Leveraging Social Media for SMEs: Findings from a Bibliometric Review
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
The paper investigates an interesting issue and the paper is well-designed. However, I have some comments:
1-) The motivation and contribution of the paper should be written more clearly.
2-) The author should compare their results with the results of the previous studies.
3-) I would also suggest citing recently published relevant papers. Please see below one of them:
Giovannetti, E. and Hamoudia, M. (2022). The interaction between direct and indirect network externalities in the early diffusion of mobile social networking. Eurasian Business Review, 12(4), 617–642.
Author Response
The paper investigates an interesting issue and the paper is well-designed. However, I have some comments:
1-) The motivation and contribution of the paper should be written more clearly.
The authors have made the following additions to the introduction:
We have explicitly stated the motivation behind this study: to enable SMEs, researchers, policymakers, and practitioners to make informed decisions regarding social media adoption and utilization for the benefit of the SME sector. This motivation is grounded in the recognition of the importance of social media in enhancing the growth and competitiveness of SMEs and its potential to contribute to the United Nations' Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs).
We have highlighted the key contributions of this paper to the literature:
- a) Providing a comprehensive overview of the current state of knowledge on the benefits and drawbacks of social media usage among SMEs, filling an important gap in the existing research.
- b) Identifying areas that require further exploration, thus serving as a valuable guide for future research efforts in the field.
- c) Offering practical recommendations for stakeholders such as governments, the private sector, and international organizations on how social media can support the SME sector, thereby contributing to the achievement of the SDGs.
2-) The author should compare their results with the results of the previous studies.
We have added the following points throughout the Results section:
4.1. Volume, Growth Trajectory, and Geographic Distribution of the Literature
The rapid increase in literature on SMEs and social media align with the observation made by Alalwan et al. (2017) and Qalati (2020).
4.2. Influential Authors
We have compared the productivity and impact of authors in our study with those identified Thaha, A. R., Maulina, E., Muftiadi, R. A., & Alexandri, M. B. (2021).
4.3. Intellectual Structure
Our identified clusters in the intellectual structure of SME and social media literature are consistent with the findings of Bilro et al. (2019), Parrott et al. (2015), and Wilk et al. (2021),
4.4. Influential Outlets
The influential outlets we have identified in this study, such as PLoS ONE, Journal of Small Business and Enterprise Development, and Industrial Marketing Management, are in line with the core publishing sources reported by Thaha, A. R., Maulina, E., Muftiadi, R. A., & Alexandri, M. B. (2021). in their bibliometric analysis of the SME and social media research area.
4.5. Keyword Co-occurrence
Our findings on keyword co-occurrence are supported by the studies of Ashley & Tuten (2015), Wang & Kim (2017), and Acquah et al. (2020).
3-) I would also suggest citing recently published relevant papers. Please see below one of them:
Giovannetti, E. and Hamoudia, M. (2022). The interaction between direct and indirect network externalities in the early diffusion of mobile social networking. Eurasian Business Review, 12(4), 617–642.
Thank you for raising this point we have added the suggested reference in section 4.1 and we have also added more recent publications throughout the entire manuscript.
Reviewer 2 Report
Dear Authors
The subject of the study is interesting and here are some recommendations to improve the work.
Title: "How Can Social Media Benefit SMEs?" It is not advisable for a question to form the title of a scientific paper. The question. It is the basis of research. But it doesn't need to. Be mandatory exposed in the title. A title, well-structured, meets the objective of the study, without necessarily referring to the question. Thus, I suggest to the authors to reformulate the title of the manuscript.
Abstract - The objective of the study and the contextualization of the problematization are missing. Where is this information? It is important that this information. It is important that this information be in the abstract because it is in this part that the reader makes the decision whether or not to read the whole paper.
Keywords - "bibliometric literature review; marketing strategy; SME; social media; VOSviewer". I suggest a new order in the keywords because VOSviewer should not be a word that reflects the study. Keywords have a function and cannot be put randomly and without a logical order.
Introduction
L.23-24 "Small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) play a crucial role in economic development, particularly in emerging economies (Abe, Troilo, & Batsaikhan, 2015)." That is a strong statement, but it is old, from 2015. I suggest more recent authors to ground the study on social networks. Preferably, authors from the last 3 years.
The study mentions SDGs, there is no mention of them in the objective.
The objective of the paper is confusing because there are too many in the text. See below:
L.42-44 "[...] this study aims to draw a better map of the current knowledge regarding social media for SMEs and provide insights for researchers, policy-makers, and practitioners in this field."
