| Literature DB >> 35068997 |
Rajat Kumar Behera1, Pradip Kumar Bala2, Nripendra P Rana3, Hatice Kizgin4.
Abstract
A platform is a business model that allows business-to-business (B2B) participants to connect, interacts, create and exchange value. B2B exploits social media for brand building and branding is vulnerable to attacks, which leads to a brand crisis. B2B should characterise such crisis and respond proportionally to avert damage to social listening (SL). To diminish damages, the solution is to measure customer experience (CX), especially in a crisis situation. The study proposes an analytics-enabled customer experience (AeCX) platform for emotion detection in social media and measures CX after recovering from such crisis, by exploring recovery time objective (RTO), recovery point objective (RPO), techno-business features (TBF), SL and perceived risk (PR). A quantitative research methodology is used on primary data collected from 302 B2B participants. The study reveals improvement in CX and the results provide evidence that social media channels and the TBF of AeCX have become important.Entities:
Keywords: B2B; Customer experience; Post brand crisis; Social media; Techno-business platform
Year: 2022 PMID: 35068997 PMCID: PMC8760122 DOI: 10.1007/s10796-021-10231-8
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Inf Syst Front ISSN: 1387-3326 Impact factor: 5.261
Fig. 1Techno-business AeCX platform (Adapted from Zutshi and Grilo, 2019)
Construct definition and its reference
| Construct | Definition/description | Reference |
|---|---|---|
| Recovery time objective (RTO) | It is the period of time or service level agreement (SLA) during which a business needs to be restored following a brand crisis to prevent undesirable implications associated with a break in business continuity. | Alhami and Malaiya, |
| Recovery point objective (RPO) | It is the period of time or SLA the business loses tolerance in the form of data i.e., data of search visitors, direct visitors, new visitors, returning visitors and referral visitors that can be lost before significant harm to the business occurs following a brand crisis. | Alhami and Malaiya, |
| Social listening (SL) | It refers to the social media word of mouth (SMWoM) of the brand whose negative event was centred. The analysis is made of SMWoM conversation around the brand to make better branding decisions. SL helps to understand why, where and how these conversations are happening and what B2B participants think. | Stewart and Arnold, |
| Techno-business features (TBF) | It refers to the features offered by the techno-business model to positively influence CX. The dimensions of business features are personalisation, social accessibility and transparency. The dimensions of technical features are completeness, flexibility, evolvability and integration. Personalisation is the level of communication with the buyers by paying attention and caring for them in the event of post brand crisis. Social accessibility is the ability to access different social media platforms to interact with users post to the brand crisis. Transparency is the degree of information symmetry among users of the social media platform and for sellers, such symmetry reduces concerns of opportunistic behaviour and creates the perception of participation (Di Gangi and Wasko, | Di Gangi and Wasko, |
| Perceived risk (PR) | It is defined as the perception of potential harm that a buyer experiences in the event of post brand crisis. | Stone and Grønhaug, |
| Customer experience (CX) | It refers to a customer's holistic perception of their experience with the business, organisation or brand. | Lemke et al.,2011 |
Fig. 2Hypothesised conceptual model (Adapted from Di Gangi and Wasko, 2016)
Fig. 3The inducement matrix showcasing satisfaction rating and the progress of time
Measurement items
| Constructs | Items | Scale Item | Source |
|---|---|---|---|
| From the perspective of B2B in exploiting social media for brand building and to improve customer experience after recovering from the brand crisis in social media (i.e., activities performed by B2B in the long-term aftermath of such crisis to restore organisational operations and mitigate the effects of future crises): | |||
| RTO | RTO1 | RTOs reflect how much downtime (time) a business is willing to tolerate. | Hijjawi and Al-Shawabkeh, |
| RTO2 | RTOs are considered a business need. | ||
| RTO3 | The results of the business impact analysis are taken into account for determining RTO. | ||
| From the perspective of B2B in exploiting social media for brand building and to improve customer experience after recovering from the brand crisis in social media (i.e., activities performed by B2B in the long-term aftermath of such crisis to restore organisational operations and mitigate the effects of future crises): | |||
| RPO | RPO1 | RPOs reflect how much downtime (data) a business is willing to tolerate. | Hijjawi and Al-Shawabkeh, |
| RPO2 | RPOs are considered a business need. | ||
| RPO3 | Business impact analysis results are considered in defining RPO. | ||
| From the perspective of B2B in exploiting social media for brand building and to improve customer experience after recovering from the brand crisis in social media (i.e., activities performed by B2B in the long-term aftermath of such crisis to restore organisational operations and mitigate the effects of future crises): | |||
| SL | SL1 | SL provides post brand crisis data from social media and as a result, I can produce a comprehensive view of user experience. | Shami et al., |
| SL2 | SL allows me to create reports or visualization of what buyers and social media users are talking about concerning different types of a brand crisis. | ||
