Organizational learning through the

use of Social media

A descriptive study of the feedback role in three

Swedish organizations

Josef Ohlsson Collentine

Nanci Kasto

Thesis 7.5 hp Tutor

Within Media and Communication Studies Program Britt-Marie Leivik-Knowles

Examiner

Spring term 2010 Karin Wennström

HÖGSKOLAN FÖR LÄRANDE OCH

KOMMUNIKATION (HLK)

Högskolan i Jönköping

Thesis 7.5 hp

Spring term 2010

Abstract

Josef Ohlsson Collentine, Nanci Kasto

Organizational learning through the use of Social media

A descriptive study of the feedback role in three Swedish organizations

Organisatoriskt lärande genom användandet av Social medier Antal sidor: 35

En beskrivande studie av feedback rollen i tre svenska organisationer

Uses of the new Web currently associated with interactivity, communication, and networking comprise social media. These uses have led to changes in the way that feedback works. Consumers are empowered and are able to demand more from organizations. If it is possible to achieve positive outcomes using consumer feedback to adapt the new knowledge received into the organization, then it is important to investigate what this implies for organizations. Espe-cially, how received feedback may relate to organizational learning. Interviews were performed with three local organi-zations to portray a descriptive view of how organizations use the feedback gathered from social media in order to achieve organizational learning. This study uses the interviews to describe how social media is currently perceived by organizations in Sweden. The conclusion drawn is that while there appears to be a will to adapt in response to con-sumer feedback, the use of feedback through social media is in a stage of slow evolution.

Keywords: Organizational learning, social media, feedback, Jönköping, Sweden, organizational change,

customer relationship

Post adress

Högskolan för lärande

och kommunikation (HLK)

Box 1026

551 11 JÖNKÖPING

Gatuadress

Gjuterigatan 5

Telefon

036–101000

Fax

036162585

Glossary blog (n.) Short for Web log. A website updated with regular entries and most often in

chronological order with tagged keywords. flickr A social network for uploading and sharing pictures on the web. facebook A social network connecting friends, coworkers, and acquaintances. twitter A social network and micro blogging (<140 character-long updates) service.

Posting instant thoughts with an openness to follow anyone youtube A social network for shared video content.

Table of Contents

1 Introduction ............................................................................... 1 1.1 Background ............................................................................................... 1 1.2 Previous Research ..................................................................................... 2 1.3 Problem Discussion ................................................................................... 2 1.4 Purpose ..................................................................................................... 3 1.5 Limitations ................................................................................................. 3

2 Frame of Reference .................................................................. 4 2.1 Organizational Learning ............................................................................. 4

2.1.1 The five cycles of a learning organization .............................................. 5 2.1.2 The 4I Organizational Learning framework ............................................ 6

2.1.3 Resistance to change ............................................................................... 7 2.2 Social media .............................................................................................. 7 2.3 Feedback .................................................................................................... 9

3 Method ...................................................................................... 11 3.1 Purpose of research .................................................................................. 11 3.2 Research method ....................................................................................... 11 3.3 Data collection methods ............................................................................. 11

3.3.1 Sample selection ................................................................................... 11 3.3.2 Interview methods .................................................................................. 12 3.4 Quality of the study ..................................................................................... 13

3.4.1 Validity ................................................................................................... 13 3.4.2 Reliability ............................................................................................... 13

4 Empirical Findings ................................................................... 14 4.1 ALMI Företagspartner Jönköping AB (ALMI) .............................................. 14

4.1.1 ALMI and Social media .......................................................................... 14 4.1.2 Feedback via Social media .................................................................... 14 4.1.3 Organizational learning .......................................................................... 15 4.2 Moderskeppet ............................................................................................. 16

4.2.1 Moderskeppet and Social media ............................................................ 16 4.2.2 Feedback via Social media .................................................................... 16 4.2.3 Organizational learning .......................................................................... 17 4.3 Destination Jönköping ................................................................................ 17

4.3.1 Destination Jönköping and Social media ............................................... 17 4.3.2 Feedback via Social media .................................................................... 18 4.3.3 Organizational learning .......................................................................... 18

5 Analysis .................................................................................... 20 5.1 ALMI Företagspartner Jönköping AB ......................................................... 20 5.2 Moderskeppet ............................................................................................ 21 5.3 Destination Jönköping ............................................................................... 22

6 Conclusion ............................................................................... 24 6.1 Final reflections ......................................................................................... 25

References .......................................................................................... 27 Appendices

Appendix 1 Interview questions.

Figures

Figure 2.1 The five learning cycle of organizational learning ................................. 5

Figure 2.2 Learning/Renewal in Organizations ....................................................... 6

Figure 2.3 The old world model of feedback .......................................................... 9

Figure 2.4 The new world model of feedback ........................................................ 9

Tables

Table 2.1 The Social Technographics Ladder ....................................................... 8

1

1 Introduction _______________________________________________________________________________

This first chapter introduces the reader to the subject, and presents a background description of the study. This is followed by a discussion about the problem that we have distinguished, which in turn will lead to a formulation of the purpose and research questions.

_________________________________________________________________________

1.1 Background

For less than fifteen years ago, when Internet had just begun to make its way, no one believed that it would escalate to where it is today. The new Web, also known as Web 2.0, is nowadays associated with interactivity, communication, and networking. In other words, what we all know as social media.

The impact of Web 2.0 along with social media has shifted a lot of the focus from one-way communication to a two-way dialogue with the consumers (O‟Reilly, 2007). Fernando (2007) concludes that organizations should “Say farewell to top-down and hello to consumer lead communication” (Fernando, 2007, p. 9). Consumers‟ influence has changed, they have more power today than ev-er before, and organizations cannot ignore this fact. Consumers are able to access any informa-tion, they can contribute to the existing information, they can edit it and they can share it (McKay, 2009).

According to Vittal (in McKay, 2009), the most essential step in facing the social Web is to listen to the consumers and what they are saying about them. “Listening is the infrastructure that enables you to collect all this information and process it and analyze it” (McKay, 2009, p. 26). Further, Dan Zinman, director of marketing programs for Lithium, argues that consumers want to see that companies are actually using their comments (Musico, 2009). It is not only important to listen, but to use and apply the feedback they receive.

Customers demand more now, and organizations need to cope with the changes that are required to keep up with this. It is getting harder to stand out as the competition is growing and intensify-ing. Not to mention the pace of technology that keeps increasing, and is putting more pressure on organizations to follow. All of this has put more focus on organizational learning (Locke & Jain (1995). According to DeGeus (1988), organizational learning may be the only sustainable competitive advantage. Organizations need to learn and discover new ways of adapting to what is happening around them in order to achieve higher efficiency and profit (Crossan, Lane and White, 1999). One example of how the use of feedback through social media may change an organization for the better can be seen in the case of Domino's Pizza. In 2009, Domino‟s Pizza experienced a fall in their pizza deliveries with 6 percent from the year before. In addition, customers were com-plaining about the 50 year old recipe, which they considered did not taste good. Domino‟s Pizza decided to listen and change their recipe. They embraced social media and requested feedback from customers throughout various channels. This paid off and allowed Domino‟s to grow their sales back into a healthy positive profit again (Allegiance, 2010). If it is possible to achieve positive outcomes using consumer feedback to adapt the new know-ledge received into the organization, then it is important to investigate what this implies for or-ganizations. Especially, how received feedback may relate to organizational learning.

2

1.2 Previous Research

There has not been done much research within the field of organizational learning and feedback received through social media. Matschke and Pederson (2009) have in their paper “The Value of Feedback- Improvements based on the voices of customers and dealers”, investigated how organizations ex-ploit customer and dealer feedback. The purpose of their study was to “examine how firms can ensure that feedback contributes to the development of improvements in the organization in order to become more customer-centric (Matschke and Pederson, 2009, p. 1)”. The authors did a case study on Volvo Construction Equipment Region International and conducted different qualitative interviews with the em-ployees at Volvo CE Region International, Volvo Otomotiv Turk and representatives from two international Volvo CE dealers. The conclusions drawn from their study was that in order for organizations to benefit from customer and dealer feedback, they need to have adequate processes for feedback analysis, knowledge creation and action-taking. Furthermore, there has to exist an appropriate organizational culture within the organization.

