Social Collaboration in Intranets

Abstract

Employees increasingly interact through social networking platforms in the workplace. A distinguishing feature of these platforms is their ability to build a sense of community (SOC)—the feelings of membership, influence, integration, and fulfillment of needs, and shared emotional connection. Yet much remains to be understood as to the way these platforms contribute to building a SOC at workplaces. This study examines whether organizational members exhibit community-like behaviors and processes in intranet communication. The study also tests a theoretical model in which members’ perceptions of the group’s norms affect the antecedents of SOC. The results of a survey of 112 employees revealed that both exchanging and observing support increased feelings of SOC. Furthermore, the perception of group norms mediated the relationship between observing and exchanging support and SOC. This study contributes to the field of business communication by applying a theory-based framework to intranets and empirically testing the role of group norms in shaping online communication behaviors at workplaces.

Keywords

intranet internal communication social collaboration social exchange group norms

Introduction

Organizational members interacting through computer-mediated communication has become common within organizations (Pazos, Chung, & Micari, 2012). They can use a variety of interactive communication technologies including instant messaging, listservs, bulletin boards, chatrooms, and blogs. Although the technologies and formats vary, what is common to these online interactions is the members’ public exchange of information and support (Jones, 1997). Through these interactions, group members may develop a virtual community—a social system in which members engage and connect with each other (Rheingold, 1993).

Indeed, today, individuals form communities based on their shared interests and goals regardless of their geographic ties. Jones (1997) argued that even in territorial neighborhoods, proximity or shared territory could not by itself constitute a community; the relational dimension is also essential to form a community. This concept is described as sense of community (SOC) in the field of social psychology and refers to an individual’s perceptions, expectations, understanding, and feelings about a community as well as his or her relationships within the community. SOC is desired because it leads to satisfaction with and commitment to the community (Sarason, 1974) and enhances involvement in community activities (McMillan & Chavis, 1986). The concept thus provides a viable framework for understanding the interactions between self and community within an organization.

Research in community psychology has long established that a SOC perceived by members is an essential element of face-to-face, geographical communities (e.g., Burroughs & Eby, 1998; McMillan & Chavis, 1986; Pretty & McCarthy, 1991). With increasing adoption of social networking platforms within organizations and society, researchers have started to investigate these feelings of community in online groups (Blanchard, 2007; Blanchard & Markus, 2004; Jones, 1997). Building upon the SOC theory in social psychology, the purpose of this study is to explain and test the factors that contribute to employees’ SOC on an intranet—a computer network within an organization that maintains internal communication and collaboration (Hollingshead, Fulk, & Monge, 2002). With increasing adoption of intranets and other social networking platforms in organizations, there is a growing need for theories and empirical studies that can explain individual choices and sacrifices for collective concerns and the role of group norms and moral obligations in shaping and directing online communication behaviors at workplaces. Many empirical studies on internal communication have been conducted in the area of business communication (e.g., Kupritz & Cowell, 2011; Madlock & Booth-Butterfield, 2012; Pazos, Chung, & Micari, 2012), but few have empirically examined a theory-based framework of factors related to SOC perceptions in an organizational intranet.

This study resides at the intersection of business communication and community psychology and contributes to these two fields. From a theoretical perspective, this study applies the SOC theory to the context of intranet communication as a means of internal information exchange and collaboration. SOC theory is a well-researched theory in community psychology and has been extensively applied in various geographical and online settings, such as workplaces (Burroughs & Eby, 1998), churches (Tham & Obst, 2009), and online interest groups (e.g., Blanchard, 2007; Blanchard & Markus, 2004). At the same time, social collaboration and communication through an intranet within organizations is an important topic, yet it is relatively less researched in the field of business communication and lacks a theoretical framework that can guide empirical research. Presenting both hierarchal and vertical communication features within an organization—between, top-down, and bottom-up (Geertshuis, Morrison, & Cooper-Thomas, 2015), employee communication occurring in an online platform offers a unique research setting for business communication. This study argues that SOC theory helps explain factors that shape and direct members’ communication behaviors on an intranet. As such, this study helps strengthen theory building in internal communication research in the field of business communication. Additionally, this research project extends the application and realm of study for SOC theory and adds new momentum in theory development in business communication.

Theoretical Framework: Sense of Community

SOC theory has an extensive history in social psychology. In community psychology, specifically, Sarason (1974) argued that community members’ feelings about each other and the community itself are important to the community’s successful functioning. Sarason (1974) defined SOC as “the sense that one was part of a readily available mutually supportive network of relationship” (p. 1) and explained that:

Sense of community is the perception of similarity to others, an acknowledged interdependence with others, a willingness to maintain this interdependence by giving to or doing for others what one expects from them, and feeling that one is part of a larger dependable and stable structure. (p. 157)

McMillan and Chavis (1986) further developed the concept by defining SOC as “a feeling that members have of belonging, a feeling that members matter to one another and to the group, and a shared faith that members’ needs will be met through their commitment to be together” (p. 9). This definition has four core elements that capture expectations of individuals from their community and their feelings toward it. The first element is membership. Individuals have feelings of belonging or of sharing a sense of personal relatedness when they become a member of a community. In essence, membership is the “feeling of acceptance by the group and a willingness to sacrifice for the group” (McMillan & Chavis, 1986, p. 19). The second element is influence. It refers to a sense of mattering, of making a difference to a group, and of the group mattering to its members. It taps into issues of power that members can influence community and community can influence members. The third element is integration and fulfillment of needs. This is the notion that members feel their needs will be met by the resources received through community membership. The final element is shared emotional connection. This is the commitment and belief that members have shared and will share history, common places, and time. Many researchers have adopted this conceptualization of SOC because it has a viable theoretical base and found empirical support in various settings (e.g., Burroughs & Eby, 1998; Obst & White, 2004; Rovai, 2002).

