Technological Forecasting & Social Change 192 (2023) 122580

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Technological Forecasting & Social Change

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/techfore

Brand–SMI collaboration in influencer marketing campaigns: A transaction

cost economics perspective
Tahir Abbas Syed a, *, Fahad Mehmood b, Talia Qaiser c
a
Alliance Manchester Business School, University of Manchester, UK
b
Dubai Business School, University of Dubai, United Arab Emirates
c
Management Science Department, Suleman Dawood School of Business, Lahore University of Management Sciences, Lahore, Pakistan

A R T I C L E I N F O A B S T R A C T

Keywords: Brands are showing an increasing appetite for influencer marketing campaigns in order to accentuate the ex­
Influencer marketing clusivity of their products. While the literature supports influencer marketing as a competent persuasive mar­
Brand–SMI collaboration keting strategy for reaching niche audiences, studies investigating influencer collaboration management
Transaction cost economics theory
strategies to evade the associated challenges remain scant. Thus, influencer marketing is at risk of wasted in­
Collaboration management framework
vestment and a low success rate. This research draws on transaction cost economics theory to investigate how
brands effectively manage collaboration with social media influencers (SMIs) using a multi-case-study approach
of influencer marketing campaigns in 15 brands. Our findings identify critical management strategies and
develop a collaboration management framework for effective collaboration. We also highlight control factors to
steer brand–SMI collaboration, offering a more nuanced understanding of influencer marketing collaboration
management strategies. This paper marks an exploratory step toward understanding influencer marketing from
brands’ perspectives and offers guidance for brands on how best to engage in effective influencer collaboration.

1. Introduction Influencer marketing provides a tempting opportunity for brands to

In the present-day industry, advanced and pervasive social media
networking applications increasingly fuel sales and advertising (Scott,
2015). Brands are realizing the importance of social media marketing
and developing a clear strategy to enhance customers’ experiences and
perceptions of their products (Evans et al., 2017). While social media
marketing campaigns adopt different approaches, influencer marketing
represents a dominant approach to promote brand awareness both faster
and better (Booth and Matic, 2011; Casaló et al., 2020; Lou and Yuan,
2019). Influencer marketing works through social media influencers
(SMIs) becoming opinion leaders (Casaló et al., 2020) who exert influ­
ence over potential buyers through social media content (Hayes and
Carr, 2015). SMIs are personalities who have become online celebrities
by creating and posting content about their passions on social media,
with large numbers of engaged followers (Freberg et al., 2011). In
contrast to commercial brand advertising, customers perceive SMIs’
opinions about products to be more authentic (Masuda et al., 2022;
Scott, 2015). Influencer marketing remains a central approach for pro­
motional strategy and reaching the niche audience for many brands
(Audrezet et al. 2018).
market their products efficiently and rapidly. In light of this, prior
research has contributed a wealth of valuable insights on influencer
marketing strategies, namely, identifying SMIs, the authenticity of SMIs
or content, customer retention, sales, and return on investment (Kim and
Ko, 2012; Malthouse et al., 2013; Godey et al., 2016). While existing
research encourages brands to engage in influencer marketing, it stops
short of explaining how to do it, that is, how to develop and manage
collaboration with SMIs (Audrezet and De Kerviler 2019). Influencer
marketing has been linked with increased competitiveness (Casaló et al.,
2020; Lou and Yuan, 2019). Nevertheless, many brands struggle to
strengthen customer relationships because of weak collaboration or the
lack of an effective collaboration management strategy with SMIs
(Audrezet and De Kerviler 2019; Uzunoğlu and Kip, 2014; Vernuccio,
2014). For instance, Wolf and Archer (2018) note that the “dynamics of
influencer engagement present major challenges to even the most
experienced PR [public relations] professionals, due to the rapid rise of
individual influencers, changing business models, and only slowly
evolving best practice approaches to the evaluation of influencer
engagement” (p. 502).
Studies such as Wiedmann and Von Mettenheim (2020) and

* Corresponding author.
E-mail addresses: tahirabbas.syed@manchester.ac.uk (T.A. Syed), fmehmood@ud.ac.ae (F. Mehmood), 19110309@lums.edu.pk (T. Qaiser).

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2023.122580
Received 1 February 2022; Received in revised form 3 April 2023; Accepted 8 April 2023
Available online 21 April 2023
0040-1625/© 2023 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Inc. This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-
nc-nd/4.0/).
T.A. Syed et al.
Reinikainen et al. (2021) also highlight the complexity of congruence
issues and the impacts of failing influencer marketing collaboration,
respectively. Failed collaboration has even resulted in a case where an
SMI accused a brand of masking paid adverts as reviews and inflating its
influencers’ blog page views (Pang et al., 2016). Similarly, Lewsey
(2015) highlighted the consequence of a failed attempt by Electronic
Arts to collaborate with an SMI that backfired on Instagram. The re­
percussions of such incidents are not limited to the disrepute of an in­
dividual SMI or wasted brand investment; they also impair customers’
trust in influencer marketing. An essential practical rationale for this
research is that increased knowledge on this topic can potentially
improve the success rate of influencer marketing.
Moreover, prior studies on influencer marketing (e.g., Lee and
Watkins, 2016; Audrezet et al., 2020; Casaló et al., 2020) have largely
relied on the data that focused on the customers’ perspective, that is,
assessing perceptions of SMIs or brands. We argue that influencer mar­
keting constitutes a dyadic relationship that involves collaboration be­
tween brands and SMIs.1 Thus, relying on the data from one side of the
dyad may neglect the other side’s perspective, implicitly assuming
collaboration congruence. It is therefore essential to understand influ­
encer marketing through investigating the perspectives of both sides of
the relationship dyad to support continued theory development in the
research area.
Against these backdrops, this study aims to provide a comprehensive
understanding of collaboration management between brands and SMIs
based on the data collected from both brands and their SMIs. We address
theoretically and managerially significant research gaps by investigating
the following research question: What factors constitute an effective
collaboration management strategy between brands and SMIs? Based on an
exploratory study adopting a multiple-case-study approach of 15 influ­
encer marketing campaigns, we use matched-pair data covering both
sides of the collaboration engagements (i.e., the brand and SMIs), which
allows us to evade a critical methodological shortcoming of prior
studies. We draw on transaction cost economics (TCE) theory to explain
collaboration management strategies and to propose a framework for
effective collaboration. Such an in-depth understanding can improve the
success rate of investments and support continuous theory development
in this area. The remainder of this article is structured as follows: in the
next section we introduce influencer marketing and review the related
literature. We then explain TCE theory in the context of this study and
describe our research methodology. Next, our findings are presented.
We conclude by discussing our findings and their implications for
research and practice.
2. Literature review
2.1. Influencer marketing and the role of SMIs
Social media platforms (i.e., social networking sites, blogs, content
communities, virtual worlds) allow customers to create, publish, and
share their personal experiences and opinions of a product/service with
others, in the form of electronic word-of-mouth (eWOM) (Ferguson,
2008). The information communicated by a fellow customer about the
products reaches a large segment of customers and is considered more
authentic and credible (Evans et al., 2017). This has changed the
competitive landscape for brands that have quickly acknowledged the
increasing relevance of social media platforms for marketing purposes.
The brands adopt a similar practice of engaging with SMIs to promote
their product or brand, which is termed influencer marketing (Freberg
1
While third parties may often manage the collaborative relationship be­
tween brands and SMIs, our data includes the brands in direct collaboration
with SMIs. We discuss the complexity of this relationship as a result of third-
party involvement in the section on limitations and avenues for further
research.
2
Technological Forecasting & Social Change 192 (2023) 122580
et al., 2011; Scott, 2015). Also referred to as sponsored or seeding
campaigns, influencer marketing represents a growing trend in promo­
tional strategies (Lou and Yuan, 2019). Influencer marketing is adapt­
able for every business, from well-known brands to start-ups. The
explosive growth of massive investments in this space shows that brands
recognize the potential benefits of working with SMIs (Casaló et al.,
2020).
Social media influencers create content in the form of stories, videos,
and visuals to engage a mass audience (Freberg et al., 2011; Chen and
Lin, 2019). The influencers, such as bloggers (Fu and Chen, 2012;
Liljander et al., 2015), vloggers (i.e., You Tubers) (Lee and Watkins,
2016; Chapple and Cownie, 2017), or Instagrammers (De Veirman et al.,
2017), investigated in marketing research can all be considered SMIs
(Audrezet et al., 2020). Studies have distinguished between typologies
of SMI based on follower count – nano (fewer than 10,000 followers),
micro (10,000–100,000 followers), macro (100,000–1,000,000 fol­
lowers), and mega or super influencers (>1 million followers) (Campbell
and Farrell, 2020) – and discussed the implications of working with
them (Brewster and Lyu, 2020; Park et al., 2021). They shape audience
attitudes and drive purchase intentions by creating short-form content
(i.e., Snapchat, tweets, blog, Instagram) that expresses their opinions
about products, offers usage tips, and posts pictures or videos containing
products/services. SMI followers have a trust-based relationship with
SMIs and consider the content or information about the product to be
original and non-commercial (Cabeza-Ramírez et al., 2022). This chal­
lenges SMIs to communicate the likes of the brand marketers while
maintaining a trust-based relationship with their followers. To avoid
such complications and reduce failures in influencer marketing, brands
must ensure a better understanding of collaboration management with
SMIs.
2.2. Brands’ collaboration with SMIs
The growing power of social media influencers creates a tempting
opportunity for brands to market their products both efficiently and
quickly. While influencer marketing is argued to support brand aware­
ness, build an online buzz, and drive sales, the proliferation of SMIs
challenges brands to sort out appropriate approaches to effectively
collaborate with them for product endorsements (Audrezet et al., 2020).
The literature on influencer marketing provides a wealth of insights
on a wide range of aspects and issues that spreads across various con­
texts such as luxury brands (Lee and Watkins, 2016), the fashion in­
dustry (Wolny and Mueller, 2013; Audrezet et al., 2020), and ice cream
parlors (Kumar and Mirchandani, 2012). Some studies provide in-depth
analyses of the critical aspects surrounding SMIs, such as public
perception, authenticity, the number of followers, the use of emojis, and
disclosure (Freberg et al., 2011; Cabeza-Ramírez et al., 2022; De Veir­
man et al., 2017; Audrezet et al., 2020; Ge and Gretzel, 2018; Lou and
Yuan, 2019). Others, meanwhile (Chu and Kim, 2011; Lu et al., 2014;
Schivinski and Dabrowski, 2016; Evans et al., 2017), focus on influencer
marketing from the customers’ perspective.
However, only a handful of studies (Audrezet and De Kerviler 2019;
Booth and Matic, 2011; Borchers and Enke, 2021, 2022; Uzunoğlu and
Kip, 2014) have investigated influencer marketing from the brand’s
perspective. Audrezet and De Kerviler (2019) revealed growing frus­
tration among SMIs concerning their collaboration with brands. They
explain a relational approach, which implies creating intimacy with
each influencer (i.e., understanding their interests, mood, and career
goals) to achieve effective collaboration. Booth and Matic (2011) sug­
gested an algorithm to rank bloggers based on weighted average scores
of social media engagement, and Uzunoğlu and Kip (2014) focused on
blogger communication patterns (tone, content, reliability, followers) as
a means of identifying SMIs. Relatedly, Borchers and Enke (2021)
identified the established routines and rationales that brands and their
agencies deploy for managing their strategic influencer communica­
tions. In another study, Borchers and Enke (2022) examined moral and
T.A. Syed et al. Technological Forecasting & Social Change 192 (2023) 122580

