Exploring Kiva: An understanding on
postmodern consumers and relationship concepts
Master Thesis
MA Corporate Communication
Århus School of Business, Århus University
June 2012
Author: Supervisor:
Anda Iulia Ionescu Anne Ellerup Nielsen
Exam Number / Student Number:
401926/AI89665
No. of characters (no spaces):
123,573
Anda Iulia Ionescu, 401926
Master Thesis - Master of Arts in Corporate Communication 2
Abstract
Purpose: The purpose of this paper is to shed light on today‟s world of consumption,
increasingly characterized by communality and socialization, by means of Kiva, pioneering non-
profit and digital micro-lending organization. In this respect, the paper aims to investigate how
Kiva members make sense of relationship concepts in consumption, as proposed by
postmodernism.
Design/Methodology/Approach: The research at hand is guided by the social constructivist
meta-theoretical paradigm and takes an interpretive approach; by developing a qualitative
analytical method inspired from critical discourses analysis, the undertaken research employs a
three-phase analysis on texts produced by Kiva members on Kivafriends.org, aiming to grasp the
meanings they attribute to relationships, and ultimately understand Kiva and the way it facilitates
relationships for and with consumers, in a postmodern context.
Findings: The findings point towards eight main discourses - affiliation/connectivity;
competitiveness; self-identification; (group) responsibility; peer recognition; sharing;
involvement; solidarity – which Kiva members draw on in conceptualizing relationships, both
with peers and with Kiva. In the light of postmodernism and consumer culture, findings are to be
interpreted, finally illustrating how Kiva members constitute an online brand community, regard
Kiva as a relationship partner, and show interest in engaging in co-creation practices.
Value: The research provides value by contributing in understanding postmodernism in its
interest for communality instead of individualism, and providing a practical insight into central
relationship constructs, with the exemplary case of Kiva. Additionally, the study is valuable for
organizations interested in making use of relationship concepts to address postmodern consumers
appropriately, in terms of their need for a sense of connectivity and affiliation. Finally, the study
at hand may become premise for further research towards the consolidation of relationship
theory in a consumer perspective.
Keywords: Postmodernism, Consumer culture, Communal consumption, Relationships,
Consumer centricity
Anda Iulia Ionescu, 401926
Master Thesis - Master of Arts in Corporate Communication 3
Table of contents
INTRODUCTION.............................................................................................................. 5
1.LITERATURE REVIEW................................................................................................ 11
1.1.Postmodernism and consumer culture........................................................................ 14
1.2.The relationship concept............................................................................................. 20
1.2.1.Brand-consumer relationships........................................................................... 20
1.2.2.Communal consumption: an alternative understanding on relationships.......... 23
Brand communities............................................................................................ 24
Tribes................................................................................................................. 26
Tribes vs. Brand communities........................................................................... 28
1.2.3.Co-creation....................................................................................................... 30
1.2.4.The online environment and social media: catalyzing relationships................ 32
2.METHODOLOGY.......................................................................................................... 35
2.1.Research philosophy and approach............................................................................ 35
2.2.Research strategy and method.................................................................................... 37
2.2.1.Data collection................................................................................................. 39
2.2.2.Data analysis.................................................................................................... 40
2.2.3.Delimitations.................................................................................................... 43
3.ANALYSIS AND FINDINGS......................................................................................... 45
3.1.Kiva Friends............................................................................................................... 45
3.2.Description phase....................................................................................................... 46
3.3.Interpretation phase.................................................................................................... 51
3.4.Explanation phase...................................................................................................... 55
3.5.Summary of findings.................................................................................................. 56
4.DISCUSSION................................................................................................................... 58
4.1.Implications............................................................................................................... 58
4.2.Limitations................................................................................................................. 61
4.3.Other research directions.......................................................................................... 62
Anda Iulia Ionescu, 401926
Master Thesis - Master of Arts in Corporate Communication 4
CONCLUSION................................................................................................................... 64
BIBLIOGRAPHY............................................................................................................... 67
APPENDIX.......................................................................................................................... 72
Anda Iulia Ionescu, 401926
Master Thesis - Master of Arts in Corporate Communication 5
INTRODUCTION
As citizens of the 21st century and inhabitants of the postmodern world, understanding the
environment we live in should be of interest for all, whether individuals, consumers, managers,
or any other actors of society. Postmodernism, which contemporary times are identified with
(Firat and Venkatesh, 1995, Cova and Cova, 2002), is widely recognized as a period of
individualism, instability, alienation and paradoxes (Firat and Venkatesh, 1995, Arnould and
Thompson, 2005). Interestingly, at the same time, signs of connectivity and an increasing need
for affiliation and socialization are depicted in contemporary society, despite the individualism
that frames it (Lipovetsky, 2005); in fact, Fournier and Lee (2009: 105) argue for this instance
and highlight that “in today‟s turbulent world, people are hungry for a sense of connection”.
Therefore, in a consumption and marketing context, the importance of these two main
postmodern positions has led to a need for a better understanding of consumers‟ desires and
pursuits, and the culture they manifest in.
Postmodern consumers seek not only individualistic but also communal experiences (Cova and
Pace, 2006 ap. Simmons, 2008). Literature discloses the tension in the postmodern consumption
world between individualistic desires and new, social forms of consumption, based on
relationship building (Simmons, 2008). Simmons (2008: 301) explicitly describes these
developments, in a nutshell: “There is a growing counter-argument within the literature which
posits that postmodernity is a period which will encourage a move away from individualism
towards a search for more social bonds due to alienation – introducing the concept of neo-tribes,
networks of people gathering homogeneously together for social interaction, often around
consumption and brands” (Maffesoli, 1996; Cova, 1997; Kozinets, 2001, 2002; Thompson and
Troester, 2002; Dholakia et al., 2004; Johnson and Ambrose, 2006; Cova and Pace, 2006; Cova
et al., 2007 ap. Simmons, 2008: 301).
Further on, relationships, in their variety of forms, are increasingly recognized as prominent in
postmodern consumer markets (Patterson and O‟Malley, 2006, Fournier, 2008). The
Anda Iulia Ionescu, 401926
Master Thesis - Master of Arts in Corporate Communication 6
“fashionability” of the relational approaches in both marketing and consumer research is derived
from their potential to provide better answers to several contemporary marketing questions,
respectively from “the intuitive appeal of the relationship concept to us as human beings”
(Patterson and O‟Malley, 2006: 10), thus pointing towards a more consumer oriented
understanding of the relationship issue.
Directing the attention towards consumers and taking into account their perspective is also a
result of the new, empowered status consumers behold nowadays. With the rise of Internet
comes the dissolution of geographical borders in terms of information diffusion, enabling
consumers to get informed independently of organizations, to express themselves and enter in
dialog with peers and organizations; thus, they become more active than ever before, and
increasingly worthy of attention (Prahalad and Ramaswamy, 2004).
Consequently, the postmodern condition comes to challenge organizations and marketers, who
must understand consumers differently and address them accordingly; along with seeing
consumers in their fragmented lives, should come the awareness of their need for connectivity, as
well as their interest and power in influencing businesses.
One player in the postmodern field is KIVA, a non-profit and digital micro-lending organization,
“one of the pioneers in the provision of microfinance” (Gajjala et al., 2011: 884). Founded in
2005, in California, the organization aims to “empower people around the world with a $25
loan” (http://www.kiva.org/) and “connect people through lending for the sake of alleviating
poverty” (http://www.kiva.org/about). Basically, Kiva provides an online fundraising platform
on kiva.org, which functions as a “person-to-person micro-lending website” (Gajjala et al.,
2011: 884), where individuals choose one or more entrepreneurs in the developing world whom
they provide a loan to, so as to enable them to lift out of poverty. The lending process may be
summarized as follows, together with an identification of the main actors involved: lenders select
an entrepreneur or a business (borrowers) according to their profile description on kiva.org, to
whom they provide a loan of “as little as $25” on the Web, through Kiva
(http://www.kiva.org/about); at the same time, a number of local financial institutions (MFIs
acting as field partners), providing non-profit microfinance services, constantly discover
entrepreneurs that need help with starting a business so as to make a living, and build their
Anda Iulia Ionescu, 401926
Master Thesis - Master of Arts in Corporate Communication 7
profiles on Kiva.org, for lenders to browse and make a decision regarding who they whish to
help; in addition, several volunteers (Kiva fellows) are out in the field, with the task of
supervising, keeping track of the borrowers, and reporting back to the field partners, Kiva
lenders and the general public. Finally, the loan is to be repaid, and lenders may choose to re-
invest in another business or an entrepreneur in need.
“Through Kiva, not only people lend money to help those in need, but they also have the
opportunity to connect and potentially to build relationships” (Gajjala et al., 2011: 884). All parts
involved in a Kiva lending process - that is Kiva members (lenders and supporters), borrowers
(local entrepreneurs), Kiva fellows (volunteers), Kiva field partners (MFIs) – become members
of the Kiva digital community. In this sense, lenders may gather around the same borrowers and
establish teams to help those in need, uniting their power for common sake. Also, “the „Kiva
community‟ [...] includes various categories by which teams of lenders are organized” (Gajjala et
al., 2011: 884-885) such as ones built around the same political views („Team Obama‟), religious
views („Kiva Christians‟), nationality („Australia‟), or life-style choices („GLBT‟)
(http://www.kiva.org/community). Lenders have also built their own Kiva forum
(http://www.kivafriends.org/) to interact with each other. In addition, lenders and all general
public may interact with Kiva fellows, particularly by means of the Kiva fellow blog
(http://fellowsblog.kiva.org/), and keep track of what is happening in the field. Last but not least,
Kiva encourages interaction and facilitates connectivity by means of a blog that provides up-to-
date information about developments and events (http://kivanews.blogspot.com/) and on the
Kiva Facebook page (https://www.facebook.com/kiva), where people may comment, like/dislike,
or launch different topics.
At this point, considering the aforementioned, “it goes without saying that Kiva fosters
networking” (Gajjala et al., 2011: 886) and facilitates relationship building. Thus, Kiva is not
only an example to look at for its interesting genre as a hybrid organization, that combines
philanthropy with business (O‟Brien, 2008) in a unique way, for succeeding to empower
individuals, for being born digital, global and sustainable at the same time, in a world where
NGOs are proliferating and ethical concerns are on the rise (Newholm and Shaw, 2007) – but
also for the way it activates individuals to build communities and the way it facilitates peer
Anda Iulia Ionescu, 401926
Master Thesis - Master of Arts in Corporate Communication 8
relations. In such reasoning, Kiva proves to be a powerful example, and a great choice for
investigating relationship constructs in postmodern society.
Therefore, the research at hand is essentially motivated by the importance of understanding
contemporary consumption, postmodern consumers and their interest in communal affiliation
and relationship building, along with the relevance of a practical insight on these matters,
provided with the aid of an efficient postmodern organization such as Kiva. As such, the
proposed research is positioned within the frame of postmodernism and centres on the
relationship concept, taking a consumer perspective that, as argued before, is much needed in
today‟s marketing studies. All these have determined the undertaken research to address the
following problem: In today‟s world of consumption, increasingly regarded in terms of
connectivity, how is Kiva, as an efficient postmodern organization, seen from a consumer
perspective?
This problem statement calls for the following research question and sub-question to be
answered:
How do consumers understand Kiva in terms of the relationship construct that prevails in
postmodern consumption?
- What meanings do Kiva members (lenders and supporters) attribute to the
relationship concept and how are these constructed?
The overall aim of the problem and thus, of investigating how consumers make sense of the
relationship concept with respect to Kiva, is to provide a better understanding on today‟s world
of consumption and on the environment contemporary organizations must perform in.
Ultimately, an insight into such an issue serves as important knowledge for any postmodern
organization, in its trial to become efficient by addressing consumers‟ interest for socialization
and by understanding consumer culture.
The set out research problem is thus more of a practical nature, i.e. related to a specific
organization, and not purely theoretical or philosophical (Olsen and Pedersen, 2005). The
undertaken research aims to develop on the two research questions so as to guide the paper in a
direction that would finally address the overall problem. In this sense, the research starts out by
Anda Iulia Ionescu, 401926
Master Thesis - Master of Arts in Corporate Communication 9
providing relevant theoretical background that would contextualize the problem and frame the
postmodern context in which Kiva performs; what follows allows for a more practical use, and
aims to investigate what meanings do Kiva lenders and supporters hold for relationships.
In this light, the purpose of the proposed research can be classified as exploratory (Saunders et
al., 2003), in the sense that it is aimed at seeking “new insights” into postmodernism, consumers,
and relationships, and gaining understanding of such phenomena (ibid: 96). This frames the
research process as flexible and adaptable – the researcher is an „explorer‟, while the research
process is a „journey‟ (ibid: 97), both being influenced by and open to all insights and adventures
encountered during the process, where interests might seem “broad and scattered” (V.S. Naipaul,
1989: 222 ap. Saunders et al., 2003: 97) in the beginning, but become increasingly focused
towards the end.
Finally, the structure of the paper is outlined in the following. The starting point is the
introduction at hand, which aimed to account for the motivation and the importance of carrying
out the present research, to establish the problem statement and subsequent research questions to
address, as well as to indicate the overall purpose of the study and the direction it is to take.
Further on, the first chapter presents a literature review that contextualizes the set out problem
and is relevant in conceptualizing Kiva as a postmodern organization: it gathers theories on
postmodernism and consumer culture, as well as on forms of relationships, communal
consumption and the influence of the online environment. Methodology is the subject of the
second chapter, which aims to present and argue for how the set out research is carried out;
research choices are to be discussed in this part, such as the meta-theoretical paradigm that
guides the research, the approach taken, the methods employed for collecting and analyzing the
data, as well as the delimitations to be aware of in the set out research process. The third chapter
corresponds to the empirical study and thus directs the attention towards Kiva, aiming to
investigate how Kiva members make sense of the relationship concept and what are the
meanings they attach to it. Chapter four initiates a discussion on the main findings of the
research in relation to existent theoretical work, and reflects on the wider implications of the
study, the limitations encountered during the research process, as well on other possible research
directions that could have potentially been developed. Lastly, the paper at hand is completed
Anda Iulia Ionescu, 401926
Master Thesis - Master of Arts in Corporate Communication 10
with an overall conclusion on all that has been achieved, summarizing what can be learned from
the research in the light of the set out problem.
Anda Iulia Ionescu, 401926
Master Thesis - Master of Arts in Corporate Communication 11
1. LITERATURE REVIEW
The starting point of the research at hand is a literature review that synthesizes some of the main
concepts inspired by postmodernism and consumer culture, towards a better understanding on
today‟s world of consumption and on the environment that postmodern organizations have to
perform in. This supports the paper‟s proposed problem statement, that of investigating how
Kiva fits in the postmodern consumption context and what are the principles that an efficient
postmodern organization makes use of, as seen with the eyes of consumers. Hence, for the
purpose of the paper at hand, the present section is organized in a way that helps answering the
problem statement, by designing the theoretical perspective used for conceptualizing Kiva as a
postmodern organization and framing a consumption context in which Kiva fits. Then, the
theoretical conceptualizations are to stand as an argument for empirical reflections on how
consumers see Kiva in terms of their postmodern expectations and pursuits.
The corpus of theories that shapes the literature review, and thus the background of the
undertaken research, has been chosen in the light of the set out purpose of the study, that of
investigating postmodernism, consumers relationships, and ultimately aiming to frame the
context in which an organization such as Kiva is functioning. Firstly, theories on postmodernism
and consumer culture have been gathered, to set the ground for understanding the contemporary
world of consumption. In this respect, Firat and Venkantesh (1995) paint a comprehensive
picture of postmodernism, while Lipovetsky (2005, 2009) takes on a similar view, but recognizes
postmodern consumers‟ orientation towards emotionality, moral values and ethical concerns, in a
„hyperconsumer society‟; the works of Holt (2002) and Arnould and Thompson (2005, 2011) are
then chosen, since they define and characterize consumer culture, building on postmodern
themes, while recognizing relationships, forms of communal consumption, and the need for
connectivity as main concepts that prevail in contemporary consumption, against the
individualism that has been set out to define postmodern individuals (Firat and Venkantesh,
1995). Secondly, works of several scholars who concentrate on relationships in their variety of
forms are chosen. In this sense, works of Susan Fournier, who has repeatedly shown interest in
investigating relationships - Fournier, 1998, Fournier and Avery, 2011, Fournier and Lee, 2009 –
Anda Iulia Ionescu, 401926
Master Thesis - Master of Arts in Corporate Communication 12
are utilized, especially with a focus on brand-consumer relationships; Patterson and O‟Malley
(2006) come to discuss the same concept, but complement it with an alternative view on
relationships, i.e. brand communities; Muniz and O‟Guinn (2001) are further chosen on the basis
of their exploration of the brand community concept; following is the work of Cova and Cova
(2002) and Cova et al. (2007), who dedicated a consistent collection of work on tribes, as an
alternative form of relationship building and communal consumption; last but not least, Prahalad
and Ramaswamy (2004) and Prahalad et al. (2000) have an important contribution in establishing
co-creation as an upgrade of relationship practices, whilst arguing for the central role consumers
have in postmodern society. Altogether, the chosen bodies of literature aim to grasp into how the
aforementioned concepts, all rooted in postmodern consumer culture, are intertwined, how they
evolved, and what is their place within the wider context of postmodernity, thus constituting as
the basis of the theoretical discussion.