1.3 Problem Discussion

The information age brings a lot of opportunities for an organization to partake in this mass of information and increase the knowledge of the organization in order to obtain an edge in the market. However, with this quick flow of information, organizations might have a hard time ad-justing and keeping up. One of the roles of an organization is to create a safety where they can return to in a fast paced world. This creates a "built-in resistance" to change. Small, slow changes still happen but they are often hard to notice. (Ahrne & Papakostas, 2002).

The concern is often that organizations getting involved with social media need to have a long-run perspective and requires the organizations to build an engagement with the customers over an extended period. This time frame might be a deterrent for some of the organizations. But hav-ing devoted fans often pays off in the end and can in some cases lead to good organizational change that benefits the organization. At the same time, the consumer is becoming more powerful, and has the ability to influence. The consumer demands to be heard, and expects organizations to listen. It is no longer something organizations can ignore, instead they need to integrate this to their organizations and learn how to deal with it. Organizational learning may be the only way for sustainable competitive advantage (DeGeus, 1988). Most of the academic research that has been done in the field of communication and social me-dia has focused on the consumer side of social media. This essay will therefore lay a groundwork focusing on the organizational side of the communication that takes place. Further, previous re-search within the field of organizational learning has often focused on the theories of organiza-tional learning, and are more concerned with contributing to a more complete understanding of organizational learning (e.g. Sanchez, 2001, Crossan et al, 1999, Huber, 1991). In this study we will try to get a deeper understanding on how feedback received through social media is used and implemented in organizations, in order to achieve organizational learning.

3

1.4 Purpose

The purpose of this study is to: portray a descriptive view of how organizations use the feedback gathered from social media in order to achieve organizational learning. In order to fulfill the purpose, the following research questions will be addressed: RQ 1: How do organizations use social media? RQ 2: How do organizations use feedback from social media? RQ 3: What similarities and differences do the interviewed organizations have regarding social media and organizational learning? RQ 4: Does the organization promote feedback in their social media use?

1.5 Limitations

The purpose of this essay is not to define social media or to suggest how organizations should use social media effectively. We will use social media as a tool to achieve organizational learning and only describe this part of the communication that takes place. The essay focuses on what the situation is like now and is not concerned to describe how potential future changes can affect the feedback through social media.

4

2 Frame of reference

_________________________________________________________________________

This chapter brings forward an overview of the theories and studies made within the fields of: Organizational learn-ing, Social media and Feedback. These theories will then support the analysis of the empirical findings that later will be presented.

_________________________________________________________________________

The focus in this study is on organizational learning, thus it is of great importance to understand what organizational learning is. Organizational learning entails many things, and is a subject of research in several different areas. However, for this study, we have chosen to focus on two models on how organizations learn that will later support our analysis. As previously mentioned, the purpose of this study involves studying how organizations incorpo-rate feedback received through social media and from that achieve organizational learning. There-fore, social media is described. Even though the study will not go to deep into focusing on what social media is and how it should be applied, it is important for the reader to understand what we mean with social media. We treat social media as a tool to achieve the feedback and look more on the communication that happens through social media then the tool itself. Further, theories on feedback need to be discussed, since it is suggested that feedback can have an impact on organi-zational learning.

2.1 Organizational learning

Organizational learning was first defined in 1969 by Simon as “the growing insights and successful re-structurings of organizational problems by individuals reflected in the structural elements and outcomes of the or-ganization itself” (Fiol & Lyles, 1985, p 803). This definition has however left many confused, since it suggests that learning consists of a change in states of knowledge and a change in terms of organizational outcome. Furthermore, the definition implies that something that clearly is not observable occurs at the same time as something that is more visible, which according to many theorists often is not the case (Fiol & Lyles, 1985). Therefore, as a result of this bewilderment, theorists have ever since tried to approach the subject organizational learning from different perspectives, resulting in a wide range of diverse defini-tions. Fiol & Lyles (1985) definition of organizational learning is “the process of improving actions through better knowledge and understanding” (Fiol and Lyles, 1985, p 803). Another definition by Cros-san & Berdrow (2003) states that organizational learning works “as a means to develop capabilities that are valued by customers, are difficult to imitate, and hence contribute to competitive advantage” (Crossan & Ber-drow, 2003, p 1089). There is also a confusion between the two terms "learning organizations" and "organizational learning". These two terms might at a first glance seem to portray the same things but there is a fundamental difference between them. Tsang (1997) makes a clear distinction between the two where "learning organizations" is concerned about "how an organization should learn" whilst "organizational learning" answers "how does an organization learn". The definitions might be many and wide but the one thing they all have in common is the assumption that learning will improve future performance (Fiol & Lyles, 1985). This is also reflected in the two models which we have chosen to discuss.

5

2.1.1 The five learning cycles of a learning organization

Sanchez (2001) developed a model named the five learning cycles model which describes the way a learning organization creates, shares and applies knowledge. The model is based on some key concepts that are central to analyzing organizational learning, and recognizes and explains five learning cycles that impel organization‟s learning processes. The model presents a “bottom-to-top” and “top-to-bottom” view of knowledge and learning processes in organizations (see figure 2.1).

Figure 2.1- The five learning cycle of organizational learning (Sanchez, 2001)

Sanchez (2001) argues that it is the individuals in an organization that develop the foundation of organizational knowledge through their own personal sense making processes. This can be seen in the Individual Learning Cycle. Some of the knowledge acquired by the individuals can directly be applied into performing his or her job, but most of the knowledge has to be shared with other individuals before one can benefit from the obtained knowledge. Thus, one of the most central phases in the process of organizational learning, is the one which occurs in the Individual/Group Learning Cycle. Here, individuals both share knowledge with other people they work with and re-ceive knowledge from their coworkers (Sanchez, 2001). The Group Learning Cycle in figure 2.1, represents the “know-how” knowledge, and the “know-why” knowledge. According to Sanchez (2001), know-how knowledge is obtained from learning by doing, it is the kind of learning that will generate “repeatable patterns of action” (Sanchez, 2001, p. 10). Know-why knowledge, on the other hand, is received through learning by analysis. It gives a better understanding of why doing certain things will end up in that way. Both are essential for an organization; know-how knowledge allows an organization to leverage its competences, and know-why knowledge is important for competence building (Sanchez, 2001). In this cycle of the model, groups can learn how to do their existing tasks in a more effective way, they can create learning that can give way to new kind of capabilities that could be developed, and thirdly they can develop ideas for how to do things differently with existing or new capabilities. However, this knowledge needs to be shared with the organization in order for the group to receive the needed

6

support to undertake new kinds of activities. This leads us to the fourth cycle, the Group/Organization Learning Cycle. This cycle embodies the process of which knowledge is communicated and shared with other groups in the organization, and where knowledge is con-verted from group knowledge to improved organizational competence (Sanchez, 2001). At the top of the model is the Organization Learning Cycle, where individuals and groups who has a more important role in the organization, try to integrate the knowledge in the organization to de-velop a strategy for how to best use this knowledge in order for the organization to achieve its goals (Sanchez, 2001).

2.1.2 The 4I Organizational Learning framework

Crossan et al. (1999), have developed a framework for the process of organizational learning. Similar to the Five Learning Cycles model (Sanchez, 2001), the 4I framework is based on three learning levels: individual, group and organization. The big difference is that it includes four re-lated processes named the 4I‟s: intuiting, interpreting, integrating and institutionalizing.

Figure 2.2 Learning/Renewal in Organizations: Four Processes through Three Levels (Crossan et al., 1999)

Not every process occur at every level (figure 2.2): intuiting and interpreting occur on the indi-vidual level, interpreting and integrating on the group level, and integrating and institutionalizing occur at the organizational level (Crossan et al., 1999).

Intuition is something that is very much an individual process, even though it may take place within a group or organizational context, it is still the individual who develops new insights based on his or her experiences. Furthermore, organizations do not interpret. Interpreting involves im-

7

proving and developing intuitive insights. This process can take place on the individual level, however, one would gain more from the interpretive process if individuals would converse and interact with other members in the organization. However, the interpretive process does not cross the group level. As individuals interact, the interpreting process merges with the integrating process. Integrating requires that there exists a shared understanding of what actions are most effective, amongst the members of a workgroup. In the beginning the group will decide on these actions on an informal level, before establishing rules and procedures, and routines become im-planted. The process of institutionalizing takes place (Crossan et al., 1999).

