This project focuses on six specific pillars of James Grunig’s Excellence Theory for public relations, with a strong emphasis and focus on the two-way symmetrical model of communication and public relations as a strategic management function.
I chose to devote more time to these two topics because many of the other components of this theory circle back to these overarching themes. For example, in order to achieve employee satisfaction, which is one aspect of the Excellence Theory and a topic of this project, you must first engage employees in two-way symmetrical communication to inform them, gather information about their needs, and cultivate relationships. In addition, a PR practitioner working at the strategic management level can utilize the scenario building tool as a way to act as the ethical conscience of an organization. All of the themes in this project are tied together and intertwined in practice.
I conducted four different interviews to utilize in this blog throughout my studies about the Excellence Theory, one of which was conducted via email with the theorist himself, James Grunig. I also interviewed three different PR professionals in different stages of their careers who all shared great insight into the blending of theory and practice. A full bibliography for this project can be found in the “about” section.
Q. In the corporate setting, which company (or companies) do you view as effectively and successfully incorporating the Excellence Theory in the practical setting? In what specific ways do they demonstrate it in their work?
A. I cannot really name any companies that best fulfill the Excellence principles without having done any research on the companies. Any that I would name would be based on pure hearsay. I have been retired for eight years, and I haven’t done new research during that time so I don’t have much of a recent research basis for naming excellent companies. In addition, as a researcher, I generally promise confidentiality to the organizations that I study. For example, in the Excellence study we were able to assign numerical scores to every organization that we studied and then we conducted qualitative interviews with 25 of the most excellent and least excellent organizations. Throughout our final book reporting the results of both the quantitative and qualitative research, we provided numerous examples of how different organizations exemplified each of the Excellence principles. The complete reference to that book is Grunig, L. A., Grunig, J. E., & Dozier, D. M. (2002). Excellent public relations and effective organizations: A study of communication management in three countries. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
It is important to recognize, as we pointed out in this book, that the Excellence principles provide a theoretical benchmark for evaluating a public relations department and that few, if any organizations, score highly on every principle. I think both scholars and professionals spend too much effort trying to find one company to emulate and not enough time trying to understand the principles and thinking of how those principles can be applied in the organization for which they work.
I would add, however, that the most important principle of the Excellence theory is the extent to which a public relations function participates in the strategic management of an organization rather than as a messenger service for decisions made by others in the organization. I am a member of the Arthur Page Society, an organization of senior communication executives in major corporations. I have been convinced from hearing about the experiences of Page members at conferences and in reports that this Excellence principle is common in major corporations. Thus, it is not too difficult to find major corporations such as IBM, Johnson & Johnson, Chevron, General Motors, Verizon, and others that practice the Excellence principles.
Q. You are described as stating that persuasion involves communication without concern for publics. Does persuasion have a place in the PR world? Or do you believe that professionals should strictly use the symmetrical model of communication?
A. I believe, more accurately, that I have said that asymmetrical communication involves communication without concern for publics. Asymmetrical communication and persuasion are not necessarily the same thing. Attempts to persuade can occur in both an asymmetrical and symmetrical model. It is not uncommon for communicators practicing a symmetrical model to try to persuade a public to understand the organization or to behave as it wants, as long as they also leave themselves open to persuasion by publics. Frequently, communicators must also attempt to persuade management to accept the views of publics and the organizational behaviors that are in the interest of both the organization and its publics.
At the same time, I have always found it difficult to understand why communication scholars are so preoccupied with persuasion. It is one of the least common effects of communication, and the concept itself is not clear. Persuasion involves changing something, but what is changed: Awareness, cognitions, attitudes, behavior, or something else? I think we need a different concept for each type of “persuasion.” I developed a taxonomy of both symmetrical and asymmetrical communication effects in Managing Public Relations (p. 134) in 1984 and developed that taxonomy more completely in a more recent book chapter: Grunig, J. E. (2008). Conceptualizing quantitative research in public relations. In B. Van Ruler, A. Tkalac Verčič, & D. Verčič, (Eds.). Public relations metrics (pp. 88-119). New York and London: Routledge. Most often, communication theorists seem to equate persuasion with changes in attitudes or behavior; but such changes are rare (see David Dozier’s chapter 7 in Grunig, J. E. (Ed.) (1992). Excellence in public relations and communication management. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.) In Managing Public Relations, I used the parable of the chicken that couldn’t lay a golden egg to illustrate what I think is an overconcern with attitude and behavior change as effects of communication. In a paper written in the early 1970s, Richard Carter of the University of Washington (and one of my mentors in graduate school at the University of Wisconsin where he taught previously) told the story of poultry scientists who studied chickens extensively to determine if they could lay golden eggs. Nothing seemed to work: Chickens mostly laid plain old eggs. Eventually, the poultry scientists gave up on the golden egg and studied methods of increasing the number of common eggs that hens laid. The point is that attitude and behavior change might be golden eggs, but plain eggs are far more common. Thus, I think we should concentrate on common effects of communication such as awareness of how others think, changes in cognition (understanding of the views of others), improvements in relationships, and similar effects that can be achieved in a symmetrical model of communication.
Q. In your mind, what is the ideal way a PR professional should engage in two-way symmetrical communication with a given audience?
A. I think that digital communication makes symmetrical communication fairly easy to practice and, in fact, might make it unavoidable. With digital communication, publics have much more control over their sources of information; and organizations have little choice other than to communicate with them symmetrically. (See this recent article: Grunig, J. E. (2009). Paradigms of global public relations in an age of digitalisation. PRism 6(2): http://www.prismjournal.org/fileadmin/Praxis/Files/globalPR/GRUNIG.pdf.) Research also is a critical component or symmetrical communication. The greatest value of public relations in strategic management is the information from publics that it brings into an organization’s decision making processes. Thus, making research a key component of everyday public relations practice is the most important way that professionals can engage in two-way symmetrical practice.
Q. What are the main obstacles PR professionals face in actually implementing the Excellence Theory within daily practice?
A. I believe that the inertia of practicing, and thinking of, public relations as a symbolic-interpretive function rather than as a strategic management function is the greatest obstacle. With a symbolic-interpretive approach, public relations professionals attempt to change how publics interpret organizational behaviors without having any role in shaping those behaviors in the first place. With a strategic management role, public relations professionals contribute to determining what that behavior will be. Unfortunately, public relations has been institutionalized in the minds of large numbers of practitioners and executives they work with as a symbolic-interpretive function—trying to use messages to make an organization look good even when it is behaving badly. The key to overcoming this obstacle is reinstitutionalizing public relations as a strategic management function in the minds of professionals, organizational executives, the population at large, and journalists. That will take education and time.
Q. What is the greatest example of successful symmetrical communication that you have seen implemented in the practical setting?
A. I always dislike citing a single example because someone will always find some fault with that example. Peters and Waterman, for example, named several companies that they believed were excellent in their 1982 book, In Search of Excellence. Shortly after, many of these companies went out of business or did not perform well. I am always more interested in understanding principles than in relying solely on examples. However, we did provide a number of examples of symmetrical communication in practice in Public Relations and Effective Organizations. The one organization whose name we revealed, because we had interviewed its CEO and communication executive onstage at an IABC conference, was the Chemical Manufacturing Association—after the Bhopal crisis. Scholars also frequently mention Johnson & Johnson, IBM, and Shell (after its crisis in Nigeria) as examples.
Q. How do you feel about the use of social media as a two-way communication tool for organizations? Is it effective in your view? Which social media sites do you view as the most effective for PR professionals today?
A. I think that digital media, which include social media but is a broader concept, are inherently interactive and therefore two-way. (See my article cited in question 2 as well as this article: Duhé, S. & Wright, D. K. (2013). Symmetry, social media, and the enduring imperative of two-way communication. In Sriramesh, K., Zerfass, A., and Kim, J-N., Public Relations and Communication Management (pp. 93-107), New York and London: Routledge.) However, too many practitioners still use digital media as a way of dumping information on publics, the symbolic-interpretive approach, and therefore think of social media sites only as a means of disseminating messages. Instead, they should think of digital media as a way of identifying problems, publics, and issues that require the attention of strategic managers and as a way of engaging in dialogue with publics. Most digital sites can be used in that way, but I fear that popular sites such as Facebook are used most to dump messages and not as interaction. Organizations should identify sites that reach their publics and develop their own sites and blogs that research suggests are most valuable in cultivating relationships with their publics. I don’t think there are any sites that are always most effective.