One additional aspect is to be mentioned, relevant for the purpose of the paper and commonly
traced in the works of the proposed scholars - the importance of a consumer perspective on
matters is mainly advocated, whether the scholars stream from marketing and sociology, in
general, or anthropology, most particularly when discussing communities and tribes. For this
reason, the works of other scholars such as Egan (2004) or Barnes (2003), for instance, who have
dedicated extensive work to relationship marketing approaches, have been left out - they focus
on a strategic perspective on relationship building and account for how organizations may foster
relationships with consumers, taking an isolated view of the two relationship partners.
Further on, a guiding model is proposed and illustrated below, towards orienting the reader
throughout the literature review and introducing him/her to the main theoretical concepts to be
presented along this chapter, together with some of their underlying relations and reflections; the
structural model functions as an overview on the chosen theoretical contributions and as the
underlying structural logic of this section.
Anda Iulia Ionescu, 401926
Master Thesis - Master of Arts in Corporate Communication 13
Based on the aforementioned theories, the model indicates that the first sub-chapter of the
literature review section is dedicated to postmodernism and consumer culture, which, amongst
others, recognizes the increasing interest for relationships and its existence in various forms of
manifestation, or, alternatively put, the presence of brands-consumer relationships, brand
communities, tribes, co-creation practices, all organized for structural reasons under the general
construct of relationship. Thus, the second sub-chapter of the theoretical section deals with the
relationship concept. The sub-chapter is presented under a consumer perspective; however,
acknowledging that relationships may be discussed from the marketer‟s perspective is necessary,
and the two instances must be distinguished if addressed alternatively. The relationship chapter
debuts with brand-consumer relationships; then, taking into consideration the wider network of
consumers and the need to address them in their collectivity, brand communities are to be
discussed as a form of consumer-brand-consumer relationship; following are tribes, in the
argument of consumer-to-consumer relationships as being primary to brand involvement. In this
Anda Iulia Ionescu, 401926
Master Thesis - Master of Arts in Corporate Communication 14
sense, the model illustrates how relationship forms may be classified according to the role of the
brand in the relationship. Further on, co-creation is introduced as a more comprehensive view on
relationships, encompassing consumers, brands, organizations, up to whole business networks. In
the end, the role Internet, as embedded in culture, has on the way relationships develop is briefly
acknowledged. Finally, the model aims to highlight that all concepts expanded upon throughout
this section are, in turn, not only defined and characterized separately, but also presented in
relation with some of the other concepts, regarded as embedded in culture and situated within the
postmodern frame.
1.1. Postmodernism and consumer culture
Postmodernism has emerged as a critique of modernism, and in the same time, as a new cultural
and philosophical movement (Borgmann, 1992, Vattimo, 1992 ap. Firat and Venkatesh, 1995).
According to this scenario, postmodernism is seen as an alternative to modernism and its
limitations (Firat and Venkatesh, 1995), such as not being able to regard reality in its complexity,
the human experience in its richness, or the individual/consumer beyond his limited position of a
merely cognitive agent. Such critique points out some of the major differences between
postmodernism and modernism, and constitutes the foundation for postmodernism‟s
characteristics and central themes, as it is to be seen in what follows.
Amongst the central themes of postmodernism, which also stand as conditions for postmodern
consumption, one of the most relevant is the reversal of production and consumption (Firat and
Venkatesh, 1995). Postmodernism is a culture of consumption, while modernism is a culture of
production, regarding consumption only as secondary, for “pure use, devouring and destruction”
(Firat and Venkantesh, 1995: 246). Meanwhile production was considered the only valid source
of value, “a body of knowledge examining consumption as a sociocultural process” (ibid) began
to appear and the emergence and rise of consumer society became acknowledged throughout
specialized literature (McKendrick, Brewer and Plumb, 1982 ap. Firat and Venkatesh, 1995:
247), suggesting a society increasingly organized around consumption and symbolic value rather
than production. This does not assume that production is ignored, but that the focus on
consumption resulted from the need to discuss both processes simultaneously, dismissing the
modern separation between them (Firat and Venkatesh, 1995: 258). Further on, Lipovetsky
Anda Iulia Ionescu, 401926
Master Thesis - Master of Arts in Corporate Communication 15
(2005, 2009) argues that the consumer society has currently entered a new phase which he labels
„hyperconsumer society‟, characterized by a consumption craze, highly individualized consumer
habits leading to personalized consumption, an increasing obsession to consume, the
proliferation of brands and the rise of their power, together with the high demand of aesthetic,
story-telling and lifestyle-enhancing brands. In this respect, the hyperconsumer society praises
the immaterial, the imaginary and the symbolic more than the material, the palpable.
“As the consumption sector turns more and more toward the consumption of images, the society
at large becomes more and more a society of spectacle.” (Firat and Venkatesh, 1995: 250) The
concept of society as spectacle is developed with the aid of hyperreality (Baudrillard, 1983: 147,
ap. Firat and Venkatesh, 1995: 251), another central theme of the postmodernist contemporary
society, which assumes that one can always propose a better version of what is commonly
regarded as reality - therefore, reality is symbolic and can be constructed, blurring the distinction
between real and non-real. Firat and Venkatesh (1995: 245) propose hyperreality as “a more
plausible version of reality”, treating “the human subject not as a centered, unified subject, but as
decentered and fragmented” (Firat and Venkatesh, 1995: 245).
Thus, both fragmentation and the decentering of subject also constitute as characteristics of
postmodernism. Lipovetsky (2009: 2) signals the emergence of a new consumer profile -
“nomadic, volatile, unpredictable, fragmented”. Firat and Venkantesh (1995: 252) support the
same view, and account fragmentation for “multiple, disjointed consumption experiences”, for an
affirmed “divided self” of the consumer and a questioned “authentic self”. In this sense,
fragmentation stands to describe consumers‟ lack of commitment and instability with respect to
most of their experiences, as well as the concomitant existence of many potential selves.
Touching upon the idea of „self‟ and the eventual lack of commitment to one‟s authentic self,
questions of identity are much discussed in relation to the postmodern consumer: while Gould
and Lerman, 1998, Murray, 2002 (ap. Ahuvia, 2005) or Ekström and Brembeck (2004) argue
that a minimum of stable traits of personality and a sense of coherent identity are inherent to any
individual, Gergen (1995) challenges the premise that a coherent sense of identity is required for
the happiness and health of the individual, arguing how one may carry many potential selves, all
of them authentic, revealed in different social settings. Further on, the decentered subject as
postmodern feature questions modernism notions such as “self-knowing”, “cognitive” and
Anda Iulia Ionescu, 401926
Master Thesis - Master of Arts in Corporate Communication 16
“independent” human subject, replacing them with “historically and culturally constructed”
human subject, with “language, not cognition, as the basis for subjectivity” (Firat and Venkatesh,
1995: 254). This is to be understood in that the postmodern individual becomes a product of the
culture and activities that he takes part in, and is constantly influenced and constructed through
communication, interaction and emotion, as opposed to being rational, unified and independent
of everyday practices.
All the aforementioned main themes reflect the idea that postmodernism as an alternative to
modernism and its limitations offers a „liberatory‟ potential on consumption (Firat and
Venkatesh, 1995: 239): fragmentation should not be seen negatively, since it allows for
liberation from the dominance of an absolute truth and permits the existence of several valid
„regimes of truth‟; the process of consumption is liberatory since it is no longer evaluated under
the logic of production and does not take place in the “capitalist market logic”(i.e. through
monetary exchange) anymore (Firat and Venkatesh, 1995: 150); and the idea that one can
consume objects, images, or symbols gains greater acceptance. Thus, “the consumer finds his/her
liberatory potential in subverting the market rather than being seduced by it.” (Firat and
Venkatesh, 1995: 251)
Nonetheless, postmodernism has also raised criticism. Habermas‟s critique (1981, ap. Firat and
Venkatesh, 1995: 244) relates to its “nihilistic posture [that is] more apparent than real”, resulted
from attacking the very foundations of modernism as, actually, postmodernism proposes a
sensible, aesthetic and human space, a qualitative, emotional and individualized consumer.
Lipovetsky (2009: 5) agrees with this instance, arguing that values are still important in
postmodern society, where individuals show interest for connectivity with peers or ethical
concerns, at is to be discussed later on in the present subchapter.
These thoughts on postmodernity are very much connected to the cultural meaning of
contemporary life and are further reflected in consumer culture (Firat and Venkatesh, 1995: 244).
The postmodern age - the age of spectacle and symbolism - thus proposes the “aestheticization”
and “spectacularization” of consumer culture, marking the postmodern phase of culture and
consumption, along with the triumph of consumption over production (Firat and Venkatesh,
1995: 250).
Anda Iulia Ionescu, 401926
Master Thesis - Master of Arts in Corporate Communication 17
The concept of consumer culture refers to a collection of behaviors and attitudes associated with
the consumption process. It represents the dominant mode of consumption, the “ideological
infrastructure that undergirds what and how people consume and sets the ground rules for
marketers‟ branding activities” (Holt, 2002: 80). Kozinets (2001 ap. Arnould and Thompson,
2005: 869) conceptualizes consumer culture as “an interconnected system of commercially
produced images, texts and objects” used by groups “to make collective sense of their
environments and to orient their members‟ experiences and lives”. Consumer culture theory is
rooted in consumer research that has broadened its focus to investigate the previously neglected
social, cultural and experiential dimensions of consumption in specific contexts (Belk, 1987,
Holbrook and Hirschman, 1982 ap. Arnould and Thompson, 2005: 869). Its aim is to investigate
consumption within the wider historical context of sociocultural practices and the dynamic of
markets i.e. “how consumers consume (Holt, 1995) across a gamut of social spaces” (Arnould
and Thompson, 2005: 875).
The postmodern consumer culture certainly builds upon the main traits of postmodernism – in
conceptualizing this issue, Arnould and Thompson (2005, 2011 in Belk and Sherry, 2011) and
Holt (2002) support the emancipatory uses of consumption and the postmodern view of society
as seen by Firat and Venkatesh (1995), providing insights into how consumer culture reflects
these issues. In this sense, consumer culture theory, aligned with postmodern thoughts,
investigates consumer identity projects - such as fragmentation of self, identity makers, inner
contradictions; supports multiple and virtual realities as the nucleus around which consumers
construct their lives and sees consumption as means to experience these realities; and views
consumers as active, interpretative agents rather than passive (Arnould and Thompson, 2005).
At the same time, building on the postmodern tradition and on issues depicted in consumer
culture, Holt (2002) and Arnould and Thompson (2005, 2011 in Belk and Sherry, 2011) signal
the existence of several concepts that have been all given a place in consumer culture theory
(Holt, 2002). They are to be discussed in the following and remaining part of this chapter, in
order to understand how they intertwine in describing postmodern consumer culture.
The connectivity dimension of consumer culture is brought forward by Arnould and Thompson
(2005), both at macro (globally) and micro (amongst individual consumers) levels. In this sense,
Anda Iulia Ionescu, 401926
Master Thesis - Master of Arts in Corporate Communication 18
consumer culture “describes a densely woven network of global connections and extensions
through which local cultures are increasingly interpenetrated by the forces of transnational
capital and the global mediascape” (Appadurai, 1990, Slater, 1997, Wilk, 1995 ap. Arnould and
Thompson, 2005: 869), but also embraces a socialization component that may be illustrated at
the level of the individual consumers and the connections they create with each other during the
process of construction and negotiation of consumption meanings, carried out in “diverse social
situations, roles and relationships” (Arnould and Thompson, 2005: 869). The same authors
further argue that consumers are in this way culture producers, who construct their worlds in the
pursue of common consumption interests, while the marketplace stands as a mediator of social
relationships and linkages. This idea is based on the concept of neotribalism (Maffesoli, 1996
ap. Arnould and Thompson, 2005: 873). Consumer culture research has shown that “the tribal
aspects of consumption are quite pervasive” and are built on the premise that the potentially
alienating condition of the postmodern individualism determines consumers to participate in
solidarity rituals and to forge collective identifications (ibid: 873-874). The relationship concept
is further mentioned to have a place in the postmodern stand of consumption dominating
production, where consumption is not an end in itself anymore, but a significant moment, a
social act, where symbolic meanings and relationships are produced (Firat and Venkatesh, 1995:
251). In this act, “postmodernism considers both symbolic production and consumption to be
major areas of community participation” (ibid: 243).
Therefore, concepts such as relationships, socialization, tribalization and communal consumption
are developments that postmodernism and consumer culture mention (Firat and Venkatesh, 1995,
Holt, 2002, Arnould and Thompson, 2005, Arnould and Thomspson, 2011 in Belk and Sherry,
2011). Another aspect further mentioned in this context is the proliferation of identity-brands
(Arnould and Thompson, 2005); and in this fashion, in describing postmodern consumer culture,
Holt (2002: 70) signals the pursuit of personal sovereignty through brands, presenting brands as
central elements in the lives of consumers who increasingly view consumption as a way to
autonomously pursue identities, but also as means for individuals to experience the social world.
The author acknowledges: “Even sovereign identities require the interpretative support of others
to give them ballast. Thus, consumers now form communities around brands, a distinctively
postmodern mode of sociality in which consumers claim to be doing their own thing while doing
Anda Iulia Ionescu, 401926
Master Thesis - Master of Arts in Corporate Communication 19
it with thousands of like-minded others” (Muniz and O‟Guinn, 2001, Schouten and
McAlexander, 1995 ap. Holt, 2002: 83). In this sense, brands are being introduced as a central
part of this social world described by connectivity and the need for communalization, while it
appears that postmodernism attempts to blur the borders between individualism and
socialization/community in consumption. Furthermore, studies on brand communities and
studies on relationships that occur both between consumers and between consumers and brands,
are now utilized to investigate issues of co-creation, “in which brand communities become
moderating or mediating elements” between consumers and organizations, “rather than
theoretical end in themselves” (Arnould and Thompson, 2011: 8 in Belk and Sherry, 2011).
In describing additional concepts essential to postmodern consumption and to the
„hyperconsumer society‟, as Lipovetsky (2005, 2009) envisions consumption, the author reveals
emotion as primary motivator for the postmodern consumer who is less driven by social
recognition than by the pursuit of hedonistic pleasures, as well as the rising influence of the
online environment and new electronic technologies. Further on, in Lipovetsky‟s work,
hyperconsumer society should not be seen as driven primarily by individualistic acts, as it is
nonetheless a society “accompanied by a strengthening of our shared canon of humanist and
democratic values”: “ethical commitments are on the increase, even with regard to consumption”,
“non-profit organizations and volunteer workers are also proliferating”. Solidarity displays and
values such as friendship, love and justice are still preserved in a society where “not everything
has been colonized by exchange values and market consumerism” (2009: 5).
All in all, postmodern consumer culture is shown to depict an interest in connectivity and
communal consumption, an inclination towards building relationships in various forms, with or
without the contribution of brands, as well as the increasing influence of Internet on consumers‟
practices around the world. In addition, humanistic and solidarity behaviors, together with ethical
concerns, are shown to be reflected in the way individuals shape their consumption experiences.
In this framing, the following chapter of the paper at hand aims to detail such issues that seem to
dominate contemporary consumption.
Anda Iulia Ionescu, 401926
Master Thesis - Master of Arts in Corporate Communication 20
1.2.The relationship concept
The postmodern focus in both consumer and marketing research is on the „relationship‟ idea. The
increasing use of the relationship concept (Patterson and O‟Malley, 2006, Fournier, 1998) in
various forms and “in all manner of situations” (Patterson and O‟Malley, 2006: 10) is signaled,
along with the increasing popularity of relationships in marketing/branding literature and the
infiltration of the relationship concept in consumer research (Patterson and O‟Malley, 2006).
On this argument, the present chapter is built around the concept of relationship, which is to be
discussed mainly from a consumer perspective, and conceptualized as it traced in marketing,
sociological or anthropological perspectives on consumers; adjacently, main implications that the
concepts presented hold for organizations and their marketing strategies are to be outlined, for an
alternative perspective. Therefore, brand-consumer relationships, brand communities and tribes
as forms of communal consumption, co-creation, the increasing influence that internet as
embedded in postmodern consumer culture has on the way relationships are conceptualized, as
well as the connections between all of these, are issues to be discussed along the present chapter,
towards understanding the various meanings the relationship concept gathers around it in
postmodern society.
