How Organizations Use Social Media: Engaging the Public

The research I’ve done on organizations’ use of social media suggests there are three main types of messages that organizations send on social media: informational, community-building, and “action” (promotional & mobilizational) messages.

Each type constitutes a different way of engaging with the intended audience:

• Informational messages serve to inform — about the organization’s activities or anything of interest to the organization’s audience. One-way communication from organization to public. The audience is in the role of learner.
• Community-building messages serve to build a relationship with the audience through engaging in dialogue or making a network connection. Two-way communication. Audience is in the role of discussant or connector.
• Promotional & mobilizational messages serve to ask the audience to do something for the organization — attend an event, make a donation, engage in a protest, volunteer, or serve as an advocate, etc. One-way mobilizational communication. Audience is in the role of actor.

This framework originated in a small “Cybermetrics” graduate seminar I taught several years ago that involved inductive analyses of nonprofit organizations’ messages on Twitter (working with one PhD student, Kristen Lovejoy), and Facebook (working with another PhD student, I-hsuan Chiu). This collaborative work resulted in two publications that layed out the basic framework (Lovejoy & Saxton, 2012; Saxton, Guo, Chiu, & Feng, 2011).[1][2]

Why was this framework innovative or important? Public relations theory had a “relational turn” in the late 1990s, where the focused shifted from an emphasis on strategic one-way communications to building relationships (Broom, Casey, & Ritchey, 1997; Hon & Grunig, 1999; Kent & Taylor, 1998, 2002; Ledingham, 2003; Ledingham & Bruning, 1998).[3][4][5][6][7][8] These studies were highly influential and helped re-shape the field of public relations to this date. Around the same time they were published, new media began to take off. The effect was that public relations and communication scholars began to focus on ways organizations were employing relationship-building and dialogic strategies in their new media efforts, contrasting these co-creational and dialogic efforts with one-way “informational” communication. In brief, by the time I started this research there was a substantial body of work on the informational and community-building efforts of organizations on new media.

Yet two key things were missing. One, scholars had yet to examine and code the key tool used by organizations on social media — the actual messages, the tweets and Facebook statuses they organizations were sending. Prior social media studies had looked at static profiles and the like. Two, in focusing on informational vs. dialogic communication, scholars had not recognized the considerable mobilizational element of organizations’ social media messages. Our study helped build on prior research and fill in both of these gaps. Our inductive study zeroed in on the messages and revealed the substantial use of tweets as a “call to action” for the organizations’ constituents, whether this was a call for volunteers, for donations, for social action, for retweeting a message, for attending an event or, indeed, for anything where the organization asked its constituents to “do something” for the organization. We labeled these tweets “promotional and mobilizational” messages or, for short, action messages.

I think this “I-C-A” (information-community-action) framework is a useful way of examining organizations’ messages, and have continued to use it in my research on nonprofit organizations, including studies of advocacy organizations (Guo & Saxton, 2014),[9] of the determinants of social media use (Nah & Saxton, 2013),[10] and of the effectiveness of organizational messages (Waters & Saxton, 2014).[11]

I am also honored that the framework is also finding itself useful by scholars working in other fields, including those working in the health field (Thackeray, Neiger, Burton, & Thackeray, 2013)[12] and political communication (Xu, Sang, Blasiola, & Park, 2014).[13]

If you’re a social media manager and are wondering about the practical significance of this research, it is important to understand the differences between these different messages, and to have an appropriate mix of each type. Informational, mobilizational, and community-building messages each have a different intended audience orientation that should be tailored to the needs of both the audience and the organization. Don’t rely only on the ‘megaphone’ (informational messages), and don’t ‘mobilize’ (action messages) too often. Most effective will be organizations that actively seek to build relationships with their target audience members. Ultimately, the appropriate mix will depend heavily on the organization’s social media strategy — and if you don’t have one, you should.

I’ve created an infographic that shows the differences:

References

• Lovejoy, K., & Saxton, G. D. (2012). Information, community, and action: How nonprofit organizations use social media. Journal of Computer‐Mediated Communication, 17, 337-353. [BibTeX] [Abstract] [PDF]
  

  The rapid diffusion of `microblogging’ services such as Twitter is ushering in a new era of possibilities for organizations to communicate with and engage their core stakeholders and the general public. To enhance understanding of the communicative functions microblogging serves for organizations, this study examines the Twitter utilization practices of the 100 largest nonprofit organizations in the United States. The analysis reveals there are three key functions of microblogging updates –- `information,’ `community,’ and `action.’ Though the informational use of microblogging is extensive, nonprofit organizations are better at using Twitter to strategically engage their stakeholders via dialogic and community-building practices than they have been with traditional websites. The adoption of social media appears to have engendered new paradigms of public engagement.