ethical concerns to address the transparency of collaboration, payments concepts develop through the systematic generation and conceptuali­
to influencers, and influencer authenticity. In light of these studies, the zation of data (Glaser et al., 1968). In the spirit of engaged scholarship
theoretical support for brand representatives on collaboration remains (Van de Ven, 2007), we started this research project by identifying and
limited when adopting influencer marketing campaigns. It makes our formulating a relevant research problem that is currently experienced by
study among the first to better understand collaboration management practitioners in leading organizations, namely, influencer marketing
strategies in influencer marketing, building on the collective perspec­ management. The initial informal discussion with our key respondents
tives of brands and SMIs. Table A-1 (Appendix) presents a sampling of from brands was based very broadly on shedding light on why influencer
research in the area of influencer marketing. This table is not intended to marketing is challenging and how it is executed. The specific research
serve as an exhaustive set of references on this topic but merely to objective and question formulated in the introduction of this paper
highlight some of the critical articles in this area and suggest that materialized during the research process parallel to shaping our un­
comparatively few articles have attempted to examine influencer mar­ derstanding of influencer marketing campaigns. We used a multiple-
keting by collecting data from both dyads. case-study approach for data collection that supports the extraction of
rich data through various techniques (e.g., interviews, observations, and
2.3. TCE theory independent analysis) and facilitates cross-validation (Stake, 2006). A
multiple-case-study approach was preferred, as it assists external val­
Transaction cost economics theory suggests that transaction costs idity, guards against observer bias, aids triangulation, and generates
exist in a relationship and consist of the direct costs of managing a more reliable and robust theory (Stake, 2006; Yin, 2009).
relationship and the opportunistic costs of making a suboptimal decision
(Williamson and Ghani, 2012). TCE highlights two assumptions about 3.1. Research context and case selection
behaviors: (1) bounded rationality – cognitive, communication, and
information-processing capabilities may limit decision-makers, leading We focused on the fashion and lifestyle category context for the se­
to additional costs; and (2) opportunism – self-interest may influence lection of influencer marketing campaign cases, mainly because fashion
dishonest or agreement violation; thus, brands bear the costs of partner and lifestyle have one of the most successful and prevalent digital
monitoring or asset safeguarding (Williamson, 1985). Cognition and presences, with massive investments in influencer marketing campaigns
self-interest are vital factors that constitute the chances of collaboration (Casaló et al., 2020). Fashion and lifestyle brands grow with numerous
between actors failing or succeeding (Williamson and Ghani, 2012). TCE differentiated products, which require them to establish effective
has been identified as an effective tool for evaluating relationships in a communication with customers to develop loyalty. Consequently,
dyad, that is, the buyer–supplier relationship (Grover and Malhotra, fashion and lifestyle brands feature a proliferation of brand–SMI
2003). While existing research in influencer marketing lacks the theo­ collaboration (Audrezet et al., 2020). Thus, the fashion and lifestyle
retical perspective, we identify that TCE presents a valuable lens to category provided a suitable and appealing context for our study.
explore collaboration management between brands and SMIs. Among the fashion and lifestyle brands involved in an influencer
TCE theory relies on propositions of asset specificity, uncertainty, marketing campaign, cases were shortlisted that met two criteria: (1) a
and governance mechanisms in a supply chain (Acquah et al., 2021) or campaign that was at least 3 months old; and (2) a campaign that
R&D collaboration (Jun et al., 2021). Asset specificity relates to the involved more than one SMI. A 3-month period was set to ensure that the
transferability of assets supporting a transaction, which can be either selected brands had established SMI engagement and that SMIs had
human (e.g., training) or physical (e.g., equipment investment) speci­ ample time to post content about the brand’s products. The selection of
ficity. Uncertainty refers to unexpected changes in circumstances sur­ brands involving more than one SMI offered the possibility to probe each
rounding a transaction and can be either ex ante, that is, environmental SMI’s collaboration separately and to comprehend the brand’s collab­
uncertainty (e.g., intractable problems at the agreement stage), or ex oration management strategy. Consistent with theoretical sampling,
post, namely, behavioral uncertainty (e.g., performance evaluation among the cases meeting this criterion, the initial samples were selected
problems). Finally, governance mechanisms refer to the processes and opportunistically, that is, according to their ability to generate new in­
structures used to ensure that the strategies and objectives of different sights that would help to develop the theory (Stake, 2008). We
parties are aligned (Powell, 1990). We develop and explain our findings approached 75 brands initially. Among these, our study included the
in light of these three propositions of TCE in the context of brand–SMI brands with their digital marketing representative being available for
collaboration management strategies. interview. Furthermore, the set of cases was limited to brands where the
To conclude, prior research has encouraged brands to engage in engaged brand SMIs were also available for interview. In total, 15
influencer marketing and provided valuable insights into identifying brands met the criteria and constituted 54 SMIs on different social media
SMIs, authenticity management, customer retention, sales, and return platforms (i.e., Facebook, Instagram, Twitter, YouTube, Blog, etc.).
on investment. However, it stops short of explaining how to successfully Table 1 presents an overview of shortlisted cases with representative
manage collaboration with SMIs. Second, much research has focused SMIs. The shortlisted 15 cases were sufficient to reach a satisfactory
exclusively on either brand or SMI perspectives when investigating
influencer marketing. Influencer marketing constitutes a dyadic rela­ Table 1
tionship that involves collaboration between brands and SMIs. Thus, Overview of brand cases.
relying on the data from one side of the dyad may neglect the other
Number of Brand Interviewed brand Partnered Interviewed
side’s perspective, implicitly assuming collaboration congruence. brand cases profile representatives SMIs SMIs
Finally, a few prior studies have applied theoretical support in devel­
Clothing
oping an effective collaboration management framewok. 03
products
04 12 03
In response, this exploratory study investigates the mechanism of Beauty
04 05 15 04
effective collaboration management between brands and SMIs – incor­ products
porating the views of brands and SMIs – to support continued theory Footwear
02 03 06 03
products
development in the research area. Our findings are later interpreted Fashion
using the TCE theory lens. 04 05 16 04
products
Travel
02 03 05 02
3. Methodology service
15 5 domains 20 54 16

We adopted an exploratory research approach, where relevant Note: Bold values represent total.