1.2.1. Brand-consumer relationships
In the last decade, “a number of calls” for discussing the relationship between brand and
consumer, and introducing such a perspective within branding literature have been signaled
(Patterson and O‟Malley, 2006: 10). The brand-consumer relationship idea is mainly based on
the concept of anthropomorphisation, i.e. when “human qualities and personalities are projected
on to brands” (Patterson and O‟Malley, 2006: 10). Whether and how the anthropomorphizing
property of brands is able to legitimize brands as relationship partners; what is the premise for
strong relationships between consumers and brands; and what other implications arise when
discussing brand-consumer relationships, are issues brought forward throughout the present
subchapter.
Anda Iulia Ionescu, 401926
Master Thesis - Master of Arts in Corporate Communication 21
One way of understanding the anthropomorphizing property of brands is to regard it as an
extension of the brand personality idea (Blackston, 1992a ap. Patterson and O‟Malley, 2006: 12):
in this way, as they have personalities, brands may be perceived as people and thus take part in
relationships. However, Fournier (1998) takes the view that in order for a brand to stand as a
legitimate relationship partner, the brand must be able to react and actively contribute to the
relationship, while the brand-consumer relation should be characterized by interdependence.
Thus, Fournier (1998: 345) both proposes anthropomorphisation (i.e. the brand is embedded with
personality qualities and is associated with human characters) and invokes theories of animism
(e.g. the brand is completely anthropomorphized as it receives “the human qualities of
emotionality, thought and volition”), arguing that the simple personification of the brand is
insufficient for it to be considered a reciprocal relationship partner. Fournier further explains
that, in this way, brands are embedded with life; and this is actually the task of the manager
behind the brand, who may perform this activity under the tag of interactive marketing or any
marketing actions/decisions that can ultimately stand as behaviors on behalf of the brand.
In addition, on the premise that brands constitute as legitimate partners for relationship, Fournier
(1998) proposes a relationship-based framework, to study the interactions between consumers
and brands. This framework is built on the view that consumer-brand relationships should be
”treated as if they were interpersonal relationships” (ap. Patterson and O‟Malley, 2006: 12). In
this sense, Fournier highlights similarities between interpersonal relationships and brand-
consumer relationships and identifies a typology of consumer-brand relationships (1998: 362)
build around six main dimensions indicating their strength (1998: 364-365): love and passion, “a
rich affective grounding”; self connection, “the degree to which the brand delivers on important
identity concerns, tasks or themes”; interdependence, the frequency and intensity of “brand
interactions”; commitment, “the intention to behave in a manner supportive of relationship
longevity”; intimacy, ”elaborate knowledge structures” developed around brands; brand partner
quality, “the consumer's evaluation of the brand's performance in its partnership role”. In an
attempt to expand on the “landscape of brand relationships”, Fournier and Avery (2011: 67) later
on map 18 relationship types, reinforcing the diversity of brand-consumer relationships. There is
no need to detail these relationship types for the purpose of the paper at hand, but solely to show
awareness of these developments, while focusing on the broader discussion of a legitimate
Anda Iulia Ionescu, 401926
Master Thesis - Master of Arts in Corporate Communication 22
relational perspective on brands and consumers, and the use of the interpersonal relationship
metaphor, described above.
Fournier (1998) argues for the use of the interpersonal relationship metaphor in discussing
brand-consumer relationships: firstly, because it offers an alternative to the brand-consumer
perspective of isolated exchanges, and secondly, because it allows for building on the positive
aspects of interpersonal relationships, when characterizing brand-consumer relationships in a
holistic framework of relationship types (ap. Patterson and O‟Malley, 2006). Barnes (2003)
agrees with Fournier (1998) in that consumers do establish relationships with brands, and these
are comparable to interpersonal relationships; whether some are more meaningful, distant, or
intimate than others, relationships are emotive, and their meaningfulness belongs to the mind of
the consumer, similarly to the constructs of interpersonal relationships (Barnes, 2003: 179).
Nevertheless, Patterson and O‟Malley (2006) draw attention on the pitfalls of seeing the
relationship with brands as interpersonal. Even though the need for a relationship perspective is
recognized throughout literature (Patterson and O‟Malley, 2006), and one of the attempts to
demonstrate “utility of the consumer-brand relationship idea as a whole” has been discussed
above (Fournier, 1998: 344), there are some commentators of this approach (Hibbard and
Iacobucci, 1999, O‟Malley and Tynan, 1999 ap. Patterson and O‟Malley, 2006: 10) who consider
some extensions of the relationship concept, such as the interpersonal relationship metaphor, to
be far fetched.
In this respect, Patterson and O‟Malley (2006) develop on the critique of brand-consumer
relationships and the use of the interpersonal relationship metaphor. They argue that the
anthropomorphisation of brands involves a “process of metaphoric transfer” (Patterson and
O‟Malley, 2006: 11) which assumes borrowing concepts from a “source domain” (in this case
the interpersonal relationships) and applying it to a “target domain” (brand-consumer
interaction). Though it results in valuable knowledge, this inter-domain transfer of concepts
assumes that some of the meanings are either lost or are prevailed during the process (ibid). For
instance, the extent to which Blackston (1992a, 1992b, 1993 ap. Patterson and O‟Malley, 2006:
14) extends the interpersonal relationship metaphor upon brands employs equivalence between
brand personality and human personality, which is a disputable issue. The metaphor is too
Anda Iulia Ionescu, 401926
Master Thesis - Master of Arts in Corporate Communication 23
powerful, and brand-consumer relationships are treated as they were indeed interpersonal
relationships (Bengtsson, 2003 ap. Patterson and O‟Malley, 2006: 14). Consequently, given the
“obvious differences between social relationships and consumer-brand relationships, it is
important for researchers to not overextend the relationship metaphor” (Aggarwal, 2004: 89 ap.
Patterson and O‟Malley, 2006: 14). Though a supporter of animism and anthropomorphisation,
Fournier (1998: 345) agrees that, after all, brands are still inanimate objects and not living
entities, and their existence is not objective - rather they exist in the minds of the consumers as a
set of perceptions of the brand management activities.
Moreover, building on the critique of the brand-consumer relationship approach, Patterson and
O‟Malley (2006: 15) elaborate on the idea that “the meanings of brands are works in progress,
constantly acted upon by the brand‟s various publics”. Specifically, they argue that meaning is
shared and constructed amongst consumers, and, consequently, insights in networking are of
increasing importance in today‟s consumer society, whereas individual dyads constitute a limited
unit of research: as such, “the move from dyad to network signaled a maturing of the emerging
relationship literature (Ford, 1990 ap. Patterson and O‟Malley, 2006: 15). Therefore, while
brand-consumer relationships provide useful insights, Patterson and O‟Malley (2006: 15) suggest
that focusing on them detracts from the wider frame of relationships and from the importance of
considering forms of communal consumption when discussing the relationship concept, a view
that constitutes as the focus of the following subchapter. In addition, as an alternative to brand-
consumer relationships and “stretching the interpersonal relationship metaphor too far”
(Patterson and O‟Malley, 2006: 10), the authors suggest another perspective on the role of brands
in consumers‟ lives: a brand community perspective, “that acknowledges the network of
connections between a brand‟s various publics” (ibid). Muniz and O‟Guinn (2001) agree that
such a perspective could be an essential step in actualizing relationships as a concept in
consumption and marketing literature. This is to be discussed in the following subchapter, in the
context of communal consumption and its manifestation forms.
1.2.2. Communal consumption: an alternative understanding on relationships
In the past years, consumption studies have begun to move their focus from individual
considerations to communal ones (Patterson and O‟Malley, 2006, Muniz and O‟Guinn, 2001).
Anda Iulia Ionescu, 401926
Master Thesis - Master of Arts in Corporate Communication 24
Communal consumption acknowledges the importance of recognizing consumer networks when
discussing consumption and it is a concept that has been discussed under various labels, all
gathered around a community feeling (Patterson and O‟Malley, 2006). For the purpose of the
paper at hand, two main labels are being distinguished: brand communities (Muniz and O‟Guinn,
2001, Patterson and O‟Malley, 2006, Cova and Cova, 2002) and tribes (Cova and Cova, 2002,
Cova et al., 2007). Both of these types of communities support the idea that people gather and
engage in relationships with other people, while brands have different roles in the way
relationships are constructed. More specifically, brand communities are concerned about
relationships between brand and consumers, while acknowledging and making use of the wider
network of consumers, whereas tribes are mainly concerned about relationships amongst
consumers, regarding consumer interaction and the social links as primary (Cova and Cova,
2002: 603). The present subchapter focuses on defining, characterizing, and contrasting brand
communities and tribes, so as to further contribute to the discussion of the relationship concept in
postmodern times. Finally, a brief discussion regarding the implications of such forms of
communal consumption on marketing is outlined.
Brand communities
As mentioned earlier in this chapter, brand communities may be perceived as a viable alternative
to the brand-consumer relationship idea, which is criticized, amongst other reasons, for
disregarding the interaction between consumers and a communal consumption perspective
(Patterson and O‟Malley, 2006).
This change of focus when discussing relationships, from dyad to network (Patterson and
O‟Malley, 2006: 15), is supported and reaffirmed in Belk‟s work (1998), who states:
“Relationships with objects are never two-way (person-thing), but always three-way (person-
thing-person)” (Belk, 1988: 147 quoted in Ahuvia, 2005: 180). Ahuvia (2005: 180) explains
what Belk specifically means, which is that “part of our desire for an object reflects a
competitive relationship with other people who may also want the object”. Consumption builds
upon the person-thing-person view, and, as such, it denotes social relationships built around a
brand whose meanings are negotiated and shared amongst consumers; and this view constitutes
as the core of brand community literature (McAlexander, Schouten, and Koening 2002; Muniz
Anda Iulia Ionescu, 401926
Master Thesis - Master of Arts in Corporate Communication 25
and O‟Guinn 2001 ap. Ahuvia, 2005: 180-181). Similarly, Patterson and O‟Malley (2006: 15)
highlight that the essence of the brand community concept resides in “the linking value that
brands provide to individuals”, while Miller (1998: 46 quoted in Ahuvia, 2005: 181) clarifies that
relationships with brands are still definitely important, but they become more important since
“they express and mediate the relationship to other people”. Finally, all these examples “reaffirm
the fundamentally social nature of consumption and reiterate the importance of the trilateral
person-thing-person framing of consumer behavior”, while they stand as arguments for a brand
community perspective on relationships (Ahuvia, 2005: 181).
A brand community is defined as “a specialized, non-geographically bound community, based on
a structured set of social relations among admirers of a brand” (Muniz and O'Guinn, 2001: 412).
The definition proposed by Muniz and O‟Guinn (2001) may be completed with the insight of
Bender (1978) on traditional communities, who ads that the social relations created within are
“marked by mutuality and emotional bonds” (Bender, 1978: 145 quoted in Muniz and O‟Guinn,
2001: 413).
The concept of community is situated in the time of the critique on modernism (Muniz and
O‟Guinn, 2001: 412) and exhibits three traditional characteristics: shared consciousness, “the
intrinsic connection that members feel toward one another”; a sense of moral responsibility, “a
felt sense of duty or obligation to the community as a whole, and to its individual members”; and
rituals and traditions, “that perpetuate the community‟s shared history, culture and
consciousness” (Muniz and O‟Guinn, 2001: 413). These “indicators of community” (ibid) are
reflected in brand communities, since the former build upon the traits of the traditional concept
of community.
What is particular for brand communities is that they are communities organized around a brand
that becomes the connecting pretext for consumers. Muniz and O‟Guinn (2001: 415) signal that
brand communities “may form around any brand”, but are in fact most probable to from “around
brands with a strong image, a rich and lengthy history, and threatening competition”.
Furthermore, members of brand communities manifest themselves in particular ways, while still
reflecting the characteristics common for any community. For instance, illustrating the existence
of rituals and traditions, one way of brand community manifestation refers to the stories that
Anda Iulia Ionescu, 401926
Master Thesis - Master of Arts in Corporate Communication 26
consumers share about the brand and the effect this ritual has on the cohesion of the community.
In this sense, Muniz and O‟Guin (2001: 423) explain: “Storytelling is an important means of
creating and maintaining community. Stories based on common experiences with the brand serve
to invest the brand with meaning, and meaningfully link community member to community
member. [...] The telling of these stories has a ritualistic character about it, and certainly
represents a strong tradition within the brand communities”. Another example of brand
community behavior is the “assistance in the use of the brand”, or, in other words, “looking out
for and helping other members in their consumption of the brand” (Muniz and O‟Guinn, 2001:
425). Along with integrating and retaining members within the brand community, providing
assistance in the use of brand illustrates moral responsibility and constitutes as a reaction arose
out of a pure sense of responsibility to the group and to its members (ibid).
All in all, brand community may be regarded as “an essential form humans invariably employ in
their social existence” (Muniz and O‟Guinn, 2001: 426). This implies that consumers are in a
perpetual need of communal affiliation and are eager to foster a sense of connection in whatever
ways (Muniz and O‟Guinn, 2001, Fournier and Lee, 2009). In addition, “given the
consumption‟s undeniable centrality in contemporary culture”, to “ignore these communities of
commerce” is not an option, as Muniz and O‟Guinn (2001: 426) point out. In these terms, the
notion of brand communities is valuable and contributes to the overall understanding of
community, contemporary society, consumption and consumer culture (Muniz and O‟Guinn,
2001: 428).
Tribes
While discussing brand communities, Muniz and O‟Guinn (2001) remind about the work of the
French sociologist Michel Maffesoli (1996) on neo-tribalism, which they consider relevant in
discussing individuals‟ need for communal affiliation in the context of postmodernity. Cova and
Cova (2002, 2007) explain and expand upon Maffesoli‟s work, arguing for and describing the
tribalisation of postmodern society.
Neo-tribalism is the ideology that advances the tribalisation of society, meaning it regards
individuals as organizing themselves into „tribes‟ and forming social networks; this is a result of
people feeling liberated from the modern social constraints, and thus “embarking on a reverse
Anda Iulia Ionescu, 401926
Master Thesis - Master of Arts in Corporate Communication 27
moment to recompense their social universe”, in “a search for maintaining or (re)-creating the
social link” (Maffesoli, 1996a ap. Cova and Cova, 2002: 596). This is to be understood in that
Maffesoli (1996) proposes that the decline of modern institutions, culture and forms of authority
determine societies to reconsider their organizational principles; in a feeling of nostalgia and a
thirst for social linkage, they turn for inspiration towards those in the past (e.g. tribes as archaic
social arrangement), that have been rejected by modern society. In this sense, Maffesoli (1996,
ap. Cova and Cova, 2002: 596-597) predicted that the postmodern era would be the era of neo-
tribalism. Currently, individuals are seen to be pursuing “alternative social arrangements and
new communities” and “increasingly gathering together in multiple and ephemeral groups” such
as tribes (Goulding et al., 2001 ap. Cova and Cova, 2002: 596). Therefore, “attempts at social re-
composition” as those argued for above are also noticeable in a contemporary era that
postmodernists characterize by individualism and social dissolution (Cova and Cova, 2002: 596),
as elaborated upon in the first chapter of the paper at hand.
Tribalism becomes a characteristic of postmodern social dynamics and postmodern consumption
(Cova and Cova, 2007). Accordingly, the citizen of the „00s is “less interested in the objects of
consumption than in the social links and identities that come with them” (Cova and Cova, 2002:
595). This is referred to as the Latin view on society, built on the principle that “the link is more
important than the thing” (Cova and Cova, 2002: 595). It proposes concentrating on the linking
element, thus looking at the consumer-to-consumer interaction, and hypothesizes that from a
tribal perspective, consumption, through its linking value, supports social interaction of the tribe.
Consequently, The Latin School differs from and offers an alternative to the Northern
approaches in that it rejects their stand for segmentation, individualism and one-to-one
relationships, arguing that people gather in tribes and that in this new sense of social and
affective community resides the future of marketing (Cova and Cova, 2007).
The term „tribe‟, regarded as an outcome of postmodern reality, is borrowed from anthropology
and refers to the returning of archaic values, where “social order was maintained without the
existence of a central power” (Cova and Cova, 2002: 597). A postmodern tribe or neo-tribe “is
defined as a network of heterogeneous persons – in terms of age, sex, income, etc. – who are
linked by a shared passion or emotion; a tribe is capable of collective action, its members are not
simple consumers, they are also advocates” (Cova and Cova, 2002: 602). Similar to the tribes of
Anda Iulia Ionescu, 401926
Master Thesis - Master of Arts in Corporate Communication 28
the archaic societies, they are mainly characterized by a local sense of identification, group
narcissism, religiosity, emotionality, and assume sharing common passions and experiencing
together. In addition, postmodern tribes are ephemeral; they constantly change, while each
individual may belong to multiple tribes and play different roles in these (ibid). Nevertheless, a
better understanding on tribes and on consumers in this perspective may be achieved by carrying
out a brief comparison with brand communities, since the two concepts may seem very similar,
yet they differ in some essential ways, as it is to be seen in the following.