Q. What is the greatest recent concrete example of a way a PR professional should negotiate with the public?
A. Again, I hesitate to offer a “greatest” example, especially since I have not been actively conducting research. I will cite a recent paper by Shannon Bowen that provides an example of how Starbucks has used digital media to engage its publics symmetrically. Here is a direct quote from her paper with the citation following:
Starbucks® provides a classic case in the development of social media and the active engagement of publics. Starbucks was among the first large organizations to take social media to an innovative level by using it to actively conduct research and generate public feedback. The idea page promotes engagement of the public with the organization, and offers a space in which publics can share ideas as well as discuss topics with each other. The page invites participation with the opening:
You know better than anyone else what you want from Starbucks. So tell us. What’s your Starbucks Idea? Revolutionary or simple—we want to hear it. Share your ideas, tell us what you think of other people’s ideas and join the discussion. We’re here, and we’re ready to make ideas happen. Let’s get started (http://mystarbucksidea.force.com/).
By actively inviting participation, the organization is not only promoting engaged relationships but is also able to use the site as a cost-effective source of research data. The site provides a valuable information, opinion, and attitudinal data freely offered by Starbucks customers. Numerous ideas that originated with Starbucks customers on the website have been launched, from recycled Starbucks cards to eco-friendly cup sleeves. In addition to the cost savings, publics to engage with Starbucks on the website will, in most cases, have increased knowledge about Starbucks and relationship satisfaction with the organization resulting in increased brand loyalty. In public relations terms, the “my Starbucks idea” campaign creates a win-win scenario.
(Bowen, S. A. (2013). Using classic social media cases to distill ethical guidelines for digital engagement, Journal of Mass Media Ethics, 28, 119–133.)
Q. What is your advice to PR professionals who have started their careers from a media relations standpoint, but are actively trying to implement aspects of the Excellence Theory in their workplaces in order to elevate their knowledge and job effectiveness?
A. Knowledge is critical, as we learned in the Excellence study. A public relations professional must understand how to do public relations strategically, must understand the technical operations of the organization for which he or she works, and he or she must understand research and how to conduct it and use it in day-to-day public relations. This may require pursuing a Master’s degree, even on site at a university or online. It certainly requires study of strategic public relations theory.
Q. Can an outside PR consultant collaborating with the CEO of a company be just as effective as a person in a “director of communications” role within a company?
A. It is possible if the outside consultant has access to the dominant coalitions making decisions in an organization on a day-to-day basis, has the capability of conducting research, and devotes most of his or her time to the organization. More often, however, the outside consultant should work to install a director of communication inside the organization with whom to work and to provide advice. Often, the consultant will provide a research that the inside chief communication officer needs. Eventually, the outside consultant will work himself or herself out of the job as the inside CCO gains competence. It’s then possible to move on to other organizations to begin the same process.
Q. What is the most effective way of showing the ROI of relationships in a practical setting?
A. In a recent book chapter, Fraser Likely and Tom Watson argued convincingly that the concept of ROI generally is used incorrectly in public relations: Likely, F., & Watson, T., Measuring the edifice: Public relations measurement and evaluation practices over the course of 40 years. In Sriramesh, K., Zerfass, A., and Kim, J-N. (2013), Public Relations and Communication Management (pp. 143-162). New York and London: Routledge.) They said that ROI requires measuring “a ratio of income or earnings on capital employed in (profit making) business activities” (p. 149). They concluded that “the complexity of communication processes and their role in business interactions mean it is not possible to calculate Return on Investment in financial terms . . . [and] that public relations practitioners should refrain from using the term in order to keep their vocabulary compatible with the overall management world.” (p. 152).
Instead of ROI, Likely and Watson suggested using Benefit-Cost-Analysis and Cost-Effectiveness Analysis. BCR is “used to predict benefits or returns while (ROI) applies to actual benefits or returns. BCR is best used to assess a proposal or to choose between several alternative ones.” They cited William Ehling’s use of compensating variation as part of the Excellence study as the most extensive use of BCR in public relations. Ehling defined compensating variation as a measure of how much someone who benefits from a process would be willing to pay to obtain that process or to avoid losing it. We asked CEOs to estimate the value of the public relations function in their organization as a benefit-cost-ratio and then showed that this ratio was higher for excellent public relations departments than for less-excellent departments. Follow-up interviews showed that CEOs based their estimates of the BCR on the extent to which public relations cultivated effective relationships with strategic publics, avoided or mitigated crises, or resolved conflict. In subsequent research, my students and I and a number of colleagues in other universities have developed both quantitative and qualitative measures of relationships that can be used on a practical basis. This method is described in my book chapter, “Conceptualizing Quantitative Research in Public Relations” as well as in a paper written by Linda Hon and me that is available on the website of the Institute for Public Relations: http://www.instituteforpr.org/topics/measuring-relationships/. A companion article on quantitative methods for measuring relationships also is available on the IPR website: http://www.instituteforpr.org/topics/organizations-publics-relationships/. In another book chapter, Jennifer Scott described how StrategyOne, the research agency owned by Edelman public relations, used this measure of relationships in a practical setting: Scott, J. (2007). Relationship measures applied to practice. In E. L. Toth (Ed.), The Future of Excellence in Public Relations and Communication Management (pp. 263-274). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Q. What is the main thought you want students to take away from your work as they are getting more familiar with the excellence theory?
A. Knowledge of public relations theory, as it conceptualizes the role of public relations in strategic management; the ability to conduct research; and active and continual use of digital media as a tool for research, listening, and interaction with publics are the keys to the future practice of public relations.
Q. In your experience as a PR professional, have you worked in positions that operated as a strategic management function? If so, how did working at the strategic management level allow you to function in a more effective way?
A. It’s the ability to work directly with the decision-maker. It puts PR on the level of a strategic discussion, rather than a press release. It also allows you to look at the impact and results of the PR function rather than the process of the PR function. It’s a great tool in helping to educate people, too. (CEO, other leaders) It’s helping them understand that whatever the message is, it has to resonate with the medium first and then with the medium’s audience. It’s about presenting the message in a way that the benefit in the message is both apparent and immediate to the audience, rather than just the organization.
Q. Are PR practitioners more able to challenge management decisions as outsiders?
A. I think the ideal combination is having someone on the inside who understands who is the advocate internally, or the access internally, for the external consultant voice, That would be a senior PR strategist, or simply someone who understands how to use it would be important. It would be a C-level director. You have access through them so that the message is a duet. There is still direct access to the CEO or the decision-maker. The internal person, understanding the function, can help assess the relevance of what the consultant says based on his or her knowledge of the organization, so that when the contact comes with the CEO that has already been vetted, so that the consultant doesn’t say something that doesn’t have application to the organization, and therefore, have the decision-maker think, ‘Well, that’s not about us.’ The consultant brings an outside perspective and an endorsement internally helps you to be successful. Also, collaboration is always a good thing.
Q. Are external PR practitioners more able to bring up issues with a CEO because of their outside position?
A. You certainly can question a CEO more often in this position because you don’t have to weigh all of the other issues happening at the company at the same time. You can just be pure about the issue at hand. But, here’s where the collaboration of an internal and external person would work. The external person can be pure on the issue at hand, the internal person can then, assuming this person is trusted, be the advocate for that and endorse it. The internal person endorses that idea based on its relevancy to the organization.
Q. In experiences in which you did not work at the strategic management level, did you feel that your work in public relations was held back in any ways? Please explain.
A. The impact is affected. Everything is interrelated. The nuances are sometimes the most valuable thing to understand to really have an impact. If you don’t have the access or if you are not operating in the strategic management position, you lose the potential and the opportunity for that impact. What it becomes is a process of PR rather than a strategy.
Q. In your own experiences, have you functioned as the ethical conscience for your organization as a PR professional because you naturally considered many points of view as management decisions were taking place? In what ways?
Yes. At least weekly in local government. And there, I would have the ability to comment on possible implications – if we do this, than this will happen, or – have we thought about this? I think that the communications function in government is a great example of that, if in fact the person has the ability to function on that level. In my job, I was a member of senior staff and was in a weekly senior staff meeting with four other people in government with the mayor.
Q. During times of crisis, have you used specific decision-making tools based in PR theory to help you manage that crisis? Can you explain a situation in which you had to deal with a crisis and how it was handled?
A. In the example of a flood, we set the mayor up in a crisis center, made regular updates, and he talked directly so that the purpose was to calm the citizenry. The communication was managed. The elected official would speak for an hour and it would come directly from him. The citizenry needed to be reassured.
Q. How important are media placements/media relations in the overall work of a PR practitioner?
A. Publicity in and of itself is not a communications strategy. It’s part of an overall strategy, however, that said, when I think about your various audiences, including your customers, your employees, and sometimes, those media placements have greater value to your internal audience, stockholders, whatever it might be, as a tool in terms of changing opinions. But it is still just a part of a whole process. Relationships with media people are very valuable, but less so than they were 10 years ago. Why? New media. You can have great relationships with a lot of media and some nameless faceless person can post a Youtube video that goes viral and it can decimate you.
Q. Do you utilize two-way symmetrical communication in your work as a PR practitioner? If so, can you provide a few examples?
