Search results

The time is right for renewed and updated attention to the relationship between public relations (PR) and human resources (HR) departments in the context of corporate social responsibility (CSR) and sustainability. For too long, conflict between the two practice areas has obscured opportunities for collaboration which benefits organizations and stakeholders. This chapter offers theoretical underpinnings for examining an interdepartmental, cross-unit working relationship between HR and PR – and advances a vision for why it is needed now.

In recent years, only a small number of studies have touched upon the question of job satisfaction of communication managers. The European Communication Monitor studies (2007–2020) series, for example, continuously returns to the issue across Europe, with its 2018 edition stating that overall job satisfaction is slowly decreasing (compared to previous studies) and connects satisfaction to an individual's willingness to change their current job profile. Recent studies in Germany (Hoffjann, Köster, & Wieczorek, 2019) indicate that communication consultants, in particular, are discontent with their current work. In general, these studies relate job satisfaction to salaries, types of organization (e.g., corporates vs NGO), the position in the organizational hierarchy, stress and pressure in a working environment.

Younger generations (e.g., Millennials; Generations Y and Z) that have entered the business over the last 10 years are known for preferring purpose-driven job profiles that are related to fields like sustainability, corporate responsibility, health, education, etc. Does this attitude also make a difference when it comes to working in communication management? This chapter discusses the connection between a good cause and job satisfaction and the difference it makes when it comes to working in communication management over time. Unlike other studies, the focus in the chapter is on purpose-driven projects as a change in business routine to stay motivated.

The purpose of this paper is to: (1) identify strategies to (re)establish organizational legitimacy which dominates the literature; (2) propose and empirically illustrate an analytical framework that establishes the linkages between the dimensions of purposefulness, transparency and participation identified in this literature review as important resources in the creation of organizational legitimacy.

Based on a review of the academic literature, we propose a three-dimensional conceptual framework for understanding and studying strategic communication in contexts of high sustainability pressure. The empirical material we use for illustration is the letters from the chief executive officer (CEO) and the chairman published in the integrated annual report of a Danish company that is well known for its focus on sustainability.

The analysis shows that all three dimensions, i.e. purposefulness, transparency and participation, are present in this data, which the authors find supportive of the theoretical argument that strategic communication needs to encompass all three concepts in order to appear legitimate in contexts of high sustainability pressure.

In recent years, there has been an increased focus on strategic communication of sustainability. However, there is still a lack of general consensus of what is understood by strategic communication in contexts of high sustainability pressure. Overlapping concepts and dimensions make operationalization difficult. This, for example, is a problem for corporations who are increasingly asked by their stakeholders to account for their sustainability activities and engage in conversations of strategic significance to their sustainability goals.

The purpose of this paper is to link the authentic, communicative activities, e.g. organization-wide meetings at the micro-level, to the institutionalized practices at the macro-level within an organization, e.g. change management decisions and communication strategy (Steyn, 2003). Thus, the concern is with the relationship between institutionalized strategic management and the real-life strategic communication processes, thus advancing the understanding of the role of texts and discourses in the actual practice of strategic communication in an organizational context of strategic change processes.

The data are based on a large corpus of video-taped management meetings and organization-wide meetings in a large Danish public, knowledge-based organization. The method applied for studying the management discourse is a conversation-analytical approach (Sacks et al., 1974; Sidnell, 2010). This method has been chosen as it enables the authors to focus on micro-aspects of organizational practices (Nicolini, 2013) by investigating the interactional patterns that serve as resources for doing legitimation as an institutionalized practice.

The common denominator for the entire analysis is legitimation accomplished through the discursive use of distanciation and the analysis identifies three different discursive elements or micro-level strategies directly related to the concrete doing of strategic communication. First, legitimation is created by reference to the socio-economic context of the organization. Second, legitimation is generated by means of pointing to the abnormality of the strategic situation. And third legitimation is fostered by the use of idiomatic expressions. These different ways of accomplishing legitimacy are in a strategy-as-practice perspective related to the specific, in-situ communicative praxis and accomplished by the concrete actions of the strategic communicators, and thus the authors can position the instances of strategic communication at the organizational micro-level.

This paper studies at a micro-level how strategic actors use various discursive resources to legitimize strategic decisions and how these resources constitute the discursive basis of strategic communication as a managerial practice. The authors focus on the role of discourse in the legitimization processes of strategic managerial decisions analyzing micro-level instances of organizational communication. The paper thereby links the actor process activities (Langley, 2007), e.g. organization-wide meetings at the micro-level, to the institutional field practices at the macro-level within an organization, e.g. strategy and planning (Johnson et al., 2007).

In the context of debates about the performance of Higher Education (HE) in which quantitative measures proliferate, this chapter reports the top line observations of an initial exploration of the preparedness for practice of recent graduates of a Public Relations (PR) course at a post-1992 United Kingdom (UK) Higher Education Institution (HEI). Preparedness for practice is chosen as a conceptual lens (as preparedness for the uncertainty of practice) because HEIs frequently promise it. Using a Bourdieusian framework, preparedness is considered in relation to habitus-field match and HE performance as capital-added in habitus transformation. The chapter offers a complementary way of considering the dynamic between educator and recent graduate agency and how that might be applied when studying course and student performance, designing curricula and developing appropriate ‘signature pedagogies’, especially for those HE actors tasked with delivering against the ‘promise’ of graduate preparedness. In considering preparedness for practice as a performative function of HE, the chapter is located in wider societal debates about the ‘worth’ of HE and offers insight for educators of future PR practitioners.

When the media report negatively about an organisation, its employees are not only affected but also a source of information for outsiders who want to find out more about the situation. Because of their credibility, employees can support public relations managers to preserve or restore organisational reputation. In this research, we explore the role of organisational identification and internal corporate communication (ICC) in the event of negative media coverage for employees’ defensive and assertive impression management behaviours. Defensive strategies include excuses, justifications and the avoidance of threatening situations. Assertive strategies are more active and refer to behaviours which aim to establish a desirable identity; in the context of negative media coverage, this entails actively defending the organisation, explaining the situation and conveying the organisation’s official version of the event in order to bolster its reputation. Results from an online survey among employed persons reveal that employees’ identification with their work organisation positively influences their assertive as well as defensive reactions. ICC has a more differentiated influence on employees’ reactions: If ICC is evaluated well, employees’ assertive reactions increase; if evaluated poorly, employees exhibit more defensive reactions. These findings show that ICC can make a difference in winning employees as ambassadors for the organisation in critical situations.