How brand post content contributes to user's Facebook brand-page engagement. The experiential route of active participation

Please cite this article in press as: Gutiérrez-Cillán, J., et al., How brand post content contributes to user’s Facebook brand-page engagement. The experiential route of active participation. BRQ Bus. Res. Q. 2017, http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.brq.2017.06.001 ARTICLE IN PRESS +Model BRQ-73; No. of Pages 17 BRQ Business Research Quarterly (2017) xxx, xxx---xxx www.elsevier.es/brq BRQ Business Research Quarterly REGULAR ARTICLES How brand post content contributes to user’s Facebook brand-page engagement. The experiential route of active participation Jesús Gutiérrez-Cillán, Carmen Camarero-Izquierdo∗, Rebeca San José-Cabezudo Facultad de Ciencias Económicas y Empresariales, University of Valladolid, Avenida Valle Esgueva, 6, 47011 Valladolid, Spain Received 6 June 2016; accepted 1 June 2017 JEL CLASSIFICATION M15; M30 KEYWORDS Facebook brand page; Brand post content; Experiential value; User behavioural engagement Abstract Creating and developing a firm-hosted virtual brand community forms part of a relationship marketing strategy; therefore, it makes sense to evaluate its effectiveness in terms of relational outcomes. In an attempt to know how marketers can foster the relationship with the brand through virtual communities, we posit and estimate a model of relational efficacy for a firm-managed Facebook brand page (FBP) in which the brand posts created by the firm influence the behavioural engagement of individual users through the utilitarian and hedonic values derived from their interactive experiences within the FBP. The findings highlight that information posts stimulate user behavioural engagement through the utilitarian experiential route. Aside from any experiential route and adopting a more direct path, interaction posts are the main drivers of engagement behaviour. Image posts contribute towards the perception of utility, but in no way affect engagement. Finally, in order to gain a deeper insight, we explore the moderating effect of user brand purchase intensity on the relations posited in the model. © 2017 ACEDE. Published by Elsevier Espa˜ na, S.L.U. This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/). Introduction The marketing landscape is changing. The new marketing environment, dominated to a large degree by the emergence of the Internet and social networks, is imposing a shift from conventional relationship marketing towards ∗Corresponding author. E-mail address: [email protected] (C. Camarero-Izquierdo). a ‘‘transcending view of relationships’’ (Vargo, 2009) or an ‘‘expanded view of relationship marketing’’ (Brodie et al., 2011; Vivek et al., 2012), in which the customer’s interactive experiences and ‘‘customer engagement’’ play a central role and in which engaged customer involvement in the firm’s activities is more proactive, interactive and co-creative (e.g., Brodie et al., 2011; Prahalad and Ramaswamy, 2000). Virtual brand communities constitute an exceptional research context in which to explore firms’ capacity to http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.brq.2017.06.001 2340-9436/© 2017 ACEDE. Published by Elsevier Espa˜ na, S.L.U. This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license (http:// creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/). Please cite this article in press as: Gutiérrez-Cillán, J., et al., How brand post content contributes to user’s Facebook brand-page engagement. The experiential route of active participation. BRQ Bus. Res. Q. 2017, http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.brq.2017.06.001 ARTICLE IN PRESS +Model BRQ-73; No. of Pages 17 2 J. Gutiérrez-Cillán et al. produce interactive experiences and promote relational engagement among customers (Relling et al., 2016). In these online spaces, individuals come together around some distinct interest (e.g., a brand) to contact and interact with each other in order to exchange, share and pool resources, such as information, knowledge, experiences, entertainment, socio-emotional support and friendship, through diverse computer-mediated communication systems (e.g., Jin et al., 2010a; Preece, 2001). In this sense, a virtual brand community is, first of all, an ‘‘online community based on social communications and relationships’’ (de Valck et al., 2009, p. 185), a ‘‘web of personal relationships’’ (Rheingold, 1993) or a ‘‘fabric of relationships’’ (McAlexander et al., 2002, p. 38). At the very least, a virtual brand community provides a ‘‘social structure to the C2C relationship in the consumer-brand-consumer triad’’ (Wu and Fang, 2010, p. 573). With the rapid diffusion and widespread use of social network sites (SNS), more and more firms are investing in SNS-based brand communities to build relationships and to encourage users to exchange knowledge about their experiences with the brand or the firm (Ruiz-Mafe et al., 2014). Millions of consumers are connected to their favourite brands through social networks such as Facebook, Twitter, YouTube, and others (Statista, 2016). Unfortunately, this in no way means that all these communities are successful and that all their individual members are active participants. The report by Hampton et al. (2012) on The Pew Research Center’s Internet & American Life Project concludes that, on average, Facebook users ‘‘get more from their friends on Facebook than they give to their friends’’ and that the typical Facebook user is ‘‘moderately active’’ in performing specific Facebook activities. Such results concur with the findings obtained by Gummerus et al. (2012, p. 870), Pöyry et al. (2013, p. 232) and van Varik and van Oostendorp (2013, p. 456), amongst others, in the case of virtual brand communities. In fact, by adopting a naive technically-oriented approach and by paying insufficient attention to the social interactions required to build a true community, many initially attractive online communities may have failed to retain and enduringly engage their members and, not surprisingly, as a result have become ‘‘cyber ghost towns’’ (Preece, 2001). In any case, regardless of its level of success, what makes a company’s social site (such as a companyhosted Facebook page) recognizable as a community is that it is a structured set of social relationships among members that share a common interest, i.e., they are admirers of a brand (e.g., Cvijikj and Michahelles, 2013; Pöyry et al., 2013; Zaglia, 2013; Munnukka et al., 2015; Relling et al., 2016). Given such a general framework, our research focuses on the relational context defined by a Facebook-page brand community (which is founded, managed, and controlled by a firm) in order to pinpoint the key drivers of user brand-page engagement (as a good indicator of community success). Specifically, our research question is how marketers can reach customers and stimulate their community engagement in the Facebook page context. Thus, we centre on those determinants of relationship marketing strategy success in Facebook that can be directly controlled by the firm, such as so-called ‘‘brand posts’’. The present work seeks to estimate a relational efficacy model of a Facebook brand page (henceforth, FBP), which will allow us to (1) gauge the extent to which brand posts (henceforth, BP) or posts created by the firm running the Facebook page help improve page users’ overall relational experience and, through this indirect pathway, actually serves to foster user engagement behaviour and (2) ascertain whether the orientation or content type of BP can determine the kind of experiential value (utilitarian or hedonic) obtained by the users and