T. Rasul Journal of Business Research 148 (2022) 325–342
Fig. 3. State-of-the-art overview of the antecedents, decisions, and outcomes of customer engagement on social media.
with customers on social media (e.g., number of postings, comments; disseminate information (Wu et al., 2019), as witnessed through higher
Lee et al., 2020) along with their ability to adapt and demonstrate brand engagement levels among customers who interact more with
customer orientation and product-market knowledge in committed, content posted by other users as compared to brands (Cheung et al.,
competent, and responsive ways (Agnihotri, 2020; Guesalaga, 2016) 2020; Giakoumaki & Krepapa, 2020; Hollebeek, 2011b), whose brand
will contribute to greater CE on social media. Nevertheless, further customized messages had no significant effects in most instances
research is needed to explore new marketer-related antecedents (i.e., (Cheung et al., 2020; Liu et al., 2019). Indeed, messages on social media
first-order knowledge) and to test its potential effectiveness to garner CE need to be interactive and trendy (Cheung et al., 2020; Liu et al., 2019;
on social media (i.e., second- and third-order knowledge). Ningthoujam et al., 2020), with prevention-focused messages gaining
more traction than promotion-focused messages, especially among
4.1.5. Message-related antecedents customers who score high on extraversion and neuroticism (Dodoo &
Message-related antecedents consist of the attributes of messages Padovano, 2020). More importantly, the manipulative nature of
that marketers design and disseminate to customers that could impact message-related antecedents demands more investigations that could
the latter’s engagement on social media. In total, 10 message-related contribute to third-order knowledge so as to influence the curation of
antecedents were uncovered based on 16 votes from second-order finer-grained message content and design that would yield the greatest
knowledge and two votes from third-order knowledge: communication amount of desired CE on social media.
style, content message, content source, customization, electronic word
of mouth, entertainment, information richness, interaction, regulatory 4.1.6. Platform-related antecedents
focus, and trendiness. In general, most message-related antecedents Platform-related antecedents encapsulate the characteristics of social
could be manipulated to curate CE on social media, with 15 positive media platforms that could influence CE on social media. In total, five
votes received out of 20 votes. For example, messages with a friendly platform-related antecedents were revealed based on five votes from
communication style were found to increase both the number of com second-order knowledge and one vote from third-order knowledge:
ments and their positive tone among customers on social media, whereas effort expectancy, performance expectancy, perceived enjoyment,
an authoritative communication style had no such effect (Wu et al., perceived risk, and perceived trust. The effect of platform-related an
2019). With such a communication style, messages that are fresh, tecedents on CE on social media is dependent on the nature of the
frequent, informative (e.g., brand, product, or deal mentions), rich, and antecedent, with three votes each for positive and negative effects. In
persuasive (e.g., remarkable facts) are likely to be more effective (Ashley particular, social media platforms that require greater effort expectancy
& Tuten, 2015; Bai & Yan, 2020; Lee et al., 2020). Interestingly, the use and places greater risks (e.g., privacy concerns) on customers are likely
of informative content, on its own, may be less effective to solicit CE, but to deter CE, whereas social media platforms that are able to perform as
may become highly effective when paired with emotional or personality expected and that could provide enjoyment in a trustworthy manner will
expressive content (e.g., emotion, humor) (Lee et al., 2018), especially likely motivate customers to engage on social media (Al Mamun et al.,
when the intention is to build brand communities rather than to simply 2020; Quach et al., 2019). Indeed, technology features of social media
331
W.M. Lim and T. Rasul Journal of Business Research 148 (2022) 325–342
Table 4
Knowledge map of antecedents, decisions, and consequences of customer engagement on social media.
Note: n.s. = non-significant. green = 10 votes or more. yellow = 5 to 9 votes. red = less than 5 votes. votes = number of studies providing construct-level support.
platforms appear to be quite pervasive for this group of antecedents, Vries & Carlson, 2014; Loureiro & Lopes, 2019; Quach et al., 2019).
though albeit limited, and thus, further application of technology While the concept of value is typically associated with costs, it is
acceptance models (e.g., technology acceptance model, uses and grati interesting to see the absence of the cost aspect of value with regards to
fications theory) could further enrich our understanding of platform- CE on social media, which may be due to the fact that engagement on
related antecedents that goes beyond customer adoption of and into social media is virtually free, and its effort expectancy and perceived risk
CE on social media. are platform-related antecedents that are typically associated with the
social media platform rather than the engagement itself. Nonetheless,
4.1.7. Social-related antecedents most findings in this area are correlational (i.e., second-order knowl
Social-related antecedents consist of social influences that impact edge), and thus, future research should focus on testing the correlations
upon CE on social media. In total, one social-related antecedent was in a casual manner, so as to develop finer-grain understanding on when
revealed based on one vote from second-order knowledge: social influ value-related antecedents could or could not work to encourage CE on
ence. This antecedent that was uncovered was relatively general, as it social media (i.e., third-order knowledge).
simply looks at the influence of family and friends on CE on social media
(Al Mamun et al., 2020). Given the lack of richness of social-related 4.2. Decisions: Customer engagement on social media
antecedents, further exploratory research is necessary (i.e., first-order
knowledge), which could then be employed for empirical testing in Decisions encapsulate the engagement that customers partake or do
correlational (i.e., second-order knowledge) and causal (i.e., third-order not partake on social media, and thus, they serve as a direct response to
knowledge) ways. antecedents and a precursor of outcomes (Lim, Yap, & Makkar, 2021;
Paul & Benito, 2018; Paul et al., 2021). That is to say, the decision under
4.1.8. Value-related antecedents study herein this review pertain to CE on social media (i.e., only one
Value-related antecedents relate to the benefits that customers stand decision).
to gain when they engage on social media. In total, six value-related Upon detailed scrutiny, the review uncovers several manifestations
antecedents were uncovered based on 10 votes from second-order of CE that could transpire on social media. In general, CE has been
knowledge and one vote from third-order knowledge: co-creation, examined as a unidimensional (e.g., Ashley & Tuten, 2015; Guesalaga,
functional, emotional (or hedonic), innovativeness, relationship build 2016; Shah et al., 2019) and a multidimensional (e.g., Carlson, Guder
ing, and social value. In general, value-related antecedents have a pos gan, Gelhard, & Rahman, 2019; Liu, Shin, & Burns, 2019; Quach, Shao,
itive impact on CE on social media, with a whopping 11 positive (out of Ross, & Thaichon, 2019; So, Wei, & Martin, 2020; Wang & Lee, 2020)
11) votes. Indeed, customers may engage on social media for a variety of construct (Table 5). As a unidimensional construct, CE is often observed
reasons, and when they are presented with a value that resonates with in a behavioral form (e.g., number of customer comments and posts in a
them (e.g., co-creation, functional, emotional [or hedonic], innova week; Bai & Yan, 2020). As a multidimensional construct, CE has
tiveness, relationship building, and social value), they are likely to manifested as “customer brand engagement,” which consists of cogni
engage on social media (Carlson, Rahman, Taylor, & Voola, 2019; de tive processing, affection, and activation (Hollebeek et al., 2014), or
332
W.M. Lim and T. Rasul Journal of Business Research 148 (2022) 325–342
333
W.M. Lim and T. Rasul Journal of Business Research 148 (2022) 325–342
brands, it is important that future research dive deeper on the outcomes psychology theory, personal construct theory, probabilistic theory,
of CE on social media from the customer perspective. Exploration of regulatory focus theory, relationship marketing, resource exchange
such outcomes could contribute to new first-order knowledge, which theory, self-concept theory, self-determination theory, self-schema the
could then be tested for correlation and causality, thereby contributing ory, service dominant logic, social comparison theory, social exchange
to second- and third-order knowledge on customer-related outcomes, theory, social interaction theory, unified theory of acceptance and use of
respectively. technology, and uses and gratifications theory), which indicate that
research in this area is not short on theories.