2.1.3 Resistance to change

In the process of learning, organizations can face a number of barriers that might hinder them from learning. According to Locke & Jain (1995), these barriers can be classified in-to different categories: individual- and group level, organizational, and environmental. An organization learns only through its members, therefore, any limitations the members have, will limit organizational learning. Locke & Jain (1995) argues that learning will not take place if the members choose not to think, for example by believing that it is to much trouble, or if the members want to play it safe rather than trying something new. Other explanations that clarify why individuals do not learn are individual‟s mental models (Senge, 1990), lack of time to deal with anything else other than the immediate issues (Hays, Wheelright, & Clark, 1988), and bounded rationality, which restricts the way individuals process information (Simon, 1955). On the group level there are a few different barriers to organizational learning. On this level there might be group norms that encourage traditional values and old routines; resistance to change that will affect established group relationships; and groupthink (Locke & Jain, 1995). Learning barriers at the organizational level can for example be the organization‟s corporate cul-ture (Argyris, 1990); focusing on utilizing existing capabilities, rather than discovering and expe-rimenting to find new ones (March, 1991); lack of feedback on accomplishments may result in wrong learning or no learning at all; and organizations ability to share newly obtained knowledge into organizational strategy, procedures, and routines (Locke & Jain, 1995). Barriers at the environmental level include markets, industries, technology, public policy, and ex-ternal stakeholder concerns. Learning in an organization may be hindered by a fast-changing technology, though competition, and steep learning curves in the industry it wants to enter. Keep in mind though, that environmental barriers can also be trigger to change and learning in organi-zations. For example, though competition may lead organizations to create and discover new ways of dealing with the competition and technological changes may force organizations to inno-vate (Locke & Jain, 1995).

2.2 Social media

Powell (2009) defines social media as “Internet-based tools for sharing and discussing information among human beings. The term most often refers to activities that integrate technology, social interaction, and the construc-tion of words, pictures, videos, and audio." (Powell, 2009, p.136-137) The internet has lead way to the information age we live in today which allows people to easier give their opinion and view of the world. “Our social tools remove older obstacles to public expression, and thus remove the bottlenecks that characterized mass media. The result is the mass amateurization of efforts pre-viously reserved for media professionals” (Shirky, 2009, p.55). What Shirky (2009) is telling us is that a

8

shift of power has taken place from previously being only a one-way broadcast through the mass-media channels to a more interactive two-way discussion that takes place in social media. This shift in communication is often referred to as web 2.0 which is a term created by O'Reilly (2007) to describe the fundamental shifts from static pages to a more collaborative and interac-tive web. Web 2.0 has simplified the interactivity and enhanced the power and influence that a consumer has over the organizations and products they produce. “From 'wisdom of the crowds' reactions, organizations can collect detailed information on users, build valuable relationships through con-versations about people's experiences, deploy higher levels of engagement, and refine offerings and related messages to better match needs” (Serrat, 2010, p.2). Haggren, Larsson, Nordvall & Widing (2008) constructed a model dividing users of social media into three separate levels of involvement. The first level is viewing, where the user only takes part of the communication based on what the sender wants the user to perceive (the power of moving the mind in a set direction is still the senders even if the user associates differently). The second level of involvement is interacting. The interactor is able to take different choices and affect the way the message is perceived compared to others who might choose differently. This still has the creator in power suggesting what the interactor should perceive. The third level is participating, which happens when the participator gains some power from the creator and they are able to af-fect each other in their perceptions. This is where the discussion starts and where the real feed-back is able to take place. The requirements to reach this third level for consumers are to give them enough “Thought-space, Choice-space and Act-space” to take part (Haggren et. al., 2008). Another way of categorizing people into activity levels has been done in the social technograph-ics ladder (Bernoff & Li, 2008). This theory creates a segmentation of people that show that all people are not participating on the same term, some interact more than others (see table 2.1). For describing the feedback and organizational learning that takes place we are only interested in the two top segments. These two top segments, creators and critics, are comprised of less then 21% of the users in Sweden (Groundswell, 2009) which shows us that for every person providing some feedback to the organizations there are a lot of people who only see the message. Table 2.1 The Social Technographics Ladder (Bernoff & Li, 2008)

Creators

Publish a blog Publish your own Web pages Upload video you created Upload audio/music you created Write articles or stories and post them

Critics Post rating/reviews of products/services Comment on someone else‟s blog Contribute to online forums Contribute to/edit articles in Wikipedia

Collectors Use RSS feeds Add „tags‟ to Web pages or photos „Vote‟ for Web sites online

Joiners Maintain profile on a social networking site Visit social networking sites

Spectators Read blogs Watch video from other users Listen to podcasts Read online forums Read customer rating/services

Inactives None of the above

9

The important part here is to not merely look at each component of a social media tool by itself and analyze what it is able to accomplish. We need to put it in a larger perspective. It is not the tools that make the web 2.0, it is the people behind the tools forming the social web by their on-line conversations and the discovery, creation and sharing of content (Breakenridge & Solis, 2009) These new communication tools better reflect our social capabilities and continuously al-lows new, flexible way of taking advantage of this change (Shirky, 2009).

2.3 Feedback

Senge's (1990) definition of feedback distinguishes between „positive feedback‟ (making encour-aging remarks) and „negative feedback‟ (potential bad news). The third concept, which is the one we are most interested in, is a bit broader and encompasses “any reciprocal flow of influence” (Senge, 1990, p.75). The same definition of feedback still applies today but the models used have evolved with the emergence of internet and social media. The information age brought social media which empowered consumers to a level they have nev-er been in the past. “The old world model of feedback represented a closed, one-way street of communication” (Powell, 2009, p.68). This can be seen in figure 2.3, where the communication exists in one direc-tion one. The public gives feedback, but the organization does not respond to the feedback in any way apart from some occasional changes (Powell, 2009).

Figure 2.3 The old world model of feedback (Powell, 2009)

With social media, this model is transformed into a continuous loop that ends once both parts are done responding to each others feedback (see figure 2.4).

Figure 2.4 The new world model of feedback (Powell, 2009)

Internet changes the playing field with its wide open nature that leaves inerasable tracks forever. Different rules of engagement apply, it is no longer possible to run or hide from the feed-back. This means that the feedback nowadays is described as thinking in circles, it is “the return of information to influence the next step” (McDermott & O'Connor, 1997, p. 26). Two types of loops

10

have been identified. The first loop is the reinforcing feedback loop where the change continues growing and is amplified; the change makes the happening occur more frequently. The second loop is the balancing feedback loop that reduces change and restores balance, which makes the happening occur less (Reed & Stoll, 2000) Argyris & Schon (1978) have developed the two-tiered model of organizational learning, single- and double-loop learning. Single-loop learning implies learning from the consequences of prior performance. Single-loop learning is when an error is detected or corrected without questioning or altering the underlying values of the system (Argyris, 1994). Single-loop learning may solve the presented problems but it disregards questions of why the problem occurred in the first place. It can not create its own standards of appropriate behavior. Double-loop learning, on the other hand, entails systems that can observe and adjust behavior, and decide what suitable behavior is. Double-loop learning needs that the system challenges its own underlying assumptions and values, and put the terms of its own organizing to the risk of changing (Hatch, 1997). Double-loop learning occurs when mismatches are corrected by first examining and altering the main variables and then the actions (Argyris, 1994). The use of double-loop learning is a genera-tive learning that makes changes easier in periods of change (Reed & Stoll, 2000) but the exis-tence of single-loop learning systems may prevent double-loop learning from occurring (Morgan, 1997). Reed & Stoll (2000) identified four main functions of feedback in organizational learning. The first one is a bridging function, creating a useful relationship between separate or disparate in-formation by linking them together. Secondly we have an illuminating function, shedding light on previously unsolvable problems and allowing the organization to progress. The third function identified is a renewal purpose, re-connecting the organization with its basic principles and al-lowing new focus. Lastly we have the challenging function, creating new knowledge by reframing the information

11

3 Method

_______________________________________________________________________________

This chapter explains our method in finding information and collecting the data. The procedure is described in de-tail and is followed by a discussion about the quality of the study. _________________________________________________________________________

3.1 Purpose of research

A descriptive research aims to portray an accurate profile of people, events or situations (Robson, 2002). This fits with the purpose of the study, since it aims to describe how organizations incor-porate the feedback they receive through social media and achieve organizational learning. We are not interested in establishing any casual relationships between variables, nor are we interested in finding new insights or assessing a phenomena in a new light. Our interest lies in explaining how organizations are achieving organizational learning from the feedback they receive through social media.

