1. Introduction

2. Materials and Methods

2.6. Data Items

This section provisions an exhaustive review of the data items sought in this systematic literature review. It focuses on the outcomes, and other variables relevant to identifying, analyzing, and incorporating social media metrics for the strategic success for small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs). The main outcomes include enhanced organizational performance of SMEs, overall business performance, and the long-term impacts of the integration of social media metrics with SMEs. Furthermore, this review also explores variables such as the economic context, technology providers, technology implementation models, and sample size and characteristics. This allows for an exhaustive comprehension of the applications, practices, and impacts of social media metrics in SMEs. This review provides a structured significant analysis of how social media activities and metrics contribute to the overall performance of SMEs across various SME sectors.

2.6.1. Data Collection Method

In this systematic literature review (SLR), identified, analyzed, and eligible data outcome was sought to meet the scrupulousness of the research papers that meet the inclusion criteria from Table 4. This review focused on the data relevant to key social media metrics, such as engagement metrics, conversion metrics, return on investment (ROI), reach and impressions, click-through rate, and sentiment analysis outcome domains that are within a publication timeframe of a decade (from 2014 to 2024).

The eligibility criteria of the studies that were included is such that the studies must provision pragmatic data on the mentioned metrics and meet proper relevance to social media activities and SMEs. Prioritization of results in cases of multitudinous outcomes within a domain was provisioned to quality research studies that were highly relevant to the linkage between social media activities and SMEs. This resulted in the maintenance of applicable high-quality data.

In relation to this research topic, the focus was initially on the types of metrics that focused on the growth and/or success of SMEs such as social media platforms subscription or follower growth and brand awareness which both facilitate the strategy success of SMEs with the employment of SMEs. However, the engagement metrics, reach and impressions, click-through, conversion metrics, ROI, and sentiment analysis proved to be more aligned with the review purpose, specifically on the strategic success of SMEs. No adjustments were made to the selection process as it is explicit. Tools such as RevMan and Covidence were used in the comprehensive structured approach of the data collection process. Figure 5 details the steps followed in the results selection from the study data.

2.6.2. Collected Data Variables Definition

Data was collected from the specific social media platforms (SMPs) mentioned in the research study title, year of publication, the mentioned online databases, journal names, type of research, industry context, geographical location, economic context, type of social media platform, types of social media metrics, applicable technology providers, technology implementation model, the research design, type of study, sample size, sample characteristics, methods of data collection, data analysis techniques, social media performance metrics, business performance metrics, organizational outcomes, and the long-term impacts variables in addition to the main data outcome domains. The mentioned variables’ summary is also available in an Excel spreadsheet compiled for this SLR. The economic context featured in this SLR explores the type of countries where a majority or lack of investment in the employment of social media metrics to SMEs helped to understand the factor that lies in the ability of SMEs to meet the organizational and long-term impacts with regards to the financial investment in the SMEs. In random cases of finding some research studies missing social media platforms specifications and or type of industry of the SMEs, educated assumptions based on the common patterns of published research papers or case studies were made such that certain social media metrics are associated with certain case studies and unspecified industries were assumed to be applicable in industries that are associated with the type of the published research case studies.

The SME performance metrics checklist and social media analytics framework were employed in an attempt or with regards to striving for an establishment of comprehensible guidelines for social media activities and metrics for strategy success for SMEs.

Table 6. Data Variables Collected.

Table 6. Data Variables Collected.

Field	Description
Study characteristics	These includes the geographical location, type of industry (e.g., SMEs, startups, small businesses), sample size, types of social media platforms employed in the studies (e.g., Facebook, Twitter/X, LinkedIn), types of social media metrics employed (e.g., engagement rate, follower growth, conversion rate), outcomes and impacts, and other factors related to the study’s context.
Intervention characteristics	Details of social media metrics and measurement tools (e.g., qualitative and quantitative metrics), the strategy alignment, and scalability (how metrics application and tools effect SMEs’ growth)
Economic factors	Financial investment value of social media metrics, competitive edge, and the ROI (return on investment)
External influences	Competitive landscape, market trends, SMPs algorithm changes/updates, technological advancements, and industry-specific trend factors

2.11. Certainty Assessment

The certainty assessment of this research topic was conducted with the guidance of the following quality assessment (QA) criteria to ensure the studies’ relevance and accuracy.

The quality assessment ratings of the studies are as follows: studies with a high level of certainty in the quality assessment are rated ‘1,’ moderate quality is denoted by ‘0.5,’ and low quality is denoted by ‘0.’ Each study can receive a total rating of up to 5, indicating a high level of certainty in the quality assessment for this review topic, while the lowest possible rating is 0, indicating low certainty and potential bias in the study. Table 6 illustrates how the studies were assessed for their certainty. Study Ref denoting the studies’ reference numbers, and the five quality assessment statements, the total and the final percentage grading from 0% to 100% (low quality to high quality).

Table 10. Proposed Research Quality Assessment Criteria.

Table 10. Proposed Research Quality Assessment Criteria.

Study Ref.	QA1	QA2	QA3	QA4	QA5	Total	Final % Grading
[Ref X1]	X	X	X	X	X	X	X1%
[Ref X2]	X	X	X	X	X	X	X2%
[Ref X3]	X	X	X	X	X	X	X3%

To evaluate the certainty of the research results, the 2021 GRADE tool was utilized to assess the certainty of evidence. To ensure comprehensive thoroughness and relevance of the research studies included, the following quality assessment statements were applied: QA1: Relevance to SMEs and social media strategy, QA2: Utilized metrics clarity and explicitness, QA3: Study Design and Methodological Thoroughness, QA4: Data Collection and Sampling Methods, and QA5: Biasness Consideration and Confounding Variables. Each factor was systematically evaluated based on its impact on the overall certainty of evidence. QA1 assessed whether the study outcomes and metrics were specifically relevant to SMEs, ensuring that the social media strategies discussed were applicable to small and medium-sized businesses. Studies with a clear focus on SME-specific strategies received higher certainty ratings. QA2 examined the clarity and explicitness of the social media metrics utilized in the studies. Studies that explicitly detailed the metrics (e.g., engagement rates, conversion rates, customer acquisition costs) were rated higher for their contribution to precision and replicability. QA3 evaluated the methodological rigor of the study design, including the choice of methods (e.g., experimental, survey-based, or mixed methods), ensuring thoroughness in investigating the relationship between social media metrics and SME success. Studies with robust designs and clear methods received high ratings for certainty.

QA4 focused on the data collection and sampling methods utilized in the studies. Those with well-defined sampling procedures and sound data collection strategies were given higher certainty ratings, while studies with vague or insufficient sampling details were considered to have lower certainty. QA5 addressed potential sources of bias and the consideration of confounding variables. Studies that explicitly identified and mitigated biases (such as selection bias or response bias) and accounted for confounding factors were rated with higher certainty. The overall judgment of certainty for each study was categorized as high (denoted by “1”), moderate (denoted by “0.5”), or low (denoted by “0”), based on the cumulative scores across the five QA statements. Studies that performed well across all factors (i.e., showing consistency, precision, and methodological thoroughness) were rated as high certainty (1), while those with limitations in one or more areas received lower ratings. Review-specific considerations included the assessment of imprecision, where effect estimates with narrow confidence intervals and significant impact on SME performance metrics were deemed more reliable.

The certainty assessment was conducted by one independent reviewer with the supervision of the second reviewer who is an expert. Disagreements were resolved through discussion, with the second reviewer overseeing the work. Additionally, information from original investigators was sought in cases where methodological clarity or additional data were required. No automation tools were utilized. However, key phrases were utilized to identify studies relevant to social media activity metrics, along with the filtration systems from the databases. The results of the certainty assessment were presented in Table X, detailing the study identifications, the quality assessment statements (QA1 to QA5), as well as the overall total percentage grading. This is in relation to the outcomes, such as engagement, conversions metrics regarding this review.