3
T.A. Syed et al. Technological Forecasting & Social Change 192 (2023) 122580

level of theoretical saturation; that is, toward the end, the data only Table 3
confirmed previously identified categories, and evidence to support the Overview of secondary data.
introduction of new categories was not found (Yin, 2009). Characteristics

Artifacts such as reports, corporate messages, screenshots,

3.2. Data collection presentation decks, internal company journal articles, and emails
Brand’s Brand written policies
artifacts Collaborative contract templates
Data collection took place from March to November 2019. The data Organizational structure and role descriptions, strategy, and
collection was initiated with semi-structured interviews with brand planning content
representatives, followed by interviews with SMIs. Among 15 brand Additional SMIs’ shared content on the social media platforms
cases, we conducted 20 interviews with brand representatives to data Interactions with SMIs and brand managers
comprehend the brand’s approaches to influencer marketing. For
instance, regarding SMI engagement, we asked brand representatives
about the practices they adopt to identify an SMI for collaboration and Table 4
how brands gauge SMIs’ pertinence. The questions were designed to Characteristics of SMIs.
inquire about SMI collaboration, namely, what organizational practices Characteristics Frequency Relative
support better collaboration and how the collaboration flourishes, about frequency (%)
managing multiple SMIs, and also contract breaches. We also probed Clothing products 03 19
their motivations and efforts to make influencer-marketing campaigns Beauty products 04 25
more sustainable. Footwear
We secured supplementary interviews with an additional brand products 03 19
Fashion products 04 25
representative from five case brands, which helped us to stay objective
Collaborating brand Travel service 02 12
and triangulate the information collected from primary interviewees Male 05 31
with opposing or confirmatory responses. Table 2 presents the key Gender Female 11 69
characteristics of brand representatives. Furthermore, the interviews Up to 5 years 04 25
Between 6 and 10
from brand representatives were supplemented by secondary data, that
Social media influencing years 09 56
is, the company’s policies and contract-related documents – see details experience >10 years 03 19
in Table 3.
The difference between clothing and beauty brands was based on whether the
We approached the respective SMIs for the selected cases for in­
brands focused on creating practical, functional items, i.e., Levis, or prioritized
terviews through networks (with the help of brand representatives),
style and luxury,i.e., Chanel, respectively.
directly emailing SMIs or contacting them over social media. A total of
16 SMIs agreed to participate in the study from the pool of 54. Table 4
presents the key characteristics of our respondent SMIs, whereas SMIs. The three-step approach included (1) content analysis of the in­
Table A-2 (Appendix) presents the complete details of our respondent terviews, (2) review of the brand’s policies for social media marketing,
SMIs. The interviews with SMIs allowed us to understand SMIs’ per­ contract-related documents, observations of the posted content on social
ceptions of brand collaboration and how they ensure flourishing media by SMIs, and (3) comparison of these data sources. Interview
collaboration with brands. These interviews were supplemented by transcripts were coded and analyzed using QSR NVivo10©, which hel­
observation of SMIs’ brand-related content on social media (Table 3). On ped to systematically organize, analyze, and synthesize the data.
average, the duration of the interviews was 43 min, and with the re­ We generated the patterns based on frequency, commonalities, and
spondents’ consent most of the interviews were audio-recorded or differences, which continuously fed back into our themes. New verbatim
accompanied by comprehensive notetaking. All of the interviews were material was compared continuously with previous material to test,
conducted in the English language. Unclear notes or issues were clarified expand, and refine the established themes and sub-themes. Conse­
through follow-up emails. quently, independent coders coded quotes from interviews into the
established themes and sub-themes with an inter-coder agreement rate
of 87.82 %. The authors reviewed the codes to check for consistency,
3.3. Data analysis and theorizing approach resolved disagreements through multiple discussions, and a final inter­
pretation emerged.
To ensure multiple evidence, we followed a three-step approach to Based on the interview transcripts, interviewer notes, and secondary
examine collaboration management strategies between brands and data, we first compiled individual cases for each brand, including data
from brand representative(s) and respective SMIs. After completing the
Table 2 individual cases, we expanded the single-case findings with cross-case
Characteristics of brand representatives. comparisons. We looked for established practices across cases, and ev­
Characteristics Frequency Relative frequency idence of challenges, and compared all cases to develop a thorough and
(%) deep understanding of the collaboration strategies. Cross-case analysis
Digital marketing enhances generalizability and deepens understanding and explanation
05 25
manager (Miles and Huberman, 1994; Stake, 2006). We created a data structure
Digital marketing (presented in Table 5) to connect our data, the emerging second-order
04 20
executive
Representatives themes, and the new aggregate dimensions, thereby revalidating that
Social media manager 04 20
titles
Marketing specialist 02 10 the final concepts reflected our underlying data.
Media director 03 15
Senior marketing
02 10 4. Interpretive findings
manager
Male 07 35
Gender
Female 13 65 The analysis revealed several consistent themes in our influencer
Up to 5 years 04 20 management campaign cases, suggesting theoretical saturation (Glaser
Industry experience
Between 5 and 10
11 55
et al., 1968). Adopting a multiple-case-study approach allowed us to
years perform cross-case comparisons (Stake, 2006). We looked for estab­
>10 years 05 25
lished practices across cases, and evidence of challenges, and compared

4
T.A. Syed et al.
all cases to develop a comparative understanding of the collaboration
management strategies. Table 6 presents an overview of the key find­
ings. Following the comparative case results, we discuss the identified
themes concerning their influence on collaboration between brands and
SMIs and review them against the literature.
4.1. Managerial commitment
The influencer marketing campaigns identified a common precursor
to managerial commitment, namely, senior management’s willingness
and dedication to enable collaboration. Senior managers should be seen
to take responsibility for driving the marketing approach and improving
the willingness of marketing staff to establish and manage collaboration
with SMIs. Brands and SMIs highlighted that successful collaboration is
established when management shows greater interest and motivation to
set the targets in the influencer marketing campaign and works together
with team members to align different targets better so that they
contribute positively to shared objectives while retaining the indepen­
dent views of brands and SMIs. Prior studies (i.e., Vangen and Huxham,
2012) have argued that senior management and collaborative repre­
sentatives (either internal or external) in a successful collaboration
Table 5
Data structure.
Selected primary data excerpts
Brand/marketing managers
"The managerial concern has
always been a serious driving force.
All the other components and
decisions come after it. Our
leadership defines attainable and
realistic goals. We do go above and
beyond in our thinking, but the
specific short-term goals are always
evaluated and re-evaluated at the
marketing department level on the
attainability dimension.”
"The SMI collaboration approval
process is defined beforehand with
specific objectives and targets at the
managerial level because the
importance and sensitivity of
collaborations is not something to
be rushed."
"Systematic handling of the bigger
goal into smaller components is our
go-to. At the divisional level,
quarterly meetings set targets
following product specificities. With
this top-down approach, the
collaboration is achieved in a more
systematic way.”
“Planning is extensive and
thorough. Any decision being made
is to be planned very strategically
keeping in mind our vision and
mission.”
Technological Forecasting & Social Change 192 (2023) 122580
constantly stress the value of working together to achieve common
goals. The jointly set targets help to explicitly define the individual
contributions of the collaborative partners to the objective (Vangen and
Huxham, 2012).
Respondents recognized that initiating any SMI collaboration has
been a top-down approach, mainly because it required resource
commitment to pursue it. Brands managing an effective collaboration (i.
e., strong relationships, higher sales, better profit margins of social
media marketing, SMIs and brand satisfaction) showed a higher mana­
gerial commitment toward an influencer marketing approach than the
other brands (Table 5). For instance, a digital marketing executive
explained, “Brands and SMIs have to work in conjunction with senior
management to agree on collective objectives and to approve strategies to
achieve objectives.” A senior marketing manager from one of the low-
performing brands in SMI collaboration stated, “Senior management
gives us the green signal for taking an SMI collaboration route; it is the
marketing department that then sets the strategies to how we go about it.” The
respondent added that their campaign goals and strategies did not
typically involve input from the SMIs, and the brand would set its targets
before approaching SMIs to meet those objectives. SMIs also provided
further credence to brand representatives’ comments by suggesting that
Indicator/code Dimensions
Social media influencers
“Every campaign I work on is very
well thought [out], by either me or
my campaign managers. Recently,
I did a series of videos on
sustainable clothing. It was
centered around the goal of
making the public aware of
sustainable clothing options. Apart
from setting such goals per Defined goals
campaign, we also set our eyes on and targets
specific targets, like how much
audience should this campaign
reach or how many engagements
should we target. This helps us get
a direction for our work.”
Managerial
commitment
“Whatever campaign we start to
work on, we plan it out, starting
from the number of posts, videos,
stories, etc. we plan on posting to
the different topics to talk about in
between. Many of them are
impromptu as well, but I do keep a Systematic
track of what I’m posting, and planning
how, because I don’t want my
followers to be bombarded with
information. Yet I want to say
what’s on my mind. So, it is
usually a mix of planning and not
planning.”
5
T.A. Syed et al.
“With ever-changing
circumstances, we try to
standardize as much as we can, but
we know that having a flexible bone
is necessary.”
"Most of our processes are well
defined when approaching SMIs for
collaboration. While there are usual
adjustments, overall processes and
procedures are followed to keep all
collaborations consistent and
aligned."
“Having a defined code of conduct
and up-to-date policies is a must.
The HR department is always in
contact with us when setting up a
collaboration and provides detailed
policies regarding all matters.”
“We understand that everything
may not essentially go ahead as
planned but we strive to follow the
defined policies of our brand.”
“The competencies for performance
evaluations, training and
development needs, and
organizational succession, have
been laid out with [the] utmost
dedication to our values and
vision.”
“We take equal responsibility in
generating content and ensuring
our influencer marketing campaign
Technological Forecasting & Social Change 192 (2023) 122580
“The formats are usually
standardized, but I don’t follow a
rigid pattern of posting; it might
seem robotic to the audience.”
“Collaborating with marketing
brands takes some thought
Standardization
process, so I try to follow some
basic rules while deciding which
firm to work with, and that
decision-making process is fairly
standardized for me now.”
Formalization
“I don’t have a set of policies in
mind usually, but there are certain
rules that I follow, both while
posting and while deciding who to
work with and when.”
“I like being casual in my Governing
conversations and interactions policies
with my audience. If I put a lot of
formalization and policies in
place, they might not find me
relatable. Because not everything
in life follows rules.”
“Competencies are not something
to be overlooked; every post, every
word spoken by an influencer,
impacts the listener/reader.”
“Not many influencers out there
Competencies
take responsibility for their words
and actions as they should. The
usual outlook is toward money;
however, with the increasing
awareness on issues, having
6
T.A. Syed et al.
is a success, and we have developed
in-house competencies over the
years to ensure we support SMIs.”
“The immense inflow of data is to
be handled very strategically. For
that we use numerous tools;
however, we do realize that
updating these tools after every few
years is a must.”
“We really only use the tools that
we know work. But with Big Data
and new platforms emerging every
now and then, we have decided to
start using more data-management
tools.”
“Working up SMIs is not
considered as a one-off task in our
firm. We regularly invest in our
tools, such as data procuring and
performance evaluation software, to
ensure we continue to achieve [the]
best of our collaborations.”
“Almost all our marketing
departments are trained to set up
collaboration without any external
support. We regularly train our staff
with data management regulations
and collaboration policies.”
“Previously, our focus was on
getting things to be standardized;
even the employee training was
standardized, but now the
landscape and market have
changed, and with that, we have
Technological Forecasting & Social Change 192 (2023) 122580
competencies is highly important.”
“Thank the universe for these
modern tools that make data easy
to use and handle. It is so
important to see where the
audience is coming from and what
content they are liking the most.” Data-capturing
“My campaign managers do use a tools
lot of tools; even I learned a few to
handle data inflow from the
audience.”
Orientation
“Working with brands on their
and
campaigns is definitely an
infrastructure
investment. Goes well, more
campaigns flow in, goes badly, and Investment
we lose the current audience too. It
is very much like risk and
returns.”
“In my team, the marketing
managers, and the brands I work
with, have to be highly and
regularly trained. I, on the other
hand, did not have a high level of
training at first, but I’m a quick
Training
learner and learned on the job.”
“I do take some training myself
from time to time, to stay afloat of
any technical or literary issues I
might face in dealing with my
audience. It is always good to
7
T.A. Syed et al.
updated our training policies and
made them more dynamic.”
“Information-sharing systems have
been put in place to increase
transparency and boost creativity in
our collaborations.”
“Each customer and their demands
serve as a data point. These data
points together make myriads of
data structures. These are available
throughout the firm and are
communicated with SMIs to content
development based on the relevant
information.”
“Currently, communication
requires a lot of effort, because of
the distinction between roles
between SMI and brand
representatives. We are working on
a more open communication
channel to work more effectively
with SMIs.”
“In collaboration, we prioritize
communication and comprehension
of not only the shared information
but also the underlying feelings of
SMIs for our brand.”
“We have a combination of pooled
interdependence in some activities
and sequential interdependence in
others. This allows [for] working
more collaboratively with SMIs.”
“We work like a car: if one
component fails to work, all the
others are affected by it.”
“Mutual support and
communication are promoted with
resource interdependence that
contributes toward organizational
long-term goals and efficiency.”
“Our goal is to capitalize our
collaborations as much on the
resource sharing as we can.”
collaboration is usually “well planned and organized” when managerial
commitment is high.
Respondents also noted that SMIs often focus on short-term targets,
that is, the number of views, engagement, likes, shares, and so on. In
contrast, the brand’s marketing targets may be long term, including
customer loyalty, sales growth, and so on, and this is achieved through
Technological Forecasting & Social Change 192 (2023) 122580
learn more.”
“Open information sharing is
highly regarded in the business;
obviously the success tactics, the
targeting of audience, etc., is
highly secretive, but the
information about the topics we’ve
been speaking about and posting
about is public knowledge, and if it
Information
is not, then it is our goal to make it
sharing
public knowledge.”
“Being a good communicator is all
that being a social media
influencer is about. If you can’t get
your point across immediately,
you’re out of the game.”
Interaction
Communication
“Ah.. yes all posts, videos,
campaigns, etc., and all in-person
Activity
activities too, are somehow
interdependence
interdependent. I try to make them
standalone too for newcomers, but
there is always some hook to the
other posts so that the user is
‘forced’ or ‘coerced’ into looking
at the rest of the page too.”
Interdepende
“I strive toward resource nce
independence because, at the end
of the day, it is me and my face
toward the people; I would not Resource
want to be too dependent on interdependence
resources that might give up in the
middle.”
managing effective collaboration over time. Thus, senior management
can ensure the direction in which collaboration is set between brands
and SMIs. This discussion and the literature review indicate that man­
agement’s commitment to coordination is critical in managing collab­
oration between brands and SMIs.
8
T.A. Syed et al. Technological Forecasting & Social Change 192 (2023) 122580