3.2 Research method

This study has applied a qualitative research method. According to Aaker, Kumar & Day (2003) qualitative research is about gathering data that cannot be measured or observed directly, and in-cludes individuals‟ subjective understanding of different events. This coincides with our inten-tions of obtaining an understanding of the subject and acquiring a deeper meaning of it. Fur-thermore, the qualitative approach allows us to reflect on the why‟s and the how‟s, which again allows for a more in depth understanding of the subject.

3.3 Data collection methods

According to Cooper & Schindler (2001), gathering literature entails a review of existing articles and books in the selected subject. In order to get an insight to the subject, a great amount of the collected information has been in the form of books. These have been attained through the Uni-versity library in Jönköping‟s search engine, Julia, which mostly provided information regarding marketing research, and organizational learning. Furthermore, the University library‟s databases, such as JSTOR, Emerald Fulltext and ABI/Inform, have been employed when searching for in-formation. When searching for literature and articles in the databases, we have used words such as “organizational learning”, “social media”, and ”feedback”. These keywords have been com-bined in order to find articles relevant to the purpose of the study. Multiple sources of informa-tion have been utilized in order to increase the study‟s credibility. Primary data is collected for the purpose of the immediate study. This can be through conducting surveys or interviews or through observations (Churchill, 1999). In this study, the primary data was derived from conducting interviews. Using interviews for our research allowed us to main-tain flexibility and context whilst focusing on the specific cases. It is also a good way of exploring an area that has not been researched much earlier (Esaiasson, Gilljam, Oscarsson, & Wängnerud, 2009)).

3.3.1 Sample selection

The sample selection was made from a strategic sample with a most similar system approach since we are not testing any theories (Esaiasson et. al., 2009). We decided to take this most similar approach to get a favorable selection for testing local organizations use of feedback in social me-dia. Choosing organizations that were already involved and active in social media allowed us to

12

concentrate on the descriptive part. Choosing these companies over more traditional companies gave us a better chance of studying the use of feedback through social media. We had certain cri-teria for the desired organizations to interview where our main one was that it needed to be local-ly situated. Another criteria was that they needed to be autonomous in their use of social media. This made us look for a different organization than Bubs Godis AB which was one of our initial selections. The collection of the sample was made mainly by our previous knowledge of local organizations active in social media, but we also received feedback on inquires done through twitter which af-fected our final sample selection. The selected organizations were ALMI Företagspartner Jönköping AB, Moderskeppet and Destination Jönköping. The reason we chose three organiza-tions was that we wanted a deeper analysis of each but at the same time have two others to com-pare the results with. A further description of what each organization does is made in chapter 4, Empirical findings. Our interviews at ALMI and Destination Jönköping were conducted in two parts. One interview was with the one directly involved and responsible for the use of social media at the organization. The other interview was with done with a communication officer at the organization. This was done in order to get a second view from a source not directly involved and see how they saw the organizational learning from social media. With Moderskeppet we chose to only perform one in-terview since everyone in that organization was directly involved in the use of social media. To get a broader perspective on their organizational learning we did the interview with two persons present so that they were able to complement and add to what the other was saying.

3.3.2 Interview methods

The five interviews that were conducted for this study all took place in the office of each organi-zation in order to maintain their "home-environment” and decrease the interviewer effect (Esaiasson et. al., 2009). The interviews were conducted with one person leading the questioning in order to not confuse the respondent with questions coming from different directions. First we started off with some warm-up questions or comments about the office to ease up the respon-dent. The rest of the questions were divided into four main topics: social media, organizational learning, responsibility and communication (see appendix 1). These topics then had a few set questions and a few follow-up questions but the interviewing was under a very relaxed form were the respondent was allowed to "wander off" in his response, touching several answers to ques-tions at once. The questions were mostly open-ended allowing a free response but some more focused questions were also made. The interviews lasted for about 30-40 minutes each. The first topic in the interview was about social media and consisted of more general questions. This allowed the respondent to ease into the questions and giving us an overview over the extent of social media use that took place at each organization before getting into more specific question related more closely to our purpose with the study. After the general initial questions we had more questions concerning organizational learning and feedback where we also got some exam-ples of organizational change as a result of feedback in social media. The third topic we took up was about responsibility and this was done to explore limitations and restrictions to organization-al change that may be in place. Lastly we discussed a more general topic again, taking up commu-nication in order to ask for changes again and get some final insights. The interviewed persons were treated as respondents where it is their thoughts and views of the situation that are important instead of using them as informants trying to reach a further under-

13

standing of a particular happening or situation (Esaiasson et. al., 2009). The same questions were asked to all respondents.

3.4 Quality of the study

There exists two ways of measuring the quality of a study; validity and reliability (Kylén, 2004). No matter what the chosen method is for collecting the data, one should always scrutinize how reliable and valid the results are (Bell, 2000).

3.4.1 Validity

Validity in the research is a way of making sure the researcher describes what he intends to dis-cuss (Wiedersheim-Paul & Ericsson, 1997). One of the ways we ensured this was to constantly have the purpose in mind with the shaping of the interview questions. The operationalization of the theory and research questions was done by dividing up the interview questions in four parts (social media, organizational learning, responsibility and communication) that all related back to the purpose. Another way of ensuring validity in the research was done by recording the inter-views as well as taking notes during the interviews, this enabled us to keep focus on the purpose without worrying about missing important points. After the interviews were conducted they were transcribed in order to decrease the risk of misinterpretations.

3.4.2 Reliability

In order to have an essay with validity it is a requirement that the reliability is good, the opposite however is not needed (Bell, 2000). Having a good reliability in a study entails that the same re-sults would have emerged even with other researchers conducting the study in the same way (Holme & Solvang, 1997). One of the problems with the reliability for this study is that it deals with an area that changes very quickly which means that the situation would not stay the same until someone else attempted this same research. Despite this quick change we consider the relia-bility good since we have made a dominantly descriptive approach, only applying the theories we have chosen. Further, since the study is only concerned with how the situation looks today, we are aware that further research on this subject would most likely lead to other findings. The inter-views were conducted with very open questions and would most likely lead to similar results if done again.

14

4 Empirical findings

_______________________________________________________________________________

This chapter present the empirical findings retrieved through the conducted interviews. All interviews were performed in Swedish. We have translated and summarized the interviews under three main topics (social media, feedback and organizational learning) to make it easier for the reader. The first empirical finding is from ALMI Företags-partner Jönköping AB followed by Moderskeppet and finally Destination Jönköping.

_________________________________________________________________________

4.1 ALMI Företagspartner Jönköping AB (ALMI)

ALMI is a government owned organization with several local offices that help to develop com-panies and new businesses. In Jönköping they have 23 employees. The following interviews were conducted in two parts but have been combined to display a more comprehensible and struc-tured empirical finding. The first interview was done 2010-05-24 with Cecilia Ödman, Business consultant and responsible for Social Media at ALMI. The second interview was done with Jenny Olsson 2010-05-27, Information responsible at ALMI.

4.1.1 ALMI and Social media

ALMI is new within the area of social media. The organization has been active for no more than 8 months within this field and the decision to enter the world of social media started from a per-sonal interest and curiosity from Cecilia Ödman. She started a blog called "Innovationsrådgivar-na" (Swedish for 'innovationconsultants'), where articles mostly about innovation were published. The blog is today called ALMI Jönköping, and is a blog for the entire organization. The plan in a longer perspective is that it will contain articles about marketing, innovation, finance and new business creation but today it is mostly about marketing since Cecilia is the most active with it. ALMI is also active on Facebook and Twitter. However, the focus for ALMI is on the blog and the Facebook account since Twitter does not contain the right target group of local people from Jönköping (C. Ödman, personal communication, 2010-05-24).

Today, it is only Cecilia that is involved with social media. There is a lack of interest with the oth-er co-workers, however Jenny Olsson believes that it is something that should be given a try. “Social media has become more common in society, and we at ALMI have always said that we want to try to be in the front edge, therefore it is important to try to be a part of what is happen-ing” (J. Olsson, personal communication, 2010-05-27).