Tribes vs. Brand communities
On the one hand, a tribe may be distinguished from the concept of community, which denotes a
group whose members share something in common “without implying the existence of non-
rational and rather archaic bonds” (Cova and Cova, 2002: 598). Nowadays, communities share
interests, which “have little to do with archaic values”, while tribes are seen as an emotional
construct, which assumes they “are more than just communities of interests” (Cova and Cova,
2002: 615).
On the other hand, tribes differ from brand communities, mainly since “brand communities are
explicitly commercial, whereas tribes are not” (Cova and Cova, 2002: 603). This means that
while brand communities gather around a brand, tribes may or may not accept a brand passed on
by companies/organizations that hope to make use of the tribal consumption benefits. Thus, one
important issue results, that of tribes being essentially concerned with consumer interaction,
while brand communities emphasize the role of the brand as partner in the relationships amongst
consumers. However, “when a tribe is organized around a same passion for a cult-object [...] it
exhibits many similarities with brand community” - e.g. Harley Davidson (ibid). Finally, brand
communities are seen as more stable and more committed then tribes, since the latter appear to
be social gatherings in a constant change, thus reflecting the identity shifting that characterizes
the postmodern consumer (Muniz and O‟Guinn, 2001: 414-415).
Anda Iulia Ionescu, 401926
Master Thesis - Master of Arts in Corporate Communication 29
Forms of communal consumption such as brand communities and tribes, as they have been
discussed until this point in the present subchapter i.e. from a consumer perspective, have wider
implications for branding and marketing strategies. In a shift of focus from consumers to an
organizational perspective, it is worth mentioning that understanding these concepts provides
valuable knowledge for organizations seeking to approach consumers by means of relationship
building. For instance, engaging in tribal marketing assumes knowing which tribe to support,
how tribes function, and what advantages may such an approach to marketing bring (Cova and
Cova, 2007). Moreover, the success of tribal marketing is conditioned not only by supporting the
functioning of a tribe by means of products “that hold people together as a group of enthusiasts
or devotees (Cova and Cova, 2002: 603), but also by authentically getting involved as a marketer
“with members of the tribe in shared, high emotion and ritual experiences” (ibid: 613).
Nonetheless, whether they engage in tribal marketing or in building brand communities,
organizations should recognize they must partner with consumers rather than remain positioned
as “a pole of the relationship” (ibid: 604). It is this short-sighted view of the firm and the
consumer as the two distinct parts of the relationship that dethrones traditional marketing (i.e.
one-to-one marketing based on exchange) and relationship marketing (i.e. building profitable
relationships with consumers) in favor of tribal marketing and community building, since none
of the former facilitates “emotional bond of collective nature” (Cova and Cova, 2002: 604).
Changes in the way marketing is done also relate to the fact that businesses move to a
“consumer-centric view” as opposed to the traditional “product-centric view” (Prahalad et al.,
2000: 76), as a consequence of the development of brand communities and communal
consumption, the increasing influence of consumers on businesses, and the refinement of
consumers‟ demands. This means that businesses learn to change their structure as to embrace
relationship and networking principles, and must set a goal in regarding consumers in their
complexity and obtaining a “360-degree-view” of each, while also understanding them in their
collectivity, rather than individually (Prahalad et al., 2000: 74). A further step is that firms begin
to allow consumers to get involved in the process of value creation, while listening to their voice
and paying attention not only to their interaction with the firm but also on their interaction with
their peers – this signals what Prahalad and Ramaswamy (2004) refer to as co-creation practices,
Anda Iulia Ionescu, 401926
Master Thesis - Master of Arts in Corporate Communication 30
a new perspective on relationships in postmodern era, that is to be discussed in the following
subchapter.
1.2.3. Co-creation
A postmodern consumer culture in which Internet and the opportunities it provides, or the desire
and power of consumers to network and create collective knowledge with other consumers are
prominent features, sets the frame for the new, empowered type of consumer who increasingly
becomes informed about companies and brands independently of their control. These are active
consumers, who not only speak out and engage in dialogues with companies, but may also
expect to participate in the development of products and services and become business
collaborators. Businesses must embrace such a scenario of consumer centricity, showing
awareness of the important role consumers have nowadays and aiming to understand the culture
they manifest in. It is these “informed, networked, empowered, and active consumers [that] are
increasingly co-creating value with the firm” (Prahalad and Ramaswamy, 2004: 5).
Co-creation assumes joint creation of value between consumers and organizations and
recognizing the need for consumer-community-company interaction; it describes an environment
characterized by continuous two-way and personalized dialogue, where meanings are shared
between consumers, firms and communities (Prahalad and Ramaswamy, 2004: 11). However, it
should be distinguished that co-creation does not mean that consumers detain supremacy, nor
that organizations should resume simply at product or service customization, which gives
consumers the mere choice to choose from a predetermined range of standard options (ibid).
The challenge of co-creating resides particularly in succeeding to establish and maintain its
defining features: open dialog amongst all parts involved in co-creation, transparency and access
for consumers and organizations in all respects of the production/consumption process, as well as
risk assessment of the implications co-creation assumes (Prahald and Ramaswamy, 2004). This
is what Prahalad and Ramaswamy refer to as the four „building blocks‟ that define co-creation
(2004: 9).
Understanding co-creation from the consumer‟s perspective enables companies to better foster
co-creative practices (Nuttavuthisit, 2010). In learning why consumers co-create, there are two
Anda Iulia Ionescu, 401926
Master Thesis - Master of Arts in Corporate Communication 31
main reasons to be remembered: consumers may co-create for „self‟, that is for their own
practical or psychological benefits, or for „others‟, which highlights the current importance of
collective consumption and community development (Nuttavuthisit, 2010: 317). Further on, two
main ways in which consumers engage in co-creation may be distinguished, according to the
type of interaction with the company. These are „participation‟, or voluntary cooperation of the
consumer and reaction to the various incentives designed by the company, and „creation‟, a
process developed at consumer level only, referring to the instances in which the consumer is
pro-active and becomes the initiator of the co-creation process (ibid).
Turning the attention towards consumers and their stand on co-creation, and more generally,
understanding their culture and their need for communalization, has determined firms to no
longer see the market as a “target” but an “ecosystem” (Prahalad and Ramaswamy, 2000: 68), in
other words a network of naturally interacting consumers. In a similar way, companies
themselves must be regarded as “part of an enhanced network – one that includes its suppliers
and partners, and its customers”, what Prahalad and Ramaswamy (2000: 68) call the “consumer-
to-business-to-business relationship”, that comes to replace the classical business-to-business or
business-to-consumer perspective on relationships.
For co-creation to happen, an environment such as described above is prerequisite. Starting from
this a view, Hatch and Schultz (2010) further extend the idea of co-creation to the branding
domain, developing on what they refer to as „brand co-creation‟. Brand co-creation is build by
making use of the brand community and co-creation ideas (Hatch and Schultz, 2010).
Specifically, brand communities are regarded as contexts for co-creation: companies interested to
engage consumers in co-creation can make use of the brand community idea, in the view that
relationships between consumers influence the relation between the consumer and the company,
and, thus, they aid companies to set up dialogue with consumers. Moreover, Hatch and Schultz
(2010) take the view that all stakeholders are engaged in co-creation, thus the meaning of the
brand is co-created amongst the variety of stakeholders, as a result of the brand‟s multiple
interpretations. Consequently, brand co-creation assumes that brand value is “co-created through
network relationships and social interactions among the ecosystem of all stakeholders” (Hatch
and Schultz, 2010: 592).
Anda Iulia Ionescu, 401926
Master Thesis - Master of Arts in Corporate Communication 32
All in all, as far as the concept of co-creation is concerned, it must be noted that both consumers
and managers need to adjust in the process. Co-creation assumes an intertwining of their worlds,
and it must start from understanding that dialog, transparency, mutual understanding, as well as
taking responsibility for the consequences of such a relationship, have critical importance for the
success of achieving mutual benefits, and constitute as the basis of “the next practice of value
creation” (Prahalad and Ramaswamy, 2004: 14).
1.2.4. The online environment and social media: catalyzing relationships
The Internet and social media as one of its essential developments are important aspects of
culture (Nuttavuthisit, 2010: 317). In an increasingly fragmented postmodern world, the Internet
“has emerged as the virtual glue” which individuals make use of to bond (Simmons, 2008: 305).
From a consumption perspective, Internet does not only offer consumers a platform to “develop
social ties”, but it becomes a marketing tool by means of which an increasing number of
companies attempt to engage with consumers (Alon and Brunel, 2007: 371). More specifically,
Internet and social media enable consumers to generate content and share it with peers, in the
“extended network of many-to-many relationships” (Nuttavuthisit, 2010: 317); by these means,
“postmodern consumers are finding a public forum in which they can express, define and
differentiate themselves to those that matter, through their consumption” (Hagel and Armstrong,
1997; Banks and Daus, 2002; Gruen et al., 2005 ap. Simmons, 2008: 304). As such, the Internet
allows consumers to communicate one with the other about brands and companies, while it also
facilitates communication between organizations and consumers (Mangold and Faulds, 2009).
Before going further, there is a need to briefly note how social media is defined and what its
main functions are. “Social media refers to activities, practices, and behaviors among
communities of people who gather online to share information, knowledge, and opinions using
conversational media. Conversational media are Web-based applications that make it possible to
create and easily transmit content in the form of words, pictures, videos and audio” (Safko and
Brake, 2009: 6). Social media may be classified in various ways and allows for many examples –
whether it is blogs, forums, networking sites (e.g. Facebook, YouTube, LinkedIn etc.) or many
others (Mangold and Faulds, 2009: 358), what they all have in common is that they “serve
valuable community functions” (Fournier and Lee, 2009: 109). In this sense, social media allows
Anda Iulia Ionescu, 401926
Master Thesis - Master of Arts in Corporate Communication 33
for social interaction, relationship and community building, peer recognition and validation of
information; thus it takes advantage of all benefits provided by the Internet, while it highlights
„the social‟ aspect of communication (Kaplan and Haenlein, 2009).
Internet and social media are thus seen as community enhancers. Taking this view, Simmons
(2008) notes how the online environment facilitates the creation of brand communities. Online
brand communities are increasingly popular – they are described as “a virtual platform, centred
around the brand, where like-minded (but individualistic!) postmodern consumers can discuss
their opinions on anything and everything” (Simmons, 2008: 305). Further on, Cova and Cova
(2002) signal how the tribal phenomenon is also amplified with the rise of Internet: “On the
Internet, virtual tribes structured around a shared passion are growing rapidly” (Rauch and
Thunqvist, 2000 ap. Cova and Cova, 2002: 615).
Community consumption and the development of Internet and social media altogether offer an
alternative perspective on consumers: “Online consumers are much more active, participative,
resistant, activist, loquacious, social and communitarian than they have previously been thought
to be” (Kozinets, 1999: 261 quoted in Cova and Cova, 2002: 615). Thus, Internet empowers
consumers, who increasingly become independent from the information provided by firms, since
they are able to seek the information they want and develop their own tools to aid them in
choosing who they want to engage with in a relationship (Prahalad and Ramaswamy, 2004).
Further on, consumers may easily “interact in a meaningful way with companies […] developing
a rapport which creates a relationship that allows these consumers to have a say in the online
creation of product and service experiences, which are tailored to their individualised needs”
(Simmons, 2008: 303). This mainly refers to online customization as one way of co-operating
with firms; however, this collaboration is even further encouraged with the help of Internet and
the opportunities it provides, enhancing co-creation. Hatch and Schultz (2010) explain that social
media has an important role in co-creation by enabling access for stakeholders and facilitating
transparency and dialogue for organizations, conditioned that it is used effectively.
To conclude, the present subchapter has highlighted how Internet and the tools it provides
support and facilitate the building of relationships, and how the concepts discussed throughout
the chapter, such as brand communities, tribes, or co-creation, may be leveled up in such a
Anda Iulia Ionescu, 401926
Master Thesis - Master of Arts in Corporate Communication 34
context. Last but not least, it has been revealed how a culture of digitalization contributes in
shaping the new type of individual, empowered, in control of information, participative and
increasingly social.
Anda Iulia Ionescu, 401926
Master Thesis - Master of Arts in Corporate Communication 35
2. METHODOLOGY
The purpose of the unfolding chapter is to provide information on how the research at hand is
approached and carried out, and, in this sense, it may be regarded as “the natural history of the
research” (Silverman, 2010 quoted in Daymon and Holloway, 2011: 335).
In order to develop on the research questions and finally address the problem statement, as they
have been previously set out and argued for in the introductive section, the first objective in the
research process embedded a theoretical dimension: reviewing literature that comes to support
and contextualize the problem, thus drawing the main concepts in the postmodern world of
consumption, relevant for conceptualizing Kiva as a postmodern organization. The second
objective relates to a more practical dimension: analyzing and discussing relationships in
consumption as proposed by postmodernism, in the way they are understood by Kiva supporters
and lenders. Ultimately, attaining both of these research objectives would shed light on the
overall problem, which aims to provide a better understanding on the way postmodern
consumers engage with organizations that facilitate relationship building, in today‟s world of
consumption, increasingly characterized by communality and socialization.
2.1. Research philosophy and approach
The undertaken research aims to understand and gain deep insight into phenomena and the way
they occur - with particular focus on the consumer‟s point of view, thus implying that social
reality is to be understood from individuals‟ point of view. For this reason, the research takes an
interpretive stand, which prioritizes “understanding over scientific explanation” and “is
interested in both the unique and the individual” (Daymon and Holloway, 2011: 102).
Interpretivism proposes that the social world does not exist separately from the individual and,
thus, reality is subjective and open to change (ibid). An interpretive worldview is chosen over a
positivist one, since positivism builds upon the view that social reality is objective and singular,
the same as the material world (Daymon and Holloway, 2011). Therefore, it is a tradition
regarded as highly structured and strict in methodology, aiming to create generalizations and/or
„laws‟ from the carried out research and to promote unbiased interpretations about the collected
Anda Iulia Ionescu, 401926
Master Thesis - Master of Arts in Corporate Communication 36
data (Saunders et al, 2003). This is where the interpretive view largely differs, as it argues that
reality is much more complex, and thus it cannot be simply categorized or become subject of
generalization; interpretivism fundamentally “aims to capture the rich complexity of social
situations” and focuses on particularities (Saunders et al, 2003: 84).
Furthermore, the choice of the interpretive tradition naturally supports and aids in understanding
social constructivism as the meta-theoretical paradigm (i.e. “a perspective or framework for how
to view the world, how to determine which questions are relevant, how to argue”, Olsen and
Pedersen, 2005:141) for the undertaken research. Social constructivism “follows from the
interpretivist position” (Saunders et al, 2003: 84) and suggests that reality is socially constructed:
meanings, interpretations, emotions are constructed in social interaction and are context bound,
thus, the researcher must aim at understanding the subjective reality of the research participants
and make sense of their actions and interactions in the way that is meaningful to them. In this
view, the social reality people live in is not a given, but is constructed by people through
communication, social interaction, and a shared history (Daymon and Holloway, 2002). The
research at hand has set out to deal with consumers‟ own understandings and perspectives, and
with emotions and relationships, notions difficult to be referred to as fixed realities, as they are
experienced differently amongst individuals. From this perspective, the social reality can be
argued to be subjective and constructed, and thus the social constructivism paradigm is
considered to most properly suit the purpose of the paper at hand.
Paradigmatic thinking influences further choices for the research process (Daymon and
Holloway, 2011). Though not always, but usually, researchers in the interpretive stance are
inclined to use an inductive approach as opposed to the deductive one, mostly associated with
positivism. Such associations reside in the common ground between interpretivism and
induction, both focusing on understanding and particularity, as well as between positivism and
deduction, that are rigorous, objective, and focused on explaining causal relationships (ibid). In
this reasoning, this research calls for an inductive approach, that concerns delving into the data
and developing theory as a result of the data analysis, rather than starting with a hypothesis based
on what is known about a certain domain and aiming to test it empirically (Bryman, 2008). Even
though the two approaches differentiate in respect to the relationship between empirical research
and theory, it is also possible that an inductive approach takes on some elements of a deductive
Anda Iulia Ionescu, 401926
Master Thesis - Master of Arts in Corporate Communication 37
one; as such, an orientative corpus of theory may still be still developed at the commencement of
an inductive research - as it is the case of the research at hand - which suggests that, in practice,
research sometimes combines elements of both approaches (Saunders et al, 2003). Though this is
a debated upon issue, there is agreement in that making use of existing theoretical developments
so as to define the object of study and frame the research questions is of great utility,
disregarding the approach taken (Daymon and Holloway, 2011, Saunders et al., 2003, Phillips
and Hardy, 2002).
