rachel-rmit-blog

[rachel-rmit-blog]

Participatory media.

Participatory media, the gift that keeps on giving, changing and adapting according to context and levels of interconnectivity. Armstrong and Hagel (2000) identify communities of value as pertaining to the myriad of resources and opportunities for networking that are available through utilising media platforms, promoting accessibility as foundational to meaningful interactions. My understanding of participatory media has been based on the ability of an individual to engage within a wider network; however, as has become evident; there are many layers and barriers that promote the inclusion and exclusion of individuals within a dialogic network.  

I wanted to use this chance to reflect on my social media campaign and evaluate the use of the social media platforms that were promoted and utilised throughout both the planning and implementation process. In his interview with Eddie, Julian highlights the importance of being reflective in how we as individuals utilise social media and how such methods have a direct impact on the motivation of others to respond to or ignore our contributions. In an effort to be heard users will often flood their social media with posts and images, rendering any effort to be meaningful as meaningless. According to Park (2017); “if overuse of the internet has an effect on the clarity of self, then it becomes problematic” (Israelashvili, Kim & Bukobza, 2012), indicating that participatory media can also lead to the compromise of self as determined by the motive of the user. Meaning offers reflection not a knee jerk reaction, it is emotive and evokes a message beyond the superficial; it engages and it invites conversation rather than remaining static. Crawford (2009) points to the significance of social media users as listeners, pertaining not to passive and withdrawn activities but rather, to actively participating in a wider conversation through hearing. In reflecting on this notion, it struck me that perhaps the very act of classing listening as participatory actually enables the participation of others as more space is created for dialogue.

Having acknowledged the significance of listening as ‘participatory’, it is of equal importance that users promote conversation by utilising participatory platforms; extending dialogue beyond the individual and inviting external contribution. In reflecting on the use of media platforms utilised throughout my campaign, I became critically aware of the ability of social media to either include or exclude individuals from a broader conversation, invariably promoting a one sided agenda. The use of Slack throughout the planning process was considered efficient by me but was not an ideal forum for collaboration with stakeholders as it failed to promote a familiar and therefore welcoming space for engagement. Inclusion cannot be identified as merely having the means to participate (Ewart & Snowden 2012, Park 2017); access itself is not the sole prerequisite of participatory media, rather motivation and interest in the perpetual dialogue should be apparent. For example, the use of Slack in planning my social media campaign represented an easily accessible medium for stakeholders; however, as it was an unfamiliar platform, there was less motivation in engaging due to difficulty in operation. A desire to participate will generally bring about a more effective result as the motive for engaging is driven by interest rather than by obligation. Love Delhi’s presence on Instagram for example has an underlying agenda, albeit a positive one; but can still be considered removed from notions of neutrality as the underlying motive of use is to evoke social change. Having said that, Love Delhi’s social media platforms do invite opportunities for interaction, promoting the power of positive values in action by providing participants with the opportunity to engage with in a variety of social movements as well as promoting their own passions and talents.

  Garcia and Morrell (2013) note that social media platforms as participatory tools are not neutral but are situated within layers of cultural and social agendas, which influence both the context and meaning of the embedded discourse. In contrast to this opinion, Castells (2009) identifies that in promoting such ‘widespread participation’ agenda becomes less dominant in the wake of the ‘spontaneity’ of communication as fostered by a range of participants.  

 Similarly, the use of livestreaming across Facebook and Instagram platforms ensures a sense of connectedness across Love Delhi’s multi-sited communities promoting a wider sense of connectedness that transcends borders of states and even nations. In considering the future of participatory media, I would argue that perhaps the meaning of dialogic exchanges are alleviated within mass contexts however; such dialogue does promote a wider sense of connectedness. Howard’s (2008) notion of traditional forms of media as ‘mass’ and therefore one sided can still be evident in within modern contexts and technologies but again is up to the discretion of the user. In concluding, participatory media has the potential to change the game; to bring about change and to amplify voices that otherwise would not have been heard.