L.44-47 "It examines the existing literature on the benefits and drawbacks of SMEs' social media usage and suggests recommendations for stakeholders such as governments, the private sector, and international organizations on how social media can support the SME sector.
L.47-48 "The study also identifies gaps in the literature and research areas that require further exploration."
L.53-55 "The study surveys the existing literature in SMEs and social media to assess the global research outputs from 2007 to 2022. It provides a bibliometric summary of the leading trends, focusing on "social media" and "SMEs.""
There are also many questions in the study. Which ones will the authors answer? Remember that scientific research investigates one question at a time, in depth.
L.50-52 "What are the most important thematic areas in SMEs and social media research
(presently)? What future research may be proposed on SMEs and social media?
How Can Social Media Benefit SMEs? - paper title.
L.57-58 "SMEs can be broadly defined as businesses with fewer than 250 employees and an annual turnover of less than €50 million (Abe, Troilo, & Narain, 2012)." The quote is from 10 years ago and the study proposes something related to a recent topic, social media. It is meaningless such a statement in the paper since there may be other definitions of SMEs, for example, those linked to annual turnover.
L61-66 "Despite their importance, SMEs face several challenges in their development, including inadequate access to finance, lack of resources, and limited digital technology adaptation. These challenges can limit the growth and competitiveness of SMEs, hindering their ability to contribute to economic development. Understanding the challenges faced by SMEs and exploring ways to overcome them is essential for promoting socio-economic development in a nation." Who is the author of that statement? Adequately referenced authors are missing here and elsewhere in the text.
The introduction is weak. Where is the main objective of the study? Where is the justification for the study? How was the study organized?
You do not use the footnotes to place concepts, as was done in footnote 4. "Digital marketing refers to promoting products or services using digital technologies, including the Internet, mobile devices, social media, search engines, and other digital channels. It can assist SMEs in reaching and engaging customers through digital channels, using functions such as search engine optimization and pay-per-click advertizing (Desai & Vidyapeeth, 2019). Social media marketing is a kind of digital marketing that uses social media platforms to promote a product or service. It leverages the unique features of social media platforms, such as user-generated content, social networks, and real-time engagement, to reach and engage customers in a personalized and effective manner (Ana & Istudor, 2019)." Why are these concepts not in the text?
The results seem satisfactory, but there is no way to know because the main goal of the research is not properly stated clearly.
The conclusions are weak. Where are the study's strong contributions? What and who does the study serve and is it useful for?
Why so much text in Section 6. Future Research Avenues? There should be more text in the conclusion section.
Author Response
Dear Authors
The subject of the study is interesting and here are some recommendations to improve the work.
Title: "How Can Social Media Benefit SMEs?" It is not advisable for a question to form the title of a scientific paper. The question. It is the basis of research. But it doesn't need to. Be mandatory exposed in the title. A title, well-structured, meets the objective of the study, without necessarily referring to the question. Thus, I suggest to the authors to reformulate the title of the manuscript.
Thanks for noting that we have reformulated the paper’s title.
Abstract - The objective of the study and the contextualization of the problematization are missing. Where is this information? It is important that this information. It is important that this information be in the abstract because it is in this part that the reader makes the decision whether or not to read the whole paper.
We have added in the revised abstract the objective of the study and the contextualization of the problematization.
Keywords - "bibliometric literature review; marketing strategy; SME; social media; VOSviewer". I suggest a new order in the keywords because VOSviewer should not be a word that reflects the study. Keywords have a function and cannot be put randomly and without a logical order.
We have reordered the keywords to prioritize the main subject of the study (SMEs and social media) and removed "VOSviewer" as suggested. The revised keywords should now better reflect the focus of the research.
Introduction
L.23-24 "Small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) play a crucial role in economic development, particularly in emerging economies (Abe, Troilo, & Batsaikhan, 2015)." That is a strong statement, but it is old, from 2015. I suggest more recent authors to ground the study on social networks. Preferably, authors from the last 3 years.
Thanks for raising that we have changed the citations with a more recent article.
The study mentions SDGs, there is no mention of them in the objective.
We have added in the introduction: "with a focus on inclusive and sustainable industrialization and fostering innovation (SDG 9)" to specify the SDG being addressed in the paper's objective.
The objective of the paper is confusing because there are too many in the text. See below:
L.42-44 "[...] this study aims to draw a better map of the current knowledge regarding social media for SMEs and provide insights for researchers, policy-makers, and practitioners in this field."
