How Social Media Can Be Used to Build a Brand Community - Term Paper Example

DISCUSS HOW SOCIAL MEDIA CAN BE USED TO BUILD A BRAND COMMUNITY AND ILLUSTRATE YOUR ANSWER WITH DETAILED EXAMPLES OF SUCH USE by 28 February 2011 Describe How Social Media Can Be Used to Build a Brand Community and Illustrate Your Answer with Detailed Examples of Such Use Introduction Brand communities have already become a distinctive feature of contemporary market reality. Brands do not exist in isolation. They produce shared meanings and unite consumers around them. The success of brands largely depends on the success of communication between them and their supporters. From the Marxist perspectives, brands build on productive communication, which leads to the creation of an ethical surplus (Arvidsson 2005). It goes without saying that technologies and social media, in particular, contribute to the development of the collective brand identities and, therefore, brand communities. The example of Apple Macintosh suggests that social media, including blogs, forums, and social networks, facilitate the creation and expansion of brand communities, through the creation of shared meanings, the development of groups and clubs, elimination of any formal hierarchy, and diversification of communication instruments and ties. Brand communities Brand communities are among the most popular topics of present day market research. The rapid advancement of technologies and social media, in particular, contributes to unprecedented growth of brand communities and groups. According to Muniz and O’Guinn (2005), “brand communities are nongeographically bound collectives of brand admirers who, through their ability to aggregate and community at very little cost, assert themselves as important marketplace collectives” (p.65). Brand communities are always about building and sustaining a common, collective identity in their members (Muniz & O’Guinn 2005). They display and use a developed system of rituals and traditions, which all community members are bound to follow (Muniz & O’Guinn 2005). These traditions and rituals usually include unusual lexicon, ritualistic utterances, sharing brand myths and stories, etc (Muniz & O’Guinn 2005). Eventually, all members of one and the same brand community demonstrate remarkable sense of moral responsibility, which reflects through “shared commitment to brand and its community members” (Muniz & O’Guinn 2005). Needless to say, brand communities develop and operate through the subcultures of consumption which differ from brand communities but also share numerous common features with them. Subcultures of consumption Unlike brand communities, subcultures of consumption is a separate society subgroup, which self-selects as a result of developing shared commitment to brand, product class, or consumption activity (Heding, Knudtzen & Bjerre 2008). The basic features of a subculture of consumption include (a) social hierarchy; (b) shared ethos; (c) unique lexicon and ritualistic features; and (d) unique ways of symbolic self-expression (Heding, Knudtzen & Bjerre 2008). Subcultures of consumption exemplify a collective view of numerous brand communities and identities. In the current state of global marketing, brand communities are of particular importance for firms, since they primarily focus on shared brand meanings and do not normally reject the prevailing society’s culture (Wiegandt 2009). In this sense brand communities’ reliance on low-cost communication methods and social interaction implies that social media do play a role in their development and expansion (Wiegandt 2009). The Apple brand community presents a unique example of how social media and brand communities interact. Apple Macintosh, brand communities, and social media Apple is one of the most frequently cited objects of brand community research in professional literature. Much has been written and said about what works and sustains the culture of sharedness in Apple Macintosh brand communities. It should be noted that the Apple brand community displays a number of specific features. These include the absence of legitimacy, oppositional messages, and excessive reliance on storytelling (Muniz & O’Guinn 2001). Apple Macintosh brand community shares the history of the brand and, simultaneously, displays the features of moral responsibility for being committed to one and the same brand (Muniz & O’Guinn 2001). “To some extent, oppositional values and messages are an effective form of promoting moral responsibility in the brand community. Moral responsibility also works through assisting brand community members to use the brand and stay committed to it” (Muniz & O’Guinn 2001). In this context, social media seem to work as an effective unifying force that unites brand supporters around common shared brand meanings. There is no one definition of Social Media. According to Kaplan and Henlein (2010), “social media is a group of Internet-based applications that build on the ideological and technological foundations of Web 2.0 and that allow the creation and exchange of User Generated Content” (p.61). Given that social media are directly associated with the use of Internet-based solutions, it comes as no surprise that social media are believed to facilitate the creation and maintenance of strong brand communities. Social media exemplify an innovative instrument of building virtual brand communities which are more durable and flexible than physically situated brand cultures (Cooke & Buckley 2007). The reason is that social media provide unlimited communication resources and favor continuous, multileveled communication between brand supporters (Brown, Broderick & Lee 2007; Ratneshwar & Mick 2005). For example, brand supporters cannot always use physical resources to reach one another and share their stories, but social media are a continuous source of communication resources