  @article{Lovejoy2012,
  Abstract = {The rapid diffusion of `microblogging' services such as Twitter is ushering in a new era of possibilities for organizations to communicate with and engage their core stakeholders and the general public. To enhance understanding of the communicative functions microblogging serves for organizations, this study examines the Twitter utilization practices of the 100 largest nonprofit organizations in the United States. The analysis reveals there are three key functions of microblogging updates --- `information,' `community,' and `action.' Though the informational use of microblogging is extensive, nonprofit organizations are better at using Twitter to strategically engage their stakeholders via dialogic and community-building practices than they have been with traditional websites. The adoption of social media appears to have engendered new paradigms of public engagement.},
  Author = {Lovejoy, Kristen and Saxton, Gregory D.},
  Date-Added = {2014-02-14 00:40:05 +0000},
  Date-Modified = {2014-02-14 17:04:45 +0000},
  Doi = {10.1111/j.1083-6101.2012.01576.x},
  Journal = {Journal of {C}omputer‐{M}ediated {C}ommunication},
  Pages = {337-353},
  Title = {Information, Community, and Action: {H}ow Nonprofit Organizations Use Social Media},
  Url = {http://ssrn.com/abstract=2039815},
  Volume = {17},
  Year = {2012},
  Bdsk-Url-1 = {http://ssrn.com/abstract=2039815},
  Bdsk-Url-2 = {http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1083-6101.2012.01576.x}}

• Saxton, G. D., Guo, C., Chiu, I., & Feng, B. (2011). Social media and social good: How do nonprofits use Facebook to communicate with the public? [translated]. China Third Sector Research, 1, 40-54. [BibTeX] [Abstract] [PDF]
  

  本文以“脸书”为例，研究美国100家最大的非营利组织如何利用社交媒体来改善与公众之间的沟通互动。我们发现，非营利组织在其“脸书”主页上的“状态”更新可以被归纳为三种核心功能：“信息传播功能”， “社区建设功能”和“动员促进功能”。我们的分析表明，尽管 “脸书”的“信息传播功能”使用程度依然相当显著，但比起传统意义上的网站，非营利组织能够通过“脸书”中的“社区建设”和“双向对话”功能更有效地与公众沟通。社交网络的应用似乎树立了组织与大众互动的新范式。 In this study, we examine the social networking practices of the 100 largest nonprofit organizations in the United States. More specifically, we develop a comprehensive classification scheme to delineate these organizations’ use of Facebook as a stakeholder engagement tool. We find there are 5 primary categories of Facebook ‘statuses,’ which can be aggregated into three key dimensions – ‘information,’ ‘community,’ and action. Our analysis reveals that, though the ‘informational’ use of Facebook is still significant, nonprofit organizations are better at using Facebook to strategically engage their stakeholders via ‘dialogic’ and ‘community-building’ practices than they have been with traditional websites. The adoption of social media seems to have engendered new paradigms of public engagement.

  @article{Saxton2011b,
  Abstract = {本文以``脸书''为例，研究美国100家最大的非营利组织如何利用社交媒体来改善与公众之间的沟通互动。我们发现，非营利组织在其``脸书''主页上的``状态''更新可以被归纳为三种核心功能：``信息传播功能''， ``社区建设功能''和``动员促进功能''。我们的分析表明，尽管 ``脸书''的``信息传播功能''使用程度依然相当显著，但比起传统意义上的网站，非营利组织能够通过``脸书''中的``社区建设''和``双向对话''功能更有效地与公众沟通。社交网络的应用似乎树立了组织与大众互动的新范式。
  In this study, we examine the social networking practices of the 100 largest nonprofit organizations in the United States. More specifically, we develop a comprehensive classification scheme to delineate these organizations' use of Facebook as a stakeholder engagement tool. We find there are 5 primary categories of Facebook 'statuses,' which can be aggregated into three key dimensions -- 'information,' 'community,' and action. Our analysis reveals that, though the 'informational' use of Facebook is still significant, nonprofit organizations are better at using Facebook to strategically engage their stakeholders via 'dialogic' and 'community-building' practices than they have been with traditional websites. The adoption of social media seems to have engendered new paradigms of public engagement.},
  Author = {Saxton, Gregory D. and Guo, Chao and Chiu, I-Hsuan and Feng, Bo},
  Date-Added = {2014-02-14 00:40:05 +0000},
  Date-Modified = {2014-02-14 16:57:43 +0000},
  Journal = {China {T}hird {S}ector {R}esearch},
  Pages = {40-54},
  Title = {Social media and social good: {H}ow do nonprofits use {F}acebook to communicate with the public? [translated]},
  Url = {http://ssrn.com/abstract=2027527},
  Volume = {1},
  Year = {2011},
  Bdsk-Url-1 = {http://ssrn.com/abstract=2027527}}