3. Results

3.1. Study Selection Results

The study selection process for this systematic literature review was conducted according to the PRISMA 2020 guidelines. An exhaustive search was performed across the following databases: Google Scholar, Web of Science, and Scopus, to identify studies highly relevant to the research topic “Tracking and Measuring Social Media Activity: Metrics for Strategy Success for SMEs.”

3.1.1. Search and Selection Process Overview

On Google Scholar, an overarching complete search was conducted by utilizing the keywords or search phrase that is directly relevant to the inclusion and exclusion criteria, this is also inclusive of Boolean logic operators the likes of: “Social media” OR “Social Networks” OR “Digital Platforms” “Tracking social media” OR “Measuring social media” OR “Social media metrics” AND “SME” or “Small and medium enterprises” OR “Small business” AND “Strategy success” OR “Strategy effectiveness” OR “Performance measurement” and this search resulted in approximately 17 500 records. A similar comprehensive search was conducted on Web of Science and Scopus. From Web of Science, the research resulted in 84 records, and Scopus resulted in 42 records. 22 duplicate records were removed. 17 626 records were screened from which 17 488 records were excluded. This led to a total of 138 research studies being sought for retrieval and included in my review.

Figure 14. Proposed PRISMA Flowchart.

Figure 14. Proposed PRISMA Flowchart.

Figure 15. Distribution Of Online Database.

Figure 15. Distribution Of Online Database.

3.1.2. Excluded Studies: Justifications for Non-Inclusion Despite Meeting Criteria

Table 11 shows the number of citations that met the inclusion criteria but were subsequently excluded, along with the reasons for their exclusion. The primary reason for exclusion was a lack of relevance or direct connection to the research topic.

The cited studies as illustrated in Table 6 were excluded due to their low relevance to the research topic of tracking and measuring social media activity—metrics for strategy success for SMEs. These research studies do not include a research framework or methodology for tracking and measuring social media activity for the strategy success of SMEs.

3.4. Results Of Individual Studies

The analysis of the social media metrics reveals several key insights for strategic success in small and medium enterprises (SMEs). While the conversion rate of 9.42% indicates effective strategies in converting engagement to actions, the decision-making metrics value of 0.72% suggests a need for improvement in making decisions in the best interest of retaining customers and maximizing their long-term value.

The high engagement rate of 18.12% shows strong audience interaction, which is promising for brand loyalty. However, the significant portion of unspecified data at 44.93% highlights a critical gap in measurement that must be addressed to gain clearer insights on this topic, as stated by the research gaps found in Table 1, along with other research gaps. Additionally, the ROI of 2.17% points to a need for optimizing marketing efforts to achieve better financial returns. Follower growth at 5.80% indicates rising interest, yet the metrics surrounding brand awareness and adoption (both at 5.07%) suggest there is still ample opportunity to enhance visibility and attract new customers.

Figure 19. Types of Social Media Metrics.

Figure 19. Types of Social Media Metrics.

In this section on the results of individual studies, the identified studies have been extracted from the Google Scholar, Web of Science, and Scopus databases through a detailed search. Figure 20 illustrates the types of social media platforms in the research studies. Figure 20 displays that Facebook is the dominant platform for SMEs, with 46 mentions, followed by Instagram with 22 mentions. A significant number of SMEs use combinations of platforms, such as Facebook, Twitter/X, LinkedIn (13 mentions), and Facebook/Instagram (13 mentions). Other combinations, including Facebook, Twitter/X, Instagram (10 mentions) and LinkedIn/Twitter/X (6 mentions), also highlight the importance of multi-platform strategies. This suggests that SMEs are focusing on a mix of platforms to broaden audience reach and engagement, using platform-specific metrics like reach, engagement rates, and conversion rates to optimize their social media strategies.

3.5. Results Of Syntheses

The following section illustrates the synthesis of the results and outcomes of the included studies. It also explores the synthesis of the identified trends, themes, and conclusions drawn from the data.

3.5.1. Summary of Study Characteristics

Figure 21 comprises 138 total industry entries, revealing that SMEs account for 90 entries, underscoring the importance of monitoring key social media metrics such as engagement rates, conversion rates, reach, and follower growth for successful strategic execution. These metrics are particularly critical in industries like retail (4), where they help improve customer experience, boost sales, and foster loyalty. 9 industry sectors are not specified. 2 entries for the travel and leisure sector, and 1 entry for the healthcare sector, along with other trust-dependent sectors, place significant emphasis on brand sentiment and reputation tracking. Industry-specific sectors, such as sustainable forestry and wood products, energy sector, and technology and industrial services sector, may benefit from customized social media metrics and influencer partnerships. Collectively, SMEs across these sectors can achieve strategic success by aligning social media metrics with industry-specific needs while tracking overarching KPIs.

3.5.2. Results of Statistical Syntheses

Figure 22 data reveals the key insights into how SMEs can leverage social media metrics across different geographical regions for strategic success. The USA (9.49%), being the largest market, highlights the need for SMEs to track reach, engagement rates, and conversion rates on platforms like Facebook and Instagram to drive brand awareness and customer acquisition. Similarly, in India and Indonesia (7.30%), SMEs should focus on follower growth, impressions, and customer sentiment, leveraging interactive platforms like Instagram. In Germany (3.65%), Spain and South Africa (4.38%), and Italy (4.38%), SMEs should prioritize engagement and conversion tracking, with a focus on localizing content. Emerging markets such as Nigeria (3.65%), Brazil (2.19%), and South Africa (4.38%) present opportunities for SMEs to emphasize reach and mobile engagement metrics. In China (4.38%), South Korea and Pakistan (2.92%), tracking platform-specific metrics like user interaction and content engagement is key, especially on local platforms. Mature English-speaking markets like the UK (5.84%), Australia (2.19%), and Canada (0.73%) require SMEs to focus on conversion rates, reach, and ROI tracking for paid campaigns. Finally, in Dubai (0.73%) and Oman (0.73%), localized engagement and sentiment tracking will enhance social media success. By aligning these metrics with regional needs, SMEs can optimize their social media strategies for global growth.

3.5.3. Analysis of Sources of Heterogeneity

Figure 22 illustrates the analysis of social media activity tracking among small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs). The findings are categorized into two economic groups: “Developed” (49%) and “Developing” (51%s) countries. Notably, SMEs in Developing countries demonstrate a slight advantage of 2% over their counterparts in Developed countries, suggesting that these enterprises are employing effective strategies in emerging markets.

To enhance the success of their social media strategies, SMEs should prioritize several key metrics: engagement rate, follower growth rate, reach and impressions, conversion rate, and customer feedback derived from sentiment analysis. Regular monitoring of these metrics will enable SMEs to refine their tactics and allocate resources more effectively, ensuring their competitiveness in a rapidly changing landscape.

Furthermore, a deep understanding of market differences is crucial. By tailoring content strategies to align with audience preferences and behaviours in different economic contexts, SMEs can optimize their social media presence and drive better engagement with their target audiences.

Figure 22. Economic Context.

Figure 22. Economic Context.

3.5.4. Sensitivity Analyses Results

Figure 23 displays a range of frameworks and technology models. The analysis of frameworks for tracking and measuring social media activities reveals several key insights. The Balanced Scorecard, with 24 entries, is the most prominent framework, emphasizing its effectiveness in aligning social media metrics with broader business objectives. Data Envelopment Analysis and the Technology Acceptance Model each have 21 entries, highlighting their roles in evaluating efficiency and user acceptance of social media tools. Additionally, Knowledge Management (11) and Neuromarketing Models (13) stress the importance of understanding customer behaviour to enhance engagement strategies. Performance Measurement Systems also feature prominently with 13 entries, reinforcing the need for structured evaluation methods. Notably, 10 entries were categorized as “Not Specified,” indicating a gap in clearly defined metrics. The Risk Management Model (6) underscores the necessity of identifying potential risks associated with social media activities. Combined frameworks, such as the Balanced Scorecard/Risk Management Model (6) and the Technology Acceptance Model/Neuromarketing Model (5), suggest a trend towards integrated approaches for comprehensive assessment.

