The online presence of Turkish banks: communicating the softer side of corporate identity

ContentslistsavailableatScienceDirect

Public

Relations

Review

The

online

presence

of

Turkish

banks:

Communicating

the

softer

side

of

corporate

identity

Emel

Ozdora-Aksak

_,

_Sirin

_Atakan-Duman

a_{BilkentUniversity,FacultyofFineArts,DesignandArchitecture,DepartmentofCommunicationandDesign,Turkey}

b_{TurgutOzalUniversity,FacultyofEconomicsandAdministrativeSciences,DepartmentofBusinessAdministration,Turkey}

a

r

t

i

c

l

e

i

n

f

o

Articlehistory:

Received9May2014

Receivedinrevisedform29August2014

Accepted8October2014

Keywords:

Corporatesocialresponsibility

Publicrelations Organizationalidentity Bankingsector Qualitativeanalysis Socialmedia

a

b

s

t

r

a

c

t

Thisstudytriestounderstandtheprocessoforganizationalidentityconstructionandthe roleofpublicrelationsinassistingthisprocess.ThisstudyfocusesonTurkey’sbanking sectortounderstandhoworganizationalidentitiesareconstructedandsupportedby cor-poratesocialresponsibility(CSR)activitiesinadditiontohowtheyarecommunicatedto stakeholders.Thecorporatewebsitesandsocialmediaaccounts(FacebookandTwitter)of theeightlargestbanksinTurkeyareexaminedthroughthematiccontentanalysisto under-standtheiridentityconstructionprocessesandhowmuchtheybenefitfromCSRactivities inthisprocess.Institutionaltheoryisutilizedinthisstudytogetadeeperunderstandingof theroleofCSRinorganizationalidentityconstruction.Theresultsrevealthatonline pres-enceofbanksinTurkeytendstoemphasizethesofter,especiallysociallyresponsibleside oftheirorganizationalidentities.

©2014ElsevierInc.Allrightsreserved.

1. Introduction

TheInternetisincreasinglybecominganimportantpublicrelationstoolfororganizationstocommunicatewiththeir

publics;theauthorsarguethatthismediumwouldalsobeanimportanttoolfororganizationalidentityconstructionand

communicationofcorporatesocialresponsibility(CSR)activities.Thefocusofthisstudyistheroleofpublicrelationsand

CSRpracticesinconstructinganorganization’sidentity.Publicrelationsisoneofthemajororganizationalcommunication

toolstoconstructanorganization’sidentityandcommunicatethisidentitytorelevantstakeholders.Infact,theroleofpublic

relationspractitionersistore-enforceorganizationalidentitythroughcommunicationactivities.

ThisstudyanalyzesatotalofeightpublicandprivatebanksinTurkey’sbankingsectorwithmorethan300branches,and

investigatestheroleofpublicrelationsandCSRpracticesinconstructingtheirorganizationalidentities.Inordertoanalyze

thebanks’organizationalidentity,theresearchersexaminetheircorporatewebsitesandsocialmediaaccounts(Facebook

andTwitter)throughthematiccontentanalysis.

Thisresearchfocusesontheroleofpublicrelationsinconstructingorganizationalidentitybybringingtogetherthe

literaturesofpublicrelationsandorganizationstudies,concentratingonexternalstakeholders,andusingqualitativeand

quantitativetechniquestounderstandthisrelationshipindetail.Inaddition,thestudyalsotriestobringadifferent

theoret-icalperspectivetothefieldofpublicrelationsthroughthefocusonsocialidentitytheorywhilealsoanalyzingsocialmedia,

whichoverthelastcoupleofyears,hasbecomeincreasinglypopularinpublicrelationsresearch.

∗ Correspondingauthor.Tel.:+903122901061.

E-mailaddresses:[email protected](E.Ozdora-Aksak),[email protected](S.Atakan-Duman).

http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.pubrev.2014.10.004

2. Literaturereview

2.1. Publicrelationsandorganizationalidentity

Organizationsusepublicrelationstocommunicateandestablishrelationshipswiththeirstakeholders.Publicrelations

hasbeendefinedasamanagementfunctionwhichhelpstobuild,nurture,andstrengthenmutuallybeneficialrelationships

betweenanorganizationanditspublics(Bruning&Ledingham,2000;Cutlip,Center,&Broom,2000;Ki&Hon,2007;

Ledingham,2006).Publicrelationshasbeenusedasaorganizationalfunctiontoreflectanorganization’sidentityandimage

toitspublics(Bromley,1993;Dowling,1994;Dutton&Dukerich,1991;vanRiel,1995).Organizationsusepublicrelations

toconnectwiththeirpublicsthroughvariousmeansandbyusingdifferentmediasuchaspublications,websites,andmore

increasinglysocialmedia.

Oneoftheimportantrolesofpublicrelationsistohelpconstructandcommunicateanorganization’sidentity.

Orga-nizationalidentityputsforthwhattheorganizationis(Balmer,1995;Hatch&Schultz,2002;vanRekom,1997;vanRiel,

1995).AsBick,Jacobson,andAbratt(2003:839)defined:“identityistheembodimentoftheorganization”anditcommunicates

“thecorevalues,philosophyandthestrategyoftheorganizationthroughthedeliveryofitsproductsand/orservices”.Itcanbe

conceptualizedasthepersonalityandthesoulofthecorporation(Lee,1983).Abratt(1989)definesorganizationalidentity

as“thecollectionofthephysicalandbehavioralcharacteristicsthatrepresentanddistinguishthecompany”(p.68).Therefore,

allorganizationalactivities,products/services,andcommunicationeffortsplayaroleinidentityconstruction(Olins,1989).