A. Yes, we do. I think more importantly is learning which platforms are most appropriate. Twitter has enormous impact if you are a celebrity, but if you want to try and get a message out on Twitter, it’s much harder if it is not an advocacy message. One of our clients in Pittsburgh has had great success in gaining a following on Twitter because it’s an advocacy organization and brings out emotion in people. Conversely, one of our clients has been working at it for two years and we started at 118 Twitter followers and we haven’t broken 2,000. But on Facebook, with the same client, we had maybe 600 followers starting, and now we have more than 73,000. The difference is pretty amazing. The other thing is texting. Everyone has this big idea about texting, but part of it is understanding how much people are willing to be invaded, and texting actually just doesn’t work that well for a lot of situations. We worked with a company that does text marketing and they said the single most important thing is how you promote. We did a billboard promoting a text number and got over the period of a month, 300 people. So, if you look at that from the perspective of a cost per thousand, it’s prohibitive. People just did not want to connect that way with a cause that was not urgent.
Q. How do you handle the two-way communication of social media?
A. I think that you have to acknowledge that social media is a two-way conversation, and if you post and someone reacts negatively, you can respond, but you run the risk of starting a dialogue. You can take it down, then run the risk of being perceived as someone who really isn’t about open communication, or you can let it go and see what happens. Watch it very carefully, but do not react – that’s what I do. It’s really easy to decide when you need to delete something if it is obscene or extreme. If you watch it and it does become a thing, you need to respond. It needs to be measured, thoughtful and strategic.
Q. How do you measure the ROI of your organization’s PR success and relationships?
A. The best way to do it is through pre, post and tracking research but most people cannot afford it. That way, you can track awareness and attitude shifts. So, how do you track the ROI? Unfortunately, most people track it in column inches. One of the things we do is track impressions, but then we also have levels of impressions, meaning how many multiple media hits within a concentrated time period occurred, because the issue there is achieving frequency for one event, one message or one release.
Q. What kind of research do you conduct in scanning your various stakeholders? What questions do you need answered for the work you do?
A. A couple of different ways – one is through traditional research methods – it’s awareness and it’s attitude – surveys, focus groups, and surveys whether they are intercept interviews – phone surveys are not as successful anymore. Internet surveys like survey monkey, and I have used that for a lot of clients trying to get a handle on audiences because it is so affordable. I helped one client with consumer research and we did intercept interviews. I don’t call them focus groups, because focus groups are led by a trained facilitator and you do a minimum of three so you don’t have any aberrations. We facilitate conversations and this client also has a survey that are on iPads on site. That’s one way. Another way is through Google searches to do a competitive scan. Another way is to research like organizations to see what they are doing and see what kind of impact it’s having, and who they are talking to.
Q. What is your advice to PR professionals who would like to move into a position in which they can work as a part of the strategic management function?
A. Learn how business works. Consider the PR function in the context of an organizational operation. Create media to support the organization – create coverage, create PR tools that support the organization’s overall objectives, rather than looking for story ideas.
Q. In your experience as a PR professional, have you worked in positions that operated as a strategic management function? If so, how did working at the strategic management level allow you to function in a more effective way?
A. Yes. By having a seat at the table, I was able to determine a course of action – be it in an everyday PR situation or in crisis management mode – that would have both the most positive and least negative impact on all areas of the business. By that I mean it’s easier to determine what a win is and how we get from here to there, and what liabilities may exist for one or more business heads if we proceed down a path of X, Y, or Z in the midst of a crisis. The more information the head of PR has, the better – it’s the same when pitching stories proactively or reacting to a story that isn’t of your own making.
Q. How important are media placements/media relations in the overall work of a PR practitioner?
A. They function as currency in the PR world – what you “got,” what you couldn’t “get,” whom you work well with (reporter-wise), who’s holding a grudge against your organization as a whole or someone on your team (and how that grudge affects your ability to land a story), and what ideas you hear in passing or by design can be cultivated into a pitch idea. That said, there is a colossal lack of understanding of how those placements come to be. Some folks within an organization think the News Fairy dropped them on the PR person’s doorstep that morning. Others think it was one phone call or email and ta daaaaa! I can’t count the number of times I’ve been asked “How could you let them print that?!” or “Why don’t you just get the NY Times to write about us?” I will also offer that media relations, in the true sense of that word is everything. You’re only as good as your sense of trust, communication, and respect with the journalists in your target area. I am honest with them at every turn, and I don’t subscribe to the very common practice of treating media like an enemy to conquer, a villain to foil. That isn’t how it should be. I will have a candid dialogue with them when they’ve screwed something up or not given us a fair shake – but when we screw up as an organization, I expect us to take it on the chin.
Q. Do you utilize two-way symmetrical communication in your work as a PR practitioner? If so, can you provide a few examples?
A. I have no idea what this is, but then I’ve yet to see any kind of PR “theory” in action. These are all academic terms that PR practitioners live out every day, and have been living out for decades before us, without naming.
Q. How do you cultivate relationships in a concrete way with your organization’s various audiences?
A. I show them that I’m not a typical PR person – because PR people have the worst reputations in the media world, and with good reason. I talk to them like a human being. I remain unfiltered no matter my audience. I live up to my word. I gain their respect not by telling them I know what I’m doing but by showing them. I try to understand their everyday functions so I can not only pitch it most effectively but also understand the playing field. I ask people to coffee just to hear what they’re all about. It terrifies people sometimes, but that’s what it takes for them to know me as a person and not just an email address.
Q. What is your advice to PR professionals who would like to move into a position in which they can work as a part of the strategic management function?
A. Ah, if only there were a roadmap! I think the same advice applies to them as it does to anyone who has ever asked me for advice on how to move up, no matter the field: Do anything and everything. Treat no task as too small. Be honest, even when you think it may surprise or upset someone (you’d be surprised at how much people respect that, especially if they live in rarified air and are surrounded by people who tell them all day how right and magical they are). And remember the piece of advice I repeat most often: I’ve learned far more from my mistakes than I have from my successes…so don’t be afraid to screw up, screw up BIG, and own up to it. It’s all about what you do next.
Q. In your experience as a PR professional, have you worked in positions that operated as a strategic management function? If so, how did working at the strategic management level allow you to function in a more effective way?
A. I had some say in strategic management as a PR professional. Working with a colleague, we brainstormed numerous pitch ideas for various media outlets – anything from syndicated outlets to local. By managing that project, I was able to be more effective because I knew exactly what was going to be pitched, when, how, etc. We had a set schedule for each month/significant day of the year. It sped up the process and allowed me to really focus on the project at hand.
Q. In experiences in which you did not work at the strategic management level, did you feel that your work in public relations was held back in any ways? Please explain.
A. Most of my work in the PR field was not in a strategic management level. Because of this, although I may have had ideas and strategies that I thought would benefit the client, they didn’t always get to see the light of day. I still had a say and was able to voice my opinions, however, not in a way that a manager would have.
Q. In your own experiences, have you functioned as the ethical conscience for your organization as a PR professional because you naturally considered many points of view as management decisions were taking place? In what ways?
A. For clients that are nonprofit to benefit a disease or illness, you have to be careful about the way you write and promote things. What you may think is not offensive can come across that way if you aren’t careful. There are always ethical decisions to be made when it comes to the public, research, medical treatments, etc.
Q. How important are media placements/media relations in the overall work of a PR practitioner?
A. I would say they are very important. There’s nothing like having a folder full of clips that you placed in the media – it shows dedication, commitment, and passion.
Q. How do you cultivate relationships in a concrete way with your organization’s various audiences?
A. In any relationship, communication is key. Whether they are patients in a medical center, the public reading a newspaper, communication and a good working relationship is beneficial. Always keep the client/audiences updated on what is going on.
Q. In your own career, would you like to work as a part of the strategic management function at some point in your career? Why or why not?
A. At some point, I think it would be a great experience to be a part of the strategic management team. I think it would take a lot of experience and knowledge of the field, so I still have a long ways to go. However, I think that kind of role brings a ton of pressure and stress – I’m not sure I could handle all that!
Relationships are essentially the building blocks of any company’s reputation. Relationships are what build success and severed relationships are what create failure. “Relationships provide a means for evaluating both the long-term and the short-term contributions of public relations programs and of the overall function to organizational effectiveness.” (Grunig, “Furnishing the Edifice,” 166) Grunig believes that the total value or ROI “of public relations develops through the intangible asset that relationships provide to organizations.” (Grunig, “Furnishing the Edifice,” 166)
Relationships are the key component that allows an organization to achieve its goals. “Effective organizations choose and achieve appropriate goals because they develop relationships with their constituencies, which public relations practitioners typically call publics. Ineffective organizations cannot achieve their goals, at least in part, because their publics do not support and typically oppose management efforts to achieve what publics consider illegitimate goals.” (Grunig and Hon, “Guidelines for Measuring Relationships,” 8) In order to be seen as legitimate in an audience’s eyes, an organization must develop relationships with its individual public members. This is largely because in the power structure of society itself, publics have the ability to make or break a business or organization through their decision to support its mission, or not support its mission. The ROI of relationships in the nonprofit sector is paramount. Without relationships, a nonprofit has no donor base, and without a donor base, a nonprofit organization ceases to exist, unless it receives all of its funding from major foundations. But even in that scenario, relationships with foundations also are the key that unlocks funding and sustains the future for the nonprofit organization. From every angle, the value of relationships can be seen when it comes to the effectiveness of an organization.
