Roger D'Aprix (2011) argues that "the most powerful communication experience of any employee is the day-to-day interchange with authority figures -- particularly with his or her own immediate supervis

2 Tab le o f C on te n ts C over T able o f C on te n ts P ra is e T itle p age C opyrig h t p age S erie s p age F O REW ORD P R EFACE A BO UT T H E A U TH ORS P art O NE: F O UNDATIO NS O F B U SIN ESS CO M MUNIC ATIO N C H APTE R O NE C H ARACTE RIS T IC S O F E XCELLE N T C O M MUNIC ATIO N The V alu e o f C om munic a tio n t o a n O rg an iz a tio n Com munic a to r R ole s Org an iz a tio n o f t h e C om munic a tio n F unctio n a n d I ts Rela tio n sh ip t o O th er M an agem en t F unctio n s Models o f P ublic R ela tio n s 3 Exte n din g t h e E xcelle n ce T heo ry t o a G lo bal T heo ry The S tr a te g ic M an agem en t R ole o f P ublic R ela tio n s New R ese a rc h t o E nhan ce t h e S tr a te g ic R ole o f t h e Com munic a tio n F unctio n CH APTE R T W O T H E C O RPO RATE C O M MUNIC ATO R A S en io r-L evel S tr a te g is t A S tr a te g ic R ole A S en io r-L evel A dvis e r A C om munic a to r’s P ortf o lio o f S kills What C orp ora te C om munic a to rs N eed t o K now a bou t Their O rg an iz a tio n s Corp ora te C om munic a to r R ole s Man agin g C om munic a tio n D urin g C han ge A C orp ora te C om munic a to r’s U ltim ate R esp on sib ility CH APTE R T H REE O RG AN IZ A TIO NAL C U LTU RE Defin in g C ultu re The I m pact o f C ultu re o n O rg an iz a tio n s a n d P eo ple Org an iz a tio n B uild in g B lo ck s a n d C ultu re Asse ssin g a n O rg an iz a tio n ’s C ultu re Com munic a tio n s a n d C ultu re Com munic a tio n s I s a C ritic a l P ro cess f o r C ultu ra l Chan ge The R ela tio n sh ip b etw een O rg an iz a tio n al C ultu re a n d Natio n al C ultu re Case i n P oin t: A m eric a O nlin e a n d T im e W arn er CH APTE R F O UR C O M MUNIC ATIO N A N D T H E H IG H - 4 TR U ST O RG AN IZ A TIO N Understa n din g a n d V alu in g O rg an iz a tio n al T ru st Our R ese a rc h W ork o n B uild in g H ig h -T ru st Org an iz a tio n s Tru st a n d O rg an iz a tio n al E xcelle n ce The O rg an iz a tio n al T ru st M odel Applic a tio n o f t h e T ru st M odel f o r O rg an iz a tio n al Lea ders a n d B usin ess C om munic a to rs Con clu sio n CH APTE R F IV E C O M MUNIC ATIO N E TH IC S Thin k L ik e a P ro fe ssio n al: D on ’t B e I d ea lis tic W hen Sortin g O ut R ig h t f r o m W ro n g Cultu ra l R ela tiv is m Eth ic a l P lu ra lis m Who I s a n I d ea l V ir tu ou s P erso n ?

Eth ic a l T ria ge Facto rs t h at A ffe ct E th ic a l D ecis io n M akin g Case i n P oin t: M ed ia B rib ery Con clu sio n CH APTE R S IX C O RPO RATE S O CIA L R ESP O NSIB IL IT Y The C om munic a to r’s R ole a s L ea der a n d A dvo ca te Tow ard S ta n dard iz a tio n o f C SR In te g ra tin g C SR C om munic a tio n s Brin gin g I t A ll T ogeth er— Why C SR M atte rs CH APTE R S E VEN C O RPO RATE S O CIA L RESP O NSIB IL IT Y A N D S U ST A IN ABIL IT Y 5 Str u ctu rin g C SR i n L arg e O rg an iz a tio n s Com munic a tin g C SR a n d S usta in ability Build in g C om munity R ela tio n s o n a L oca l L evel Susta in ability a n d R ep u ta tio n Con clu sio n Part T W O: M ANAG IN G CO M MUNIC ATIO N CH APTE R E IG H T S T R ATE G IC A PPR O ACH ES T O MAN AG IN G T H E C O M MUNIC ATIO NS F U NCTIO N Where D oes C om munic a tio n s R esid e o n t h e Org an iz a tio n al C hart?

Brid gin g t h e I sla n ds o f C om munic a tio n Outs o u rc in g How C om munic a tio n s G ets F unded How C om munic a tio n s F unctio n s D em on str a te V alu e The C om munic a to r a s P erfo rm an ce C on su lta n t CH APTE R N IN E S T R ATE G IC P LA N NIN G Tim ele ss W is d om S till S hapes S uccessfu l Com munic a tio n P ro gra m s Str a te g ic P la n nin g The S tr a te g ic P la n nin g P ro cess The R ole o f S tr a te g ic P la n nin g i n C om munic a tio n Man agem en t CH APTE R T E N I S SU ES M AN AG EM EN T Lin kin g B usin ess a n d C om munic a tio n P la n nin g 6 How I ssu es D evelo p— an d H ow O rg an iz a tio n s C an In flu en ce T hem The F iv e-S te p I ssu es M an agem en t P ro cess Issu es M an agem en t I m pro ves C om munic a tio n Effe ctiv en ess Case i n P oin t: B uild in g G ra ssro ots S upport f o r a Develo pm en t P ro je ct CH APTE R E LE VEN C O M MUNIC ATIN G C H AN GE When C han ge J u st D oesn ’t S to p: C re a tin g R ea lly G ood Chan ge C om munic a tio n Defin in g C han ge C om munic a tio n : A B ro ader Con sid era tio n What I s t h e P urp ose o f Y ou r C om munic a tio n ?