Legitimacyiscriticalfororganizations.Accordingtoinstitutionaltheorists,theinstitutionalenvironmentdeterminesthe

sociallyconstructedrulesandrequirementswhichorganizationshavetocomplywithinordertogainlegitimacy(Meyer

&Rowan,1977;Scott,1995).Thereforeorganizationstrytoadapttotheirenvironmentsandconformtoenvironmental

normstoincreasetheirchancesofsurvival.Thismeansthatorganizationsmanagetosurviveandgainlegitimacybycopying

eachother’sactions.Thenormsandvaluesoftheorganizationalfield,thecontextwheresociallyconstructedpracticesare

reproducedandoutspread(Greenwood,Suddaby,&Hinings,2002),determineorganizationalnorms(Kondra&Hinnings,

1998).Therefore,organizationsneedtoadapttotherulesandrequirementsoftheenvironmentnotonlyforefficiency,but

alsotogainlegitimacy(Kondra&Hinnings,1998).Gaininglegitimacyiscriticalforthesurvivalandsuccessoforganizations

andmanytrytogainlegitimacythroughCSRpractices.AsFombrunandShanley(1990)argue,publicstodaycareabout

thenon-economicagendasoforganizations.Infact,thereisincreasedconcernabouttheorganizations’addedvaluetothe

societynotjustfinancialbutalsothenon-financialbenefits(Pfeffer&Salancik,1978).AsClaasenandRoloff(2011)argued,

aninfluentialwaytogainlegitimacyismakingCSRpracticeshighlyvisiblethroughanorganization’scommunicationefforts.

2.2. Publicrelationsandcorporatesocialresponsibility

Strategicpublicrelationseffortsusuallyfocusonconnectinganorganizationwithasociallyresponsiblecausethatfits

theorganization’smissionandbusinessactivities,enhancingreputationthroughCSRandcommunicatingabouttheseCSR

effortswiththeorganization’sstakeholders.CSRhasmoral,ethical,andsocialimplicationsthatpromotemutuallybeneficial

relationshipsbetweenanorganizationanditspublics,whichcausedittobealsoreferredtoasthe“goodwillcapital”of

organizations(David,Kline,&Dai,2005,p.293).ThegoalofCSRisnotshort-termprofitsbutdoinggoodforthesociety

(J.E.Grunig,2000).Lai,Chiu,Yang,andPai(2010)definedCSRas“voluntaryactivitiestakenbycorporationstoenhance

economic,socialandenvironmentalperformancevoluntarily”(p.458).Theauthorsargued,“CSRandcorporatereputation

arousecustomers’emotionalperceptionsaboutthefirmstheydealwith,leadingthemtoassociatetheirperceptionswith

thebrandstheyintendtopurchase,thusdevelopingbrandequityaswellasenhancingcorporatereputation”(Laietal.,2010,

p.459).InthisnewCSR-drivenbusinessera,publicrelationsprofessionalsandscholarsneedtounderstandhowdifferent

CSRinitiativesmayinfluenceanorganization’sreputation.Thisknowledgemayassistprofessionalstostrategicallyguide

companieswhenplanningandimplementingCSRpractices.

HavingastrongCSRprogrammightbeseenbymanyasastrategicdecisionbyorganizationstoimprovetheir

repu-tationsandgainacompetitiveedge.However,CSRprogramsshouldnotonlyservetheorganizationforimage/reputation

managementpurposes,butalsobenefittheirpublicsandthesocietyatlargebysupportingdifferentsocialcausessuch

ashumanrights,education,gender,anti-discrimination,children,environment,health,qualityproducts/services,etc.(Lee,

Mak,&Pang,2012).Intheirstudy,Davidetal.describeddiscretionaryCSRpracticesas:“contributesresourcestothearts

andculturalprogramsinthecommunity”;“contributesresourcestoraisesocialawarenessofissuessuchashungerand

domesticviolence”;“supportschildrenandfamilyissues,suchasadoptionandfostercare”;and“supportspublichealth

programs”(Davidetal.,2005,p.303).Manyresearchersarguethatcommunicatinganorganization’sCSRpracticesiscritical

forshapingstakeholders’viewsofCSRpractices(Davidetal.,2005;Epstein&Roy,2001;Kim,2011;Maignan&Ferrell,

2001).CommunicationofCSRshouldfocusmainlyonestablishingalinkagebetweenanorganization’simageanditsCSR

practices.EpsteinandRoy(2001)haveevenarguedthatakeyperformancemeasureofasuccessfulCSRcampaignisits

communicationandpromotiontokeypublics,includingthecommunity.

CSRprogramsusuallyreflectanorganization’sculture,valuesandidentityandtheygenerallytargetkeypublics,including

consumers,employees,andthecommunity.Selvi,Wagner,andTürel(2010)analyzedCapital’s“Themostadmiredcompanies

inTurkey”and“TheleadersinsocialresponsibilityinTurkey”listsandcomparedthefirm-yearobservationsofcompanies

performanceandreputation,leadingtobetterfinancialperformanceandincreasedfirmvalueormarketshare.Theseresults

revealthatCSRplaysanimportantroleinTurkey’sbusinesssector.

Associalmediaisincreasinglybecomingacriticaltoolforpublicrelationsprofessionalstocommunicatewiththeir

stakeholders,thisnewmediaisalsobecominganimportanttoolforthecommunicationofCSRpractices.AsPavitt(2012)

argued,organizationsmustcatchthenewcommunicationtechnologyandsocialmediatrendsandshouldalsorealizethat

theycannolonger“evadetheirresponsibilitytoactethicallyandresponsiblyasatruecorporatecitizen”(p.25).Because

socialmediaallowsforinteractionandtwo-waycommunication,organizationsdonothavetheluxurytoignorethequestions

ordemandsoftheirstakeholders.Thus,theresearchersassumethattheCSReffortsofcompanieswillbevisibleontheir

socialmediaaccountsandtheyneedtowinthepublicsoveraboutbeingresponsible“corporatecitizens”.

2.3. Publicrelationsandsocialmedia

TheInternetandsocialmediaareincreasinglybecomingusedforpublicrelationspurposesastheyallowforinteraction

betweentheorganizationanditspublicsandhelppublicsengagewithorganizationsbyaskingquestions,sharingcontent,

orhavingconversations(Bonsón&Ratkai,2013;Hill&White,2000;Ye&Ki,2012).Infact,asPavitt(2012)argued,public

relationshasalsoevolvedwiththeincreasinguseoftheInternetandsocialnetworksasitisnolongerlimitedtosending

letterstotheeditorortryingtogetnewsreleasespublishedbyusingyourconnectionswithjournalists.Thisisanatural

resultoftheincreaseduseofsocialnetworksbecause“organisationscannolongerhidebehindcloseddoors,justtelling

theirstakeholderswhattheythinktheyneedtoknow”(Pavitt,2012,24).

