here - ERIM - Erasmus Universiteit Rotterdam

More documents

Recommendations

Info

A validation Study of House of Quality key performance indicators Communities of interest; members of this type of communities are willing to share knowledge and experiences. For example recommendation sites like Kieskeurig.nl, where people share their experiences about different product. Communities of fantasy; within communities of fantasy members interact with each other by playing virtual games with each other. Within this fantasy world members can play with fictive persons in different fictive environments. Communities of transaction; within this communities members exchange goods, services etc. on a demand and supply manner. Although this classification by Hagel and Armstrong (1997) is still used, nowadays many other types of virtual communities can be distinguished. Some examples are; brand communities (Muniz & O’Guinn, 2001), communities of ethnicity (Mitra, 1999), communities of consumption (Kozinets, 1999) and e-learning communities (Hardaker and Smith, 2002). Although these types of virtual communities are useful to detail and will limit the focus for research, according to De Valck (2005) they do not add new categories to the classification of Hagel and Armstrong (1997). De Valck (2005) stated that in fact most virtual communities are a combination of a community of relationships and a community of interest which combines social interaction with information exchange based on for example a similar demographic background, specific brand, consumption related activity, certain travel destination or a medical problem. To cover the main purpose served by virtual communities, De Valck (2005) adds another type to the four types distinguished by Hagel and Armstrong (1997); the community of practice. A community of practise consists of a group of people who are informally bound (within or between organizations) and share their knowledge and information to learn from each other regarding shared (work) related practices. Segmentation by computer mediated context Virtual communities are supported by different functional software systems, like for example; email lists, chat rooms, electronic bulletin boards or online buying functionalities. Different types of virtual communities will arise due to different characteristics of the software (De Valck, 2005). Kozinets (1999) classified virtual communities, based on the computer mediated context of the community. This classification is based on two dimensions; group focus (information exchange vs. social interaction) and social structure (loose vs. tight). 30
A validation Study of House of Quality key performance indicators Segmentation by organizational structure According to De Valck (2005), the way a virtual community is organized not only influences the way individual members participate but has also influence on how they make consumer decisions. Therefore the third segmentation aspect distinguished by De Valck (2005) is based on the organizational structure of the virtual community. For segmentation on the organizational structure De Valck distinguished several dimensions. The most appropriate one for De Unie will be the issue whether and to what extent the individual members are likely to endorse the virtual community on a voluntary basis. 2.3.3 Function of Virtual Communities in Marketing As mentioned before, the internet can be very valuable to its users. The internet is able to connect across diverse and dispersed locations. By doing so, the internet creates new social constructs like communities of users (Jones 1999). Therefore the interest of marketers in learning about, organizing and managing virtual communities on the internet is increasing (Bagozzi and Dholakia, 2002). Hagel and Armstrong (1997) announce that companies which are able to invest in new possibilities created by the internet will gain positive advantages by the creation of virtual communities, leading to market knowledge and information. Nowadays marketers start finding ways that can strengthen and support their brand image and overall corporate identity by the creation of strong virtual communities (Hildebrand, 1998). Kozinets (1999) mentioned that marketers should be aware that within the virtual environment, consumers are considered to be; 1) more active and discerning; 2) less accessible to one-on-one processes and 3) provide a large amount of valuable and cultural information. Taking this into account, Rowley (2004) contributes that within the virtual environment marketing communications therefore are concerned with the following factors; creating presence, creating relationships and creating mutual benefits. De Valck (2005) summarized the benefits for consumers as well as for producers in the overview presented in Table 1. 31
Page 1 and 2: A validation Study of House of Qual
Page 29: A validation Study of House of Qual
Page 81 and 82:
A validation Study of House of Qual
Page 83 and 84:
Page 85 and 86:
Page 87 and 88:
Page 89 and 90:
Page 91 and 92:
Page 93 and 94:
Page 95 and 96:
Page 97 and 98:
Page 99 and 100:
Page 101 and 102:
Page 103 and 104:
Page 105 and 106:
Page 107 and 108:
show all

here - ERIM - Erasmus Universiteit Rotterdam

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?