3.6. Reporting Biases

The data reveals significant reporting biases in the tracking and measuring of social media activities, highlighting areas where insights may be skewed or incomplete. A predominant 63 entries are categorized simply as “SMEs,” which constitutes a major portion of the dataset and suggests a lack of granularity that can hinder targeted analysis. This broad classification may mask the unique challenges and strategies of different types of SMEs. Marketing roles are somewhat better represented, with Marketing Managers appearing 3 times and SME Managers/Business Analysts also listed 3 times. However, the representation of other specific roles, such as B2B SMEs at 2, SME Owners/Managers at 2, and Start-Ups at 6, remains limited, indicating potential underrepresentation of important perspectives in the analysis. A notable 10 entries are labeled as “Not Specified,” further emphasizing the uncertainty in defining relevant stakeholder categories. This ambiguity can lead to misinterpretations and a lack of clarity in understanding the effectiveness of social media strategies across different groups. Other roles, such as Healthcare Professionals, Hospitality Managers, and various marketing-related positions, each appear only once, suggesting that crucial sectors may be inadequately represented. Additionally, Small Businesses are mentioned 9 times, but this too lacks specificity regarding their social media practices.

Figure 24. Research Emphasis on Sample Characteristics.

Figure 24. Research Emphasis on Sample Characteristics.

4. Discussion

Table 17. Summary of the Insights and Answers to Section 1.1 Research Questions.

4.1.8. Metrics and KPIs for Measuring Study Topic Performance 

Each KPI plays a crucial role in helping SMEs track and enhance their social media performance over time. Conversion Rate is vital as it directly links social media activities to business outcomes, allowing SMEs to understand which strategies lead to sales or leads. Engagement Rate offers insights into how well content resonates with the audience, guiding content creation to foster deeper connections. Monitoring Follower Growth is essential for assessing brand reach and the effectiveness of campaigns designed to attract new customers. Customer Lifetime Value (CLV) helps SMEs recognize the long-term benefits of customer loyalty, informing strategies for retention and engagement. Evaluating Brand Awareness allows SMEs to gauge their market presence and differentiate from competitors while measuring Return on Investment (ROI) is crucial for determining the financial impact of social media marketing efforts.

Table 21. Key Performance Indicators for Key Metrics Success.

Table 21. Key Performance Indicators for Key Metrics Success.

KPI	Description	Relevance
Conversion Rate.	Percentage of users completing desired actions.	Measures social media’s impact on goals.
Engagement Rate	User interactions relative to followers/impressions.	Indicates content effectiveness.
Follower Growth	Increase in followers over time.	Displays brand reach potential.
Customer Lifetime Value	Customer Lifetime Value (CLV) Total revenue generated per customer relationship.	Evaluates long-term customer value.
Brand Awareness	Customer recognition and recall of a brand.	Crucial for the acquisitioning of attracting new customers.
Return on Investment (ROI)	(ROI) Financial return from marketing investments.	Assesses marketing efficiency.

Table 22 details how the strategies from this review can be customized to different SME industries.

4.1.12. Roadmap for SMEs Businesses and Policy Recommendations 

This section explores the roadmap for SMEs businesses and policy recommendation as detailed by Table 25. The following roadmap, which was developed after a comprehensive examination of the best practices, identifies important actions that SMEs should take. This roadmap highlights the significance of setting precise goals and guidelines in addition to the necessity of continual training and performance reviews.

Small and medium-sized businesses (SMEs) can successfully incorporate social media strategies into their operations by following this blueprint, which will guarantee consistent customer engagements and social media platform compliance. Additionally, suggestions for policies are offered to assist with digital marketing initiatives, to allow SMEs to adopt the agility and flexibility structured approaches to the constantly changing social media scene. SMEs may more effectively monitor and assess their social media activity by employing this methodical roadmap, which will ultimately improve their strategy’s growth and success.

Table 25. Summary of the Key Findings, with Metrics and their Direct Business Impacts.

Table 25. Summary of the Key Findings, with Metrics and their Direct Business Impacts.

Step	Action	Results
1. Current State Analysis	Evaluate existing social media presence and performance.	Identify strengths, weaknesses, and opportunities for growth.
2. Set Objectives	Define specific, measurable goals for social media engagement.	Create a focused strategy that aligns with overall business objectives.
3. Develop a Policy	Establish clear social media policies and guidelines.	guidelines Ensure consistent messaging and compliance across platforms
4. Implementation	Launch targeted social media campaigns using relevant content.	Drive engagement and reach social media metrics while monitoring key performance indicators (KPIs).
5. Training & Support	Provide training for staff on social media best practices.	Empower team members to effectively manage and contribute to social media efforts.
6. Performance Evaluation	Frequently assess the campaign results and collect useful feedback.	Adopt agility, and flexibility based on performance data to optimize future campaigns

Figure 26. Roadmap to Effective Social Media Integration for SMEs.

Figure 26. Roadmap to Effective Social Media Integration for SMEs.

To promote digital marketing in SMEs, there are several key policy recommendations that can be implemented. Training programs backed by the Government should be developed to enhance digital marketing skills among SME staff. Financial incentives, such as tax breaks or grants, can encourage investments in digital marketing tools. A centralized online resource hub can provide SMEs with essential templates and best practices. Additionally, facilitating networking events will allow SMEs to learn from successful case studies, while mentorship programs can connect them with experienced digital marketers for personalized guidance. Together, these initiatives can empower SMEs to effectively integrate digital marketing strategies and strengthen their online presence.