AftertheInternetwasintroducedinmid-1990s,publicrelationsprofessionalsquicklyrealizeditspotentialforenhancing

communicationandfosteringrelationshipsbetweenanorganizationanditspublics.Theacademydidnotlagtoomuch

behindascommunicationscholarsstartedtoexaminesocialmediaasanewanddevelopingtoolforbusinesscommunication

(Bonsón&Ratkai,2013).Two-waycommunicationwithpublicscanbeestablishedthroughtheuseofInternetandsocial

mediainadditiontomonitoringpublicopinion,collectingdetailedinformationaboutstakeholdersandhavingdialogwith

them(McAllister&Taylor,2007;vanderMerwe,Pitt,&Abratt,2005).Justlikeitsuseforpublicrelationsprofessionalsto

createtwo-waycommunicationopportunitieshasincreasedintheU.S.(Diga&Kelleher,2009),Europeanpublicrelations

practitionersalsobenefitfromthesefast-developingonlinenetworkstoengagewiththeirpublics(Verhoeven,Tench,Zerfass,

Moreno,&Vercic,2012).ThepopularuseoftheInternetandsocialnetworksseemstohaveevolvedsimilarlyinTurkeyas

well.PublicrelationsprofessionalsinTurkeyalsoagreewiththepotentialofsocialmediaasanopportunityforpublic

relationsanduseittoengagewiththeirpublics(Alikilic&Atabek,2012).Howeverthisinteractivemediumalsoallowsfor

publicstobemoreactiveandeventryinfluencingorganizationstoactincertainways.Individualscannowmakevirtual

connectionsandpushorganizationstocreatechangethroughtheinteractivemediumofsocialmedia(Pavitt,2012).

Infact,Turkeyisamajoruserofsocialmedia.InTurkey,45percentofthepopulation(35millionusers)hadaccessto

theInternetin2011,makingTurkeythefifthlargestInternetuserinEuropeandsecondlargestinEasternEuropeafterthe

RussianFederation(InternetWorldStats,2012).AccordingtoComscore(2011),InternetusersinTurkeyspendanaverageof

32hourspermonthonline,makingthemthemostengagedusersinEurope(Comscore,2011).JustliketheuseofInternetis

popularinTurkey,peoplearealsoinfavorofusingsocialmediaveryactively.AccordingtoAlikilicandAtabek(2012),Turkey

hasthethirdlargestpopulationofFacebookusersintheworld.Astheuseofsocialmediahasincreased,theopportunities

theycreateforpeopleandbusinesseshavealsorevealedthemselves.

Theincreasingpopularityofsocialmediacreatesmanyopportunitiesforpublicrelationsprofessionalsaswellas

aca-demicians.Infact,researchrelatedtointernetuseforpublicrelationshasincreasedbetween1992and2009,andstartedto

focusmoreontheinteractionsbetweenorganizationsandtheirpublics(Ye&Ki,2012).Thisresearchalsoaimstocontribute

tothisgrowingliteraturebyprovidinginsightabouthowwebsitesandsocialmediaaccountsarebeingusedforpublic

relationspurposesbythebankingsectorinTurkey.Theresearchwillalsotrytoillustratehowmuchorganizationsfocuson

theirCSReffortsontheirsocialmediaaccounts.Theresearchissignificantasitaimstodevelopameasurementinstrument

tohelpmeasureonlineorganizationalcommunicationandtrytobringpublicrelationsscholarsandprofessionalscloser.

Thereforethisstudyaimstounderstandthefollowingresearchquestions:

RQ1.WhichthemesandthemecategoriesdobanksinTurkeyemphasizeontheircorporatewebsites?

RQ2.WhatistheroleofCSRinthisidentityconstruction,howmuchisCSRemphasizedoncorporatewebsites?

RQ3.Howmuchdothesebanksutilizesocialmediaaccountsforidentityconstruction,dotheytrytoreflecttheidentityconstructed

oncorporatewebsites?

RQ4.HowmuchisCSRcommunicated/emphasizedonthesocialmediaaccountsofthesebanks?

Thefollowingsectionintroducesthemethodsusedfordatacollectionandcoding fromthewebsitesand socialmedia

accountsofTurkishbanks.Then,theresultssectionexplainsthewebsiteanalysisandsocialmediaanalysisfindingsintwo

subheadingsfollowedbyacomparisonoftheresults.Thediscussionandconclusionssectionhighlightstheimplicationsof

theresultsandrevealsthepatternsusedbybanksintheironlinepresenceandthedifferencesbetweenstate-ownedversus

privatebanks.Thestudylimitationsandimplicationsforfutureresearchsectionincludessuggestionsforfutureresearchers

3. Methodology

AsvanRekom(1997)argued,corporateidentityresearchshouldstartwithqualitativeanalysisinwhich

organization-specificelementsaregatheredtoderiveadequateidentitystatementsfromanorganization’s“factualcorporateidentity”(p.

415).Infact,thequalitativeresearcheradoptsaninductiveapproachandworkswiththedataasitemergestouncover“the

multipleinterrelationshipsamongdimensionsthatemergefromthedatawithoutmakingpriorassumptionsorspecifying

hypothesesaboutthelinearorcorrelativerelationshipsamongnarrowlydefined,operationalizedvariables”(Patton,2002,

p.56).Thequalitativeresearcherseekstocomprehenddeepermeaningsandunderstandinterrelationshipsinthedata.

Furthermore,asvanRielandBalmer(1997)suggested,aninterdisciplinaryapproachisrequiredwhenstudyingcorporate

identity.Thisstudyattemptstodeterminehoworganizationsdefinethemselvesandcommunicatetheirdistinctive

char-acteristicstocreateapositivepublicidentitythroughtheirwebsitesandsocialmediaaccounts.Thelanguageusedonthe

websitesandsocialmediaaccountstocommunicateorganizationalidentityisthemainfocusofthestudyaslanguageisan

importanttoolforconstructingmeaningthroughsocialinteraction(Berger&Luckmann,1966).SundaramurthyandKreiner

(2008)alsoemphasizedtheimportanceoflanguagebyreferringtoitasa“manifestationofculturalvalues”(p.419).In

addi-tion,thisresearchaimstounderstandtheinfluenceofCSRactivitiesonorganizationalidentityconstructionandhighlights

therelativesignificanceandinfluenceofCSRactivitiesonorganizationalidentityconstruction.