4.1.2 Feedback via Social media

Since ALMI arranges many different seminars, the aim is that people attending these seminars will continue to have contact with ALMI via Facebook. For ALMI, social media is a great way of showing the expertise and skills that exits at the organization, and at the same time be more avail-able for the customers, and function as a good consultant for them. Furthermore, social media enables more explicit reactions from the customers. Normally, after the seminars, the customers are asked to fill out a survey, but with the use of social media ALMI can get more direct and spontaneous comments (C. Ödman, personal communication, 2010-05-24).

Jenny further explains that social media could be a way of reaching new target groups, especially the new younger generation. She considers social media as a complement to the media channels ALMI already is using. “The more places you try to expose yourself on, the greater chance you will have to reach out”. Jenny says that they try to receive feedback from customers by linking to the blog in the newsletters they send out, and they have experienced an increase in visitors. How-

15

ever, they do not encourage feedback but are instead more informative in their blog. Jenny has not experienced any changes yet regarding the communication with the customers and their in-fluence after social media has been implemented within the organization (J. Olsson, personal communication, 2010-05-27).

The aim is to get more feedback from customers, though. Optimally customers would give ideas on what subjects they want the seminars to be about, or feedback on what ALMI is already doing. However, ALMI is not working with easing the feedback process at the moment, but Ce-cilia hopes that there will be more interactivity with the customers in the near future (C. Ödman, personal communication, 2010-05-24).

4.1.3 Organizational learning

The average age at ALMI is fairly high amongst the employees, in other words, they are not the Facebook-generation. Many co-workers within ALMI do not have Facebook, it is therefore not a natural tool for them to use (C. Ödman, personal communication, 2010-05-24). Jenny explains that it is a big leap to make, especially if you are not familiar with this way of spreading informa-tion.

They have had some internal education in order to get everybody involved with social media. The result from this is a higher interest from some of the employees, some have even started their own Facebook accounts after this and also approached Cecilia with questions about social media. Therefore, Cecilia hopes that the organization is on its way of getting an understanding that social media is part of the marketing process just like a template or brochure (C. Ödman, personal communication, 2010-05-24).

Other than the age issue, another obstacle to social media is time. Good things take time. Social media requires you to think about what to publish and what the published will lead to. Many people believe social media is only for fun, something you can do on your coffee break, therefore Cecilia gets the feeling that the co-workers are not aware of how important social media is for ALMI (C. Ödman, personal communication, 2010-05-24). Jenny explains that many within the organizations have difficulties in grasping the use of social media. What is it good for and why should we use it? What is lacking right now is strategies for social media, so that ALMI can get something in return from using social media (J. Olsson, personal communication, 2010-05-27. “I can see some of the advantages of using social media, especially the blog, however, we need to reflect on the time and effort we put in using social media, and the gains we receive from it. You need to believe in it yourself first, in order to use it in different contexts” (J. Olsson, personal communication, 2010-05-27).

The organization copes with changes within social media individually. Those that attend any training that might be arranged do not share it with the rest of the organization. According to Jenny it is because social media requires time, and everybody prioritizes differently. Social media might just not be important for everybody (J. Olsson, personal communication, 2010-05-27).

Cecilia constantly evaluates the process, and compiles numbers before sharing it with the rest of the organization. ALMI has monthly meetings and Cecilia tries to compile what has happened within the world of social media but only presents this to the others maybe quarterly. At the moment, it is only Cecilia that tries to keep herself updated within social media and attends to different education opportunities but after what she has understood and believes this will in-crease with the entire corporation in the future (C. Ödman, personal communication, 2010-05-24).

16

An example on feedback that lead to an organizational change started with a person who com-plained about not receiving a confirmation on their attendance to the seminar. ALMI keeps a ca-lendar with events listed but events that are added late are not updated in it. This caused the re-ception to lack information about the updated events and they couldn't answer questions about it. The feedback resulted in a form to fill out at each event which is kept in the reception (C. Ödman, personal communication, 2010-05-24).

4.2 Moderskeppet

Moderskeppet is a company that teaches photo-editing with Adobe Photoshop to interested people. At the moment they have 6 employees. The interview was done 2010-05-24 with Chrille Peterson, marketing, concept and business development, and with Mattias Karlsson, founder (who joined ten minutes into the interview). Both persons were active in the interview and sometimes even discussing the matters with each other.

4.2.1 Moderskeppet and Social media

Moderskeppet was sprung from the world of social media and they have worked actively with it even before the company was created. Chrille Peterson characterizes Moderskeppet as a classical IT start-up. It developed from a blog driven by one person, Mattias Karlsson, to an organization consisting of soon-to-be 7 employees. Currently it has a dynamic website, is active on Facebook and has an upcoming website where more interaction with the customers is planned. They also use YouTube as a transmission channel for content they feel they do not have a need to own. Moderskeppet has worked with social media before it was known as a concept. “We are every-where on the internet where our users are”. That is why they also have a Twitter account, even though their target group is not yet there (C. Peterson, personal communication, 2010-05-24). Social media is mainly used as sales and marketing channel. Moderskeppet also uses it to test dif-ferent ideas and evaluate what the customers think about them. They try to investigate where the interest is the biggest, and try to fulfill that need first (C. Peterson, personal communication, 2010-05-24). They also use social media as a form of receiving validation on if what they are ac-tually doing is something good and that people like them (M. Karlsson, personal communication, 2010-05-24).

4.2.2 Feedback via Social media

Moderskeppet tries to receive feedback by encouraging it. Whenever something is posted on Fa-cebook, they try to include an open-ended question which will encourage fans to interact with them. On the blog feedback in the form of comments are considered to be of a higher quality than Facebook. “People take their time when they comment on the blog, especially if it is nega-tive feedback. People can be anonymous and at the same time very detailed” (C. Peterson, per-sonal communication, 2010-05-24). Customer interaction has changed over the years. When the company was first started five years ago, Mattias could ask the customers a direct question of what they wanted the next video to be about and then create this for them. Today this has become more difficult because they are more people involved in what the organization should be working on (M. Karlsson, personal commu-nication, 2010-05-24). Mattias further explains that it is important to distinguish if the users can influence the content inside the channels, or if the users can influence the choice of channels. “When there was only the blog, the customers had more power over what content they wanted to see. But now that there are so many different channels, they have more influence over what channels we should be

17

using. The customers have demonstrated that they want to see us more on Facebook and on Youtube” (M. Karlsson, personal communication, 2010-05-24). Moderskeppet makes sure to monitor their organization‟s name, Moderskeppet, and also their area of business, Photoshop. This allows them to catch both positive and negative opinions early, allowing them to transform the negative into satisfied customers. "We constantly feel that we could listen to our customers all the time and change direction all the time, depending on where the winds go. We are very flexible if you compare to a lot of other organizations but at the same time it's important to not always shift in the direction of the wind" (M. Karlsson, personal com-munication, 2010-05-24).

4.2.3 Organizational learning

The monitoring of their business also ensures they always stay proactive and learn new things as quickly as possible. This allows them to help people with problems by referring them to their website (C. Peterson, personal communication, 2010-05-24). When they monitor themselves, they catch up on tendencies. They notice trends in what people are asking them, and what people are saying. Since they cannot respond to all the feedback they receive, they try to get a feeling of what people are interested in and try to meet these needs (M. Karlsson, personal communication, 2010-05-24). Once every week, they have a meeting where they have a recurring point about interaction with the customers. They discuss what tendencies they have noticed, and what they should respond to. Newly acquired knowledge within social media is shared with the employees through internal training. If there are new software applications and services on the Internet, then someone is re-sponsible for this and learns everything about them before sharing it with the rest of organiza-tion. Everyone has their own field of expertise that they have a responsibility to keep up with (C. Peterson, personal communication, 2010-05-24). “It is important to have all the co-workers onboard on the technology train, so that when there is a new technology that is the new must-technology, you are prepared since you have grasped the predecessors. That is why we are on Twitter, to be prepared for the next phenomena within technology. You never know what is next” (M. Karlsson, personal communication, 2010-05-24). They also work a lot with getting used to new technologies. Mattias explains, “If you know Youtube you know other video-sites. If a new service or program appears then someone has the responsibility of learning it, how it works, how to work with it and then they share the know-ledge. It is all very transparent.” (M. Karlsson, personal communication, 2010-05-24).

4.3 Destination Jönköping

Destination Jönköping has an objective to strengthen the view of Jönköping and attract more visitors. The organization consists of 24 employees. The following interviews were conducted in two parts but have been combined to display a more understandable and structured empirical finding. The first interview was done 2010-05-26, with Johan Lundell, communication officer at Destination Jönköping. The second interview was done 2010-05-28, with the Marketing manager Helena Nordström.