4.3.4. Social media-related outcomes Second, the review reveals that 22 studies have applied theories to
Social media-related outcomes encapsulate the consequences of CE guide their research on CE and social media, with 15 studies employing a
on social media on the social media itself. In total, two social media- single theory (e.g., Algharabat et al., 2020), five studies employing two
related outcomes were revealed based on two votes from second-order theories (e.g., Li et al., 2020), and two studies employing three theories
knowledge: social media perceived quality and social media use in (e.g., Wang & Lee, 2020), which suggest that theoretical integration is a
sales. In general, CE on social media was observed to produce no sig potential means that could be exploited by future research, as seen by
nificant effect in (re)shaping customer perceptions of social media past research in the area.
quality in the consumer market (Algharabat et al., 2020). Yet, this Third, the review also noted 12 studies that have not relied on any
engagement could motivate the use of social media for sales, as seen in theories to guide their research irrespective of fields (e.g., marketing
the business market (Guesalaga, 2016). Needless to say, social media- [Ashley & Tuten, 2015], management [Sashi, 2012], information sys
related outcomes remain underexplored, and thus, further research tems [Oh et al., 2017], tourism [Sashi et al., 2019]) and journal ranks (e.
that uncovers additional outcomes using correlational and causal ways g., “A*” [Agnihotri, 2020], “A” [Liu et al., 2019], “B” [Loureiro & Lopes,
is therefore warranted to enrich our understanding in this area. 2019], and “C” [Ningthoujam et al., 2020]). Though this observation
suggests that publishing without relying on theories is possible, it is
5. How do we know? arguably better to employ theories to inform research, as its presence
would arguably strengthen the theoretical foundation of the study,
Building on the rich insights that avail from the extant literature, this especially in the case of conceptual, quantitative, and experimental
section will dive into the theories, contexts, and methods that have been research. Future research could rely on the theories identified herein,
employed to inform our understanding of CE on social media. and if necessary, integrate a number of them so as to enrich and solidify
its theoretical foundation.
5.1. Theories
5.2. Contexts
Theories are essential to advance fields of knowledge (Lim, Yap, &
Makkar, 2021, Paul et al., 2017,2021). Guided by an integration of
Contexts refer to the circumstances that characterize a study (Lim,
theories in the form of the ADO and TCM frameworks (Lim, Yap, &
Yap, & Makkar, 2021; Paul et al., 2017,2021). The review considers
Makkar, 2021; Paul & Benito, 2018; Paul et al., 2017,2021), the review
three main contexts where CE on social media transpired in the 34 ar
sheds light on three pertinent insights on the theories used to inform past
ticles under study: country, customer, and social media (Table 7).
conceptual and empirical research on CE on social media (Table 6).
In terms of country, the review indicates that past research on CE on
First, the review uncovers 23 different theories that have been
social media (n = 23) have been carried out in nine different countries,
employed in past studies on CE on social media (i.e., communication
namely China (including Hong Kong and Taiwan), Greece, India,
theory, configuration theory, consumer culture theory, consumption
Ireland, Jordan, Malaysia, Norway, United Kingdom, and United States,
value theory, customer engagement theory, dynamic capability theory,
whereas 12 studies have considered their research as an international
economic theory, emotional attachment theory, interactional
phenomenon (e.g., Hollebeek et al., 2014; Oliveira & Fernandes, 2020),
which is no surprise given that brands can be multinational, and thus,
Table 6 acquiring and serving customers beyond their country of origin and to
List of theories for customer engagement on social media research.
Theory n articles Table 7
With theory (n = 22; 1 theory = 15, 2 theories = 5, 3 theories = 2) Contextual coverage of customer engagement on social media research.
Communication theory 1
Context n articles
Configuration theory 1
Consumer culture theory 3 Country
Consumption value theory 2 China (including 1 each from Hong Kong and Taiwan) 6
Customer engagement theory 1 Greece 1
Dynamic capability theory 1 India 3
Economic theory 1 Ireland 1
Emotional attachment theory 1 Jordan 1
Interactional psychology theory 1 Malaysia 1
Personal construct theory 1 Norway 1
Probabilistic theory 1 United Kingdom 1
Regulatory focus theory 1 United States 8
Relationship marketing 2 International 12
Resource exchange theory 1 Customer
Self-concept theory 1 Business 6
Self-determination theory 1 Consumer 28
Self-schema theory 1 Social media
Service dominant logic 2 Facebook 13
Social comparison theory 1 Instagram 3
Social exchange theory 2 LinkedIn 1
Social interaction theory 1 Sina Weibo 4
Unified theory of acceptance and use of technology 1 Twitter 4
Uses and gratifications theory 1 YouTube 1
Without theory (n = 12) 12 General 11
334
W.M. Lim and T. Rasul Journal of Business Research 148 (2022) 325–342
customers worldwide. Only one studied had explicitly collected samples these studies (n = 25) focused on marketing, whereas two studies
in two countries (i.e., Ireland and United Kingdom) (Panagiotopoulos focused on sales, and one study focused on both marketing and sales.
et al., 2015), which could inspire other studies to do the same in the B2C studies with a marketing focus indicated that CE on social media
future, thereby allowing for cross-country and cross-culture assisted brands to configure and share marketing messages more effec
comparisons. tively with existing and potential customers (Carlson, Gudergan, Gel
In terms of customers, the review shows that past research on CE on hard, & Rahman, 2019; Carlson, Rahman, Taylor, & Voola, 2019;
social media have generally considered two types of customers: business Giakoumaki & Krepapa, 2020; Lee et al., 2018; Lee et al., 2020; Pan
and consumer. In particular, most studies in the area have focused on agiotopoulos et al., 2015). Such studies also reported that CE on social
customers in consumer markets (n = 28) (e.g., Carlson, Rahman, Taylor, media enriches brand value and brand loyalty (Helme-Guizon & Mag
& Voola, 2019; Quach et al., 2019; So, Wei, & Martin, 2020; Wang & noni 2019; Li et al., 2020; Ningthoujam et al., 2020; Samala et al., 2019;
Lee, 2020), with few studies shedding light on customers in business Solem & Pedersen, 2016). In contrast, B2C studies with a sales focus
markets (n = 6) (e.g., Agnihotri, 2020; Bai & Yan, 2020; Guesalaga, indicated that CE on social media increases a brand’s economic per
2016; Panagiotopoulos et al., 2015). This observation, in turn, evidences formance (Al Mamun et al., 2020; Oh et al., 2017), whereas the B2C
that social media is not only relevant for consumers, but also businesses, study that focused on both marketing and sales highlighted the value of
not only as sellers, but also as buyers (or customers). CE on social media in influencing customers’ advocacy for the brand and
In terms of social media, the review reveals that past research on CE its products (Sashi et al., 2019).
on social media have been conducted on six different types of social Three studies each were devoted to B2B and both B2C and B2B. All
media platforms (n = 26), namely Facebook, Instagram, LinkedIn, Sina three studies that concentrated on B2B were also focused on sales. These
Weibo, Twitter, and YouTube, whereas 11 studies have considered so studies reported that CE on social media enhances a brand’s perfor
cial media platforms in general in their research (e.g., Garg et al., 2020; mance by increasing its sales, and in turn, its profits (Agnihotri, 2020;
Loureiro & Lopes, 2019; Shah et al., 2019). Apart Sina Weibo, which is Garg et al., 2020; Guesalaga, 2016). The remaining three studies
widely used in China (e.g., Bai & Yan, 2020; Carlson, Gudergan, Gel concentrated on both B2C and B2B, wherein two of these studies focused
hard, & Rahman, 2019; Wu et al., 2019), the other social media plat on marketing, whereas one study focused on both marketing and sales.
forms, such as Facebook and Twitter, are very much Western-centric, These studies reported the utility of social media to increase a brand’s
but nonetheless, remain widely-used even in non-Western countries, engagement with their existing and potential customers, as well as
such as India (e.g., Garg et al., 2020; Ningthoujam et al., 2020; Samala stakeholders, resulting in improved overall brand performance (Bai &
et al., 2019) and Jordan (e.g., Algharabat et al., 2020). Yan, 2020; Loureiro & Lopes, 2019).
335
W.M. Lim and T. Rasul Journal of Business Research 148 (2022) 325–342
Table 10 We opine that this diversity in conceptualization, on the one hand, en
Research data in customer engagement on social media research. riches the emerging field but, on the other hand, creates the challenge of
Data n article(s) confusion. This diversity could be attributed to the different dimensions
suggested by numerous scholars (e.g., Hollebeek et al., 2014; Hollebeek
Primary (n = 24—single data = 22, multi-data = 2 [2 data sources = 1, 3 data
sources = 1]) et al., 2019; Kumar et al., 2010; Leckie et al., 2016; Rasul, Hoque, &
Interviews (n = 3) Arefin, 2020; Sashi, 2012; So et al., 2014; Schivinski et al., 2016; van
Focus group 1 Doorn et al., 2010) but may nonetheless be consolidated into three
Individual 2 major dimensions, namely, cognitive, affective, and behavioral
Online survey (n = 18)
MTurk 4
engagement, as we have explained in our review.
Norstat 1 The key point of the debate that remains unresolved, however, is
Qualtrics 2 how cognitive, affective, and behavioral engagement could manifest
SoJump 2 across a lifecycle perspective (e.g., connection, interaction, satisfaction,
Survey Cake 1
retention, commitment, and advocacy), as in the case of the “customer
Survey Monkey 1
Unnamed online panel 1 engagement cycle” (Sashi, 2012). Moreover, in most instances, the
Self-collected 6 different manifestations of CE are often “behavioral” (e.g., consumption,
Offline survey (self-collected) (n = 7) 7 contribution, creation; like, share, comment) (Schivinski et al., 2016),
Secondary (n = 8) with the “cognitive” and “affective” dimensions of CE remaining
Third party (Facebook Insights) (n = 1) 1
Web crawling (n = 7)
underexplored. This may be due to the lack of clarity on how the latter
Event pages 1 two dimensions could be operationalized beyond self-reported
Facebook comments 1 measures.