EightlargestpublicandprivatebanksinTurkey’sbankingsectorwithmorethan300brancheswereinvestigatedinthis

study.Outoftheeightbanksstudied,threearepublic;ZiraatBankwithatotalof1492branches,HalkBankwith823branches

andVakıfBankwith741branchesandfiveareprivately-owned;AkBankwith974branches,TurkEconomyBank(TEB)with

507branches,GarantiBankwith926branches, ˙Is¸Bankwith1233branchesandYapıKrediBankwith927branches(Türkiye

BankalarBirli˘gi,2013).Theresearchmakesuseofonlysecondarydatawhilefocusingonthewebsitesandsocialmedia

accountsoftheeightbanksatthecorporatelevel.

3.1. Websiteanalysis

Thetextualdatawascollectedfromtheaboutus,history,missionandvision,andcorporatesocialresponsibilitysections

ofeachbank’swebsite.Contentanalysiswasexecutedwithpre-readingsfollowedbydetailedreadingsofthesemiotic

content,whichhelpeddeterminethemainthemes,ideas,andissuestoenlightentheresearchquestions.Contentanalysis

wasusedasitisthe“systematicreadingofabodyoftexts,imagesandsymbolicmaterial,notnecessarilyfromtheauthor’s

perspective”(Krippendorf,2004,p.3).Infact,oneofthemostcommonlyusedtechniquetoanalyzeinformationabout

organizationsiscontentanalysis(Bonsón,Escobar,&Flores,2008;Ettredge,Richardson,&Scholz,2001;Gallego-Alvarez,

Rodriguez-Dominguez,&Garcia-Sanchez,2011).

Dominantthemeswereidentifiedthroughfocusingoncertainissuesandconceptsexpressingdistinctive

characteris-ticsofeachbank.Themeswerelatercategorizedundercomprehensiveheadingstodevelopthemecategories.Thetheme

categoriesobtainedfromtheanalysiswerecomparedtodeterminetheuniquepositioningofeachbankandCSR

activi-tiesincommunicatingitsorganizationalidentity.Theanalysisalsorevealedthevariationsineachbank’suseofCSRinthe

organizationalidentityconstructionandcommunicationprocess.

3.2. Socialmediaanalysis

Thepostsandphotossharedonactivesocialmediaaccounts(FacebookandTwitter)oftheeightbanksduringa

four-monthperiodbetweenMarchandJuly2013werecollectedonaseparateworddocumentandanalyzedbothquantitatively

andqualitatively.Thenumberofpostsandphotoswerefirstcountedtorevealandcomparetheusageofsocialmediaaccounts

bydifferentbanks.Inaddition,thecontentofthepostswasthematicallyanalyzedthroughasocialmediameasurement

instrument.Theinstrumentwasmodifiedbytheresearchersaccordingtotheresearchquestionsofthisstudyfromthe

socialmediameasurementtooldevelopedbyLoandWaters(2013).CSRdimensionswerealsoaddedtothemeasurement

instrumenttorevealtheroleofCSRinonlineidentityconstruction.

Themeasurementinstrumentmainlyfocusesonthefollowingdimensions:toneoflanguageusedintheposts,personal

vs.formallanguage;frequencyofposts;useoftwo-waycommunicationandencouragementofinteraction(allowingand

respondingtocomments);referencetomissionandgoals;referencetoorganizationalachievements;emphasisonCSR

activities;andfinallyuseofmulti-media(sharingorganizationalphotosandvideos).

4. Results

Theresultsarepresentedintwodifferentsubheadings–websiteandsocialmediaanalysis–tomakeresearchfindings

easiertofollowandcompare.

4.1. Websiteanalysis

Asmentionedbefore,thetextspublishedbyeachbankontheirwebsitesconstitutethedatasetofanin-depthconceptual

Table1

Themecategoriesthatcameoutofthethematicwebsiteanalysis.

Themecategories Extensiveimpactand development

Futureorientation Beingethical Superiority Corebankingfunctions •Sustainability •Contemporarybanking •Openness/honesty/trustworthiness •Respectability •Createvalue •Growth/leap •Beingtechnological •Equalopportunity/fairness •Beingthefirst •Profitability •Beinginternational •Change/renewal •Corporatesocialresponsibility •Beingtheleader •Productivity

•Collaboration/partnership •Innovation/creativity •Benefitthesocietyandeconomy •Beingastrongbank •Beingcustomeroriented •Beingcompetitive •Qualifiedpersonnel

•SMEbanking

differentsetofthemestoidentifyitselfandcontinuouslycommunicatesitsidentitythroughthesedistinctivewordgroups.

Thethemecategorieswerederivedfromtheanalysisoftextsonthehomepages,aboutussectionsandotherrelatedgeneral

contentpagesofthebanks’websitesinadditiontotheircorporatesocialresponsibilitysections.Firstdistinctivethemes

emphasizedbythebankswereidentifiedandcoded.Laterthesethemesweregroupedintothemecategoriesaccordingto

theirfunctionsforidentityconstruction.Thethemecategoriesthatcameoutofthethematicwebsiteanalysiswereextensive

impactanddevelopment,futureorientation,beingethical,superiority,andcorebankingfunctions(Table1).

Theextensiveimpactanddevelopmentthemecategoryincludesthemesthatemphasizesustainability,growth/leap,

beinginternational,andcollaboration/partnership.Futureorientationincludesafocusoncontemporarybanking,being

tech-nological,change/renewal,andinnovation/creativity.Anotherimportantthemecategorywasbeingethicalwhichfocused

onopenness/honesty/trustworthiness,equalopportunity/fairness,benefitingthesocietyandeconomy,andcorporatesocial

responsibility.Thethemecategorysuperioritywasdevelopedbygroupingthemessuchasrespectability,beingthefirst,

beingtheleader,beingastrongbank,andbeingcompetitive.Thefinalthemecategorywascorebankingfunctionsthat

includedcreatingvalue,profitability,productivity,beingcustomeroriented,havingqualifiedpersonnel,andSMEbanking.

ThemostpopularthemecategoriesusedbyeachbankandtheirrelativeweightispresentedinTable2.Asthistablereveals

whilestate-ownedpublicbankscommunicatecorebankingfunctionsandextensiveimpactanddevelopmenttheme

cate-goriesmoreheavily,privatebankstendtoconstructtheiridentitiesthroughsuperiority,beingethical,futureorientationin

additiontoextensiveimpactanddevelopment.