 References

 Armstrong, A., & Hagel, J. (2000). The real value of online communities. Knowledge and communities. 74(3). 85-95

Crawford, K. (2009). Following You: Disciplines of Listening in Social Media. Continuum. Vol.23(4). pp 515-535

Castells, M. (2011). The rise of the network society: The information age: Economy, society, and culture (Vol. 1). John Wiley & Sons

Ewart, J. Snowden, C. (2012). The media’s role in social inclusion and exclusion. Media International Australia, Incorporating Cultural Policy. No. 142, pp 61-63

Garcia, A. Morrell, E. (2013) City youth and the pedagogy of participatory media. Learning, Media and Technology. Vol 38(2). pp 123-127

Howard, R. (2008). The Vernacular Web of Participatory Media. Critical Studies in Media Communication. Vol.25(5). pp 490-513

Israelashvili, M. Kim, T. Bukobza, G. (2012). Adolescents’ Over-use of the Cyber World: Internet Addiction or Identity Exploration, Journal of Adolescence. Vol. 35(2). pp 417-424

Park, S. (2017). Digital Capital. Macmillan Publishers, London, UK

[rachel-rmit-blog]

Building a network.

 The world of ‘networking’ opens up new possibilities and potential for inviting individuals into a collective space within which a common purpose is served. Networking is not limited to an online medium but can be found in personal, work and everyday life, however; ‘new networking’ strategies have expanded the reach of traditional ‘business card’ style network to reach groups of people outside of one’s physical proximity (Twete, 2013). The notion of ‘community liberation’ as coined by Odella (as cited in Safar and Mahdi, 2012) supports the idea of expanding community beyond traditional means to incorporate and transcend geographical boundaries. Twete (2013) also talks about the value of a shared experience in bringing people together which upon reflection is how most of the friendships and communities I am a part of on my life came about. Common ground binds people together and creates a sense of belonging and community within which even more intricate networks evolve.  

American actor Justin Baldoni called upon his global following of Instagram and Twitter users to collectively work to get the hashtag #saveisabel; an effort by which he was trying to get the attention of the President to prevent unlawful deportation due to a recent change in policy. Isabel suffers from Mucopolysaccharidoses resulting in abnormalities and requiring extensive medical treatment. In this example, networking not only served the purpose of uniting a group of people for a common cause, the intent was to reach across multiple networks in an effort to amplify the overarching message in order to penetrate government networks.

I love this quote from Twete (2013), and I think it speaks volumes about the power of networking for the greater good. She notes;

           “crowds are just as powerful as experts”

And in the context of Isabel’s story and her fight to gain approval to stay within America to receive medical treatment, this statement is absolutely right.

The realm of social media serves a dual purpose not only for creating a network of people but of creating a network of knowledge. Cameron (2012) furthers this statement, noting;

“Twitter itself and the Twitter-like entities that will follow are less “social media” than mutual knowledge engines”.

Communities such as diet or exercise groups have the opportunity to share recipes, tips and progress within a certain network, opening up opportunities for new networks and knowledge sharing. Knowledge sharing through networking can invite new expertise into the conversation, broadening the knowledge base and promoting community interaction.

Before passing away in 2018, Claire Wineland consistently uploaded videos of her life in hospital, detailing her struggle with cystic fibrosis and opening up a wider conversation about the disease to generate awareness. Claire’s videos display a distinct desire for the disease to be normalised in conversation and for those suffering to not feel alienated and alone in their fight. 

Claire’s use of Youtube enabled her own videos and opinion pieces whilst allowing others to comment on and share her videos in order to reach wider networks than the cystic fibrosis community. In reading through the comments on Claire’s video ‘my life expectancy’, many individuals have now commented about their desire to be organ donors after hearing her story and being confronted with the reality of many people who are suffering from this disease. Similarly, individuals opened up about their personal stories and journeys through sickness, utilizing Claire’s platform to network with fellow patients.