• Broom, G. M., Casey, S., & Ritchey, J. (1997). Toward a concept and theory of organization-public relationships. Journal of Public Relations Research, 9(2), 83-98. [BibTeX]

  @article{Broom1997,
  Author = {Broom, Glen M. and Casey, Shawna and Ritchey, James},
  Date-Added = {2014-04-25 16:49:30 +0000},
  Date-Modified = {2014-04-25 16:49:30 +0000},
  Journal = {Journal of {P}ublic {R}elations {R}esearch},
  Number = {2},
  Pages = {83-98},
  Title = {Toward a Concept and Theory of Organization-Public Relationships},
  Volume = {9},
  Year = {1997}}

• Hon, L., & Grunig, J. E.. (1999). Guidelines for measuring relationships in public relations . [BibTeX]

  @techreport{Hon1999,
  Author = {Hon, L. and Grunig, James E.},
  Date-Added = {2014-04-25 16:49:30 +0000},
  Date-Modified = {2014-04-25 16:49:30 +0000},
  Keywords = {publicrelations},
  Title = {Guidelines for measuring relationships in public relations},
  Year = {1999}}

• Kent, M. L., & Taylor, M. (1998). Building dialogic relationships through the world wide web. Public Relations Review, 24(3), 321-334. [BibTeX]

  @article{Kent1998,
  Author = {Kent, M. L. and Taylor, M.},
  Date-Added = {2014-04-25 16:49:30 +0000},
  Date-Modified = {2014-04-25 16:49:30 +0000},
  Journal = {Public {R}elations {R}eview},
  Keywords = {newmediaandnonprofits},
  Number = {3},
  Pages = {321-334},
  Title = {Building dialogic relationships through the world wide web},
  Volume = {24},
  Year = {1998}}

• Kent, M. L., & Taylor, M. (2002). Toward a dialogic theory of public relations. Public Relations Review, 28(1), 21-37. [BibTeX]

  @article{Kent2002,
  Author = {Kent, M. L. and Taylor, M.},
  Date-Added = {2014-04-25 16:49:30 +0000},
  Date-Modified = {2014-04-25 16:49:30 +0000},
  Journal = {Public {R}elations {R}eview},
  Number = {1},
  Pages = {21-37},
  Title = {Toward a dialogic theory of public relations},
  Volume = {28},
  Year = {2002}}

• Ledingham, J. A. (2003). Explicating relationship management as a general theory of public relations. Journal of Public Relations Research, 15(2), 181-198. [BibTeX]

  @article{Ledingham2003,
  Author = {Ledingham, J. A.},
  Date-Added = {2014-04-25 16:49:30 +0000},
  Date-Modified = {2014-04-25 16:49:30 +0000},
  Journal = {Journal of {P}ublic {R}elations {R}esearch},
  Number = {2},
  Pages = {181-198},
  Title = {Explicating relationship management as a general theory of public relations},
  Volume = {15},
  Year = {2003}}

• Ledingham, J. A., & Bruning, S. D. (1998). Relationship management in public relations: dimensions of an organization-public relationship. Public Relations Review, 24(1), 55-65. [BibTeX]

  @article{Ledingham1998,
  Author = {Ledingham, J. A. and Bruning, S. D.},
  Date-Added = {2014-04-25 16:49:30 +0000},
  Date-Modified = {2014-04-25 16:49:30 +0000},
  Journal = {Public {R}elations {R}eview},
  Number = {1},
  Pages = {55-65},
  Title = {Relationship management in public relations: Dimensions of an organization-public relationship},
  Volume = {24},
  Year = {1998}}

• Guo, C., & Saxton, G. D. (2014). Tweeting social change: How social media are changing nonprofit advocacy. Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly, 43, 57-79. [BibTeX] [Abstract] [PDF]
  

  How are nonprofit organizations utilizing social media to engage in advocacy work? We address this question by investigating the social media use of 188 501(c)(3) advocacy organizations. After briefly examining the types of social media technologies employed, we turn to an in-depth examination of the organizations’ use of Twitter. This in-depth message-level analysis is twofold: a content analysis that examines the prevalence of previously identified communicative and advocacy constructs in nonprofits’ social media messages; and an inductive analysis that explores the unique features and dynamics of social media-based advocacy and identifies new organizational practices and forms of communication heretofore unseen in the literature.