their level of page engagement. We thus explore the degree to which each type of BP encourages user brand-page engagement through the utilitarian and hedonic experiential routes. In addition, we explore the moderating influence which the user’s brand purchase intensity (i.e., how much of the brand they buy) might have on the model’s structure and paths, one aspect not to taken into account thus far in the context of FBP relational efficacy. Previous literature on the context of FBPs has empirically analyzed the response of page users to brand posts. For instance, de Vries et al. (2012), Cvijikj and Michahelles (2013), Sabate et al. (2014) and Luarn et al. (2015), amongst others, examine how the content type (among other characteristics) of a BP directly impacts on the ‘‘popularity’’ of that BP (as indicated by the number of likes, comments and shares on the BP). Compared to the works mentioned, our research evidences two significant differences in terms of approach and methodology which should be highlighted. First, while the unit of analysis of previous works is the BP, the unit of analysis in the current work is the brand page and the page-user behaviour. Our research focus is customer behaviour in the relational context of a virtual brand community, in which each individual member holds links with the community as a whole, with the other members of the group, with the brand and with the firm (McAlexander et al., 2002). The dependent variable in our model is not, therefore, the community’s direct and global response to each BP or the efficacy per brand post, but each user’s overall response to the brand page (i.e. user brand-page engagement) or the relational efficacy per page user. Moreover, contrary to previous works, which evaluate objective indicators of BP content type and engagement, the independent variables in the current research correspond to users’ appraisals vis-à-vis the interest aroused in them by various types of BP depending on their content, and the dependent variable is the users’ subjective evaluation of their active involvement in the page’s relational activities. In other words, we measure the number of likes, comments and shares per page-user, not as an objective figure, but rather as the user’s subjective evaluation of their actual behaviour. Secondly, we conjecture that BPs do not promote user engagement directly. Rather, BP content influences user engagement and brand page success through a key mediating construct: the user’s brand-page experiences. We thus follow the recommendation of Brodie et al. (2011), Gummerus et al. (2012) and Malthouse and Calder (2011), according to which the engagement construct should be based on the relational experiences of individuals interacting with the brand page. Therefore, we develop an alternative (but fully compatible and complementary) model in which user relational experiences within the FBP play a central and crucial role as a mediator in the relationship between BP interest and user brand-page engagement. In this vein, we refer to the ‘‘experiential route of user behavioural engagement’’. Please cite this article in press as: Gutiérrez-Cillán, J., et al., How brand post content contributes to user’s Facebook brand-page engagement. The experiential route of active participation. BRQ Bus. Res. Q. 2017, http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.brq.2017.06.001 ARTICLE IN PRESS +Model BRQ-73; No. of Pages 17 How brand post content contributes to user’s Facebook brand-page engagement 3 In summary, the current paper contributes to the literature on the relational efficacy of SNS-based brand communities. By adopting a different perspective, it analyses the individual users’ experiential and behavioural responses to a FBP and then explains its efficacy per pageuser. In addition, the study offers insights about the way in which the firm-generated content can foster users to participate in the FBP activities. The empirical findings show that the utilitarian experiential route clearly dominates the hedonic route. Thus, brand-related content posted by firm ultimately results in active engagement with the FBP if users perceive it as truly useful in solving problems and making decisions. Contrary to expectations, entertainment content, even if appreciated and enjoyed by users, does not promote their active participation. Anyway, while the experiential route is perhaps the most consistent with the relationship marketing orientation, it is not the only (nor the shortest) route of user brand-page engagement. Theoretical background and research hypotheses User brand-page engagement as an indicator of relational success Digital technology applications may supply the relational online space, but member-generated content and interpersonal communication provide the essence (Hagel and Armstrong, 1997; Ridings et al., 2002; Wu and Fang, 2010) as well as the formative and shaping force (Bagozzi and Dholakia, 2002) of a virtual brand community. In other words, the value of a virtual community stems from the content produced and shared during member interaction and conversation (Jin et al., 2010a). In light of this, the active and ongoing participation (i.e., engagement) of each member in the community’s public forum is regarded as a key ingredient in weaving the relational fabric of a virtual brand community (Rheingold, 1993; Rothaermel and Sugiyama, 2001) and crucial to ensuring the community’s survival and endurance (Algesheimer et al., 2005; Koh and Kim, 2004). In addition, creating and developing a firmhosted community forms part of a relationship marketing strategy (e.g., Pitta and Fowler, 2005; Rothaermel and Sugiyama, 2001), so it makes sense to evaluate the efficacy of a virtual brand community in terms of relational outcomes. Since a brand community brings together individuals around a brand as a focal point for their interests and discussions, individuals’ community engagement will also be perceived by the firm running the community as a reliable indicator of how successful its relationship marketing strategy is (Wiertz and de Ruyter, 2007). Although there are many and wide-ranging definitions of engagement (see Brodie et al., 2011; Dessart et al., 2015; Hollebeek et al., 2014; van Doorn et al., 2010 or Vivek et al., 2012 for a review of relevant literature), broadly speaking, engagement may be conceived as the intensity of an individual’s connection and interaction with a particular object, activity, agent, idea, value or symbol. In the customer relationship marketing context, the ‘‘engagement subject’’ (i.e., the engaged individual) may be either a current customer or a potential customer, and the ‘‘engagement object’’ may refer to a brand or product, an organization’s offering or activity, or the others in the social network (e.g., a brand community) created around the brand, product, offering or activity (Vivek et al., 2014). Customer engagement is based on the existence of focal interactive customer experiences with the specific engagement object (Brodie et al., 2011), reaches ‘‘beyond purchase’’ (MSI, 2010, p. 4) and embraces the customer’s overall participation within and outside the specific exchange situations (Vivek et al., 2012). Finally, customer engagement is characterized by its dynamic and interactively generated nature (Hollebeek et al., 2014) as well as by its complex multidimensional structure (Brodie et al., 2013), which comprises relevant cognitive, affective, behavioural and social components (Vivek et al., 2012). In the current research, our interest focuses on the social-behavioural dimension of customer engagement, known as ‘‘customer behavioural engagement’’ (e.g., Gummerus et al., 2012; Zheng et al., 2015) or ‘‘customer