The role of social media in the co-creation of value in relationship marketing: a multi-domain study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Social Media (SM) is an established channel by which organisations can create and seek to co-create value with consumers and other stakeholders. However, the role of SM in building relationships (i.e. relationship marketing) is uncertain. Thus, this research aims to investigate the use of SM as a relationship marketing tool. The study adopted a qualitative research approach drawing from multi-domain data sources (i.e. SM platform domain, organisation domain, and consumer domain). Three different but interrelated studies were conducted. The findings from the three studies are integrated to construct a multi-dimensional understanding of the place and use of social media in relationship marketing. Results inform that SM is providing new directions to relationship marketing, support it as an effective channel in realising relationship marketing goals. Theoretically, the work has extended Grönroos’s relationship marketing process model through the lens of social media. Practically, results suggest that managers should implement activities to further foster the value of social media that facilitates brand humanisation, enhances product experience, empowers audiences to be informed consumers, and provides customer services.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.010 | 0.013 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.007 | 0.007 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".