References

Cameron, N (2012), WHY TWITTER MATTERS: TOMORROW’S KNOWLEDGE NETWORK, Word press, available at: https://nigelcameron.wordpress.com/future/why-twitter-matters/

 [Movie Clips]. (2011, May 11th). The Social Network #9 Movie CLIP - Putting It Online. [video file]. Retrieved from: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o6TYEHyv00Y&list=PLZbXA4lyCtqqtbMX01u7KO0IDk3jDzj9k&index=18

Safar, M & Mahdi, K. (2012). Social Networking and Community Behavior Modeling: Qualitative and Quantitative Measures.Information Science Reference. Hershey, Pennsylvania

Twete, M (2013), You Know Everybody!: A Career Girl's Guide to Building a Network That Works, Mill City Press, Minneapolis, Minnesota

Wineland, C. [Clare Wineland]. (2018 May 24th). My Life Expectancy.[video file] retrieved from:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fERuEamIEb8

[rachel-rmit-blog]

Collaboration vs cooperation

I found it really interesting hearing Hailey’s breakdown of collaboration and the value of this forum in enhancing collective participation. I think most of us would come up with a definition centered around a group of people working together to achieve a common goal or purpose. The key in collaboration however, aside from the importance of contribution, is the ability for participants to have access to a content in order to add, edit and delete from it therefore collectively adapting something into its final form.

As Hailey noted, there is not a lack of collaborative technology and resources available, there is a need for capacity building in developing a culture that utilizes such resources efficiently throughout the workspace context. Majchrzak and authors (2014) acknowledge the characteristic of collaboration as ‘shaping’ a body of knowledge within which contributors reflect a certain set of norms or behaviours characterised by the forum itself.  Thomas and Akdere (2011) argue that the collaboration is a concept that needs to be attained and striven for and is not an automatic result of a collective effort. They note;

“Once the capacity to collect, archive, and distribute organizational knowledge is achieved, the true potential and value of collaborative media for the purpose of HRD goals and objectives can be realized” (Thomas & Akdere, 2011)

Mediums such as Slack and Trello provide a space for individuals to collaborate on creating projects, providing structured opportunities for constructive conversation towards a common goal. The key with these forums is that participants can access information and build on current ideas and conversations; with the mediums providing the opportunity to edit and reconstruct content. Media resources such as Facebook, Instagram and Twitter fall short of the collaborative title as they act only as spaces of contribution, meaning that users can add content but have no opportunity to develop or change it. Such examples of social media present information to a passive audience, within which content is ‘linear’ and non-specific (Lowgren & Reimer, 2013). In looking forward to the next assessment I am interested to explore the possible links between social media platforms and creating opportunities for collaboration. As a standalone source these forms of media do not meet the requirements of a collaborative platform but is there potential for such a possibility if participants were allocated the time and resources to utilize such a medium?

References

Lowgren, J & Bremer, B (2013), Collaborative Media, The MIT Press, Massachusetts

Majchrzak, A Fife, E Min, Q & Pereira, F (2014), Activating the Tools of Social Media for Innovative Collaboration in the Enterprise, Springer International Publishing

Thomas, K & Akdere, M (2013), Social Media as Collaborative Media in Workplace Learning, Human Resource Development Review, vol 12(3), pp 329–34

[rachel-rmit-blog]

week 5

Activating the public

MIVOTE gives users the opportunity to engage with current political issues as they unfold, valuing the significance of individual voice in the now. Whilst Jacoby had been developing this idea of online democratic decisions for some time, the breaking point was the realization that the voice of his children was not recognised within the political sphere. The underlying cause of engagement or a lack thereof became a fundamental factor towards developing a platform that even those below the legal voting age could actively engage in. Jacoby (2019) states “everything about the way we interact has changed but government has not” referring to the evident need for political practices to adapt to the consistently changing climate of communication and engagement.

Whilst MIVOTE is not limited to engaging with a certain demographic, the nature of its use as an application makes a notable effort to connect with the emerging younger generation who have been born into a globalised world consistently pursuing technological advancements. Having not seen the app in action it is difficult to comment as to the efficiency of its use, however I would be interested to see how much traction it gained within the political realm and whether politicians utilised the public’s effort to engage as ‘stakeholders’ in a decision making process.

The linked video below outlines the way in which MIVOTE has utilised the power of ‘gaming’ to create revenue, further appealing to the younger generation to get involved with changing the nature of Australian democracy. Although the funding goal to launch MIVOTE has not yet been reached, the emergence of the concept as redefining democracy has certainly created a broader conversation. As noted by Armstrong and Hagel (2000); “the value of participating in a community lies in user’s ability to access a broad range of people and resources quickly and easily”; which, according to Jacoby, seems to be the driving force behind MIVOTE capturing user attention by inviting users to engage through personal devices.