engagement behaviour’’ (e.g., van Doorn et al., 2010). Specifically, in the case of a Facebook brand page (FBP), users’ behavioural engagement is manifested through their active participation in the functionalities Facebook offers (Gummerus et al., 2012; Luarn et al., 2015): clicking, liking, commenting and sharing behaviours (Wallace et al., 2014), which we term ‘‘user brand-page engagement’’. Effect of brand posts on user brand-page engagement by the experiential route In the literature relating to the determinants of customer’s integration and active participation in social networks and online communities, there are two main streams of research although distinguishing between them does not always proves an easy task. The first group encompasses studies which focus on the role of the ‘‘benefits sought’’ (Cotte et al., 2006) as factors which determine community user behaviour (e.g., Hennig-Thurau et al., 2004; Liao et al., 2013; Pöyry et al., 2013), by considering that the pursuit of these benefits is the main motivational driver of behaviour. Closely linked to this, the other group of works (e.g., Dholakia et al., 2004; Jin et al., 2010a,b; Mathwick et al., 2008; Wang et al., 2007; Zhou et al., 2013) centres on community members’ relational experience and the ‘‘benefits derived’’ from their integration in the social network as determinants of their behaviour. The present work is framed within this second category. Following Malthouse and Calder (2011), Gummerus et al. (2012, p. 871) indicate that ‘‘customer engagement can only be understood through customer experiences, which are context-dependent’’. Engagement occurs by virtue of firsthand interactive experiences (Brodie et al., 2011; Hollebeek et al., 2014; van Doorn et al., 2010) and its behavioural manifestation reflects individual involvement and participation in activities. Thus, although individual users’ initial intention to join a virtual community is influenced by their value expectations, over time the accumulation of community experiences shapes their community behaviour. Cleary, the reason why members actively participate in a virtual community is attributed to the experiential values derived from their relationship history within the community. Please cite this article in press as: Gutiérrez-Cillán, J., et al., How brand post content contributes to user’s Facebook brand-page engagement. The experiential route of active participation. BRQ Bus. Res. Q. 2017, http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.brq.2017.06.001 ARTICLE IN PRESS +Model BRQ-73; No. of Pages 17 4 J. Gutiérrez-Cillán et al. Adapting the Brakus et al. (2009) definition of brand experience to our case study, the user’s brand-page experience is a term employed to represent the cognitive and affective reactions sparked in the user by page-related stimuli. Page experience occurs during the whole process of interaction with the FBP and stems from the set of interactions involving the user over time. This is not, therefore, a one-off experience (e.g., a short-lived emotion) brought on by a particular stimulus (e.g., a BP), but an overall relational experience resulting from an accumulation of interactive experiences. Insofar as the relational experience itself can be more or less rich in value, users evaluate the overall experience in terms of the benefits it provides. Experiential value thus emerges as a consequence of cumulative experiences. By joining a virtual community, users may obtain different types of relationship benefits (i.e. benefits resulting from integration), such as practical benefits, social benefits, social enhancement, entertainment and economic benefits (Gummerus et al., 2012), or different types of values, such as purposive (including informational and instrumental) value, self-discovery, maintaining interpersonal connectivity, social enhancement and entertainment value (Dholakia et al., 2004). Reflecting the utilitarian versus hedonic dichotomy (Hirschman and Holbrook, 1982), Mathwick et al. (2001) conceptualize the ‘‘experiential value’’ within the context of online purchasing and distinguish between an intrinsic or hedonic component (e.g., visual appeal, entertainment, escapism and enjoinment) and an extrinsic or utilitarian component (e.g., service excellence, efficiency and economic value). In the case of virtual communities (Dholakia et al., 2004; Jin et al., 2010a), the extrinsic experience is linked to the purposive or utilitarian value, that is, to the informational and instrumental benefits derived from accessing information on the product and its uses, solving specific problems, and learning from others. In contrast, the intrinsic experience is linked to the social hedonic or entertainment value derived from searching for playfulness, fun, amusement, fantasy, sensory stimulation or relaxation by interacting with others. As an active source of intrinsic value, playfulness involves enjoyment and escapism, and is reflected in the pleasure that comes from engaging in activities that are absorbing and provide an opportunity to get away from daily routine (Mathwick et al., 2001). In both utilitarian and entertainment experiential dimensions, if community members are not satisfied, there will be no incentive to participate (or to continue participating) in the community. On the contrary, if individual members’ experiences in previous interactions within the community prove positive, they will feel satisfied and motivated to participate (or to participate more actively) in the community activities (Casaló et al., 2010). In this line of thought, Jin et al. (2010a) evidence the influence of positive disconfirmation of both utilitarian and hedonic experiential values on individual member satisfaction and affective commitment and, in turn, on ‘‘continuance intention to participate’’ in an online community. Likewise, Loureiro et al. (2015) note how a satisfied member is more willing to engage deeply. This effect of positive experiences on active participation might also be explained as the result of ‘‘the call of duty’’ (Wiertz and de Ruyter, 2007) or a sense of indebtedness (Chan and Li, 2010), according to which community members tend to reciprocate the social support received. Jin et al. (2010b) show that, in return for the social and functional benefits gained from community participation, members reciprocate with their affective and calculative commitment to the virtual community. In our case, users who gain utilitarian and hedonic experiential values by participating in the FBP are more likely to reciprocate. In this regard, active engagement is understood as a reciprocating behaviour to reduce the sense of indebtedness. Furthermore, participation may also be due to patterns of imitation and contagion. Based on observational learning theory, Zhou et al. (2013) explore the transformation mechanism that converts visitors into active members in online brand communities. If, by viewing posts, visitors realize the benefits of active member participation and perceive posts as having informational and social values, they will be interested in imitating member behaviour and in seeking greater belongingness to the community through a stronger intention to participate. Finally, in line with the flow theory (Novak et al., 2000), if community users experience ‘‘flow’’ in their online interactions (more likely when they are involved in enjoyable activities that provide them with utility and entertainment), they will be more inclined to spend time and effort in contributing to the community. In fact, Hall-Phillips et al. (2016) report a direct and positive link between escapism and engagement in social networks. All of this drives us to advocate the