فصلنامه علمی مطالعات فرهنگ - ارتباطات

فصلنامه علمی مطالعات فرهنگ - ارتباطات

مردم‌نگاری اینترنتی ارتباطات کارآفرینی در ایران؛ مطالعه موردی کارآفرینان ایرانی در شبکه اجتماعی اینستاگرام

نوع مقاله : مقاله پژوهشی

نویسندگان
فائزه اعتماد گلستانی 1
علی اسکندری 2
1 دانشجوی دکتری علوم ارتباطات دانشگاه تهران، تهران، ایران. f.etemadgolestani@ut.ac.ir
2 استادیار گروه ارتباطات، دانشکده علوم اجتماعی، دانشگاه پیام‌نور، تهران، ایران.(نویسنده مسئول) alieskandari@pnu.ac.ir
10.22083/jccs.2026.534673.4069
چکیده
این مطالعۀ کیفی با بهره‌گیری از رویکرد نتنوگرافی، به بررسی راهبردهای ارتباطی کارآفرینان ایرانی در شبکۀ اجتماعی اینستاگرام می‌پردازد. پژوهش حاضر بر پایه چارچوب‌های مفهومی ارتباطات کارآفرینی، کنش متقابل نمادین و جامعه‌شناسی ارتباطات انجام‌ گرفته است و تلاش می‌کند تا نشان دهد که کارآفرینان ایرانی چگونه از امکانات رسانه‌های دیجیتال برای بازنمایی هویت، تولید سرمایه اجتماعی و شکل‌دهی به گفتمان‌های اجتماعی بدیل استفاده می‌کنند. تحلیل کیفی پژوهش شش راهبرد ارتباطی کلیدی را آشکار می‌سازد: روایت‌پردازی شخصی، تعامل اجتماعی و همدلی، خود افشاگری هدفمند، ساخت هویت کارآفرینانه، بازاندیشی انتقادی نسبت به ساختارهای اجتماعی و کنش‌گری ارزش‌محور در شرایط محدودیت منابع. یافته‌ها نشان می‌دهد که کارآفرینی در ایران، صرفاً یک فعالیت اقتصادی نیست، بلکه کنشی فرهنگی، هویت‌محور و درهم‌تنیده با ساختارهای اجتماعی به شمار می‌آید. این پژوهش با ارائه مدلی نظری مبتنی بر زمینه فرهنگی و اجتماعی ایران، ابعاد عاطفی، نمادین و ساختاری ارتباطات کارآفرینی را برجسته می‌سازد. درنهایت، این مطالعه افق‌های تازه‌ای را برای پژوهشگران، سیاست‌گذاران و کنشگرانی که علاقه‌مند به مطالعه دربارۀ نقش فزاینده ارتباطات در زیست‌بوم‌های کارآفرینی در اقتصادهای نوظهور هستند، فراهم می‌کند.
کلیدواژه‌ها
ارتباطات کارآفرینی
نتنوگرافی
رسانه‌های اجتماعی
راهبردهای ارتباطی
کارآفرینان ایرانی
موضوعات

عنوان مقاله English

Nethnography of Entrepreneurial Communication in Iran (A Case Study of Iranian Entrepreneurs on Instagram)

نویسندگان English

faeze etemad golestani 1
علی اسکندری 2
1 D. Candidate, Department of Communication, Faculty of Social Sciences, University of Tehran, Tehran, Iran. Email: f.etemadgolestani@ut.ac.ir
2 Assistant Professor, Department of Communication, Faculty of Social Sciences, Payame Noor University, Tehran, Iran. (Corresponding Author) Email: alieskandari@pnu.ac.ir
چکیده English