5. Conclusions

References

1. 1. U. Sivarajah, Z. Irani, S. Gupta, and K. Mahroof, “Role of big data and social media analytics for business to business sustainability: A participatory web context,” Industrial Marketing Management, vol. 86, no. 1, pp. 163–179, Apr. 2020. Author 1, A.; Author 2, B. Title of the chapter. In Book Title, 2nd ed.; Editor 1, A., Editor 2, B., Eds.; Publisher: Publisher Location, Country, 2007; Volume 3, pp. 154–196. [CrossRef]
2. Alalawneh, A.A.; Al-Omar, S.Y.S.; Alkhatib, S. The Complexity of Interaction between Social Media Platforms and Organizational Performance. Journal of Open Innovation: Technology, Market, and Complexity, 2022; 8, 169. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
3. Rodriguez, M.; Peterson, R.M.; Ajjan, H. Crm/Social Media Technology: Impact on Customer Orientation Process and Organizational Sales Performance. in Ideas in Marketing: Finding the New and Polishing the Old, 2014, pp. 636–638. [CrossRef]
4. Power, D.J.; Phillips-Wren, G. Impact of Social Media and Web 2.0 on Decision-Making. Journal of Decision Systems 2011, 20, 249–261. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
5. Power, D.J.; Phillips-Wren, G. Impact of Social Media and Web 2.0 on Decision-Making. Journal of Decision Systems 2011, 20, 249–261. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
6. ZERRES, C. TOO HARD TO MEASURE! MEASUREMENT OF SOCIAL MEDIA ACTIVITIES. AN OBJECTIVE-BASED PROCESS. Management & Marketing 2021, 19, 201–211. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
7. “SELYE E-STUDIES SELYE E-STUDIES Selye e-studies. vol. 11, no. 1, 2020, Available at:: https://eprints.uad.ac.id/43211/1/Artikel%20jurnal_Nick%20_%20Rendra_WIdyatama_page%2042-54_Selye_E_studies_1_2020.pdf#page=27.
8. “Evaluation and decision-making in social media marketing | Request PDF,” ResearchGate. Available at:https://www.researchgate.net/publication/309563351_Evaluation_and_decisionmaking_in_social_media_marketing.
9. “(PDF) RENL: A Framework for Social Media Marketing Strategy,” ResearchGate. Available at: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/263109467_RENL_A_Framework_for_Social_Media_Marketing _Strategy.
10. Bruce, Emmanuel & Zhao, Shurong & Bankuoru Egala, Sulemana & Yegenmuradov, Mammet & Godson, Kweitsu. (2022). Social Media and Its Connection to Business Performance—A Literature Review. American Journal of Industrial and Business Management. 12. 877-893. [CrossRef]
11. Spiller, L.; Tuten, T. Integrating Metrics Across the Marketing Curriculum. Journal of Marketing Education 2015, 37, 114–126. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
12. Stieglitz, S.; Mirbabaie, M.; Ross, B.; Neuberger, C. Social media analytics – Challenges in topic discovery, data collection, and data preparation. International Journal of Information Management 2018, 39, 156–168. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
13. Rosário, Albérico & Dias, Joana. (2023). Marketing Strategies on Social Media Platforms. International Journal of E-Business Research. 19. 1-25. [CrossRef]
14. Barnes, L.R.; Foster, A.M. Decision-making in social media marketing: The role of data-driven insights. Journal of Marketing Theory and Practice.
15. Keegan; B.J.; Rowley; J. (2017), “Evaluation and decision making in social media marketing”, Management Decision, Vol. 55 No. 1, pp. 15-31. [CrossRef]
16. Shareef, M.A.; Mukerji, B.; Dwivedi, Y.K.; Rana, N.P.; Islam, R. Social media marketing: Comparative effect of advertisement sources. Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services 2019, 46, 58–69. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
17. Pour, J. ; Hosseinzadeh; Mahdiraji, A.; H. (2021), “Exploring and evaluating success factors of social media marketing strategy: a multi-dimensional-multi-criteria framework”, Foresight, Vol. 23 No. 6, pp. 655-678. [CrossRef]
18. I. Lee, “Social Media for Business Model Improvement,” www.igi-global.com, 2014. https://www.igiglobal.com/chapter/social-media-for-business-model-improvement/113596.
19. Mccorkindale, T.; Distaso, M. The State of Social Media Research: Where Are We Now, Where We Were and What It Means for Public Relations.” Available: https://painepublishing.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/02/The-State-of-SM-Research-by-Tina-and-Marcia.pdf.
20. F. J. Grajales III, S. Sheps, K. Ho, H. Novak-Lauscher, and G. Eysenbach. Social Media: A Review and Tutorial of Applications in Medicine and Health Care. Journal of Medical Internet Research 2014, 16, e13. [CrossRef]
21. Toker, A.; Seraj, M.; Kuscu, A.; Yavuz, R.; Koch, S.; Bisson, C. Social media adoption: A process-based approach. Journal of Organizational Computing and Electronic Commerce 2016, 26, 344–363. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
22. Knoll, “Advertising in social media: a review of empirical evidence. International Journal of Advertising 2015, 35, 266–300. [CrossRef]
23. Canziani; B.F.; Welsh; D.H.B. (2016), “Website quality for SME wineries: measurement insights”, Journal of Hospitality and Tourism Technology, Vol. 7 No. 3, pp. 266-280. [CrossRef]
24. He, W.; Wang, F.-K.; Chen, Y.; Zha, S. An exploratory investigation of social media adoption by small businesses. Information Technology and Management 2015, 18, 149–160. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
25. Haase, H.; Franco, M. What factors drive performance of small and medium-sized enterprises? European J. of International Management 2016, 10, 678. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
26. White; E. ; Black, J. Social Media Analytics in the Fashion Industry for SMEs. Fashion Marketing Review 2018, 6, 201–213. [Google Scholar]
27. Singh; Patel; amp; Sharma, K. Engagement Metrics for SMEs in the Hospitality Industry. Journal of Hospitality Marketing 2018, 5, 156–170. [Google Scholar]
28. Ukoha, C.; Stranieri, A. Criteria to Measure Social Media Value in Health Care Settings: Narrative Literature Review. Journal of Medical Internet Research 2019, 21, e14684. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
29. Essa, M.A.; Yahia, I.B. Success and failure factors of social media integration - insights from business experience. Intern tional Journal of Electronic Marketing and Retailing, vol. 10, no. 2, p. 118, 2019. [CrossRef]
30. Essa, M.A.; Yahia, I.B. Success and failure factors of social media integration - insights from business experience. International Journal of Electronic Marketing and Retailing 2019, 10, 118. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
31. Wilson; R. ; Hart, L. Effectiveness of Social Media Campaigns in SMEs: An Analysis. Marketing Science 2020, 9, 99–112. [Google Scholar]
32. Dirgiatmo, Y.; Abdullah, Z.; Ali, R.H.R.M. Social media practices in Indonesian SMEs. International Journal of Business Information Systems, vol. 35, no. 1, p. 2020, 35, 3. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
33. Irbo, M.M.; Mohammed, A.A. Social media, business capabilities and performance: A review of literature. African Journal of Business Management 2020, 14, 271–277. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
34. Kubheka, B.Z.; Carter, V.; Mwaura, J. Social media health promotion in South Africa: Opportunities and challenges. African Journal of Primary Health Care & Family Medicine 2020, 12. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
35. Dwivedi, Y.K.; Ismagilova, E.; Rana, N.P.; Raman, R. Social Media Adoption, Usage And Impact In Business-To-Business (B2B) Context: A State-Of-The-Art Literature Review. Information Systems Frontiers 2021, 25, 971–993. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
36. Nanda, P.; Kumar, V. Social media analytics: tools, techniques and present day practices. International Journal of Services Operations and Informatics 2021, 11, 422. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
37. ZERRES, C. TOO HARD TO MEASURE! MEASUREMENT OF SOCIAL MEDIA ACTIVITIES. AN OBJECTIVE-BASED PROCESS. Management & Marketing 2021, 2. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
38. Dos Santos, J.; Duffett, R. Exploring social media usage as a communication channel among independent food retailer SMEs in South Africa. Small Business International Review 2021, 5, e392. [CrossRef]
39. Qalati, S.A.; Ostic, D.; Sulaiman, M.A.B.A.; Gopang, A.A.; Khan, A. Social Media and SMEs’ Performance in Developing Countries: Effects of Technological-Organizational-Environmental Factors on the Adoption of Social Media. SAGE Open 2158, 12, 215824402210945. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
40. Pellegrino, A.; Abe, M. Leveraging Social Media for SMEs: Findings from a Bibliometric Review. Sustainability 2023, 15, 7007. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
41. J. Pour, S. M. Jafari, and F. Javidi. A Framework for Social Media Marketing Evaluation in SMEs: A Mixedmethods Approach. New Marketing Research Journal 2023, 12, 1–28. [CrossRef]
