Analysis - 1.60 Very not - 2.20 not positive - 2.80 positive enough - 3.40 Positive – 4.00

6

D. E-Marketing

Basically E Marketing is an activity involving a communication between two people or among many people to introduce and sell the product by using internet as a medium of the communication Stokes, 2008: 5. In another word, E-marketing is some kind of effort of an individual or a company to sell product or service and to build a good relation with its costumer via internet. This form of marketing is basically big public networking website among computers around the world into single communication medium platform Kotler and Armstrong, 2008: 237. According to Boone and Kurtz 2005 e-marketing is a component in e commerce with specific purpose by marketer, such as making process strategy, distribution, promotion, and to implement new price of product or service to the internet via internet or other digital device. According to Mohammed, Fisher, Jaworski, and Paddison 2003: 4, there are 5 component of Internet marketing, such as Process, Create and maintain relationship with customers, Online, Exchange, and Fulfillment of need. 2. METHODOLOGY Research on online business communication at the faculty of science communication UMS student uses descriptive quantitative research methods. Descriptive research is the basis for all research. This type of research is the type of survey, where this type of research is intended to provide a clear picture of the issues under study, in order to interpret and explain the data systematically. This study took place at the campus of the Muhammadiyah University of Surakarta, precisely at the Faculty of Communication and Information. The sampling technique used in this study is the purposive sampling with criteria; one year experience in online business and two million rupiah of monthly income. To determine the amount of sample is using sempel jenuh. Sempel jenuh is a sampling technique in which all members of the population are taken and used as a sample Hidayat, 2007; 83. So it can be said that the sample used in this study as many as 30 people. 3. ANALYSIS AND DISCUSSION

3.1 Analysis

The data according to questionnaire that has been spread to 30 respondent then grouped to every dimension according to the categories. To get score of mean for each category, then can be count with the formula bellow: 7 Scoring Scale = = = = 0,6 Category marking is as follow: Table 1 Marking Category Score Category

1.00 - 1.60 Very not

positive

1.61 - 2.20 not positive

2.21 - 2.80 positive enough

2.81 - 3.40 Positive

3.41 – 4.00

very positive From the formula above, score of mean for each category are follow: Table 2 Response of Respondent against Dimension of Business Communication Dimension Item Questioner Total Score Mean sd Business communication 1 111 3.70 0.595 2 109 3.63 0.556 3 107 3.56 0.626 4 102 3.40 0.563 5 114 3.80 0.406 6 112 3.73 0.449 Total 655 21.82 Mean 218,3 3.63 Table 3 Response of Respondent against Dimension of Media Online Dimension Item Questioner Total Score Mean sd Media Online 1 86 2.86 0.819 2 109 3.63 0.490 3 90 3.00 0.909 4 114 3.80 0.406 5 106 3.53 0.681 6 103 3.43 0.626 8 Total 608 20.25 Mean 101,3 3.37 Table 4 Response of Respondent against Dimension of Customers Dimension Item Questioner Total Score Mean sd Customer 1 105 3.50 0.508 2 91 3.03 0.668 3 74 2.46 1.306 4 103 3.43 0.817 5 112 3.73 0.449 6 118 3.93 0.253 Total 603 20.08 Mean 100.5 3.35 Table 5 Response of Respondent against Dimension of Promotion Dimension Item Questioner Total Score Mean sd Promotion 1 99 3.30 0.595 2 111 3.70 0.466 3 109 3.63 0.490 4 111 3.70 0.466 5 111 3.70 0.466 6 80 2.66 0.844 Total 621 20.69 Mean 103.5 3.45 Table 6 Response of Respondent against Dimension of Persuasion Dimension Item Questioner Total Score Mean sd Persuasion 1 78 2.60 0.498 2 98 3.26 0.639 3 99 3.30 0.702 4 98 3.26 0.449 5 109 3.63 0.490 6 83 2.76 0.858 Total 565 18.81 Mean 94.17 3.13 9 Table 7 Response of Respondent against Dimension of Informative Dimension Item Questioner Total Score Mean sd Informative 1 89 2.96 .668 2 87 2.90 .758 3 105 3.50 .508 4 114 3.80 .406 5 96 3.20 .550 6 99 3.30 .595 Total 590 19.66 Mean 98.33 3.27 Table 8 Response of Respondent against Dimension of Non Verbal Communication Dimension Item Questioner Total Score Mean sd Non Verbal communication 1 101 3.36 0.808 2 100 3.33 0.758 3 68 2.26 0.449 4 63 2.10 0.305 5 99 3.30 0.466 6 112 3.73 0.449 Total 543 18.08 Mean 98.33 3.01 Table 9 mean scoring for each category No Dimension Mean 1 Business Communication 3.63 2 Online Media 3.37 3 Customer 3.35 4 Promotion 3.45 5 Persuasion 3.13 6 Informative 3.27 7 Non-verbal Communication 3.01 Total 23.21 Mean 3.31 10

3.2 Discussion

Dokumen yang terkait

STUDENTS’ BEHAVIOR ON WATCHING POLITICAL INFORMATION PROGRAMS ON TELEVISION (A Descriptive Study in Communication Science Department Students Political and Social Science Faculty 2005 at Muhammadiyah University of Malang)

0 19 3

Avoidance of the English Phrasal Verbs as a Strategy in Learning Process: A Case Study of the English Department Students of Faculty of Letters Jember University 2011 and 2012 Academic Years

1 4 7

A Descriptive Study of Teaching English Vocabulary for the Fifth-year Students at SDN Kepatihan 02 Jember in the Academic Year 2002/2003

0 7 77

A Descriptive Study on Descriptive Paragraph Writing Ability by Using Realia of the Seventh Grade Students at SMP Negeri 10 Jember

0 12 3

A Descriptive Study on Reading Comprehension Achievement of the Second Year Students of SLTP Negeri 1 Arjasa Jember in the 2002 / 2003 Academic Year

0 6 60

A Descriptive Study on the Grade VIII Students’ Ability in Using Punctuation and Capitalization in Descriptive Paragraph Writing at SMPN 13 Jember.

0 5 6

The Effectiveness of Contextual Teaching and Learning in Teaching the Simple Past Tense (An Experimental Study at the Second Grade Students of SMK Bintang Nusantara, Tangerang Selatan)

0 5 97

The Relationship between Students' Vocabulary Mastery and Their Writing Descriptive Text Ability (A Correlational Study of the Seventh Grade Students in MTs Soebono Mantofani Jombang, Tangerang Selatan)

0 13 0

“A Comparative Analysis on Sanguine and Phlegmatic Students Concerning their English Speaking Skill “(A Comparative Study at the Second Year Students of SMP Wijayakusuma)”. Strata 1 (S1). Department of English Education, Faculty of Tarbiyah and Teachers’

0 8 12

Abraham Geiger and the Study of the Qur'an

0 1 20