Introduction: The conflict between Palestinians and the Zionist occupation represents one of the most significant and enduring struggles in the contemporary world. The present situation can be understood as part of a violent and organized process that began in 1948, involving the displacement of the indigenous Palestinian population and the establishment and expansion of Jewish settlements, accompanied by the destruction of communities and the erosion of Palestinian culture and identity. This settler-colonial project has involved sustained forms of structural and systematic violence. Over many decades, Palestinian resistance to occupation, displacement, and the destruction of communities has generated a distinctive form of resistance. As the Israeli occupation permeates various dimensions of everyday life, the arena of resistance has likewise extended beyond the battlefield into the realm of daily life. This article seeks to bring together Palestinians’ lived experiences in order to understand this distinctive dimension of resistance through the lens of everyday life.
Methods: This study employed a qualitative phenomenological approach, focusing on commonalities in the lived experiences of Palestinians. The study sought to understand the essence of everyday resistance from the participants’ perspectives and to provide a rich and detailed description of the phenomenon. Its aim was to access the meanings embedded in participants’ lifeworlds and their experiences of everyday life, thereby developing a deeper understanding of the phenomenon under investigation. Phenomenological research emphasizes the investigation of the lifeworld, encompassing social realities as they are experienced in everyday life, and therefore calls for a return to the direct, pre-theoretical experience of phenomena. Accordingly, this study sought to collect data that captured these experiences as directly as possible. To this end, in-depth interviews were conducted with Palestinians at the Rafah border crossing and in a Palestinian refugee camp in Lebanon. The data were further supplemented by existing interviews drawn from sources documenting and narrating aspects of Palestinian everyday life. The collected material was then qualitatively coded and analyzed within a phenomenological framework.
Findings: According to the findings, the lived experience of Palestinians under Israeli occupation is shaped by a dual structure of domination and resistance. Mechanisms of domination include the persistent production of fear and intimidation, systematic humiliation in everyday life, psychological suffering, and pervasive anxiety surrounding ordinary activities. These mechanisms contribute to exhausting Palestinians and placing pressure on them to leave their land. They are institutionalized primarily through two instruments: military checkpoints, which function as sites of control, discipline, and degradation, and a complex bureaucratic permit system that restricts movement and construction, thereby disrupting the normal course of everyday life. In response, Palestinians cultivate sources of resistance that make life not only possible but also meaningful. These include maintaining hope and aspirations, transforming the fear of death into an acceptance of martyrdom, nurturing a deep attachment to the homeland, and deriving a sense of meaning and satisfaction from acts of resistance. Key strategies of resistance also include integrating the struggle into everyday routines, whereby survival itself becomes an act of resistance; fostering social solidarity based on shared experiences of suffering; transmitting the values of resistance to children through education and upbringing; and maintaining a steadfast commitment to remaining on the land despite repeated displacement. Ultimately, Palestinian resistance emerges as a life-affirming response to domination and as an enduring expression of agency, identity, and hope embedded in the fabric of everyday life.
Conclusion: The Palestinian struggle against Zionist settler colonialism has persisted for nearly a century. From a sociological perspective, examining the mechanisms and instruments of domination alongside the corresponding strategies and sources of resistance is essential for understanding the dynamics of this enduring struggle. By focusing on the lived experience of resistance in the everyday lives of Palestinians, this study sought to identify and understand the mechanisms through which domination is experienced and the strategies through which resistance is sustained. The most significant mechanisms of domination identified in Palestinian everyday life include the production of fear and intimidation, systematic humiliation, the infliction of psychological suffering and pressure, and the creation of pervasive anxiety in daily activities. These mechanisms are primarily enacted through two key instruments: military checkpoints, which serve as sites of control and degradation, and a complex bureaucratic permit system that restricts movement and construction and thereby disrupts the normal conduct of everyday life.
In contrast, Palestinians have developed enduring forms of resistance rather than remaining passive recipients of domination. These forms of resistance are sustained by several important sources, including hope and aspiration, an acceptance of death and martyrdom, attachment to the homeland, and the ability to derive meaning and even joy from acts of resistance. These sources are reinforced through tangible everyday practices. Among the most significant is the integration of resistance into daily life. The continuation of everyday existence, the development of ways of living that intertwine life with resistance, and the transformation of ordinary activities, such as preparing and serving food, into expressions of resilience and defiance demonstrate how everyday practices can acquire political and symbolic significance. This fusion of everyday life and resistance represents a central strategy through which Palestinians confront the conditions imposed by occupation. Furthermore, the cultivation of social solidarity, the transmission of resistance-oriented values through the education and upbringing of children, and the steadfast commitment to remaining on the land despite repeated displacement constitute important elements of the Palestinian repertoire of resistance. Taken together, these practices demonstrate how everyday life itself can become a site of resistance, enabling Palestinians to preserve identity, social continuity, attachment to place, and a sense of agency under conditions of prolonged occupation.