among Apple consumers. They create conditions needed to promote multileveled communication between consumers, consumers and brand manufacturers, as well as those who are only familiarizing themselves with the brand (assistance in use of the brand – Muniz & O’Guinn 2001; Schau & Muniz 2002). The speed and convenience of social media facilitate the provision of assistance to new brand users (Hollenbeck & Zinkhan 2006). Social media facilitate brand communities by shaping effective connections between brand consumers and manufacturers: it goes without saying that, the more responsive the manufacturer is the more committed consumers are likely to become. Social media create value in brand community practices (Schau, Muniz & Arnould 2009). For example, Apple Macintosh users can use blogs and forums as a rich source of information about their attitudes and beliefs about the brand (Darroch 2009). The company managers can monitor this information and address consumer concerns (Darroch 2009). In this way, they also prove themselves as reliable providers of quality products that aim at having all consumer needs satisfied. Simultaneously, consumers feel that they do have a voice in the development of new and improvement of the existing brand products (Ha 2004). Social media promote accountability and exemplify a diversified vehicle of brand communication – Apple Macintosh consumers can choose the communication channel that suits their needs (Darroch 2009). For example, some of them prefer using forums, whereas others perceive blogs as the most effective instrument of self-expression. Social media further strengthen the sense of belonging among Apple consumers; they remove hierarchies and provide consumers with the feeling of social equality on the web (Darroch 2009). Social media emphasize the importance of all customers and all customer messages. Unfortunately, the use of social media in brand communities is not without limitations. The use of social media in brand communities is associated with certain downside risks. First, consumers use social media to generate brand messages, which are no longer controlled by brand owners (Darroch 2009). In this situation, the popularity of any brand, including that of Apple Macintosh, can be easily compromised by customers. For example, customers can place negative responses to products or services or express their dissatisfaction with the quality of customer service in Apple. Second, social media facilitate spreading consumer-generated messages; as a result, brand communities, perceptions, and shared meanings are often solely based on consumer contribution and input (Darroch 2009). In this situation, brands cannot fully protect themselves from the information and messages that come from competitors and distort their brand image. Finally, interactions in brand communities are not always rich in social messages but can be devoid of them; in this situation, they lose their value for branding (McAlexander, Schouten & Koening 2002). Yet, it is through social media that marketing professionals can develop a profound insight into the needs and concerns of their customers. Without social media, consumers would lose trust in their brands and a valuable channel of communication with other members of the brand community. Conclusion Brand communities are a distinctive feature of contemporary market reality. Social media work as an effective unifying force that unites brand supporters around common shared brand meanings. Social media facilitate brand communities by shaping effective connections between brand consumers and manufacturers. They create value in brand community practices. The use of social media in brand communities is associated with certain downside risks. Nevertheless, without social media, consumers would lose a valuable channel of communication with other members of the brand community. References Arvidsson, A 2005, ‘Brands: A critical perspective’, Journal of Consumer Culture, vol.5, pp.235-258. Brown, J, Broderick, AJ & Lee, N 2007, ‘Word of mouth communication within online communities: Conceptualizing the online social network’, Journal of Interactive Marketing, vol.21, no.3, pp.2-20. Cooke, M & Buckley, N 2007, ‘Web 2.0, social networks and the future of market research’, International Journal of Market Research, vol.50, no.2, pp.267-293. Darroch, J 2009, Marketing through turbulent times, Palgrave Macmillan. Ha, HY 2004, ‘Factors influencing consumer perceptions of brand trust online’, Journal of Product & Brand Management, vol.13, no.5, pp.329-342. Heding, T, Knudtzen, CF & Bjerre, M 2008, Brand management: Research, theory and practice, Taylor & Francis. Hollenbeck, CR & Zinkhan, GM 2006, ‘Consumer activism on the Internet: The role of anti- brand communities’, Advances in Consumer Research, vol.33, pp.479-485. Kaplan, AM & Henlein, M 2010, ‘Users of the world, unite! The challenges and opportunities of social media’, Business Horizons, vol.53, pp.59-68. McAlexander, JH, Schouten, JW & Koening, HF 2002, ‘Building brand community’, Journal of Marketing, vol.66, no.1, pp.38-54. Muniz, AM & O’Guinn, TC 2001, ‘Brand community’, Journal of Consumer Research, vol.27, pp.412-432. Muniz, AM & O’Guinn, TC 2005, ‘Marketing communications in a world of consumption and brand communities’, in AJ Kimmel, Marketing communication: New approaches, technologies, and styles, Oxford University Press, pp.63-85. Ratneshwar, S & Mick, DG 2005, Inside consumption: Consumer motives, goals, and desires, Routledge. Schau, HJ & Muniz, AM 2002, ‘Brand communities and personal identities: Negotiations in cyberspace’, Advances in Consumer Research, vol.29, pp.344-349. Schau, HJ, Muniz, AM & Arnould, EJ 2009, ‘How brand community practices create value’, Journal of Marketing, vol.73, pp.30-51. Wiegandt, P 2009, Value creation of firm-established brand communities, Gabler Verlag. Read More