Alig n m en t b etw een C han ge C om munic a tio n C om pete n ce an d C han ge C om munic a tio n E xpecta tio n s Engagin g i n t h e B ack gro u nd T alk o f C han ge Case i n P oin t: S ta te S m art a n d P eo ple C han ge Con clu sio n CH APTE R T W ELV E C RIS IS C O M MUNIC ATIO N Movin g f r o m T actic a l R esp on se t o P ro activ e C ris is Pre p are d n ess Defin in g C ris is Cris is M an agem en t a n d C om munic a tio n Case i n P oin t: C ris is M an agem en t a t a M ultin atio n al Org an iz a tio n Con clu sio n CH APTE R T H IR TE EN T H E R O LE O F 7 CO M MUNIC ATIO NS I N C O M PA N Y B U SIN ESS ST R ATE G Y Understa n d B usin ess S tr a te g y F undam en ta ls Understa n d F in an ce B asic s In te rv ie w Y ou r S tr a te g y O ffic e Lea rn A bou t t h e B usin ess Tie C om munic a tio n s W ork t o C orp ora te M etr ic s a n d Busin ess S tr a te g ie s Mea su re a n d R ep ort o n M an agem en t’ s P ro m is e R eco rd Con tr ib u te t o B usin ess S tr a te g y F orm ula tio n Ask S en io r E xecu tiv es W hat B ugs T hem A bou t Com munic a to rs a n d H ow Y ou C an B ette r M eet T heir Need s If Y ou M ust A sk f o r R eso u rc es ( H um an o r F in an cia l) , Make a B usin ess C ase CH APTE R F O URTE EN T H E I M PA CT O F TE CH NOLO GY O N C O RPO RATE C O M MUNIC ATIO N The P erfe ct S to rm Con se q u en ces The R etu rn t o t h e M ark etp la ce In te g ra tio n The S peed o f C han ge Part T H REE: I N TER NAL CO M MUNIC ATIO N CH APTE R F IF TE EN I N TE RN AL C O M MUNIC ATIO N Build in g B lo ck s o f I n te rn al C om munic a tio n 8 Socia l M ed ia : B rin gin g t h e P ie ces T ogeth er Socia l N etw ork in g a t W ork : T urn in g P la y i n to P ro fit Exactly W ho I s a n E m plo yee?

Reco gn iz in g L im ita tio n s CH APTE R S IX TE EN C O M MUNIC ATIN G W IT H A DIV ERSE W ORKFO RCE Div ersity a n d I n clu sio n Ben efits a n d C halle n ges Div ersity a n d C om munic a tio n Case i n P oin t: L ock h eed M artin M S2 Con clu sio n CH APTE R S E VEN TE EN I N TE G RATIN G E M PLO YE E CO M MUNIC ATIO NS M ED IA The N ew R ole o f P rin t Onlin e C om munic a tio n i n a 2 .0 W orld In te g ra tio n : B rin gin g I t A ll T ogeth er CH APTE R E IG H TE EN I N TE RN AL B RAN DIN G, EM PLO YE R B RAN DIN G What I t M ea n s Bad I d ea s E xecu te d B adly Case i n P oin t: A G re a t E xam ple The E arth I sn ’t F la t ( B ut M y B udget I s) In sid e O ut CH APTE R N IN ETE EN C O M MUNIC ATIN G F O R A MERG ER O R A N A CQ UIS IT IO N 9 Understa n din g t h e T erm in olo gy Pre p arin g f o r t h e M &A Pre a n nou ncem en t P la n nin g Pre m erg er P la n nin g Postm erg er C ultu ra l I n te g ra tio n Con clu sio n CH APTE R T W EN TY T H E C H ALLE N GES O F EM PLO YE E E N GAG EM EN T Thro w in g R ock s a t t h e C orp ora te R hin ocero s Work ers a s M ere U nits o f C ost Engagem en t a s a S oft I ssu e The R ock T hro w ers The E ngagem en t P ow er o f t h e B oss Tra n sla tin g I t A ll I n to P ra ctic a l A ctio n s Driv in g t h e R hin ocero s A way CH APTE R T W EN TY-O NE M EASU RIN G T H E EFFECTIV EN ESS O F I N TE RN AL C O M MUNIC ATIO N Ste p 1 : I d en tif y t h e P ro ble m a n d A sse ss N eed s Ste p 2 : D evelo p a R ese a rc h M eth odolo gy Ste p 3 : C on du ct t h e R ese a rc h Ste p 4 : A naly ze t h e D ata Ste p 5 : R ep ort t h e R esu lts , T ake A ctio n , a n d C om mit t o Follo w -U p M ea su re m en t Case i n P oin t: C om munic a tio n s I m pact M odelin g Part F O UR: P U BLIC R ELA TIO NS 10 CH APTE R T W EN TY-T W O P U BLIC R ELA TIO NS RESE ARCH A N D P LA N NIN G Public R ela tio n s R ese a rc h a n d P la n nin g Best P ra ctic es i n P ublic R ela tio n s R ese a rc h a n d Pla n nin g Public R ela tio n s I m pact o n R etu rn o n I n vestm en t Con clu sio n CH APTE R T W EN TY-T H REE M ED IA R ELA TIO NS Defin in g N ew s Sele ctin g t h e R ig h t M ed ia Med ia R ela tio n s T ools Mea su rin g Y ou r R esu lts Case I n P oin t: M ore T han M an gos C om pan y L au nch CH APTE R T W EN TY-F O UR I N VEST O R R ELA TIO NS AN D F IN AN CIA L C O M MUNIC ATIO N Why I n vesto r R ela tio n s?

Shaken I n vesto r C on fid en ce The N um bers The S to ry In fo rm atio n C en tr a l: T he I n vesto r R ela tio n s F unctio n an d R ole s Not A ll I n vesto rs A re C re a te d E qu al The I m porta n ce o f C om munic a tio n The T ools o f t h e T ra de Best P ra ctic e I n vesto r R ela tio n s F unctio n In te g ra tin g I n vesto r R ela tio n s a n d C orp ora te Com munic a tio n s 11 Glo bal T re n ds The E nd R esu lt o f a S tr o n g I n vesto r R ela tio n s P ro gra m CH APTE R T W EN TY-F IV E G OVERN M EN T R ELA TIO NS Con nectin g C om munic a tio n t o t h e P ublic P olic y P ro cess Defin in g G overn m en t R ela tio n s Models o f G overn m en t R ela tio n s Govern m en t A s K ey S ta keh old er Im porta n ce o f R ese a rc h a n d E va lu atio n Im porta n t P ro cesse s f o r G overn m en t R ela tio n s A ctiv itie s Govern m en t R ela tio n s S tr u ctu re s Case i n P oin t: C an ada: C lie n t “ G re en ” Case i n P oin t: U nite d K in gdom : G overn m en t R ela tio n s with in C om munic a tio n s Con clu sio n CH APTE R T W EN TY-S IX R EPU TA TIO N M AN AG EM EN T Build in g, E nhan cin g, a n d P ro te ctin g O rg an iz a tio n al Rep u ta tio n i n t h e I n fo rm atio n A ge Build in g R ep u ta tio n : I n te g rity i s E very th in g Rep u ta tio n M on ito rin g Enhan cin g R ep u ta tio n Pro te ctin g R ep u ta tio n Rep u ta tio n R ep air Case i n P oin t: G ood H ea lth P harm aceu tic a ls Con clu sio n : T he S ecre t o f R ep u ta tio n al S uccess I s Sin cerity CH APTE R T W EN TY-S E VEN M EASU RIN G P U BLIC 12 RELA TIO NS P R O GRAM S The S cie n ce o f P ublic R ela tio n s What Y ou N eed t o K now a bou t P ublic R ela tio n s Rese a rc h Rese a rc h T ools f o r E ffe ctiv e P ublic R ela tio n s Mea su re m en t Con clu sio n Part F IV E: M ARK ETIN G CO M MUNIC ATIO N CH APTE R T W EN TY-E IG H T M ARKETIN G CO M MUNIC ATIO N Ask a n d Y ou S hall R eceiv e . . . S evera l A nsw ers Con te x tu al T arg et M ark etin g Shall W e D o t h e F an dan go?