  @article{Guo2014,
  Abstract = {How are nonprofit organizations utilizing social media to engage in advocacy work? We address this question by investigating the social media use of 188 501(c)(3) advocacy organizations. After briefly examining the types of social media technologies employed, we turn to an in-depth examination of the organizations' use of Twitter. This in-depth message-level analysis is twofold: a content analysis that examines the prevalence of previously identified communicative and advocacy constructs in nonprofits' social media messages; and an inductive analysis that explores the unique features and dynamics of social media-based advocacy and identifies new organizational practices and forms of communication heretofore unseen in the literature.},
  Author = {Guo, Chao and Saxton, Gregory D},
  Date-Added = {2014-02-14 00:40:05 +0000},
  Date-Modified = {2014-02-14 02:57:25 +0000},
  Doi = {10.1177/0899764012471585},
  Journal = {Nonprofit and {V}oluntary {S}ector {Q}uarterly},
  Pages = {57-79},
  Title = {Tweeting Social Change: {H}ow Social Media Are Changing Nonprofit Advocacy},
  Url = {http://ssrn.com/abstract=2247136},
  Volume = {43},
  Year = {2014},
  Bdsk-Url-1 = {http://ssrn.com/abstract=2247136},
  Bdsk-Url-2 = {http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0899764012471585}}

• Nah, S., & Saxton, G. D. (2013). Modeling the adoption and use of social media by nonprofit organizations. New Media & Society, 15, 294-313. [BibTeX] [Abstract] [PDF]
  

  This study examines what drives organizational adoption and use of social media through a model built around four key factors – strategy, capacity, governance and environment. Using Twitter, Facebook, and other data on 100 large US nonprofit organizations, the model is employed to examine the determinants of three key facets of social media utilization: (1) adoption, (2) frequency of use and (3) dialogue. We find that organizational strategies, capacities, governance features and external pressures all play a part in these social media adoption and utilization outcomes. Through its integrated, multi-disciplinary theoretical perspective, this study thus helps foster understanding of which types of organizations are able and willing to adopt and juggle multiple social media accounts, to use those accounts to communicate more frequently with their external publics, and to build relationships with those publics through the sending of dialogic messages.

  @article{Nah2013,
  Abstract = {This study examines what drives organizational adoption and use of social media through a model built around four key factors -- strategy, capacity, governance and environment. Using Twitter, Facebook, and other data on 100 large US nonprofit organizations, the model is employed to examine the determinants of three key facets of social media utilization: (1) adoption, (2) frequency of use and (3) dialogue. We find that organizational strategies, capacities, governance features and external pressures all play a part in these social media adoption and utilization outcomes. Through its integrated, multi-disciplinary theoretical perspective, this study thus helps foster understanding of which types of organizations are able and willing to adopt and juggle multiple social media accounts, to use those accounts to communicate more frequently with their external publics, and to build relationships with those publics through the sending of dialogic messages.},
  Author = {Nah, Seungahn and Saxton, Gregory D.},
  Date-Added = {2014-02-14 00:40:05 +0000},
  Date-Modified = {2014-04-25 16:25:52 +0000},
  Doi = {10.1177/1461444812452411},
  Journal = {New {M}edia & {S}ociety},
  Pages = {294-313},
  Title = {Modeling the adoption and use of social media by nonprofit organizations},
  Url = {http://ssrn.com/abstract=2130630},
  Volume = {15},
  Year = {2013},
  Bdsk-Url-1 = {http://ssrn.com/abstract=2130630},
  Bdsk-Url-2 = {http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/1461444812452411}}

• Saxton, G. D., & Waters, R. D. (2014). What do stakeholders ‘like’ on Facebook? Examining public reactions to nonprofit organizations’ informational, promotional, and community-building messages. Journal of Public Relations Research, advanced online publication. [BibTeX] [Abstract]
  

  Though public relations scholarship has often discussed the possibilities of dialogue and engagement using social media, research has not truly explored this dynamic. Instead, research on social media platforms has focused on measuring the content and structure of organizational profiles. This study seeks to enhance the field’s discussion about social media engagement by determining what organizational content individual stakeholders prefer on Facebook in terms of liking, commenting, and sharing. A content analysis of 1,000 updates from organizations on the Nonprofit Times 100 list indicates that, based on what they comment on and “like,” individuals prefer dialogic as well as certain forms of mobilizational messages; however, they are more likely to share one-way informational messages with their own networks. These findings are interpreted using practical and theoretical implications for the practice of public relations.