42. Diab, A. Critical Analysis on Measuring Social Media Performance: Applicability of the ROI. Management Studies and Economic Systems, vol. 8, no. 1/2, pp. 1–8, Apr. 2023, Accessed: Sep. 08, 2024. [Online]. Available: https://www.msaes.org/article_169563.html.
43. Minova, “THE INFLUENCE OF SOCIAL MEDIA MARKETING ON THE GROWTH OF SMALL AND MEDIUM SIZED ENTERPRISES IN MACEDONIA. KNOWLEDGE - International Journal, /: no. 1, pp. 103–108, 2024, Accessed: Sep. 08, 2024. [Online]. Available: https://ikm.mk/ojs/index.php/kij/article/view/6901, 2024; 1.
44. Raihan, “A review of the digitalization of the small and medium enterprises (SMEs) toward sustainability. Global Sustainability Research 2024, 3, 1–16. [CrossRef]
45. Sagala, G.H.; Őri, D. Toward SMEs digital transformation success: a systematic literature review. Information Systems and e-Business Management 2024. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
46. Maxwell,, S.; Verma,, A.; Singh,, A.K. EXPLORING THE INFLUENCE OF SOCIAL MEDIA MARKETING ON THE GROWTH OF MSMES. Jamshedpur Research Review 2024, 12. [Google Scholar]
47. Mani; Jabbour; C. J.C.; Mani; K.T. Supply chain social sustainability in small and medium manufacturing enterprises and firms’ performance: Empirical evidence from an emerging Asian economy. International Journal of Production Economics 2020, 227, 107656. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
48. Valos; Polonsky; M. J.; Mavondo; Lipscomb, J. Senior marketers’ insights into the challenges of social media implementation in large organisations: assessing generic and electronic orientation models as potential solutions. Journal of Marketing Management 2015, 31, 713–746. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
49. Mankgele; K.P. 2021. The impact of strategic orientation and networking on the sustainable performance of Small and Medium Business in Polokwane Municipality, Limpopo Province (Doctoral dissertation).
50. Vetráková; Hitka; Potkány; Lorincová; Smerek, L. Corporate sustainability in the process of employee recruitment through social networks in conditions of Slovak small and medium enterprises. Sustainability 2018, 10, p1670. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
51. McCann; Barlow, A. Use and measurement of social media for SMEs. Journal of Small Business and Enterprise Development 2015, 22, 273–287. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
52. Mahendrawathi, E.R.; Wardati, N. K. Mahendrawathi; E. R.; Wardati, N. K. The impact of social media functionality and strategy alignment to small and medium enterprises (SMEs) performance: a case study in garment SME in East Java. Asia Pacific Journal of Information Systems 2020, 30, 568–589. [Google Scholar]
53. Jones, N.; Borgman, R.; Ulusoy, E. . Impact of social media on small businesses. Journal of Small Business and Enterprise Development 2015, 22, 611–632. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
54. Medjani, F.; Rutter, R.; Nadeau, J. Social media management, objectification and measurement in an emerging market. International Journal of Business and Emerging Markets 2019, 11, 288–311. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
55. Merrigan, N. Social Media Marketing and its effectiveness among Irish SMEs in the hospitality industry. Doctoral dissertation, Dublin, National College of Ireland, 2021.
56. A. Akbar. Factors influencing the usage of Instagram for business and its effect on financial performance and non-financial performance. Journal of Digitovation and Information System 2021, 1, 43–55. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
57. Santos, J.D.; Duffett, R. Exploring social media usage as a communication channel among independent food retailer SMEs in South Africa. Small Business International Review 2021, 5, e392. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
58. Shafique, R. Importance of Online Marketing Using Social Media Platforms for Small Companies. 2024.
59. Hämäläinen, A. Measuring the performance of influencer marketing campaigns: objectives and performance metrics. 2021.
60. Al-Essa, M.; Yahia, I.B. Success and failure factors of social media integration—insights from business experience. International Journal of Electronic Marketing and Retailing 2019, 10, 118–129. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
61. Lányi, A.; Hornyák, M.; Kruzslicz, F. The effect of online activity on SMEs’ competitiveness. Competitiveness Review: An International Business Journal 2021, 31, 477–496. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
62. Setkute, J. In search of digital marketing communications success: the case of oil and gas industry B2B SMEs. Doctoral dissertation, 2018.
63. Stepanova, D. Effectiveness of short-form video marketing in social media strategy. 2024.
64. Etim, G.S.; James, E.E.; Nnana, A.N.; Okeowo, V.O. E-marketing strategies and performance of small and medium-sized enterprises: A new-normal agenda. Journal of Business and Management Studies 2021, 3, 162–172. [Google Scholar]
65. Khadim, R.A.; Ali, R.; Hanan, M.A. The Impact of Social Media Usage on Multiple Strategic Orientations and Its Effect on Financial and Non-Financial Performance. Journal of Asian Development Studies 2023, 12, 252–264. [Google Scholar]
66. Sheeraz, M.; Sajid, M.; Mehmood, Y.; Irfan, M.; Tahir, I. Brand Awareness and Digital Marketing: Measurement Tools and Data Analytics for Agricultural Industry. Journal of Arable Crops and Marketing 2023, 5, 37–50. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
67. Rakshit, S.; Islam, N.; Mondal, S.; Paul, T. An integrated social network marketing metric for business-to-business SMEs. Journal of Business Research 2022, 150, 73–88. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
68. Lepkowska-White, E.; Parsons, A. Strategies for monitoring social media for small restaurants. Journal of Foodservice Business Research 2019, 22, 351–374. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
69. Ayodeji, A.G.; Kumar, V. Social media analytics: a tool for the success of online retail industry. International Journal of Services Operations and Informatics 2019, 10, 79–95. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
70. Lupo, V. Social media marketing strategies in landscape industry small businesses. Doctoral dissertation, Walden University, 2018.
71. Abbas, J.; Mahmood, S.; Ali, H.; Raza, M.A.; Ali, G.; Aman, J.; Bano, S.; Nurunnabi, M. The effects of corporate social responsibility practices and environmental factors through a moderating role of social media marketing on sustainable performance of business firms. Sustainability 2019, 11, 3434. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
72. Chanthinok, K.; Ussahawanitchakit, P.; Jhundra-Indra, P. Social media marketing strategy and marketing performance: Evidence from e-commerce firms in Thailand. AU-GSB e-JOURNAL 2015, 8.
73. Nijssen, E.J.; Ordanini, A. How important is alignment of social media use and R&D–Marketing cooperation for innovation success? Journal of Business Research 2020, 116, 1–12. [Google Scholar]
74. Ananda, A.S.; Hernández-García, Á.; Lamberti, L. SME fashion brands and social media marketing: From strategies to actions. International Journal of Web Based Communities 2017, 13, 468–498. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
75. Icha, O. Effectiveness of social media networks as a strategic tool for organizational marketing management. J. Internet Bank Commer 2015, S2. [Google Scholar]
76. Guha, S.; Harrigan, P.; Soutar, G. Linking social media to customer relationship management (CRM): a qualitative study on SMEs. Journal of Small Business & Entrepreneurship 2018, 30, 193–214. [Google Scholar]
77. Daowd, A.; Kamal, M.M.; Eldabi, T.; Hasan, R.; Missi, F.; Dey, B.L. The impact of social media on the performance of microfinance institutions in developing countries: a quantitative approach. Information Technology & People 2021, 34, 25–49. [Google Scholar]
78. Canhoto, I.; Quinton, S.; Pera, R.; Molinillo, S.; Simkin, L. Digital strategy aligning in SMEs: A dynamic capabilities perspective. The Journal of Strategic Information Systems 2021, 30, 101682. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
79. Oyewobi, L.O.; Adedayo, O.F.; Olorunyomi, S.O.; Jimoh, R. Social media adoption and business performance: the mediating role of organizational learning capability (OLC). Journal of Facilities Management 2021, 19, 413–436. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
80. Cawsey, T.; Rowley, J. Social media brand building strategies in B2B companies. Marketing Intelligence & Planning 2016, 34, 754–776. [Google Scholar]
81. Parsons, A.L.; Lepkowska-White, E. Social Media Marketing Management: A Conceptual Framework. Journal of Internet Commerce 2018, 17, 81–95. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
82. Kurian, A.A.; Asokan, S.; Dham, S. Social Media Marketing and SMEs: Is it a Winning Combination in Singapore? An Analysis. Indira Management Review 2019, 13, 1. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