Movie releases 1 Though we are confident of the tripartite classification of CE (i.e.,
Microblogs 2
cognitive, affective, and behavioral), we concede that we were not able
Tweets 2
No data (n = 2) 2 to confidently code and classify the fragmented dimensions that tran
spired in our review, such as identification and absorption (So, Wei, &
Martin, 2020). These dimensions could span all three dimensions of CE.
Some qualitative studies avail, with many taking a rigorous qualitative That is to say, the fragmented dimensions could be accurately classified
approach in the form of fuzzy-set qualitative comparative analysis only when they are described more thoroughly (e.g., cognitive [identify
(fsQCA) (n = 3). Critical reviews were used for two conceptual articles, with beliefs, perspectives, and opinions shared about the brand on social
whereas single experiments (n = 2) were most common in experimental media]; affective [identify with feelings shared about the brand on so
studies. cial media]).
In terms of research data, past research on CE on social media have More importantly, we contend that it may be possible to capture
generally relied on two sources of data: primary and secondary data. “cognitive” and “affective” engagement via “behavioral” engagement,
Most articles in the review have relied on primary data (n = 24), with 22 wherein behaviors are analyzed in terms of manifestations of rationality
studies relying on a single data source, and one study each relying on and emotion, as in the case of social media comments and posts that are
two and three data sources for primary data, respectively. Interestingly, captured as secondary measures. Thus, this article calls for future
most articles that have employed primary data have opted for online research that conducts in-depth investigations that expand on the different
surveys (n = 18), which may be due to the quick turnaround time in data cognitive, affective, and behavioral engagement manifestations. This includes
collection that typifies online survey panels such as MTurk, Norstat, the possibility of cognitive and affective engagement manifestations tran
Qualtrics, SoJump, Survey Cake, and Survey Monkey. Self-collected spiring in behavioral engagement on social media. This further explains how
surveys appear to be equally distributed regardless of whether it is off such manifestations might remain constant or evolve as customers gain more
line (n = 7) or online (n = 6). Only three qualitative studies avail, with experience in engaging on social media over time. We opine that such a
two articles using individual interviews and one article using focus pathway would further consolidate the disparate fragments of CE and
groups. Whereas, web crawling of social media data (e.g., event pages, enrich its operational manifestations substantially.
Facebook comments, movie releases, microblogs, tweets) were highly Second, the review demonstrated a plethora of antecedents and
popular secondary data, with one study opting for a third-party provider consequences of CE on social media. Indeed, the breadth of categories
(e.g., Facebook Insights). uncovered provides good coverage of the possible scope that could be
studied. Yet, the depth amongst categories is relatively inconsistent,
6. Where should we be heading? with some categories researched more richly than others, regardless of
whether they are categories of antecedents or consequences.
Charting pathways for future research is an important agenda for For example, customer- and message-related categories were some of
systematic reviews (Lim, Kumar, & Ali, 2022). In this article, we identify the most researched antecedents in our review, with 10 constructs un
several pertinent pathways that we would highly encourage future covered in both cases. However, industry- and social-related anteced
research to consider in order to build upon the findings of past research ents collectively revealed only three constructs in our review. Similarly,
on CE and social media that we have reviewed. These pathways are the brand-related category was the most studied consequence in our
segmented into three main areas, namely pathways to advance knowl review, with 13 constructs revealed. However, business-, customer-, and
edge (i.e., focusing on theory), pathways to improve representation (i.e., social media-related consequences collectively uncovered only five
focusing on context), and pathways to enhance rigor (i.e., focusing on constructs in our review.
method). In light of these observations predicated on the ADO framework, this
article calls for greater investigation of the categories of antecedents and
6.1. Pathways to advance knowledge (theory) consequences that remain underexplored, namely brand-, industry-,
marketer-, platform-, social-, and value-related antecedents, as well as
In terms of theory, this article offers three potentially fruitful path business-, customer-, and social media-related consequences. We believe
ways that future researchers could consider to contribute new knowl such a pathway would add “more meat to the bones” in our under
edge on CE on social media. standing of CE on social media.
First, the review accentuated the various manifestations of CE (i.e., Third, the review indicated that many studies have employed only a
customer brand engagement, CE, CE behavior, CE cycle, and CE value). single theory to inform their investigation of CE on social media (e.g.,
336
W.M. Lim and T. Rasul Journal of Business Research 148 (2022) 325–342
Algharabat et al., 2020; Bai & Yan, 2020; Lee et al., 2018; Shah et al., represent an organization or themselves, whereby the former represents
2019). A few other studies relied on a combination of theories (e.g., customers from business markets, whereas the latter represents cus
Hollebeek et al., 2014; Solem & Pedersen, 2016; Wang & Lee, 2020). We tomers from consumer markets. Most studies have concentrated on CE
believe that research predicated on theory is arguably better than on social media in consumer markets (e.g., Ashley & Tuten, 2015;
research without a guiding theory. This is because a theory typically Helme-Guizon & Magnoni, 2019; Sashi et al., 2019), with few studies
provides an underlying foundation for supporting purported proposi focusing on such engagement in business markets (e.g., Agnihotri, 2020;
tions and sensemaking. We also opine that research that is informed by a Garg et al., 2020; Panagiotopoulos et al., 2015).
collection of theories would arguably produce richer insights than Though we opine that both customers are equally important, as
research relying on only a single theory (Hollebeek et al., 2019). In brands and marketers stand to gain a bigger return on a single trans
particular, theoretical integration—or the combination and application action from business markets and a greater diversity in customer base
of multiple theories—provides the opportunity for research to effec from consumer markets (Hollebeek et al., 2019), we would like to issue a
tively craft a more holistic scope of investigation. This allows multiple rallying call for future research that considers CE on social media in business
perspectives to be investigated, thereby enabling cross-perspective markets alongside consumer markets, which should shed light on whether CE
comparisons. strategies on social media could be undifferentiated or should be differenti
For example, a study that integrates the theories of economics, social ated for brands that serve customers from both business and consumer
exchange, and self-schema could reveal whether customers are more markets—a pathway that we believe would elevate business insights on
likely to engage in the presence of economic or social benefits and the topic to the level that we have witnessed with respect to consumer
whether such motivations would differ among customers with different insights, thereby enriching our understanding on the extent to which
personalities and experiences with the brand and social media. Simi consumer insights may be generalizable to other customer (e.g., busi
larly, a study that relies on the theories of social comparison and tech ness) markets.
nology acceptance could reveal whether the technological aspects of Third, the review showed that research on CE on social media have
social media would be more, less, or as important as the social dynamics investigated numerous social media platforms, such as Facebook,
that transpire in CE on social media. This, in turn, could dictate where Instagram, LinkedIn, Sina Weibo, Twitter, and YouTube. Similar to the
brands and marketers should invest their effort, time, and resources to context of country, research in the area has also considered social media
curate and enhance engagement with customers on social media. platforms in general (e.g., Al Mamun et al., 2020; Guesalaga, 2016;
Thus, this article calls for future research that pursues theoretical inte Loureiro & Lopes, 2019), which to us, may provide little insights on
gration as a means to showcase a “big picture” rather than a “jigsaw piece” whether CE on social media will differ or remain consistent across
of myriad aspects of CE on social media. We opine such a pathway would different social media platforms.
dismantle disciplinary silos and propel multidisciplinary research, In addition, most social media platforms that have been investigated
thereby enriching insights (and mitigating piecemeal findings). are Western-centric, with the exception of Sino Weibo, though many of
them are also widely used around the world. More importantly, the
6.2. Pathways to improve representation (context) variety of social media platforms that CE is investigated will need to be
expanded given the emergence and widespread adoption of new social
In terms of context, this article offers three enriching pathways that media platforms, such as social feed platforms (e.g., TikTok), social
future research may consider if they wish to rely on context as a means gathering platforms (e.g., Clubhouse), social messaging platforms (e.g.,
to contribute to our understanding of CE on social media. Indeed, Telegram, WhatsApp, and WeChat), social shopping platforms with
context holds the potential to deliver meaningful contributions when the community and live streaming functions (e.g., Lazada, Shopee), and
unique circumstances that characterize CE on social media are cate social world platforms (e.g., Meta [metaverse]).
gorically delineated (e.g., country, customer, social media platform) in Thus, this article encourages future research that compares and con
ways that improves representation. trasts CE across different types of social media platforms—a pathway that
First, the review revealed that most studies on CE on social media should create better alignment in the nature of CE that brands and
have been conducted in a single country rather than in multiple coun marketers would like to solicit and the types of social media platforms
tries (e.g., de Vries & Carlson, 2014; Giakoumaki & Krepapa, 2020; that could satisfy such engagement goals among different customer
Quach et al., 2019; Wu et al., 2019). In addition, the geographic markets.
coverage has so far been scarce, with only nine countries receiving
serious research attention, thereby limiting the generalizability of 6.3. Pathways to enhance rigor (method)
research findings to the larger population.