  @article{Saxton2014b,
  Abstract = {Though public relations scholarship has often discussed the possibilities of dialogue and engagement using social media, research has not truly explored this dynamic. Instead, research on social media platforms has focused on measuring the content and structure of organizational profiles. This study seeks to enhance the field's discussion about social media engagement by determining what organizational content individual stakeholders prefer on Facebook in terms of liking, commenting, and sharing. A content analysis of 1,000 updates from organizations on the Nonprofit Times 100 list indicates that, based on what they comment on and ``like,'' individuals prefer dialogic as well as certain forms of mobilizational messages; however, they are more likely to share one-way informational messages with their own networks. These findings are interpreted using practical and theoretical implications for the practice of public relations.},
  Author = {Saxton, Gregory D. and Waters, Richard D.},
  Date-Added = {2014-04-24 23:01:37 +0000},
  Date-Modified = {2014-04-24 23:01:37 +0000},
  Journal = {Journal of {P}ublic {R}elations {R}esearch},
  Pages = {advanced online publication},
  Title = {What do Stakeholders 'Like' on {F}acebook? {E}xamining Public Reactions to Nonprofit Organizations' Informational, Promotional, and Community-Building Messages},
  Year = {2014}}

• Thackeray, R., Neiger, B. L., Burton, S. H., & Thackeray, C. R. (2013). Analysis of the purpose of state health departments’ tweets: Information sharing, engagement, and action. Journal of Medical Internet Research, 15(11). [BibTeX]

  @article{Thackeray2013,
  Author = {Thackeray, Rosemary and Neiger, Brad L and Burton, Scott H and Thackeray, Callie R},
  Date = {2013},
  Date-Added = {2014-04-25 15:51:40 +0000},
  Date-Modified = {2014-04-25 15:52:29 +0000},
  Journal = {Journal of {M}edical {I}nternet {R}esearch},
  Number = {11},
  Publisher = {JMIR Publications Inc.},
  Title = {Analysis of the Purpose of State Health Departments' Tweets: {I}nformation Sharing, Engagement, and Action},
  Volume = {15},
  Year = {2013}}

• Xu, W. W., Sang, Y., Blasiola, S., & Park, H. W. (2014). Predicting opinion leaders in Twitter activism networks: the case of the Wisconsin recall election. American Behavioral Scientist, advance online publication. [BibTeX] [Abstract] [PDF]
  

  This study employs content and network analysis techniques to explore the predictors of opinion leadership in a political activism network on Twitter. The results demonstrate the feasibility of using user-generated content to measure user characteristics. The characteristics were analyzed to predict users’ performance in the network. According to the results, Twitter users with higher connectivity and issue involvement are better at influencing information flow on Twitter. User connectivity was measured by betweenness centrality, and issue involvement was measured by a user’s geographic proximity to a given event and the contribution of engaging tweets. In addition, the results show that tweets by organizations had greater influence than those by individual users.

  @article{Xu2014,
  Abstract = {This study employs content and network analysis techniques to explore the predictors of opinion leadership in a political activism network on Twitter. The results demonstrate the feasibility of using user-generated content to measure user characteristics. The characteristics were analyzed to predict users' performance in the network. According to the results, Twitter users with higher connectivity and issue involvement are better at influencing information flow on Twitter. User connectivity was measured by betweenness centrality, and issue involvement was measured by a user's geographic proximity to a given event and the contribution of engaging tweets. In addition, the results show that tweets by organizations had greater influence than those by individual users.},
  Author = {Xu, Weiai Wayne and Sang, Yoonmo and Blasiola, Stacy and Park, Han Woo},
  Date-Added = {2014-04-25 15:50:08 +0000},
  Date-Modified = {2014-04-25 15:51:18 +0000},
  Doi = {10.1177/0002764214527091},
  Eprint = {http://abs.sagepub.com/content/early/2014/03/11/0002764214527091.full.pdf+html},
  Journal = {American {B}ehavioral {S}cientist},
  Pages = {advance online publication},
  Title = {Predicting Opinion Leaders in {T}witter Activism Networks: The Case of the {W}isconsin Recall Election},
  Url = {http://abs.sagepub.com/content/early/2014/03/11/0002764214527091.abstract},
  Year = {2014},
  Bdsk-Url-1 = {http://abs.sagepub.com/content/early/2014/03/11/0002764214527091.abstract},
  Bdsk-Url-2 = {http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0002764214527091}}