experiential origin of engagement and suggest a positive direct effect of the experiential value obtained on the level of engagement expressed by page users. In turn, users’ experiential value comes from connecting to a brand page and stems from the global evaluation of their relationship history within the community (i.e., their experiential history of interaction with the brand, the firm and other page-users). Even so, in this process of producing both utilitarian and hedonic experiential values, page posts play a particularly key role. When users are exposed to Facebook page posts, the elicited affective and cognitive elaborations determine attitudes towards the posts (Chen et al., 2015), which are later transferred to experiences and perceptions of experiential value. As a result, the interest which users perceive in the page posts will determine the quality of their relational experience with the brand page. It is clear, however, that Facebook-page posts can be generated by both marketer and peer user. Thus, depending on the post creator, posts can be categorized as either ‘‘brand post’’ or ‘‘user post’’. Unlike user-generated content (i.e. user posts), brand posts (BPs) refer to the content created and directly controlled by an identified marketer (or brand) under the tenet of viral marketing (Chen et al., 2015). Through these posts, the firm seeks to influence page user experiences. Yet, BP content may vary enormously and not all BPs generate the same values to the same degree. According to Luarn et al. (2015), marketers can post information about the product, firm, brand or marketing activities (informational posts); messages presenting limited offers, samples, coupons, special offers and other campaign activities aimed at promoting the brand (remuneration posts); questions, opinion polls and other messages encouraging users to discuss, interact and actively participate on brand pages (social posts), or content that is unrelated to the brand or a particular product, but provides an opportunity for users to enjoy themselves, have fun and escape Please cite this article in press as: Gutiérrez-Cillán, J., et al., How brand post content contributes to user’s Facebook brand-page engagement. The experiential route of active participation. BRQ Bus. Res. Q. 2017, http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.brq.2017.06.001 ARTICLE IN PRESS +Model BRQ-73; No. of Pages 17 How brand post content contributes to user’s Facebook brand-page engagement 5 routine (entertainment posts). Assuming, therefore, that BPs are designed to offer a range of benefits (e.g., entertainment or firmand brand-related information) or to spark an array of different responses, the interest which such content arouses is expected to shape user experience in the FBP and the type and level of experiential value to emerge. Taken together, the preceding arguments suggest that experiential value mediates the effect of brand posts (BPs) on users’ page engagement behaviour. The distinction between ‘‘utility’’ and ‘‘entertainment’’ as experiential values leads us to consider the possible two-fold influence of BPs on user behavioural engagement. Indeed, as shown in Fig. 1, we propose two experiential routes of active engagement: the utilitarian route, which derives from informational value, and the entertainment route, which derives from enjoyment and escapism values. Such a consideration of experiential values as mediating variables entails the assumption that (1) BPs are factors inducing experiential value and (2) active engagement is a behaviour induced by experiential values. Accordingly, the following hypothesis (broken down into more specific and operational sub-hypotheses) is submitted for empirical testing: H1. On a FBP, experiential value mediates the influence of brand posts on a user’s page engagement behaviour, inasmuch as brand posts contribute towards the perception of both utilitarian (H1a) and hedonic (H1b) experiential values (albeit differently, depending on the orientation or content type of brand posts) and, in turn, the perception of both utilitarian (H1c) and hedonic (H1d) experiential values contributes positively to a user’s page engagement behaviour. The moderating effect of a user’s brand purchase intensity Given that the present study focuses on analysing the experiences and engagement of individuals who display a positive attitude towards the brand (inferred because they are fans of the brand page) and who also tend to purchase the brand, we were keen to find out whether the amount they purchase in any way influences the effects considered. Empirical evidence has shown that more intense purchasers are more engaged and maintain more stable and longer-lasting relations with the firm (e.g., Reinartz and Kumar, 2003). In the present context, we might also speculate that brand purchase intensity could affect page-users’ perceptions, attitudes and behaviours and, therefore, might influence the extent to which interacting with the BPs generates utility or entertainment and, in turn, fosters engagement. As regards the effect of the type of BP on the perceived experience (H1a and H1b), it could be argued that more intense purchasers, thanks to their greater brand purchase and consumption experience, are more familiar with the brand and with the firm’s products and, therefore, perceive less utility in posts that offer informative content. Should this be the case, the effect of informational posts on utilitarian value will be less, the higher the purchase intensity (negative moderating effect on H1a). Yet, regular buyers of the brand might also be thought to be more sensitive to the latest information on the firm’s products and its innovations, which would allow us to conjecture the opposite informational post effect to the one suggested earlier (i.e., a positive moderating effect on H1a). Similar observations might also be made with regard to other kinds of BPs and the other type of experiential value. Likewise, it is also possible to put forward contradictory hypotheses for the moderating effect of purchase intensity on the relations suggested in H1c and H1d between experiential values and engagement. On the one hand, it seems reasonable to consider that the most intense purchasers will be more engaged with the brand and will, therefore, be more inclined towards page engagement irrespective of how they evaluate their experience in the FBP. In such instances, page engagement would be shaped less by experiential values when the user is a more intense purchaser (negative moderating effect on H1c and H1d). Nevertheless, it might also be argued that purchasers who are more intense and involved with the brand behave motivated more by the call of reciprocity and, therefore, adjust their engagement behaviour better to the level of value they receive. By contrast, purchasers who are less intense and less involved with the brands might act less motivated by reciprocity and more by opportunism, leading them to display a lower level of engagement with the page, somewhat irrespective of the value received. In this case, the positive effect of the experiential value on page engagement will be clearer for more intense purchasers (positive moderating effect on H1c and H1d). Since we put forward this purchase-intensity effect as an exploratory question, we will test empirically for the moderating effect, but do not posit a specific directional hypothesis. H2. The page-user’s brand purchase intensity moderates the direct and indirect effects considered in hypothesis H1, i.e., the direct influence of BP on experiential value, the direct influence of experiential value on engagement, and the indirect influence of BP on engagement. All