Sense of Community at Workplaces

Sarason (1974) proposed that a psychological SOC could be created by individuals who chose a referent, such as a business organization, to bring structure and meaning to their daily lives, and whose quality and force are in some ways functions of that entity. According to Sarason, members with an SOC understand that the welfare of the organization takes precedence over that of the individual because it is through a shared SOC that the creative potential of the individual and the organizational community will reach expression. Similarly, Burroughs and Eby (1998) argued that through an SOC, members recognize that “the organization represents a vehicle through which individual needs can be met and that members see themselves as part of a larger network of relationships” (p. 513). The elements of SOC at workplaces thus focus on whether the members of an organization honestly communicate and have deep relations with one another and whether the organization serves as an important place for meaning, growth, and connection for workers (Burroughs & Eby, 1998). Furthermore, an SOC in organizations depends on reciprocal exchanges that occur between individuals and between individuals and the organization through past experiences and anticipated future interactions.

Several studies have examined SOC at workplaces. Klein and D’Aunno (1986) identified the workplace as relational community and proposed that a member’s SOC could be determined by employee characteristics (how long employees worked for their employer), job characteristics (autonomy, skill variety), and supervisor/management characteristics (feedback, participative decision making). They argued that these characteristics would affect member’s perceptions of community identity, their positive appraisal of workgroup, and thus, their motivation to become active members in the workplace community. Similarly, Pretty and McCarthy (1991) found both individual (e.g., gender, job status) and environmental characteristics such as peer cohesion, supervisor support, and job involvement to be positively related to SOC among organizational members.

Burroughs and Eby (1998) applied McMillan and Chavis’s (1986) model to SOC inside an organization with some modifications. The researchers developed a measurement system and tested a framework of the antecedents and consequences of their new SOC measure. They hypothesized that employees’ need for affiliation and tenure, size of workgroup, number of friends, transactional contracts (e.g., benefits), and relational contracts (i.e., intrinsic motivations) would lead to SOC. Their analysis showed that only relational contracts (supportive exchanges) made a significant positive contribution to their SOC measure. Emphasizing the relational aspect, Klein and D’Aunno (1986) similarly found that supportive exchanges among members and the intrinsic value of the work lead to higher levels of SOC in an organization. Therefore, member interactions and, particularly, exchange of support between members positively affect developing SOC at workplaces. The growing body of literature on SOC has recently expanded to studying the attributes and process of online communities.

Sense of Community in Online Platforms

As an extension of face-to-face SOC in social psychology, the concept of online community or virtual community has been recently examined in the computer-mediated communication literature (Blanchard, 2007; Jones, 1997; Reich, 2010). Research on SOC in virtual communities has revealed findings similar to what has been reported in the face-to-face SOC research. For example, Blanchard and Markus (2004) examined sense of a virtual community (SOVC) in an online newsgroup and found similarities to the McMillan and Chavis’s (1986) SOC model, including feelings of membership, integration of needs, and shared emotional connections among the members. In addition, they found a significant influence of exchanging support on SOVC. However, Blanchard and Markus (2004) found distinct differences in their online group’s SOVC. The group members did not report feelings that they influenced or were influenced by others. They also reported that simply recognizing others and developing relationships with group members were important to their SOVC. That is, the main difference from a face-to-face community is that virtual group members feel the stronger role of individual relationships and weaker role of individual influences. This difference could be due to the specific nature of interacting in the online environment, which can be largely anonymous. However, the process of recognizing and having relationships with individuals might differ in intranet settings.

Intranets restrict access exclusively to specified organizational members integrating text, graphics, sound, and video (Bansler, Damsgaard, Scheepers, Havn, & Thommesen, 2000; Damsgaard & Scheepers, 2001). The intranet system supports both structured and unstructured data and enables communication exchanges between diverse computers within an organization (Hollingshead, Fulk, & Monge, 2002). In addition to the space where the primary information is updated, there are settings for readers to post comments about the entries or to e-mail the author who creates content. This creates two opportunities for interaction on the intranet for the readers: one with the content creator (author) and one with other readers. However, participants in this communication exchange are not anonymous.

An SOC in intranets depends on reciprocal exchanges that occur between individuals and between individuals and the organization. The review of the literature suggests member interactions and, particularly, exchange of support between members positively affect developing SOC at workplaces. Thus, this study will focus on social exchange theory to understand how SOVC develops. Additionally, this study will examine how the perception of norms in an intranet community mediates social exchange processes to increase SOVC.