L.44-47 "It examines the existing literature on the benefits and drawbacks of SMEs' social media usage and suggests recommendations for stakeholders such as governments, the private sector, and international organizations on how social media can support the SME sector.
L.47-48 "The study also identifies gaps in the literature and research areas that require further exploration."
L.53-55 "The study surveys the existing literature in SMEs and social media to assess the global research outputs from 2007 to 2022. It provides a bibliometric summary of the leading trends, focusing on "social media" and "SMEs.""
We combined and clarified objectives in a single paragraph to address the confusion mentioned by the reviewer.
There are also many questions in the study. Which ones will the authors answer? Remember that scientific research investigates one question at a time, in depth.
L.50-52 "What are the most important thematic areas in SMEs and social media research
(presently)? What future research may be proposed on SMEs and social media?
How Can Social Media Benefit SMEs? - paper title.
We have removed the second research question and changed the title to address the reviewer's comment on multiple questions and focus on a single main question.
L.57-58 "SMEs can be broadly defined as businesses with fewer than 250 employees and an annual turnover of less than €50 million (Abe, Troilo, & Narain, 2012)." The quote is from 10 years ago and the study proposes something related to a recent topic, social media. It is meaningless such a statement in the paper since there may be other definitions of SMEs, for example, those linked to annual turnover.
We have added the phrase "in various ways, such as the number of employees or annual turnover" to acknowledge that there are other definitions of SMEs. We have updated the source to a more recent one (European Commission, 2021) to address the concern about the outdated reference.
L61-66 "Despite their importance, SMEs face several challenges in their development, including inadequate access to finance, lack of resources, and limited digital technology adaptation. These challenges can limit the growth and competitiveness of SMEs, hindering their ability to contribute to economic development. Understanding the challenges faced by SMEs and exploring ways to overcome them is essential for promoting socio-economic development in a nation." Who is the author of that statement? Adequately referenced authors are missing here and elsewhere in the text.
Thanks for noting that, we have added references for that.
The introduction is weak. Where is the main objective of the study? Where is the justification for the study? How was the study organized?
To address this comment, we have restructured the introduction to make the main objective, justification, and organization of the study more apparent. We have emphasized the main objective of the study, added a sentence about the organization of the paper and moved the mention of the SDGs to the part where the paper's organization is described.
You do not use the footnotes to place concepts, as was done in footnote 4. "Digital marketing refers to promoting products or services using digital technologies, including the Internet, mobile devices, social media, search engines, and other digital channels. It can assist SMEs in reaching and engaging customers through digital channels, using functions such as search engine optimization and pay-per-click advertizing (Desai & Vidyapeeth, 2019). Social media marketing is kind of digital marketing that uses social media platforms to promote a product or service. It leverages the unique features of social media platforms, such as user-generated content, social networks, and real-time engagement, to reach and engage customers in a personalized and effective manner (Ana & Istudor, 2019)." Why are these concepts not in the text?
Thanks for the feedback we made sure to include the note within the text.
The results seem satisfactory, but there is no way to know because the main goal of the research is not properly stated clearly.
The main goal of the paper has been modified in the introduction and we have tried to make it clearer.
The conclusions are weak. Where are the study's strong contributions? What and who does the study serve and is it useful for?
We have revised the conclusions to emphasize the study's strong contributions and its usefulness for different stakeholders. We have added a paragraph to highlight the study's strong contributions and its potential impact on future research and practical applications.
Why so much text in Section 6. Future Research Avenues? There should be more text in the conclusion section.
We have summarized the Future Research Avenues section and incorporated some of the key points into the updated conclusion section.
Reviewer 3 Report
This paper aims to provide an overview of the existing literature on the use of social media by small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs). However, The study has little relevance, lacks a deeper understanding of social media, and is a simple listing of existing literature.
(1) The research process of the article lacks logic and has various shortcomings. For instance,
①　The evaluation of authoritative authors in section 4.2 did not consider the quality of the journal? But only from the perspective of quantity and citation.
②　What variables are used to represent edges in the network constructed in section 4.3? What does "intellectual similarity" mean? In addition, is there quantitative data to support the density of this network?
③　What is the significance of studying the distribution of journals in section 4.4? What guiding significance does this have for the study of SMEs?
(2) The Discussions and Conclusions section of the article does not start from a specific perspective, but merely lists the benefits of social media for SMEs. The conclusion is not strongly correlated with the research process, and the sense of fragmentation is strong. The research content has no substantive inspiration for relevant research and the development of small and medium-sized enterprises, and the entire research process is broad and imprecise, without focusing on the key points.