83. Kraus, S.; Gast, J.; Schleich, M.; Jones, P.; Ritter, M. Content is king: How SMEs create content for social media marketing under limited resources. Journal of Macromarketing 2019, 39, 415–430. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
84. Yang, J.; Xiu, P.; Sun, L.; Ying, L.; Muthu, B. Social media data analytics for business decision making system to competitive analysis. Information Processing & Management 2022, 59, 102751. [Google Scholar]
85. Alraja, N.; Khan, S.F.; Khashab, B.; Aldaas, R. Does Facebook commerce enhance SMEs performance? A structural equation analysis of Omani SMEs. Sage Open 2020, 10, 2158244019900186. [Google Scholar]
86. Saura, J.R.; Palacios-Marqués, D.; Ribeiro-Soriano, D. Digital marketing in SMEs via data-driven strategies: Reviewing the current state of research. Journal of Small Business Management 2023, 61, 1278–1313. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
87. Abbasi, G.A.; Rahim, N.F.A.; Wu, H.; Iranmanesh, M.; Keong, B.N.C. Determinants of SME’s social media marketing adoption: competitive industry as a moderator. Sage Open 2022, 12, 21582440211067220. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
88. Siti-Nabiha, A.K.; Nordin, N.; Poh, B.K. Social media usage in business decision-making: the case of Malaysian small hospitality organisations. Asia-Pacific Journal of Business Administration 2021, 13, 272–289. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
89. Qalati, S.A.; Li, W.; Vela, E.G.; Bux, A.; Barbosa, B.; Herzallah, A.M. Effects of technological, organizational, and environmental factors on social media adoption. The Journal of Asian Finance, Economics and Business 2020, 7, 989–998. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
90. Tajpour, M.; Hosseini, E.; Ratten, V.; Bahman-Zangi, B.; Soleymanian, S.M. The role of entrepreneurial thinking mediated by social media on the sustainability of small and medium-sized enterprises in Iran. Sustainability 2023, 15, 4518. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
91. Brooks, G.; Heffner, A.; Henderson, D. A SWOT analysis of competitive knowledge from social media for a small start-up business. Review of Business Information Systems 2014, 18. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
92. Chanthinok, K.; Ussahawanitichakit, P.; Jhundra-indra, P. Social Media Marketing Strategy And Marketing Outcomes: A Conceptual Framework. Arden: Jordan Whitney Enterprises, Inc. 2015. Available online: https://www.proquest.com/conference-papers-proceedings/social-media-marketing-strategyoutcomes/ docview/1764885681/se-2.
93. Mazzarol, T. SMEs engagement with e-commerce, e-business and e-marketing. Small Enterprise Research 2015, 22, 79–90. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
94. Valos; M. J.; Mavondo; F. T.; Nyadzayo, M. W. How do alternative strategic orientations influence social media performance? Journal of Strategic Marketing 2017, 27(1), 1–20. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
95. Nusantara, D.A.; Dellyana, M.D. Evaluating implementation of success and finding competitive advantages, ideal goals of digital inbound marketing with measurement methods for Indonesian MSME business. Journal of Research in Administrative Sciences 2022, 11, 13–21 [Online] Available: https://jraspublicationsorg/indexphp/jras/article/view/180. [Google Scholar]
96. Galati, A.; Crescimanno, M.; Tinervia, S.; Fagnani, F. Social media as a strategic marketing tool in the Sicilian wine industry: Evidence from Facebook. Wine Economics and Policy, vol. 6, no. 1, pp. 40–47, 2017. Available Online: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S221297741630055X.
97. Muninger, M.-I.; Hammedi, W.; Mahr, D. The value of social media for innovation: A capability perspective. Journal of Business Research 2019, 95, 116–127. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
98. Hallock, W.; Roggeveen, A.L.; Crittenden, V. Firm-level perspectives on social media engagement: an exploratory study. Qualitative Market Research: An International Journal 2019, 22, 217–226. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
99. Saxton, G.D.; Guo, C. Social media capital: Conceptualizing the nature, acquisition, and expenditure of social media-based organizational resources. International Journal of Accounting Information Systems 2020, 36, 100443. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
100. Vecchio, D.; Mele, G.; Passiante, G.; Vrontis, D.; Fanuli, C. Detecting customers knowledge from social media big data: toward an integrated methodological framework based on netnography and business analytics. Journal of Knowledge Management 2020, 24, 799–821. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
101. Lin, J.; Luo, Z.; Benitez, J.; Luo, X.R.; Popovič, A. Why do organizations leverage social media to create business value? An external factor-centric empirical investigation. Decision Support Systems 2021, 151, 113628. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
102. Pratono, A.H. From social network to firm performance: The mediating effect of trust, selling capability and pricing capability. Management Research Review 2018, 41, 680–700. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
103. Veldeman, A.; Van Praet, E.; Mechant, P. Social Media Adoption in Business-to-Business: IT and Industrial Companies Compared. International Journal of Business Communication 2015, 54, 283–305. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
104. Martins, J.; Gonçalves, R.; Oliveira, T.; Cota, M.; Branco, F. Understanding the determinants of social network sites adoption at firm level: A mixed methodology approach. Electronic Commerce Research and Applications 2016, 18, 10–26. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
105. Alarcón-del-Amo, M.-C.; Rialp-Criado, A.; Rialp-Criado, J. Examining the impact of managerial involvement with social media on exporting firm performance. International Business Review 2018, 27, 355–366. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
106. Ananda, A.S.; Hernández-García, Á.; Lamberti, L. N-REL: A comprehensive framework of social media marketing strategic actions for marketing organizations. Journal of Innovation & Knowledge 2016, 1, 170–180. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
107. Pakura, S.; Rudeloff, C. How entrepreneurs build brands and reputation with social media PR: empirical insights from start-ups in Germany. Journal of Small Business & Entrepreneurship 2020, 35, 1–28. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
108. Veeravalli, S.; Vijayalakshmi, V. A morphological review of enterprise social media literature. Journal of Organizational Computing and Electronic Commerce 2019, 29, 139–162. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
109. Lagat, C.; Frankwick, G.L. Marketing capability, marketing strategy implementation and performance in small firms. J. for Global Business Advancement 2017, 10, 327. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
110. Son, J.; Niehm, L.S. Using social media to navigate changing rural markets: the case of small community retail and service businesses. Journal of Small Business & Entrepreneurship 2021, 1–19. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
111. Bacinello, E.; Tontini, G.; Alberton, A. Influence of corporate social responsibility on sustainable practices of small and medium-sized enterprises: Implications on business performance. Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management 2020, 28. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
112. Perdana, A.; Lee, H.H.; Koh, S.; Arisandi, D. Data analytics in small and mid-size enterprises: Enablers and inhibitors for business value and firm performance. International Journal of Accounting Information Systems 2022, 44, 100547, [Online]. Available: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1467089522000075. [Google Scholar]
113. Wang, Z.; Kim, H.G. Can Social Media Marketing Improve Customer Relationship Capabilities and Firm Performance? Dynamic Capability Perspective. Journal of Interactive Marketing 2017, 39, 15–26. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
114. Dudic, Z.; Dudic, B.; Gregus, M.; Novackova, D.; and, I. Djakovic. The Innovativeness and Usage of the Balanced Scorecard Model in SMEs. Sustainability 2020, 12, 3221. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
115. Foltean, S.; Trif, S.M.; and D., L. Tuleu. Customer relationship management capabilities and social media technology use: Consequences on firm performance. Journal of Business Research 2018, 104. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
116. Eder, F.; Koch, S. Critical Success Factors for the Implementation of Business Intelligence Systems. International Journal of Business Intelligence Research 2018, 9, 27–46. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