Social Exchange Theory

Research on computer-mediated communication has shown that the exchange of support is a significant reason for the existence of many virtual communities (Blanchard, 2007; Jones, 1997; Wellman & Gulia, 1999). This study contributes to understanding the process of developing SOVC in intranets by examining the support exchange behavior by group members through social exchange theory.

Organizational members exchange support in intranets through various ways. They may exchange support publicly in posts for the entire group to read or may privately exchange support through e-mails. Wellman et al. (1996) have argued that the public exchange of support may increase members’ perceptions of being a supportive group when in fact few people are actually involved in the supportive exchange. Therefore, there is a perception that the group is very supportive, even if only a few of the members actually help each other. Yet, because everyone can read the message, all group members benefit from the support exchange even if they were not active in creating it.

Social exchange theory in social psychology helps us understand behaviors between individuals and within groups. It explains why people help each other and why they exchange information, support, and love. One of the main constructs of social exchange is reciprocity, which can either be direct, as in the support exchanged between two people, or indirect when support is exchanged with an entire group (Flynn, 2005). In addition, social exchange theory argues that people’s affective attachment is governed by the entity with which they are exchanging support (Flynn, 2005). Accordingly, if the exchange occurs indirectly within a group or organization, the attachment is to the group or the organization. Thus, this study proposes that exchanging support in an intranet group is positively related to SOVC.

Hypothesis 1: Observing support is positively related to SOVC.

Hypothesis 2: Posting support is positively related to SOVC.

Hypothesis 3: E-mailing support is positively related to SOVC.

Adherence to Group Norms in Intranet Communication

The study model so far proposes that social exchange among organizational members contributes to the development of SOVC in intranets. The development and adherence to group norms may serve as one important mediator of this relationship. Group norms are “socially negotiated and contextually dependent modes of conduct” (Rimal & Lapinski, 2015, p. 394) and both affect and are affected by communicative interactions. People develop and then are constrained by certain rules of exchange, which turn into norms that serve as guidelines for people’s interactions (Postmes, Spears, Lee, & Novak, 2005). These norms of behavior can develop as people interact.

Although not tested in physical SOC research, McMillan and Chavis (1986) predict that group norms would increase SOC. They argue that as the community becomes more cohesive, there is greater pressure on the community members to conform. This pressure creates a feeling among the members that “we are alike” and develops into part of the members’ SOC. From this perspective, as members more closely adhere to the norms of the community, their bond to the community increases (Sarason, 1974). Thus, development and adherence to norms closely precede SOC in physical communities. This study suggests that they will similarly lead to SOVC in intranet communities.

Recent research suggests that social exchange processes in online platforms may lead to the formation of group norms. Indeed, members of an online group have been shown to create and then observe norms of behavior (Postmes et al., 2005). For example, organizational members who use the intranet can observe others exchanging support and can also participate in it privately through e-mail or publicly through posting messages to the group. Thus, as members observe and also participate in the exchange of support, they are developing norms of behavior. However, this is likely to happen only with publicly exchanging support and not privately exchanging support via e-mail.

In the original SOC framework, norms were conceptualized as an antecedent to SOC (McMillan & Chavis, 1986). As members perceive norms of behavior and adhere to these norms, their bonds to the group increase. This process likely applies to groups in intranets. Therefore, this study proposes that group norms are positively related to SOVC and mediate the relationships between exchange of support and SOVC.

Hypothesis 4: Observing support is positively related to group norms.

Hypothesis 5: Posting support is positively related to group norms.

Hypothesis 6: Group norms are positively related to SOVC.

The hypothesized model in this study is presented in Figure 1.

To better understand the factors that lead to an SOC perceived through intranet communication, this study posed one research question.

Research Question: What specific factors lead to feelings of SOC and perceptions of group norms in intranet communication?

Methodology

This study used a mixed-methods approach incorporating quantitative and qualitative data from survey instruments to examine the factors that lead to an SOC perceived through intranet communication. The researcher first examined Southwest Airlines’ (SWA) intranet system called SWALife through a special temporary access and conducted a preliminary interview with a senior communications advisor at SWA. Next, the researcher collected data through an online survey of SWA employees. An e-mail message containing a link to the questionnaire was sent out to 300 employees working in various units. The research protocol along with terms of confidentiality and privacy were provided to the participants.

Testing the Theoretical Model: Measures

Sense of Virtual Community

Fourteen items were used to assess SOC adapted from Blanchard’s (2007) measurement scale with some modifications (see the appendix). This instrument is based on the original SOC construct with adjustments to assess the unique components of SOVC. Sample items included “I think this is a good group for me to be a member,” “I anticipate how some members will react to certain questions or issues in this group of this group,” and “I feel obligated to help members of this group.” Responses ranged from 1 = strongly disagree to 4 = strongly agree. The scale’s reliability was .91.

Observing and Exchanging Support

To assess exchanging support, two measures were used: one to evaluate members’ observation of support and one to assess their participation in exchanging support through posting to the group. Following Blanchard (2008), items included both perceptions and online behaviors that could be observed or enacted (e.g., asked a question, asked for help, asked for support, provided information, shared experiences). Six items were used to assess how much people observed support including “Members of this group support each other” and “Members of this group help each other.” Responses ranged from 1 = strongly disagree to 4 = strongly agree.

