This paper presents a strategic profile and case analysis of Facebook as a social networking organization. It traces Facebook's origins as a campus-based platform and examines how it differentiated itself from predecessors such as MySpace and Friendster through a peer-oriented, privacy-conscious design. The paper explores the cultural conditions that fueled social networking's rise in the United States, including celebrity culture and adolescent identity formation. It also addresses Facebook's competitive strategy, financing, and economic valuation challenges. Central to the analysis is the tension between Facebook's expansionist business model and the growing controversy surrounding user privacy — a conflict the paper identifies as a defining strategic challenge for the company's future.
The paper uses a case-analysis framework to move from historical context to competitive positioning to forward-looking strategic recommendation. By weaving multiple scholarly and industry sources into a coherent argument, it models how to synthesize evidence across disciplines — business strategy, sociology, and consumer behavior — in support of a single analytical thesis.
The paper opens with a broad cultural framing of social networking in the U.S., then narrows to Facebook's founding story and market differentiation. It examines MySpace as a competitive predecessor, analyzes user behavior and cultural penetration, and transitions into the privacy controversy. It closes by addressing economic valuation difficulties and positioning privacy reform as Facebook's central strategic imperative. The argument flows logically from context → competition → growth → risk → future challenge.
Social networking through sites such as MySpace, Friendster, and Facebook became a popular and virally spreading phenomenon in the United States. Avenues such as blogging and tweeting facilitated a form of independent mass communication that allows regular internet users to broadcast both personal and general thoughts to the world. These online contexts for community, group orientation, and networking originated in the U.S. and generated remarkable success and innovative application there.
To some extent, social networking seems to be a direct reflection of celebrity culture in the United States. Tabloid culture, reality television, and celebrity voyeurism suggest an almost obsessive drive to eliminate the boundaries between public and private life. For the common media user, the internet has become a de facto medium through which to act on these instincts, with personal disclosure, self-promotion, and the desire to establish connections with large social cross-sections all playing significantly into the success of social networking and blogging. Such outlets have become extremely popular and effective ways to access one another — to communicate thoughts, ideas, and event invitations; to connect with old friends; to establish new friendships or romances; to voice political views; or to share personal and artistic expression.
However, there are broader sociological effects that have come into sharper focus as these outlets have increasingly permeated popular culture. None has penetrated the popular lexicon and lifestyle of Americans as thoroughly as Facebook, the social networking site that for many has become a de facto forum for personal expression, communication with one's social network, and connection with individuals of common interest. Today, Facebook is relatively unchallenged in its dominance in the field of online social networking, but it also stands as a target for competitors and a point of controversy in the evolving discussion concerning internet privacy. The strategic profile and case analysis offered here are intended to provide organizational insight into the realities ahead for Facebook both as a product and as an organization.
Facebook began in 2004 as a free service centered on a university campus community, where its founder desired to make virtual the traditional "facebook" campus directories that had long been used to connect and organize student groups and social circles. According to a 2006 article, Facebook would by then have become "a full-fledged technology business with over 100 employees and 7.5 million users" (Harken, 139). Moreover, it distinguished itself significantly in the American market from other social networking sites by creating a greater level of user control over the development of a personal network and the defining of privacy terms and limitations. Most importantly, its strategic development would focus on a strategy driven by personal rather than commercial or anonymous interfacing.
Harken identifies this as a key difference in the internal strategy of Facebook, distinguishing it from the structures of companies that had preceded it in achieving popularity and mainstream penetration. Harken indicates that "unlike Friendster and MySpace, where divisions between various networks were not explicit, Facebook made its members' school their primary network and offered only limited access beyond that. 'What makes it so much better than Friendster is that it's your peers rather than a random assortment of people'" (Harken, 143). Not only on the point of competition, but also on the point of achieving an internal design for product growth that is more inherently self-perpetuating, Facebook distinguished itself in terms of the speed and sturdiness of its expansion.