Table 6 ability, and consisting mainly of spontaneous communication among

Summary of case-wise comparisons. individuals – to very high, pursued through regular meetings and/or
Themes Level of influencer marketing engagement involving the creation of formalized partnerships, namely, structured
plans and strategic alliances.
A lower level of Medium level of High level of
collaboration and collaboration and collaboration and A digital marketing executive explained that trust could still be a
profits profits profits significant factor in a high formalization setting. Both SMIs and brand
(Representative (Representative (Representative respondents implied that formalization might be a significant aspect of
cases = 3) cases = 8) cases = 4) collaboration. At the lower end of the formalization scale, an SMI
Going above and explained that “it is highly flexible and casual interactions at times, where
Maintaining an
beyond to only the willingness to cooperate is essential …. it rides either on the repu­
independent Developing social
participate in
social media media presence tation of our work or based on networking.”
influencer
engagement. Lack with SMI
marketing At the other end of formalization, a social media manager explained
Managerial of clear or defined engagement.
development that “our agreement demands SMIs to participate in joint planning, [and] this
commitment goals and Limited evidence
targets for of defined goals or
programs. may take the shape of an interdisciplinary team.” Prior studies provided
Integrated targets competing arguments on the role of formalized structures in managing
influencer targets by the
and action plans
marketing management.
set by senior
collaboration. For instance, Tiwana (2010) pointed out that highly
approach. formalized processes or control mechanisms in collaborative working
management.
Symbolic Regular Complete may hinder established informal working processes – namely, personal,
representation representation representation. spontaneous interaction – and can reduce service quality. Similarly,
(wants to be seen (intention with Well-developed
Martínez-López et al. (2020) identified that higher control by the brand
as supportive limited efforts). written policies or
without Limited written planned over the content of the influencer’s post is negatively related to fol­
dedicating policies or strategies. Trust- lowers’ trust in the influencer. On the other hand, formalized collabo­
Formalization
necessary planned building ration may often be necessary to overcome structural or professional
resources or strategies. Relies initiatives to barriers between actors (Patnayakuni and Ruppel, 2006). Either way,
effort). No written heavily on trust promote it
policies or between partners between partners
the literature supports the respondents’ stance that formalization is a
planned on the agreed on the agreed critical factor in managing effective collaboration between brands and
strategies. terms. terms. SMIs.
Leadership in
Irregular
implementing
development of 4.3. Orientation and infrastructure
social media
new and more
marketing
effective social
initiatives by Our findings suggest that the brand’s orientation and infrastructure
media marketing
No development
campaigns.
proactive and reflect their commitment and support to managing effective collabora­
of new and more continuous tion. For instance, an SMI for clothing products suggested that “working
Limited
effective social development of
media marketing
investment in new
new and more
with the brands that show a strong social media marketing approach with
tools, procedures, tools, competencies, and investments, we feel equally pushed to work harder,
Orientation and campaigns. effective
programs,
infrastructure Limited campaigns. resulting in more effective partnerships.” Brand representatives explained
competencies, etc.
investment in new Investing in new that clear orientation in the marketing approach allows a better focus,
The investments
tools, procedures, tools, procedures,
were not shared, i. and with infrastructural support brands can develop internal compe­
programs, programs,
competencies, etc.
e., brands do not
competencies, etc. tencies to engage and collaborate with SMIs in successful marketing
offer investment
SMIs are offered campaigns.
to SMIs to acquire
content
brands’ resources, The orientation and infrastructure support provide a unique position
i.e., KPI to liaise with SMIs to foster learning about markets and help to develop
development
measurement
tools.
tools.
better products. A digital marketing manager explained that “we are also
Well-defined and reliant on developing a learning orientation through infrastructural in­
Lacking defined Intermittent continuous vestments that allow us to respond appropriately to highly competitive envi­
communication communication refinement of ronments and to develop more effective collaborations with SMIs.” An
channels or channels or communication
infrastructural base allows brands to build up architectural knowledge
information- information- channels or
Interaction
sharing practices sharing practices information- competence, integrating and linking dispersed knowledge from SMIs
to engage with to engage with sharing practices into a coherent whole. Consistently, studies (i.e., Zhang and Baden-
SMIs in social SMIs in social to engage with Fuller, 2010) also suggest that a strong orientation and centralized
media campaigns. media campaigns. SMIs in social approach can help to prevent leakages of necessary knowledge during
media campaigns.
Evidence of Proactive
the learning process, owing to the richer collaboration experience for
Lack of both actors.
limited collaborative
collaborative
collaborative engagements with
approach with
arrangements SMIs and other 4.4. Interaction
Interdependence SMIs to develop
with SMIs to stakeholders to
social media
develop social develop social
marketing
media marketing media marketing Another essential collaboration-managing mechanism is the extent
capabilities.
capabilities. capabilities. to which brands and SMIs are involved in one another’s tasks and
required to share information and establish open communication. We
refer to interaction as the degree of involvement and communication
4.2. Formalization between brands and SMIs. A media director explained that “our in­
teractions depend on the defined targets with SMIs, [and] where we are co-
Formalization explains the extent to which standardized processes, creating the content with SMIs, the requirements of sharing information
written policies, and frameworks of collaboration are established for and keeping communications free-flowing become critical.”
brand–SMI collaboration. In our case, brand formalization varied from Interaction in terms of open communication and information sharing
very low – extremely informal, relying on trust and good faith in partner has been argued to be an essential facilitator in collaboration between