Public relations practitioners can play an important role as a strategic management function in protecting an organization’s relationships, because a CEO or other leaders may primarily only have the best interest of the company in mind while making decisions. “Organizations generally make better decisions when they listen to and collaborate with stakeholders before they make final decisions rather than simply trying to persuade them to accept organizational goals after decisions are made.” (Grunig and Hon, “Guidelines for Measuring Relationships,” 8) When an organization respects its publics enough to consider them during key decisions, that organization has a better chance at achieving long-term, sustainable success, because attention to its relationships is occurring on a regular basis. This can be accomplished with a PR practitioner in place at the strategic management level, because he or she considers multiple points of view at all times, and can act as the voice for an organization’s publics within a closed door meeting that only includes a few.
In addition to securing its future, healthy relationships between a nonprofit and its publics can bring about extra projects that simply cannot be included in the budget because of resource constraints. If a construction company owner is to connect with a nonprofit organization, they could volunteer labor and materials to complete needed onsite work, saving the nonprofit thousands of dollars. The value of a relationship of this kind can be seen in the amount of money saved through the implementation of a volunteer project. Relationships in the nonprofit sector also can result in entire programs or events being funded by larger corporations in the community, therefore those relationships can be measured by the annual savings the organization reaps through these kinds of partnerships. When a business agrees to become a lead sponsor of one of the largest fundraisers of the year for a nonprofit, that nonprofit can then focus on achieving its fundraising goal for that specific event, rather than worrying about how costs will be covered in addition to reaching a fundraising goal. This is a clear example of how relationships can help an organization achieve its goals through collaboration and cultivated connections.
Relationships can also be measured through the use of developed questionnaires distributed to publics that have relationships with the organization. “Such questions can be used in place of, or to supplement, the general reputational surveys that organizations often take of the general population.” (Grunig and Hon, “Guidelines for Measuring Relationships,” 26)
Relationships are not connections that can be established and then walked away from, which is why cultivation is so important for the long-term success of an organization’s relationships with its publics. “During a growing season, for example, crops are cultivated according to the conditions that affect them. They are not simply maintained. I believe the same is true for relationships.” (Grunig, “Furnishing the Edifice,” 168) The cultivation of relationships is a direct link to two-way symmetrical communication, as one strategy for accomplishing this would be a CEO making sure he has contact with an organization’s publics in order to engage in conversation and two-way communication. This is an act that cultivates relationships through the use of symmetrical communication.
Many people in the professional world measure the ROI of public relations in the form of counting media hits, however, this is not a successful way in which PR practitioners can truly measure the strength of the relationships between an organization and its publics. I believe many professionals outside of public relations, in addition to PR professionals who focus only on media relations, put too much emphasis on the number of media hits per year as being the one tangible way of measuring real success. This is highlighted by PR Professional #1: “The best way to do it is through pre, post and tracking research but most people cannot afford it. That way, you can track awareness and attitude shifts. So, how do you track the ROI? Unfortunately, most people track it in column inches. One of the things we do is track impressions, but then we also have levels of impressions, meaning how many multiple media hits within a concentrated time period occurred, because the issue there is achieving frequency for one event, one message or one release.” This issue highlights Grunig’s statement that one of the biggest challenges that public relations faces is its own institutionalization as a strategic management function, rather than a focus on symbolic-interpretive activities that include media relations.
The function of media relations is important to an organization – and so is regular media coverage. However, simply measuring the number of stories and their length in print is not a clear way of measuring the success of public relations or cultivating relationships that are important to an organization. In the nonprofit sector, one way to highlight the financial value of media relations efforts, which would make a stronger case for PR as a strategic management function in a way, is to present a media placement as a way of comparing it to what the cost of advertising would be for that same amount of space if it is in print. For instance, if a nonprofit in Pittsburgh gets a front-page story in the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette, it could be said that it would be of equal value to a half-page advertisement, which costs more than $3,000 to run for a single day. Rather than simply counting the number of media hits achieved per year on behalf of an organization, PR practitioners should highlight the cost savings involved in gaining this kind of free visibility as a result of strong relationships with members of the media. At the same time, while this presents a clearer way of expressing ROI related to media relations, it still does not highlight the important work done by PR professionals as related to strengthening and cultivating organization-public relationships. With the use of social media, online relationships between an organization and its “followers” can be measured through the level of engagement that occurs on organization sites and through tracking hashtags and keywords. At the same time, these tracking devices lack the personal information that can be gained through the use of questionnaires, which was noted before as a tool for examining relationships, according to Grunig.
In closing, an organization’s relationships to its publics are one of the most critical ways in which a strong reputation is built. The value of public relations clearly lies in the great benefit that strong relationships can give to a company in a variety of both tangible and intangible ways.
Through the Excellence Theory, Grunig provides PR practitioners with the concept of environmental scanning, which is a way professionals can gather information from its publics in an effort to better serve them, communicate with them, and represent them as a member of the dominant coalition of an organization. “Chang (2000), for example, found that personal sources of information are more useful than impersonal sources such as media, public opinion polls, or published information. The communication executives in her study said the most useful external personal contacts were customers, activist groups, journalists and government officials.” (Grunig, “Furnishing the Edifice,” 162) Internally, the most useful sources were employees, supervisors and other staff members.
Using Grunig’s tools in this component of the Excellence Theory allows a PR practitioner to elevate the profession because they can now do the work that many people view as only being done by marketing professionals. Environmental scanning is very similar to Integrated Marketing Communication techniques, because it allows us to gather information about members of our various publics through a number of different channels. Environmental scanning essentially is research PR practitioners conduct to be better informed about their audiences needs and current opinions regarding a given organization, or issues related to the organization.
Social media is a platform that PR practitioners can specifically use for environmental scanning. Social media in itself is an environmental scanning tool that allows us to search and document important information related to our audiences – for free. For example, on Twitter, PR professionals can search key words related to their company or organization to tap into conversations that are occurring related to those topics. In addition, PR professionals can also use hashtags during campaigns to measure how effective a strategy is online and to see its publics’ responses in real time. Similar searches also can be conducted via Facebook, blogs and other related social media platforms and websites.
Starbucks showed a way that a company could both conduct environmental scanning research and communicate symmetrically with its audiences in an example noted in the section of this project that analyzes two-way symmetrical communication. In an emailed Q&A, Grunig cited a paper by Shannon Bowen, who provided this example from the globally recognized coffee empire:
“You know better than anyone else what you want from Starbucks. So tell us. What’s your Starbucks Idea? Revolutionary or simple—we want to hear it. Share your ideas, tell us what you think of other people’s ideas and join the discussion. We’re here, and we’re ready to make ideas happen. Let’s get started (http://mystarbucksidea.force.com/).
By actively inviting participation, the organization is not only promoting engaged relationships but is also able to use the site as a cost-effective source of research data. (Bowen)”
PR Professional #1 stated that she conducts environmental scanning in a couple of different ways, one of which is through traditional research methods. “It’s awareness and it’s attitude – surveys, focus groups…phone surveys are not as successful anymore. I have used internet surveys like Survey Monkey, and I have used that for a lot of clients trying to get a handle on audiences because it is so affordable,” she said in an interview. In another instance, this professional uses interviews to gather information in regards to environmental scanning. “I helped one client with consumer research and we did intercept interviews. I don’t call them focus groups because focus groups are led by a trained facilitator and you do a minimum of three so you don’t have any aberrations. What we are doing is facilitating conversations and this client also has a survey people can fill out on iPads on site.” Another way this PR professional engages in environmental scanning activities is through Google searches in completing a competitive scan. “I also research like-organizations to see what they are doing and see what kind of impact it’s having, and who they are talking to,” she said. These activities in the practical setting reflect the importance Grunig places on the personal connections between an organization and its publics rather than polls and other impersonal methods. Through interviews and even taking a survey through an iPad onsite, the PR practitioner is able to gain important insight into the opinions of its various stakeholders.