The above argues for and develops on the present research taking an interpretive stand, hence a
social constructivist meta-theoretical paradigm, and an inductive approach, to gather knowledge
in response to the problem statement. Further on, considerations on the research process are to be
made, including strategies and methods for data collection and data analysis.
2.2. Research strategy and method
In the following, a plan concerning how to go about in answering the research questions is
presented. This includes data collection and method for data analysis, as well as concerns
regarding the advantages, disadvantages and limitations of the chosen direction.
The purpose of the research at hand demands employing a qualitative method of research, as this
provides an in-depth view of a certain issue and is used to “understand and gain insight over the
apparent problem” (Ghauri and Grønhaug, 2002: 196). Qualitative research is concerned with
exploring, in-depth understanding, interpreting and answering the „what‟ and „how‟ questions
(Daymon and Holloway, 2002); in this light, issues like how is Kiva understood by consumers
and what meanings do consumers attribute to the relationship notion can only be addressed by
means of qualitative research. Therefore, the use of a qualitative method has the advantage of
uncovering a more deeply-rooted view of the problem, which a quantitative approach that is
categorizing, statistical, interested in causal explanations and in “bringing numeric data” (Ghauri
and Grønhaug, 2002: 197) cannot provide. Furthermore, qualitative methods are rooted in the
interpretative worldview, are most usually associated with an inductive approach and are most
appropriate for delving into meaning and the social construction of reality (Daymon and
Holloway, 2011), which lends further credibility to the choice of this sort of method for the paper
at hand, in the light of the proposed paradigmatic thinking. Last but not least, qualitative research
Anda Iulia Ionescu, 401926
Master Thesis - Master of Arts in Corporate Communication 38
is most appropriate “in the increasingly interconnected, complex and volatile nature of the
postmodern world” (Daymon and Holloway, 2011: 5), a world that this study is aiming to
investigate, where narratives, discourses, language, particularisms, and subjective experiences
are the dominating visions (Firat and Venkatesh, 1995: 244).
The next decision regarding the research process is influenced by this postmodernist perspective:
thus, a qualitative analytical approach inspired from Discourse analysis is proposed. Before
defining discourse analysis, this must be distinguished not only as a method, but as a
methodology, as it comprises both a philosophical perspective explaining how to look at social
reality and a useful set of methods (for data collection and data analysis) employed for studying
it (Phillips and Hardy, 2002: 3). Discourse analysis is a „package‟ (Jørgensen and Phillips, 2002):
making use of its method implies accepting the philosophy it embodies i.e. “a „strong‟ social
constructivist view of the social world” (Gergen, 1999 ap. Phillips and Hardy, 2002: 5). The
research at hand accepts the social constructivist take, as argued for in the beginning of this
chapter; and since social constructivism is often concerned with language and assumes that the
world “is constituted in one way or another as people talk it, write it and argue it” (Potter, 1996:
98 quoted in Bryman, 2008: 20), Discourse analysis proves to be most appropriate to gain insight
into how consumers attach meanings to various interpretations of the relationship concept that
surrounds Kiva as an organisation.
Discourse may be defined as “an interrelated set of texts, and the practices of their production,
dissemination and reception, that brings an object into being” (Parker, 1992 ap. Phillips and
Hardy, 2002: 3). It assumes that interaction amongst individuals and amongst individuals and
organizations is of interest to show how different concepts are constructed by means of
communication and language; therefore, discourse does not reflect a pre-existing view of the
world, but it constructs versions of it (Daymon and Holloway, 2011). However, “discourse is
more than language because it constitutes, or produces, a particular view of social reality” (ibid:
166). Phillips and Hardy (2002) take on Fairclough‟s view (1992) and propose a three-
dimensional approach to the study of discourse i.e. the interplay between text, context and
discourse must be recognized in order to refer to Discourse analysis. This means that corpuses of
texts are studied for clues to sorts of discourses, since discourses cannot be found entirely in a
single body of text, while at the same time, reference to the social context where the texts are
Anda Iulia Ionescu, 401926
Master Thesis - Master of Arts in Corporate Communication 39
found and discourses emerge must be made – it is specifically in this relation between discourse
and social reality that resides the usefulness of Discourse analysis as a way of studying social
phenomena (Phillips and Hardy, 2002: 5).
Based on the features of both qualitative methods and Discourse analysis, what follows comes to
build and critically reflect on an analytical method appropriate for the purpose of this research.
2.2.1. Data collection
The starting point for the empirical study is selecting a corpus of data which would finally
generate knowledge on how consumers understand relationships in the postmodern context, in
the case of Kiva. In this direction, a site where the data will be collected from is selected; data
should pertain to sites that are “transparent”, meaning that they should make the topic of interest
for the research visible (Eisenhardt, 1989 ap. Phillips and Hardy, 2002: 67). For the research at
hand, the data is gathered from Kiva members‟ online communication platform: the Kiva
supporters‟ forum (http://www.kivafriends.org), where the discursive activity of Kiva lenders,
supporters or other participants in the discussion is potentially noticeable, since the platform is
dedicated to such a purpose. Specifically, the collected data consists of online content (comments
and posts) generated by Kiva members and debate participants. Therefore, the collected data is
primary, i.e. “original data, collected by us for the research problem at hand” (Ghauri &
Grønhaug, 2010: 90) and constitutes as written text, as opposed to talk and nonverbal interaction,
images, video material, symbols, or other sorts of media which Discourse analysis may
investigate.
When discussing the data collection procedure, sampling considerations must also be made. To
start with, qualitative research is not dependant on sample size (Daymon and Holloway, 2011:
171): samples are rather small, since research is concerned with the uniqueness of contexts; they
are flexible and adjustable during research. However, there is always need for some sort of
sampling (Saunders et al., 2003); from thousands of comments posted on kivafriends.org, after
careful and intensive scanning, only a few have been selected, on the basis of revealing
something meaningful for the purpose of the paper at hand (Daymon and Holloway, 2011). The
selection includes what is considered “sufficiently representative”, such as “important” texts
(Phillips and Hardy, 2002: 68) that present any sort of clues to relationships and the discourses
Anda Iulia Ionescu, 401926
Master Thesis - Master of Arts in Corporate Communication 40
this notion draws on, in relation to Kiva. Also, “theoretical sampling” is applied (Phillips and
Hardy, 2002: 68), meaning that data is “chosen based on the likelihood that they will provide
theoretically relevant results (Glaser and Strauss, 1967, Yin, 1984 ap. Phillips and Hardy, 2002:
68). In addition, it is worth mentioning that, purposively, no time frame for the production of the
texts has been set out as selection criteria: such a decision would have prevented from an
overview on the general topics to be addressed, since a forum is structured according to the
subjects it proposes for discussion, and, thus, the same conversation might be continuously
developed on a significant period of time. Finally, the criteria employed for the selection of data
follows the argument that qualitative and discursive research come to an end not when the data is
exhaustively analysed and it provides no new insight, but rather when the researcher considers
the data is sufficient to make a point (Wood and Kroger, 2000 ap. Phillips and Hardy, 2002: 74).
In this respect, the process of collecting data for the research at hand ceases when relevant
examples of discourses that relationships may draw upon are found. The aforementioned criteria
for data collection are employed due to the fact that even if qualitative research assumes the data
collection process is rather subjective, it does not mean that the process should not be argued for
and explained within the possible limits.
2.2.2. Data analysis
Discourse analysis as method is considered to be subjective and freed from rigorous constraints;
however, this is due to the fact that being too systematic “undermines the very basis of discourse
analysis” which is to interpret and understand phenomena by grasping the meanings of texts
(Phillips and Hardy, 2002: 74). For this reason, standard procedures or templates for data
analysis are difficult to render, and researchers usually choose to build up and justify their own
approach, according to the purpose of their own study (ibid). The analytical approach for the
undertaken research builds on this argument: the remainder of this sub-section deals with how
the analytical approach has been structured to serve this specific research, and in what way it is
inspired from Discourse analysis theory.
An overall view on the various forms of discourse analysis that exist is necessary for choosing an
appropriate one to build the discursive analytical method of this research. Phillips and Hardy
(2002: 20) propose two dimensions that help in distinguishing between major discourse
Anda Iulia Ionescu, 401926
Master Thesis - Master of Arts in Corporate Communication 41
approaches: the interest of the researcher in text vs. context and a pure social constructivist
concern vs. a more critical stand. Though discourse analysis implies being concerned with both
text and context along discourse, as mentioned previously in this chapter, it is impossible for any
researcher to focus on all in the same way – thus, the research questions should guide such
choices (ibid). In order to investigate what meanings do consumers attribute to relationships and
how this aids in understanding Kiva as a postmodern organisation, the research at hand aims to
identify what are the discourses that Kiva members draw on in constructing meanings for the
relationship notion and how are these related to the wider consumption context. This indicates a
concern for the macro-context rather than a micro-textual analysis, the latter providing insight
into how Kiva members use language rather than what they discuss about. Further on, in the
same rationale, the analytical approach draws more on critical discourse analysis (CDA). This
approach to discourse analysis (Focault, 1972, Fairclough, 1995 ap. Phillips and Hardy, 2002) is
mostly preoccupied with “the distal context” (ibid: 25) i.e. social order and issues of power
dynamics, history and ideology, rather than viewing text and language in isolation. For the
proposed problem statement, exposing power relations in society and ideology concerns are not
of interest, however, an approach that favours the macro-context instead of detailed textual
analysis is still required in response to the research questions.
Therefore, the analytical method is inspired from Norman Fairclough‟s approach to critical
discourse analysis, more specifically his Three Dimensional Model (Fairclough, 1995), which
proposes text, discourse practice, and socio-cultural practice as dimensions for analysis
(Fairclough, 1995: 98). The model is illustrated and described below.
The Three Dimensional Model (after Fairclough, 1995: 98)
Anda Iulia Ionescu, 401926
Master Thesis - Master of Arts in Corporate Communication 42
Fairclough takes the view that language is a component of society, meaning that any means of
interaction and communication amongst individuals are socially determined. In this way,
investigating language solely by analyzing texts detracts from the wider implications of language
as discourse and embedded in social reality (Fairclough, 2001). Further on, Fairclough‟s model
suggests that a communicative act involves (1) text and the text production process, (2) discourse
and the interpretation process of the text - discourses may be traced in macro-topics that prevail
in any linguistic act, and (3) social practice, meaning that language is also defined by societal
elements, not only linguistic characteristics (ibid: 20-22). While illustrating the idea of text being
embedded in a wider context and the correlation between text, context and discourse, the model
proposes three dimensions for critical discourse analysis and thus provides a structured three-
phase way of conducting analysis of texts: (1) description or text analysis, (2) interpretation or
processing analysis, and (3) explanation or social analysis (Fairclough, 1995: 95-98).
From a more instrumental perspective, the analysis part of the research at hand is carried out in
the following stages, under the influence of Fairclough‟s Three Dimensional Model (1995) and
with the guidance of some of the most common techniques used in any sort of Discourse
Analysis (Daymon and Holloway, 2011):
1. Description phase. Operating with text, identifying topics (Fairclough, 1995) - the
interest is not in individual words, but in “whole chunks of text” (Daymon and Holloway,
2011: 173); topics are identified by looking for “regularities and variabilities in the
language used” and then selecting an appropriate label for them (ibid), while also
inferring on the text production process (Fairclough, 1995).
2. Interpretation phase. Interpreting text in the light of participants‟ social interaction - the
focus is on the intended purpose of the text; investigating whether the text is derived from
any metaphors and which ones, which is referred to as identifying “interpretive
repertoires” (Potter and Wetherell, 1987 ap. Daymon and Holloway, 2011: 173) or
relating previously found topics to macro-topics (Fairclough, 1995) i.e. discourses.
3. Explanation phase. Reflecting on the wider context i.e. contextualizing the texts
(Daymon and Holloway, 2011: 174), which indicates awareness of the “important notion
of intertextuality [that] highlights the existence of discourse beyond the micro-context of
the word usage” (ibid); paying attention to the “social and historical contexts in which
Anda Iulia Ionescu, 401926
Master Thesis - Master of Arts in Corporate Communication 43
discourse is embedded” (ibid) – focus is placed on social structures and the social
interactions that influence and are influenced by these social structures; more complex
reasoning is made in this phase, since analysis aims to explain the culture and society
where the text is produced (Fairclough, 1995).
2.2.3. Delimitations
The choice for any research method, however useful and appropriate it is, also brings along
disadvantages which researchers must consider carefully. Qualitative methods are criticized for
being too subjective, difficult to reproduce, to generalise and account for their rigor, as well as
for lacking transparency in the selection, collection and analysis of the data (Daymon and
Holloway, 2011). In addition, a discourse analytic approach raises criticism for being narrowly
focused, difficult to carry out, too theoretical, ambiguous and complex, with no patterns for
conducting the analysis and risky when evaluated for its rigour as a method (Phillips and Hardy,
2002, Daymon and Holloway, 2011). Nevertheless, such criticism can be somewhat overcome if
taking into consideration aspects such as the following.
To begin with, legitimacy of a qualitative study or one inspired from Discourse analysis does not
reside in classical evaluation criteria such as validity and reliability. Validity, or “the idea that
the research closely captures the „real‟ world” and reliability, or “the idea that results are
„repeatable‟” are not relevant in world regarded as subjective and socially constructed, where
generalisations are avoided in favour of the uniqueness of the subject; instead, research is judged
on its logical argumentation, plausibility of the results, and the pertinence of the proposed
analytical scheme (Phillips and Hardy, 2002: 79-80). Nevertheless, Daymon and Holloway
(2011) argue that it is important to provide credibility of the findings and to assure they are not
opinion-made but grounded in research and data, and propose that qualitative research is judged
according to the criteria of trustworthiness and authenticity, instead of validity and reliability.
Authenticity is derived from documents that are “genuine, complete, reliable and of unquestioned
authorship” (Daymon & Holloway, 2011: 281) and from a research strategy that aims to reflect
research participants‟ ideas. In this sense, the undertaken research gathers and analyzes texts that
are originally produced by Kiva lenders, supporters, or other participants in the conversation as
Anda Iulia Ionescu, 401926
Master Thesis - Master of Arts in Corporate Communication 44
posts on the official Kiva Facebook page and the Kivafriends.org forum. Therefore, making use
of the participants‟ own words as data, authenticity is considered to be a fulfilled criterion.
As far as trustworthiness is concerned, four other criteria must be fulfilled (Daymon and
Holloway, 2011). Credibility, which requires the researcher to set out the research process so as
to facilitate the readers‟ own understanding of the topic is achieved by means of the present
chapter and the overall structure of the paper that aim to explain and support how the research is
carried out. Transferability is attained if the findings of the research may be transferred or related
to, and is achieved ensuring that the research topic can be related to academic literature or if the
study is descriptively enough as to enable readers to make their own judgements; in this sense,
the present research paper has constantly provided literature as support for choices and has set
out to relate the results to the wider context of consumption that has been outlined prior to the
empirical study. Dependability i.e. consistent and accurate research is set to be fulfilled by a
clear flow of the decision-making throughout the research at hand. Lastly, if the findings achieve
the purpose of the study; if data are shown to be linked with their sources so that readers can
interpret them in their own way; and if the researcher proves to be critical regarding the way
he/she carried out the research; then the confirmability criteria is achieved. In this respect, the
present research manages to provide answers to the research question in the final chapter i.e.
Conclusion; provides transparent data by attaching all original posts included in the analysis (see
Appendix for print-screens); while the researcher shows awareness on the need to reflect on the
choices made in order to be as least biased as possible, as well as admits her direct involvement
in shaping the social reality together with the research subjects, by means of interpretation.
To conclude, the chosen approach has been explained and argued for with respect to the purpose
of the undertaken research and the questions it seeks to answer, having in mind the opportunities
it provides, as well as its potential weaknesses and the means by which these are overcome.
Finally, the present chapter reaches an end in the belief that there is more to gain from the chosen
approach, than there is to lose from its limitations.
Anda Iulia Ionescu, 401926
Master Thesis - Master of Arts in Corporate Communication 45
3. ANALYSIS AND FINDIGS
In the unfolding chapter, a three-phase analysis is carried out, structured under the guidance of
the Three Dimensional Model of Fairclough (1995) approaching discourse analysis. As already
set out in the previous chapter, the analysis is to incorporate three levels: (1) a description phase,
operating with textual material that is significant in demonstrating positions attributed to
relationships by Kiva lenders, supporters and other participants in the discussions on
kivafriends.org; (2) an interpretation phase, aimed to correlate the texts to potential discourses
they draw on; and (3) an explanation phase, meant to contextualize the issues raised so far. The
analysis proceeds by briefly introducing kivafriends.org and concludes with a summary of all
findings.