Spea k t h e W ord The S cie n ce o f P ersu asio n No D ay b u t T oday CH APTE R T W EN TY-N IN E T H E E N GAG EM EN T O F BRAN DS Con sid er H ow B ra n ds W ork Focu s o n B ra n d F undam en ta ls Rea ch F or t h e B ig I d ea s Follo w A ll t h e S te p s Fin d t h e W ord s B efo re C re a tin g t h e V is u al Con clu sio n 13 CH APTE R T H IR TY C U ST O M ER R ELA TIO NS Sm art O rg an iz a tio n s T hin k L ik e T heir C usto m ers Rem em ber t o F org et t h e G old en R ule Seg m en ta tio n I s t h e K ey t o T hin kin g L ik e a C usto m er Analy ze P ro fita bility t o I m pro ve F ocu s Tie M essa ges t o C on su m er V alu es Tailo r H ow M essa ges A re C om munic a te d t o A udie n ces Dete rm in e W hic h R ela tio n sh ip s S hou ld L ast F ore ver Success f o r t h e T w en ty -F ir st- C en tu ry C om munic a to r CH APTE R T H IR TY-O NE M EASU RIN G M ARKETIN G CO M MUNIC ATIO N What t o M ea su re Check poin ts f o r M ea su rin g M ark etin g C om munic a tio n Challe n ges o f M ark etin g C om munic a tio n s M ea su re m en t Mea su re m en t b y M ed ia Case I n P oin t: A m eric a n G re etin gs In dex Abou t t h e I n te rn atio n al A sso cia tio n o f B usin ess Com munic a to rs 14 Pra is e f o r T he I A BC H an dbook o f O rg an iz a tio n al C om munic a tio n , S eco n d E ditio n “L ookin g t o e x pan d y our p ro fe ssio nal a b ilitie s? L earn n ew s k ills ? O r h one y our a re a o f ex pertis e ? T his b ook d eliv ers an am azin g an d p ra ctic al stu dy o f o ur p ro fe ssio n— an d a g uid eb ook fo r str a te g ic co m munic atio n b est p ra ctic es. T he H andbook e x plo re s th e m an y a sp ects o f o u r p ro fe ssio n w ith e x pert in sig hts o f th e b est o f t h e b est i n c o m munic atio n.” — Jo hn D ev en ey , A BC, A PR , p re sid en t o f D ev en ey C om munic atio n “It is a re al p le asu re to re ad th e la te st v ers io n o f The IA BC H andbook o f O rg aniz a tio nal C om munic a tio n.

I t p re se n ts a s o und, r e se arc h -b ase d f o undatio n o n c o m munic atio n— its im porta n ce to org an iz atio ns, w hy th e fu nctio n m ust be s tr a te g ic , an d w hat it ta k es to g et it rig ht. F ro m P au l S an ch ez’s d eta ile d an d i n sig htf u l an aly sis o f o rg an iz atio nal cu ltu re an d its in flu en ce o n em plo yees to M ary A nn M cC au le y ’s d is c u ssio n o n th e s ig nif ic an t ro le th at C SR h as c o m e to p la y as org an iz atio ns se ek new an d in novativ e w ay s to in cre ase vis ib ility , r e p uta tio n, a n d b ra n d a w are n ess w ith k ey s ta k eh old ers , th is is a v alu ab le te x t th at p ro fe ssio nal c o m munic ato rs s h ould e m bra ce a n d re fe r to o fte n fo r g uid an ce a n d p la n nin g.” — Jo hn G . C le m ons, A BC, A PR , co rp ora te d ir e cto r o f co m munity re la tio ns, R ay th eo n “A ll m yth s ab out org an iz atio nal co m munic ato rs bein g bra in w ash ed , bia se d c o rp ora te jo urn alis ts are out th e w in dow w ith th is Handbook.

This ste lla r c o m pen diu m f ro m d ozen s o f a u th ors , r e se arc h ers , a n d e d ito rs o f h ig h p ro fe ssio nal s ta tu re is tim ely a n d fo rw ard -th in kin g. I k now th ese p eo ple , a n d I a m in a w e o f t h eir w ork . C om munic atio n s tu den ts p artic u la rly w ill b en efit f ro m u nders ta n din g t h e co m ple x dis c ip lin es th at in te rtw in e an d driv e effe ctiv e org an iz atio nal c o m munic atio n.” — Barb ara W . P uffe r, A BC, p re sid en t, P uffe r P ublic R ela tio ns S tr a te g ie s, a n d a sso cia te pro fe sso r, Com munic atio ns Stu die s an d Pro fe ssio nal Writin g, U niv ers ity o f M ary la n d U niv ers ity C olle g e “C halk u p a w in f o r T eam I A BC. E dito r T am ara G illis h as a sse m ble d a w in nin g l in eu p o f th e b est c o m munic ato rs to c o m pile th is u se fu l, r e ad ab le Handbook.

N ot a n oth er h ow -to -d o-it ta ctic al m an ual, th is v olu m e d ra w s fro m th eo ry a n d g lo bal b est p ra ctic es to e x pla in th e s tr a te g ic re aso ns b eh in d m odern c o m munic atio n. A m ust- re ad fo r a n yone in te re ste d in u nders ta n din g th e c o m munic atio n p ro fe ssio n a n d a u se fu l d esk to p c o m pan io n to th e p ro fe ssio nal c o m munic ato r’s d ic tio nary a n d s ty le g uid e.” — Willia m B rig gs, IA BC fe llo w a n d d ir e cto r, S ch ool o f J o urn alis m a n d M ass 15 Com munic atio ns, S an J o se S ta te U niv ers ity 16 17 © 2 011 b y J o hn W ile y & S ons, I n c. A ll r ig hts r e se rv ed .

