Diversity among enterprise online communities

Abstract

There is a growing body of research into the adoption and use of social software in enterprises. However, less is known about how groups, such as communities, use and appropriate these technologies, and the implications for community structures. In a study of 188 very active online enterprise communities, we found systematic differences in size, demographics and participation, aligned with differences in community types. Different types of communities differed in their appropriation of social software tools to create and use shared resources, and build relationships. We propose implications for design of community support features, services for potential community members, and organizations looking to derive value from online groups.

Understanding user participation in online communities: A systematic literature review of empirical studies

“…They emphasize the role of functionality in meeting a unique need that defines the community; finding a balance between user anonymity and social translucence; setting realistic expectations for the levels of participation (as niche communities will never become very large); and allowing for the personalization of the community interface because, for instance, younger users tend to be more visually oriented than older ones (Sahib & Vassileva, 2009). In order to analyze how different types of communities use technology, Muller et al (2012) compared 188 online enterprise communities in terms of participation rate, relationships and sharing. Their conclusion was that even with the same technologies available, community owners and members make novel use of those resources to achieve different organizational forms and outcomes (Muller et al, 2012).…”

“…In order to analyze how different types of communities use technology, Muller et al (2012) compared 188 online enterprise communities in terms of participation rate, relationships and sharing. Their conclusion was that even with the same technologies available, community owners and members make novel use of those resources to achieve different organizational forms and outcomes (Muller et al, 2012). These results put to question the generalizability of community success metrics and suggest that each community type should be analyzed separately.…”

Moderation of Enterprise Social Networks _ A Literature Review from a Corporate Perspective

“…x [14] x [15] x [17] x [19] x [21] x [23] x [26] x [28] x [31] (x) x (x) [32] x [33] x [34] x [38] x [39] x [45] (x) [50] x [53] x [54] (x) [55] (x) (x) [57] (x) (x) [62] x [63] (x) (x) [64] (x) (x) [68] x [70] x (x) not soley in favor 3 5 6 x in favor 4 17 3 the narrative put one approach in the foreground, we could still gain useful insights about another approach. Consequently, one article might be assigned to two approaches and if one approach is clearly favored "x" is used as an indicator.…”

“…Top-management commitment to ESN tools is often seen as a jump starter at the beginning [38], quality assurance [12,14,21] and motivator [14,21] for UGC. Another corporate moderation is suggested by [54] in their mixed method case study examination to determine diversity among different ESN communities. They promote the idea of a templating service which guides the ESN user to the wanted UGC outcome via a corporate service orientation, but preserves enough flexibility to customize the user's own perception.…”

“…Here [28; p. 4075] deliver additional remark with their mixed method case study that the degree of predefined uses (here understood as the degree of corporate engagement) needs to leave "still enough freedom" for the ESN users in order to have them engaged. Further, implications are given in terms of recommendation systems to steer the users` content consumption [54,62] or with a reward system and ESN management team [12,70]. The latter two were also part of the findings in the corporate supervision approach, but here the focus was on the UGC promotion [12,14] rather than on compliance.…”