کلیدواژه‌ها English

Entrepreneurial Communication
Netnography
Social Media
Communication Strategies
Iranian Entrepreneurs
ایسپا؛ مرکز افکار سنجی دانشجویان ایران (1403، 7 مهر)، نتایج جدیدترین نظرسنجی ایسپا؛ میزان استفاده ایرانیان از پیام‌رسان‌ها و شبکه‌های اجتماعی بازیابی شده از:                      ispa.ir/fa/3472
دیتاک (1404)، گزارش سالانه 1403 دیتاک، تاریخ انتشار بهار 1404 بازیابی شده از 
https://dataak.com/1403annual
Abidin, Crystal. “Visibility Labour: Engaging with Influencers’ Fashion Brands and #OOTD Advertorial Campaigns on Instagram.” Media International Australia, vol. 161, no. 1, Nov. 2016, pp. 86-https://doi.org/10.1177/1329878X16665177.
Alsaleh, A. The impact of technological advancement on culture and society. Sci Rep 14, 32140 (2024). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-024-83995-z 
Berger, P.L. and Luckmann, T. (1966) The Social Construction of Reality: A Treatise in the Sociology of Knowledge. Doubleday & Company, New York.
Bourdieu, P. (1986). The forms of capital. In J. Richardson (Ed.), Handbook of Theory and Research for the Sociology of Education (pp. 241-258). Greenwood
Brüderl J. Preisendörfer P. (1998). Network support and the success of newly founded business. Small Business Economics, 10(3), 213-225. DOI:10.1023/A:1007997102930
Bruhn, M. (2008). Kommunikationspolitik für Gründungsunternehmen Entrepreneurial Communication. In J. Freiling & T. Kollmann (Eds.) ,Entrepreneurial Marketing: Besonderheiten, Aufgaben und Lösungsansätze für Gründungsunternehmen (pp. 481-502). Gabler. 
Brüntje, D..& Gajda, O. (2016). Crowdfunding in Europe. State of the Art in Theorey and Practice. Springer International. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-18017-5 Bruyat C., Julien P. (2001). Defining the field of research in entrepreneurship. Journal of Business Venturing, 16(2), 165-180. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0883-9026(99)00043-9 
Cottan-Nir, O. (2019). Toward a conceptual model for determining CEO brand equity. Corporate Reputation Review,22(4), 121-133. https://www.doi.org/10.1057/s41299-019-00063-3
Cumberland, D. M. Herd, A. Alagaraja, M. & Kerrick, S. A. (2016). Assessment and development of global leadership competencies in the workplace: A review of literature. Advances in Developing Human Resources, 18(3), 301-317. https://doi.org/10.1177/152342231664588
Dataak (1404), Dataak Annual Report 1403, publication date Spring 1404 Retrieved from https://dataak.com/1403annual[In Persian]
Di Domenico, M. L., Haugh, H., & Tracey, P. (2010). Social bricolage: Theorizing social value creation in social enterprises. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 34(4), 681-703. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-6520.2010.00370.x
Dong, C., & Zhang, Y. (2024). NPOs’ voice in CSR partnership: An exploratory study using topic modeling. International Journal of Business Communication, 61(2), 219-239. https://doi.org/10.1177/2329488418819136
Downing, S. (2005). The social construction of entrepreneurship: Narrative and dramatic processes in the coproduction of organizations and identities. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 29(2), 185-204. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-6520.2005.00076.x
Duffy, B. E., & Pruchniewska, U. (2017). Gender and self-enterprise in the social media age: A digital double bind. Information, Communication & Society, 20(6), 843-859. https://doi.org/10.1080/1369118X.2017.1291703
Engel, Y., Kaandorp, M., & Elfring, T. (2017). Toward a dynamic process model of entrepreneurial networking under uncertainty. Journal of Business Venturing, 32(1), 35-51. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusvent.2016.10.001
Freiling, J., & Kollmann, T. (Eds.). (2008). Entrepreneurial marketing: Besonderheiten, Aufgaben und Lösungsansätze für Gründungsunternehmen (pp. 481-502). Gabler.
Garud, R., Schildt, H. A., & Lant, T. K. (2014). Contextualizing entrepreneurial innovation: A narrative perspective. Research Policy, 43(7), 1177-1188. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2014.04.015
Gedajlovic, E., Honig, B., Moore, C. B., Payne, G. T., & Wright, M. (2013). Social capital and entrepreneurship: A schema and research agenda. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 37(3), 455-478. https://doi.org/10.1111/etap.12042