Posting support was assessed from four items about the participants’ behavior on the group. Participants were asked how often they posted a question to other members, posted an answer to other members, posted a comment to other members, or posted a response. Responses ranged from 1 = never to 4 = quite a lot.

Additionally, e-mailing support was assessed from four items about the participant’s e-mail behavior. Participants were asked how often they e-mailed a question to other members, e-mailed an answer to other members, e-mailed a comment to other members, or e-mailed a response. Responses ranged from 1 = never to 4 = quite a lot. The reliability coefficients of these scales were .76, .73, and .78.

Group Norms

Based on Postmes et al. (2005), members’ perceptions of the group’s norms were measured by asking participants four items including “I understand what appropriate behaviors are for this group,” “People in this group know what the proper behavior is,” and “People generally behave appropriately on this group.” Responses ranged from 1 = strongly disagree to 4 = strongly agree. The scale’s reliability was .75.

Qualitative Questions

To address the research question of this study, participants were also asked open-ended questions to complement and support the quantitative analysis. Following Pazos et al. (2013), the open-ended questions were grounded in the theoretical framework and focused on identifying the four constructs of SOC—membership, influence, fulfillment of needs, and shared goals and values (McMillan & Chavis, 1986) and the perceptions of group norms in SWALife (Postmes et al., 2005). The questions were reviewed by three experts in the field and pilot tested before delivery. The responses were analyzed through a qualitative textual analysis to capture richness of detail and explanatory power (Miles & Huberman, 1994), focusing on the key concepts, words, and phrases. The next sections present results and discuss the findings.

Results

The SWALife Experience

SWA established its intranet called SWALife in 1999. The main goals of SWALife are to support organizational communication, facilitate knowledge dissemination, and enhance social collaboration (personal communication, Chris Mainz, March 10, 2012). The company utilizes SWALife in a number of ways. In addition to presenting general company information, SWALife provides daily news updates on current issues. Gary Kelly, the chief executive officer and president of SWA, posts a weekly message for all employees about the recent updates. Financial information called “Knowing the Score” on quarterly earnings is also provided on SWALife. One of the recent additions to SWALife is the WNdow feature where a weekly video newscast is aired. It is similar to television broadcast news with two anchors recapitulating the important news of the week. The “Southwest spirit” based on fun, love, and teamwork (Miles & Mangold, 2005) prevails as the common theme on SWALife through various images and content.

SWALife includes a wide range of functional tabs, such as luv culture, tools, career, news, need to know, customer support and services, and leadership. In addition, more personalized settings, such as about me and m&e, where employees can construct their personal profiles are available. All employees are encouraged to write blogs and add comments on SWALife. Most frequently, employees who work in the communication department and employees who have social skills and develop interpersonal relationships at the workplace often contribute to the content on SWALife. Employees use usernames on SWALife and when they post, their real names appear on the screen.

SWALife has two main goals: (a) to provide employees with the information about company matters through various channels (broadcasting news, RSS, etc.) and (b) to enhance social collaboration among employees. In addition, SWALife provides an interactive platform for employees to create content and network with peers. Although all employees are encouraged to be actively involved with the content creation, employee participation is generally low and most of the SWALife content is created and managed by the company’s communication department.

Findings From the Survey Analysis: Testing the Model

Descriptive analyses of the study variables are presented in Table 1. A total of 112 employees responded to the survey, resulting in a satisfactory effective response rate of 37% (Sheehan, 2001). Additional background information of the participants is as follows. The mean age of the participants was 38 and 62% of the participants was female. Nearly 68% of the respondents had more than 5 years of experience at SWA. Of the 112 employees who responded to the survey, 89% of them indicated that they think of e-mail as the most convenient communication tool to communicate with other members at the workplace. Although SWALife offers a variety of collaboration and socialization functions for employees, respondents reported that information seeking (77%) was the primary reason for using SWALife. Table 1 presents descriptives of the variables and reliability measures.

Table 1.

Results From the Descriptive Analysis.

Variables	M	SD	1	2	3	4	5
1. SOVC	3.04	0.46	(.91)
2. Observing support	3.27	0.53	.21**	(.76)
3. Posting support	2.87	0.62	.42***	.27**	(.73)
4. E-mailing support	2.63	0.58	.34***	.26	.24	(.78)
5. Norms	3.52	0.52	.36***	.31**	.28***	.09	(.75)

Note. N = 112. SOVC = sense of a virtual community. Reliabilities are in the diagonal.

p < .05. **p < .01. ***p < .001.

The theoretical model was tested using structural equation modeling (SEM) on LISREL. SEM is a valuable tool used by communication researchers (Holbert & Stephenson, 2002) as it can determine direct relationships among variables.¹ The results indicate that the conceptual model was a good fit to the data (χ²₍₁₄₎ = 17.383, p < .05; goodness-of-fit index = 0.87; adjusted goodness-of-fit index = 0.82; comparative fit index = 0.86; root mean square error of approximation = 0.05). The findings revealed that observing support (β = .32, p = .01) and posting support (β = .18, p = .001) as well as e-mailing support (β = .23, p < .001) were directly related to SOVC. Furthermore, observing support (β = .42, p < .001) and posting support (β = .24, p < .001) were related to norms. However, e-mailing support was not found to be related to norms (β = .08, p = .72). In addition, there was a significant relationship between norms and SOVC (β = .27, p = .001). Figure 2 presents the results from the analysis.