MIVOTE, 2017

I have referred to the notion of Castells (2011) in previous posts, that “communication shapes culture”, which is invariably the motivation for engaging with a younger audience so as to shape a culture of informed individuals that can actively participate in decision making processes in real time. Looking back to last week’s case study on the Thankyou, the conversation that the organisation is creating through communicating the direct outputs stemming from product purchases which in turn has the potential to change the ‘culture’ of giving.

References

Armstrong, A., & Hagel, J. (2000). The real value of online communities. Knowledge and communities, 74(3), 85-95.

Castells, M. (2011). The rise of the network society: The information age: Economy, society, and culture (Vol. 1). John Wiley & Sons

[Julian Waters-Lynch] 2016, 15th August, Adam Jacoby Guest Interview, [video file], retrieved from https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qFks1PHxdr8#action=share

[MIVOTE], 2017 7th December,  Democratize Me, It's not just a game, it's a game-changer, [video file] retrieved from, https://youtu.be/SgImcnZTM6o

[rachel-rmit-blog]

Social media and social interaction.

In the lecture Vicki highlighted the way in which social media has the ability to influence the way in which we interact with one another; even on a subconscious level, the various layouts and options either enhance or limit the type of interactions had at any time. For example as Vicki noted, the absence of a dislike button on Instagram does somewhat deter people from responding negatively to someone’s post (although many will voice their opinions through comments); however it also represents conditioning in the opposite many, that ‘likes’ represent value. In a recent trial to improve mental health, Instagram removed the number of likes usually displayed below photo posts in an attempt to refocus users on the content being shared rather than trying to gain a sense of value reflected through the number of users that liked their post (Leighton-Dore, 2019). As was highlighted last week, ‘communication shapes culture’ (Castells, 2013) and when interwoven within platforms such as Instagram, it is the distinct shift to a culture of popularity that is reinforcing ‘attitudes and values (Tiggeman & colleagues; Thompson & Stice, 2001)

I remember meeting a couple of friends and being shocked at the fact that they didn’t have a Facebook OR Instagram account and wondering how on earth they were able to communicate or keep tabs on everything going on around them. However when you step back, is it generally the important ‘stuff’ that gets posted on Instagram or does it tend to be the generic latte or beach sunset that demonstrates the day to day goings on of people’s lives. Now there is such a thing as a social media ‘detox’ for people to get away from the demand of social media and unplug from the virtual into authentic and lived experiences.

I found the following quote from Serafinelli (2018) quite challenging when thinking about the reduction in physical contact due to emerging communication trends; “before the mediation of means of communications, physical proximity was considered an essential element for the development of communities.” I find the platform of social media as a tool for communication quite a challenging one as I think it brings a myriad of opportunities to the table but I also think it can never supply the intimacy that comes from interactions through conversation in the physical proximity of someone else. Benkler and Nissenbaum (2006) highlight the elite ability of social media platforms to unite a groups of people on a global scale, transcending geographical locations, majority of whom utilize such platforms for a shared purpose.

In concluding I will highlight a final concept discussed by Norman (2013) known as ‘automation’. Although Norman (2013) refers to automation in light of emerging technologies and ‘auto-pilot’ functions, I am posing the question; are we as individuals engaging on social media platforms entering into autopilot? Are we taking away from being present in the real world and are we really aware of how platforms shape our interactions, somewhat conditioning our behavior?

References

Benkler, Y., & Nissenbaum, H. (2006). Commons‐based peer production and virtue. Journal of Political Philosophy, 14(4), 394-419

Castells, M. (2011). The rise of the network society: The information age: Economy, society, and culture (Vol. 1). John Wiley & Sons

Leighton-Dore, S. (2019). Will getting rid of Instagram likes finally get rid of the pressure of living up to the hype?, SBS, Accessed at: https://www.sbs.com.au/topics/life/culture/article/2019/07/18/why-instagram-removing-likes-win-everyone

Norman, D. A. (2013). The design of everyday things: Revised and expanded edition. Basic books

Serafinelli, E. (2018). Digital Life On Instagram. Emerald Publishing Limited. Wagon Lane, Bingley

Tiggeman, M. Hayden, S. Brown, Z. Veldhuis, J. The effect of Instagram “likes” on women’s social comparison and body dissatisfaction. Body Image. (Vol .26). pp 90-97

[rachel-rmit-blog]

Participatory Media and Communities of Practice

The what and how.