117. Khan, Wang, Ehsan, Nurunnabi, and Hashmi. Linking Sustainability-Oriented Marketing to Social Media and Web Atmospheric Cues. Sustainability 2019, 11, 2663. [CrossRef]
118. Saura, J.R.; Palos-Sánchez, P.; Suárez, L.M.C. Palos-Sánchez, and L. M. Cerdá Suárez, “Understanding the digital marketing environment with KPIs and web analytics. Future Internet 2017, 9, 76, [Online]. Available: https://www.mdpi.com/1999-5903/9/4/76. [Google Scholar]
119. Hasibuan, R.R.; Novandari, W.; Setyanto, R.P. The role of digital literacy on the social media performance of batik MSMEs with digital capability as an intervening variable. International Journal of Business and Quality Research 2024, 2, 39–54. [Google Scholar]
120. Ritz, W.; Wolf, M.; McQuitty, S. Digital marketing adoption and success for small businesses. Journal of Research in Interactive Marketing 2019, 13, 179–203. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
121. Marzouk, W.G. Usage and effectiveness of social media marketing in Egypt: an organization perspective. Jordan Journal of Business Administration 2016, 12, 209–238. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
122. Siebu, S. Impact of social media advertising on the profitability of SMEs in Ghana’s retail industry. Doctoral dissertation, University of Ghana, 2019. [Online]. Available: https://ugspace.ug.edu.gh/handle/123456789/32364.
123. Amoako, G.K.; Okpattah, B.K.; Arthur, E. The impact of social media marketing on brand equity - A perspective of the telecommunication industry in Ghana. Journal of Business & Retail Management Research 2019, 13. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
124. Su, J.; Zhang, Y.; Wu, X. . How market pressures and organizational readiness drive digital marketing adoption strategies’ evolution in small and medium enterprises. Technological Forecasting and Social Change 2023, 193, 122655. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
125. Vieira, V.A.; de Almeida, M.I.S.; Gabler, C.B.; Limongi, R.; Costa, M.; da Costa, M.P. Optimising digital marketing and social media strategy: from push to pull to performance. Journal of Marketing Management 2021, 38, 1–31. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
126. Kwayu, S.; Lal, B.; Abubakre, M. Enhancing Organisational Competitiveness Via Social Media - a Strategy as Practice Perspective. Information Systems Frontiers 2017, 20, 439–456. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
127. Mosweunyane, L.; Rambe, P.; Dzansi, D. Use of social media in Free State tourism small, medium and micro enterprises to widen business networks for competitiveness. South African Journal of Economic and management Sciences 2019, 22. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
128. He, W.; Wang, F.-K.; Zha, S. Enhancing social media competitiveness of small businesses: insights from small pizzerias. New Review of Hypermedia and Multimedia 2014, 20, 225–250. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
129. Qalati, S.A.; Ostic, D.; Sulaiman, M.A.B.A.; Gopang, A.A.; Khan, A. Social Media and SMEs’ Performance in Developing Countries: Effects of Technological-Organizational-Environmental Factors on the Adoption of Social Media. SAGE Open 2158, 12, 215824402210945. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
130. Fernandes, S.; Belo, A.; Castela, G. Social network enterprise behaviors and patterns in SMEs: Lessons from a Portuguese local community centered around the tourism industry. Technology in Society 2016, 44, 15–22. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
131. Scuotto, V.; Del Giudice, M.; della Peruta, M.R.; Tarba, S. The performance implications of leveraging internal innovation through social media networks: An empirical verification of the smart fashion industry. Technological Forecasting and Social Change 2017, 120, 184–194. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
132. Fraccastoro, S.; Gabrielsson, M.; Pullins, E.B. The integrated use of social media, digital, and traditional communication tools in the B2B sales process of international SMEs. International Business Review 2020, 30, 101776, Available:https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0969593120301256. [Google Scholar]
133. Rudeloff; Pakura, S. ; Eggers, F.; Niemand, T. It takes two to tango: the interplay between decision logics, communication strategies and social media engagement in start-ups. Review of Managerial Science, Apr. 2021. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
134. Jung, S.H.; Jeong, Y.J. Twitter/X data analytical methodology development for prediction of start-up firms’ social media marketing level. Technology in Society 2020, 63, 101409. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
135. Sardi, A.; Sorano, E.; Garengo, P.; Ferraris, A. The role of HRM in the innovation of performance measurement and management systems: a multiple case study in SMEs. Employee Relations: The International Journal, 2020; ahead-of-print, no. ahead-of-print. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
136. Seow, N.; Choong, Y.O.; Ramayah, T. Small and medium-size enterprises’ business performance in the tourism industry: the mediating role of innovative practice and moderating role of government support. Asian Journal of Technology Innovation 2021, 29, 283–303. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
137. Sivarajah, U.; Irani, Z.; Gupta, S.; Mahroof, K. . Role of big data and social media analytics for business to business sustainability: A participatory web context. Industrial Marketing Management 2020, 86, 163–179. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
138. Eggers, F.; Hatak, I.; Kraus, S.; Niemand, T. Technologies That Support Marketing and Market Development in SMEs-Evidence from Social Networks. Journal of Small Business Management 2017, 55, 270–302. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
139. Li, F.; Larimo, J.; Leonidou, L.C. Social Media Marketing strategy: definition, conceptualization, taxonomy, validation, and Future Agenda. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science 2020, 49, 51–70. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
140. Obermayer, N.; Kővári, E.; Leinonen, J.; Bak, G.; Valeri, M. How social media practices shape family business performance: the wine industry case study. European Management Journal 2021, 40. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
141. Burgess, S.; Sellitto, C.; Cox, C.; Buultjens, J. Strategies for Adopting Consumer-generated Media in Small-sized to Medium-sized Tourism Enterprises. International Journal of Tourism Research 2014, 17, 432–441. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
142. Lashgari, M.; Sutton-Brady, C.; Søilen, K.S.; Ulfvengren, P. Adoption strategies of social media in B2B firms: a multiple case study approach. Journal of Business & Industrial Marketing 2018, 33, 730–743. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
143. Dumitriu; Militaru, G. ; Deselnicu, D.C.; Niculescu, A.; Popescu, M.A.-M.. A Perspective over Modern SMEs: Managing Brand Equity, Growth and Sustainability through Digital Marketing Tools and Techniques. Sustainability 2019, 11, 2111. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
144. Garrido-Moreno, A.; García-Morales, V.J.; Lockett, N.; King, S. The Missing link: Creating Value with Social Media Use in Hotels. International Journal of Hospitality Management 2018, 75, 94–104. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
145. Shen, C.; Luong, T.; Ho, J.; Djailani, I. Social media marketing of IT service companies: Analysis using a concept-linking mining approach. Industrial Marketing Management 2019. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
146. Hanafizadeh, P.; Shafia, S.; Bohlin, E. Exploring the consequence of social media usage on firm performance. Digital Business 2021, 1, 100013. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
147. Zilber, S.; Monken, S.; Quevedo-Silva, F. Adoption of Social Media by Small-and Medium-sized Healthcare Enterprises. Brazilian Business Review 2019, 16, 453–469. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
148. Harrigan, P.; Miles, M. From e-CRM to s-CRM. Critical factors underpinning the social CRM activities of SMEs. Small Enterprise Research 2014, 21, 99–116. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
149. Miles, D.A. Measuring customer behavior and profitability: Using marketing analytics to examine customer and marketing behavioral patterns in business ventures. Academy of Marketing Studies Journal 2014, 18, 141–165. [Google Scholar]
150. Lee, C.S.; Wong, K.Y. Knowledge management performance measurement in micro-, small-, and medium-sized enterprises: An exploratory study. Business Information Review 2015, 32, 204–211. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