Publis h ed b y J o sse y -B ass A W ile y I m prin t 989 M ark et S tr e et, S an F ra n cis c o , C A 9 4103-1 741— www.j o sse y bass.c o m No p art o f t h is p ublic atio n m ay b e r e p ro duced , s to re d i n a r e tr ie v al s y ste m , o r tr a n sm itte d i n a n y f o rm o r b y a n y m ean s, e le ctr o nic , m ech an ic al, p hoto co pyin g, re co rd in g, s c an nin g, o r o th erw is e , e x cep t a s p erm itte d u nder S ectio n 1 07 o r 1 08 of t h e 1 976 U nite d S ta te s C opyrig ht A ct, w ith out e ith er t h e p rio r w ritte n p erm is sio n o f t h e p ublis h er, o r a u th oriz atio n t h ro ugh p ay m en t o f t h e a p pro pria te per-c o py f e e t o t h e C opyrig ht C le ara n ce C en te r, I n c., 2 22 R ose w ood D riv e, Dan vers , M A 0 1923, 9 78-7 50-8 400, f a x 9 78-6 46-8 600, o r o n t h e W eb a t www.c o pyrig ht.c o m . R eq uests t o t h e p ublis h er f o r p erm is sio n s h ould b e ad dre sse d t o t h e P erm is sio ns D ep artm en t, J o hn W ile y & S ons, I n c., 1 11 R iv er Str e et, H oboken , N J 0 7030, 2 01-7 48-6 011, f a x 2 01-7 48-6 008, o r o nlin e a t www.w ile y .c o m /g o/p erm is sio ns .

Fig ure s 7 .1 , 7 .2 , a n d E xhib it 7 .1 a re u se d c o urte sy o f R BC.

The b ulle te d l is t o n p ag es 3 08–309 i s r e p rin te d b y p erm is sio n o f W av ela n d Pre ss, I n c. A ll r ig hts r e se rv ed .

Read ers s h ould b e a w are t h at I n te rn et W eb s ite s o ffe re d a s c ita tio ns a n d/o r so urc es f o r f u rth er i n fo rm atio n m ay h av e c h an ged o r d is a p peare d b etw een t h e tim e t h is w as w ritte n a n d w hen i t i s r e ad .

Lim it o f L ia b ility /D is c la im er o f W arra n ty : W hile t h e p ublis h er a n d a u th or h av e u se d t h eir b est e ffo rts i n p re p arin g t h is b ook, t h ey m ak e n o r e p re se n ta tio ns o r w arra n tie s w ith r e sp ect t o t h e a ccu ra cy o r c o m ple te n ess o f t h e c o nte n ts o f t h is book a n d s p ecif ic ally d is c la im a n y i m plie d w arra n tie s o f m erc h an ta b ility o r f itn ess f o r a p artic u la r p urp ose . N o w arra n ty m ay b e c re ate d o r e x te n ded b y s a le s re p re se n ta tiv es o r w ritte n s a le s m ate ria ls . T he a d vic e a n d s tr a te g ie s c o nta in ed here in m ay n ot b e s u ita b le f o r y our s itu atio n. Y ou s h ould c o nsu lt w ith a p ro fe ssio nal w here a p pro pria te . N eith er t h e p ublis h er n or a u th or s h all b e l ia b le f o r an y l o ss o f p ro fit o r a n y o th er c o m merc ia l d am ag es, i n clu din g b ut n ot l im ite d t o sp ecia l, i n cid en ta l, c o nse q uen tia l, o r o th er d am ag es.

Jo sse y -B ass b ooks a n d p ro ducts a re a v aila b le t h ro ugh m ost b ooksto re s. T o co nta ct J o sse y -B ass d ir e ctly c all o ur C usto m er C are D ep artm en t w ith in t h e U .S .

at 8 00-9 56-7 739, o uts id e t h e U .S . a t 3 17-5 72-3 986, o r f a x 3 17-5 72-4 002.

Jo sse y -B ass a ls o p ublis h es i ts b ooks i n a v arie ty o f e le ctr o nic f o rm ats . S om e co nte n t t h at a p pears i n p rin t m ay n ot b e a v aila b le i n e le ctr o nic b ooks.

18 Lib ra ry o f C on gress C ata lo gin g-in -P ublic a tio n D ata The I A BC h an dbook o f o rg an iz atio nal c o m munic atio n : a g uid e t o i n te rn al co m munic atio n, p ublic r e la tio ns, m ark etin g, a n d l e ad ers h ip / T am ara L . G illis ed ito r ; f o re w ord b y N ata sh a N ic h ols o n. — 2nd e d .

p. c m .— (A j o in t p ublic atio n o f t h e J o sse y -B ass b usin ess & m an ag em en t se rie s a n d t h e I n te rn atio nal A sso cia tio n o f B usin ess C om munic ato rs ) I n clu des b ib lio gra p hic al r e fe re n ces a n d i n dex .

I S B N 9 78-0 -4 70-8 9406-4 ( c lo th ); I S B N 9 78-1 -1 18-0 1633-6 ( e b k); I S B N 978-1 -1 18-0 1634-3 ( e b k); I S B N 9 78-1 -1 18-0 1635-0 ( e b k) 1 . C om munic atio n i n o rg an iz atio ns— Unite d S ta te s. I . G illis , T am ara L .

II. I n te rn atio nal A sso cia tio n o f B usin ess C om munic ato rs .

H D30.3 6.U 5I2 5 2 011 6 58.4 '5 — dc2 2 2011002089 19 A J O IN T P U BLIC A TIO N O F TH E J O SSE Y -B A SS BU SIN ESS & M ANAGEM EN T S E R IE S AND TH E IN TER N ATIO NAL ASSO CIA TIO N OF BU SIN ESS C O M MUNIC A TO RS 20 FO REW ORD O rg an iz atio nal c o m munic atio n a s a p ro fe ssio n i s r e la tiv ely y oung w hen c o m pare d t o o th er b usin ess d is c ip lin es, tr a cin g it ro ots b ack le ss th an 1 00 y ears . B ut a s c u rre n t w orld ev en ts su ch as th e T oyota re calls an d g overn m en t b uy-o uts o f A m eric an a u to m an ufa ctu re rs h av e s h ow n, it is a v alu ab le , s e rio us, a n d e sse n tia l b usin ess co m ponen t th at is necessa ry fo r org an iz atio ns to th riv e, gro w , an d s u sta in m is fo rtu nes.

The p ro fe ssio n’s e m erg en ce a n d g ro w th is c lo se ly m atc h ed to th e g ro w th a n d e v olu tio n o f th e In te rn atio nal A sso cia tio n o f B usin ess C om munic ato rs (IA BC).