Furthermore, two Sobel tests were calculated to determine if norms partially mediated the relationship between observing support, posting support, and SOVC. The findings revealed that the perception of norms mediates the relationship between observing support and SOVC, z = 2.16, p < .05, confidence interval [.03, .09], and also mediates the relationship between posting support and SOVC, z = 2.67, p < .001, confidence interval [.07, .12]. Consequently, although there is a direct relationship between observing support and posting support to SOVC, additional variance can be explained by examining how observing and posting support affects norms.

Findings From the Qualitative Analysis: Factors Leading to SOVC

Participants were asked open-ended questions exploring the four constructs of SOC—membership, influence, fulfillment of needs, and shared goals and values (McMillan & Chavis, 1986) and the perception of norms that could influence their communication behaviors on the intranet (Postmes et al., 2005). Among the four SOC constructs, the feelings of membership based on the identification with group members were prevalent in the responses. Moving beyond simply recognizing names, respondents reported creating an (online) identity for themselves through their postings, and they reported developing an understanding of other members’ identities. Identification enabled participants to anticipate others’ respond to issues and posts. A number of respondents indicated that they were confident that they could anticipate how certain members would respond to issues on SWALife. For example, one respondent explained:

After you read the comments for a while, you get to know which posters have a tendency to be negative toward change (or news about the Company) and those who post to be positive and supportive.

Similarly, one respondent noted, “Most people tend to follow a trend with their comments. If they are cheery and supportive, they tend to repeat that pattern.” Another respondent reported that some posters can be easily identified by their posts:

There are prolific users of SWALife where it is not difficult to gauge whether they will be articulate, positive, critical, etc., in their comments. Sometimes I am surprised by the comments (in a good way) so I do try not to pre-judge as much as possible.

The next question focused on influence, the second construct of SOC, and asked respondents whether they cared about what other members think about their postings. Participants noted that they strongly cared about what other members think about their actions and comments on SWALife because they thought their postings affect their image as an employee in the workplace. For example, one respondent explained, “I view my postings as an extension of my perception in the workplace.” Another respondent reported, “I care about my postings. I know that other users (including those I lead and those who lead me) are reading the postings and I want to be seen as an honest, positive employee.” Another respondent highlighted the importance of postings: “If I were to apply to another department I want them to know some about me. It’s also important that nothing is offensive if I were to post something.” One respondent pointed out the relationship between SWALife and the physical workplace: “Southwest is my job and SWALife reflects my feelings, attitudes, concerns, etc., about the workplace.” Another one noted that “I haven’t really developed my profile, and I rarely comment out of anxiety about others’ thoughts. I don’t want to appear stupid or uninformed.”

The third construct of SOC focused on members’ fulfillment of needs in SWALife. Respondents reported that when they had a problem, they were comfortable asking questions in SWALife. One respondent explained, “If you have a question or problem regarding a specific department you can post something and a more experienced person from that department, who you may/may not know, can answer it and provide further information.” However, responses suggested that members mostly receive informational support rather than social support. One respondent further explained, “We had a question on a specific project and we knew that some information was posted on SWALife in the Need to Know box. We went there and found the information we were looking for.” Yet members seemed to prefer face-to-face communication for more complex problems: “I would think most work-related problems are handled face-to-face, via email or over the phone rather than online” and another respondent reported, “There might be a similar situation posted that could trigger a solution, but honestly, if I had a work-related problem . . . I would not have thought to seek answers through SWALife.”

Finally, participants were asked about their perceptions of shared values and emotions—the fourth construct of SOC. Respondents reported that they believed they used SWALife for the same purposes as other employees and that they shared similar values, priorities, and goals with those who use SWALife. A majority of the respondents acknowledged that the Golden Rule of SWA (to treat people the way that you want to be treated) is a shared value that shapes their interactions in SWALife: “In terms of my few postings because I want them to share my passion for Proactive Customer Service delivery and for Golden Rule behavior.” Likewise, another respondent noted, “I only post positive comments. I try to be supportive and follow the Golden Rule.” One respondent further explained, “If there are negative comments, I try to add positive ones if they are warranted to keep up the Southwest spirit.”

Responses suggested that certain group norms existed in SWALife that affected members’ communication behaviors. The respondents who posted in the past reported that they only posted positive and constructive comments. For example, one respondent noted, “I generally can just assume the comments will be positive since we are a Southwest family.” Another respondent reported:

I usually only post positive comments because I don’t want to hurt someone’s feelings (unless it’s an opinion on a policy or rule breaking issue), so I don’t ever post negative comments. I try to always follow the golden rule (a big SWA goal), so I guess I follow a pattern.