Gill, R. (2017). Entrepreneurship. In C. R. Scott & L. Lewis (Eds.) , The international encyclopedia of organizational communication (pp. 1-10). John Wiley & Sons. https://doi.org/10.1002/9781118955567.wbieoc073
Gill, R., & Ganesh, S. (2007). Empowerment, constraint, and the entrepreneurial self: A study of white women entrepreneurs. Journal of Applied Communication Research, 35(3), 268-293. https://doi.org/10.1080/00909880701434265
Global Entrepreneurship Monitor (GEM). (2023). Global entrepreneurship monitor 2023/2024 global report: 25 years and growing. https://www.gemconsortium.org/reports/latest-global-report
Global Entrepreneurship Monitor (GEM). (2024). Global entrepreneurship monitor 2023/2024 global report: 25 years and growing. https://www.gemconsortium.org/report/global-entrepreneurship-monitor-gem-20232024-global-report-25-years-and-growing
Gossel, B. M. (2022). Analogies in entrepreneurial communication and strategic communication: Definition, delimitation of research programs and future research. International Journal of Strategic Communication, 16(2), 134-156. https://doi.org/10.1080/1553118X.2021.2015689
Greenfield, P. M. (2019). Communication technologies and social transformation: Their impact on human development. In R. D. Parke & G. H. Elder Jr. (Eds.) , Children in changing worlds (pp. 235-274). Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108264846.009
Greve, A., & Salaff, J. W. (2003). Social networks and entrepreneurship. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 28(1), 1-22. https://doi.org/10.1111/1540-8520.00029
Habermas, J. (1984). The theory of communicative action, volume 1: Reason and the rationalization of society. Beacon Press.
Haris, A., Barliana, M. S., Saripudin, D., & Abdullah, A. G. (2019). Effectiveness of entrepreneurship communication skills in business group: Ethno-andragogy approach to technical vocational education and training. In 5th UPI International Conference on Technical and Vocational Education and Training (ICTVET 2018) (Vol. 299, pp. 179-182).
Hill, R. C., & Levenhagen, M. (1995). Metaphors and mental models: Sensemaking and sensegiving in innovative and entrepreneurial activities. Journal of Management, 21(6), 1057-1074. https://doi.org/10.1177/014920639502100603
Hoang, H., & Antoncic, B. (2003). Network-based research in entrepreneurship: A critical review. Journal of Business Venturing, 18(2), 165-187. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0883-9026(02)00081-2
Hoops, J. F., & Drzewiecka, J. A. (2017). Critical perspectives toward cultural and communication research. In Oxford Research Encyclopedia of Communication. Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/acrefore/9780190228613.013.175
Huang, G. (2021). Social capital and financial capital acquisition: Creating gaming ventures in Shanghai’s entrepreneurial ecosystem. Chinese Journal of Communication, 14(1), 5-23. https://doi.org/10.1080/17544750.2020.1762686
Humate, M., Atouba, Y., Cooper, K. R., & Pilney, A. (2014). Two paths diverged: Examining the antecedents to social entrepreneurship. Management Communication Quarterly, 28(3), 404-421. https://doi.org/10.1177/0893318914538561
Iacob, S. E., & Hristache, D. A. (2017). Entrepreneurship communication and its role in business management. Annals of the University Dunarea de Jos of Galati: Fascicle XVII, Medicine, 3-10.
Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers (IEEE), & IEEE Technology and Engineering Management Society. (2018). Conference proceedings ICE/IEEE ITMC: 2018 IEEE International Conference on Engineering, Technology and Innovation (ICE/ITMC): Stuttgart, 17.06.-20.06.2018. IEEE.
Invernizzi, E., & Romenti, S. (2015). Adopting an entrepreneurial perspective in the study of strategic communication. In D. Holtzhausen & A. Zerfass (Eds.) , The Routledge handbook of strategic communication (pp. 214-228). Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203094440
Invernizzi, E., Biraghi, S., & Romenti, S. (2012). Entrepreneurial communication and the strategic role of internal communication. Sinergie, 47(87), 149-170.
ISPA; Iranian Student Opinion Polling Center (1403, Mehr 27), Results of the latest ISPA survey; Iranians’ use of messaging apps and social networks Retrieved from: ispa.ir/fa/3472[In Persian]