T his a sso cia tio n c am e t o geth er i n 1 970 w ith a b an d o f b old v is io narie s a t i ts h elm — re ad y t o s e rv e a n e m erg in g n eed f o r a p ro fe ssio n o f t h e f u tu re . I t s o ught t o h elp i ts m em bers f in d t h eir w ay i n t h e b usin ess w orld a n d t o d em onstr a te t h e t r u e v alu e o f co m munic atio n. W hat sta rte d as a g ro up o f p eo ple w ho calle d th em se lv es “ in dustr ia l e d ito rs ” g re w in to a v arie d a sse m bly o f “ co m munic ato rs ” r e sp onsib le f o r m an y f a cets o f o rg an iz atio nal c o m munic atio n.

As th e p ro fe ssio n h as g ro w n, s o h as IA BC. A m ile sto ne o f th at g ro w th is th is H andbook . At th is book’s fo undatio n is th e defin itio n of org an iz atio nal c o m munic atio n as a p ro fe ssio n an d d eta ils ab out w hat th at m ean s in to day ’s b usin ess w orld — ad herin g to a s e t o f p rin cip le s th at a re a p plie d in a n um ber o f s p ecia ltie s th at affe ct th e su ccessfu l o pera tio n o n an o rg an iz atio n. W hen I, o r a n yone w ho is c lo se to IA BC, d esc rib e th e a sso cia tio n, w e o fte n lis t s p ecia ltie s l ik e m ed ia r e la tio ns, m ark etin g c o m munic atio n, a n d e m plo yee c o m munic atio n a s a m ean s o f d esc rib in g th e g oals a n d in te n t o f o rg an iz atio nal c o m munic atio n. W e a ls o ack now le d ge th at th e pro fe ssio n is co ntin ually gro w in g an d ev olv in g to a d dre ss th e cu rre n t best pra ctic es in co m munic atio n str a te g y th at affe ct o rg an iz atio nal co m munic atio ns. W e d o th is b ecau se it is th is co m positio n o f s p ecia ltie s th at bre ath es lif e in to co m munic atio n. This co m positio n of c o m ple m en ta ry s p ecia ltie s s h ow s th at o rg an iz atio nal c o m munic atio n is n ot a n eat a n d t id y p ack ag e. I t i s a c o m ple x a rra y o f c o m munic atio n d is c ip lin es t h at c o nnect t o s h ap e a n o rg an iz atio n’s d estin y— cre atin g th e d if fe re n ce b etw een a n e n gag ed w ork fo rc e a n d o ne th at is w ro ught w ith m ala is e , o ffe rin g th e a b ility to r e la te th e v is io n o f a b rillia n t c o m pan y o r c o nvey a s a d ly b ack w ard e n tity .

This s e co nd e d itio n o f th is Handbook s ig nif ie s th e p ro gre ssio n o f a p ro fe ssio n — se p ara te d in to s p ecia ltie s th at a re w orth w hile a n d e sse n tia l to to day ’s b usin ess w orld . IA BC, w ith o uts ta n din g g uid an ce fro m T am ara G illis , h as c o lle cte d th e b est a n d b rig hte st in th e c o m munic atio n w orld a n d in clu ded in to th is b ook th eir t h oughts , pers p ectiv es, co ncern s, an d an aly sis . It is a m ust- re ad fo r ev ery c o m munic ato r w ho w an ts to u nders ta n d th e r e al v alu e o f c o m munic atio n. A nd it i s very much lik e IA BC’s mem bers th em se lv es: a co lle ctio n of gre at 21 co m munic ato rs , s h arin g b est p ra ctic es, a n aly zin g w hat w ork s a n d w hat d oes n ot, an d s tr iv in g t o m ak e o rg an iz atio ns s tr o nger t h ro ugh c o m munic atio n.

This co lle ctio n of org an iz atio nal co m munic atio n pra ctic es co m ple m en ts IA BC’s r e se arc h a g en da a s w ell a s its v ast a n d e v er-g ro w in g lib ra ry o f r e so urc es.

I w elc o m e y ou t o l e arn m ore a b out I A BC b y v is itin g www.i a b c.c o m .

Feb ru ary 2 011 Nata sh a N ic h ols o n Vic e P re sid en t, P ublis h in g a n d R eco gnitio n Execu tiv e E dito r, Com munic a tio n W orld 22 PR EFACE May y ou l iv e i n i n te re stin g t im es.

Seem s lik e w e h av e a ll b een c u rs e d : w e a re liv in g in in te re stin g tim es. T he l a n dsc ap e o f b usin ess c o m munic atio n c o ntin ues t o e v olv e t o m eet t h e d em an ds o f t h e busin ess w orld aro und us. The In te rn atio nal A sso cia tio n of Busin ess C om munic ato rs ([IA BC], 2010) co ntin ues to m eet th e need s of pro fe ssio nal c o m munic ato rs ta sk ed w ith m an eu verin g th at e v er-c h an gin g la n dsc ap e th ro ugh p ro fe ssio nal d ev elo pm en t p ro gra m s a n d g ro undbre ak in g r e se arc h t h at s h are s “ b est g lo bal co m munic atio n pra ctic es, id eas an d ex perie n ces th at will en ab le c o m munic ato rs to d ev elo p h ig hly e th ic al a n d e ffe ctiv e p erfo rm an ce sta n dard s” a n d th is se co nd ed itio n of The IA BC Handbook of Org aniz a tio nal C om munic a tio n.

In 2 009 I c o nducte d a se rie s o f su rv ey s, in te rv ie w s, a n d c o nte n t a n aly se s to c re ate a sn ap sh ot of co m pete n cie s an d ex pecta tio ns of pro fe ssio nal c o m munic ato rs to day (G illis , 2009). N ot su rp ris in g, co m munic atio n th ought l e ad ers an d em plo yers aro und th e w orld cam e to sim ila r co nclu sio ns, an d m em bers o f th e IA BC A ccre d ita tio n C ouncil a g re ed th at th e fo llo w in g fin din gs s e t a fo undatio n fo r b usin ess c o m munic ato rs to day — an d th e fo undatio n fo r th is b ook:

Busin ess c o m munic ato rs m ust h av e b usin ess a cu m en .

Busin ess co m munic ato rs are ex pecte d to pro vid e so und co m munic atio n co unse l.

Busin ess c o m munic ato rs a re e x pecte d t o t h in k a n d a ct s tr a te g ic ally .

Busin ess co m munic ato rs are ex pecte d to su pport decis io n m ak in g w ith so und r e se arc h , m easu re m en t, a n d e v alu atio n.

Busin ess c o m munic ato rs a re e x pecte d t o m ak e e th ic al d ecis io ns.

Busin ess co m munic ato rs are ex pecte d to le v era g e co m munic atio n te ch nolo gy t o m eet b usin ess g oals .

Busin ess c o m munic ato rs a re e x pecte d to c u ltiv ate o rg an iz atio nal tr u st a n d cre d ib ility .

Busin ess c o m munic ato rs m ust e m bra ce d iv ers ity .