3.1. Kiva Friends
Kivafriends.org constitutes as a virtual “community for lenders – by lenders”
(http://www.kivafriends.org/, Appendix 1) and began as an extension of the Kiva Yahoo Group
(http://groups.yahoo.com/group/kivaloans/). The online platform was founded in March 2007 by
Kiva lenders, independently of Kiva but with the organization‟s acknowledgement, and is
moderated by users „Diane Charlie‟ and „Joe‟. With a total of 6532 registered members
(http://www.kivafriends.org/, visualized on the 9th
of May, 2012), Kiva Friends gather lenders,
supporters of Kiva, as well as potentially new members of Kiva, and essentially anyone of the
general public interested in the conversations carried out on the platform. The thousands of
topics for debate include a wide range of issues adjacent to Kiva and its supporters‟ lives, from
micro-lending to sustainable development, from personal interests to various off-topic subjects,
and have generated 94243 posts so far (http://www.kivafriends.org/, visualized on the 9th
of May,
2012). Finally, it is to mention that Kiva supports Kiva Friends – staff members follow and
participate in the discussions, while also recommending the site for further interaction with peers
and gathering useful information in their journey with Kiva.
Anda Iulia Ionescu, 401926
Master Thesis - Master of Arts in Corporate Communication 46
3.2. Description phase
After a close investigation of the texts gathered from kivafriends.org and inferring on the text
production process, a number of themes or topics have been identified and labeled accordingly:
groups and teams; self - others; integration and assistance; common interests; call for action and
support; Kiva stories. In the following, all of these topics are to be described in turn, and
illustrated with specific textual examples extracted from users‟ comments and posts on
kivafriends.org.
Groups and teams. Kiva Friends constantly show preoccupation in gathering into groups and
forming teams. Whether they propose potential new teams, they express their considerations
regarding existing teams on kivariends.org, or they promote forms of gathering according to
various purposes and search for adherents, quite a number of posts produced by Kiva Friends
revolve around he „team‟ or „group‟ idea.
To begin with, the following examples illustrate the need to create some sort of grouping form,
as it is expressed by some of the users on kivafriends.org:
(1) “Wouldn't it be great if there were a way to have lender groups built in to kiva? (Appendix 2)
“I think it'd be great if lenders could found and join groups on Kiva.” (Appendix 3)
The aforementioned examples correspond to the initiation of the idea of what later on became the
„team lending feature‟ proposed by Kiva. It appears that Kiva took on the initiative proposed by
users of kivafriends.org, as one of the Kiva staffers explains:
(2) “Kiva is planning to roll out a "team lending" feature this Fall to the website. This feature will allow Kiva
users to affiliate with teams (e.g. school, company, religious organization). […] We are looking for Kiva
users who are potentially interested in starting a lending team.” (Appendix 4)
Consequently, the „team‟ topic is further on triggered in the posts and comments describing
reactions to the „team lending feature‟, as well as announcements and introductions of newly
formed teams, and invitations to join.
(3) “How about a Kiva Friends Team?”/“Sounds great!” (Appendix 4)
(4) “I've just started this new group: Kivans support group loans” (Appendix 5)
“Hello. We are a new lending team, Accountants for Social Good. We are a new team, so if anyone has any
advice or experience they would like to share with us, please do, it will be very much appreciated.”
(Appendix 6)
Anda Iulia Ionescu, 401926
Master Thesis - Master of Arts in Corporate Communication 47
“Would anyone else be interested in joining a team specifically focused on funding housing loans?”
(Appendix 7)
“If you want to know more about is you can find us here […] If you want to join us you are very
welcome.” (Appendix 8)
Last but not least, besides objectively discussing this topic, users of kivafriends.org may also
take a reflective stand on the matter, recognizing the implications such forms of gatherings have,
and challenging peers to take the same position.
(5) “It's really fun and motivating for all of us to lend together! Social lending is just more fun! […] What do
you guys think?” (Appendix 2)
“Obviously, lenders at this forum want to hook up with like-minded folks.” (Appendix 9)
“Sooooo.. If I said the term, "Team Lending," what would it mean to you?” (Appendix 10)
Self - others. There are several instances in which texts posted on the Kiva Friends forum depict
a connection between a more explicit concern for the „self‟, for the „others‟, or for the „self‟ in
relation to „others‟. Describing the upcoming examples sheds light on this topic.
One instance refers to Kiva members interested in connecting with like-minded individuals, who
share the same lifestyle choices; in this sense, they express their desire to relate with others,
while maintaining a preoccupation for the self and approaching relationships from this premise.
Examples include individuals of specific religious beliefs, sexual orientation, or with particular
lifestyle choices, such as vegetarians or sporty people, all aiming to connect with and obtain
support from others of the same beliefs as them:
(6) “I have been struggling with eating meat for years, and have very recently decided that I want to become a
vegan. […] is anyone here vegetarian or vegan? If you could share with me how it was for you in the
beginning and how it is now I would deeply appreciate it.” (Appendix 11)
“Just curious if there are other gay and lesbian folks and couples actively lending on Kiva...
would love to chat in here.” (Appendix 12)
“I'm starting this thread so that anyone who's in the same boat can join me... or if not... then just
to fish for a tiny bit of support from my k-friends. I'm embarking on a No-TV-Month for July
with the purpose of spending more time working out, and de-stressing.” (Appendix 13)
“For a few days I was doubting whether or not to join the Christian Team. […] Looking for
another team to join I realised that there wasn't any religious team I felt I really belonged to, so
after a while I decided to create a team I'd like to join.” (Appendix 14)
Anda Iulia Ionescu, 401926
Master Thesis - Master of Arts in Corporate Communication 48
Further on, some of the textual examples gathered reflect that relating to others may be outstand
by a competitive spirit, thus pointing towards a more explicit concern of the respectively text-
producers for the self. The extracts below describe taking a competitive stand.
(7) “We fully hope that the "Kiva Friends" Lending Team will be one of the first (and most active!)
teams” (Appendix 4)
“I think it'd be great if lenders could found and join groups on Kiva. […] Nothing like a little
competition amongst friends ” (Appendix 3)
The following examples describe two main positions regarding the „self‟ - „double agents‟ and
„sticklers‟ - which may be attributed to the users who a response to the question “How about a
KivaFriends team?” (Appendix 4):
(8) “Sounds great! How many teams can one lender be on? (I‟m at least a double agent!)” (Appendix 4)
“Yes PLEASE, but I‟m a stickler.. Make it the KivaFriends.org team” (Appendix 4)
Therefore, the „double agent‟ describes the user as pertaining to more than one team, thus
indicating a primary concern to his interests, whereas the „stickler‟ adheres to stability and favors
the team spirit. In the same tone of identifying instances where focus is on reflecting the self or
the others, the two text excerpts below must be considered:
(9) “Would anyone else be interested in joining a team specifically focused on funding housing loans? […] I
don't want to wind up making a team that nobody will be interested in, but if people are interested I might
have to put one together.” (Appendix 7)
“I decided to create a team I'd like to join. I have no idea if others would like to join a team like that too,
but here we go.” (Appendix 14)
It appears that the user who produced the former of the two previous examples is working in the
interest of the other members, offering to implement a team if it would be of general use;
oppositely, the latter example indicates how the user made a decision primarily of self-
convenience, and has placed the concern for others‟ way of relating to it as subsequent.
Integration and assistance. The topics labeled under integration and assistance are derived from
comments and posts regarding the interaction rules of Kiva Friends on the forum, such as
welcoming new members, helping out and answering questions, addressing requests, appraising
and encouraging activity, as well as showing concern for other Kiva Friends.
Anda Iulia Ionescu, 401926
Master Thesis - Master of Arts in Corporate Communication 49
For instance, the following describe initiating and encouraging members as part of the
integration in the group:
(10) “Welcome aboard, Armanie”/“thanks for the warm welcome!” (Appendix 15)
“That was pretty cool, Peter!” (Appendix 16)
Assistance is best described by asking for and offering help and guidance into whatsoever
problems, from kivafriends.org and properly using its features, to Kiva and the lending process,
and to everything else that may or may not be connected directly to Kiva.
(11) “Is there a procedure for getting approval to start a new "common interest" team where the common
interest is supporting a philanthropic organization?” (Appendix 17)
“Thank you, Peter, for asking prior to posting the details and welcome to KF. […] The moderators will
thus gladly discuss your request and let you know” (Appendix 18)
“Joe... GREAT work! “/“Thanks guys. I'm just glad I could fulfill a request and help out. “(Appendix 19)
“Before I bother Joe - has anyone else had this problem?”/“Yes I had the same problem, that is when I
clicked on […] Now it works.” (Appendix 20)
In addition to reflecting the assistance process, the above textual examples also reinforce the
encouragement/initiation idea, discussed previously. Finally, the latter example (Appendix 20)
introduces the idea of concern for other members, also part of the topic under discussion. A
further example of showing concern is the following:
(12) “Apologies if this team already exists […] I did look!” (Appendix 7)
Common interests. Common interests refer to anything that participants are preoccupied with,
additionally to Kiva (Appendix 21). There are many examples of posts and comments gathering
under this label, describing favorite movies, books, music, art etc. (Appendix 22).
Texts such as the ones below are illustrative of this idea, while also indicating that
kivafriends.org is an appropriate place for exchanging information in such a way:
(13) “So, just in case anyone wants to turn over a new year‟s leaf early and take advantage of the fact that we
have a perfect place, here, for turning one another onto treasures that we, ourselves, have lucked upon,
here‟s a thread where you can Turn, Turn, Turn, (postandshare) if you feel like it.” (Appendix 23)
“I just had to share this video – I have no words to describe” (Appendix 24)
Furthermore, while illustrating the „common interests‟ topic, the following extracts may be
described as reflecting positive reactions for taking the initiative of sharing information of
common interest.
Anda Iulia Ionescu, 401926
Master Thesis - Master of Arts in Corporate Communication 50
(14) “Peter---the video was great! Thanks for sharing” (Appendix 25)
“Thanks Fred for that superb chase from Ronin - I hadn't seen it before.” (Appendix 26)
“That was a great video Margie...Ill definitely be passing this one on...” (Appendix 27)
Considering the last of the examples above (Appendix 27), an additional idea is transmitted: if
information and materials reflect interests or passions that members share, they are to be further
distributed in the wider networks of the members.
Call for action and support. Another theme that has been identified while investigating
kivafriends.org refers to the appeals Kiva Friends make to their peers in getting involved in and
adhering to causes for the greater good. This topic has been depicted in texts such as the ones
below:
(15) “be nice to help them out more but borrowers arent giving there , most of the country doesnt even have
electricity ....” (Appendix 28)
“Here‟s my little bit: […] I am willing to contribute $25 toward the restoration and rebuilding of
Haiti*** for each Kiva Friend who either reads or who re-reads at least a hundred pages of Mountains
Beyond Mountains and who will post about it. My thought is that caring often begins with “story,” with
our having our consciousnesses raised.” (Appendix 29)
“I'm certain that you and I and just about everyone else here reading at KivaFriends wishes that […] the
sad reality that it bespeaks never would have been there in the first instance […] What a crazy, totally
upside-down world […] I am so sorry for all the people in Uganda who, now, will have to be feeling even
additional fear and prejudice on top of what they, undoubtedly, had had to experience before. the only
chance we have of really eradicating terrorism and poverty, is by supporting and encouraging
EDUCATION.” (Appendix 30)
Along with militating for taking certain actions, phrases such as “be nice to help them out”,
“caring often begins with […] having our consciousnesses raised” or “I am sorry for all the
people in Uganda” point towards building the call for support and action on understanding,
awareness, and empathy.
Kiva stories. Sharing experiences regarding Kiva, whether with respect to the lending process, to
Kiva as an organization, or to the feelings and emotions Kiva generates amongst peers, Kiva
Friends seem to be concerned with sharing stories about Kiva.
The first example in this sense would be illustrating the following texts, which denote the Kiva
lending experience and the experience with Kiva, the organization.
(16) “I've had exchanges with folks from Houston ("Hey, I see you're from Houston. How are you and your
Anda Iulia Ionescu, 401926
Master Thesis - Master of Arts in Corporate Communication 51
family?") and other places based on something about their profile or photo that resonated with me.”
(Appendix 31)
“I've become addicted to the kiva fellows blog. It's simply amazing. Today, though, I read that kiva asked
the fellows to restrict their blog entries to microfinance only. I'm rather upset with that.” (Appendix 32)
A different type of „Kiva story‟ constitutes as part of the „inside stories‟ on the forum, which are
initiated amongst members, and thus, they can not always be understood by uninvolved parts,
such as it is the case of the author and the reader of the paper at hand. For instance:
(17) “OK, so here's the loan description that made me laugh so much: "Oranges, bananas, pineapples, mangos,
apples, pears and bees in search of sweet fruit are part of the daily life of Ramón (who is known as
Moncho)".” (Appendix 33)
“I've been blaming my addiction on Kiva Friends […] A couple of years ago, Lynn coined a term
"KivaNut".”(Appendix 34)
Usually, such stories reflect strong emotions, which Kiva Friends held with respect to the
organization and the experiences it provides. All the above posts under the „Kiva stories‟ come to
support this: “I‟ve become addicted”, “made me laugh so much”, “that resonated with me”, “I‟m
rather upset”. These emotions are reflected in the text production process, and thus can be
depicted in the final textual form. Therefore, Kiva appears as personalized, illustrative of the
emotions Kiva Friends hold for it. Such an example is the term “KivaNut” (Appendix 34). In the
following, another two examples may be found in this respect: “Kivans” and “KivAddict”.
(18) “And I'm KivAddict.” (Appendix 35)
“But wouldn't it be nice if Kiva had a way to send invites from us to other Kivans? “(Appendix 36)
Finally, the description phase reaches an end by establishing six main themes predominant in the
comments and posts on kivafriends.org. Once the textual analysis is completed and the topics
have been identified, the next stage in the proposed three-phase analysis is to commence – the
interpretation phase.
3.3. Interpretation phase
In the present section, the previously analyzed texts are to be interpreted in the light of their
intended purpose. The six topics identified thus become clues for macro-topics, i.e. discourses
they draw on, which are to be detailed, in turn. Therefore, eight main discourses have been
depicted: affiliation/connectivity; competitiveness; self-identification; (group) responsibility;
peer recognition; sharing; involvement; solidarity. It is to be mentioned that these are only the
Anda Iulia Ionescu, 401926
Master Thesis - Master of Arts in Corporate Communication 52
major discourses that became apparent and have been established in accordance with the purpose
of the paper at hand, however, they are neither the only ones possible, nor exclusive. Each of the
texts proposed for analysis may draw on several discourses, in a similar way that the six
identified topics may each point to more that one discourse, as it is to be expanded upon in the
following.
Affiliation and connectivity. Topics such as „groups and teams‟ or „self-others‟ are the most
indicative examples of discourses on affiliation and connectivity. Firstly, the very proposition of
gathering in online groups and forming teams has arisen out of a need for affiliation. This
instance has been grasped by Kiva staff members, and it may be detected in the response of Kiva
staff regarding the decision to launch a team lending feature on the official Kiva website: “this
feature will allow Kiva users to affiliate with teams (text sample (2) in the previous section of the
analysis; Appendix 4). Secondly, the „self-others‟ topic points toward the need to connect with
like-minded individuals and the importance of achieving a sense of belonging. This is mostly
derived from the examples describing a more explicit concern for the „other‟ and an inclination
for acting in the interest of the group (text samples (8) and (9); Appendix 4, respectively
Appendix 7).
Competitiveness. The „self-others‟ topic draws on competitiveness, as well. However, this is
reflected only in the instances where users take the position of prioritizing their ambition,
competitive spirit, and thus the importance of self-actualization, in the wider context of
networking and connecting with peers. Examples in the corpus of text (7) (Appendix 3 and 4) are
illustrative in this direction, denoting how a „friendly‟ competition appears appealing to some of
the Kiva Friends.
Self-identification. The idea of identifying oneself both with peers and with Kiva is most
prominently induced by topics centered on „self-others‟ and „Kiva stories‟. As far as the relation
between the self and the others involved in the discussions is concerned, a need for gathering
around peers that allow identification with the self may be noticed. More specifically, Kiva
Friends want to connect with other Kiva friends sharing the same life views or life styles, since
they can better identify one with the other. As some of the texts ((6), Appendix 11-14)
exemplify, Christians are in search for other Christians, vegetarians for vegetarians, LGBT
Anda Iulia Ionescu, 401926
Master Thesis - Master of Arts in Corporate Communication 53
fellows for other LGBT fellows. Regarding the way Kiva Friends identify themselves with Kiva
as an organization, brand, or with the individual members of Kiva staff or Kiva fellows,
examples under the topic labeled „Kiva stories‟ provide clarification. Strong emotions such as
addiction or empathy have been depicted during the textual analysis (texts (16); Appendix 31,
32), feelings that arise from a strong sense of identification of self with the causes Kiva promotes
and the set of moral principles Kiva members detain.