Nonetheless, around 30% of the studies reviewed have considered In terms of method, this article offers three noteworthy pathways
customers as international as opposed to associating them to any one that should improve the rigor of research focusing on CE on social
particular country (e.g., Agnihotri, 2020; Lee et al., 2020; Liu et al., media, as observed through the foundation of marketing knowledge (i.
2019; Sashi et al., 2019). Though this approach may, to a certain extent, e., first-, second-, and third-order knowledge).
improve generalizability, it may, however, ignore the reality that cus First, the review discovered two studies that have contributed to first-
tomers may inherently differ based on country and culture (e.g., order knowledge with respect to CE on social media, whereby the crit
engagement practices accepted in the Western context may be inter ical review approach was adopted to conceptually develop two mani
preted as culturally insensitive in and thus inappropriate for the Eastern festations of CE, namely CE cycle (Sashi, 2012) and CE value (Agnihotri,
context), thereby overlooking the need for representative samples in 2020).
order to truly establish generalizability more broadly (e.g., over However, one of the shortcomings of critical reviews is the absence
continents). of a procedure that would systematically organize the underpinnings of
In this regard, this article calls for future research that considers cross- prior literature, which is arguably needed to accentuate research gaps
country studies, which in turn, would enable cross-cultural comparison of CE and to justify proposals for (re)conceptualization and (re)operationali
on social media between customers originating from different countries—a zation that typically avail in research contributing to first-order
pathway that we believe should help to improve the generalizability of knowledge.
findings when consistent effects are observed, as well as the represen Thus, to improve the rigor of first-order knowledge, this article calls
tation of findings when inconsistent effects are discovered as a result of for future research seeking to enrich our understanding of concepts relating to
cross-cultural differences. CE on social media to consider conducting systematic reviews using alter
Second, the review indicated that customers may be individuals who native review methods such as bibliometric and meta-systematic methods
337
W.M. Lim and T. Rasul Journal of Business Research 148 (2022) 325–342
(Lim, Kumar, & Ali, 2022) guided by rigorous review protocols (e.g., from second-order knowledge, and nine votes from third-order
PRISMA; Moher et al., 2009; SPAR-4-SLR; Paul et al., 2021)—a pathway knowledge.
that should deliver conceptual insights in a more systematic and Using the TCM framework, the review herein this article sheds light
rigorous way. on 23 different theories, nine different countries, two types of customers,
Second, the review indicated that most studies on CE on social media six variations of social media platforms, one approach for conceptual
contributed to second-order knowledge, with most studies adopting a research, 14 approaches for empirical research, and five types of data
quantitative (e.g., Cheung et al., 2020; Li et al., 2020) as opposed to a sources that past scholars have relied upon to contribute to our under
qualitative research approach (e.g., Panagiotopoulos et al., 2015). In standing of CE on social media. Moreover, the TCM framework was
addition, most studies relied only on a single method (e.g., Liu et al., employed as a guiding framework to chart the nine pathways, with three
2019; So, Wei, & Martin, 2020). We opine that future research could pathways each for advancing knowledge (theory), improving repre
benefit by taking a mix-methods approach, which could consist of sentation (context), and enhancing rigor (method).
rigorously conducted qualitative and quantitative studies (e.g., Ashley & Notwithstanding the contributions of our review, we concede that
Tuten, 2015; Helme-Guizon & Magnoni, 2019; Lang et al., 2022). we had to make several but necessary concessions to keep our review
For example, the fuzzy-set qualitative comparative analysis is a state- manageable. First, our review did not consider CE in online commu
of-the-art qualitative analysis that is increasingly employed by qualita nities, as individuals in such communities may not necessarily be cus
tive researchers today (Kumar et al., 2022). Insights from the qualitative tomers (e.g., soccer fans who do not purchase club merchandises), the
study could then inform the design of the quantitative study, which latter which is the focus of our review. Second, our review did not
could rely on the highly popular structural equation modeling, including consider research where “customer engagement,” “consumer engage
a multi-group analysis that builds upon a latent profile analysis. ment,” “brand engagement,” or “business engagement” and “social
Needless to say, a research that conducts and reports on multiple media” did not appear in the title of the article, though this is generally
studies using different research approaches would be substantially more an acceptable practice in systematic reviews (Paul & Criado, 2020).
rigorous than a research that reports on the results of only a single study. Thus, we believe the concessions we made were pragmatic and thus
In that sense, this article calls for future research that adopts mix-methods upholding our representation of the state of the field in a legitimate way.
to develop multiple studies to improve the rigor of conclusions about CE on
social media—a pathway that will enable triangulation and thus CRediT authorship contribution statement
strengthen the rigor of second-order knowledge.
Third, the review revealed that few studies that begun to use an Weng Marc Lim: Conceptualization, Data Curation, Formal Anal
experimental approach to study CE on social media (e.g., Quach et al., ysis, Investigation, Validation, Visualization, Writing – Original Draft,
2019). This, to us, is promising, and must be highly encouraged given Writing – Review & Editing. Tareq Rasul: Conceptualization, Data
that experimental research allows causality to be established, which Curation, Formal Analysis, Investigation, Validation, Visualization,
represents the third-order and strongest form of marketing knowledge. Writing – Original Draft, Writing – Review & Editing.
Yet, the majority of experimental studies in the review had employed
only a single experiment (e.g., Dodoo & Padovano, 2020; Giakoumaki &
Krepapa, 2020), which suggests that the potential for confounding ef Declaration of competing interest
fects may not have been rigorously tested, as in the case with multiple
experiments, and the difference between chronic disposition and situa The authors declare that they have no known competing financial
tional priming cannot be ascertained with confidence (Lim, 2015). interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence
Moreover, the experiments in the review have not kept abreast with the work reported in this paper.
the latest advances in experimental research, such as the use of neuro
scientific tools (e.g., electroencephalogram, eye tracker, galvanic sen Appendix. List of articles reviewed.
sors), which could potentially offer very powerful insights beyond self-
report measures (Lim, 2018a, 2018b). Undeniably, the running of ex 1. Agnihotri, R. (2020). Social media, customer engagement, and
periments is often resource intensive, but new solutions, such as data sales organizations: A research agenda. Industrial Marketing
partitioning, avail in order to maximize the ways in which data could be Management, 90, 291–299.
utilized and to minimize the cost associated with experiments (Holle 2. Al Mamun, A., Nawi, N. B. C., Nasir, N. A. B. M., & Fazal, S. A.
beek et al., 2019; Lim, Ahmed, & Ali, 2019, 2022). (2020). Social media and consumer engagement: The case of
In this regard, this article calls for future research that adopts an Malaysian student entrepreneurs. Journal of Asia-Pacific Business,
experimental approach to consider designing multiple experiments, measuring 21(3), 185–206.
chronic and primed dispositions, and using neuroscientific tools in order to 3. Algharabat, R., Rana, N. P., Alalwan, A. A., Baabdullah, A., &
more accurately identify or rule out potential confounding effects that could Gupta, A. (2020). Investigating the antecedents of customer
distort our understanding of the effects of manipulated antecedents on CE on brand engagement and consumer-based brand equity in social
social media and its ensuing outcomes—a pathway that would result in media. Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, 53, 101767.
substantially stronger third-order marketing knowledge in the area. 4. Ashley, C., & Tuten, T. (2015). Creative strategies in social media
marketing: An exploratory study of branded social content and
7. Conclusion consumer engagement. Psychology & Marketing, 32(1), 15–27.
5. Bai, L., & Yan, X. (2020). Impact of firm-generated content on
In summary, this article has provided a state-of-the-art overview of firm performance and consumer engagement: Evidence from so
CE on social media using a systematic review that was predicated upon cial media in China. Journal of Electronic Commerce Research, 21
the integrated ADO-TCM framework (Lim, Yap, & Makkar, 2021; Paul & (1), 56–74.
Benito, 2018; Paul et al., 2017,2021). 6. Carlson, J., Gudergan, S.P., Gelhard, C., & Rahman, M.M. (2019).