151. Mandhachitara, R.; Allapach, S. Small business performance in Thailand: key success factors. Journal of Research in Marketing and Entrepreneurship 2017, 19, 161–181. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
152. Csordás, T.; Markos-Kujbus, É.; Gáti, M. The attributes of social media as a strategic marketing communication tool. Journalism and Mass Communication 2014, 4, 48–71. [Google Scholar]
153. Singh, T.; Kumar, R.; Kalia, P. E-marketing practices of micro-, small-and medium-sized enterprises: evidence from India. In Strategic corporate communication in the digital age (pp. 197-216). Emerald Publishing Limited.
154. Matsoso, M.L.; Benedict, O.H. Financial performance measures of small medium enterprises in the 21st century. Journal of economics 2016, 7, 144–160. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
155. Milichovský, F.; Šimberová, I. Marketing effectiveness: Metrics for effective strategic marketing. Engineering economics 2015, 26, 211–219. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
156. Raman, R.; Menon, P. Using social media for innovation–market segmentation of family firms. International Journal of Innovation Science 2017. [CrossRef]
157. Saunila, M. Understanding innovation performance measurement in SMEs. Measuring Business Excellence 2017, 21, 1–16. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
158. Ahmad, K. The implementation of management accounting practices and its relationship with performance in small and medium enterprises. International Review of Management and Marketing 2017, 7, 342–353. [Google Scholar]
159. Aureli, S. The balanced scorecard logic in the management control and reporting of small business company networks: A case study. CONTABILITATE SI INFORMATICA DE GESTIUNE 2018, 12, 191–215. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
160. Gao, H.; Tate, M.; Zhang, H.; Chen, S.; Liang, B. Social media ties strategy in international branding: An application of resource-based theory. Journal of International Marketing 2018, 26, 45–69. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
161. Nudurupati, S.S.; Garengo, P.; Bititci, U.S. Impact of the changing business environment on performance measurement and management practices. International Journal of Production Economics 2021, 232, 107942. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
162. Vasquez Rojas, C.; Roldan Reyes, E.; Aguirre y Hernandez, F.; Cortes Robles, G. Integration of a text mining approach in the strategic planning process of small and medium-sized enterprises. Industrial Management & Data Systems 2018, 118, 745–764. [Google Scholar]
163. Islam, A.H.; Sarker, M.R.; Hossain, M.I.; Ali, K.; Noor, K.A. Challenges of Small-and Medium-Sized Enterprises (SMEs) in business growth: A case of footwear industry. Journal of Operations and Strategic Planning 2021, 4, 119–143. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
164. Jiménez, E.; de la Cuesta-González, M.; Boronat-Navarro, M. How small and medium-sized enterprises can uptake the sustainable development goals through a cluster management organization: A case study. Sustainability 2021, 13, 5939. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
165. Bianchi, C.; Winch, G.; Cosenz, F. Experimenting lean dynamic performance management systems design in SMEs. International Journal of Productivity and Performance Management 2018, 67, pp.1234–1251. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
166. Erasmus, L.; Reynolds, A.; Fourie, H. A generic balanced scorecard for small and medium manufacturing enterprises in South Africa. The Southern African Journal of Entrepreneurship and Small Business Management 2019, 11, 1–15. [Google Scholar]
167. Muafi, M. A nexus among strategic orientation, social network, knowledge sharing, organizational innovation, and MSMEs performance. The Journal of Asian Finance, Economics and Business 2020, 7, 327–338. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
168. Chonsawat, N.; Sopadang, A. Defining SMEs’ 4.0 readiness indicators. Applied sciences 2020, 10, 8998. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
169. Hartono, R.; Sheng, M.L. Knowledge sharing and firm performance: the role of social networking site and innovation capability. Technology Analysis & Strategic Management 2016, 28, pp.335–347. [Google Scholar]
170. Attaran, M.; Woods, J. Cloud computing technology: improving small business performance using the Internet. Journal of Small Business & Entrepreneurship 2019, 31, 495–519. [Google Scholar]
171. Manville, G.; Karakas, F.; Polkinghorne, M.; Petford, N. Supporting open innovation with the use of a balanced scorecard approach: a study on deep smarts and effective knowledge transfer to SMEs. Production Planning & Control 2019, 30, 842–853. [Google Scholar]
172. Datta, A.; Sahaym, A.; Brooks, S. Unpacking the antecedents of crowdfunding campaign’s success: The effects of social media and innovation orientation. Journal of Small Business Management 2019, 57, 462–488. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
173. Vrontis, D.; Chaudhuri, R.; Chatterjee, S. Adoption of digital technologies by SMEs for sustainability and value creation: Moderating role of entrepreneurial orientation. Sustainability 2022, 14, 7949. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
174. Agbim, K.C. Social networking and the family business performance: A conceptual consideration. Journal of Entrepreneurship, Management and Innovation 2019, 15, 83–122. [Google Scholar]
175. Dong, J.Q.; Yang, C.H. Business value of big data analytics: A systems-theoretic approach and empirical test. Information & Management 2020, 57, 103124. [Google Scholar]
176. Wang, S.; Wang, H. Big data for small and medium-sized enterprises (SME): a knowledge management model. Journal of Knowledge Management 2020, 24, 881–897. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
177. De, D.; Chowdhury, S.; Dey, P.K.; Ghosh, S.K. Impact of lean and sustainability oriented innovation on sustainability performance of small and medium sized enterprises: a data envelopment analysis-based framework. International Journal of Production Economics 2020, 219, 416–430. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
178. Hanggraeni, D.; Ślusarczyk, B.; Sulung, L.A.K.; Subroto, A. The impact of internal, external and enterprise risk management on the performance of micro, small and medium enterprises. Sustainability 2019, 11, 2172. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
179. Nyuur; R. B.B.I.; Brečić; Simintiras, A. The moderating effect of perceived effectiveness of SMEs’ marketing function on the network ties—strategic adaptiveness relationship. Journal of Small Business Management 2016, 54, 1080–1098. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
180. Mangla; S.K.; Raut; Narwane; V.S.; Zhang; Priyadarshinee, P. Mediating effect of big data analytics on project performance of small and medium enterprises. Journal of Enterprise Information Management, 2021; 34, 168–198.
181. Abu-Rumman, A.; Al Shraah, A.; Al-Madi, F.; Alfalah, T. Entrepreneurial networks, entrepreneurial orientation, and performance of small and medium enterprises: are dynamic capabilities the missing link? Journal of Innovation and Entrepreneurship 2021, 10, 29. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
182. Thaha, A.R.; Maulina, E.; Muftiadi, R.A.; Alexandri, M.B. Digital marketing and SMEs: a systematic mapping study. Library Philosophy and Practice 2021, 2021, 1–19. [Google Scholar]
183. Pattanasak, P.; Anantana, T.; Paphawasit, B.; Wudhikarn, R. Critical factors and performance measurement of business incubators: A systematic literature review. Sustainability 2021, 52, 427–432. [Google Scholar]
184. Essakly, A.; Wichmann, M.; Spengler, T.S. A reference framework for the holistic evaluation of Industry 4.0 solutions for small-and medium-sized enterprises. IFAC-PapersOnLine.
185. Kithinji, L.W. Internet marketing and Performance of Small and medium Enterprises in Nairobi County (Doctoral dissertation, University of Nairobi). 2021. [Google Scholar]
186. Malagueño, R.; Lopez-Valeiras, E.; Gomez-Conde, J. Balanced scorecard in SMEs: effects on innovation and financial performance. Small Business Economics 2018, 51, 221–244. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
187. Gazal, K.; Montague, I.; Poudel, R.; Wiedenbeck, J. Forest products industry in a digital age: Factors affecting social media adoption. Forest Products Journal 2016, 66, pp.343–353. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
188. Song, J.; Lee, K.B.; Zhou, Z.; Jia, L.; Cegielski, C.; Shin, S.I. Enhancing supply chain sensing capability through social media: an environmental scanning perspective. Information Technology & People 2022, 35, 367–391. [Google Scholar]
189. Iannacci, F.; Fearon, C.; Pole, K. From acceptance to adaptive acceptance of social media policy change: A set-theoretic analysis of B2B SMEs. Information Systems Frontiers 2021, 23, 663–680. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]