4.3.1 Destination Jönköping and Social media

Destination Jönköping has recently launched their new website, where you are able to "like and share" pages with others on Twitter and Facebook (J. Lundell, personal communication, 2010-05-26). Helena believes that Facebook is useful since it is common and big whilst on Twitter they find the marketers and opinion makers that are able to spread their information like rings on the

18

water. This is the reason why their primary social media tool is Twitter. They use it as a place to share information on the things that happen in Jönköping. “If we publish an article about an event on the website, we‟ll put a link on Twitter so that you can follow anything that is happening in Jönköping” (H. Nordström, personal communication, 2010-05-28).The activity on Facebook is limited to a fanpage for Jönköping‟s ambassadors (interested people who help spread the view of Jönköping). The approach on Facebook is pretty much the same as on Twitter; to spread infor-mation on what is happening in Jönköping. Another social media they have used recently is Flickr which was used when Jönköping‟s ice hockey team, HV71, won the Swedish Elite League 2010. Flickr worked well and they intend to use it again on more occasions (J. Lundell, personal communication, 2010-05-26 & H. Nordström, personal communication, 2010-05-28). The main objective with social media is to reach their goals of increasing the numbers of visitors and more booked hotel-rooms, everything else is bonus. At the moment, there are 5 persons working actively with social media. “It‟s all about taking one step at a time. We have only gotten started, there are so many things you could do” (H. Nordström, personal communication, 2010-05-28).

4.3.2 Feedback via Social media

Twitter has been used for about one year, but according to Helena the approach the organization took in the beginning was a clear mistake. Twitter was used as a megaphone where information was spread one-way only, and any comment that was made was not met. However, ever since Helena entered the organization, she has tried to clarify that Twitter is about creating dialogues, and if someone has questions, they must be answered (H. Nordström, personal communication, 2010-05-28). The feedback the organization has received through social media has been fairly scarce so far de-spite desiring more comments. When comments are received Destination Jönköping is quick with responding and developing it to a conversation. In that way, they do try to encourage feed-back (H. Nordström, personal communication, 2010-05-28). One example, is the “have your say” function on the website, so that people can leave comments on what they like and do not like about Destination Jönköping. ”The goal is to create a dialogue. We are only in the starting phase”, Johan explains. Helena elucidate that there exist possibilities to involve the people more, by for example including them in helping to strengthen Jönköping as a brand by leaving propos-als on what Jönköping means to them. During the launching of their website, there has been a “lets create Jönköping‟s display window”, where the audience was asked about what they wanted displayed. People could comment and leave suggestions on what they would like to see displayed (J. Lundell, personal communication, 2010-05-26).

4.3.3 Organizational learning

Helena has held a walk-through with the management on Twitter. The executive wanted to un-derstand how social media worked and therefore asked Helena to give a basic overview. Helena explains that it is important for an organization to have a management that encourages the use of social media and understands the value of marketing where the target group is. She elaborates that it comes down to the employees needing to share in this interest for the organization to progress. ”The key to successful communication is to have individuals within the organization that are curious and motivated to learn and adapt to changes” (H. Nordström, personal commu-nication, 2010-05-28). Johan says that what is needed is more internal work to get the employees comfortable with working with social media, and to make them familiar with this way of working (J. Lundell, personal communication, 2010-05-26). “We are a lot of people here who understand and have an interest for social media, many of us use it naturally. Those who are older also want to understand but haven't grasped it yet” (H. Nordström, personal communication, 2010-05-28).

19

Every Monday morning the co-workers who work with social media get together for a 20 minute meeting. At this meeting they discuss what has happened on the web, what will happen in Jönköping and what problems they might have encountered on the web. Thereby they all get an overview and can update each other and each person is then responsible to make sure that the information is shared to his or her department. "We reflect but we do it very fast" (H. Nordström, personal communication, 2010-05-28). Changes within social media is thus every one of these co-workers responsibility to pick up on and share it with the rest of the organization. This can be done partly through internal blogging, partly through staff meetings. They also have an intranet where information is shared (J. Lundell, personal communication, 2010-05-26). Even though strategies are good to have, Helena explains that it is important not to get stuck in only writing strategies and never getting started. “The goal is to strengthen the image of Jönköping, and therefore as long as the activities support this goal, we just go for it” (H. Nordström, personal communication, 2010-05-28). Since the use of social media, it has been apparent that the organization has to be transparent, since social media requires things to be rapid. “You need to be quick on responding on Twitter and Facebook, which requires organizations to change. Governmental organizations are slow” (J. Lundell, personal communication, 2010-05-26).

20

5 Analysis

_______________________________________________________________________________

This chapter analyses the empirical findings and draws connection to the frame of reference in order to get a deeper understanding of the findings. The first analysis is ALMI followed by Moderskeppet and lastly Destination Jönköping. _______________________________________________________________________________

5.1 ALMI Företagspartner Jönköping AB

The difference between the two conducted interviews at ALMI was that Jenny does not use so-cial media as much as Cecilia does. This might explain why Jenny does not share the same posi-tivity towards the use of social media as Cecilia. To Cecilia social media is a revolution that entails a new way of reaching the target group and being where everybody else is. Jenny on the other hand needs to be more convinced that there are benefits the organization can gain from using social media. Cecilia is aware that there is a lack of interest in parts of the organization, but since she believes in this way of working she is willing to continue pushing for a higher implementation of social media in the organization. Serrat (2010) discusses how social media has enabled more interactivity with the public, and how it has increased their power of influence. This coincides with Shirky‟s (2009) arguments that so-cial media has changed the communication process and has given organizations an opportunity to be more interactive with the public. Both Cecilia and Jenny want to see more interactivity, however at the moment, the feedback they receive on the blog and on the Facebook account is small. There exist a small attempt to increase feedback by linking to the blog on the newsletters they send out, but they both agree that this is something that needs to be improved. The lack of feedback can be explained by the fact that ALMI has recently started to blog and many might not be aware of this yet. The model constructed by Haggren et al. (2008) throws some more light on this. ALMI is at the moment only on the first level which is Viewing. The articles published on the blog are informative, and do not encourage the viewer to participate. The intentions from ALMI is to get the information out, and they do not focus on interactivity to take place. According to Haggren et al. (2008), in order to move from this level to a more interac-tive level, ALMI needs to create more discussions that enable the viewer to reflect and hence leave comments. Nevertheless, the organization has witnessed an increase in visitors to the blog. Bernoff & Li (2008) argue that people are different and do not participate on the same term. Some are simply willing to participate more than others. The internal process that took place from feedback that was explained in the empirical findings is an example of Argyris & Schon (1978) double-looping model of organizational learning. Instead of just coming across a problem and correcting it, ALMI was able to find the underlying assump-tions to what the problem was; that the organization was experiencing poor internal communica-tion. They corrected these underlying causes with an appropriate solution; to have a form where the responsible for the event can fill out whatever information is needed and keep it in the recep-tion. This use of double-loop learning enables the organization to progress past this problem in the future.

21

ALMI‟s situation regarding organizational learning can be more comprehensible by applying the 4I model by Crossan et al., (1999). As explained in the model, organizational learning begins with an individual‟s intuition. The decision to start working with social media came from a personal interest with Cecilia. She saw something in social media that she believes is needed for ALMI in order to stay competitive on the market, and took the initiative to work with it. However, as pre-viously mentioned, it is only Cecilia who keeps herself updated on the trends and changes in so-cial media. She has so far not been able to take it to the next level, that is to the interpretive process where she could discuss social media with her co-workers. At the moment, her co-workers are not very involved in Cecilia‟s work with social media, and therefore it is often her own interpretations and reflections that are shared with the organization. As Crossan et al., (1999) explains, the organization would be able to benefit more from social media and the feed-back received if the interpretive process would take place with other individuals‟ insights and in-terpretations. Cecilia perceives a reluctance in the organization to embrace social media. This can deter the or-ganization from learning and developing. According to Locke & Jain (1995) if the members choose not to think by for example assuming that something is too difficult to learn, learning will not take place. Since the average age at ALMI is rather high, they are not accustomed with social media and how it works. For that reason, a lack of motivation and willingness to learn is present in the organization, which in turn will hinder the organization from changing and evolving.