9
T.A. Syed et al.
partners, namely, firms–suppliers (Karaosman et al., 2020). Alter (1990)
identified that collaboration between actors could take three forms: (1)
relatively independent work performed in a sequential flow of tasks; (2)
reciprocal encounters between actors; or (3) close face-to-face interac­
tion for joint intervention (see also Thompson, 2003). One of the SMIs
for a travel service reflected on the effort required to coordinate when
adopting the first form of independent collaboration: “When I am working
independently, I have to reach out to brands from time to time to exchange
information at points of intersection in order to harmonize our efforts.”
The interaction may take the shape of more in-depth cooperation
when brands work together with SMIs in the content generation or
refinement. The senior marketing manager added that “the joint service or
cooperation in developing content requires a high degree of commitment from
both sides.” The extent of interaction is enhanced and fosters collabora­
tion when the professional competencies and areas of responsibility
have blended, replacing specialized skills with generalist competencies.
Altogether, our findings suggest that interaction plays a significant role
in effective collaboration between brands and SMIs.
4.5. Interdependence
Collaboration can be more valuable and effective if the actors work
interdependently of one another to achieve a common goal. Drawing on
our data, we identify interdependence in two forms: task interdepen­
dence and resource interdependence. We define task interdependence as
task features, such as role definitions, task requirements, task outcomes,
and so on. In contrast, resource interdependence refers to complemen­
tarity, requiring multiple individuals from brands and SMIs to work
together to achieve the desired outcomes.
Respondents explained that the rationale behind effective collabo­
ration is to overcome possible disadvantages related to specialization in
combination with mutual or symbiotic dependencies between partners.
A media director, for example, described interdependence as the “matter
of refining strategies for effective outcomes.” Such expectations are
consistent with the findings in the literature, suggesting that higher
interdependence within diverse working groups exhibits a higher level
of collaborative behavior (Caruso and Williams Woolley, 2008; Monks
et al., 2016). Some SMIs suggested that role and customer expectations
have influenced task complementarities; in other words, some customers
reach out with specific questions or checks that require brand input and
at-time resources. An SMI for fashion products explained: “My followers
have asked me to perform a colorfast testing, or a fabric burst testing ……
sometimes [a] lack of equipment or training for customer demands require us
to work with brands to provide the content of customers’ expectations.”
To facilitate improved standards in online content development,
some brands actively train and work with SMIs. For example, a digital
marketing executive from a beauty product ran training programs where
SMIs were introduced to product features and provided guidance on
applying new products. Prior studies have related interdependence be­
tween collaborating actors with a comprehensive boundary-spanning
activity (i.e., Kim et al., 2018), where interdependence mechanisms
allow brands to recognize opportunities and achieve exploratory in­
novations. Thus, stronger interdependencies between brands and SMIs
may allow brands to actively access specific feedback to sense oppor­
tunities for competitive action and either launch disruptive innovations
or protect their interests.
While performing case-to-case comparisons, we identified common
factors that appeared consistently among data transcripts that steer and
shape the management of an effective collaboration approach with
SMIs. Our findings suggest that the way a brand collaborates with SMIs
varies with respect to the following factors: product, goals, type of content,
and target audience. We introduce these factors as control factors to steer
the collaboration strategy. Table 7 provides an overview of the identi­
fied control factors in the collaboration strategies.
10
Technological Forecasting & Social Change 192 (2023) 122580
5. Theorizing the development of a conceptual framework
Our research provided an empirical basis for detailing how brands
and SMIs ensure management of effective collaboration and leveraging
it in influencer marketing campaigns. Our data supported the critical
finding that managerial commitment is the key driving force in enabling
influencer marketing. However, it involves a set of mechanisms to
ensure that managerial commitment translates into managing effective
collaboration. This section will offer research propositions derived from
our case research. Based on the interpretative findings and identified
themes, a conceptual framework was drawn up to indicate how the
influencing factors might interact and influence collaboration manage­
ment between brands and SMIs. This section synthesizes our data to
develop initial propositions related to developing a framework to lay the
groundwork for further theorizing and future empirical study.
Our findings identify lower, medium, and high levels of engagement
in influencer marketing campaigns (Table 6), and such variance in the
applicability of influencer marketing can be interpreted as the costs
associated with brand–SMI transactions and point to TCE, introduced
above, as a potentially helpful theoretical lens to understand brand–SMI
collaboration. We rely on TCE propositions of asset specificity, uncer­
tainty, and governance mechanisms following Grover and Malhotra
(2003) and McIvor (2009) to interpret our findings in the context of
managing brand–SMI collaboration.
The first proposition of TCE states that transaction costs are higher
for high asset specificity (Grover and Malhotra, 2003; McIvor, 2009). In
managing brand–SMI collaboration, human asset-specific investment
can be when brands educate and train an SMI in delivering the required
objectives. Our data suggests that human asset-specific investments can
enhance the performance of influencer marketing campaigns. However,
such human capital investment cannot easily be redeployed should the
collaboration be terminated. This may explain why brands are often
reluctant to make such investments, instead relying on monitoring or
auditing, and more managerial commitment is required to initiate
effective collaboration management. In terms of physical assets, the
initial cost implications are high, that is, installing new data analytics
tools, procedures, and programs, in the short term. However, these asset
investments can be beneficial in the long term, leading to higher market
sensitivity and agile decision-making. This may explain why brands
might feel reluctant to charge the costs of such initiatives to SMIs.
Similarly, the costs associated with endorsement or test products can be
significant for small or medium-sized brands, particularly when SMIs
fail to deliver the desired outcomes. The data suggested that managerial
commitment played a vital role in managing brand–SMI collaboration
that overcame the risks associated with sunk costs. This emphasis was
consistent with the perceived pressure by marketing teams to identify
best practices and manage collaboration as a competitive advantage.
Evidence showed that managerial commitment could lead to an
improvement in collaboration-supporting processes. The stronger
managerial drive showed proactive and continuous development of new
and more effective implementation tools, procedures, and programs. No
evidence was found that such brands had exceeded expectations from
SMIs. Instead, these brands adopted a shared responsibility approach,
with dedicated staff/departments working with SMIs, or they made
substantive in-house operational improvements to improve collabora­
tive efforts with SMIs. In contrast, some brands demonstrated evidence
of symbolic managerial commitment; in other words, there needed to be
more evidence of the brand’s processes to support influencer marketing
or working with SMIs. Such brands even described the relationships with
SMIs as mostly adversarial – perhaps because the brands and SMIs
lacked shared objectives.
Proposition 1. A higher level of managerial commitment increases the
likelihood of effective brand–SMI collaboration.
The management concerns drive several operational processes
within the brands to utilize the potential of collaboration with SMIs. Our
T.A. Syed et al. Technological Forecasting & Social Change 192 (2023) 122580

data evidences that formalization, orientation and structure, and inter­

action were the significant empowering processes needed to co-create

are needed or just one long-term contract with an SMI or short

The mode that serves as an appropriate approach to sharing a

Marketing budgets are distributed accordingly; multiple SMIs
brand meaning with SMIs. The processes disseminate knowledge, eval­

Free sampling, giveaways, distribution at a minimal price,

uations, perceptions, expectations, and brand experiences to establish

Research, surveys, customer feedback, market insights.

effective collaboration. Drawing on TCE, asset-specific investments
mainly related to human assets pose higher transaction costs in man­
aging brand–SMI collaboration. While greater physical asset specificity –

firm’s product provides selection criteria.

the mediating mechanism – may increase transaction costs in the short
term, it could reduce costs in the longer term. The differences in phi­
losophies and backgrounds (i.e., experiences, education, expertise) be­
tween brands and SMIs may result in difficulties managing
collaboration. The respondents signified the role of managerial
Actions taken by brand

commitment as a precursor to setting up collaboration but further

explained the processes and practices necessary to implement the
managerial commitment to realizing successful collaboration. We term
these processes and practices “intermediating collaborative mecha­
discounts.

nisms” and argue that managerial commitment may not directly influ­
term.

ence the effectiveness of collaboration. However, managerial

commitment develops the intermediating collaborative mechanism to
ensure effective collaboration management. These findings extend pre­
goodwill, social, informational, promotional, explanatory, reaction, or

Demographic or geographical differences, i.e., young adults, females,

Increase sales, reach a larger audience, increase awareness, establish

vious research on developing SMI capabilities, such as implementing

quality management systems (Kozinets et al., 2010).
Proposition 2. The intermediating collaborative mechanisms trans­
Healthcare, beauty products, clothes, shoes, furniture, etc.

late the managerial commitment into effective brand–SMI collaboration.