4.2. Socialmediaanalysis

Inadditiontothewebsiteanalysis,socialmediaaccountsoftheseeightbankswerestudiedquantitativelyand

qualita-tivelytounderstandhowtheyutilizetheirsocialmediaaccountsforidentityconstructionduringafour-monthperiod.Their

frequencyofuse,numberofpostsandnumberofphotossharedwereexaminedtorevealthedifferencesinsocialmedia

useofthesebanksaspresentedinTable3.Thebankshavebeengroupedaccordingtotheirownershipprivateversuspublic

andthecomparisonimmediatelyrevealsthatprivately-ownedbanksusesocialmediamoreheavilywhilepublicbankslag

behindintermsoftheirsocialmediapresence.

Theresultsoftheanalysisrevealedthatallofthebanksanalyzedarestilllearningandexperimentingwithsocialmedia.

Itissafetosaythatthereisnobankthatsharescontent(Facebookposts,tweetsorphotos)everyday.However,AkBank,

GarantiandTEBarethemosteffectiveusersofsocialmediarelativetotheotherbanksanalyzed.Thesethreebanksshared

morepostsandphotos,makingthemmoreactiveusersofFacebookandTwitter.HalkBanklagsbehindinsocialmedia

adoptionanddoesnotevenhaveaFacebookaccountwhilerarelyusingTwitter.

Table4presentsthesocialmediausesummaryofthebanks.Thestateownedbanksdonotemphasizetheirinstitutional

identitiesviasocialmedia,theytendtouseaformallanguageintheirpostsortweetsandtheydonotengageintwo-way

communication.AlmostallbanksuseacollectivetoneandcasuallanguageintheirsocialmediaaccountsexceptforZiraat

Bankand ˙Is¸Bank.Theauthorsbelievethatbecausethesetwoarestatebankstheymightbetryingtokeeptheirformal“state

banktone”inthesocialmediaaccounts.InadditionZiraatBankistheonlybankthatstillusesone-waycommunicationrather

thantwo-way,whichispreferredbyalltheotherbanks.Theanalysisrevealedthatallofthebanksreflecttheidentitythemes

theyuseontheirwebsitesontheirsocialmediaaccountsaswell.Adetailedanalysisofthebanksrevealthatprivately-owned

bankstendtobemoreprofessional,up-to-date,andactiveinthewaytheymanagetheirsocialmediaaccountswhereastwo

ofthestatebanksstudiedalmosthavenosocialmediapresenceanddonotseemtobetakingtheissueveryseriouslyeither.

TheresultsofthewebsiteanalysisoftheseeightbanksshowedthatbanksutilizetheirCSRinitiativestodifferentiate

themselvesfromtheircompetitorswhileconstructingtheiridentities.AsTable4indicatesthethreepublicbanks,Vakıf,

ZiraatandHalkbanksaresignificantlydifferentthantheirprivatecounterpartsintermsofsocialmediause.Theydonot

haveanemphasisonsocietalimpactandcustomers,theirsocialmediapostsareirregularanddaily,theytendtouseformal

languageandmostsignificantlytheydonotengageintwo-waycommunication.ApartfromZiraatBankandHalkBankwhich

arestate-ownedbanks,alloftheotherbanksmentionedCSRontheirsocialmediaaccountssimilartotheirwebsites.This

findingunderlinesthefactthatthebanksstudiedalsotrytohighlighttheirsofterside,theirCSRinitiativesandconsequently

E. Ozdora-Aksak, S. Atakan-Duman / Public Relations Review 41 (2015) 119–128 Table2

Mostpopularthemecategoriesusedbyeachbank.

Themecategories Banks

Privately-ownedmutualsavingsbanks State-ownedmutualsavingsbanks

YapıKredi T. ˙Is¸ Bank TEB GarantiBank AkBank VakıfBank ZiraatBank HalkBank

% % % % % % % %

Superiority 3 12.00 4 57.14 13 35.14 17 27.87 9 25.00 – – 3 10.00 5 8.06

Corebankingfunctions 4 16.00 – – 12 32.43 8 13.11 7 19.44 5 35.71 15 50.00 28 45.16

Extensiveimpactanddevelopment 5 20.00 3 42.86 9 24.32 16 26.23 4 11.11 6 42.86 8 26.66 11 17.74

Beingethical 13 52.00 – – – – 11 18.03 10 27.77 3 21.43 – – 9 14.52

Futureorientation – – – – 3 8.11 9 14.75 6 16.66 – – 4 13.33 9 14.52

Table3

Contentandpostcountofsocialnetworkingsites.

Banks Facebook Twitter

Numberofposts Numberofphotos Numberoftweets Numberofphotos Privately-ownedmutualsavingsbanks

AkBank 138 88 291 45

Garanti 134 94 151 13

TEB 122 89 309 24

YapıKredi 72 50 191 4

˙Is¸ Bank 42 40 66 5

State-ownedmutualsavingsbanks

ZiraatBank 52 86 158 27

VakıfBank 48 65 71 3

HalkBank – – 39 –

Table4

SocialmediasummaryofTurkishbanks. Banks

Privately-ownedmutualsavingsbanks State-ownedmutualsavingsbanks YapıKredi ˙Is¸Bank TEB Garanti AkBank Ziraat VakıfBank HalkBank

Facebook Facebookanalysis

couldnotbeconducted asthebankdoesnot haveanactiveaccount

‘AboutUs’

Emphasisontheinstitution √ √ √ √ √ √ √ Emphasisonsociety √

Emphasisonthethemesderived outfromtheanalysis

√ √ √ √ √ √ √

Status

EmphasisontheInstitution √ √ √ √ √

Emphasisonsociety √ √ √

Collectivetoneofthelanguage √ √ √ √ √

Useofformallanguage √ √

2-Waycommunication √ √ √ √ √ √

Emphasisonthecustomers √ √

Frequencyofposts(everyday)

ReferencetocurrentCSRprograms √ √ √ √ √

Twitter

EmphasisontheInstitution √ √ √ √ √ √ √ √

Emphasisonsociety √ √ √ √ √ √

Collectivetoneofthelanguage √ √ √

Useofformallanguage √ √

2-Waycommunication √ √ √ √

Emphasisonthecustomers √ √ √ √ √ √

Frequencyofposts(everyday) √

ReferencetocurrentCSRprograms √ √ √ √ √ √

,thepresenceofthesubheadingforthespecifiedbank.