Group (Responsibility). Discourses on responsibility may be depicted in Kiva Friends‟ concern
over all members of kivafriends.org. It is not only the moderators who are concerned to integrate,
engage, and support other members on kivafriends.org, but it is also the other users who express
concern regarding the perceived influence or utility of their posts/requirements/questions for he
other members. Such reasoning is supported by the examples under the „integration and
assistance‟ topic, more specifically corpus of text (11) which synthesizes responsible positions
adopted by users and moderators – asking for and providing guidance, welcoming and
encouraging, attempting ease certain processes (Appendix 17-20).
Peer recognition. The desire of being recognized by peers appears to motivate some of the users‟
in sharing interesting posts, responding promptly to other users‟ appeal for help in whatever
situations, or fishing for support in their ambitious plans. Topics such as „common interests‟,
„integration and assistance‟ or „self-others‟ seem to point towards „peer recognition‟: Kiva
Friends share videos, quotes, music etc. and are praised for their inspiration to do so („common
interests‟ topic, texts (14); Appendix 25-27); they offer support to their peers and their efforts are
acknowledged in this respect („integration and assistance‟ topic, texts (11); Appendix 19); in
addition, they expect being recognized for their personal achievements and expect support in
carrying out challenging plans (texts (6); Appendix 13).
Sharing. The overall purpose of kivafriends.org and the activity carried out by its members
revolves around „sharing‟. Whether it is opinions, thoughts, interests, news etc., the gathered
textual materials convey clues to the discourse of sharing, the importance of sharing, and the
emotions sharing generates for both the receiver and the initiator. Examples in this sense are
suggested under the topic of „common interests‟ (texts (13) and (14); Appendix 23-27) where
texts bear the marks of the social interaction and emotion that comes with sharing.
Anda Iulia Ionescu, 401926
Master Thesis - Master of Arts in Corporate Communication 54
Involvement. The „calls for action and support‟ ((15); Appendix 28-30) are most likely to be
interpreted as involvement in different causes, projects, and activities in line with the moral
beliefs of Kiva Friends and with the principles Kiva is defined by. Kiva Friends not only prove
to get involved and commit to their beliefs and Kiva‟s goal, but they also show involvement in
the Kiva Friends group and kivafriends.org. The latter is inferred from their pro-active take on
technical and maintenance issues arisen on kivafriends.org, which are illustrated under the
„integration and assistance‟ label (texts (11); Appendix 17, 18, 20).
Solidarity. Discourses on solidarity may be traced in most of the discussions Kiva Friends launch
or engage in on kivafriends.org, and this may be interpreted as related to the nature Kiva as an
organization has – concerned with the welfare of individuals in poverty and, in this sense, the
instigation to solidarity – since Kiva is, essentially, the center of discussions on kivafriends.org.
Therefore, this type of discourse is tracked in topics such as „call for action and support‟, that
essentially reflect members‟ preoccupation for ethical concerns and their desire to determine
others to take the same view, by appealing to solidarity and empathy (texts (15); Appendix 28-
30).
All in all, the interpretation phase of the analysis terminates with depicting eight major
discourses, related to the previously established topics and the intended purpose of the texts
proposed for analysis. Certainly, some of the discourses indentified within this section may
encompass more than just the topics that have been ascribed to them. For instance, sharing, or
affiliation and connectivity, may be traced throughout most of the topics debated on
kivafriends.org, or at least in all of the six topics identified, since by the very nature of a forum,
networking, sharing, and connecting with peers around a favorite brand is a constant aim of
members; thus, this may also be reflected in the language they use and the topics they initiate.
However, the interpretation phase has been structured around discourses coupled with the major
topics that illustrate them more clearly, since further combinations would have become
increasingly subjective.
Anda Iulia Ionescu, 401926
Master Thesis - Master of Arts in Corporate Communication 55
3.4. Explanation phase
In the last phase of the proposed analysis, the gathered texts are to be contextualized. With
reference to the societal context that language is embedded in, more specifically postmodernism
and consumer culture, the previously identified discourses are explained in the following.
The first step in contextualizing the findings gathered until this point of the analysis is reflecting
on who are the actors involved in the text production process, what roles they play in this process
and how they interact. In this respect, it is to say that the digital community kivafriends.org is
built up of individuals acting as Kiva members (lenders and supporters) or as interested users,
but non-associated to Kiva. On kivafriends.org, these individuals may play further roles:
moderators, guests, recently joined members, old members etc., some of them more active,
others less. Disregarding the roles, all the individuals in these groups interact on their own behalf
and may freely participate to any discussions; meanwhile, other individuals may intervene,
acting as representatives of the Kiva staff.
Further on, an understanding on why the subjects of investigation produce the texts as they do,
and draw on discourses such as those identified, is required. For this purpose, zooming out even
more, to capture the wider context in which these interactions take place and in which the texts
are produced, allows for shedding light on how findings gathered so far make sense in
contemporary society; ultimately, this will contribute to gaining insight into the relational aspects
on kivafriends.org. The so far gathered results are firmly placed within postmodern society and
consumer culture, and regarding them in this perspective facilitates their explanation.
Regarded as produced within the postmodern context, the identified discourses make sense in the
light of the tension between individualism and socialisation, both characterizing the postmodern
world (Lipovetsky, 2005). Affiliation and connectivity are prominent discourses identified
amongst Kiva Friends, which along with sharing or group responsibility, are justified having in
mind postmodern consumers‟ pursuit for “a sense of connection” (Fournier and Lee, 2009). At
the same time, postmodernism is framed by individualism, which explains the need to affirm
oneself, to position the self in relation to others, the need to be recognized and validated by
Anda Iulia Ionescu, 401926
Master Thesis - Master of Arts in Corporate Communication 56
peers, and the potential prominence of competitive spirits. In addition, in a postmodern society
that moves away from individualism towards embracing socialization and networking,
recognizes no general single truth, and allows the coexistence of opposites, the existence of
competitiveness or the need of self-identification with the others do not exclude, neither
undermine, the need and importance of affiliation and connectivity, the concern for others and
responsibility towards the group, or the importance of sharing.
Understanding consumer culture further aids in explaining the prevalence of such discourses as
those identified by means of users‟ interactions on kivafriends.org. Postmodern consumer culture
views consumers as active agents, acknowledges the existence of global connections, and
indicates the prominence of relationships, community participation and involvement (Arnould
and Thompson, 2005). This allows for an understanding on how Kiva Friends take proactive
stands, and construct their discourses around the importance of getting involved in actions that
may help improve the lives of disadvantaged people around the world, or getting involved in
matters the concern the online community they pertain to. In addition, a consumer society
depicting emotion and moral values as motivators for postmodern consumers‟ choices and
pursuits, as well as the rise of ethical concerns and displays of solidarity or love (Lipovetsky,
2009) constitutes as a reinforcement of the way Kiva Friends make sense of their social reality,
and the way they choose to reflect it in their discourses.
Therefore, reflecting on the postmodern worldview and consumer culture allows for a
contextualization of the issues raised up to this point. The existence of topics such as those
depicted during the analysis, and of the discourses they draw on, may be explained in the light of
the wider context they are embedded in, while their interconnectivity may becomes justified.
3.5. Summary of findings
In the chapter at hand, a three-phase analysis inspired from Fairclough‟s (1995) Three
Dimensional Model approaching critical discourse analysis has been carried out. Accordingly, in
the first phase – description – a corpus of textual materials gathered from kivafriends.org have
been analyzed in search for the topics they address. In this respect, six main topics have been
identified: groups and teams; self-others; integration and assistance; common interests; call for
action and support, Kiva stories. In the second phase – interpretation – topics have been related
Anda Iulia Ionescu, 401926
Master Thesis - Master of Arts in Corporate Communication 57
to eight macro-topics, i.e. discourses: affiliation and connectivity; competitiveness; self-
identification; (group) responsibility; peer recognition; sharing; involvement; solidarity. In
addition, each of the topics has proved to draw on several discourses. Finally, in the third phase
of the analysis – explanation – texts have been contextualized, with reference to society and
culture: postmodernism and consumer culture. The table below provides a summary of all
findings.
Anda Iulia Ionescu, 401926
Master Thesis - Master of Arts in Corporate Communication 58
4. DISCUSSION
The unfolding chapter aims to reflect on the findings of the undertaken research, and provide a
discussion regarding their implications. In this respect, what is to follow hereupon includes an
interpretation of the findings in the light of previous theoretical work. As such, questions
regarding the meaning of the texts and the topics identified within, of the discourses they draw
on, and of the way they are embedded within the social context are to be answered in relation to
the theoretical contributions proposed in the beginning of the paper at hand. Finally, some of the
main limitations encountered during the study, as well as other directions of research that could
we have been taken, are part of the discussion chapter.
4.1. Implications
The results of the undergone analysis provide meaningful and practical insight into relationship
concepts, as they are conceptualized in consumer and marketing research, and into the way Kiva
is understood by consumers, in terms of the relationships it facilitates. The identified six topics,
eight discourses, and their place within the social context, indicate how to look at Kiva Friends,
Kiva, and their interaction, and understand how this is reasoned. To begin with, it appears that
Kiva is regarded by Kiva Friends as a relationship partner. Texts produced by users on
kivafriends.org that are indicative of a brand-consumer relationship (Patterson and O‟Malley,
2006) have been mostly labeled under the „Kiva stories‟ topic, and provide examples of the way
Kiva Friends personalize the Kiva brand as a result of the strong connection they feel towards it,
and, thus, how they invest it with meaning: users identify themselves as “Kivans”, “KivAddicts”
or “KivaNuts” (Appendix 34-36). This is what Fournier (1998) refers to as anthropomorphisation
of the brand, meaning that the brand is transferred human characteristics, which allows for it to
be regarded as relationship partner.
Further on, zooming out on the relationships amongst Kiva Friends, as they interact one with the
other on kivafriends.org, is essential, since they represent the very purpose of building an online
platform for the gathering of Kiva lenders and supporters. As Patterson and O‟Malley (2006)
suggest, consumer networking cannot be ignored when discussing relationships with brands.
Anda Iulia Ionescu, 401926
Master Thesis - Master of Arts in Corporate Communication 59
Therefore, the relationships built amongst Kiva Friends are important to investigate, in addition
to focusing on the way they relate to Kiva. Such a perspective enables and understanding on
Kiva Friends as a brand community, in which consumers are explicitly gathered around Kiva
since it provides “linking value” (Patterson and O‟Malley, 2006: 15). The results of the
undertaken analysis indicate that Kiva Friends exhibit defining characteristics of a brand
community. One of them is “shared consciousness” (Muniz and O‟Guinn, 2001: 412), reflected
in the intrinsic connection Kiva members feel one towards the other – they share common
interests, moral values, and similar lifestyles, they identify one with the other in these terms, and
display support and involvement in the way they relate to one another, as far as the resulted
topics and discourses they draw on, in the analysis section, illustrate. Another characteristic that
positions Kiva Friends as a brand community is the “sense of moral responsibility” for the group
(Muniz and O‟Guinn, 2001: 412) that drives members to show concern towards their peers, assist
them when in need, integrate and retain them within the community; this is resulted from the
way Kiva Friends draw on discourses on responsibility in expressing concern towards peers. Last
but not least, Kiva Friends share stories around Kiva and the experiences they live in relation to
Kiva, as well as inside-stories that only members of the community may understand - Muniz and
O‟Guinn (2001: 412) refer to these as “traditions”, or ritualistic manifestations, characteristic for
any brand community. Therefore, kivafriends.org may be conceptualized as an online brand
community, a virtual platform where like-minded individuals preoccupied with Kiva get together
and create links. However, having in mind traditional forms of community, the research at hand
raises the question of whether kivafriends.org, and generally online communities, may thus be
regarded only as imagined or conceptual. This issue may be debatable; nevertheless, one way of
seeing it is that, since Internet appears as the virtual social glue which allows people to connect
in a similar way to being in proximity by destroying geographical barriers (Simmons, 2008),
there is no reason not to accept that online communities are as real as any other forms of
community.
Moreover, while still having in mind primarily the interaction between Kiva Friends, the results
of the analysis imply that the way in which they bond traces some of the characteristics of tribal
consumption. Kiva friends share passions, emotions, and interests as it results from their „calls
for action and support‟ with respect to ethical causes they strongly believe in, and the „common
Anda Iulia Ionescu, 401926
Master Thesis - Master of Arts in Corporate Communication 60
interests‟ that unite them and generate emotion; also, they constantly show interest in the social
links that come with engaging with Kiva and in finding like-minded individuals by these means -
illustrated by instances when Christians, vegetarians, or homosexuals make use of the linking
value Kiva provides and try to trace other members in their “virtual tribe” (Rauch and Thunqvist,
2000 ap. Cova and Cova, 2002: 615). In addition, Kiva Friends not only get involved in the Kiva
lending process, but they are also advocates of other unrelated ethical causes („call for action and
support‟ topic). Cova and Cova (2002) identify these as tribal manifestations. However,
considering the fact that the primary purpose of these individuals gathering is Kiva, and it is not
Kiva as a brand that is passed on to them as already formed tribes (Cova and Cova, 2002), it is
more appropriate to resume the discussion at understanding Kiva Friends as brand community.
Another issue that arises from the analysis and findings proposed by the research at hand is that
Kiva Friends are “informed, networked, empowered, and active consumers” (Prahalad and
Ramaswamy, 2004: 5). The opportunities the Internet provides, as well as the need for „sharing‟,
„affiliation and connectivity‟ have empowered Kiva lenders and supporters to gather
independently of Kiva‟s support and create kivafriends.org, a place where they network and
become increasingly informed regarding Kiva with the help of their peers. Kiva Friends are also
increasingly active, showing „involvement‟ whether with regard to kivafriends.org and the
„assistance and integration‟ of their peers; to Kiva and the lending process, as „Kiva stories‟
illustrate; or to generic ethical concerns, such as demonstrated in their „calls for action and
support‟.
These are the types of consumers that “are increasingly co-creating value with the firm”,
Prahalad and Ramaswamy (2004: 5) point out. And, as a matter of fact, signs of co-creation may
be tracked in the case of Kiva Friends. As far as the co-creation process concerns the users of
kivafriends.org, they have been depicted to be pro-active in co-creation - the instance of Kiva
Friends initiating the idea of gathering in lending teams is illustrative of this issue (Appendix 2
and 3). Nuttavuthisit (2010: 317) refers to such an instance as “creation”, one of the potential
ways in which co-creation is recognized at consumer level. Further on, with reference to the
above exemplified instance, by implementing the team-lending feature on kiva.org (Appendix 4),
Kiva demonstrated its interest to follow discussions on kivafriends.org and take into
consideration Kiva members‟ opinions; this illustrates the organization‟s preoccupation to listen
Anda Iulia Ionescu, 401926
Master Thesis - Master of Arts in Corporate Communication 61
to its supporters, engage in dialog with them, and encourage co-creation. In addition, by
supporting its brand community and participating in discussions carried out on kivafriends.org,
Kiva appears to exploit brand community as a context for co-creation (Hatch and Schultz, 2010),
acknowledging that Kiva supporters and lenders are part of an extended network, where
meanings of the brand are negotiated and co-created amongst consumers (ibid).
All in all, the proposed discussion articulates the findings of the analysis in terms of relationship
concepts, in the way they are conceptualized according to the corpus of theory suggested in the
beginning of the paper. In summary, findings imply that Kiva Friends constitute a strong brand
community and perceive Kiva as a significant relationship partner, while they also detain the
potential and interest to co-create together with the organization. In this light, Kiva may only be
understood as a powerful brand – it is around strong brands that brand communities, an
especially such devoted communities as Kiva Friends, are most likely to form (Muniz and
O‟Guinn, 2001: 415).
4.2. Limitations
The discussion continues by pointing out and reflecting on the main limitations of the study at
hand; besides the limitations that come together with the chosen method for analysis (qualitative,
inspired from discourse analysis), which have been anticipated and presented in the methodology
chapter (more specifically subchapter 2.2.3. Delimitations), further practical limitations have
been encountered during the analysis and data collection process.
One of them is that several additional topics might have been derived from the data available on
kivafriends.org, and, in consequence, several other discourses. Examples of potential topics
include suggestions for Kiva, asking for peer opinions, sustainability concerns, Kiva
transparency issues etc. Nevertheless, for manageability reasons, not all topics could be included,
and not all the data available on kivafriends.org (which includes 94243 posts so far -
http://www.kivafriends.org/, visualized on the 9th
of May, 2012) could become subject of
analysis.
Further on, having in mind the textual material analyzed and the topics depicted, there is a need
to acknowledge that the interpretation phase might have been carried out at a deeper level, and
Anda Iulia Ionescu, 401926
Master Thesis - Master of Arts in Corporate Communication 62
thus, the eight proposed discourses might have also been related to other topics amongst the
proposed ones, in addition to the ones already ascribed to each discourse. For instance,
affiliation/connectivity has been mainly discussed in relation to „groups and teams‟ and „self-
others‟. However, most texts or topics may be thought to point towards a discourse on the need
and importance of connecting, after all, this resides in the nature of a blog. It is because such
interpretations become increasingly subjective and intuitive, that the analysis took into
consideration only the instances in which the relation between discourses and texts could be
more clearly justified.