Transaction cost economics also highlights that bounded rationality
and opportunistic behavior under high uncertainty increase transaction
costs (Grover and Malhotra, 2003; McIvor, 2009). This uncertainty
Videos, blogs, pictures, short stories, etc.

features in brand–SMI collaboration because of ex ante information

asymmetry, that is, an inability to ascertain SMI identity. Brands incur
direct costs through the initial technical and social evaluation to identify
and approach the right SMI; however, the risk of future losses remains if
an inappropriate SMI is chosen. For instance, Volvo collaborated with
Chriselle Lim, an American mother and fashion influencer with 1.1
senior citizens, etc.

million followers, to promote an environmentally friendly car. The

misfit between Lim’s identity (as a mother and fashionista) and the
Examples

promotional content was soon followed by angry comments calling out

reply.

her lack of authenticity (Wiley, 2019). The mismatch between the SMI’s
identity and the brand values could significantly damage the SMI’s
reputation. The interdependence of activities may allow brands to
Refers to the preferred means to convey the message across the audience. Defines
Refers to a physical good, service, initiative, message, or idea that SMIs have to

ascertain the technical and social identity of SMIs, thereby allowing

Represents the objectives of collaboration, ways to stimulate, coordinate and

Refers to the groups of individuals aimed at product marketing and defines

more effective management of collaboration. Moreover, behavioral

support collaborative initiatives, and ensure the development of strategic

uncertainty includes the ex post costs of monitoring an SMI’s perfor­

mance and dealing with opportunistic SMI behavior. Our respondents
appropriateness of content for product/service marketing strategy.

discussed in-depth the interdependence factors to reinforce the signifi­

cance of intermediating collaborative mechanisms. For instance, higher
levels of resource interdependence between brands and SMIs emphasize
the importance of formalized procedures to reduce the ambiguity sur­
Overview of control factors affecting collaboration strategy.

rounding the collaboration process or resource orchestration. Similarly,

a higher activity interdependence reinforces information sharing and
communication for timely and accurate information processing. Our
data identify the interdependent factors that influence intermediating
collaborative mechanisms in managing successful collaboration so that
high intensity of such factors may strengthen the effectiveness of
share with their followers.

intermediating mechanisms in realizing successful collaboration. We

posit the identified factors as moderators in the relationship between
potential customers.

mediating mechanisms and successful collaboration, and we propose the

following:
partnerships.
Definition

Proposition 3. Interdependence between brands and SMIs moderates

the relationship between intermediating collaborative mechanisms and
brand–SMI collaboration such that a higher level of interdependence
strengthens this relationship, and vice versa.
audience
content

Based on TCE theory, high transaction costs favor formalized

Product

Type of
Control
Table 7

factors

Target
Goals

governance structure (Grover and Malhotra, 2003; McIvor, 2009). Our

data suggest that an informal governance structure may involve high

11
T.A. Syed et al.
risk as the result of bounded rationality and opportunistic behavior, as
discussed above. A formal governance structure, namely, using control
factors to steer the relationship, may allow suitable approaches to
enforcing effective brand–SMI collaboration. However, 11 out of 15
cases demonstrated a medium to low formal structure. One of the crit­
icisms of TCE is that it underplays the role of trust in offsetting the
failures of informal governance mechanisms (Grover and Malhotra,
2003). While our data suggested that all cases rely on trust, the cam­
paigns became more effective with a formal governance structure and
efforts to promote trust. Overall, a combination of monitoring, formal
specifications on control factors, and trust-building may be the most
efficient way. In conclusion, our data support the propositions of TCE
that brand–SMI collaboration is characterized by high transaction costs,
which call for an integrated form of governance. Formalized approaches
complemented with trust-building approaches can be more effective.
Fig. 1 presents our propositions in a conceptual framework.
6. Implications for practice and future research avenues
Our results provide guidelines for brands on how to manage
collaboration with SMIs. Managers being aware of mediating mecha­
nisms can channel managerial ambitions in the right direction, which
may help to improve the effectiveness of influencer marketing cam­
paigns. Our findings suggest that managers develop activity and
resource interdependencies between brands and SMIs to strengthen the
mediating mechanism in order to ensure the successful management of
collaboration. Drawing on TCE, our findings recognize the need for both
formal and informal governance that can help brands to attenuate the
transaction costs associated with opportunistic behavior, namely, un­
authorized subcontracting. Such steps are necessary for more risks of
misalignment to be inevitable, and influencer marketing campaigns will
continue to leave themselves vulnerable to reputation damage. This
paper provides managerial contributions, the limitations of which can
be used as a basis for future research. Our data focused specifically on
established brands, but the collaboration of SMIs with new or emergent
brands (with a relatively low customer base or reputation) could provide
a further avenue for research if the findings hold. Our data only include
brands directly collaborating with SMIs; however, brands may have
third parties managing their influencer marketing campaign. The in­
clusion of a third party might add another layer of complexity to man­
aging collaboration with SMIs and could present an interesting avenue
for further research to understand the role of third parties in effectively
Fig. 1. Conceptual framework.
12
Technological Forecasting & Social Change 192 (2023) 122580
managing collaboration.
Although the findings of this study are unique, since it uses data from
both sides of the dyad – brands and SMIs – it can only offer a starting
point for future research to expand upon using quantitative approaches
to verify the generalizability of the key findings, namely, survey data to
test the developed framework of initiators, mediating mechanisms,
moderators, and control factors in collaboration-managing strategies.
Future research might also investigate comparative influencer market­
ing campaigns in specific contexts, that is, different social media plat­
forms (i.e., Facebook, Instagram); over different countries (i.e.,
developing, developed); or cultures. This would provide a more thor­
ough reflection on the contextual and social understanding of influencer
marketing campaigns. Our data suggest the moderating role of resource
interdependence; however, it may seem an ominous choice for brands.
Further research could specifically explore the effect of in­
terdependencies on collaboration. While this study looks at data from
the brand and the SMI, future research could also include the data from
the end customer, namely, SMI followers. Followers and their buying
behavior have become pivotally important, given that the flow of con­
trol of brand messaging has shifted from SMIs to consumers (Gensler
et al., 2013).
7. Conclusion
Brands struggle to make the best of investments in influencer mar­
keting campaigns, particularly in setting up an effective engagement
strategy with SMIs (Audrezet and De Kerviler 2019; Uzunoğlu and Kip,
2014; Vernuccio, 2014). This study presents an exploratory approach to
understanding how to engage in influencer marketing. It combines the
perspectives of brand representatives and SMIs to explore ways of
managing effective collaboration between brands and SMIs. Our data’s
richness adds to an understanding of the literature on the complexities of
engaging in influencer marketing campaigns. Our findings highlight the
precursors, mediating mechanisms, and moderators of successful
collaboration. In addition, TCE theory has been used to interpret our
findings, which were found to either fully or partially support three
propositions on TCE from prior studies in differing contexts (i.e., Grover
and Malhotra, 2003; McIvor, 2009).
Data availability
The authors do not have permission to share data.
T.A. Syed et al. Technological Forecasting & Social Change 192 (2023) 122580

Appendix A
Table A-1
Representative sampling of prior work on influencer marketing.

Reference Methodology Influencer marketing engagement from SMIs’ characteristics related to Influencer marketing perceptions from the
firms/brands’ perspective or from SMIs’ perspective customers’ perspective

Empirical validation using

De Vries et al. archival data of
(2012) 355 brand posts from 11
international brands.
Empirical validation using
Carr and Hayes
vignette-based experiments
(2014)
on 405 individuals.
Empirical validation using
Lee and Watkins vignette-based experiments
(2016) on 396, 88, and 117 female
fashion customers.
Empirical validation using
De Veirman two vignette-based
et al. (2017) experiments on 117 and 118
Instagram users.
Audrezet et al. Theoretical framework using
(2020) interviews of 27 SMIs.
Empirical validation using a
Casaló et al. survey of 808
(2020) followers of an Instagram
account.
Empirical validation using a
Lou and Yuan
survey of 538 social media
(2019)
users.
Audrezet and De 27 in-depth interviews with
Kerviler influencers and supplemental
(2019) case studies.
Wiedmann and
Empirical validation using a
Von
survey of 547 social media
Mettenheim
users.
(2020)
Theoretical framework using
Borchers and
interviews of 20 brands and
Enke (2021)
agency representative.
Experimental design using
155 adults for MTurk.
Reinikainen Experimental design using
et al. (2021) 250 participants.
Theoretical framework using
interviews of 10 client
Borchers and
organizations, 9
Enke (2022)
intermediaries, and 9
influencers.
Empirical validation using a
Cabeza-Ramírez
survey of 948 social media
et al. (2022)
users.
Empirical validation using a
Masuda et al.
survey of 948 social media
(2022)
users.
Characteristics of brand posts that enhance
the number of likes and the number of
comments contribute to brand popularity.
N/A
N/A
SMIs with high numbers of followers may
not be the best marketing choice for
promoting divergent products.
N/A
N/A
N/A
Firms find that a relational approach
implies creating intimacy with each
influencer (i.e., understanding their
interests, mood, and career goals) to
provide better results in engaging with
influencers.
N/A
Understanding established routines and
rationales that organizations and their
agencies deploy to manage their strategic
influencer communications.
N/A
N/A
Examining moral and ethical concerns to
address transparency of collaboration,
payments to influencers, and influencer
authenticity.
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
Physical attractiveness, social
attractiveness, and attitude to
homophily of SMI influencer
parasocial interaction.
N/A
SMIs’ authenticity management
to resolve the tensions created
by brand encroachment into
their content.
SMI account characteristics that
develop customers’ perceptions
of an SMI.
SMIs’ shared content,
trustworthiness, attractiveness,
and similarity to the followers’
trust in SMIs’ branded posts.
In-depth interviews revealed
growing frustration among
influencers concerning their
relationships with marketers.
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
Understanding ethical issues
regarding their engagement
with organizations,
intermediaries, and audiences.
N/A
N/A
N/A
Full disclosures influence the perceived
credibility of SMIs and customer attitudes
toward products and purchase intention.
Customers’ parasocial interaction influences
their perceptions of luxury brands and
luxury brand purchase intentions.
SMIs with high numbers of followers are
found to be more likable.
N/A
The perception of opinion leaders drives
consumers’ behavioral intentions to
interact, recommend, and follow advice.
Customers’ trust in branded posts positively
influences brand awareness and purchase
intentions.
N/A
Relevance of the congruency of
the influencer personality with brand
personality and consumers’ actual/ideal
selves.
N/A
Examine the level of social presence and the
mediating role of parasocial interaction in
influencer marketing.
Understanding perception of brands and
influencers.
N/A
Analyzing the possible interconnection
between observational learning, product
involvement, and perceived risk on the
effectiveness of influencers’
recommendations.
Relationship between personal attributes
(attitude to homophily, physical
attractiveness, and social attractiveness)
and characterizations (trustworthiness,
perceived expertise, and PSR) as
antecedents of purchase intention.