Scenario Building
By bringing the tool of scenario building into the realm of a PR practitioner’s world, Grunig is equipping professionals with an important perspective to bring into the executive level meeting to help guide decision-making. “Management scholars have used scenarios for some time as a way of visioning the consequences of different decisions, but the technique has seldom been used in public relations.” (Grunig, “Furnishing the Edifice,” 164) By identifying publics and being able to construct scenarios pertaining to potential issues that could arise with each of those populations, a PR practitioner is providing valuable information to management that will help them to make the best choices for both the organization and its publics. This specifically allows the PR practitioner to contribute to strategic organizational decisions. (Grunig, “Furnishing the Edifice,” 164)
Scenario building is a tool that would be most effectively used by a PR practitioner working at the strategic management level, because he or she would be able to create a picture for top decision-makers and program directors regarding the potential consequences or benefits of their decisions. There also is a direct correlation between the act of scenario building and the PR practitioner acting as the ethical conscience of the organization. These two activities and aspects of the Excellence Theory are interwoven, as a PR practitioner who is scenario building is essentially highlighting how different audiences related to an organization will react or be affected by the decisions made by the dominant coalition. Through scenario building, the PR practitioner has the ability to guide the dominant coalition in making ethical choices and also helps those leaders to consider the multiple viewpoints of the various stakeholders they must answer to. This is why it is so critical that scenario building occur at the strategic management level, because this activity will directly influence the key decisions made within an organization. In a sense, scenario building is a way that a PR practitioner can protect an organization’s relationships with its various publics, because this act is putting a focus on how those publics will react to any given decision.
PR Professional #1 essentially stated that she used scenario building while acting as the ethical conscience of an organization, specifically during her time in working as a PR practitioner for an elected official. In meetings with the few members of the senior staff, in which she was included, she was able to voice potential situations that could result from key decisions. “I would have the ability to comment on possible implications – if we do this than this, or – have we thought about his?” She was able to guide the top-level leaders by expanding the way they looked at situations. The PR practitioner, through scenario building, is creating a wider perspective for the dominant coalition to ensure that an organization’s publics’ needs are met and the relationships most important to the organization are protected. In the end, relationships build a good reputation, therefore, those strong relationships essentially build and protect the reputation of the company overall.
Scenario building also is a critical tool that can be used to help organizations avoid crises situations that could have long-term negative financial effects on the company as a whole and damaging effects to the organization’s reputation. Crises have the ability to bring down an entire empire, as we have seen with Food Network’s fallen star, Paula Deen, who is an example of someone who handled a PR crisis in a disastrous way through avoidance and denial. An organization often faces a crisis after it has overstepped its power and violated its relationships with its publics, therefore, scenario building at the dominant coalition level of a company is one way that a PR practitioner serves as a check and balance mechanism for strategic management leaders. Scenario building could have been incredibly useful to the leadership of Bayer in the example of the 31 deaths caused by a risky high dosage in a product that the company was well aware of and still willing to distribute under the guise that it was safe, according to Fred Robins in “Learning from corporate mistakes.” This company engaged in extremely unethical behavior in quest of a greater immediate profit, but in the end, the cost of making an unethical decision caused more damage on all fronts to the company, and that damage had to be undone. Through the use of scenario building, an ethical PR practitioner could have warned the leadership at Bayer about the ramifications of trying to hide a potentially fatal flaw in a product. The possible death of any customer is not worth the immediate profit a company can gain by hiding information. The PR practitioner also could have highlighted the potential scenarios in which the cost of litigation after the wrongful deaths would occur, the damage to the company’s reputation, the damage to the company’s stocks and the damage to the company’s stockholder relationships, in addition to their relationships with the general publics and consumers.
The use of scenario building by a PR practitioner also involves the use of sociodrama and rhetoric on behalf of the PR practitioner in presenting language strategically used to persuade the dominant coalition to consider other points of view. When we describe the potential scenarios that can arise as a result of a decision made by an organization, we are creating meaning for the leaders of an organization through the use of storytelling and sociodrama in the form of a conversation or written memo. We are making the case as to why certain decisions should or should not be made, depending on the situation the organization is facing.
Scenario building is a tool PR practitioners can use to encourage and foster the use of transparency at the strategic management level, because it highlights the importance of ethical decision-making through putting a spotlight on potential outcomes. A PR practitioner using this tool can give management a big picture look at what their decisions mean to multiple stakeholders and the long-term success of the business. The key to the successful use of scenario building largely depends and relies upon the PR practitioner operating as a strategic management function to ensure that he or she has the ability to influence the top decision-makers in an organization. Through a postmodern lens, I doubt that a PR practitioner would be able to use this tool as effectively if he or she were in a mid-level position at an organization, however, through the act of scenario building, the PR practitioner, even while working as a strategic management function, is essentially acting as the organizational activist because he or she is advocating on behalf of publics by demonstrating how top-level decisions will affect specific groups of people who have relationships with the company. This is a way in which both modern and postmodern PR theories can be aligned and used together in a compromise between the approaches.
Both scenario building and environmental scanning are tools PR practitioners can use to help elevate the status of public relations as a field, and also can use these tools to show the greater value practitioners can lend to the strategic management function. By implementing these aspects of the Excellence Theory in the workplace, PR professionals can make the case through demonstrated action as to why the PR position should be institutionalized as a strategic management function, and not just thought of as a process for media relations. These tools allow PR professionals to serve an organization on a deeper level that is extremely instrumental to the leaders of the dominant coalition.
Arthur W. Page once stated, “Public relations is everybody’s job.” This statement could not ring more true than when employee stakeholders’ relationships with an organization are examined. “Employees are the most important customers an organization has and should be given at least the same attention as external publics.” (Carden, “Working with innovators and laggards,” 82) When employees are unhappy in their job situation or with their company, they will let just about everyone in their life know about it. I think this is a truth that just about anyone can relate to at some point in his or her career. This is why employee-organizational relationships are so important to the long-term success of a company. Satisfied employees means a positive reputation for the community and a key group of stakeholders that have the potential to become advocates for the organization they work for. This essentially highlights the reason why PR, in fact, is everyone’s job. “Employees should be thought of as an extension of the public relations department. Organizational knowledge not only makes them feel more a part of the organization, it also helps to maintain the organization’s reputation and to promote its products, programs and services to customers.” (Carden, “Working with innovators and laggards,” 83)
Caption: This company demonstrates its commitment to employees as stakeholders.
In Grunig’s work in forming the Excellence Theory, employee communication was explored with the use of “theories of organizational communication, sociology, and psychology…adding the concepts of organizational structure, culture, and systems of internal communication.” (Grunig, “Furnishing the Edifice,” 160) During this study, Grunig measured two types of employee satisfaction, including satisfaction with the job and satisfaction with the organization. (Grunig, “Furnishing the Edifice,” 160)
The concept of two-way symmetrical communication comes into play when an organization is communicating with one of its most important stakeholders – its employees. While Grunig studied the behavior of organizations, he found that they largely engaged in one-way communication, which typically “resulted in policies and programs of agencies” that did not work well for employees. In order to serve employees and ensure their satisfaction as members of an organization, an organization must first seek their opinions and discover their needs.
Clear communication efforts between an organization and its employees essentially translate into a reality where all employees, from top to bottom, are on the same page when it comes to a company’s values, reflecting the concept of symbolic interactionism. This can affect every aspect of a company’s existence. These values, which are strengthened through clear communication to these specific employee stakeholders, are then shared through action: making regularly ethical choices because of a shared interest in the company’s reputation and overall identity. This allows each individual employee to contribute directly to the company’s reputation and long-term success, as eventually they can become full-blown ambassadors of their own workplace. “To do this, a positive corporate identity is developed and projected through organizational behavior, symbols and communication, which in turn includes a favorable corporate image and reputation amongst stakeholders, including staff,” N. Leila Trapp states. (Trapp, “The persuasive strength of values,” 157)
Identifying as an employee of a company is one way a person creates their own reality. Symbolic interactionism “provides a worldview of a human being as an active individual,” defining oneself internally and through daily interactions in various aspects of society, Batchelor states in a lecture we referred to during this course. In this respect, a given company’s communications and interactions with an individual are essentially what will shape the way that employee views or values the company for which they work. An organization’s logo, brand image, internal communications and all interactions with upper level and peer staff are symbols and interactions that build the way employees define their employer within their own reality. These interactions also serve as persuasive tools that have the potential to convince employees to buy into an organization’s mission in a deeper, more committed way. These are the many reasons why employee satisfaction and organization-employee relationships are so critical to the ongoing success of a company. PR is everyone’s job.