Respondents reported that a good deal of informational and social support was exchanged in SWALife. One respondent explained, “I post very rarely, but it is usually to support other employees: pat on the back and such . . . ” Another respondent said, “I generally post a comment to support my teammates who have posted.” Similarly, one respondent noted, “I have commented on Co-worker’s posts to encourage them or to show support.” As such, members experienced a high level of obligation to exchange support in SWALife.

To sum, responses to the open-ended questions revealed that SWALife contributed to the feelings of SOVC. Participants recognized that SWALife helped them feel like they are part of a community. Members identified themselves and others with the group through various exchanges in SWALife. Responses also suggested that informational and social support was exchanged in SWALife and that support was an important part of the community. Although only a few respondents actively participated in asking for and providing support, all members of SWALife benefited from publicly offered support. Furthermore, findings suggested that participants developed a set of group norms in SWALife based on the organizational values at SWA and they adhered to these norms in their intranet communication (e.g., posting positive comments, exchanging support).

Discussion

Employees increasingly use computer-mediated communication technologies within organizations. Through these online interactions, organizational members publicly exchange communication and support creating a social system in which members engage and connect with each other (Wellman & Gulia, 1999). This study found that SWALife members exhibit community-like behaviors and processes in intranet communication. In addition, the findings from the theoretical model testing revealed that members’ perceptions of the group’s norms affect the antecedents of SOC. The findings from the analyses offer several important implications for business communication researchers and practitioners that deserve further discussion.

Sense of Community in Intranets: The Importance of Exchanging Support

The results of this study showed that organizational members exchanged support in SWALife through various ways. They exchanged support publicly through posting comments for the entire group to read and privately exchanged support through e-mails. Since publicly exchanging support increases members’ perceptions of being a supportive group (Wellman & Gulia, 1999), there was a perception among the participants that the group was very supportive in SWALife, even if few people were actually involved in the supportive exchange. The findings from the responses revealed that in fact few people actively exchanged support. Yet, because everyone could read the message, all group members benefited from the support exchange even if they were not active in creating it.

The giving and receiving support contributed to the feelings of SOC in SWALife, developing a high level of obligation among members. Social exchange theory is based on the norm of reciprocity occurring directly between two people or indirectly within an entire group (Flynn, 2005). In addition, members’ affective attachment is directed by the entity with which they are exchanging support. In other words, when the exchange occurs indirectly within group or organization, the attachment is tied to the group or the organization. The findings of this study showed that observing support, posting support, and e-mailing support influenced the perceived SOC in SWALife. An SOC perceived in SWALife was directly related to observing the exchange of support, publicly posting support, and e-mailing support. These findings suggest that, as with SOC in physical settings (McMillan & Chavis, 1986), support is an important element of perceived SOVC in intranets.

The Impact of Group Norms on SOVC in Intranets

The study also tested a theoretical model in which members’ perceptions of the group’s norms affect the antecedents of SOC. Recent research has suggested that observing others exchanging support and posting support increase perceptions of norms of behavior and increase members’ attachment to the group (Postmes et al., 2005). The results of the analysis support the research model. The findings revealed that observing support and posting support were directly related to norms. These findings are consistent with the research on SOVC in other online settings (Blanchard, 2008; Blanchard & Markus, 2004; Flynn, 2005). However, this study found that e-mailing support was not related to norms. A majority of the participants (89%) reported that e-mail was their primary communication tool at the workplace and they exchanged support through e-mail. Because the exchange is usually dyadic and private (not open to the group) in e-mail communication, it may not be affected by the group norms.

Social exchange theory proposes that norms should mediate the relationships between public exchange of support and SOVC. The results from both analyses suggest that observing others exchange support is important in this mediation process. Wellman and Gulia (1999) argued that observing others exchange support is important, but that it may promote slacking from other participants because these lurkers never have to contribute to the community by active participation. Furthermore, dominant group norms of communication prcaticed by active participants may suppress the dissident voices in organizations (Mumby, 1997). Thus, it is important to encourage participation from all members of the group to maintain an inclusive intranet communication platform in organizations.

The findings of this study highlight the link between organizational norms in the workplaces and their repercussions in intranet communication. This study showed the Golden Rule (to treat people the way that you want to be treated, and thus to be positive and constructive at all times), originally initiated by SWA management as a customer service strategy (Miles & Mangold, 2005), was a dominant group norm in SWALife. For example, a number of respondents expressed that they would never post a negative comment (even though they may disagree with comments or articles) because they thought it would be against the Golden Rule of Southwest culture. From a critical perspective, this positivity could be problematic because resistant or dissident voices may not find a place in intranet communication (Madlock & Booth-Butterfield, 2012).

Theorizing about the impact of group norms on computer-mediated communication behavior should place both social context and individual-level factors at the nexus of inquiry. The findings of this study showed that members’ perceptions about others and behaviors in their social environment, pressures they perceive to conform, and their decisions to act in certain ways in intranet communication are determined not only by factors at the individual level but also at a macro level. Therefore, employees’ communication behaviors can indicate their perceptions about the collective norms in their group and thus they can be contradictory to the actual collective norms.