Jones, G., & Wadhwani, R. D. (2006). Entrepreneurship and business history: Renewing the research agenda. Harvard Business School Working Paper, No. 07-007.
Khazraee, E. (2013). Cultural context of social media use: How do Iranians adapt and use Facebook? iConference 2013 Proceedings.
Kia, A. A., & Nikbakhsh, M. (2023). The netnography of Iranian users’ culture on Instagram. New Media Studies, 9(33), 80-51. https://doi.org/10.22054/nms.2023.34271.544. [In Persian] 
Kozinets, R. V. (2002). The field behind the screen: Using netnography for marketing research in online communities. Journal of Marketing Research, 39(1), 61-72. https://doi.org/10.1509/jmkr.39.1.61.18935
Kozinets, R. V. (2010). Netnography: Doing ethnographic research online. Sage Publications Ltd.
Kozinets, R. V. (2015). Netnography: Redefined (2nd ed.). Sage Publications Ltd.
Lee, R., & Jones, O. (2008). Networks, communication and learning during business start-up: The creation of cognitive social capital. International Small Business Journal: Researching Entrepreneurship, 26(5), 559-594. https://doi.org/10.1177/0266242608094030
Liu, W., Yang, A., Shin, J., Li, Y., Sun, J., Qu, Y., Zhen, L., Kim, H. M., & Dong, C. (2023). One earth, one humanity versus the virus: Examining the global COVID-19 social partnership communication networks on social media. International Journal of Business Communication, 60(2), 587-610. https://doi.org/10.1177/23294884221114393
Lounsbury, M., & Glynn, M. A. (2001). Cultural entrepreneurship: Stories, legitimacy, and the acquisition of resources. Strategic Management Journal, 22(6-7), 545-564. https://doi.org/10.1002/smj.188
Marx, J., Mirbabaie, M., & Stieglitz, S. (2020). You are now an influencer! Measuring CEO reputation in social media. In Australasian Conference on Information Systems 2018, Sydney (pp. 1-7). UTS ePRESS. https://doi.org/10.5130/acis2018.be
Mead, G. H. (1934). Mind, Self, and Society. University of Chicago Press.
Mella, P., & Gazzola, P. (2018). Corporate social responsibility through stakeholder engagement and entrepreneurial communication processes. International Journal of Business Performance Management, 19(1), 36-54. https://doi.org/10.1504/IJBPM.2018.088495
Mella, Piero, and Patrizia Gazzola. “Corporate Social Responsibility through Stakeholder Engagement and Entrepreneurial Communication Processes.” International Journal of Business Performance Management, vol. 19, no. 1, 2018, p. 36. DOI.org (Crossref), https://doi.org/10.1504/IJBPM.2018.088495.Corbin, J., & Strauss, A. (2007). Basics of qualitative research: Techniques and procedures for developing grounded theory (3rd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Mueller, S., Volery, T., & Von Siemens, B. (2012). What do entrepreneurs actually do? An observational study of entrepreneurs’ everyday behavior in the start-up and growth stages. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 36(5), 995-1017. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-6520.2012.00538.x
Mursalzade, H. (2024). Digital social entities, valuable communities: How digitalization enables value co-creation for social enterprises. Society and Economy, 46(4), 423-440. https://doi.org/10.1556/204.2024.00015
Niazi, M., et al. (2019). Ranking virtual social networks based on user satisfaction in Tehran. Interdisciplinary Studies in Communication and Media, 2(3), Article e1064. [In Persian]
Patton, M. Q. (2002). Qualitative research & evaluation methods (3rd ed.). Sage Publications.
Rainie, L., & Wellman, B. (2012). Networked: The new social operating system. MIT Press.
Reynolds, P. N., Hay, M., & Camp, S. M. (1999). Global entrepreneurship monitor 1999: Executive report. https://www.gemconsortium.org/file/open?fileId=47099
Roundy, P. T., & Asllani, A. (2019). Understanding the language of entrepreneurship: An exploratory analysis of entrepreneurial discourse. Journal of Economic and Administrative Sciences, 35(2), 113-127. https://doi.org/10.1108/JEAS-08-2017-0084
Rudeloff, C., Möller, M., Schneider, S., & Rauterberg, H. (2022). It takes two to tango: The interplay between decision logics, communication strategies and social media engagement in start-ups. Review of Managerial Science, 16(3), 681-712. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11846-021-00464-x