Using the ADO framework, the review herein this article has Customer engagement with brands in social media platforms:
discovered eight categories of antecedents consisting of 41 constructs, Configurations, equifinality and sharing. European Journal of
one decision in the form of CE on social media, four categories of out Marketing, 53(9), 1733–1758.
comes consisting of 18 constructs, and 107 votes of positive, negative, 7. Carlson, J., Rahman, M. M., Taylor, A., & Voola, R. (2019). Feel
and non-significant relationships among the 59 different constructs, the VIBE: Examining value-in-the-brand-page-experience and its
which emerged from eight votes from first-order knowledge, 73 votes impact on satisfaction and customer engagement behaviours in
338
W.M. Lim and T. Rasul Journal of Business Research 148 (2022) 325–342
mobile social media. Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, 24. Oliveira, M., & Fernandes, T. (2020). Luxury brands and social
46, 149–162. media: Drivers and outcomes of consumer engagement on
8. Cheung, M. L., Pires, G., & Rosenberger, P. J. (2020). The influ Instagram. Journal of Strategic Marketing. https://doi.org/
ence of perceived social media marketing elements on consum 10.1080/0965254X.2020.1777459 (in press)
er–brand engagement and brand knowledge. Asia Pacific Journal 25. Panagiotopoulos, P., Shan, L. C., Barnett, J., Regan, Á., &
of Marketing and Logistics, 32(3), 695–720. McConnon, Á. (2015). A framework of social media engagement:
9. Dodoo, N. A., & Padovano, C. M. (2020). Personality-based Case studies with food and consumer organisations in the UK and
engagement: An examination of personality and message fac Ireland. International Journal of Information Management, 35(4),
tors on consumer responses to social media advertisements. 394–402.
Journal of Promotion Management, 26(4), 481–503. 26. Quach, S., Shao, W., Ross, M., & Thaichon, P. (2019). Customer
10. de Vries, N., & Carlson, J. (2014). Examining the drivers and engagement and co-created value in social media. Marketing In
brand performance implications of customer engagement with telligence & Planning, 38(6), 730–744.
brands in the social media environment. Journal of Brand Man 27. Samala, N., Singh, S., Nukhu, R., & Khetarpal, M. (2019). Inves
agement, 21(6), 495–515. tigating the role of participation and customer engagement with
11. Garg, P., Gupta, B., Dzever, S., Sivarajah, U., & Kumar, V. (2020). tourism brands (CETB) on social media. Academy of Marketing
Examining the relationship between social media analytics Studies Journal, 23(1), 1–16.
practices and business performance in the Indian retail and IT 28. Sashi, C. M. (2012). Customer engagement, buyer-seller re
industries: The mediation role of customer engagement. Interna lationships, and social media. Management Decision, 50(2),
tional Journal of Information Management, 52, 102069. 253–272.
12. Giakoumaki, C., & Krepapa, A. (2020). Brand engagement in self- 29. Sashi, C. M., Brynildsen, G., & Bilgihan, A. (2019). Social media,
concept and consumer engagement in social media: The role of customer engagement and advocacy: An empirical investigation
the source. Psychology & Marketing, 37(3), 457–465. using Twitter data for quick service restaurants. International
13. Guesalaga, R. (2016). The use of social media in sales: Individual Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management, 31(3),
and organizational antecedents, and the role of customer 1247–1272.
engagement in social media. Industrial Marketing Management, 54, 30. Shah, S. A. A., Sukmana, R., Fianto, B. A., Ahmad, M. A., Usman,
71–79. I. U., & Mallah, W. A. (2019). Effects of Halal social media and
14. Helme-Guizon, A., & Magnoni, F. (2019). Consumer brand customer engagement on brand satisfaction of Muslim customer:
engagement and its social side on brand-hosted social media: Exploring the moderation of religiosity. Journal of Islamic Mar
How do they contribute to brand loyalty? Journal of Marketing keting, 11(6), 1671–1689
Management, 35(7–8), 716–741. 31. So, K. K. F., Wei, W., & Martin, D. (2020). Understanding
15. Hollebeek, L., Glynn, M., & Brodie, R. (2014). Consumer brand customer engagement and social media activities in tourism: A
engagement in social media: Conceptualization, scale develop latent profile analysis and cross-validation. Journal of Business
ment and validation. Journal of Interactive Marketing, 28, Research. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2020.05.054 (in
149–165. press)
16. Lee, D., Hosanagar, K., & Nair, H. S. (2018). Advertising content 32. Solem, B. A. A., & Pedersen, P. E. (2016). The role of customer
and consumer engagement on social media: Evidence from brand engagement in social media: Conceptualisation, measure
Facebook. Management Science, 64(11), 5105–5131. ment, antecedents and outcomes. International Journal of Internet
17. Lee, M., Hong, J. H., Chung, S., & Back, K. J. (2020). Exploring Marketing and Advertising, 10(4), 223–254.
the roles of DMO’s social media efforts and information richness 33. Wang, T., & Lee, F. Y. (2020). Examining customer engagement
on customer engagement: Empirical analysis on Facebook event and brand intimacy in social media context. Journal of Retailing
pages. Journal of Travel Research. https://doi.org/10.1177/0047 and Consumer Services, 54, 102035.
287520934874 (in press) 34. Wu, J., Chen, J., Chen, H., Dou, W., & Shao, D. (2019). What to
18. Li, M. W., Teng, H. Y., & Chen, C. Y. (2020). Unlocking the say on social media and how: Effects of communication style and
customer engagement-brand loyalty relationship in tourism so function on online customer engagement in China. Journal of
cial media: The roles of brand attachment and customer trust. Service Theory and Practice, 29(5/6), 691–707.
Journal of Hospitality and Tourism Management, 44, 184–192.
19. Liu, X., Shin, H., & Burns, A. C. (2019). Examining the impact of
luxury brand’s social media marketing on customer engagement: References
Using big data analytics and natural language processing. Journal
of Business Research. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2019.0 Agnihotri, R. (2020). Social media, customer engagement, and sales organizations: A
research agenda. Industrial Marketing Management, 90, 291–299.
4.042 (in press) Ajiboye, T., Harvey, J., & Resnick, S. (2019). Customer engagement behaviour on social
20. Loureiro, S. M. C., & Lopes, J. (2019). How corporate social re media platforms: A systematic literature review. Journal of Customer Behaviour, 18
sponsibility initiatives in social media affect awareness and (3), 239–256.
Al Mamun, A., Nawi, N. B. C., Nasir, N. A. B. M., & Fazal, S. A. (2020). Social media and
customer engagement. Journal of Promotion Management, 25(3), consumer engagement: The case of Malaysian student entrepreneurs. Journal of Asia-
419–438. Pacific Business, 21(3), 185–206.
21. Meire, M., Hewett, K., Ballings, M., Kumar, V. & Van Den Poel, D. Algharabat, R., Rana, N. P., Alalwan, A. A., Baabdullah, A., & Gupta, A. (2020).
Investigating the antecedents of customer brand engagement and consumer-based
(2019). The role of marketer-generated content in customer brand equity in social media. Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, 53, Article
engagement marketing. Journal of Marketing, 83, 21–42. 101767.
22. Ningthoujam, S., Manna, R., Gautam, V., & Chauhan, S. (2020). Alvarez-Milán, A., Felix, R., Rauschnabel, P. A., & Hinsch, C. (2018). Strategic customer
engagement marketing: A decision making framework. Journal of Business Research,
Building customer engagement and brand loyalty through online
92, 61–70.
social media: An exploratory study. International Journal of Elec Anthony, B., Majid, M. A., & Romli, A. (2017). Sustainable adoption and implementation
tronic Marketing and Retailing, 11(2), 143–160. in collaborative enterprise: A systematic literature review. Journal of Theoretical &
23. Oh, C., Roumani, Y., Nwankpa, J. K., & Hu, H. F. (2017). Beyond Applied Information Technology, 95(9), 1875–1915.
Arora, A., Bansal, S., Kandpal, C., Aswani, R., & Dwivedi, Y. (2019). Measuring social
likes and tweets: Consumer engagement behavior and movie box media influencer index-insights from Facebook, Twitter and Instagram. Journal of
office in social media. Information & Management, 54(1), 25–37. Retailing and Consumer Services, 49, 86–101.
339
W.M. Lim and T. Rasul Journal of Business Research 148 (2022) 325–342
Ashley, C., & Tuten, T. (2015). Creative strategies in social media marketing: An Greve, G. (2014). The moderating effect of customer engagement on the brand
exploratory study of branded social content and consumer engagement. Psychology & image–brand loyalty relationship. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 148,
Marketing, 32(1), 15–27. 203–210.
Bai, L., & Yan, X. (2020). Impact of firm-generated content on firm performance and Guesalaga, R. (2016). The use of social media in sales: Individual and organizational
consumer engagement: Evidence from social media in China. Journal of Electronic antecedents, and the role of customer engagement in social media. Industrial
Commerce Research, 21(1), 56–74. Marketing Management, 54, 71–79.