Busin ess c o m munic ato rs a re e x pecte d to b e a b le to m an ag e c o m munic atio ns to s u pport o rg an iz atio ns i n t im es o f c h an ge.

Busin ess c o m munic ato rs m ust b e p re p are d t o h an dle c ris is c o m munic atio n.

Busin ess c o m munic ato rs a re e x pecte d t o b uild r e la tio nsh ip s w ith t h e m ed ia .

Busin ess c o m munic ato rs a re e x pecte d to k eep u p w ith c u rre n t b est p ra ctic es in t h eir d is c ip lin e.

Last b ut n ot le ast, b usin ess c o m munic ato rs m ust h av e e x celle n t b asic s k ills 23 in w ritin g a n d e d itin g.

Reg ard le ss o f t h e i s su e a t h an d, t h ese b asic p rin cip le s c o ntin ue t o r in g t r u e: Y ou need a so und pla n , w ell- c ra fte d m essa g es th at deliv er on busin ess str a te g ie s, deliv ere d b y a p pro pria te m ed ia th at re ach th e ta rg et a u die n ces, a n d a m ean s to measu re y our a cco m plis h m en ts . O ur p ublic s a re d em an din g c le ar, c o ncis e , a n d re aso ned c o m munic atio ns f ro m b usin ess e n te rp ris e s, n onpro fit o rg an iz atio ns, a n d govern m en t e n titie s a lik e.

We liv e in in te re stin g tim es. A tim e w hen as co m munic ato rs our str a te g ic co m munic atio ns e m pow er e m plo yees; e d ucate a n aly sts a n d in vesto rs ; e n co ura g e su pplie rs ; an d co m fo rt cu sto m ers . W e co m munic ate tw en ty -f o ur h ours a d ay , se v en d ay s a w eek w ith m ed ia re p re se n ta tiv es w ho a re o fte n b ia se d a n d ja d ed becau se o f th eir la ck o f p re p ara tio n a n d re se arc h a s th ey m eet d ead lin es fo r a vora cio us a n d f ru str a te d p ublic .

Robert D ile n sc h neid er (2 008) re m in ds u s th at in th e en d “it is th e ro le o f co m munic ato rs in o ur so cie ty to day to su sta in co nfid en t co m munic atio ns. W e need to f in d w ay s to c o m munic ate c o nfid en ce a n d r e d uce p an ic th ro ugh g en uin e co m munic atio n s o t h at s o lu tio ns c an b e f o und a n d s h are d .” It is in th ese “ in te re stin g tim es,” o ur fin est h ours a s c o m munic ato rs , th at w e le av e a le g acy o f c o m munic atio n s tr a te g y th at d efin es c o rp ora te c o m munic atio n, org an iz atio nal co m munic atio n, an d both public an d in te rn al co m munic atio n str a te g ie s.

My s in cere th an ks to th e c h ap te r a u th ors ; th eir e x pertis e a n d w is d om m ad e th is book p ossib le . S pecia l th an ks g o to th e IA BC A ccre d ita tio n C ouncil fo r th eir in sig hts in to th e pro cess of dev elo pin g th is Handbook . It is m y hope th at co m munic atio n pra ctitio ners at all le v els , ed ucato rs , an d th ose outs id e th e co m munic atio ns fie ld w ill fin d in th is book in sig hts an d unders ta n din g th at co ntr ib ute t o o rg an iz atio nal s u ccess.

Who S hou ld R ea d T his B ook ?

This b ook i s d esig ned a n d o rg an iz ed w ith a n um ber o f d if fe re n t r e ad ers i n m in d.

If y ou a re n ew t o t h e w orld o f c o rp ora te c o m munic atio n, t h e c h ap te rs i n t h is b ook brin g to th e fo re is su es th at are critic al to unders ta n d an d m aste r in an y org an iz atio n. If y ou are a p ro fe ssio nal co m munic ato r, th is b ook p ro vid es n ew in sig hts o n tr a d itio nal a n d e m erg in g is su es in o rg an iz atio nal c o m munic atio n. If you a re a c o rp ora te e x ecu tiv e o uts id e t h e c o m munic atio n d is c ip lin e, t h is b ook w ill help y ou u nders ta n d th e im porta n ce an d re ach o f co m munic atio n w ith in y our org an iz atio n a n d w ith e x te rn al s ta k eh old ers .

Unders ta n din g o ccu rs w hen p eo ple a sk q uestio ns a n d s h are in fo rm atio n. T his book f o llo w s s u it. L ik e a n y o th er h an dbook, it m ay b e r e ad in a n um ber o f w ay s.

24 Fir s t, it m ay b e re ad fro m c o ver to c o ver. If y ou a re in te re ste d in a ll fa cets o f org an iz atio nal c o m munic atio n, y ou w ill e n jo y sta rtin g a t th e b eg in nin g o f th is book a n d r e ad in g t h ro ugh t o t h e e n d. T he b ook’s o rg an iz atio n b uild s f ro m g en era l to pic s t o s p ecia lty i n te re sts .

Seco nd, re ad ers m ay c h oose to sk im th e b ook fo r to pic s o f in te re st o r to pic s re la te d t o a c u rre n t c h alle n ge. T his b ook t o uch es o n i s su es o f i n te re st t o t h ose n ew to t h e f ie ld o f o rg an iz atio nal c o m munic atio ns a s w ell a s s e aso ned p ro fe ssio nals .

How T his B ook I s O rg an iz ed In d ev elo pin g th e c o nte n t fo r th is s e co nd e d itio n, a re v ie w o f th e 2 006 e d itio n was co nducte d in ad ditio n to th e co m pete n cy re se arc h re fe re n ced earlie r. T he Accre d ita tio n C ouncil an d oth er co m munic atio n le ad ers ag re ed th at th is new ed itio n w ould b en efit fro m m ore c ase s tu die s a n d e x am ple s, a g re ate r fo cu s o n measu re m en t, an d le ss re d undan cy . In th is ed itio n re ad ers w ill fin d m ore ex am ple s o f p rin cip le s a n d p ra ctic es th at su pport th e fo undatio nal e le m en ts o f busin ess c o m munic atio n. T he to pic s a d dre sse d in th is Handbook re p re se n t w hat our e x perts a g re ed w as m ost re le v an t fo r c o m munic ato rs a n d o th er o rg an iz atio n asso cia te s t o u nders ta n d a b out t h e p ro cess o f o rg an iz atio nal c o m munic atio n.