An example of one tool organizations can use to ensure that employee needs are being met is through the use of surveys. In my own organization, surveys are conducted annually to gather opinions from employees about how they feel about their own job and position, and how they feel about the organization, which highlights the two main aspects that Grunig included while examining these relationships. This allows an organization to discover which areas of the operation need to improve and what top leaders can do better in their efforts to make sure that employees feel appreciated and their problems are solved to the greatest extent possible. Another tool that can be used to create symmetrical communication between the employee stakeholders and the CEO of a company are regularly scheduled brown bag lunch meetings in which managers and mid-level staff can have an open conversation about current issues affecting them within their specific work situations. This opens a dialogue or discourse that can help the company to grow, challenge itself, and perhaps create new policies. Company-wide town hall meetings also create a space for two-way symmetrical communication to flourish, and also highlights the importance of rhetoric. Through debate and discourse, organizations are more able to evolve because the top leaders are willing to listen to employees and meet their needs. In a more informal setting, company-wide picnics allow leaders to express their gratitude for their employees’ work, while at the same time, creating a culture in which unity is important and valued. It may seem like a mundane event, but when executed properly and well-attended, this event can play a role in the larger communications that take place between employee stakeholders and the organization.
Larger organizations with multiple divisions that are then split into multiple programs face significant challenges when it comes to employee communication and employee satisfaction. When hundreds of employees are spread across multiple locations, it is difficult to create a unified sense of oneness when it comes to the organizational identity. A tool that can aid in creating a more unified group of employees is an internal newsletter. While this communication could be seen as one-way communication, the way in which it is executed can actually involve the employees with the creation of an editorial committee. By involving employees in the planning process for the internal newsletter, a PR practitioner is fostering two-way communication with the employee stakeholder group. By creating an editorial committee, the employees have the chance to get involved in their organization in a deeper way by taking ownership of the internal newsletter. This type of communication is critical in larger organizations because it also aids in clearly communicating the values of the organization, while connecting separate and differing departments to the overarching mission of the collective company. Internal newsletters help PR practitioners to break down silos and walls created by department definitions and day-to-day work. While this typically one-way communication tool did not allow for feedback in the past, in the digital world, an internal newsletter can actually create a space where employees can reply and send suggestions, comments or questions to the PR practitioner as well. This strengthens the bond between the employee and the organization. In addition, the use of language and rhetoric allows the PR practitioner to create meaning in the life of an employee, as previously noted. Through creating different narratives about the company’s latest business and current events, and making sure the message is focused on the employees, communicators can create an emotional bond between the organization and the employee that lasts. Through the use of rhetoric and sociodrama in the form of an employee newsletter, we as communicators are working to motivate employees to continue to do their job at a high standard, or, we are reaching out to those employees who may not be completely satisfied in an effort to improve that relationship through two-way communication.
Company-wide social media profiles also serve as a tool for two-way communication to occur between its employee stakeholders and the organization as a whole. Through connecting on social media with the company they work for, employees are engaged and up to date with the work of various departments, and have the chance to respond to posts about issues directly related to their own work. An even better option in the social media world for two-way communication to occur would be within a closed Facebook group. This closed group could provide a safe space for employees to discuss current issues or challenges, and also could allow them to participate in an open forum by asking questions of the company leaders or PR practitioner.
One-on-one, personal communication between top-level executives and mid-level staff also is a critical key to the overall organization-employee relationships. Whether it’s a handshake in passing, or regular site visits, friendly, personable interactions between a CEO and its employees is a small action that can make a big difference when it comes to company morale. In one of my previous work situations, rumors of layoffs began to swirl after many company changes took place. I couldn’t shake the feeling that I would soon lose my job. A member of the dominant coalition of this company called me personally and asked me about my concerns. This person specifically asked me what I was worried about, and explained the current situation in a both honest and hopeful way. I was able to communicate my concerns directly to a top-level leader without hesitation, because that person reached out to me personally and asked me what my needs were as an employee. I was able to return to my daily tasks and know that my fears were addressed. It was both comforting and reassuring, and made me have more faith in the company that I worked for. Another example of a company truly valuing the employee stakeholders is the way in which leaders show that they care about an employee’s life experiences. Recently, I lost my grandfather who was suddenly diagnosed with cancer and died six weeks later. I not only received a card from my boss and immediate colleagues, but also received a card from the overall agency expressing their sympathy. These small gestures add up to an employee feeling valued not just as a worker, but also as a human being.
As communicators and PR practitioners, it is up to us to cultivate a work environment where employees feel comfortable enough to express their needs. It is also up to the PR practitioner to create the platforms and forums in which employees are able to do so in a comfortable way. Two-way symmetrical communication between an organization and its employees is the key to future success and employee retainment. If we are able to emotionally connect employees to the greater, overall mission of our organizations, we can create a stronger company that not only has employees, but also has a group of stakeholders that are willing to advocate for the company during off-hours.
Caption: Facebook COO questions the lack of female leaders in her famous TED Talk, which inspired her book, “Lean In.”
Gender plays an important role in Grunig’s Excellence Study, which led to the Excellence Theory, because of “the growing number of women in public relations and because of evidence that women had difficulty entering managerial roles — thus limiting the number of knowledgeable public relations professionals available for a strategic role.” (Grunig, “Furnishing the Edifice,” 161)
Grunig went on to state, “We found that organizations with excellent public relations valued women as much as men for the strategic role and developed programs to empower women throughout the organization.” (Grunig, “Furnishing the Edifice,” 161) It is important to note that a gender gap in the world of PR management does not exist on its own, but rather, highlights a universal problem in the dominant coalitions of the corporate world, no matter the field. When we are discussing professionals working as a strategic management function within their field, which is a core focus of Grunig’s Excellence Theory, the gap becomes even more pronounced and equality is harder to achieve at the executive level. According to a 2010 Forbes report, “the number of women in C-suite positions decreased to 9.8% last year, from 10.3% in 2008, according to a new study of large public companies in the New York City area by the Financial Women’s Association. In addition, according to the study, the number of companies with no women among their most highly compensated executives increased more than 12% to 65 from 58.” (Hymowitz, “Gender gap in America’s top ranks,” Forbes)
This is in part due to the institutionalized support of men in powerful positions with the help of other men opening doors for them to succeed. This gender gap specifically affects women in public relations and their ability to live out the Excellence Theory. If women are held back from reaching a strategic management role, they will not be able to be as effective in terms of delivering impact with their PR efforts and skills, and certainly will not be able to fully manifest Grunig’s Excellence Theory within their own work. By leaving women out of the top power structure of an organization, a company is only holding itself back. “The business case for having more women in senior positions at corporations is clear. Quite simply, women bring a different perspective to the work world. Multiple studies have found a correlation between corporate performance and the percentage of women on boards, regardless of the industry.” (Hewlitt, “What women need to advance,” Forbes) Including women at the executive table translates into bigger profits for a company.
One program used throughout many corporations in an effort to increase diversity and gender equity at the strategic management level is through internal mentoring programs. Leaders of a company will often focus on a group of employees that show great potential, and pair them with top-level leaders as a way to groom them for advancement in the company. A corporate female executive that I recently interviewed during a freelance project stated that even within mentoring programs, women are often matched with other senior women, while men are often paired with another man at a higher level. The man then becomes the one who has access to the executive leadership and board, and thus, begins establishing relationships with people who will secure his executive future. In this way, men are building strategic relationships that can lead them to the strategic management function because they had literal doors opened for them that were immediately closed for the woman when her mentor was chosen for her. This is just one example of the ongoing obstacles that women face in gaining access to leadership roles in the corporate setting. Companies that take the steps to close the gender gap have legitimate economic reasons to do so that go beyond the fact that it is morally the right thing to do. “Having a diverse team is vital not only to success, but also to innovation. With women consumers making the majority of purchasing decisions across the globe, corporations looking to stay on the cutting edge of their industries are well advised to cultivate gender diversity.” (Hewlitt, “What women need to advance,” Forbes)
Receiving sponsorship within an organization is a critical step and another tool women can use to work toward reaching the strategic management function of a company. The differences between mentorship and sponsorship are strong. “To get ahead, women need to acquire a sponsor — a powerfully positioned champion — to help them escape the ‘marzipan layer,’ that sticky middle slice of management where so many driven and talented women languish.” (Hewlitt, “Mentors are good. Sponsors are better,” New York Times) In a sense, women have to pay attention to their own personal brand and personal public relations strategy in order to climb the corporate ladder.
Through sponsorship, women are essentially receiving an endorsement from a powerful, high-level employee who can vouch for their skills and potential directly to top leaders, creating a strong basis for their path to upper level management in the eyes of those leaders who can eventually open the door for them. Mentors on the other hand provide a much less powerful effect in advancing a woman’s career because the overall effect relies upon how much power the mentor has personally in the company. “Research from the Center for Work-Life Policy, a New York-based think tank, quantifies the power of the sponsor effect. Sponsorship provides a statistical benefit of up to 30 percent when it comes to stretch assignments, promotions, and pay raises—a boost that mentoring alone can never hope to match.” (Hewlitt, “What women need to advance,” Forbes) However, it seems that women in general also need to shift their focus to realize the powerful effect that sponsorship can have on their careers and advancement. “Many junior women still underestimate the crucial push sponsorship can contribute to a high-potential but unrecognized employee. According to CWLP data, 77 percent of women believe that hard work and long hours, not connections, contribute the most to their advancement. There’s an overwhelming sense that getting ahead by any other means is dirty. Furthermore, many are hesitant to pursue a relationship with a senior male sponsor for fear of the perception of being sexually involved.” (Hewlitt, “What women need to advance,” Forbes) Both men and women of companies must overcome these fears of perception so that the issue of gender inequality can be overcome. It will take members of both sexes working together to fix this problem.