Barari, M., Ross, M., Thaichon, S., & Surachartkumtonkun, J. (2021). A meta-analysis of Gusenbauer, M. (2019). Google Scholar to overshadow them all? Comparing the sizes of
customer engagement behaviour. International Journal of Consumer Studies, 45(4), 12 academic search engines and bibliographic databases. Scientometrics, 118(1),
457–477. 177–214.
Belur, J., Tompson, L., Thornton, A., & Simon, M. (2021). Interrater reliability in Hao, F. (2020). The landscape of customer engagement in hospitality and tourism: A
systematic review methodology: Exploring variation in coder decision-making. systematic review. International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management, 32
Sociological Methods & Research, 50(2), 837–865. (5), 1837–1860.
Bhattacharjee, M. (2020, June) Robust growth to resume in 2021: Global digital ad Harmeling, C. M., Moffett, J. W., Arnold, M. J., & Carlson, B. D. (2017). Toward a theory
spending to bounce back, reports eMarketer. WNIP. Available at https:// of customer engagement marketing. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 45
whatsnewinpublishing.com/robust-growth-to-resume-in-2021. (3), 312–335.
Bowden, J. (2009). The process of customer engagement: A conceptual framework. Harrigan, P., Evers, U., Miles, M., & Daly, T. (2018). Customer engagement and the
Journal of Marketing Theory and Practice, 17(1), 63–74. relationship between involvement, engagement, self-brand connection and brand
Brodie, R., Hollebeek, L., Biljana, J., & Ilic, A. (2011). Customer engagement: Conceptual usage intent. Journal of Business Research, 88, 388–396.
domain, fundamental propositions and implications for research. Journal of Service Harrigan, P., Evers, U., Miles, M., & Daly, T. (2017). Customer engagement with tourism
Research, 14(3), 252–271. social media brands. Tourism Management, 59, 597–609.
Brodie, R., Ilic, A., Biljana, J., & Hollebeek, L. (2013). Consumer engagement in a virtual Helme-Guizon, A., & Magnoni, F. (2019). Consumer brand engagement and its social side
brand community: An exploratory analysis. Journal of Business Research, 66, on brand-hosted social media: How do they contribute to brand loyalty? Journal of
105–114. Marketing Management, 35(7–8), 716–741.
Buzeta, C., De Pelsmacker, P., & Dens, N. (2020). Motivations to use different social Hennessy, B. (2018). Influencer: Building your personal brand in the age of social media. New
media types and their impact on consumers’ online brand-related activities York: Citadel Press.
(COBRAs). Journal of Interactive Marketing, 52, 79–98. Hennig-Thurau, T., Malthouse, E. C., Friege, C., Gensler, S., Lobschat, L.,
Calder, B. J., Malthouse, E. C., & Schaedel, U. (2009). An experimental study of the Rangaswamy, A., & Skiera, B. (2010). The impact of new media on customer
relationship between online engagement and advertising effectiveness. Journal of relationships. Journal of Service Research, 13(3), 311–330.
Interactive Marketing, 23(4), 321–331. Hollebeek, L. (2011a). Demystifying customer brand engagement: Exploring the loyalty
Carlson, J., Gudergan, S. P., Gelhard, C., & Rahman, M. M. (2019). Customer engagement nexus. Journal of Marketing Management, 27(7–8), 785–807.
with brands in social media platforms: Configurations, equifinality and sharing. Hollebeek, L. (2011b). Exploring customer brand engagement: Definition and themes.
European Journal of Marketing, 53(9), 1733–1758. Journal of Strategic Marketing, 19(7), 555–573.
Carlson, J., Rahman, M. M., Taylor, A., & Voola, R. (2019). Feel the VIBE: Examining Hollebeek, L., & Chen, T. (2014). Exploring positively- versus negatively-valanced brand
value-in-the-brand-page-experience and its impact on satisfaction and customer engagement: A conceptual model. Journal of Product and Brand Management, 23(1),
engagement behaviours in mobile social media. Journal of Retailing and Consumer 62–74.
Services, 46, 149–162. Hollebeek, L., Glynn, M., & Brodie, R. (2014). Consumer brand engagement in social
Carlson, J., Rahman, M., Voola, R., & de Vries, N. (2018). Customer engagement media: Conceptualization, scale development and validation. Journal of Interactive
behaviours in social media: Capturing innovation opportunities. Journal of Services Marketing, 28, 149–165.
Marketing, 32(1), 83–94. Hollebeek, L., Sprott, D., Andreassen, T., Costley, C., Klaus, P., Kuppelwieser, V., …
Chandni, S., & Rahman, Z. (2020). Customer engagement and employee engagement: Rather, R. (2019). Customer engagement in evolving technological environments:
Systematic review and future directions. The Service Industries Journal, 40(13–14), Synopsis and guiding propositions. European Journal of Marketing, 53(9), 2018–2023.
932–959. Hride, F. T., Ferdousi, F., & Jasimuddin, S. M. (2022). Linking perceived price fairness,
Cheung, M. L., Pires, G., & Rosenberger, P. J. (2020). The influence of perceived social customer satisfaction, trust, and loyalty: A structural equation modeling of
media marketing elements on consumer–brand engagement and brand knowledge. Facebook-based e-commerce in Bangladesh. Global Business and Organizational
Asia Pacific Journal of Marketing and Logistics, 32(3), 695–720. Excellence, 41(3), 41–54.
Coulson, D. C. (2013). Dynamics of social media, politics and public policy in the Arab Husain, R., Ahmad, A., & Khan, B. M. (2022). The role of status consumption and brand
World. Global Media Journal, 12(22), 1–20. equity: A comparative study of the marketing of Indian luxury brands by traditional
Cova, B., & Pace, S. (2006). Brand community of convenience products: New forms of and social-media. Global Business and Organizational Excellence. https://doi.org/
customer empowerment — The case “My Nutella” community. European Journal of 10.1002/joe.22156
Marketing, 40(9–10), 87–105. Huurne, M., Ronteltap, A., Corten, R., & Buskens, V. (2017). Antecedents of trust in the
Coviello, N., Brodie, R., Danaher, P., & Johnston, W. (2002). How firms relate to their sharing economy: A systematic review. Journal of Consumer Behaviour, 16(6),
markets: An empirical examination of contemporary marketing practices. Journal of 485–498.
Marketing, 66(3), 33–46. Islam, J., Hollebeek, L., Rahman, Z., Khan, I., & Rasool, A. (2019). Customer engagement
Cramer-Flood, E. (2021, November 3). Worldwide digital ad spending year-end update: in the service context: An empirical investigation of the construct, its antecedents
Record-setting boom will subside in 2022 and beyond. Insider Intelligence. Available and consequences. Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, 50, 277–285.
at https://www.emarketer.com/content/worldwide-digital-ad-spending-year-end Islam, J. U., & Rahman, Z. (2016). The transpiring journey of customer engagement
-update. research in marketing: A systematic review of the past decade. Management Decision,
Dalll’Omo-Riley, F., & de Chernatony, L. (2000). The service brand as relationships 54(8), 2008–2034.
builder. British Journal of Management, 11(2), 137–150. Islam, J., & Rahman, Z. (2017). The impact of online brand community characteristics on
Dessart, L., Veloutsou, C., & Morgan-Thomas, A. (2016). Capturing consumer customer engagement: An application of Stimulus-Organism-Response paradigm.
engagement: Duality, dimensionality and measurement. Journal of Marketing Telematics and Informatics, 34(4), 96–109.
Management, 32(5–6), 399–426. Kumar, J., & Nayak, J. (2019). Consumer psychological motivations to customer brand
Dodoo, N. A., & Padovano, C. M. (2020). Personality-based engagement: An examination engagement: A case of brand community. Journal of Consumer Marketing, 36(1),
of personality and message factors on consumer responses to social media 168–177.
advertisements. Journal of Promotion Management, 26(4), 481–503. Kumar, S., Sahoo, S., Lim, W. M., Kraus, S., & Bamel, U. (2022). Fuzzy-set qualitative
Dwivedi, A. (2015). A higher-order model of consumer brand engagement and its impact comparative analysis (fsQCA) in business and management research: A
on loyalty intentions. Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, 24, 100–109. contemporary overview. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 178, Article
de Vries, N., & Carlson, J. (2014). Examining the drivers and brand performance 121599.
implications of customer engagement with brands in the social media environment. Kumar, V. (2020). Building customer-brand relationships through customer brand
Journal of Brand Management, 21(6), 495–515. engagement. Journal of Promotion Management, 26(7), 986–1012.
Eigenraam, A. W., Eelen, J., Van Lin, A., & Verlegh, P. W. (2018). A consumer-based Kumar, V., Aksoy, L., Donkers, B., Venkatesan, R., Wiesel, T., & Tillmanns, S. (2010).
taxonomy of digital customer engagement practices. Journal of Interactive Marketing, Undervalued or overvalued customers: Capturing total customer engagement value.
44, 102–121. Journal of Service Research, 13(3), 297–310.
