Understanding Platform Choice Among Small-Scale Entrepreneurs: A Uses And Gratifications Perspective On Social Media And SEO In Chennai

Abstract

The current research investigates small-scale business owners' preference for using social media for their business needs instead of Search Engine Optimization (SEO). Their usage patterns of social media and their regard for the utility of other platforms were explored. The responses of 385 business owners located in Chennai, India, indicated that social media was utilized universally by all subjects. Business practices were largely influenced by peer recommendation, with 74.5% of participants indicating their choice of a certain platform based on their observations of other similar business activity. Overwhelmingly (80.5%), participants expressed their intention to invest in SEO; however, very few (7.6%) actually implemented some form of SEO, indicating a large intention-action gap. Social media platforms were perceived to be more immediate and visible than SEO when compared to the business owners' desire for social approval and to have ways of engaging with peers (defined as other business owners nearby). The business owners reported structural barriers such as perceptions of complexity, time constraints, and confusion surrounding processes to hinder them from making the switch to utilizing SEO. The study proposes that accessibility of the positive outcomes of SEO can lead small-scale business owners to utilize SEO as their platform of choice while proposing that the selection of a platform is based upon the degree of media that meets social and functional needs by the media. Additionally, due to the noticeable visibility and demonstrability of such outcomes through the implementation of SEO, this may lead to enhancing small-scale business owners' use of the same.

REFERENCES

1. Agarwal, R. N. (2023). Exploring the cultural dimension of technological behaviour in the Indian context. International Journal of Health Sciences, 14(2), 45–58.

2. Hsieh, H. F., & Shannon, S. E. (2005). Three approaches to qualitative content analysis. Qualitative Health Research, 15(9), 1277–1288.

3. Katz, E., Blumler, J. G., & Gurevitch, M. (1974). Utilization of mass communication by the individual. In J. G. Blumler & E. Katz (Eds.), The uses of mass communications: Current perspectives on gratifications research (pp. 19–32). SAGE Publications.

4. McQuail, D. (1983). McQuail’s mass communication theory (1st ed.). SAGE Publications.

5. Ministry of MSME. (2022). Annual report 2021–22. Government of India.

6. Musa, H., Rosli, M. M., & Omar, S. R. (2016). Digital adoption barriers in Southeast Asia: A Malaysian MSME perspective. Asia-Pacific Business Review, 22(3), 420–437.

7. Rath, N. (2024). Perceived advantages and challenges of internet marketing: A study of small entrepreneurs in Punjab. Journal of Policy Options, 7(1), 12–24.

8. Rogers, E. M. (2003). Diffusion of innovations (5th ed.). Free Press.

9. Ruggiero, T. E. (2000). Uses and gratifications theory in the 21st century. Mass Communication & Society, 3(1), 3–37.

10. Shama, S., Mazhar, S. S., Mittal, P., Rizvi, A. F., Khan, F. S., & Rehman, A. (2024). Exploring the interplay of entrepreneurs’ awareness, perception and intention in driving digitalisation for MSMEs. Financial and Credit Activity: Problems of Theory and Practice.

11. Sundar, S. S., & Limperos, A. M. (2013). Uses and grats 2.0: New gratifications for new media. Journal of Broadcasting & Electronic Media, 57(4), 504–525.

12. Venkatesh, V., Morris, M. G., Davis, G. B., & Davis, F. D. (2003). User acceptance of information technology: Toward a unified view. MIS Quarterly, 27(3), 425–478.

13. Whiting, A., & Williams, D. (2013). Why people use social media: A uses and gratifications approach. Qualitative Market Research: An International Journal, 16(4), 362–369.