This study contributes to the research on SOC and internal communication by going beyond the direct relationships of antecedents and SOVC to understand the process by which these antecedents work in intranet communication. The findings demonstrate that norms, the perception by group members that there are certain rules that govern behaviors in the group, mediate the relationship between the antecedents and SOVC.

Intranets as a Venue for Social Collaboration

Respondents in this study considered SWALife as a supplementary social space where they can reinforce their image in the physical workplace. For some respondents, SWALife was the only outlet where they could accurately express themselves (“I cared about my postings, because for some of them [group members], it’s their only way to know who I am. I want to be accurately portrayed.”). Unlike other studies of SOVC in various online settings (e.g., Blanchard & Markus, 2004; Rotman, Golbeck, & Preece, 2009), this study showed the importance of the concept of influence for respondents. The qualitative responses pointed out the intertwined nature of the relationship between the physical workplace and intranet setting—as an extension of the self-projection. Group members did not want to be judged by others as uninformed or negative at the workplace because of their online postings. This anxiety may prevent organizational members from actively contributing to intranet communication, resulting in low active participation.

SWALife nicely fits with Jones’s (1997) definition of a virtual settlement. The site meets the requirement of having a minimal level of member interactions. However, in this case, these interactions are shaped by organizational values defined by top management. The findings revealed that the organizational values at SWA based on love and fun were manifested in the responses of Southwest employees. In their answers, respondents emphasized that they are a “family” at SWA and preferred using “we” rather than “they,” which suggests that SWA achieves its goals to a certain extent. Allowing members more autonomy, organizations should use intranets as a social space where participants can actively co-create meanings and redefine organizational values.

Although SWALife offers a wide variety of features (e.g., social collaboration, content creation) for its users, findings from the responses to open-ended questions suggested that participants use this internal communication tool primarily to seek informational support. Hollingshead, Fulk, and Monge (2002) explained that one of the main functions of intranets is knowledge management, which includes locating, storing, and retrieving data, information, and knowledge. However, going beyond informational exchange, intranets should serve as the main platform for social collaboration and networking at the workplace.

The findings also indicated that few participants actively contribute to the content in SWALife. Consistent with the previous findings (e.g., Blanchard & Markus, 2004; Reich, 2010; Rotman et al., 2009) that virtual community members were often lurkers (Jones, 1997), the participants in this study reported that they regularly read messages but rarely created original content in SWALife. When they rarely post a comment, it is usually to support a colleague. Many researchers view lurkers negatively because lurkers do not actively contribute to the virtual community (Boyd, 2002). Nonetheless, lurkers may comprise the vast majority of participants of a virtual community. Additionally, Blanchard and Markus (2004) reported that lurkers do have a clear SOC within the virtual community, although it is weaker than that of the more active members. However, they also noted that the level of perceived SOVC directly related to activity level. Thus, active participation is essential for building a SOC in intranets.

This study emphasizes the important role of active member participation in intranet communication for social networking and collaborative decision making in the workplace. Without a critical mass of engaged, connected, and attached participants, the survival of a community in intranets depends primarily on the content creator alone. As long as organizational members are not actively engaged in creating the content, intranets are likely to remain as yet another means of traditional internal communication.

Limitations and Future Research

This study provides some valuable information on organizational members’ SOC in intranets—one type of computer-mediated internal communication at workplaces. Intranets have the potential to evolve into socially beneficial, self-sustaining workplace communities. Future studies of intranets as virtual communities should continue to assess not only members’ SOC but also how members adapt to and modify the intranet technology to meet their needs in developing a vibrant community.

While the study shed light onto antecedents of employees’ SOC perceived through intranet communication at SWA, the findings may not be generalized to other organizations. Klein and D’Aunno (1986) argued that organizational and employee characteristics could determine the level of SOC perceived among employees at workplaces. Therefore, future research should empirically test the factors that contribute to SOVC in intranets in various organizations. In addition, this study did not compare the demographics of the sample with SWA as a whole. Incorporating other variables in the theoretical model, such as demographics and job satisfaction, could provide further insights into understanding SOVC in intranets.

Feelings of SOVC may lead to satisfaction with and commitment to the organization. However, community-like behaviors and processes are outcomes that are not certain to occur in every intranet platform. Thus, understanding how such processes get started, become established, and are maintained is important for effective internal communication and social collaborations in workplaces. By applying SOC theory to intranet communication, this study contributes to the business communication theory and practice and opens up new venues for future research in the field.

Footnotes

Appendix

Declaration of Conflicting Interests

The author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Funding

The author(s) received no financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Notes

Author Biography

Nur Uysal (PhD, University of Oklahoma) is an assistant professor in the Diederich College of Communication at Marquette University, USA. Her main research interests include the adoption and use of digital communication technologies in corporate communication, stakeholder engagement, and corporate social responsibility.

References

Bansler

J. P.

Damsgaard

Scheepers

Havn

Thommesen

(2000). Corporate intranet implementation: Managing emergent technologies and organizational practices. Journal of the Association for Information Systems, 1(10), 1-39.

Blanchard

A. L.

(2007). Developing a sense of virtual community measure. Cyberpsychology & Behavior, 10, 827-830.

Blanchard

A. L.

(2008). Testing a model of sense of virtual community. Computers in Human Behavior, 24, 2107-2123.