Sheryl Sandberg, the COO of Facebook, found recent success with her book, “Lean In,” which highlights the issue of women working toward the top roles in their companies, and the ways they may be holding themselves back in the process through their own individual habits and behavior. This is another aspect of how the gender gap can be addressed, but not a solution that can stand on its own. Sandberg brings up the many issues women face while trying to climb the corporate ladder, whether that means juggling work and family, or trying to speak up more in important company meetings. Sandberg challenges women to “lean in” to the table and be heard rather than sit on the margins silently as men make the decisions. While she was widely criticized for her book due to her own comfortably wealthy status, Sandberg helped to spark a new conversation surrounding the issue of women in management. Recently, a New York Times writer brought this issue back into light. “As Ms. Sandberg noted, women’s chances of making it to the top are also stuck. Only 17 percent of directors and 14 percent of C-suite executives at Fortune 500 companies are women. All but 20 or so of their chief executives are men. At the other end of the spectrum of opportunity, 16.3 percent of women are officially poor, according to census figures, compared to 13.6 percent of men.” (Porter, “To address gender gap, is it enough to lean in?” New York Times)
These figures dramatically demonstrate the key obstacles facing women who hope to become a part of the strategic management function of their companies. This issue, as noted previously, is one that goes beyond the world of public relations. It is an issue that we must face and grapple with as a society in order to create a more equal world.
The two-way symmetrical model of public relations as described in Grunig’s Excellence Theory is focused primarily in making sure that decisions made by an organization are mutually beneficial between itself and its audiences. The goal of Grunig’s symmetrical communication model is one that embraces negotiation between the organization and its publics, and one that also fosters mutual understanding. During this aspect of Grunig’s research, his idea for symmetrical communication “also was stimulated by Carter’s (1965) and Chaffee and McLeod’s (1968) conceptualization of coorientation.” (Grunig, “Furnishing the Edifice,” 156) The roots for this model “represented a movement away from theories of attitudes held by one person and research on how to develop messages to change the orientations (attitudes) of person.” (Grunig, “Furnishing the Edifice,” 156) This model is drastically different in comparison to the stereotypical view of the PR practitioner as a manipulative figure who uses smoke and mirrors to control audiences. The symmetrical model “proposed that individuals, organizations, and publics should use communication to adjust their ideas and behavior to those of others rather than try to control how others think and behave.” (Grunig, “Furnishing the Edifice,” 156)
The symmetrical model of communication is a democratic framework for the PR practitioner to follow, and one that can both be effective or detrimental, depending on the situation. The overall goal of creating mutual understanding between parties also is much more palatable for audiences, because in human nature, no one desires to be controlled. If a person is controlled or feels inferior to another person or organization, they will not develop trust, and they are likely to withdraw completely from a relationship. The same goes for the organizational-public relationship as well. If we create a sense of open communication and build trust through the two-way symmetrical model, we are more likely to be in a positive position when a time of crisis does occur because of strong relationships that have created a strong reputation. The use of two-way symmetrical communication by a PR practitioner who functions at the strategic management level also allows our audiences to have a voice at the executive table. This model creates a level playing field for negotiation and mutual understanding to take place between the organization and its publics. The two-way model provides an organization with the tools and path needed to create a strong company reputation built upon solid, long-lasting relationships, because both the organization and its audiences are provided with a voice in processes and developing issues or problems. The two-way symmetrical model for communication maintains both the organization’s best interests and its audiences’ best interests at the forefront in the most fair and balanced way possible. Through the use of this model, both the organization and its audiences can collaborate together to both grow and strengthen an overall organization, leading it to greater success.
Two-way symmetrical communication and digital media
The worldwide success of social media websites, blogs and interactive online technology has provided companies and organizations with a direct link to customers and constituents 24 hours a day, seven days a week. Its impact can be seen on a global scale, as activists utilized Facebook in organizing the “Arab Spring” protests and uprising in the Middle East, and the websites are used by just about every generation today. These various sites provide organizations with the ability to reach new audiences and engage with potential new supporters on a daily basis. When an organization uses a Facebook page on a daily basis, providing interesting content that engages users to take action like make a comment, share a photo, or even click “like,” audiences are helping the organization to gain awareness across social media sites, while at the same time, feeling a one-on-one, interactive connection with a company. Facebook provides a space for our publics to have a voice in a centralized online location. Now more than ever, the two-way symmetrical model is a part of daily life for PR practitioners who are managing social media websites. Grunig stated via an emailed Q&A that now more than ever, symmetrical communication is a reality for PR practitioners regardless of whether or not they are trying to implement it. “I think that digital communication makes symmetrical communication fairly easy to practice and, in fact, might make it unavoidable,” Grunig said. “With digital communication, publics have much more control over their sources of information; and organizations have little choice other than to communicate with them symmetrically.”
At the same time, PR practitioners must understand how these platforms work. Social media sites are not simply websites where information can be posted and left to stand on its own. It must be utilized for two-way conversations to take place. Grunig also cautioned professionals to use these symmetrical communication tools in the right way. “Too many practitioners still use digital media as a way of dumping information on publics, the symbolic-interpretive approach, and therefore think of social media sites only as a means of disseminating messages,” Grunig stated via email. “Instead, they should think of digital media as a way of identifying problems, publics, and issues that require the attention of strategic managers and as a way of engaging in dialogue with publics. Most digital sites can be used in that way, but I fear that popular sites such as Facebook are used most to dump messages and not as interaction.”
Through the use of Twitter, ongoing interactive conversations occur daily between companies and their publics. In this medium, complaints can be handled and resolved in an immediate fashion, and users discussing the same topics related to a company can also connect with each other through the use of hashtags paired with key words. Twitter gives the PR practitioner a chance to communicate daily with various audiences, while at the same time, provides an avenue for scanning the latest topics and trends, which connects to another facet of the Excellence Theory: environmental scanning. With the use of LinkedIn, companies are provided with a more informal platform to reach out to current employees to update them about various news and events. LinkedIn also provides companies with a way of attracting new employees through engagement and regular updates. Instagram allows the PR practitioner to take full advantage of the power of symbols in the climate of new media, however this also highlights Grunig’s fear of PR professionals using social media as a symbolic-interpretive tool rather than an interactive one. Start-up websites like Concert-oh, a company based in Pittsburgh, allow organizations to host virtual town hall meetings via webcams in which two-way communication can take place in a convenient and open manner. Social media websites and modern technology provides us with an array of platforms in which relationships can be strengthened and communication can take place anytime, anywhere. Access to a company’s leaders is just a click away in today’s social media-driven world.
Through the use of social media, every audience an organization works with via the two-way symmetrical model not only has a voice, but one that is very public in that everyone engaged on a social media site will have the ability to view an individual’s comments, concerns or complaints. With this fact comes the very unique challenges that social media presents to the PR practitioner in the midst of the very positive cultivation of two-way symmetrical communication. One example is posed by the use of blogs. A blog is a medium that is largely dominated by reader comments, suggestions and insights. Blogs provide a way to connect with various audiences on a regular basis, but they also open up an organization to regular scrutiny and comments from a wide range of people who can enjoy the anonymity of the Internet. In today’s world, the majority of people have experienced or witnessed the presence of “trolls” online – the anonymous commenters who want nothing more than to trash anything and everything they see online simply to aggravate others. This is why PR practitioners today must have solid social media policies in place that create a healthy balance of two-way communication that fosters mutual understanding, and a policy that protects the organization from shallow insults that have no merit.
PR Professional #1 said the practitioner must understand how to use each platform and also must understand that new media is a place for conversation. “I think that you have to acknowledge that social media is a two-way conversation, and if you post and someone reacts negatively, you can respond, but you run the risk of starting a dialogue,” she said. “You can take it down, then run the risk of being perceived as someone who really isn’t about open communication, or you can let it go and see what happens. Watch it very carefully, but do not react – that’s what I do. It’s really easy to decide when you need to delete something if it is obscene or extreme. If you watch it and it does become a thing, you need to respond. It needs to be measured, thoughtful and strategic.” The world of social media opens the floodgates for two-way communication to take place, and it must be managed by the PR practitioner in a rational and professional manner to uphold the integrity and reputation of the company.