5.2 Moderskeppet

This interview was done with both respondents present which made it hard to discern big differ-ences between them, but Chrille was perceived to have a more strategic view on the use of so-cial media than Mattias had. The social media environment in the organization was very natural and is constructed to adjust to changes. The organization was very advanced in their strategies around how to use social media and for what purpose they were using it. Moderskeppet was born as a “classical IT start-up” which makes the web 2.0 environment a nat-ural part. A large amount of their customers can be assumed to be at the top of the social tech-nographics ladder (creators) since they are taking a course on how to edit photos and create their own content. Despite this, the customers are still on the second level of Haggren et al. (2008) model where they have a participating role. They can make active choices in what ways to perce-ive things but they are still in the power of the creators. This is a planned strategy from Moders-keppet where they want a certain interactivity but a focus on sales and marketing where they can push out their own content. In the beginning, when they only had a blog, the feedback looked a lot like the old feedback model in figure 2.3; they answered questions but the discussions were very limited. Today, with the monitoring, they actively seek up negative customers in order to have a discussion with them (see fig 2.4) and transform the negative into satisfied customers. This use of the balancing feed-back loop (Reed & Stoll, 2000) reduces the spreading of the negative views and ensures a better opinion of Moderskeppet. The major function of Moderskeppet‟s use of social media is the illu-minating function, where they receive comments that enlightens them on previously not known problems and allow the organization to progress (Reed & Stoll, 2000). However, there is an un-derstanding within the organization that it is not possible to respond to all feedback they receive. One of the barriers to organizational learning from feedback that has emerged over time is that, as Moderskeppet has grown, it has become harder to react directly to the feedback. This is be-cause more people means a harder time of convincing enough people to invest time in creating

22

the change suggested by the feedback. The organization works a lot in the lines of Sanchez (2001) five learning cycles of an organization. They each have their own area of expertise where they learn individually, relevant parts of this is then spread in the group learning cycle and, at the end, what is relevant for the entire organization may be discussed and reflected upon at their weekly meetings.

5.3 Destination Jönköping

As a newly employed marketing manager, Helena is very active and involved in using social me-dia. She perceives this as natural as any other marketing tool. Johan shares the interest with Hele-na, however he is more involved from a technical perspective with administrating the website. Whereas Helena believes that as long as they are on the right track, strategies are not what are most important at the moment. Johan on the other hand feels that they are in need of strategies in order to know what the gains are from using social media. Currently, there has not been much feedback received but after Helena started working there they have shifted towards a more interactive web 2.0 environment (O'Reilly, 2007). "Twitter is about creating dialogues and if someone has answers they must be answered". The feedback is encouraged and desired. Whenever they post something on Twitter or Facebook and when comments are received Destination Jönköping is quick with responding and develop-ing it to a conversation. This attempt of getting the feedback into a loop can be seen in the new model of feedback (fig 2.4). The current lack of feedback via social media could be explained by the fact that the use of social media at Destination Jönköping is still very new and limited. The inhabitants in Jönköping might not yet be aware of the fact that they have an opportunity to influence and give their opinions on what they would like to see happening in Jönköping. When the model constructed by Haggren et al., (2008) is applied to Destination Jönköping we find the citizens somewhere between the viewing level and the interacting level. Destination Jönköping wants to interact with the viewer, and whenever they post something on Twitter or Facebook and they receive a comment, they try to respond in a way that a conversation could develop. Furthermore, their “Have your say”- function on the website is an attempt from their side to allow more interaction with the viewers. However, their posts on Twitter and Facebook are still very much more informative in the sense that they want to create awareness on the things that are happening in Jönköping. The ambassadors that are active on Destination Jönköping's Facebook page can be considered creators according to the social technographics ladder (Bernoff & Li, 2008). They have a large freedom in creating what they feel is important to promote Jönköping. Helena‟s enthusiasm about social media is shared with the rest of the organization. They are about 5 people who are working actively with this trying to improve and catch new trends. San-chez (2001) model of organizational learning can be approached as a “top-to-bottom” and “bot-tom-to-top” (see figure 2.1). In Destination Jönköping, both approaches are present. There is an interest from the management within the organization to learn more about social media, and how the organization can develop from this. Their motivation and encouragement in learning more has resulted in approaching Helena so that they can gain more knowledge about social media and how to implement it in order to gain as much as possible. In addition, Helena‟s interest and in-volvement is shared with a couple of other individuals in the organization, who she works more closely with. Therefore, they are able to use each other‟s insights and try to develop ideas on how to do things differently and more effectively and evolve from that.

23

As mentioned, every Monday morning begins with a short meeting where the co-workers who are involved in working with social media at Destination Jönköping, update each other on what is currently happening on the web. It is a good way of sharing information, however, the time given is not enough for the individuals to reflect on the use of social media. The risk is that the organi-zation can get stuck in the single-loop model (Argyris, 1994). The group may solve the problems they have incurred during the week, but as a consequence they will neglect reflecting on the un-derlying factors to these problems which would help them finding more appropriate solutions. This can prevent the organization from developing double-loop learning.

24

6 Conclusion

_______________________________________________________________________________

In this chapter, the conclusions drawn from the study are presented, the purpose is answered by discussing the re-search questions. This is followed by some final reflections. _________________________________________________________________________ The purpose of this essay was to portray a descriptive view of how organizations use the feedback gathered from social media in order to achieve organizational learning. This was done by answering the three re-search questions. RQ 1: How do organizations use social media? ALMI uses social media mostly as an information channel. Currently they are present on Face-book, a blog and twitter. They are still very new at using social media and most of them are not the “Facebook-generation”. An interest has appeared and they are slowly but surly making use of more and more social media. The use of social media at Destination Jönköping is very similar but they are more involved in the use of it. Destination Jönköping uses Twitter as their main channel to spread information about Jönköping and their ambassadors use Facebook, they have also used Flickr on one occasion. The average age in the organization is younger and they have more people with a big interest for social media. Moderskeppet is very different their use of social me-dia. For them it is a very natural tool and the way they connect with customers and make profits. They have a strategy behind their use and know what channels they want to be on as well as how much interactivity they want. RQ 2: How do organizations use the feedback from social media? ALMI does not yet receive much feedback through social media but this means that they have more time reflecting on the feedback that does come in and an ability to reach the underlying fac-tors in order to achieve a double-loop learning. At Destination Jönköping the feedback from so-cial media was previously neglected but is today encouraged and pushed into the new model of feedback (see fig. 2.4). At Moderskeppet they receive a lot of feedback and reply to everything but it is first when they notice tendencies from several persons that they make organizational changes. They also use the feedback to test concepts and products by measuring the reactions from their customers. A third way Moderskeppet uses feedback is taking in the positive com-ments to motivate themselves in that what they are doing is right and appreciated.

RQ 3: What similarities and differences do the interviewed organizations have regarding social media and orga-nizational learning?

All three organizations are at different phases concerning their use of social media. Whereas Moderskeppet is comfortable working with social media, ALMI and Destination Jönköping have just entered this new way of working. Both ALMI and Destination Jönköping are beginners, and are still exploring what social media could offer their organizations. They are still experimenting and trying to figure out what channels they should focus on. Moderskeppet on the other hand developed from social media, which has gained the organization benefits that both ALMI and Destination Jönköping lack. Nevertheless, the conditions at ALMI and Destination Jönköping differ in the sense that at Destination Jönköping, the interest for discovering social media is big-ger and is shared with the organization. At ALMI, there is a lack of interest among many of the

25

co-workers which can hinder the organization from developing and learning more about social media. The learning environment in the different organizations is another area that differs. Moderskep-pet is the organization best adjusted for change but it is also getting more restricted the more it grows. ALMI is the biggest organization and thereby has the most people to convince for a change to take place. Both ALMI and Destination Jönköping have a barrier to change in the form of the state being slow in changes which restricts their learning environment a bit. The age is another restriction on learning where ALMI with many older employees have a harder time with the incorporation of social media into the organization than the two other organizations have. This restriction to learning is also seen in the age of how long the organizations have ex-isted. ALMI, the oldest organization, is yet again the one hardest to change. RQ 4: Does the organization promote feedback in their social media use? All three organization want feedback, nevertheless there is a difference in the way they promote it. Moderskeppet is very forward and direct in encouraging interaction. They include open-ended questions whenever they post on Facebook, so that viewers are motivated to respond and leave comments. ALMI has yet to begin with promoting feedback but are rather informative in their blog. The situation is similar at Destination Jönköping. They try to interact with the view-ers that leave comments, and from there develop a conversation.