Blanchard

A. L.

Markus

M. L.

(2004). The experienced “sense” of a virtual community: Characteristics and processes. DATA BASE for Advances in Information Systems, 35, 65-79.

Boyd

(2002). In community we trust: Online security communication at eBay. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 7(3). doi:10.1111/j.1083-6101.2002.tb00147.x

Burroughs

S. M.

Eby

L. T.

(1998). Psychological sense of community at work: A measurement system and explanatory framework. Journal of Community Psychology, 26, 509-532.

Damsgaard

Scheepers

(2001, June). Using intranet technology to foster organizational knowledge creation. Paper presented at Global Co-Operation in the New Millennium, The 9th European Conference on Information Systems, Bled, Slovenia.

Flynn

F. J.

(2005). Identity orientations and forms of social exchange in organizations. Academy of Management Review, 30, 737-750.

Geertshuis

S. A.

Morrison

R. L.

Cooper-Thomas

(2015). It’s not what you say, it’s the way that you say it: The mediating effect of upward influencing communications on the relationship between leader-member exchange and performance ratings. International Journal of Business Communication, 52, 228-245.

10.

Holbert

R. L.

Stephenson

M. T.

(2002). Structural equation modeling in the communication sciences, 1995–2000. Human Communication Research, 28, 531-551.

11.

Hollingshead

A. B.

Fulk

Monge

P. R.

(2002). Fostering intranet knowledge sharing: An integration of transactive memory and public goods approaches. In Hinds

Kiesler

(Eds.), Distributed work: New research on working across distance using technology (pp. 335-355). Cambridge: MIT Press.

12.

Jones

(1997). Virtual communities, virtual settlements & cyber-archaeology: A theoretical outline. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 3(3), 24.

13.

Klein

K. J.

D’Aunno

T. A.

(1986). Psychological sense of community in the workplace. Journal of Community Psychology, 14, 365-377.

14.

Kupritz

V. W.

Cowell

(2011). Productive management communication online and face-to-face. International Journal of Business Communication, 48, 54-82.

15.

Madlock

Booth-Butterfield

(2012). The influence of relational maintenance strategies among coworkers. International Journal of Business Communication, 49, 21-47.

16.

McMillan

D. W.

Chavis

D. M.

(1986). Sense of community: A definition and theory. Journal of Community Psychology, 14, 6-23.

17.

Miles

M. B.

Huberman

A. M.

(1994). Qualitative data analysis (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

18.

Miles

S. J.

Mangold

W. G.

(2005). Positioning Southwest Airlines through employee branding. Business Horizons, 48, 535-545.

19.

Mumby

D. K.

(1997). The problem of hegemony: Rereading Gramsci for organizational communication studies. Western Journal of Communication, 61, 343-375.

20.

Obst

P. L.

White

K. M.

(2004). Revisiting the sense of community index: A confirmatory factor analysis. Journal of Community Psychology, 32, 691-705.

21.

Park

H. S.

Dailey

Lemus

(2002). The use of exploratory factor analysis and principal components analysis in communication research. Human Communication Research, 28, 562-577.

22.

Pazos

Chung

J. M.

Micari

(2012). Instant messaging as a task-support tool in information technology organizations. International Journal of Business Communication, 50, 68-86.

23.

Postmes

Spears

Lee

A. T.

Novak

R. J.

(2005). Individuality and social influence in groups: Inductive and deductive routes to group identity. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 89, 747-763.

24.

Pretty

G. H.

McCarthy

(1991). Exploring psychological sense of community among women and men of the corporation. Journal of Community Psychology, 19, 351-361.

25.

Reich

M. S.

(2010). Adolescent’s sense of community on MySpace and Facebook: A mixed methods approach. Journal of Community Psychology, 38, 688-705.

26.

Rheingold

(1993). The virtual community: Homesteading on the electronic frontier. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.

27.

Rimal

R. N.

Lapinski

M. K.

(2015). A re-explication of social norms, ten years later. Communication Theory, 25, 393-409.

28.

Rotman

Golbeck

Preece

(2009, June). The community is where the rapport is—On sense and structure in the YouTube community. Paper presented at the International Conference on Communities and Technologies, University Park, PA.

29.

Rovai

A. P.

(2002). Building sense of community at a distance. International Review of Research in Open and Distance Learning, 3, 197-211.

30.

Sarason

S. B.

(1974). The psychological sense of community: Prospects for a community psychology. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

31.

Sheehan

K. B.

(2001). E-mail survey response rates: A review. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 6(2), 10-34.

32.

Tham

Obst

(2009). Helping the soul: The relationship between connectivity and well-being within a church community. Journal of Community Psychology, 37, 342-361.

33.

Wellman

Gulia

(1999). Virtual communities as communities: Net surfers don’t ride alone. In Smith

M. A.

Kollack

(Eds.), Communities in cyberspace (pp. 167-194). New York, NY: Routledge.

34.

Wellman

Salaff

Dimitrova

Garton

Gulia

Haythornthwaite

(1996). Computer networks as social networks: Virtual community, computer-supported cooperative work and telework. Annual Review of Sociology, 22, 213-238.