So what is a community of practice and how does it translate within the realm of participatory media?

When we think of the word community I think the general consensus of what that represents is largely around a group or groups of people, interacting around a commonly shared set of values or interests. These interests could be anything from residents in a particular area (geographical location), fans or followers of a celebrity or a local bird watchers club. The common thread tying all forms of community together is the “network of interactive communication organized around a shared interest or purpose” (Castells, 2009) which can be translated into online communities of interactions. Participatory media therefore is a platform within which users can actively engage with one another, it is not passive or one sided but is open to the sharing of conversations and opinions.

Looking at the above diagram you can see how different media correlate to a variety of communities of practice regardless of the difference in how one might utilize these platforms specifically. These forms of media are all about communication which doesn’t change according to each community but takes on a different kind of etiquette or language.

According to Castells (2009) “community decisively shapes culture” which translates into all communities of practice and the way that communication either empowers or excludes groups or individuals from a wider conversation. Communities are not limited to operating in a professional capacity but are evident within everyday interactions such as a family group chat or a watching a live stream on Instagram of your favourite singer. Communities such as Twitter gives users the ability to instantaneously connect with individuals on a global level, within users are able to ‘tweet’ sports or TV personalities who each have their own communities of practice.  Having said this, it seems as though certain generations utilize different social media platforms for different uses and my general observation is that younger generations don’t seem to associate platforms such as Instagram or Facebook as a predominantly professional environment as much as an opportunity for social interaction.

In reflecting on my own personal use of media platforms, I noticed the recurring theme of  Armstrong and Hagel’s (2000) notion of ‘Communities of relationship’ wherein participants interact with each other on a deeper level and conversation (whilst based on a common interest) is more personal. For example one of the communities that I am a part of is our family group chat, this is a space which all family members utilize to keep each other updated on their day to day activities. The conversation is informal and personal in nature and users often share updates in the form of photos and videos to try and minimize the geographical distance experienced between members.

Alternatively, another community I am a part of is called ‘Love Delhi’ and consists of a core team that have a started a social movement in India and are seeking to spread a positive message through music and friendship. I get about three hundred notifications a day because of this group which drives me crazy but the conversation is again an informal platform for sharing local events and gatherings as well as often being utilized to share encouragement to one another.  

References

Armstrong, A., & Hagel, J. (2000). The real value of online communities. Knowledge and communities, 74(3), 85-95

Castells, M. (2011). The rise of the network society: The information age: Economy, society, and culture (Vol. 1). John Wiley & Sons.

[rachel-rmit-blog]

It all started with water.

Thankyou is a company that manufactures products which, when purchased, contribute to funding projects that help to ‘end global poverty’ (Thankyou, 2019). Whilst starting with the manufacturing of water bottles Thankyou has expanded to include a food, hygiene and baby range focusing on grassroots projects specific to product components. Thankyou has engaged with its stakeholders using a number of different communication mediums, which have gone viral across the nation in order to gain the momentum and support of Australian citizens and companies. As noted by Castells (2013) “the internet increases the ability of an organization to disseminate its message” and Thankyou has an important message which  relies on consumer support commitment to enhancing participatory mediums in order not only to expand productivity but to personalize consumer experience are essential.

Daniel Flynn, one of the co-founders of Thankyou and the key ideas man behind creating a social enterprise to bring about positive change to those in need. “We’ve carried out disruptive marketing campaigns that have gained worldwide attention…the results have stumped many industry experts and have demonstrated the force of a people-powered brand”.

Thankyou’s marketing campaigns and social media activity is a key example of utilizing communication mediums to evoke a wider conversation, as noted by Castells (2013, pg 333) “many activists rely on creating tactics that will draw attention and provoke debate”.