6.1 Final reflections

The most important part for developing a better organizational learning is the will to change. All three organizations have this will, some more than others. Both ALMI and Destination Jönköping want to evolve and expand their use of social media whilst Moderskeppet is content with the level they are at today. In order for the organizations to improve their use of social media it is important to encourage and motivate the employees. If more people are involved there is more discussion, ideas and ref-lections around the use of social media which will make it progress much faster. Having more people working with social media makes it a more natural and integrated part of the organization instead of being a separate phenomena. Social media requires a faster pace of information than earlier. However, it is important to take time to strategize and reflect on the learning. If the organization only stress and follow everyone else they might miss how their specific organizations are able to make use of feedback through social media. Another aspect they might miss is how they are able to make their routines and use of social media more effective. With new technology it is important to continuously take small steps in learning and follow new trends in order to avoid falling behind. If one falls behind it takes a much greater effort to catch up and learn the new technology, therefore it is important to leave room for experimentation and reflections in the daily use of social media. With this attitude organizational learning becomes a normal part of everyday work at the organization. In order to achieve better feedback from organizational learning it is important to get the rest of the organization involved in the use of social media. When it is normalized into an ordinary communication channel it is easier to look past it and focus on the feedback that arises out of it.

26

This normalization would result in a better ability to adapt and use organizational learning that emerges from the feedback in social media. To summarize in the words of the respondents: “Social media is a revolution” (C. Ödman, personal communication, 2010-05-24). “You need to be quick on responding on Twitter and Facebook, which requires organizations to change” (J. Lundell, personal communication, 2010-05-26). “It‟s important to not always shift in the direction of the wind” (M. Karlsson, personal commu-nication, 2010-05-24).

27

References

Aaker, D. A., Kumar, V., & Day, G. S. (2003). Marketing research (8th ed.). Hoboken, NJ: John Wi-ley & Sons, Inc.

Ahrne, G. & Papakostas, A. (2002) Organisationer, samhälle och globalisering. Lund: Studentlitteratur.

Allegiance, (2010) The case for social media feedback management. Retrieved May 24, 2010, from http://www.allegiance.com/documents/Case_for_Social_Media_Feedback_Management.pdf Argyris, C. (1990). Overcoming organizational defenses. Needham, MA: Allyn-Bacon. Argyris, C. (1994). On Organizational Learning. USA: Blackwell Publishers. Argyris, C. & Schon, D. A., (1978). Organizational learning: A theory of action perspective. Reading, Mass: Addison-Wesley.

Bell, J. (2000). Introduktion till forskningsmetodik. (3rd ed.). Lund: Studentlitteratur.

Bernoff, J. & Li, C. (2008). Groundswell: Winning in a world transformed by social technologies. Boston: Harvard Business Press. Breakenridge, D. & Solis, B. (2009). Putting the public back in public relations: How social media is rein-venting the aging business of PR. New Jersey: Pearson Education. Churchill, G.A. (1999). Marketing Research: Methodological Foundations (7th ed.). USA: The Dry-den Press. Cooper, D.R., & Schindler, P.S. (2001). Business research methods (7 pulp.). Boston: Irwin/McGraw-Hill. Crossan, M. M. & Berdrow, I., (2003). Organizational learning and strategic renewal. Strategic Management Journal, 24(11), 1087-1105.

Crossan, M. M., Lane, H. W., & White, R. E., (1999). An organizational learning framework: from intuition to institution. The Academy of Management Review 24(3), 522-537.

DeGeus, A.P. (1988). Planning as learning. Harvard Business Review (66)2, 70-74.

Esaiasson, P., Gilljam, M., Oscarsson, H. & Wängnerud, L. (2009). Metodpraktikan: Konsten att studera samhälle, individ och marknad. Vällingby: Elanders. Fernando, A. (2007). Social media change the rules. Communication World. Jan/Feb, 9-10.

Fiol, C. M. & Lyles, M. A. (1985). Organizational learning. The Academy of Management Review, 10(4), 803-813.

Groundswell (2009). What's The Social Technographics Profile Of Your Customers? Forrester re-search, Inc. Retrieved May 24, 2010, from http://www.forrester.com/Groundswell/profile_tool.html Haggren, K., Larsson, E., Nordwall, L. & Widing, G. (2008). Deltagarkultur. Denmark: Norhaven.

28

Hatch, M. J., (1997). Organization theory. New York: Oxford University Press. Hays, R. L., Wheelwright, S. C., & Clark, K.B. (1988). Dynamics of manufacturing: Creating the learning organizations. New York: Free Press.

Holme, I., & Solvang, B. (1997). Forskningsmetodik om kvalitativa och kvantitativa metoder. Lund: Stu-dentlitteratur. Huber, P. G. (1991). Organizational learning: the contributing processes and the literatures. Orga-nization Science 2(1) 88-115. Kylén, J. A. (2004). Att få svar. Intervju, Enkät, Observation. Stockholm: Bonnier Utbildning AB.

Locke, E. A., & Jain, V. K. (1995). Organizational learning and continuous improvement. The International Journal of Organizational Analysis (3)1, 45-68.

March, J. G. (1991). Exploration and exploitation in organizational learning. Organization Science, 2, 71-87.

Matschke, J & Pederson, H. (2009). The value of Feedback- Improvements based on the voices of customers and dealers. Kalmar: Baltic Business School at the University of Kalmar, Business Administration. McDermott. I. & O‟Connor, J. (1997). The art of systems thinking: Essential skills for creativity and prob-lem-solving. San Francisco: Thorsons Publishing. McKay, L. (2009). Everything‟s social (now). Consumer Relationship Management. June, 24-28.

Morgan, G. (1997). Images of organizations (2nd ed). London: Sage.

Musico, C. (2009). You‟re not social (enough). Consumer Relationship Management. June, 39-43.

O'Reilly, T. (2007). What is web 2.0: Design patterns and business models for the next genera-tion of software. Communication and Strategies, 65, 16-37.

Powell, J. (2009). 33 Million people in the room: How to create, influence and run a successful business with social networking. New Jersey: FT Press. Reed, J. & Stoll, L. (2000). “Promoting organisational learning in schools: The role of feedback”, pp. 127-144 in Feedback for Learning, S. Askew, editor, London: Routledge. Robson, C. (2002). Real World Research. (2nd ed.). Oxford: Blackwell. Sanchez, R., (2001). “Managing knowledge into competence: The five learning cycles of the competent organization,” pp. 3-37 in Knowledge Management and Organizational Competence, R. Sanchez, editor, Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Senge, P. M. (1990). The fifth discipline: The art and practice of the learning organizations. New York: Double Day.

29

Serrat, O. (2010) Social media and the public sector. Asian Development Bank, Knowledge Solu-tions nr. 83 Shirky, C. (2009). Here comes everybody: How change happens when people come together. Great Britain: Penguin Books. Simon, H. A. (1955). A behavioral model of rational choice. Quarterly Journal of Economics, 39, 99-118.

Simon, H. A. (1969). Sciences of the artificial. Cambridge, MA: M.I.T. Press.

Tsang, E. (1997). Organizational learning and the learning organization: a dichotomy between descriptive and prescriptive research. Human Relations, 50(1), 57-70. Wiedersheim-Paul, F., & Eriksson, L. (1991). Att utreda, forska och rapportera. Malmö: Liber Eko-nomi.

30

Appendix 1- Interview questions

Social Media

Describe your use of social media?

How long have you used social media?

What made you start using social media?

Strategy behind your use?

Why the channels that you use?

Tools that you use?

What do you get back from the use? Organizational Learning

Do you try to get feedback and comments from Social Media?

How do you help make it easy?

How does the rest of the organization get affected by the use of Social Media?

Could you give examples of an organizational change based on customer feedback?

Do you take time to reflect over your use of Social Media?

Do you take the time to reflect over the customers‟ feedback?

How do you partake in changes (educational) within Social Media?

How do you share this with the rest of the organization? Responsibility

Who has the responsibility?

Expectations?

How much freedom is there in what one can say?

Has it ever turned out wrong?

Communication

How has the communication changed with Social Media?

Has the customers influence changed?

How are their comments passed on into the organization?

How does the customers comments reach you outside/before Social Media?