This b ook is o rg an iz ed in to fiv e p arts . P art O ne se rv es a s a n in tr o ductio n to busin ess co m munic atio n an d ad dre sse s so m e univ ers a l pre m is e s co ncern in g co rp ora te co m munic atio n. The ch ap te rs in th is part in tr o duce re ad ers to co m ple x itie s a n d s tr u ctu re s o f c o rp ora te c o m munic atio n. T he u niv ers a l c o ncep ts of ex celle n ce, tr u st, cu ltu re , eth ic s, so cia l re sp onsib ility , an d m easu re m en t are re v ie w ed t o s e t t h e f o undatio n f o r t h e r o le o f c o rp ora te c o m munic ato rs t o day .

Part Tw o fo cu se s on th e cu rre n t ch alle n ges of man ag in g co rp ora te co m munic atio ns an d org an iz atio nal co m munic atio n. C ultiv atin g a cu ltu re of co m munic atio n is c ritic al w ith in a n y o rg an iz atio n. T he a u th ors s h are in sig hts in to su ccessfu l pla n nin g, im ple m en ta tio n, an d man ag em en t of co rp ora te co m munic atio n. The str a te g ie s th ey re v ie w are fu ndam en ta l to su ccessfu l co m munic atio n m an ag em en t.

Part T hre e c o nta in s s e v en c h ap te rs th at e x plo re e v olv in g is su es in th e p ra ctic e of e m plo yee c o m munic atio n a n d in te rn al c o m munic atio n n etw ork s. A t th e h eart of e ach e x celle n t o rg an iz atio n o r c o rp ora tio n is a tr u ste d in te rn al c o m munic atio n pro gra m . I n te g ra l i s su es o f r e la tio nsh ip b uild in g, e m plo yee e n gag em en t, d iv ers ity , an d in te rn al b ra n din g a re h ig hlig hte d h ere a s k ey to d ev elo pin g tr u ste d in te rn al pro gra m s.

Part F our ap pris e s re ad ers of th e ro le of public re la tio ns in th e co rp ora te co m munic atio n pro gra m . A host of ex te rn al public s aw ait busin ess co m munic ato rs . T hese sta k eh old ers w ill h av e a n im pact o n th e re p uta tio n a n d su ccess o f o ur o rg an iz atio ns in r e ach in g th eir g oals . T he c h ap te rs d em onstr a te th e 25 need f o r a s tr a te g ic a p pro ach t o m an ag in g e x te rn al r e la tio nsh ip s.

Part F iv e a d dre sse s k ey c o ncep ts o f m ark etin g a n d b ra n d m an ag em en t a n d th eir pla ce in th e c o rp ora te c o m munic atio n p ro gra m . T he c h ap te rs in th is p art b rin g to lif e th e in te rn al im pact an d ex te rn al ch alle n ges o f m ark etin g co m munic atio ns.

Here , p ro fe ssio nals s h are th eir in sig hts a n d e x pertis e f o r d ev elo pin g e x celle n ce in co rp ora te p erfo rm an ce t h ro ugh m ark etin g c o m munic atio n p ro gra m min g.

Ack now le d gm en ts The p ro cess o f c o m pilin g a v olu m e o f k now le d ge lik e The I A BC H andbook o f Org aniz a tio nal C om munic a tio n is a n a rd uous o ne, w ith m an y tw is ts a n d tu rn s alo ng th e w ay . I a m g ra te fu l f o r th e a ssis ta n ce a n d f rie n dsh ip th at I r e ceiv ed f ro m Am an da A ie llo , N ata sh a N ic h ols o n, a n d H eath er T urb ev ille . I e sp ecia lly t h an k a ll th e c h ap te r a u th ors w ho c o ntr ib ute d th eir tim e a n d w is d om . T heir e x pertis e w ill help co untle ss p ro fe ssio nals m ak e th e rig ht ch oic es fo r th eir o rg an iz atio ns. A sp ecia l th an k y ou to th e a ccre d ite d b usin ess c o m munic ato rs w ho h elp ed in th e pre lim in ary s ta g es. A nd o ne b ig t h an k y ou t o J e ffre y f o r a ll h is s u pport d urin g t h e pro cess.

Feb ru ary 2 011 Tam ara L . G illis Eliz ab eth to w n, P en nsy lv an ia Refe re n ces Dile n sc h neid er, R . (2 008, O cto ber 1 3). C om munic atin g d urin g tu rb ule n t tim es, Keyn ote a ddre ss t o t h e 2 008 I A BC H erita ge R eg io nal C onfe re n ce . H artf o rd , C T.

Gillis , T . (2 009).

It’ s y o ur m ove: C om pete n cie s a nd e xp ecta tio ns . (P ro prie ta ry re se arc h ). S an F ra n cis c o : I n te rn atio nal A sso cia tio n o f B usin ess C om munic ato rs .

In te rn atio nal A sso cia tio n o f B usin ess C om munic ato rs [IA BC]. (2 010). IA BC’s mis sio n, vis io n an d bra n d. Retr ie v ed Ju ly 22, 2010, fro m www.i a b c.c o m /in fo /a b out/a b outia b .h tm .

26 ABO UT T H E A U TH ORS R ob B rig gs is d ir e cto r o f in te rn al c o m munic atio ns fo r th e in te rn atio nal d iv is io n o f R BC W ealth M an ag em en t, o ne o f th e w orld ’s la rg est p riv ate b an ks a n d b ase d i n L ondon, U K, a n d Je rs e y , C han nel Is la n ds. H e p ro vid es str a te g ic c o unse l a s w ell as th e im ple m en ta tio n of in te rn al co m munic atio n cam paig ns, ex ecu tiv e c o m munic atio ns, a n d c o m munity r e la tio ns p ro gra m s. B rig gs i s a p ast c h air m an o f t h e E uro pe a n d M id dle E ast R eg io n o f IA BC. H e h old s a n M .S c. w ith M erit in c o rp ora te c o m munic atio ns a n d r e p uta tio n m an ag em en t f ro m M an ch este r B usin ess S ch ool; a B .A . in P hilo so phy fro m th e U niv ers ity of R ead in g; an ad van ced d ip lo m a in co m munic atio n stu die s fro m th e C om munic atio n, A dvertis in g an d M ark etin g F oundatio n; a n d th e fin an cia l p la n nin g c ertif ic ate fro m th e C harte re d I n su ra n ce I n stitu te . H e i s a ccre d ite d b y t h e B ritis h A sso cia tio n o f C om munic ato rs i n B usin ess a n d is a F ello w o f th e R oyal S ocie ty f o r th e E nco ura g em en t o f A rts , M an ufa ctu re s a n d C om merc e.

Ste v e C resc en zo is a c o nsu lta n t, w rite r, a n d se m in ar le ad er w ho h as h elp ed t h ousa n ds of co m munic ato rs im pro ve both th eir prin t an d ele ctr o nic c o m munic atio ns effo rts . R eco gniz ed as o ne o f th e n atio n’s le ad in g ex perts in c o rp ora te co m munic atio ns, C re sc en zo is th e le ad er of th e popula r Str a te g ic C re ativ e C om munic atio n se m in ar an d sp eak s aro und th e w orld on em plo yee c o m munic atio n, s o cia l m ed ia , w ritin g, i n te g ra tin g p rin t a n d o nlin e, a n d c re ativ ity .