Author Response
This paper aims to provide an overview of the existing literature on the use of social media by small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs). However, The study has little relevance, lacks a deeper understanding of social media, and is a simple listing of existing literature.
(1) The research process of the article lacks logic and has various shortcomings. For instance,
①　The evaluation of authoritative authors in section 4.2 did not consider the quality of the journal? But only from the perspective of quantity and citation.
To address the concern regarding the quality of the authors’ publications, we have decided to expand Section 4.2 by incorporating the Scopus h-index quality metrics, for the articles published by the leading authors. This could provide a more comprehensive understanding of the influence and quality of their research contributions in the field of SMEs and social media.
②　What variables are used to represent edges in the network constructed in section 4.3? What does "intellectual similarity" mean? In addition, is there quantitative data to support the density of this network?
In Section 4.3, the edges in the network represent intellectual similarity between frequently co-cited authors. The term "intellectual similarity" refers to the degree of shared thoughts, ideas, or research focus among authors, as their work is often cited together in the literature. This concept is derived from the assumption that if two authors are frequently cited together, their work likely addresses similar research topics or themes (Bush & Gilbert, 2002).
In the construction of the co-citation network, the connections between nodes (authors) are based on the number of times their papers have been cited together. The thickness of the edges can be proportional to the number of co-citations, with thicker edges indicating a higher degree of intellectual similarity between the connected authors.
To support the density of the network with quantitative data, a network density metric is calculated by VOSViewer. Network density is a measure of how interconnected the nodes are within a network. It is calculated as the ratio of the number of existing connections (edges) in the network to the total number of possible connections.
③　What is the significance of studying the distribution of journals in section 4.4? What guiding significance does this have for the study of SMEs?
The significance of studying the distribution of journals in Section 4.4 lies in providing a clearer understanding of the publication landscape within the SME and social media research area. By identifying the core publishing sources and their characteristics, such as the impact factor, journal quartile, number of citations, and publisher, this analysis offers several guiding insights for both researchers and practitioners in the field of SMEs:
Identifying influential outlets: By highlighting the most cited journals, researchers can identify the core publishing sources in the SME and social media domain, which may lead to more focused literature reviews and the discovery of relevant, high-impact research. It also provides guidance for researchers seeking to publish their work in reputable journals in this research area.
Assessing journal quality and reputation: The journal quartile and h-Index offer insights into the quality and reputation of the identified influential outlets. Researchers can use this information to select appropriate journals for their publication goals, as submitting their work to high-quality, reputable journals increases the chances of their research being recognized and cited by others.
Understanding the interdisciplinary nature of the field: The distribution of journals across different publishers and disciplines indicates that the study of SMEs and social media is interdisciplinary in nature. This finding can encourage researchers to explore diverse perspectives and methodologies when conducting their studies, as well as to collaborate with experts from different fields to address complex research questions related to SMEs and social media.
Informing future research direction: The analysis of influential journals can also provide an indication of the research trends and areas of focus within the SME and social media domain. By examining the most cited journals and their research themes, researchers can identify potential research gaps and opportunities for future studies, contributing to the advancement of the field.
(2) The Discussions and Conclusions section of the article does not start from a specific perspective, but merely lists the benefits of social media for SMEs. The conclusion is not strongly correlated with the research process, and the sense of fragmentation is strong. The research content has no substantive inspiration for relevant research and the development of small and medium-sized enterprises, and the entire research process is broad and imprecise, without focusing on the key points.
To address these concerns, we have revised both the Discussions and Conclusions sections as follows:
We have summarized the main findings from the bibliometric literature review, highlighted the most influential publications, authors, and research themes. Then, discussed the benefits of social media for SMEs within the context of these findings.
We have then elaborated on how these benefits can address the challenges faced by SMEs, based on the findings from the bibliometric analysis. Explained how these benefits can contribute to the development of SMEs, and discuss the practical implications for SME owners, researchers, and policymakers.
In the conclusion section we have reiterated the main findings from the bibliometric literature review and discussed how the review contributes to the understanding of social media usage by SMEs.
Round 2
Reviewer 2 Report
Dear Authors
The authors have improved their work by accepting the suggestions. The manuscript is clearer now. Congratulations.
Best Regards
Reviewer 3 Report
This paper have revised this paper carefully according to my suggestions and comments, and can be considered for publication.