France, C., Merrilees, B., & Miller, D. (2016). An integrated model of customer-brand Labrecque, L. I. (2014). Fostering consumer–brand relationships in social media
engagement: Drivers and consequences. Journal of Brand Management, 23, 119–136. environments: The role of parasocial interaction. Journal of Interactive Marketing, 28
Garg, P., Gupta, B., Dzever, S., Sivarajah, U., & Kumar, V. (2020). Examining the (2), 134–148.
relationship between social media analytics practices and business performance in Lamberton, C., & Stephen, A. T. (2016). A thematic exploration of digital, social media,
the Indian retail and IT industries: The mediation role of customer engagement. and mobile marketing: Research evolution from 2000 to 2015 and an agenda for
International Journal of Information Management, 52, Article 102069. future inquiry. Journal of Marketing, 80(6), 146–172.
Giakoumaki, C., & Krepapa, A. (2020). Brand engagement in self-concept and consumer Lang, L. D., Lim, W. M., & Guzmán, F. (2022). How does promotion mix affect brand
engagement in social media: The role of the source. Psychology & Marketing, 37(3), equity? Insights from a mixed-methods study of low involvement products. Journal
457–465. of Business Research, 141, 175–190.
Gilpin, J. (2019, February 5). Social is going back to its roots, with brands leading the Leckie, C., Nyadzayo, M., & Johnson, L. (2016). Antecedents of consumer brand
way. Sprout Social. Available at https://sproutsocial. Com/adapt/social-going-back- engagement and brand loyalty. Journal of Marketing Management, 32(5–6), 558–578.
to-its’s-roots/.
340
W.M. Lim and T. Rasul Journal of Business Research 148 (2022) 325–342
Lee, D., Hosanagar, K., & Nair, H. S. (2018). Advertising content and consumer Papakonstantinidis, S. (2017). The SoLoMo customer journey: A review and research
engagement on social media: Evidence from Facebook. Management Science, 64(11), agenda. Innovative Marketing, 13(4), 47–54.
5105–5131. Paul, J., & Benito, G. R. (2018). A review of research on outward foreign direct
Lee, M., Hong, J. H., Chung, S., & Back, K. J. (2020). Exploring the roles of DMO’s social investment from emerging countries, including China: What do we know, how do we
media efforts and information richness on customer engagement: Empirical analysis know and where should we be heading? Asia Pacific Business Review, 24(1), 90–115.
on Facebook event pages. Journal of Travel Research. https://doi.org/10.1177/ Paul, J., & Mas, E. (2020). Toward a 7-P framework for international marketing. Journal
0047287520934874 (in press) of Strategic Marketing, 28(8), 681–701.
Li, M. W., Teng, H. Y., & Chen, C. Y. (2020). Unlocking the customer engagement-brand Paul, J., & Criado, A. R. (2020). The art of writing literature review: What do we know
loyalty relationship in tourism social media: The roles of brand attachment and and what do we need to know? International Business Review, 29(4), Article 101717.
customer trust. Journal of Hospitality and Tourism Management, 44, 184–192. Paul, J., Lim, W. M., O’Cass, A., Hao, A. W., & Bresciani, S. (2021). Scientific procedures
Lim, W. M. (2021). A marketing mix typology for integrated care: The 10 Ps. Journal of and rationales for systematic literature reviews (SPAR-4-SLR). International Journal
Strategic Marketing, 29(5), 453–469. of Consumer Studies, 45(4), O1–O16.
Lim, W. M. (2018a). Demystifying neuromarketing. Journal of Business Research, 91, Paul, J., Parthasarathy, S., & Gupta, P. (2017). Exporting challenges of SMEs: A review
205–220. and future research agenda. Journal of World Business, 52(3), 327–342.
Lim, W. M. (2018b). What will business-to-business marketers learn from neuro- Phua, J., Jin, S. V., & Kim, J. J. (2017). Uses and gratifications of social networking sites
marketing? Insights for business marketing practice. Journal of Business-to-Business for bridging and bonding social capital: A comparison of Facebook, Twitter,
Marketing, 25(3), 251–259. Instagram, and Snapchat. Computers in Human Behavior, 72, 115–122.
Lim, W. M. (2015). Enriching information science research through chronic disposition Pinto, L., Loureiro, S., Rita, P., & Sarmento, E. (2019). Fostering online relationships with
and situational priming: A short note for future research. Journal of Information brands through websites and social media brand pages. Journal of Promotion
Science, 41(3), 399–402. Management, 25(3), 379–393.
Lim, W. M., Ahmad, A., Rasul, T., & Parvez, M. O. (2021). Challenging the mainstream Prentice, C., Wang, X., & Lin, X. (2020). An organic approach to customer engagement
assumption of social media influence on destination choice. Tourism Recreation and loyalty. Journal of Computer Information Systems, 60(4), 326–335.
Research, 46(1), 137–140. Quach, S., Shao, W., Ross, M., & Thaichon, P. (2019). Customer engagement and co-
Lim, W. M., Ahmed, P. K., & Ali, M. Y. (2019). Data and resource maximization in created value in social media. Marketing Intelligence & Planning, 38(6), 730–744.
business-to-business marketing experiments: Methodological insights from data Rasul, T., & Hoque, R. (2020). A review of social media research in the tourism and
partitioning. Industrial Marketing Management, 76, 136–143. hospitality industry through the lens of social structure. Tourism Recreation Research,
Lim, W. M., Ahmed, P. K., & Ali, M. Y. (2022). Giving electronic word of mouth (eWOM) 45(3), 425–427.
as a prepurchase behavior: The case of online group buying. Journal of Business Rasul, T., Hoque, R., & Arefin, S. (2020). Social media for web-communities of female
Research, 146, 582–604. entrepreneurs: A PRISMA compliant exploration. International Journal of Web Based
Lim, W. M., Kumar, S., & Ali, F. (2022). Advancing knowledge through literature Communities, 16(4), 396–409.
reviews: ‘What’, ‘why’, and ‘how to contribute’. The Service Industries Journal. Rasul, T., Zaman, U., & Hoque, M. R. (2020). Examining the pulse of the tourism industry
https://doi.org/10.1080/02642069.2022.2047941 in the Asia-Pacific region: A systematic review of social media. Tourism and
Lim, W. M., Kumar, S., Pandey, N., Rasul, T., & Gaur, V. (2022). From direct marketing to Hospitality Management, 26(1), 173–193.
interactive marketing: A retrospective review of the Journal of Research in Riley, J. (2020). Sustaining customer engagement through social media brand
Interactive Marketing. Journal of Research in Interactive Marketing. https://doi.org/ communities. Journal of Global Scholars of Marketing Science, 30(4), 344–357.
10.1108/JRIM-11-2021-0276 Rosado-Pinto, F., & Loureiro, S. M. C. (2020). The growing complexity of customer
Lim, W. M., Rasul, T., Kumar, S., & Ala, M. (2022). Past, present, and future of customer engagement: A systematic review. EuroMed Journal of Business, 15(2), 167–203.
engagement. Journal of Business Research, 140, 439–458. Rosenbaum, M. S., Seger-Guttmann, T., & Giraldo, M. (2017). Vulnerable consumers in
Lim, W. M., Yap, S. F., & Makkar, M. (2021). Home sharing in marketing and tourism at service settings. Journal of Services Marketing, 31(4–5), 309–312.
the tipping point: What do we know, how do we know, and where should we be Rossiter, J. R. (2001). What is marketing knowledge? Marketing Theory, 1(1), 9–26.
heading? Journal of Business Research, 122, 534–566. Rossiter, J. R. (2002). The five forms of transmissible, usable marketing knowledge.
Liu, X., Shin, H., & Burns, A. C. (2019). Examining the impact of luxury brand’s social Marketing Theory, 2(4), 369–380.
media marketing on customer engagement: Using big data analytics and natural Sajid, S., Volkova, N., Wilson, J. A., & Opoku-Asante, E. (2022). Using text mining and
language processing. Journal of Business Research. https://doi.org/10.1016/j. crowdsourcing platforms to build employer brand in the US banking industry. Global
jbusres.2019.04.042 (in press) Business and Organizational Excellence, 41(4), 6–27.
Loureiro, S. M. C., & Lopes, J. (2019). How corporate social responsibility initiatives in Samala, N., Singh, S., Nukhu, R., & Khetarpal, M. (2019). Investigating the role of
social media affect awareness and customer engagement. Journal of Promotion participation and customer engagement with tourism brands (CETB) on social
Management, 25(3), 419–438. media. Academy of Marketing Studies Journal, 23(1), 1–16.
Marbach, J., Lages, C., & Nunan, D. (2016). Who are you and what do you value? Santini, F. D. O., Ladeira, W. J., Pinto, D. C., Herter, M. M., Sampaio, C. H., & Babin, B. J.