AmongallbanksonlyGarantiBankactivelyusesTwittereveryday.AllthebankshaveacustomerfocusinTwitteraccounts

andtweetswiththeexceptionof ˙Is¸BankandHalkBank.Inaddition,allbanksuseafriendlytoneandcasuallanguagein

theirTwitteraccountsexceptforZiraatBankandHalkBank.Moreover,halfofthelargestbanksinTurkey,Ziraat,Vakıf, ˙Is¸

andHalkBank,useone-waycommunicationinTwitterwhichissurprisingwhenoneconsiderstheinteractiveengagement

opportunitiesprovidedbythismedium.

SimilartotheresultsoftheFacebookanalysis,currentCSRprogramsareutilizedbybanksinTwitteraccountstoreflect

theircommitmenttothecommunityandstrengthentheircorporateidentities.Howeverthestate-ownedbanks,Ziraat, ˙Is¸

andHalkBank,donotemphasizecurrentCSRprogramsintheirTweets.Thepreliminaryreadingoftheresultsrevealed

asignificantdistinctionamongbanksintermsofbeingstate-ownedandthedateofestablishment.Theseresultswillbe

furtherdiscussedinthefollowingsection.

5. Discussionandconclusion

Thetwomostcommonthemesemphasizedbyalmostalltheeightbankswerecorporatesocialresponsibilityand

sus-tainability.Theseresultsarestriking,asbanksdonotconstructtheiridentitieswiththeircorebankingfunctions,meaning

theireconomicoutputs;insteadtheyaccentuatetheiridentitythroughnon-economicoutputs.Morespecifically,allofthe

factorutilizedbyallthebanksexceptTEBandHalkBank.Ontheotherhand,themostcommonlyemphasizedeconomic

outputisfoundtobecustomerorientation,whichisemphasizedbyallbanksexceptforYapıKrediand ˙Is¸Bank.Insummary,

thesefindingsindicatethatTurkey’seightlargestbanksprefertohighlightnon-economicoutputswhencommunicating

theiridentitiestotheirstakeholders.Amongthesenon-economicoutputs,engaginginCSRandbeingethicalplaysaspecial

roleintheidentityconstructionprocess(Table2),especiallyforprivatelyownedbanks.

ThisfindingsupportstheargumentputforthbyMcWilliams,Siegel,andWright(2006)thatestablishedorganizations

investmoreinCSR.TheunderlyingmotivebehindemphasizingCSRisthegoalofbeingperceivedasagoodcorporatecitizen

byallstakeholders(Maignan&Ferrell,2001)andbuildingastrongreputation(Brammer,Millington,&Rayton,2007).As

institutionaltheorysuggests,compliancetotheorganizationalenvironmentisvitalforbothorganizationalsurvivaland

competitiveness.Thispressuretoadapttotheenvironmentisrootednotonlyinefficiencyconcerns,butalsointheneedto

gainlegitimacy(Kondra&Hinnings,1998).Althoughbanksexistontheircorebankingfunctions,whicharesolelyeconomic,

theystrivetoconstructtheiridentitiesonnon-economicconcernsinordertobeperceivedastrustworthycorporatecitizens

thatexistforthebenefitofsociety.FombrunandShanley(1990)alsoarguethatpublicscareaboutthenon-economic

agendasoforganizations.Infact,communicatingnon-economicagendas,especiallyCSRrelatedactivities,hasbecomea

criticalpublicrelationstactictogainlegitimacyandcompetitiveadvantage.OrganizationsincreasinglyintegrateCSRinto

theirpublicrelationsagendasandemphasizeCSRintheircommunicationefforts.Thisresearchrevealsthatregardlessofits

corebusinessfunction,anorganizationhastocommunicatenon-economicsocialconcernsforconstructinganidentityas

wellasgainingandsustaininglegitimacy.

Mostofthebankspreferacasualfuntonetocommunicateonsocialmedia,whichsuitsthenatureandformatofthis

medium.Inaddition,noneofthebankssharetheirannualreportsorotherofficialreportsontheirsocialmediaaccounts

althoughtheyareavailableontheircorporatewebsites.Thisgoesparallelwiththecasualnon-hierarchicaland

engagement-promotingnatureofsocialmedia.Similarly,acustomer-focusedapproachcanbeobservedinmostofthebanks’socialmedia

accounts,whichisnativetosocialmediabutcannotbeobservedintheircorporatewebsites.Morespecifically,research

resultsrevealedthatstateownedandolderbanks(Ziraat, ˙Is¸BankandHalkBank)tendtobelessactiveintheiruseofsocial

media.

AnotherimportantresultoftheanalysisishowmuchbanksemphasizetheirCSReffortsonsocialmedia.Specifically

YapıKrediandGarantibankshighlighttheirCSRinitiativesrelativetootherbanksanalyzed,especiallyfocusingonthe

varietyincludingeducation,environment,sportsandsocialprograms.Thisstudycontributestotheliteraturebyrevealing

thesignificanceofCSRforthepublicrelationsandidentityconstructioneffortsoforganizations.Thescopeofthisresearch

allowedresearcherstoidentifyvaryingnumberofthemesutilizedbybankstoconstructandcommunicatetheiridentities.

AlthoughrelatedliteratureframesCSRasastrategicmanagementtooltoimprovecorporatereputationandincreasereturn

oninvestment,CSRultimatelyservesthecommunity.Itincreasessocialwelfareandallowsmembersofthesocietytobenefit

fromservicesprovidedbyorganizations.

TheresultspresentedinTables2and4clearlyrevealthatthereisasignificantdistinctionbetweenstate-ownedpublic

banksandprivatelyownedbanksintermsofthethemesandthemecategoriestheyutilizeforidentityconstruction.Public

banks,Vakıf,ZiraatandHalkbanks,relymoreheavilyoncorebankingfunctionsandextensiveimpactanddevelopment

themecategoriestoconstructtheiridentities.Onereasonforthispreferencemightbethestateassurancebehindthem,as

theydonotneedtogainpublictrustbyemphasizingthemeswhichhighlightbeingethicalsuchasCSR,equalopportunity

andfairness,andopenness,honestyandtrustworthiness.Similarlytheydonothavefutureconcernsastheyareaidedby

thestate;thereforepublicbanks,asexpected,donotheavilystressthethemecategoryfutureorientation.Inaddition,public

banksdonotneedtoprovetheirsuperiorityastheyareownedbythestateandasaresulttheydonotheavilyaccentuate

theirsuperiorityincomparisontootherbanks.Superiority,beingethicalandhavingafutureorientationthemecategories

arebelievedtobedirectlyrelatedwithgaininglegitimacy,howeverpublicbanksdonothavelegitimacyconcernsasthey

alreadyhavealegitimateidentitybybeingstate-ownedinstitutions.Consequently,theydifferentiatethemselvesfromtheir

privatelyownedcompetitorsbyemphasizingthemeswhichhighlightcorebusinessfunctionssuchasbeingverygoodat

SMEbankingandtheirextensiveimpactforthenationaleconomyandthedevelopmentofthesociety.