| SL3 | The social media-enabled platform will become an important tool of my work. | ||
| From the perspective of B2B in exploiting social media for brand building and to improve customer experience after recovering from the brand crisis in social media (i.e., activities performed by B2B in the long-term aftermath of such crisis to restore organisational operations and mitigate the effects of future crises): | |||
| TBF | TBF1 | The model gives me personal attention. | Di Gangi and Wasko, |
| TBF2 | The model enables us to gain access to the experiences of others in social media. | ||
| TBF3 | The model adapts to the buyer's shifting needs and interests. | ||
| TBF4 | The model effectively integrates data from different social media sites. | ||
| From the perspective of B2B in exploiting social media for brand building and to improve customer experience after recovering from the brand crisis in social media (i.e., activities performed by B2B in the long-term aftermath of such crisis to restore organisational operations and mitigate the effects of future crises): | |||
| PR | PR1 | I perceived the platform features were risky. | Trivedi, |
| PR2 | I perceived there was a chance that something could go wrong in the platform output. | ||
| PR3 | I perceived that the platform outcome would be difficult to predict. | ||
| From the perspective of B2B in exploiting social media for brand building and to improve customer experience after recovering from the brand crisis in social media (i.e., activities performed by B2B in the long-term aftermath of such crisis to restore organisational operations and mitigate the effects of future crises): | |||
| CX | CX1 | The platform is exactly what I needed. | Song and Zinkhan, |
| CX2 | I feel confident with the features of the platform. | ||
| CX3 | I feel satisfied with the features of the platform. | ||
| CX4 | I feel relieved with the features of the platform. | ||
B2B organisation and respondent profile
| Characteristics | # of organisations | Organisation proportion | # of respondent | Respondent proportion |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Less than 50 | 10 | 22% | 36 | 12% |
| 50-99 | 4 | 9% | 69 | 23% |
| 100-249 | 12 | 25% | 54 | 18% |
| 250 – 499 | 13 | 29% | 85 | 28% |
| More than 500 | 7 | 15% | 58 | 19% |
| Until 5 | 44 | 96% | 285 | 94% |
| More than 5 | 2 | 4% | 17 | 6% |
| Total | 46 | 100% | 302 | 100% |
Convergent validity and internal reliability
| Constructs | Items | FL | CA | CR | AVE |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| RTO | RTO1 | 0.694 | 0.750 | 0.779 | 0.543 |
| RTO2 | 0.661 | ||||
| RTO3 | 0.637 | ||||
| RPO | RPO1 | 0.902 | 0.880 | 0.881 | 0.712 |
| RPO2 | 0.903 | ||||
| RPO3 | 0.878 | ||||
| SL | SL1 | 0.743 | 0.845 | 0.845 | 0.646 |
| SL2 | 0.735 | ||||
| SL3 | 0.678 | ||||
| TBF | TBF1 | 0.849 | 0.893 | 0.889 | 0.671 |
| TBF2 | 0.806 | ||||
| TBF3 | 0.834 | ||||
| TBF4 | 0.868 | ||||
| PR | PR1 | 0.879 | 0.839 | 0.840 | 0.638 |
| PR2 | 0.839 | ||||
| PR3 | 0.873 | ||||
| CX | CX1 | 0.709 | 0.838 | 0.837 | 0.563 |
| CX2 | 0.728 | ||||
| CX3 | 0.732 | ||||
| CX4 | 0.740 |
Correlation matrix of constructs
| Constructs | CX | TBF | PR | SL | RTO | RPO |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| CX | ||||||
| TBF | 0.390 | |||||
| PR | -0.080 | 0.150 | ||||
| SL | 0.738 | 0.447 | 0.053 | |||
RTO RPO | 0.708 | 0.415 | 0.056 | 0.723 | ||
| 0.042 | 0.046 | -0.044 | 0.127 | 0.118 |
Hypotheses testing results
| Hypotheses | Relation | Std. Beta | Std. Error | t-value | p-value | HTR | Significance |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| H1 | RTO →SL | 0.75 | 0.074 | 8.937 | *** | Accept | Highly significant |
| H2 | RPO → SL | 0.05 | 0.044 | 0.904 | 0.366 | Reject | Not significant |
H3 H4 | SL → CX | 0.75 | 0.075 | 10.306 | * | Accept | Significant |
| TBF → CX | 0.12 | 0.048 | 2.395 | * | Accept | Significant |
[HTR represents the hypothesis testing result. *** denotes p<0.001, ** denotes p< 0.01, * denotes p< 0.05]
Moderator effect of Hypothesis H5
| Relation | Std. Beta | Std. Error | t-value | p-value | HTR | Significance |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| TBF→PR | 0.15 | 0.078 | 2.326 | * | accept | Significant |
| PR→CX | -0.14 | 0.042 | -2.550 | * | accept | Significant |
HTR represents the hypothesis testing result. *** denotes p<0.001, ** denotes p<0.01, * denotes p< 0.05
Fig. 4R2 and β result of AeCX platform
Model fit indices
| Test | Value | Ref value | Reference |
|---|---|---|---|
| CMIN/DF | 2.662 | [1 – 3] | Hooper et al., |
| RMSEA | 0.074 | 0.05 - 0.10 | MacCallum et al.,1996 |
| GFI | 0.850 | 0.90 | Tanaka and Huba, |
| IFI | 0.888 | 0.90 | Bollen, |
| TLI | 0.874 | 0.90 | Tucker and Lewis, |
| NFI | 0.832 | 0.90 | Bentler and Bonett, |
Fig. 5CX funnel
Urgency and question types of each quadrant
| Quadrant | Urgency of closing the loop | Conversation |
|---|---|---|
| Act Now | Urgent and critical | Why are not buyers satisfied? |
| Reassess | Urgent and important | What negative changes are buyers noticing? |
| Monitor | Urgent but no important | What positive changes are buyers watching? |
| Continue | Urgent but no important | What are buyers highly satisfied? |
Closing criteria for each stage of the AeCX platform
| Stage | BIRS | PBCCS |
|---|---|---|
| Recognise | Mortification | Full apology |
| Recalibrate | Corrective Action | Ingratiation |
| Restore | Corrective Action | Justification |
| Redirect | Corrective Action | Corrective action |
| Reinvigorate | Corrective Action | Ingratiation |
BIRS symbolises brand image restoration strategy, and PBCCS symbolizes post brand crisis communication strategy.