Ruef, M., & Lounsbury, M. (2007). Introduction: The sociology of entrepreneurship. In M. Ruef & M. Lounsbury (Eds.) , The sociology of entrepreneurship (Research in the Sociology of Organizations, Vol. 25, pp. 1-29). Emerald Group Publishing Limited. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0733-558X(06)25001-8
Saniei, S., & Kent, M. L. (2019, July 2-5). Shifting the focus from corporate to community: How entrepreneurial engagement informs public relations practice. Paper presented at the Australian & New Zealand Communication Association Conference 2019, Canberra, Australia.
Sarker, S., Ahuja, M., Sarker, S., & Hove-Kirkeby, S. (2011). The role of communication and trust in global virtual teams: A social network perspective. Journal of Management Information Systems, 28(1), 273-310. https://doi.org/10.2753/MIS0742-1222280109
Savrul, M. (2017). The impact of entrepreneurship on economic growth: GEM data analysis. Pressacademia, 4(3), 320-326. https://doi.org/10.17261/Pressacademia.2017.494
Sawyer, R., & Chen, G. M. (2012). The impact of social media on intercultural adaptation. Intercultural Communication Studies, 21(2), 151-169.
Shelby, A. N. (1993). Organizational, business, management, and corporate communication: An analysis of boundaries and relationships. The Journal of Business Communication, 30(3), 241-267. https://doi.org/10.1177/002194369303000302
Shin, C., & Fu, J. S. (2024). Looking back, moving forward: A systematic review of entrepreneurship studies in communication research. International Journal of Business Communication. Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1177/23294884241255906
Śledzik, K. (2013). Schumpeter’s view on innovation and entrepreneurship. In S. Hittmar (Ed.) , Management trends in theory and practice. University of Zilina, Faculty of Management Science and Informatics & Institute of Management.
Soegoto, E. S. (2018). Effective enterprise communication and learning attitude in business performance: A case study on SMEs. European Research Studies, 21(4), 55-68. https://doi.org/10.35808/ersj/1103
Statista. (2022). Number of Instagram users in Iran. https://www.statista.com/statistics/1281604/iran-number-of-instagram-users/
Statista. (2023a). Number of social media users worldwide from 2017 to 2027. https://www.statista.com/statistics/269615/social-network-penetration-by-region/
Statista. (2024). Most popular social networks worldwide as of January 2024, ranked by number of monthly active users. https://www.statista.com/statistics/272014/global-social-networks-ranked-by-number-of-users/
Stevenson, H. H. (1983). A perspective on entrepreneurship (Working Paper No. 9-384-131). Harvard Business School.
Stevenson, H. H. (1985). The heart of entrepreneurship. Harvard Business Review, 63(2), 85-94.
Stolz, I., & Oldenziel Scherrer, S. (2022). International leadership: Effecting success across borders in a boundaryless world. In I. Stolz & S. Oldenziel Scherrer (Eds.) , International leadership: Effecting success across borders in a boundaryless world (pp. 7-30). Springer.
Tuazon, G., Bellavitis, C., & Filatotchev, I. (2018, July). Nascent entrepreneurship research: Theoretical challenges and opportunities. In Academy of Management Proceedings (Vol. 2018, No. 1, p. 11583). Academy of Management. https://doi.org/10.5465/AMBPP.2018.11583
Venciute, D., Yue, C. A., & Thelen, P. D. (2024). Leaders’ personal branding and communication on professional social media platforms: Motivations, processes, and outcomes. Journal of Brand Management, 31, 38-57. https://doi.org/10.1057/s41262-023-00332-x
Welz, B., & Rosenberg, A. (2018). Innovation in the twenty-first century. In SAP Next-Gen (pp. xx-xx). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-72574-1_4
Werven, R. (2017). Acquiring resources for a new venture: A study of the micro-level linguistic practices of startup entrepreneurs [Doctoral dissertation, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam]. Amsterdam Business Research Institute.
Zhang, Y., & Wildemuth, B. M. (2009). Qualitative analysis of content. In B. M. Wildemuth (Ed.) , Applications of social research methods to questions in information and library science (pp. 308-319). Libraries Unlimited.
Ziaei Parvar, H., & Aghili, V. (2009). A study on the influence of virtual social networks among Iranian users. Resaneh, 20(4).[In Persian]