Ontheotherhand,privatelyownedbankstendtoconstructandcommunicatetheiridentitiesthroughutilizingthemes

thathighlightsuperiority,beingethical,futureorientationinadditiontoextensiveimpactanddevelopment.Privatebanks

havetogainlegitimacyastheirbasisofexistenceisunderquestionandtheyhavetoconstructanidentitybeyondbeinga

profitseekingentitythatmightengageinunethicalpracticesforitsownsurvivalandsuccess.Inaddition,thefutureand

sustainabilityofthesebanksisnotsecuredbythestate,thereforeemployingthemesthatfocusontheirfutureorientation

appearstobeanotherwaytogainlegitimacyforprivatebanksandpromisesustainabilitytocurrentandpotentialcustomers.

5.1. Studylimitationsandimplicationsforfutureresearch

Therelationshipbetweentherobustnessofthesebanks’on-linecommunicationspresenceandtheiroverallfinancial

successhasnotbeenstudiedinthispaperasitrequiresadifferentanalysiswhichisbeyondthescopeofthisstudy.However

itprovidesasignificantresearchquestionforfutureresearch.Inadditionthisstudyisonlylimitedtotheeightlargest

mutualsavingsbanksinTurkeybutfutureresearchmayincreasethisnumberbyincludingothertypesofbankssuchas

makingprocessesandpoliciesofbanksinconstructingtheirorganizationalidentitiesprimarydatasuchasinterviewcould

beutilizedinfuturestudies.

Acknowledgements

Theauthorswouldliketothanktheanonymousreviewersfortheirvaluableinsightsandsuggestionswhichhelpedmake

thepaperstronger.Inaddition,BerrakEsenandMelikeTiglicannotbethankedenoughforhelpingwiththelongandtedious

datacollectionprocessforthispaper.ThisworkhasbeenfundedbyTheScientificandTechnologicalResearchCouncilof

Turkey(TUBITAK),grantno.114K096.

References

Abratt,R.(1989).Anewapproachtothecorporateimagemanagementprocess.JournalofMarketingManagement,5(1),63–76.

Alikilic,O.,&Atabek,U.(2012).SocialmediaadoptionamongTurkishpublicrelationsprofessionals:Asurveyofpractitioners.PublicRelationsReview,38,

56–63.

Atakan-Duman,S.,&Ozdora-Aksak,E.(2014).Theroleofcorporatesocialresponsibilityinonlineidentityconstruction:AnanalysisofTurkey’sbanking

sector.PublicRelationsReview,http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.pubrev.2014.07.004

Balmer,J.M.T.(1995).Corporatebrandingandconnoisseurship.JournalofGeneralManagement,21(1),22–46.

Berger,P.L.,&Luckmann,T.(1966).Thesocialconstructionofreality.Middlesex,England:PenguinBooks.

Bick,G.,Jacobson,M.C.,&Abratt,R.(2003).Thecorporateidentitymanagementprocessrevisited.JournalofMarketingManagement,19(7–8),835–855.

Bonsón,E.,Escobar,T.,&Flores,F.(2008).Navigationqualityasakeyvalueforthewebpageofafinancialentity.OnlineInformationReview,32(5),623–634.

Bonsón,E.,&Ratkai,M.(2013).AsetofmetricstoassessstakeholderengagementandsociallegitimacyonacorporateFacebookpage.OnlineInformation

Review,37(5),787–803.

Brammer,S.,Millington,A.,&Rayton,B.(2007).Thecontributionofcorporatesocialresponsibilitytoorganizationalcommitment.TheInternationalJournal

ofHumanResourceManagement,18(10),1701–1719.

Bromley,D.B.(1993).Reputation,imageandimpressionmanagement.NewYork:Wiley.

Bruning,S.D.,&Ledingham,J.A.(2000).Perceptionsofrelationshipsandevaluationsofsatisfaction:Anexplorationofinteraction.PublicRelationsReview,

26,85–95.

Claasen,C.,&Roloff,J.(2011).Thelinkbetweenresponsibilityandlegitimacy:ThecaseofDeBeersinNamibia.JournalofBusinessEthics,107(3),379–398.

Comscore. (2011). Turkey in the global internet and the future of online measurement. Presentation retrieved from http://www.comscore.com/

Insights/PresentationsandWhitepapers/2011/TurkeyintheGlobalInternetandTheFutureofOnlineMeasurement

Cutlip,S.M.,Center,A.H.,&Broom,G.M.(2000).Effectivepublicrelations(8thed.).EnglewoodCliffs,NewJersey:Prentice-HallInternational,Inc.

David,P.,Kline,S.,&Dai,Y.(2005).Corporatesocialresponsibilitypractices,corporateidentity,andpurchaseIntention:Adual-processmodel.Journalof

PublicRelationsResearch,17(3),291–313.

Diga,M.,&Kelleher,T.(2009).Socialmediause,perceptionsofdecision-makingpower,andpublicrelationsroles.PublicRelationsReview,35,440–442.

Dowling,G.R.(1994).Corporatereputations:Strategiesfordevelopingthecorporatebrand.London:KoganPage.

Dutton,J.E.,&Dukerich,J.M.(1991).Keepinganeyeonthemirror:Imageandidentityinorganizationaladaptation.AcademyofManagementJournal,34,

519–554.

Epstein,M.J.,&Roy,M.J.(2001).Sustainabilityinaction:Identifyingandmeasuringthekeyperformancedrivers.LongRangePlanning,34,585–604.

Ettredge,M.,Richardson,V.,&Scholz,S.(2001).Thepresentationoffinancialinformationatcorporatewebsites.InternationalJournalofAccounting

InformationSystems,2(3),14–68.