The pinball metaphor

Social media for example is a communication platform that is not neutral in nature and is similarly designed and structured to evoke a response. The ‘pinball metaphor’ of social media details the abrupt bouncing of ideas and information by stakeholders through processes of communication; which, in regard to marketing, encourage the general public to actively engage in a wider conversation which can then inform organizational productivity (Viglia et al, 2018). As individuals we are consistently faced with facts and figures about the world around us; through marketing campaigns, advertising, news through media and conversations our minds are being constantly stimulated by different forms of communication. In this sense the notion of the pinball machine might not seem so foreign as various forms of information are thrown our way sometimes with no notion of their validity leaving us with very little sense of control. Fleming (2011) argues that organizations attempting to gain the cooperation of stakeholders should approach such an activity not as an ‘act of compliance’ (a robotic action occurring as a result of injected information) but to build a foundation of ‘trust and autonomy’ in engagement.

A campaign to change the game.

According to Castells (2013) the ‘diffusion’ of communication technologies and their utilization within various media platforms “has prompted the development of horizontal networks of communication that connect local and global in chosen time”. Organizations have the ability to structure the release of information within a certain time frame in order to maximize the reach or desired effect within a community of followers. For example, in 2013 Thankyou launched the Coles and Woolworths campaign targeting two of Australia’s leading supermarkets and organized a publicity ‘stunt’, urging their followers to get the video trending in order to demonstrate Australia’s support of the brand. Whilst consumers were being presented with the information, they are invited to participate in what Castells (2013) coins as ‘viral diffusion’, by spreading the message or information provided to promote relevant action.

“From its original emphasis of reaching out to a mass audience, the movement has shifted to stimulate mass citizen participation by making the best of the interactive capacity offered by the internet” (Castells, 2013, p327).

On the day of the campaign launch, participants flooded Coles and Woolworths social media pages in support and commitment to purchasing Thankyou products should the supermarkets decide to jump on board (Flynn, 2016). In the space of a fortnight, Thankyou’s campaign video was viewed over 80,000 times (Kimorely, 2015) which attributes to the distinct value of social capital in communication as noted by Azmat (2017) “If you can convince your investors and followers of the importance of your cause, then the world is at your feet” (as cited in This). Essentially organizations such as Thankyou rely on more traditional advertising medium of ‘word of mouth’, inviting consumers to actively engage in the promotion not only of Thankyou products but of the deeper message of empowerment and social change around which consumers have a vital role to play. Purpose binds this network together as stakeholders engage to achieve a common goal, which extends beyond self-gratification or sales targets but is the unification of different communities for a greater good.

Viglia and colleagues (2018) suggest that it is the ‘cognitive’ response to information that enhances stakeholder participation and furthermore, that it is the interaction between such actors that produces such a widespread response or conversation rather than the ‘focal organization’ itself. The figure below demonstrates that whilst the organization may produce the information itself, it is the response of actors to such information that in turn evokes a response or action which then generates stakeholder engagement (Viglia et al, 2018).

(Viglia et al, 2018)

Generating profit and consumer participation – Be the change you want to see

Perhaps the most tangible way of actively engaging stakeholders with the Thankyou brand and its impact has been the emergence of the track your impact branding which can be found on the label of all Thankyou products. This technology encourages users to engage online with the specific project that their purchase has contributed to and find out more about the reach and impact. Empowerment therefore occurs two levels, the consumers are empowered to engage in and support a global conversation about eradicating poverty and are recognized as playing an integral part in project success, and beneficiaries are empowered through the purchase of products and indirectly through such global conversation (Viglia et al, 2018).

It is especially essential for companies like Thankyou to enable the social participation and interaction of their consumers not purely for the sake of profit generating profit from products but because these products individually fund grassroots projects. According to Armstrong and Hagel (2000) the relationship between companies and buyers is one that gives insight into consumer trends and demands, therefore informing product development, much of which come from allowing consumers to interact in a public medium.