Grunig noted a specific successful example of the use of social media in negotiating with the public and engaging in two-way symmetrical communication in his emailed Q&A interview. “I will cite a recent paper by Shannon Bowen that provides an example of how Starbucks has used digital media to engage its publics symmetrically,” Grunig said. “Here is a direct quote from her paper with the citation following:”
“Starbucks® provides a classic case in the development of social media and the active engagement of publics. Starbucks was among the first large organizations to take social media to an innovative level by using it to actively conduct research and generate public feedback. The idea page promotes engagement of the public with the organization, and offers a space in which publics can share ideas as well as discuss topics with each other. The page invites participation with the opening:
‘You know better than anyone else what you want from Starbucks. So tell us. What’s your Starbucks Idea? Revolutionary or simple—we want to hear it. Share your ideas, tell us what you think of other people’s ideas and join the discussion. We’re here, and we’re ready to make ideas happen. Let’s get started (http://mystarbucksidea.force.com/).’
By actively inviting participation, the organization is not only promoting engaged relationships but is also able to use the site as a cost-effective source of research data. The site provides a valuable information, opinion, and attitudinal data freely offered by Starbucks customers. Numerous ideas that originated with Starbucks customers on the website have been launched, from recycled Starbucks cards to eco-friendly cup sleeves. In addition to the cost savings, publics to engage with Starbucks on the website will, in most cases, have increased knowledge about Starbucks and relationship satisfaction with the organization resulting in increased brand loyalty. In public relations terms, the “my Starbucks idea” campaign creates a win-win scenario.”
(Bowen, S. A. (2013). Using classic social media cases to distill ethical guidelines for digital engagement, Journal of Mass Media Ethics, 28, 119–133.)
Other arguments and analyses
Integrated Marketing Communication also is a useful, two-way communication tool that can inform the PR practitioner about its audiences needs, so that more strategic messages and narratives can be created, making sure a company can meet those needs in reality. While Grunig states that public relations should be utilized as a “bridging activity – of value to organizations, publics and society,” IMC offers PR practitioners’ research methods to execute this bridging activity in the practical setting. (Grunig, “Furnishing the Edifice,” 172) “IMC strategy that uses the Dialogic Bridge opens itself to consumers on common ground and develops meaningful messages that affect their purchasing habits, attitudes and brand loyalties…Openness establishes a two-way exchange of information between parties, otherwise known as dialogic engagement.” (Malcolm, “Philosophical Bridges,” 27) IMC represents a compromise of sorts between Grunig’s two-way symmetrical model and more traditional thoughts on the art of persuasion and public relations. While IMC aims to affect attitudes, and the basis for Grunig’s two-way symmetrical theory marks a move away from this position, the tools of IMC are in fact used to foster stronger relationships between an organization and its audiences because the research collected from various publics informs the organization or company in how it can better serve and better communicate with those audiences. It could also be argued that Grunig’s development of scenario building and environmental scanning tools allows PR practitioners to accomplish the same goals that IMC tools aim to achieve through research that can inform company-wide decisions.
For example, when a company uses surveying as an IMC tool, it is initiating two-way symmetrical communication with its audiences. Surveys also can be used as a tool while thinking of the work from the environmental scanning approach of Grunig’s Excellence Theory. IMC simply happens to be a school less interested in negotiation and collaboration and more interested in information that can contribute to the success of future organizational campaigns. At the same time, this does not mean a company or organization is inherently selfish or serving its own needs above its audience – it is simply ensuring that it can better serve its customers by getting to know their needs in a direct and more in-depth way. From another perspective, the use of IMC could actually be seen as the audience shaping the message for the practitioner, because the end message created will be based on the needs and responses of the group of people surveyed, thus reflecting Grunig’s idea of symmetrical, collaborative communication between an organization and its publics.
Despite Grunig’s assertion: “persuasion involved communication without concern for publics,” I personally believe that rhetoric should be considered both an ethical and balanced mode for two-way symmetrical communication to take place. (Malcolm, “Philosophical Bridges,” 129) Rhetoric encourages a public discourse – a two-way conversation or debate – between an organization and its audience to take place. Grunig has stated that rhetoric focuses more on the organization than its audiences, but I disagree with this assumption, especially when it comes to the nonprofit sector. The relationship between a nonprofit organization and its donors is one that is reliant upon persuasive language that is backed up with solid facts as to why people should financially support its mission. Without the use of rhetoric, it would be incredibly challenging for successful fundraising to take place, because in order for people to reach into their wallets to support a cause, a personal connection must be made through the use of a narrative that highlights exactly why their support is needed. According to Grunig’s two-way symmetrical model, which is focused on mutual benefit, it could be more personally beneficial to the potential donor to keep his or her own money and buy something for himself or herself. However, this would not be of the greatest benefit to society, because it is the ultimate goal for nonprofit organizations engaging in fundraising to make society a better place for all. Nonprofits are the liaison between the public and real social change, which actually is mutually beneficial for all for generations to come.
While Grunig acknowledged via email that persuasion can be used in both asymmetrical and symmetrical communication, he also stated that he believes scholars are overly concerned with the topic. “I have always found it difficult to understand why communication scholars are so preoccupied with persuasion,” Grunig said. “It is one of the least common effects of communication, and the concept itself is not clear. Persuasion involves changing something, but what is changed: Awareness, cognitions, attitudes, behavior, or something else? I think we need a different concept for each type of ‘persuasion.’”
Thoughts on media relations
Grunig also has labeled “images, perceptions, messaging, reputation, ROI, strategic communication and corporate responsibility projects as fads, while claiming that professionals who focus on these topics ‘have skill sets that are limited to media and media relations.’” (Batchelor, “Toward Pragmatic Public Relations,” 160) In today’s world of the combination of both print and online media, activities related to gaining media placements cannot be viewed as futile, rather, they should be utilized as a piece of a larger PR strategy. Through the use of press releases and story pitches, sociodrama can be utilized to create a narrative that can help to shape a new reality for readers, in which our organizations have meaning. While these methods are a form of one-way asymmetrical communication, they do have a place in the overall strategy for PR practitioners. In the practical setting, many company leaders, in my own experience, view the number of media hits per year as a way to measure success. However, there are weaknesses that come with the use of one-way communication, which highlight the strengths of the two-way symmetrical model of communication. Through the establishment of a feature story in a newspaper or online publication, a PR practitioner must surrender a certain amount of control because naturally, the perspective of the reporter and the reporter’s interpretation of facts will be present in the story. This also applies to any subjects being interviewed as well.
In addition, when relying on media placements as a way to create more relationships in the community, an organization relies upon a reader to take the first step in initiating that relationship, which they most likely will only do if they have a need that can be fulfilled by the organization, or if they have a personal connection to the narrative that they read in the newspaper. This is an example that explains why we cannot depend on media placements alone to motivate people to form a relationship with a company or organization. With the use of two-way communication, relationships are built through mutual communication, negotiation, understanding and a give and take. Media placements in a newspaper are presented to an audience and then digested or rejected by an audience. There is not necessarily a chance for audience members to respond unless they are so moved to do so, or if an online comment section is provided, and even then, the commenter is not communicating directly with a company, but rather, they are communicating on the media outlet’s platform.
PR Professional #1 offered her own insights on the topic of media relations by stating publicity in and of itself is not a communication strategy. “It’s part of an overall strategy, however, with that said, when I think about your various audiences, including your customers, your employees, sometimes those media placements have greater value to your internal audience, stockholders, whatever it might be, as a tool in terms of changing opinions,” she said. “But it is still just a part of a whole process. Relationships with media people are very valuable, but less so than they were 10 years ago. Why? New media. You can have great relationships with a lot of media and some nameless, faceless person can post a YouTube video that goes viral and it can decimate you.”
Media relations and the power of symbols cannot be dismissed in today’s 24-hour news cycle in which all organizations strive to increase visibility and awareness, however, in terms of relationship building and mutual understanding, the two-way symmetrical model seems to be more effective in that regard. Media relations activities should serve as a tool to use to benefit the overall success of an organization, but should not be relied upon as a sole relationship-building tool.
Is the two-way symmetrical model a utopian ideal?
Some have suggested that Grunig is too idealistic in his theory of two-way symmetrical communication, with some arguing that it simply is not realistic in the practical setting. I have to disagree with these arguments and say that Grunig’s theory challenges PR professionals in the field to implement components of his theory in a world where most people view the work of PR professionals as simply securing media coverage as a main task and goal. Grunig’s theory challenges PR practitioners in the practical setting to move deeper into their field in order to increase the value of PR as a whole to an organization. He moves the profession beyond a process of media relations and into a function at the strategic management level. The two-way symmetrical model is possible to achieve in the field and can ultimately result in stronger relationships between an organization and its publics, which is what we all strive to build as PR professionals – after all, these relationships lead to an even stronger reputation for the organizations we represent in our communities.
James Grunig: Excellence Theory 
You must be logged in to post a comment.