the proposed relations are shown in Fig. 1. Data Sample The information required to estimate the model and to test the hypotheses was taken from a sample of fans in a Facebook page of a Spanish brand of women’s fashion run by the firm itself. The fashion brand, which wishes to remain anonymous, currently boasts some 27,000 Facebook fans. Although the brand is commercialized in different European countries, the fan page is addressed to Spanish customers (it is in Spanish). The fashion industry is unquestionably one of enormous importance when analysing the value of online communities for brands (e.g., Park and Cho, 2012; Christofer, 2014), given that many communities and blogs run by the brands themselves or by fashion lovers have emerged in recent years. Moreover, clothes are experiential products with emotional connotations in addition to their utilitarian functions (Hirschman and Holbrook, 1982). The fan pages of the brands are thus likely to offer followers the chance Please cite this article in press as: Gutiérrez-Cillán, J., et al., How brand post content contributes to user’s Facebook brand-page engagement. The experiential route of active participation. BRQ Bus. Res. Q. 2017, http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.brq.2017.06.001 ARTICLE IN PRESS +Model BRQ-73; No. of Pages 17 6 J. Gutiérrez-Cillán et al. H1a UTILITY (ex per iential v alue) ENTER TAINME NT (ex per iential v alue) CONTEN T TYPE OF BRAND POST USER BRA ND-PAG E ENGAGEMENT H1d H1c H1b Utilitarian experiential route of engagement Hedonic experiential route of engagement H2 (mod eratin g eff ect) Brand purcha se int ensit y Figure 1 Research Model. to find both hedonic and utilitarian experiences. In the case of the Facebook page chosen for the present study, the content generated by the firm (BP) includes catalogue photos, descriptions of clothes, information on promotions, ideas for matching clothes and accessories, ‘‘the making of’’ videos, photos of fans and famous people wearing the brand’s clothes, opinion polls about new designs, prize draws amongst fans as well as invitations to take part in activities organized by the page, information concerning the brand’s presence at fairs and fashion shows together with appearances in the social media (television, magazines or blogs), etc. On said brand page, the firm does not post messages that do not refer to the firm or the brand, in reference to the type of content which Cvijikj and Michahelles (2013), de Vries et al. (2012) or Luarn et al. (2015) term as ‘‘entertainment posts’’. In order to gather information, a link to an online questionnaire was inserted in a post of the Facebook fan-page. In an effort to encourage people to reply, fans were offered a 10 Euro voucher for their next online purchase. We obtained 266 responses. Since the firm disposed of the emails address provided by respondents, it was noted that some individuals submitted the questionnaire twice. After deletion of duplicated answers, a final sample of 252 responses was accepted for analysis. Given that those surveyed chose themselves when responding, the sample cannot be considered representative. Nevertheless, we feel that it is a valid sample for studying the behaviour of the most active followers and those most closely linked to the brand. Even though the sample is not random, we calculated the sampling error and obtained a value of 6.13% for a confidence interval of 95%, a finite population size (19,895 fans) and a sample of 252 interviewees. As regards the description of the sample in terms of sex, age, qualifications and occupation, all of those who answered were women, 52% were aged between 36 and 45, 69% held a university degree and 71% were salaried workers, reflecting fairly well the profile of the brand’s purchasers. As for their purchase behaviour, over the past year, 33% had bought over four of the brand’s garments, 37% between two and four, 17% only one and 13% none. Finally, with regard to where they preferred to buy the brand, 52% stated a preference for the physical store and 48% for the online store. Measures Measurement of the variables (Table 1) is based on a review of the literature and on the scales validated in prior research, although some variables had to be adapted to the context of the study. Except for the number of brand articles purchased, all items were measured on 1 to 5 point Likert type scales. User brand-page engagement was measured using three indicators reflecting the frequency (from 1: virtually never, to 5: quite often) with which those surveyed engaged with the brand page through the three options offered by Facebook: like, comment and share (e.g., Cvijikj and Michahelles, 2013; Luarn et al., 2015). Although these indicators reflect different behaviours, they are usually closely related, and so were treated as reflective items. As regards user experiences in the social network, the hedonic experiential value (i.e., entertainment) was measured with two indicators of enjoyment and one indicator reflecting escapism used by Mathwick et al. (2001), whereas the utilitarian experiential value (i.e., utility) scale was based on previous scales of perceived utility (e.g., Davis et al., 1989; Kulviwat et al., 2007) but adapted to the case of a fashion social network. To pinpoint content types of BPs, 15 items were proposed reflecting the various content offered by the firm on its Facebook page and which was rated by fans in terms of the interest said content generated in five-position scales ranging from 1 (not in the least interesting) to 5 (very interesting). These items were grouped into the three categories that emerged from an exploratory factorial analysis: (1) interaction content/posts or posts that encourage fans to get involved (e.g., uploading photos, commenting or voting); (2) image content/posts or posts that convey the brand’s image and social presence (e.g., ‘‘making of’’ videos, the brand’s appearance on television, blogs and magazines, or photos and videos of famous people wearing the brand), and (3) information content/posts or posts that provide information about the brand and its products (e.g., catalogue, description of garments and accessories, promotions Please cite this article in press as: Gutiérrez-Cillán, J., et al., How brand post content contributes to user’s Facebook brand-page engagement. The experiential route of active participation. BRQ Bus. Res. Q. 2017, http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.brq.2017.06.001 ARTICLE IN PRESS +Model BRQ-73; No. of Pages 17 How brand post content contributes to user’s Facebook brand-page engagement 7 Table 1 Variables measured. Variables and indicators Mean S.D. Loadings Engagement (␣ = 0.88; CR = 0.92; AVE = 0.80) I take part in the posts with ‘‘likes’’ 2.88 1.261 0.847*** I comment on the posts 2.13 1.055 0.908*** I share the posts with other people 2.31 1.114 0.942*** Utility (˛ = 0.92; CR = 0.94; AVE = 0.80) The fan-page. . . Helps me to decide what to buy 3.25 1.100 0.884*** Helps me to decide what to wear or how to match up clothes 3.12 1.137 0.877*** Offers me useful information 3.51 1.024 0.902*** Gives me ideas 3.63 0.991 0.917*** Entertainment (˛ = 0.92; CR = 0.95; AVE = 0.86) The fan-page . . . Provides a welcome distraction from my daily routine 3.27 1.145 0.899*** Is fun 3.44 1.060 0.952*** Really entertains me 3.15 1.101 0.925*** Information posts (˛ = 0.83; CR = 0.88; AVE = 0.66) I pay attention to and am interested in. . . Posts informing me about special offers 4.25 0.960 0.793*** Posts with catalogue photos 4.08 1.009 0.801*** Posts with descriptions of garments 3.87 1.078 0.818*** Posts with ideas about how to match up clothes 3.77 1.115 0.831*** Image posts (˛ = 0.92; CR = 0.94; AVE = 0.76) I pay attention to and am interested in . . . Posts about [the Brand] appearing on television 3.37 1.147 0.943*** Posts about [the Brand] appearing in blogs 3.30 1.142 0.920*** Post about [the Brand] appearing in magazines 3.37 1.130 0.919*** Posts with photos of famous people wearing [the Brand] 3.33 1.149 0.867*** Posts with videos on the making of 3.18 1.207 0.701*** Interaction posts (˛ = 0.88; CR = 0.92; AVE = 0.69) I pay attention to and am interested in . . . Posts encouraging me to upload fan photos 3.06 1.193 0.839*** Posts encouraging me to comment 3.09 1.147 0.920*** Posts asking me to vote 2.94 1.157 0.852*** Posts with specific mentions of fans or their comments 3.08 1.123 0.895*** Posts announcing prize draws for fans 4.15 1.086 0.622*** *p < 0.05 (bilateral). ** p < 0.01 (bilateral). *** p < 0.001 (bilateral). or ideas for matching up clothes). For the subsequent analyses, the item relating to ‘‘prize draws’’, which factorial analysis located in the factor we referred to as ‘‘information content/posts’’, was relocated to the factor ‘‘interaction content/posts’’. This is because in the page analyzed, the prize draws appear as an incentive to take part or as a reward for users who engage in the page by liking, sharing or commenting. Finally, brand purchase intensity was measured as the number of garments purchased over the last year on a four-point scale: (1) no purchase, (2) one garment, (3) between two and four garments and (4) more than four garments. This variable was dichotomized so as to create two user groups: lower-intensity (LI) group, comprising the 76 fans who purchased one or no garments, and higherintensity (HI) group, made up of the 196 fans who purchased two or more garments. Table 1 shows the indicators used and the descriptive statistics (mean and standard deviation) of each indicator, as well as the standardized factorial loadings in the measurement model to emerge from partial least squares analysis (PLS). Also offered are Cronbach’s alpha coefficient, composite reliability (CR) and the average variance extracted (AVE) of each reflective construct. Table 2 shows the correlation matrix as well as the square root of the AVE in order to test the discriminant validity of the proposed variables following the criterion of Fornell-Larcker. A high correlation can, however, be seen between the two dimensions of the experiential value (utility and entertainment). Although they are different concepts and are not expected to be highly correlated, in the current context (fashion fans) we suspect that utility and entertainment might act as reflective dimensions of an experiential value construct. To check this, we Please cite this article in press as: Gutiérrez-Cillán, J., et al., How brand post content contributes to user’s Facebook brand-page engagement. The experiential route of active participation. BRQ Bus. Res. Q. 2017, http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.brq.2017.06.001 ARTICLE IN PRESS +Model BRQ-73; No. of Pages 17 8 J. Gutiérrez-Cillán et al. Table 2 Correlation matrix. Information posts Image posts Interaction posts Utility Entertainment Information posts 0.811 Image posts 0.660 0.874 Interaction posts 0.698 0.755 0.832 Utility 0.684 0.603 0.630 0.895 Entertainment 0.684 0.584 0.678 0.749 0.925 Engagement 0.396 0.456 0.571 0.465 0.440 The diagonal shows the square root of the AVE of the reflective constructs (all except engagement). performed Type I second-order confirmatory factor analysis (Jarvis et al., 2003) that confirmed the reflective nature of utility and entertainment as dimensions of experiential value [2(13) = 32.82, p = 0.000, GFI = 0.964, AGFI = 0.923, CFI = 0.987, NFI = 0.979, RMSEA = 0.078]. In order to avoid, or at least minimize, common method variance bias, we followed some recommendations made by Podsakoff et al. (2003) when designing the questionnaire: respondents were explicitly assured that there were no right or wrong answers and that the information they provided would be treated confidentially; item wording was revised so as to avoid ambiguous or unfamiliar terms; different response formats were used; and question order did not match the causal sequence in the model. In addition, Harman’s single-factor test was performed. Evidence for common method bias exists when a single factor emerges from the factor analysis or when one general factor accounts for the majority of covariance among the measures. In our case, exploratory factor analysis with all the indicators produced five factors with an eigenvalue greater than 1.0 (accounting for 76% of explained variance) and a first factor explaining only 22% of variance. In sum, the procedural remedies applied and the findings of the above-mentioned test suggest that common method bias is not a major concern in this study. The unmeasured latent methods factor test (Podsakoff et al., 2003) was also performed. We introduced a CMV factor that includes all the principal constructs’ indicators and calculated the degree to which each indicator’s variance was explained by its principal construct (i.e., substantive variance) and by the CMV factor. While substantive variance averaged 0.777, the average method-based variance is 0.023 (Table 3). As the ratio of substantive variance to method variance is about 34:1, and most of the method factor loadings are insignificant, this analysis also indicates that CMV is unlikely to be a critical factor in the study. Analysis and results In order to test the hypotheses posited, the partial least squares (PLS) method was applied using SmartPLS (Ringle et al., 2005) software. The levels of statistical significance of the coefficients of the measurement and structural model were calculated using bootstrapping with 500 sub-samples. The results of estimating the structural model (Model 1 or full-mediation model) are shown in the first column of Table 4. In order to test the robustness of the results obtained, each latent constructs was reduced to a single index (as the average of its indicators) and the model was estimated by means of path analysis (using AMOS 23.0 software). Said estimation allows us to consider the reflective nature of the two dimensions of experiential value (allowing the correlation of the measurement errors of utility and entertainment) and to obtain goodness-of-fit indices. As shown in the second column of Table 4, the fit obtained did not prove satisfactory. The full-mediation model was then compared to several nested models considering the direct effects of brand post content on engagement, that is, the partial mediation of the utilitarian and hedonic experiential values in the relationship between type of BP and user engagement. This revealed that introducing a direct effect of the interaction posts on engagement significantly improved the model’s goodness-of-fit (third column in Table 4). Lastly, this quasi-mediation model (Model 2) was estimated by means of PLS (fourth column in Table 4). These final results were used to test hypotheses H1a, H1b, H1c, and H1d. Despite the high correlation between utility and entertainment, the values of the variance inflation factor (VIF) rule out the existence of problems of multicollinearity between the determinants of engagement, both in the full mediation model [VIF (Utility) = 2.274; VIF (Entertainment) = 2.274] and in the quasi-mediation model [VIF (Interaction posts) = 1.976; VIF (Utility) = 2.728; VIF (Entertainment) = 2.711]. In light of the results, it can be confirmed that the content of BPs impacts on the perception of experiential values. In fact, the three kinds of BP account for over fifty per cent of the variability of utility (R2= 0.524) and entertainment (R2= 