Key Challenges and Opportunities in Web Entrepreneurship by Alexandru Capatina Elisa Rancati

Author:Alexandru Capatina,Elisa Rancati
Language: eng
Format: epub
Publisher: IGI Global

Source: (Fiske, 1992)

Fiske’s four-grid model posits that societies can be broken down into the following models of interaction: communal sharing (CS), authority ranking (AR), equality matching (EM), and market pricing (MP) (Figure 2). Numerous studies have demonstrated that people in all cultures integrate these models in their day-to-day encounters. However, societies at different stages of their evolution may go through biases, leaning towards one quadrant of the model as opposed to another. For example, theories have been proposed that in the Neolithic Age, society focused on being more communal and sharing (Sahlins, 1974), whereas the postmodern Western society leans towards the MP model (Firat, Nikhilesh, Dholakia, Alladi, & Venkatesh, 1995), which is taken to imply that relationships are being measured and evaluated on a cost-benefit analysis basis, with behaviours and actions being oriented towards a specified goal. The MP model is not inherently selfish or individualistic (Fiske, 2009). Although ‘price’ functions as a key lingua franca and barometer, it need not be exploitative because it can benefit social enterprises, for example, Oxfam organising a campaign on the Facebook platform to raise donations (MP).

Hence, Fiske’s model made use of addressing a new typology that operates like a rotating helicopter, funnelling its way through the prism of macrosocietal lens. It rotates because it mixes and matches in accordance with different segments of society and different epochs.

The other three relational models work harmoniously with one another. EM focuses on trying to keep relationships in balance with one another by minimising differences. In this respect, the old pre-Gorbachev Soviet era was an example of an intended EM. For example, in a hypothetical household with a couple, she takes out the garbage, and he brings the bins back in. People in relationships keep track of the balance or difference amongst those within the team, organisation, neighbourhood, or society. EM can be complex, pending an array of factors, such as the environment and the culture or subculture concerned. It highlights wider issues, such as trust and fairness, values and a sense of right and wrong, of which digital and social media are always fluid.

AR is all about relationships in relation to a hierarchical power, for example, in connection with the military, prestige, religion (monotheistic), or sports teams. Communication is usually top-down, and commonly, there is a threat of punishment should one not obey. In essence, these are relationships based on perceptions of legitimate asymmetries. For example, the social networking platform Diamond Lounge only allows persons of a certain category of income to be able to join them. This show of prestige is an exposition on power. This has vast implication for luxury brands on SNS. A critical component of this is the tone of voice (Tagg & Seargeant, 2013) used to communicate on these social media platforms, which for brands raises certain critical questions. Firstly, should communication be consistent across all social media platforms? Secondly, should this follow through on all social media devices? Thirdly, how does a brand ensure these are all integrated and consistent

Download

Copyright Disclaimer:
This site does not store any files on its server. We only index and link to content provided by other sites. Please contact the content providers to delete copyright contents if any and email us, we'll remove relevant links or contents immediately.