13
T.A. Syed et al. Technological Forecasting & Social Change 192 (2023) 122580

Table A-2
Detailed characteristics of respondent SMIs.

Identifying code SMIs gender SMIs’ age SMIs’ Social media platform* Number of followers or subscribers**
experience

SMI 1.1 Female 25 03 Instagram 2.7 M

SMI 1.2 Female 26 04 Instagram 1.2 M
SMI 1.3 Male 32 08 Twitter 3.0 M
SMI 2.1 Female 24 02 Facebook 51 K
SMI 2.2 Female 30 06 YouTube 22 K
SMI 2.3 Female 28 07 Facebook 39K
SMI 2.4 Female 32 11 Facebook 1.3 M
SMI 3.1 Female 29 07 Twitter 27 K
SMI 3.2 Male 26 04 Instagram 7.5 M
SMI 3.3 Male 32 07 Instagram 3.6 M
SMI 4.1 Female 25 03 Instagram 2.9 M
SMI 4.2 Male 29 06 Twitter 1M
SMI 4.3 Female 30 08 Facebook 6.2 M
SMI 4.4 Female 32 09 YouTube 2.8 K
SMI 5.1 Female 36 13 Twitter 7.9 M
SMI 5.2 Male 32 12 Facebook 8.6 M
Note: K = thousands, M = millions.
*
Many SMIs work on multiple social media platforms; this table only includes the platform reviewed for the posted content about the brand.
**
The number of followers or subscribers for the included social media platform.

Table A-3
Characteristics of case brands.

Frequency Relative frequency

Small (≤ 49 full-time employees) 03 20

Brand size Medium (50–249 full-time employees) 05 33
Large (≥ 250 full-time employees) 07 47
5–10 years 04 27
Brand age 11–15 years 08 53
≥15 years 03 20
Clothing products 03 20
Beauty products 04 27
Representative industry Footwear products 02 13
Fashion products 04 27
Travel service 02 13

References Diversity and Groups (Research on Managing Groups and Teams, Vol. 11). Emerald
Group Publishing Limited, Bingley, pp. 245–266.
Casaló, L.V., Flavián, C., Ibáñez-Sánchez, S., 2020. Influencers on Instagram: antecedents
Acquah, I.S.K., Naude, M.J., Sendra-García, J., 2021. Supply chain collaboration in the
and consequences of opinion leadership. J. Bus. Res. 117, 510–519.
petroleum sector of an emerging economy: comparing results from symmetrical and
Chapple, Callum, Cownie, Fiona, 2017. An investigation into viewers’ trust in and
asymmetrical approaches. Technol. Forecast. Soc. Chang. 166, 120568.
response towards disclosed paid-for-endorsements by YouTube Lifestyle vloggers.
Alter, C., 1990. An exploratory study of conflict and coordination in interorganizational
J. Promotional Commun. 5 (2), 110–136.
service delivery system. Acad. Manag. J. 33 (3), 478–502.
Chen, S.C., Lin, C.P., 2019. Understanding the effect of social media marketing activities:
Audrezet, Alice, De Kerviler, Gwarlann. How brands can build successful relationships
the mediation of social identification, perceived value, and satisfaction. Technol.
with influencers. Harvard Business Review. Retrieved from: https://hbr.org/2019/
Forecast. Soc. Chang. 140, 22–32.
04/how-brands-canbuild-successful-relationships-with-influencers.
Chu, Shu-Chuan, Kim, Yoojung, 2011. Determinants of consumer engagement in
Audrezet, A., De Kerviler, G., Moulard, J.G., 2020. Authenticity under threat: when social
electronic word-of-mouth (eWOM) in social networking sites. Int. J. Advert. 30 (1),
media influencers need to go beyond self-presentation. J. Bus. Res. 117, 557–569.
47–75.
Booth, N., Matic, Ann, 2011. Mapping and leveraging influencers in social media to
De Veirman, Marijke, Cauberghe, Veroline, Hudders, Liselot, 2017. Marketing through
shape corporate brand perceptions. Corp. Commun. Int. J. 16 (3), 184–191.
Instagram influencers: the impact of number of followers and product divergence on
Borchers, N.S., Enke, N., 2021. Managing strategic influencer communication: a
brand attitude. Int. J. Advert. 36 (5), 798–828.
systematic overview on emerging planning, organization, and controlling routines.
De Vries, Lisette, Gensler, Sonja, Leeflang, Peter S.H., 2012. Popularity of brand posts on
Public Relat. Rev. 47 (3), 102041.
brand fan pages: an investigation of the effects of social media marketing. J. Interact.
Borchers, N.S., Enke, N., 2022. "I’ve never seen a client say: ’Tell the influencer not to
Mark. 26 (2), 83–91.
label this as sponsored’": an exploration into influencer industry ethics. Public Relat.
Evans, Nathaniel J., Phua, Joe, Lim, Jay, Jun, Hyoyeun, 2017. Disclosing Instagram
Rev. 48 (5), 102235.
influencer advertising: the effects of disclosure language on advertising recognition,
Brewster, M.L., Lyu, J. December. Exploring the parasocial impact of nano, micro and
attitudes, and behavioral intent. J. Interact. Advert. 17 (2), 138–149.
macro influencers. In the International Textile and Apparel Association Annual
Ferguson, Rick, 2008. Word of mouth and viral marketing: Taking the temperature of the
Conference Proceedings 2020; 77(1). Iowa State University Digital Press.
hottest trends in marketing. J. Consum. Mark. 25 (3), 179–182.
Cabeza-Ramírez, L.J., Sánchez-Cañizares, S.M., Santos-Roldán, L.M., Fuentes-García, F.
Freberg, Karen, Graham, K., McGaughey, Karen, Freberg, A., 2011. Who are the social
J., 2022. Impact of the perceived risk in influencers’ product recommendations on
media influencers? A study of public perceptions of personality. Public Relat. Rev. 37
their followers’ purchase attitudes and intention. Technol. Forecast. Soc. Chang.
(1), 90–92.
184, 121997.
Fu, Jen-Ruei, Chen, Jessica H.F., 2012. An investigation of factors that influence blog
Campbell, C., Farrell, J.R., 2020. More than meets the eye: The functional components
advertising effectiveness. Int. J. Electron. Bus. Manag. 10 (3), 194.
underlying influencer marketing. In: Business Horizons, 63(4), pp. 469–479.
Ge, Jing, Gretzel, Ulrike, 2018. Emoji rhetoric: a social media influencer perspective.
Carr, Caleb T., Hayes, Rebecca A., 2014. The effect of disclosure of third-party influence
J. Mark. Manag. 34 (15-16), 1272–1295.
on an opinion leader’s credibility and electronic word of mouth in two-step flow.
Gensler, Sonja, Völckner, Franziska, Liu-Thompkins, Yuping, Wiertz, Caroline, 2013.
J. Interact. Advert. 14 (1), 38–50.
Managing brands in the social media environment. J. Interact. Mark. 27 (4),
Caruso, H.M., Williams Woolley, A., 2008. Harnessing the power of emergent
242–256.
interdependence to promote diverse team collaboration. In: Phillips, K.W. (Ed.),