0.547). Specifically, in agreement with H1a, the interest aroused by information posts (b = 0.434, p < 0.001), image posts (b = 0.161, p < 0.05) and interaction posts (b = 0.206, p < 0.05) positively and significantly affects the utilitarian experiential value. In agreement with H1b, information posts (b = 0.399, p < 0.001) and interaction posts (b = 0.367, p < 0.001) positively and significantly affect hedonic experiential value. However, the same cannot be said of image posts, whose effect on entertainment does not prove significant (b = 0.044, p > 0.1). Aside from this exception, hypotheses H1a and H1b can be seen to be supported. In turn, the perception of an extrinsic or utilitarian experiential value significantly contributes to improving fan engagement in FBP, in other words, to enhancing their level of activity by following, commenting on and sharing posts, both in the full-mediation model (b = 0.309, p < 0.001) and in the quasi-mediation model (b = 0.169, p < 0.05). In the case of intrinsic or hedonic experiential value, things change. As expected, the result of estimating the full-mediation Please cite this article in press as: Gutiérrez-Cillán, J., et al., How brand post content contributes to user’s Facebook brand-page engagement. The experiential route of active participation. BRQ Bus. Res. Q. 2017, http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.brq.2017.06.001 ARTICLE IN PRESS +Model BRQ-73; No. of Pages 17 How brand post content contributes to user’s Facebook brand-page engagement 9 Table 3 Common method variance analysis. Variables and indicators Construct loading (CL) CL2Method-Factor Loading (MFL) MFL2 Engagement I take part in the posts with ‘‘likes’’ 0.887** 0.787 −0.002 0.000 I comment on the posts 0.921** 0.848 −0.016 0.000 I share the posts with other people 0.901** 0.812 0.018 0.000 Utility The fan-page. . . Helps me to decide what to buy 0.870** 0.757 0.017 0.000 Helps me to decide what to wear or how to match up clothes 0.940** 0.884 −0.073 0.005 Offers me useful information 0.936** 0.876 −0.040 0.002 Gives me ideas 0.839** 0.704 0.091*0.008 Entertainment The fan-page . . . Provides a welcome distraction from my daily routine 0.968** 0.937 −0.080 0.006 Is fun 0.994** 0.988 −0.049 0.002 Really entertains me 0.817** 0.667 0.126** 0.016 Information posts I pay attention to and am interested in. . . Posts informing me about special offers 4 0.924** 0.854 −0.135 0.018 Posts with catalogue photos 1 0.913** 0.834 −0.132*0.017 Posts with descriptions of garments 13 0.809** 0.654 0.015 0.000 Posts with ideas about how to match up clothes 15 0.612** 0.375 0.238** 0.057 Image posts I pay attention to and am interested in . . . Posts about [the Brand] appearing on television 1.031** 1.063 −0.095*0.009 Posts about [the Brand] appearing in blogs 0.997** 0.994 −0.087 0.008 Post about [the Brand] appearing in magazines 0.892** 0.796 0.036 0.001 Posts with photos of famous people wearing [the Brand] 0.982** 0.964 −0.124*0.015 Posts with videos on the making of 0.379** 0.144 0.346** 0.120 Interaction posts I pay attention to and am interested in . . . Posts encouraging me to upload fan photos 1.043** 1.088 −0.222** 0.049 Posts encouraging me to comment 0.982** 0.964 −0.069 0.005 Posts asking me to vote 0.814** 0.663 0.042 0.002 Posts with specific mentions of fans or their comments 0.975** 0.951 −0.086 0.007 Posts announcing prize draws for fans 0.200 0.040 0.459** 0.211 Average 0.859 0.777 0.007 0.023 *Significance level p < 0.05. ** Significance level p < 0.01. model (Model 1) evidences a positive and significant effect (b = 0.209, p < 0.01) of entertainment on engagement. Nevertheless, this effect loses all its power and ceases to be significant (b = −0.005, p > 0.1) in the case of the quasimediation model (Model 2). We thus find support for hypothesis H1c, but are forced to reject hypothesis H1d. Finally, although it is not an effect which is considered in hypothesis H1 and in the original model, we see how interaction posts have a strong direct impact on engagement (b = 0.472, p < 0.001). Indeed, this type of BP becomes the main driver of active participation, even above the two dimensions of experiential value. By way of a complement to the results commented on, Table 5 shows the indirect effects of BP type on engagement. As can be seen, only the indirect effect of information posts (b = 0.072, p < 0.05), whose influence on engagement is mainly noticeable through utilitarian experiential value, proves significant. Even if they generate experiential value, image and interaction posts do not contribute significantly to engagement through the indirect experiential route. Nevertheless, the existence of the previously mentioned direct effect of interaction posts on engagement leads us to conclude that its effect on engagement is immediate, without any intermediation from experience. As a result, we can partially support H1 since we see three types of effects of BPs on engagement depending on the BP content type: (1) a purely indirect effect (not direct) through utility, in the case of information posts; (2) Please cite this article in press as: Gutiérrez-Cillán, J., et al., How brand post content contributes to user’s Facebook brand-page engagement. The experiential route of active participation. BRQ Bus. Res. Q. 2017, http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.brq.2017.06.001 ARTICLE IN PRESS +Model BRQ-73; No. of Pages 17 16 J. Gutiérrez-Cillán et al. Cvijikj, I.P., Michahelles, F. , 2013. Online engagement factors on Facebook brand pages. Soc. Netw. Anal. Mining 3 (4), 843---861. Cotte, J., Chowdhury, T.G., Ratneshwar, S., Ricci, L.M., 2006. Pleasure or utility? Time planning style and web usage behaviours. J. Interact. Market. 20 (1), 45---57. Davis, F.D., Bagozzi, R.P., Warshaw, P.R., 1989. User acceptance of computer technology: a comparison of two theoretical models. Manag. Sci. 35 (8), 982---1003. de Valck, K., van Bruggen, G.H., Wierenga, B., 2009. Virtual communities: a marketing perspective. Decis. Supp. Syst. 47 (3), 185---203. de Vries, L., Gensler, S., Leeflang, P.S.H., 2012. Popularity of brand posts on brand fan pages: an investigation of the effects of social media marketing. J. Interact. Market. 26 (2), 83---91. Dessart, L., Veloutsou, C., Morgan-Thomas, A., 2015. Consumer engagement in online brand communities: a social media perspective. J. Prod. Brand Manag. 24 (1), 28---42. Dholakia, U.M., Bagozzi, R.P., Pearo, L.K., 2004. A social influence model of consumer participation in networkand smallgroup-based virtual communities. Int. J. Res. Market. 21 (3), 241---263. Gummerus, J., Liljander, V., Weman, E., Pihlström, M., 2012. Customer engagement in a Facebook brand community. Manag. Res. Rev. 35 (9), 857---877. Hagel, J., Armstrong, A.G., 1997. Net Gain: Expanding Markets Through Virtual Communities. Harvard Business School Press, Boston, MA. Hall-Phillips, A., Park, J., Chung, T.L., Anaza, N.A., Rathod, S.R., 2016. I (heart) social ventures: identification and social media engagement. J. Bus. Res. 69 (2), 484---491. Hampton, K., Goulet, L.S., Marlow, C., Rainie, L., 2012. Why Most Facebook Users get More Than They Give. Pew Research Center, Available from: http://pewinternet.org/Reports/2012/ Facebook-users.aspx (accessed February 2016). Hennig-Thurau, T. , Gwinner, K.P., Walsh, G., Gremler, D.D., 2004. Electronic word-of-mouth via consumer-opinion platforms: what motivates consumers to articulate themselves on the Internet? J. Interact. Market. 18 (1), 38---52. Hirschman, E.C., Holbrook, M.B., 1982. Hedonic consumption: emerging concepts, methods and propositions. J. Market. 