For Facebook, this success converged with a high cultural cachet in its chosen product field. The appeal of social networking had never been greater. Initially structured to connect students with specific ties to universities and campus communities, the platform increasingly came to include parents, relatives, and even teachers. At this juncture, Facebook had permeated the general culture and public perceptions in a way that did nothing less than alter the way individuals interface with one another — not just virtually, but socially.
Initially, Facebook's success rested on its remodeling of industry standards. With MySpace establishing dominance first, Facebook devised a strategy informed by the successes of the burgeoning industry while simultaneously addressing the needs demonstrated within it. Accordingly, company founder Mark Zuckerberg approached Facebook with consideration of the industry's conceivable risks first and foremost. Despite Facebook's immediate and rousing success, "other well-funded, so-called 'social networking' sites had come and gone long before Zuckerberg coded Facebook in his dormitory. Was it just a fad that would disappear from the collegiate landscape as quickly and vigorously as it had consumed it? Or would Facebook remain popular and overcome mounting competitive threats and intense media scrutiny?" (Harken, 139). These were the difficult questions before Facebook as it achieved a plateau of success previously unseen in the creation of a fully virtual product.
In many ways, Facebook's successes were drawn from the apparent failures of its precursors. Facebook was modeled in part on chief competitors such as MySpace, which achieved total penetration of popular culture during the early part of the millennium before being purchased by Fox Broadcasting's parent company, News Corp. MySpace was essentially designed on the twin premises of free social networking on a single forum and the creation of a valuable, ever-expanding demographic for advertising within that forum. The result was a surprising willingness on the part of users to engage in full biographical and commercial disclosure. Miyazaki and Fernandez (2000) observed of the trend that "although several prior academic and industry studies have evaluated commercial Web sites for privacy- and security-related disclosures, most have taken a general approach and have not examined how such disclosures may affect consumer behavior" (Miyazaki & Fernandez, 54). MySpace provided both considerable income to its creators and something of an ethnographic context for evaluating such behaviors. The site proved that consumers were willing to forego the privacy they might otherwise protect during an online purchasing exchange, instead allowing the site to catalogue their interests and hobbies alongside personal and contact information.
Ultimately, this opened the floodgates for a new way of socializing and relating. In recent years, the commercialization of MySpace led to a decline in its use, as increasingly savvy social networkers moved to other networks such as Friendster and Facebook. The latter in particular took up the mantle of MySpace with a superior template that was actively pursued by Zuckerberg and his associates as they worked to develop a competitive model. Accordingly, "Zuckerberg would have to develop an organizational strategy that could allow the company to keep up with its underlying growth metrics, while ensuring Facebook's user experience was better than its alternatives. The company's core market — college students — were prone to switching, and potential new markets — college students outside of the U.S. and high school students — were rife with well-funded entrants that were a step ahead of Facebook" (Harken, 139).
Thus, Facebook entered the market with a clear intent to overtake its preexisting and well-grounded competitors. Its more streamlined aesthetic design and dynamic tools for connecting individuals through community or common interest elevated Facebook to the single most prominent social networking site. And even as Facebook was designed with superior security and information protection, it was increasingly the set of decisions made by its users that defined the tension around privacy. As Barnes (2006) observes, focusing on the younger demographics that first initiated the rise of social networking, "the popularity of social networking sites on the Internet introduces the use of mediated communication into the relationship development process. Teenagers now use organized social Web sites to meet others and explore identity formation. These sites can be viewed within a larger trend that shifts the influence of interpersonal correspondence to mediated messages" (Barnes, 1). Where base competition exists, Facebook had largely vanquished its closest rivals in the American market from which it drew its target audience.
Barnes, S.B. (2006). A privacy paradox: Social networking in the United States. First Monday, 11(9).
Harkey, M. (2006). Case 14: Facebook. University Graduate School of Business.
Miyazaki, A.D., & Fernandez, A. (2000). Internet privacy and security: An examination of online retailer disclosures. Journal of Public Policy & Marketing, 19(1), 54–61.
Salkever, A. (2009). Will social networks kill Google? A Facebook founder (naturally) says yes. Daily Finance.
Always verify citation format against your institution’s current style guide requirements.