14
T.A. Syed et al.
Glaser, B.G., Strauss, A.L., Elizabeth, S., 1968. The discovery of grounded theory;
strategies for qualitative research. Nurs. Res. 17 (4), 364.
Godey, Bruno, Manthiou, Aikaterini, Pederzoli, Daniele, Rokka, Joonas, Aiello, Gaetano,
Donvito, Raffaele, Singh, Rahul, 2016. Social media marketing efforts of luxury
brands: influence on brand equity and consumer behavior. J. Bus. Res. 69 (12),
5833–5841.
Grover, V., Malhotra, M.K., 2003. Transaction cost framework in operations and supply
chain management research: theory and measurement. J. Oper. Manag. 21 (4),
457–473.
Hayes, A., Carr, Caleb T., 2015. Does being social matter? Effects of enabled commenting
on credibility and brand attitude in social media. J. Promot. Manag. 21 (3), 371–390.
Jun, S.P., Yoo, H.S., Hwang, J., 2021. A hybrid recommendation model for successful
R&D collaboration: mixing machine learning and discriminant analysis. Technol.
Forecast. Soc. Chang. 170, 120871.
Karaosman, H., Perry, P., Brun, A., Morales-Alonso, G., 2020. Behind the runway:
Extending sustainability in luxury fashion supply chains. J. Bus. Res. 117, 652–663.
Kim, Angella, Ko, Eunju, 2012. Do social media marketing activities enhance customer
equity? An empirical study of luxury fashion brand. J. Bus. Res. 65 (10), 1480–1486.
Kim, B., Kim, E., Kim, Y., Cho, J.Y., 2018. Where to find innovative ideas:
interdependence-building mechanisms and boundary-spanning exploration. Knowl.
Manag. Res. Pract. 16 (3), 376–387.
Kozinets, R.V., De Valck, K., Wojnicki, A.C., Wilner, S.J., 2010. Networked narratives:
Understanding word-of-mouth marketing in online communities. J. Mark. 74 (2),
71–89.
Kumar, V., Mirchandani, Rohan, 2012. Increasing the ROI of social media marketing.
MIT Sloan Manag. Rev. 54 (1), 55–61.
Lee, Jung Eun, Watkins, Brandi, 2016. YouTube vloggers’ influence on consumer luxury
brand perceptions and intentions. J. Bus. Res. 69 (12), 5753–5760.
Lewsey, Jake. Electronic Arts celebrity Endorsement Attempt Backfires on Instagram.
Releases 2015, available at. https://www.releases.com/posts/5f41637a-d48a-4a0
d-91db-5671e7da9638.
Liljander, Veronica, Gummerus, Johanna, Söderlund, Magnus, 2015. Young consumers’
responses to suspected covert and overt blog marketing. Internet Res. 25 (4),
610–632.
Lou, Chen, Yuan, S., 2019. Influencer marketing: how message value and credibility
affect consumer trust of branded content on social media. J. Interact. Advert. 19 (1),
58–73.
Lu, Long-Chuan, Chang, Wen-Pin, Chang, Hsiu-Hua, 2014. Consumer attitudes toward
blogger’s sponsored recommendations and purchase intention: the effect of
sponsorship type, product type, and brand awareness. Comput. Hum. Behav. 34,
258–266.
Malthouse, Edward C., Haenlein, Michael, Skiera, Bernd, Wege, Egbert, Zhang, Michael,
2013. Managing customer relationships in the social media era: introducing the
social CRM house. J. Interact. Mark. 27 (4), 270–280.
Martínez-López, F.J., Anaya-Sánchez, R., Fernández Giordano, M., Lopez-Lopez, D.,
2020. Behind influencer marketing: key marketing decisions and their effects on
followers’ responses. J. Mark. Manag. 36 (7-8), 579–607.
Masuda, H., Han, S.H., Lee, J., 2022. Impacts of influencer attributes on purchase
intentions in social media influencer marketing: mediating roles of characterizations.
Technol. Forecast. Soc. Chang. 174, 121246.
McIvor, R., 2009. How the transaction cost and resource-based theories of the firm
inform outsourcing evaluation. J. Oper. Manag. 27 (1), 45–63.
Miles, Matthew B., Huberman, A. Michael, 1994. Qualitative Data Analysis: An Expanded
Sourcebook, 2nd ed. Sage Publications, Thousand Oaks, CA.
Monks, K., Conway, E., Fu, N., Bailey, K., Kelly, G., Hannon, E., 2016. Enhancing
knowledge exchange and combination through HR practices: reflexivity as a
translation process. Hum. Resour. Manag. J. 26 (3), 304–320.
Pang, A., Yingzhi Tan, E., Song-Qi Lim, R., Yue-Ming Kwan, T., Bhardwaj Lakhanpal, P.,
2016. Building effective relations with social media influencers in Singapore. In:
Media Asia, 43 (1), pp. 56–68.
Park, J., Lee, J.M., Xiong, V.Y., Septianto, F., Seo, Y., 2021. David and Goliath: when and
why micro-influencers are more persuasive than mega-influencers. J. Advert. 50 (5),
584–602.
Patnayakuni, R., Ruppel, C., 2006. Managing the complementarity of knowledge
integration and process formalization for systems development performance.
J. Assoc. Inf. Syst. 7 (8), 545–567.
15
Technological Forecasting & Social Change 192 (2023) 122580
Powell, W.W., 1990. Neither market nor hierarchy: network forms of organization. In:
Staw, B.M., Cummings, L.L. (Eds.), Research in Organizational Behavior, 12. JAI
Press, Greenwich, CT, pp. 295–336.
Reinikainen, H., Tan, T.M., Luoma-aho, V., Salo, J., 2021. Making and breaking
relationships on social media: the impacts of brand and influencer betrayals.
Technol. Forecast. Soc. Chang. 171, 120990.
Schivinski, Bruno, Dabrowski, Dariusz, 2016. The effect of social media communication
on consumer perceptions of brands. J. Mark. Commun. 22 (2), 189–214.
Scott, David Meerman, 2015. The New Rules of Marketing and PR.: How to Use Social
Media, Online Video, Mobile Applications, Blogs, News Releases, and Viral
Marketing to Reach Buyers Directly. John Wiley & Sons, New Jersey.
Stake, R.E., 2006. Multiple Case Study Analysis. Guilford Press, New York.
Stake, R.E., 2008. Qualitative case studies. In: Denzin, N.K., Lincoln, Y.S. (Eds.), The
SAGE Handbook of Qualitative Research, 3rd ed. SAGE Publications, pp. 119–149.
Thompson, J.D., 2003. Organizations in Action: Social Science Bases of Administrative
Theory. McGraw-Hill, New York.
Tiwana, A., 2010. Systems development ambidexterity: explaining the complementary
and substitutive roles of formal and informal controls. J. Manag. Inf. Syst. 27 (2),
87–126.
Uzunoğlu, Ebru, Kip, Misci, 2014. Brand communication through digital influencers:
leveraging blogger engagement. Int. J. Inf. Manag. 34 (5), 592–602.
Van de Ven, A.H., 2007. Engaged Scholarship: A Guide for Organizational and Social
Research. Oxford University Press on Demand.
Vangen, S., Huxham, C., 2012. The tangled web: Unraveling the principle of common
goals in collaborations. J. Public Adm. Res. Theory 22 (4), 731–760.
Vernuccio, M., 2014. Communicating corporate brands through social media: an
exploratory study. Int. J. Bus. Commun. 51 (3), 211–233.
Wiedmann, K.P., Von Mettenheim, W., 2020. Attractiveness, trustworthiness and
expertise–social influencers’ winning formula? J. Prod. Brand Manag. 30 (5),
707–725.
Wiley, K., 2019. 3 Brand Influencer Marketing Fails. StatuSphere. Available at. https://
brands.joinstatus.com/brand-influencer.
Williamson, O.E., 1985. The Economic Institutions of Capitalism: Firms, Markets,
Relational Contracting. Free Press, New York, NY.
Williamson, O., Ghani, T., 2012. Transaction cost economics and its uses in marketing.
J. Acad. Mark. Sci. 40 (1), 74–85.
Wolf, K., Archer, C., 2018. Public relations at the crossroads: the need to reclaim core
public relations competencies in digital communication. J. Commun. Manag. 22 (4),
494–509.
Wolny, Julia, Mueller, Claudia, 2013. Analysis of fashion consumers’ motives to engage
in electronic word-of-mouth communication through social media platforms.
J. Mark. Manag. 29 (5-6), 562–583.
Yin, R., 2009. Case Study Research: Design and Methods. Sage, Thousand Oaks, CA.
Zhang, J., Baden-Fuller, C., 2010. The influence of technological knowledge base and
organizational structure on technology collaboration. J. Manag. Stud. 47 (4),
679–704.
Tahir Abbas Syed is a lecturer (assistant professor) in Management Sciences at the Uni­
versity of Manchester, U.K. He holds a M.S. in Engineering Management from Politecnico
di Torino, Italy, and a B.E. in Mechanical Engineering from National University of Sciences
and Technology, Pakistan. His research focuses on the business value of IT in the
contemporary firm and has been published in European Journal of Information Systems,
Decision Sciences, Information and Management, and Supply Chain Management: An In­
ternational Journal.
Fahad Mehmood is an Assistant Professor of Operations Research & Decision Sciences at
the Dubai Business School, University of Dubai, United Arab Emirates. He received his PhD
and MS degrees from Polytechnic University of Turin. His research interests involve
application of OR techniques to solve problems related to energy, supply chain and In­
formation Systems. He has published his work in Energy, Energy Policy, Economic
Modeling and Facilities.
Talia Qaiser is an Enterprise Sales Coordinator at Educative, Inc. She received her BSc.
(Honors) degree in Management Sciences from Lahore University of Management Sciences
(LUMS), Pakistan. Her research interests focus on data and business analytics as well as
drawing marketing insights to stimulate sales.