Investigating the role of personality traits and customer-perceived value in online (2020). Customer engagement in social media: A framework and meta-analysis.
customer engagement. Journal of Marketing Management, 32(5–6), 502–525. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 48(6), 1211–1228.
Marketing Science Institute. (2018, May 13). Research priorities 2018-2020. MSI at the Sashi, C. M. (2012). Customer engagement, buyer-seller relationships, and social media.
ARF. Available at https://www.msi.org/articles/marketers-top-challenges-2018-202 Management Decision, 50(2), 253–272.
0-research-priorities/. Sashi, C. M., Brynildsen, G., & Bilgihan, A. (2019). Social media, customer engagement
Marketing Science Institute. (2020, May 7). MSI announces 2020-22 research priorities. and advocacy: An empirical investigation using Twitter data for quick service
MSI at the ARF. Available at https://www.msi.org/articles/2020-22-msi-research-pri restaurants. International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management, 31(3),
orities-outline-marketers-top-concerns/. 1247–1272.
Meire, M., Hewett, K., Ballings, M., Kumar, V., & Van Den Poel, D. (2019). The role of Shah, S. A. A., Sukmana, R., Fianto, B. A., Ahmad, M. A., Usman, I. U., & Mallah, W. A.
marketer-generated content in customer engagement marketing. Journal of (2019). Effects of Halal social media and customer engagement on brand satisfaction
Marketing, 83, 21–42. of Muslim customer: Exploring the moderation of religiosity. Journal of Islamic
Moher, D., Liberati, A., Tetzlaff, J., & Altman, D. (2009). Preferred reporting items for Marketing, 11(6), 1671–1689.
systematic reviews and meta-analyses: The PRISMA statement. Annals of Internal Sawhney, M., Verona, G., & Prandelli, E. (2005). Collaborating to create: The Internet as
Medicine, 151(4), 264–269. a platform for customer engagement in product innovation. Journal of Interactive
Moliner, M., Monferrer-Tirado, D., & Estrada-Guillen, M. (2018). Consequences of Marketing, 19(4), 4–17.
customer engagement and customer self-brand connection. Journal of Services Schivinski, B., Christodoulides, G., & Dabrowski, D. (2016). Measuring consumers’
Marketing, 32(4), 387–399. engagement with brand-related social-media content. Journal of Advertising Research,
Ng, S. C., Sweeney, J. C., & Plewa, C. (2020). Customer engagement: A systematic review 56(1), 64–80.
and future research priorities. Australasian Marketing Journal, 28(4), 235–252. Shawky, S., Kubacki, K., Dietrich, T., & Weaven, S. (2020). A dynamic framework for
Ningthoujam, S., Manna, R., Gautam, V., & Chauhan, S. (2020). Building customer managing customer engagement on social media. Journal of Business Research, 121,
engagement and brand loyalty through online social media: An exploratory study. 567–577.
International Journal of Electronic Marketing and Retailing, 11(2), 143–160. Simon, F., & Tossan, V. (2018). Does brand-consumer social sharing matter? A relational
Nysveen, H., & Pedersen, P. (2014). Influences of cocreation on brand experience. framework of customer engagement to brand-hosted social media. Journal of Business
International Journal of Market Research, 56(6), 807–832. Research, 85, 175–184.
Oh, C., Roumani, Y., Nwankpa, J. K., & Hu, H. F. (2017). Beyond likes and tweets: So, K., King, C., & Sparks, B. (2016). The role of customer engagement in building
Consumer engagement behavior and movie box office in social media. Information & consumer loyalty to tourism brands. Journal of Travel Research, 55(1), 64–78.
Management, 54(1), 25–37. So, K., King, C., & Sparks, B. (2014). Customer engagement with tourism brands: Scale
Oliveira, M., & Fernandes, T. (2020). Luxury brands and social media: Drivers and development and validation. Journal of Hospitality & Tourism Research, 38(3),
outcomes of consumer engagement on Instagram. Journal of Strategic Marketing. 304–329.
https://doi.org/10.1080/0965254X.2020.1777459 (in press) So, K. K. F., Li, X., & Kim, H. (2020). A decade of customer engagement research in
Palmatier, R. W., Houston, M. B., & Hulland, J. (2018). Review articles: Purpose, process, hospitality and tourism: A systematic review and research agenda. Journal of
and structure. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 46(1), 1–5. Hospitality & Tourism Research, 44(2), 178–200.
Panagiotopoulos, P., Shan, L. C., Barnett, J., Regan, Á., & McConnon, Á. (2015). So, K. K. F., Wei, W., & Martin, D. (2020). Understanding customer engagement and
A framework of social media engagement: Case studies with food and consumer social media activities in tourism: A latent profile analysis and cross-validation.
organisations in the UK and Ireland. International Journal of Information Management, Journal of Business Research. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2020.05.054 (in
35(4), 394–402. press)
341
W.M. Lim and T. Rasul Journal of Business Research 148 (2022) 325–342
Solem, A. (2016). Influences of customer participation and customer brand engagement Weng Marc Lim is an Adjunct Professor at Swinburne University of Technology’s home
on brand loyalty. Journal of Consumer Marketing, 33(5), 332–342. campus in Australia and a Full Professor and the Dean of the Faculty of Business, Design
Solem, B. A. A., & Pedersen, P. E. (2016). The role of customer brand engagement in and Arts at Swinburne University of Technology’s international branch campus in
social media: Conceptualisation, measurement, antecedents and outcomes. Malaysia. His research interests include business, consumer, and government (BCG)
International Journal of Internet Marketing and Advertising, 10(4), 223–254. research. He has authored ± 100 manuscripts in journals ranked ‘A*’ and ‘A’ such as
Steinhoff, L., Arli, D., Weaven, S., & Kozlenkova, I. V. (2019). Online relationship European Journal of Marketing, Industrial Marketing Management, Journal of Advertising,
marketing. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 47(3), 369–393. Journal of Advertising Research, Journal of Business Research, Journal of Business and In
Thaichon, P., Brown, J. R., & Weaven, S. (2020). Special issue introduction: Online dustrial Marketing, Journal of International Marketing, Journal of Consumer Behaviour, In
relationship marketing. Marketing Intelligence & Planning, 38(6), 673–675. ternational Journal of Consumer Studies, Journal of Product and Brand Management, Journal of
Thakur, R. (2016). Understanding customer engagement and loyalty: A case of mobile Retailing and Consumer Services, Journal of Strategic Marketing, Marketing Theory, Marketing
devices for shopping. Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, 32, 151–163. Intelligence and Planning, and Psychology & Marketing, among others. He has also presented
Tsai, W., & Men, L. (2013). Motivations and antecedents of consumer engagement with his work and led high-level policy discussions at the United Nations Educational, Scientific
brand pages on social networking sites. Journal of Interactive Advertising, 13(2), and Cultural Organization and the World Economic Forum. Contact: @limwengmarc on
76–87. Instagram and Twitter or his personal homepage at https://www.wengmarc.com.
van Doorn, J., Lemon, K., Mittal, V., Nass, S., Doreen, P., Pirner, P., & Verhoef, P. (2010).
Customer engagement behavior: Theoretical foundations and research directions.
Tareq Rasul is a Senior Lecturer at the Australian Institute of Business (AIB), Australia. He
Journal of Service Research, 13(3), 252–266.
holds a doctorate in marketing from the University of South Australia, Australia and an
Vivek, S., Beatty, S., & Morgan, R. (2012). Customer engagement: Exploring customer
MBA from the University of East London, United Kingdom. To date, he has published
relationships beyond purchase. Journal of Marketing Theory and Practice, 20(2),
around 55 peer-reviewed journal articles, conference papers and book chapters. His
127–145.
research has been published in high-ranked journals such as Australasian Journal of In
Wang, T., & Lee, F. Y. (2020). Examining customer engagement and brand intimacy in
formation Systems, International Journal of Bank Marketing, Journal of Business Research,
social media context. Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, 54, Article 102035.
Journal of Islamic Marketing, Journal of Knowledge Management, Journal of Strategic Mar
Wu, J., Chen, J., Chen, H., Dou, W., & Shao, D. (2019). What to say on social media and
keting, and Tourism Recreation Research, among others. He has obtained a total of around
how: Effects of communication style and function on online customer engagement in
AUD 25000 in internal and external research grants and successfully produced the out
China. Journal of Service Theory and Practice, 29(5/6), 691–707.
comes required. He is also a Certified Practising Marketer (CPM) and a member of
Zook, Z., & Smith, P. R. (2016). Marketing communications: Offline and online integration,
Australian Marketing Institute (AMI) and Action Learning Action Research Association
engagement and analytics. New York: Kogan Page Publishers.
(ALARA). He can be contacted at tareq.rasul@aib.edu.au or tfrasul@gmail.com.
342