Another limitation resides in the fact that not enough texts reflecting the relationship Kiva
Friends have with Kiva as organization, or with Kiva staff, have been gathered, compared to the
ones focusing on peer relations. Therefore, it has proved to be difficult to infer much about how
Kiva Friends make sense of their relationship with Kiva as an organization, and thus, gain a
better understating on how they co-create value. An analysis of the interactions that take place on
the official Kiva Facebook page might have completed the picture in this respect. However, it
was necessary to narrow the angle of research due to space limitations, and focus solely on
kivafriends.org, which ultimately provides the benefit of being more specific and detailed
regarding the aspects approached so far. Nevertheless, considering the approach taken, it might
have been useful to employ a complementary analysis method, in order to gain another
perspective on the same matter, or go more in depth with what has been achieved so far. The
latter option might have called for carrying out some interviews with some of the kivafriends.org
users. In any manner, gathering more information and shedding light on deeper aspects of the
proposed research topic constitutes the subject of a more extensive study.
4.3. Other research directions
The latter remark brings about the idea of possibly engaging into other directions of research
regarding Kiva. This particular organization is quite complex, which offers the opportunity to
analyze and discuss it from multiple perspectives. For instance, a focus on consumers from a
consumer behavior perspective, under the guidance of Arnould, Price and Zinkhan (2003),
Assael (1995) or other behaviorists, might have shed light on why consumers engage in ethical
consumption after all, and particularly with Kiva. In this respect, the issue might have been
Anda Iulia Ionescu, 401926
Master Thesis - Master of Arts in Corporate Communication 63
investigated in relation to consumers‟ needs, motivations and perceptions, or in relation to the
environmental factors, such as the social context of consumption, or lifestyle and personality
characteristics. In addition, investigating identity issues such as how consumers‟ identity
narratives influence the choices they make in consumption (Ahuvia, 2005, Ekström and
Brembeck, 2004) might have also lead the discussion into a possibly useful direction, providing
insight into why consumers would opt to engage with Kiva, or, narrowly, why Kiva lenders
choose borrowers according to the way their stories reflect lenders‟ identity, lifestyle and own
endeavors. Otherwise, a research direction concerning an organizational perspective on
relationship building with consumers might have been chosen; based on relationship marketing
theory (Egan, 2004, Barnes, 2003), this perspective would illustrate how Kiva approaches
consumers in terms of relationship strategies, to provide knowledge for any other postmodern
organization that aims to enhance relationships with consumers. Nevertheless, one of the most
pertinent directions of research would be that of ethical concerns, considering what the very aim
of Kiva as an organization is. An insight into why consumers engage in ethical endeavors may be
developed starting from understanding the new economic system based on social production, co-
existing with capitalism, which Arvidsson (2008) refers to as „the ethical economy‟, together
with the rise of the ethical consumer (Newholm and Shaw, 2007) and ethical consumption, in
postmodern fashion (Cherrier, 2007, Carrington et al, 2010).
Anda Iulia Ionescu, 401926
Master Thesis - Master of Arts in Corporate Communication 64
CONCLUSION
As the undertaken research approaches to an end, this final section aims to recapitulate the main
findings so as to indicate how they respond to the set out research questions, towards finally
addressing the problem statement.
The paper at hand has endeavored to explore Kiva and investigate postmodern consumers and
the meanings they ascribe to relationship concepts, with the overall purpose to shed light on the
postmodern world of consumption and the environment contemporary organizations must
perform in. In this respect, the following problem has been has been set out to be addressed: In
today‟s world of consumption, increasingly regarded in terms of connectivity, how is Kiva, as an
efficient postmodern organization, seen from consumers‟ perspective? This problem calls for one
main research question to be answered, i.e. How do consumers understand Kiva in terms of the
relationship construct that prevails in postmodern consumption? and one sub-question, i.e. What
meanings do Kiva members (lenders and supporters) attribute to the relationship concept and
how are these constructed?
The study commenced with a literature review aimed to shed light on postmodernism, consumer
culture, and forms of relationships as prevailing within this context, thus designing a theoretical
frame what would conceptualize Kiva as a postmodern organization and point out the
consumption environment that Kiva performs in. Further on, following social constructivism as
guiding meta-theoretical paradigm, a qualitative analytical method inspired from Norman
Fairclough‟s (1995) Three Dimensional Model approaching critical discourse analysis has been
developed, to guide the research into a direction that would answer the proposed question and
sub-question, to ultimately address the problem statement.
Providing an answer to the main research question is conditioned by firstly shedding light on its
sub-question. In this respect, the analytical tool has been employed to investigate textual material
produced by Kiva members (lenders and supporters) on kivafriends.org. In the first phase of the
analysis, six main topics have been identified and labeled accordingly: groups and teams; self -
Anda Iulia Ionescu, 401926
Master Thesis - Master of Arts in Corporate Communication 65
others; integration and assistance; common interests; call for action and support; Kiva stories.
These topics provided clues for discourses they potentially draw on; consequently, in the second
phase of the analysis, eight discourses have been depicted, which include:
affiliation/connectivity; competitiveness; self-identification; (group) responsibility; peer
recognition; sharing; involvement; solidarity. The last step in the analysis was concerned with
contextualizing discourses, thus providing an explanation of the results in the light of
postmodernism and consumer culture. Therefore, the findings of the analysis indicate that Kiva
members make sense of relationships out of social interaction with their peers and involvement
with Kiva; in addition, relationships are attributed meanings such as connectivity, affiliation,
competition, sharing, solidarity, self-identification with peers and the Kiva brand, feeling a sense
of responsibility towards members of the group, peer recognition, and involvement with Kiva as
organization and the principles it promotes, with the Kiva Friends community, or with generic
ethical concerns. As such, having answered the set out sub-question, the next aim was to address
the main research question, based on the insight gained so far.
The paper at hand has conducted a discussion on the implications of the findings and their
meaning in the light of the previous established theoretical work. This allows for providing an
answer in relation to the main research question, that of how consumers understand Kiva in
terms of the relationship construct that prevails in postmodern consumption. In this sense, it is
concluded that Kiva Friends (i.e. lenders and supporters) regard Kiva as a relationship partner
and display strong emotions in this respect; in addition, they constitute a brand community and
often take a reflective stand on this matter, showing awareness of the importance of connecting
with peers and experiencing a sense of affiliation, as well as of the significant role that Kiva
plays in their lives. Last but not least, it is concluded that Kiva members are open to co-creation
and perceive Kiva to take a similar stand – though limitations of the study in certifying this as a
valid conclusion have been pointed out during the discussion section.
Having answered both the research question and its sub-question, and having designed a
theoretical framework that sheds light on today‟s world of consumption and the way in which it
is increasingly regarded in terms of connectivity, the set out problem is finally addressed. It is
only left to articulate how Kiva is seen as an efficient postmodern organization, and in this sense,
the research concludes by reinforcing that the subjects of investigation are passionate about Kiva,
Anda Iulia Ionescu, 401926
Master Thesis - Master of Arts in Corporate Communication 66
and this is reflected in the way relationships are built around and with the brand. It appears that
Kiva makes great use of postmodern knowledge – enhances relationships in several possible
ways, appeals to and generates intense emotions, displays ethical concerns and fights for
sustainability, and is born and operates digitally, thus succeeding to engage its members and
supporters in a unique and durable way.
Finally, the paper at hand concludes in the enthusiasm that, even though the research carried out
and its findings cannot be standardized due to the interpretive approach and focus on
particularity that it employs, it still proves to be valuable in several respects. It provides
academic value by contributing on understanding postmodernism in interest for communality
despite the individualism that characterizes it, and shedding light on important and fashionable
relationship constructs, with the exemplary case of Kiva. In addition, it provides value for
marketers and managers who are in an endeavor to master relationship principles and gain more
in-depth insight on how consumers make sense of the relationship concepts and what their
postmodern expectations and pursuits are. Last but not least, the research at hand can be used as
premise for further research towards the consolidation of relationship theory in a consumer
perspective.
Anda Iulia Ionescu, 401926
Master Thesis - Master of Arts in Corporate Communication 67
BIBLIOGRAPHY
Ahuvia, A. C. (2005). Beyond the Extended Self: Loved Objects and Consumers‟ Identity
Narratives. In Journal of Consumer Research. Vol. 32. Iss. 1. pp. 171-184
Alon, A. T. & Brunel, F. (2011). Dynamics of community engagement: The role of interpersonal
communicative genres in online community evolutions. In Belk, R. W. & Sherry, J. F. (2011).
Consumer culture theory. Research in consumer behavior. Vol. 11. Emerald Group Publishing
Limited. pp. 371- 400
Arnould, E. J., Price, L. & Zinkhan, G. M. (2003). Consumers. Second edition. McGraw – Hill/
Irwin
Arnould, E. J. & Thompson C. (2011). Consumer culture theory (and we really mean theoretics).
In Belk, R. W. & Sherry, J. F. (2011). Consumer culture theory. Research in consumer behavior.
Vol. 11. Emerald Group Publishing Limited. pp. 3-22
Arnould, E. J. & Thompson, C. J. (2005). Consumer Culture Theory (CCT): Twenty Years of
Research. In Journal of Consumer Research. Vol. 31
Arvidsson, A. (2008). The ethical economy of consumer coproduction. In Journal of
macromarketing. Vol. 28. Sage. pp. 326-338
Assael, H. (1995). Consumer Behavior and Marketing Action. Fifth edition. Kent
Barnes, J. G. (2003). Establishing meaningful customer relationships: Why some companies and
brands mean more to their customers. In Managing Service Quality. Vol. 13. Iss. 3. pp. 178-186
Bryman, A. (2008). Social Research Methods. Third edition. Oxford University Press
Carrington, M. J., Neville, B. A. & Whitwell, G. J. (2010). Why ethical consumers don‟t walk
their talk. In Journal of Business Ethics. Vol. 97. pp. 139–158
Anda Iulia Ionescu, 401926
Master Thesis - Master of Arts in Corporate Communication 68
Cherrier, H. (2007). Ethical consumption practices: Co-production of self-expression and social
recognition. In Journal of Consumer Behaviour. Vol. 6. Published online in Wiley InterScience.
pp. 321-335
Cova, B.& Cova, V. (2002). Tribal marketing: the tribalisation of society and its impact on the
conduct of marketing. In European Journal of Marketing. Vol. 36. Iss. 5/6. pp. 595-620
Cova, B., Kozinets, R. V. & Shankar, Avi. (2007). Consumer tribes. First edition. London.
Butterworth-Heinemann
Daymon, C.& Holloway, I. (2002). Qualitative Research Methods in Public Relations and
Marketing Communications. London. Routledge
Daymon, C.& Holloway, I. (2011). Qualitative Research Methods in Public Relations and
Marketing Communications (2nd Edition). Abingdon. Oxon. Routledge
Egan, J. (2004). Relationships in marketing. Chapter 1. In Egan, J. Relationship Marketing:
Exploring relational strategies in marketing. Second edition. pp. 3-31. Prentice Hall
Ekström, K. M. & Brembeck, H. (2004). Elusive Consumption. Berg Publishers
Fairclough, N. (1995). Critical Discourse Analysis: the Critical Study of Language. Harlow.
Longman.
Fairclough, N. (2001). Language and Power. Second edition. Harlow. Longman.
Firat, A. F. & Venkatesh, A. (1995). Liberatory Postmodernism and the Reenchantment of
Consumption. In: Journal of Consumer Research. Vol. 22. Iss. 3. pp. 239-267.
Fournier, S. (1998). Consumers and Their Brands: Developing Relationship Theory in Consumer
Research. In The Journal of Consumer Research. Vol. 24, Iss. 4. pp. 343-373
Fournier, S. & Avery, J. (2011). Putting the Relationship Back Into CRM. In MIT Sloan
Management Review. Vol. 52. Iss. 3. pp. 63-72
Anda Iulia Ionescu, 401926
Master Thesis - Master of Arts in Corporate Communication 69
Fournier, S. & Lee, L. (2009). Getting brand communities right. In Harvard Business Review.
(April 2009). pp: 105-111
GajjalaV., GajjalaR., Birzescu A. & Anarbaeva S. (2011). Microfinance in online space: a visual
analysis of kiva.org. Development in Practice. Vol. 21:6. pp. 880-893
Gergen, K. J. (1995). The healthy happy human being wears many masks. Chapter 21. In
Anderson, W. T. The truth about the truth: de-confusing and re-constructing the postmodern
world. pp. 136-144. Tarcher/Putnam
Ghauri, P.& Grønhaug, K. (2010). Research Methods in Business Studies – A Practical Guide.
Prentice Hall
Holt, D. B. (2002). Why Do Brands Cause Trouble? A Dialectical Theory of Consumer Culture
and Branding. In Journal of Consumer Research, Vol. 29, Iss. 1. pp 80-90.
Kaplan, A. M. & Haenlein, M. (2010). Users of the world, unite! The challenges and
opportunities of Social Media. In Business Horizons. Vol. 53. Iss. 1. pp. 59-68
KIVA
http://www.kiva.org/
http://www.kivafriends.org
http://kiwanews.blogspot.com
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/kivaloans/
http://www.facebook.com/kiva
http://fellowsblog.kiva.org/
http://blog.build.kiva.org/
Lanier, C. D. & Schau, H. J. (2011). Culture and co-creation: Exploring consumers‟ inspirations
and aspirations for writing and posting on-line fan fiction. In Belk, R. W. & Sherry, J. F. (2011).
Consumer culture theory. Research in consumer behavior. Vol. 11. Emerald Group Publishing
Limited. pp. 321 – 342
Anda Iulia Ionescu, 401926
Master Thesis - Master of Arts in Corporate Communication 70
Lindlof, T. R. (1995). Qualitative Communication Research Methods. Thousand Oaks. Sage
Lipovetsky, G. (2009). Consumption in a hypermodern society. Document from the conference:
Marketing Communications in a hypermodern world
Lipovetsky, G. (2005). Hypermodern Times. Polity Press. London
Mangold, W. G. & Faulds, D. J. (2007). Social media: The new hybrid element of the promotion
mix. In Business Horizons. Vol. 52. Iss. 4. pp. 357-365
Muniz, A.M. Jr. & O'Guinn, T. C. (2001). Brand Community. In Journal of Consumer Research.
Vol. 27. Iss. 4. pp. 412-432
Newholm, T. &Shaw, D. (2007). Studying the ethical consumer: a review of research. In Journal
of Consumer Behaviour. Vol. 6. Wiley&Sons. pp. 253-270
Nuttavuthisit, K. (2010). If you can't beat them, let them join: The development of strategies to
foster consumers' co-creative practices. In Business Horizons. Vol. 53. Iss. 3. pp. 315-324
O'Brien, J. M. (2008). The Only Nonprofit That Matters. Fortune. Vol. 157 Iss. 4.pp. 37-42
Olsen, P. B.& Pedersen, K. (2005). Problem-Oriented Project Work - A workbook. First
edition.Roskilde University Press
Patterson, M. & O'Malley, L. (2006). Brands, consumers and relationships: A review. In Irish
Marketing Review. Vol. 18. Iss. 1/2. pp. 10-20
Phillips, L. & Jørgensen, M. W. (2002). Discourse analysis as Theory and Method.Thousand
Oaks. Sage
Phillips, N.& Hardy, C. (2002). Discourse Analysis: Investigating Processes of Social
Construction. Sage University Papers Series on Qualitative Research Methods. Vol. 50.
Thousand Oaks. Sage
Prahalad, C. K. & Ramaswamy, V. (2004). Co-creating unique value with customers. Strategy
and Leadership. Vol. 32. Iss. 3. pp. 4-9
Anda Iulia Ionescu, 401926
Master Thesis - Master of Arts in Corporate Communication 71
Prahalad, C. K. &Ramaswamy, V. (2004). Co-creation experiences: The next practice in value
creation. In Journal of Interactive Marketing. Vol. 18. Iss. 3
Prahalad, C. K., Ramaswamy, V.& Krishnan, M. S. (2000). Consumer centricity. In
InformationWeek (April2010). ProQuest Research Library. pp. 67
Safko, L. & Brake, D.K. (2009). The social media bible. New Jersey. John Wiley&Sons
Saunders, M., Lewis, P., & Thornhill, A. (2003). Research Methods for Business Students. Third
edition. London. Prentice Hall-Financial Times
Simmons, G. (2008). Marketing to postmodern consumers: introducing the internet chameleon.
In European Journal of Marketing. Vol. 42 Iss. 3/4. pp 299 – 310
Top Related