Fombrun,C.,&Shanley,M.(1990).What’sinaname?Reputationbuildingandcorporatestrategy.AcademyofManagementJournal,33(2),233–258.

Gallego-Alvarez,I.,Rodriguez-Dominguez,L.,&Garcia-Sanchez,I.(2011).InformationdisclosedonlinebySpanishuniversities:Contentandexplanatory

factors.OnlineInformationReview,35(3),360–385.

Greenwood,R.,Suddaby,R.,&Hinings,C.R.(2002).Theorizingchange:Theroleofprofessionalassociationsinthetransformationofinstitutionalizedfields.

AcademyofManagementJournal,45,58–80.

Grunig,J.E.(2000).Collectivism,collaboration,andsocietalcorporatismascoreprofessionalvaluesinpublicrelations.JournalofPublicRelationsResearch,

12,23–48.

Hatch,M.J.,&Schultz,M.(2002).Thedynamicsoforganizationalidentity.HumanRelations,55(8),989–1018.

Hill,L.N.,&White,C.(2000).Publicrelationspractitioners’perceptionoftheWorldWideWebasacommunicationtool.PublicRelationsReview,26,31–51.

Internet World Stats. (2012). Top 20 countries with highest number of internet users – June 30, 2012. Retrieved from http://www.

internetworldstats.com/top20.htm

Ki,E.J.,&Hon,L.C.(2007).Testingthelinkagesamongtheorganization–publicrelationshipandattitudeandbehavioralintentions.JournalofPublicRelations

Research,19,1–23.

Kim,S.(2011).TransferringeffectsofCSRstrategyonconsumerresponses:Thesynergisticmodelofcorporatecommunicationstrategy.JournalofPublic

RelationsResearch,23(2),218–241.

Kondra,A.Z.,&Hinnings,C.R.(1998).Organizationaldiversityandchangeininstitutionaltheory.OrganizationStudies,19(5),743–767.

Krippendorf,K.(2004).ContentAnalysis:Anintroductiontoitsmethodology.London:Sage.

Lai,C.S.,Chiu,C.J.,Yang,C.F.,&Pai,D.C.(2010).Theeffectsofcorporatesocialresponsibilityonbrandperformance:Themediatingeffectofindustrial

brandequityandcorporatereputation.JournalofBusinessEthics,95(3),457–469.

Ledingham,J.A.(2006).Relationshipmanagement:Ageneraltheoryofpublicrelations.InC.H.Botan,&V.Hazleton(Eds.),PublicrelationstheoryII(pp.

465–483).Mahwah,NJ:LawrenceErlbaumAssociates.

Lee,R.(1983).Shapingyourbank’scorporateidentity.BankMarketing,15(10),21–24.

Lee,M.H.,Mak,A.K.,&Pang,A.(2012).Bridgingthegap:AnexploratorystudyofcorporatesocialresponsibilityamongSMEsinSingapore.JournalofPublic

RelationsResearch,24(4),299–317.

Lo,K.D.,&Waters,R.D.(2013).Organizationsinthesocialmediasphere:Creatinganewvirtualcultureorreinforcingtraditionalculturaldimensions?In

PresentedatinternationalconferenceoninterculturalresearchUniversityofNevada-Reno,June23–27,2013.

Maignan,I.,&Ferrell,O.C.(2001).Corporatecitizenshipasamarketinginstrument.EuropeanJournalofMarketing,35,457–484.

McAllister,S.,&Taylor,M.(2007).Communitycollegewebsitesastoolsforfosteringdialogue.PublicRelationsReview,33,230–232.

McWilliams,A.,Siegel,D.S.,&Wright,P.M.(2006).Corporatesocialresponsibility:Strategicimplications.JournalofManagementStudies,43(1),1–18.

Meyer,J.W.,&Rowan,B.(1977).Institutionalizedorganizations:Formalstructureasmythandceremony.AmericanJournalofSociology,83,340–363.

Olins,W.(1989).CorporateIdentity:MakingStrategyVisiblethroughDesign.London:Thames&Hudson.

Patton,M.Q.(2002).Qualitativeresearchandevaluationmethods(3rded.).ThousandOaks,CA:Sage.

Pavitt,H.(2012).Noplacetohide:NewtechnologicaladvancesinWeb2.0andSocialMediamayforceorganisationstoimprovetheircorporatesocial

responsibility.SocialAlternatives,31(2),22–26.

Scott,W.R.(1995).Institutionsandorganizations.ThousandOaks,CA:SagePublications.

Selvi,Y.,Wagner,E.,&Türel,A.(2010).Corporatesocialresponsibilityinthetimeoffinancialcrisis:EvidencefromTurkey.AnnalesUniversitatisApulensis

SeriesOeconomica,12(1).

Sundaramurthy,C.,&Kreiner,G.E.(2008).Governingbymanagingidentityboundaries:Thecaseoffamilybusinesses.EntrepreneurshipTheoryandPractice,

32(3),415–436.

TürkiyeBankalarBirli˘gi.(2013).Turkishbanksandtheirbranches2013.Retrievedfromhttp://www.tbb.org.tr/modules/banka-bilgileri/bankasubebilgileri.

asp?tarih=16.01.2013

vanderMerwe,R.,Pitt,L.,&Abratt,R.(2005).Stakeholderstrength:PRsurvivalstrategiesintheInternetage.PublicRelationsQuarterly,50(1),39–48.

vanRekom,J.(1997).Derivinganoperationalmeasureofcorporateidentity.EuropeanJournalofMarketing,31(5/6),410–422.

vanRiel,C.B.M.(1995).Principlesofcorporatecommunication.HemelHempstead,England:PrenticeHall.

vanRiel,C.B.M.,&Balmer,J.M.T.(1997).Corporateidentity:Theconcept,itsmeasurementandmanagement.EuropeanJournalofMarketing,31(5/6),

340–355.

Verhoeven,P.,Tench,R.,Zerfass,A.,Moreno,A.,&Vercic,D.(2012).HowEuropeanPRpractitionershandledigitalandsocialmedia.PublicRelationsReview,

38,162–164.

Ye,L.,&Ki,E.J.(2012).Thestatusofonlinepublicrelationsresearch:AnAnalysisofpublishedarticlesin1992–2009.JournalofPublicRelationsResearch,