Social Control in Online Communities of Consumption: A Framework for Community Management

Abstract

International audienceOnline communities of consumption (OCCs) represent highly diverse groups of consumers whose interests are not always aligned. Social control in OCCs aims to effectively manage problems arising from this heterogeneity. Extant literature on social control in OCCs is fragmented as some studies focus on the principles of social control, while others focus on the implementation. Moreover, the domain is undertheorized. This article integrates the disparate literature on social control in OCCs providing a first unified conceptualization of the topic. The authors conceptualize social control as a system, or configuration, of moderation practices. Moderation practices are executed during interactions operating under different governance structures (market, hierarchy, and clan) and serving different purposes (interaction initiation, maintenance, and termination). From this conceptualization, important areas of future research emerge and research questions are developed. The framework also serves as a community management tool for OCC managers, enabling the diagnosis of social control problems and the elaboration of strategies and tactics to address them

Toward a Taxonomy of Virtual Communities from a Value Cocreation Perspective

“…The results showed the existence of the following four types of groups: those managed by the company, those managed by the members with an informational/social objective, those managed by the members with a generic objective, and those managed by the members with the intention of buying and selling (Figure ). These types of groups are consistent with the types of online community governance structures identified by Sibai, Valck, Farrell, and Rudd ().…”

Examining Consumers’ Motivations to Engage in Firm‐Hosted Virtual Communities

“…So despite their importance to firms for facilitating consumer engagement in value cocreation, many are struggling to understand these virtual communities, and how best to support the suggested value cocreation (Brodie, Ilić, Juric, & Hollebeek, 2013;Claffey & Brady, 2014;Durkin, 2013;Kietzmann, Silvestre, McCarthy, & Pitt, 2012;Kumar et al, 2010;Porter et al, 2011). Moreover, several firms are unsuccessful in their firm-hosted deployments due to misguided perceptions, including a contention that peer-to-peer communities require no administration or moderation (Nambisan & Baron, 2009;Porter, Devaraj, & Sun, 2013;Sibai, Valck, Farrell, & Rudd, 2015).…”

Value co‐creation in online healthcare communities: The impact of patients’ reference frames on cure and care

“…Community managers therefore might try to decrease the impact of group cohesion by providing tools that stimulate contributions of content that deviates from the group norm. For example, through active moderation of discussions, managers might ask participants explicitly to “think outside the box” (Sibai, de Valck, Farrell, & Rudd, ). However, group cohesion should be strong enough to support trust building, as is needed to foster the co‐creation of care.…”

“…For example, through active moderation of discussions, managers might ask participants explicitly to "think outside the box" (Sibai, de Valck, Farrell, & Rudd, 2015). However, group cohesion should be strong enough to support trust building, as is needed to foster the co-creation of care.…”