46 (3), 92---101. Hollebeek, L.D., Glynn, M.S., Brodie, R.J., 2014. Consumer brand engagement in social media: conceptualization, scale development and validation. J. Interact. Market. 28 (2), 149---165. Jarvis, C.B., MacKenzie, S.B., Podsakoff, P.M., 2003. A critical review of construct indicators and measurement model misspecification in Marketing and consumer research. J. Consum. Res. 30 (2), 199---218. Jin, X.L., Lee, M.K.O., Cheung, C.M.K., 2010a. Predicting continuance in online communities: model development and empirical test. Behav. Inform. Technol. 29 (4), 383---394. Jin, B., Park, J.Y., Kim, H.S., 2010b. What makes online community members commit? A social exchange perspective. Behav. Inform. Technol. 29 (6), 587---599. Kabadayi, S., Price, K., 2014. Consumer-brand engagement on Facebook: liking and commenting behaviours. J. Res. Interact. Market. 8 (3), 203---223. Koh, J., Kim, D., 2004. Knowledge sharing in viral communities: an e-business perspective. Expert Syst. Appl. 26 (2), 155---166. Kulviwat, S., Bruner II, G.C., Kumar, A., Nasco, S.A., Clark, T. , 2007. Toward a unified theory of consumer acceptance of technology. Psychol. Market. 24 (12), 1059---1084. Liao, C., To, P.L., Hsu, F.C., 2013. Exploring knowledge sharing in virtual communities. Online Inf. Rev. 37 (6), 891---909. Loureiro, S.M.C., Pires, A.R., Kaufmann, H.R., 2015. Creating value for customers through engagement and participation in brand communities. Int. J. Bus. Perform. Manag. 16 (2---3), 114---132. Luarn, P. , Lin, Y. F. , Chiu, Y. P. , 2015. Influence of Facebook brandpage posts on online engagement. Online Inf. Rev. 39 (4), 1---15. Malthouse, E.C., Calder, B.J., 2011. Engagement and experiences: comments on Brodie, Hollenbeek, Juric, and Ilic (2011). J. Serv. Res. 14 (3), 277---279. Mathwick, C., Malhotra, N., Rigdon, E., 2001. Experiential value: conceptualization, measurement and application in the catalog and Internet shopping environment. J. Retail. 77 (1), 39---56. Mathwick, C., Wiertz, C., de Ruyter, K., 2008. Social capital production in a virtual P3· community. J. Consum. Res. 34 (6), 832---849. McAlexander, J.H., Schouten, J.W., Koenig, H.F., 2002. Building brand community. J. Market. 66 (1), 38---54. Munnukka, J., Karjaluoto, H., Tikkanen, A., 2015. Are Facebook brand community members truly loyal to the brand? CHB 51, 429---439. MSI --- Marketing Science Institute, 2010. 2010---2012 Research Priorities. Marketing Science Institute, Cambridge, MA. Novak, T. P. , Hoffman, D.L., Yung, Y. F. , 2000. Measuring the customer experience in online environments: a structural modeling approach. Market. Sci. 19 (1), 22---42. Park, H., Cho, H., 2012. Social network online communities: information sources for apparel shopping. J. Consum. Market. 29 (6), 400---411. Pitta, D.A., Fowler, D., 2005. Internet community forums: an untapped resource for consumer marketers. J. Consum. Market. 22 (5), 265---274. Podsakoff, P.M., MacKenzie, S.B., Podsakoff, N.P., 2003. Common method biases in behavioral research: a critical review of the literature and recommended remedies. J. Appl. Psychol. 88 (5), 879---903. Pöyry, E., Parvinen, P. , Malmivaara, T. , 2013. Can we get from liking to buying? Behavioural differences in hedonic and utilitarian Facebook usage. Electron. Commer. Res. Appl. 12 (4), 224---235. Prahalad, C.K., Ramaswamy, V., 2000. Co-opting customer competence. Harv. Bus. Rev. 78 (1), 79---87. Preece, J., 2001. Sociability and usability in online communities: determining and measuring success. Behav. Inform. Technol. 20 (5), 347---356. Reinartz, W.J., Kumar, V., 2003. The impact of customer relationship characteristics on profitable lifetime duration. J. Market. 67 (1), 77---99. Relling, M., Schnittka, O., Sattler, H., Johnen, M., 2016. Each can help or hurt: negative and positive word of mouth in social network brand communities. Int. J. Res. Market. 33 (1), 42---58. Rheingold, H., 1993. The Virtual Community: Homesteading on the electRonic Frontier. Harper Collins, New York, Electronic version available from: http://www.rheingold.com/vc/book/ (accessed February 2016). Ridings, C.M., Gefen, D., Arinze, B., 2002. Some antecedents and effects of trust in virtual communities. J. Strateg. Inf. Syst. 11 (3---4), 271---295. Ringle, C.M., Wende, S., Will, A., 2005. SmartPLS 2.0 (M3) Beta. SmartPLS, Hamburg, Retrieved from: http://www.smartpls.de. Rothaermel, F. T. , Sugiyama, S., 2001. Virtual Internet communities and commercial success: individual and community-level theory grounded in the atypical case of TimeZone.com. J. Manag. 27 (3), 297---312. Ruiz-Mafe, C., Martí-Perre˜ no, J., Sanz-Blas, S., 2014. Key drivers of consumer loyalty to Facebook fan pages. Online Inf. Rev. 38 (3), 362---380. Sabate, F. , Berbegal-Mirabent, J., Ca˜ nabate, A., Lebherz, P.R., 2014. Factors influencing popularity of branded content in Facebook fan pages. Eur. Manag. J. 32 (6), 1001---1011. Shao, W., Ross, M., 2015. Testing a conceptual model of Facebook brand page communities. J. Res. Interact. Market. 9 (3), 239---258. Please cite this article in press as: Gutiérrez-Cillán, J., et al., How brand post content contributes to user’s Facebook brand-page engagement. The experiential route of active participation. BRQ Bus. Res. Q. 2017, http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.brq.2017.06.001 ARTICLE IN PRESS +Model BRQ-73; No. of Pages 17 How brand post content contributes to user’s Facebook brand-page engagement 17 Statista, 2016. https://www.statista.com/topics/2057/brands-onsocial-media/. Steenkamp, J.E.M., Baumgartner, H., 1998. Assessing measurement invariance in cross-national consumer research. J. Consum. Res. 25 (1), 78---107. van Doorn, J., Lemon, K.N., Mittal, V., Nass, S., Pick, D., Pirner, P. , Verhoef, P.C., 2010. Customer engagement behaviour: theoretical foundations and research directions. J. Serv. Res. 13 (3), 253---266. van Varik, F.J.M., van Oostendorp, H., 2013. Enhancing online community activity: development and validation of the CA framework. J. Comput. Mediat. Commun. 18 (4), 454---475. Vargo, S.L., 2009. Toward a transcending conceptualization of relationship: a service-dominant logic perspective. J. Bus. Ind. Market. 24 (5---6), 373---379. Vivek, S.D., Beatty, S.E., Morgan, R.M., 2012. Customer engagement: exploring customer relationships beyond purchase. J. Market. Theory Pract. 20 (2), 127---145. Vivek, S.D., Beatty, S.E., Dalela, V., Morgan, R.M., 2014. A generalized multidimensional scale for measuring customer engagement. J. Market. Theory Pract. 22 (4), 401---420. Wallace, E., Buil, I., de Chernatony, L., 2014. Consumer engagement with self-expressive brands: brand love and WOM outcomes. J. Prod. Brand Manag. 23 (1), 33---42. Wang, L.C., Baker, J., Wagner, J.A., Wakefield, K., 2007. Can a retail web site be social? J. Market. 71 (3), 143---157. Wasko, M.M., Faraj, S., 2005. Why should I share? Examining social capital and knowledge contribution in electronic networks of practice. MIS Q. 29 (1), 35---57. Wiertz, C., de Ruyter, K., 2007. Beyond the call of duty: why customers contribute to film-hosted commercial online communities. Organ. Stud. 28 (3), 347---376. Wu, S.C., Fang, W., 2010. The effect of consumer-to-consumer interactions on idea generation in virtual brand community relationships. Technovation 30 (11---12), 570---581. Zaglia, M.E., 2013. Brand communities embedded in social networks. J. Bus. Res. 66 (2), 216---223. Zheng, X., Cheung, C.M.K., Lee, M.K.O., Liang, L., 2015. Building brand loyalty through user engagement in online brand communities in social networking sites. Inf. Technol. People 28 (1), 90---106. Zhou, Z., Wu, J.P., Zhang, Q., Xu, S., 2013. Transforming visitors into members in online brand communities: evidence from China. J. Bus. Res. 66 (12), 2438---2443.