#ichoosethankyou The interaction between stakeholders are grounded upon a set of values represented by an organization; which, when commonly shared with consumers, are acted upon to form an alliance (Rondinelli and London, 2003). If an organization can recognize that their audience are not passive recipients of products and information but communicative participants in a wider conversation, collaboration can occur. As Spinuzzi (2015) coins as being ‘All Edge’ organizations now find themselves in a position of horizontal hierarchy as new networks enable more modes of communication in which stakeholders generate conversation and therefore flow of information. The terms of ‘communication, coordination and collaboration’ which inform and engage stakeholders in a participatory process of information sharing and consumer interaction, in such a way that we are ‘always on’ (Spinuzzi, 2015). Furthermore; if this is the case, the public as engaging stakeholders, are essential to driving and marketing products using various communication tools and media platforms attributing to a set of shared values and beliefs.

Information communication technologies transcend historic forms of communication as they are able to provide instantaneous forms of interaction around which accessibility is not limited to a certain elite but is extended to a myriad of stakeholders. Spinuzzi (2015) notes that part of our ‘value’ as stakeholders are the ‘connections’ we forge beyond the familiar to the edges of the unknown where new connections can be formed and information transferred informing relevant recipients. The #ichoosethankyou movement is an example of such a connection as Instagram, Facebook and Twitter users post pictures of Thankyou products captioning them with the #ichoosethankyou hashtag, which then forges broader connections.  By simply clicking on the #ichoosethankyou hashtag, users are met with a myriad of images that showcase their individual support of Thankyou products.

The above image not only showcases numerous hashtags pertaining to the Thankyou company, it also communicates the use of the ‘track your impact’ technology which as mentioned is a vital part of the company’s effort to maintain its socially powered nature. Once information is released, organizations cannot control the response of stakeholders which can present both the potential for the growth or demise of a product or company. However, when viewing this potential in a highly optimistic light, stakeholder engagement has the potential to reach a myriad of individuals all of whom possess a vast number of skills and attributes which collectively can further the impact of an organization’s product or message (Spinuzzi, 2015).

In concluding, whilst Thankyou consumers are primarily connected to communities of transaction, the organization’s drive for equality and empowerment behind the products invites users into communities of interest and of relationship, which significantly expand a company’s reach within the market by diversifying a target audience (Armstrong and Hagel, 2000). In the case of Thankyou, the ‘strategic ties’ fostered through stakeholder engagement have the ability to further the company’s engagement and success across both a national and potentially a global scale (Kaler, 2006 in Verbeke, 2012).

 References

Armstrong, A. Hagel, J. (2000). The Real Value of Online Communities in Knowledge and Communities, pp 85-95

Castells, M. (2013). Communication power. OUP Oxford.

Flemming, N. (2011). Stakeholder engagement – applying insights from neuroscience. ECOS, Iss 60. Vol 1. pp 29

 Flynn, D (2016). Chapter One, The Messenger Group, Australia Square, NSW

Kimmorely, S. (2015). IN GOOD COMPANY: How Thankyou water got the attention of Australia's biggest retailers, Business Insider Australia, Accessed at:

https://www.businessinsider.com.au/in-good-company-how-thankyou-water-got-the-attention-of-australias-biggest-retailers-2015-5

Rondinelli, D. A., & London, T. (2003). How corporations and environmental groups cooperate: Assessing cross-sector alliances and collaborations. The Academy of Management Executive, 17(1), 61-76

Spinuzzi, C. (2015). All edge: Inside the new workplace networks. University of Chicago Press

Thankyou, (2019). Accessed at:

https://thankyou.co/

This, How social enterprise Thankyou is fighting global poverty, Deakin University, Accessed at:

https://this.deakin.edu.au/career/how-social-enterprise-thankyou-is-fighting-global-poverty

Verbeke, A., & Tung, V. (2013). The future of stakeholder management theory: A temporal perspective. Journal of Business Ethics, 112(3), 529-543

[rachel-rmit-blog]

Introducing me.

Hi all,

My name is Rachel and I am currently completing my Masters in International Development and will be finishing up at the end of this year! Communication particularly via media through a range of social platforms is increasingly becoming a dominant way to connect and send messages to individuals and to the public. With reference to the NGO sector, media platforms provide an opportunity to connect with people on a global scale to promote, collaborate and invite involvement on a variety of levels. This blog will contain my ideas on a variety of topics surrounding stakeholder involvement within development and the connection of such engagement through media platforms. Stay tuned!