H e w as th e n um ber o ne ra te d sp eak er o f IA BC’s In te rn atio nal C onfe re n ces in 2 002, 2 008, 2 009, a n d 2 010 a n d h as b een a sk ed to sp eak in IA BC’s “ A ll S ta r T ra ck ” fo r th e p ast fiv e y ears . H e als o w rite s a re g ula r co lu m n o n em plo yee c o m munic atio ns i n Com munic a tio n W orld m ag azin e.

Roger D’A prix , ABC, IA BC Fello w , is an in te rn atio nally know n c o m munic atio ns co nsu lta n t, au th or, an d le ctu re r. H e has assis te d sc o re s of F ortu ne 500 co m pan ie s in dev elo pin g co m munic atio n str a te g ie s, desig nin g c o m munic atio n i n itia tiv es, a n d t r a in in g f o r m an ag ers a n d s u perv is o rs . H e i s a v ic e p re sid en t o f R O I C onsu ltin g, a S ilic o n V alle y –base d co nsu lta n cy . F or fif te en y ears h e h eld s e n io r p ositio ns w ith tw o o f th e le ad in g h um an r e so urc e c o nsu ltin g c o m pan ie s: T ow ers P errin an d M erc er. H e is th e au th or of se v en books on e m plo yee c o m munic atio n. H is la te st b ook p ublis h ed in 2 009 b y Jo sse y -B ass is T he C re d ib le C om pany: C om munic a tin g w ith T oday’s S kep tic a l W ork fo rc e.

H is c o nsu ltin g c are er fo llo w s tw o d ecad es a s a c o rp ora te c o m munic atio n e x ecu tiv e f o r X ero x C orp ora tio n a n d G en era l E le ctr ic .

M elis sa D . D od d is a docto ra l stu den t fo cu sin g on co m munic atio n/p ublic r e la tio ns a t th e U niv ers ity o f M ia m i’ s S ch ool o f C om munic atio n. D odd is a c o - o rg an iz er fo r th e In te rn atio nal Public R ela tio ns R ese arc h C onfe re n ce an d a c o au th or fo r th e in str u cto r’s m an ual co m pan io n to D on W . S ta ck ’s Prim er o f 27 Public R ela tio ns R ese a rc h , se co nd ed itio n. S he re ceiv ed th e B rig ham Y oung Univ ers ity T op E th ic s P ap er A ward in M arc h 2 010. D odd h as g ain ed p ra ctic al public re la tio ns ex perie n ce th ro ugh se v era l public re la tio ns an d m ark etin g positio ns a n d in te rn sh ip s. S he e arn ed h er m aste r o f a rts in p ublic re la tio ns fro m Ball S ta te U niv ers ity a n d w ill g ra d uate w ith h er d octo ra te i n 2 012.

Nic k D uru tta , A BC, is a se n io r co m munic atio ns m an ag er fo r T he C ap ita l Gro up C om pan ie s, a g lo bal in vestm en t m an ag em en t fir m b ase d in L os A ngele s.

Prio r to jo in in g C ap ita l in 1 996, h e w as a c o m munic atio ns c o nsu lta n t fo r m an y years , sp ecia liz in g in in te rn al ch an ge co m munic atio n. H e hold s a bach elo r’s deg re e i n j o urn alis m f ro m C alif o rn ia S ta te U niv ers ity a t F ulle rto n. A m em ber a n d a past dir e cto r of th e IA BC, he has se rv ed as ch air of th e org an iz atio n’s in te rn atio nal a w ard s p ro gra m a s w ell a s p re sid en t o f t h e L os A ngele s c h ap te r.

Jen nif e r F ra h m , Ph.D ., is th e fo under of C onvers a tio ns of C han ge® , a boutiq ue c o nsu lta n cy th at s p ecia liz es in c h an ge c o m munic atio n, b uild in g c h an ge cap ab ility in h ouse , c o ach in g c h an ge a g en ts a n d le ad ers , a n d c o nductin g o ff-s ite re tr e ats o n c are er a n d w ork -lif e c h an ge. S he h as c h an ge m an ag em en t e x perie n ce in fin an cia l s e rv ic es, h ig her e d ucatio n, e n erg y, in novatio n, h um an s e rv ic es, a n d man ufa ctu rin g. T his w ork has in volv ed pro vid in g str a te g ic ad vic e to se n io r man ag em en t, dia g nosis of co m munic atio ns pro ble m s, an d an aly sis of ch an ge in te rv en tio ns w ith an em phasis o n ch an ge p ro gra m effe ctiv en ess. S he h old s a docto ra te in m an ag em en t, is th e 2 010–2011 IA BC V ic to ria A ustr a lia ch ap te r pre sid en t, blo gs on th e IA BC eX ch an ge, an d can be fo und on Tw itte r (@ je n fra h m ).

Kellie G arrett, A BC, is se n io r vic e pre sid en t of str a te g y, know le d ge, an d re p uta tio n a t F arm C re d it C an ad a (F C C). S he is re sp onsib le fo r F C C’s b usin ess str a te g y, know le d ge m an ag em en t an d str a te g ic in te llig en ce, an d re p uta tio n, in clu din g co rp ora te co m munic atio ns. H er te am h as w on d ozen s o f aw ard s fo r in novativ e a n d b est p ra ctic e p ro gra m s in d iv ers e a re as. S he is a f re q uen t s p eak er in h er a re as o f e x pertis e a n d a p assio nate v olu nte er fo r b oard s in th e a re as o f co rp ora te s o cia l r e sp onsib ility a n d a u tis m . G arre tt w as c h air o f I A BC’s R ese arc h Foundatio n B oard in 2 006. S he h old s a n M .A . in le ad ers h ip a n d is a c ertif ie d ex ecu tiv e c o ach .

Dia n e M . G ayesk i, P h.D ., is in te rn atio nally re co gniz ed a s a th ought le ad er in org an iz atio nal c o m munic atio n a n d le arn in g. C urre n tly s h e is th e d ean o f th e R oy H. P ark S ch ool o f C om munic atio ns. F or m ore t h an t h ir ty y ears , s h e h as b een b oth an a cad em ic a n d a p ro fe ssio nal s p ecia liz in g i n c o rp ora te c o m munic atio ns s tr a te g y an d m an ag em en t. She le ad s G ay esk i A naly tic s an d co nsu lts w ith clie n ts world w id e s u ch a s G en era l E le ctr ic , U .S . N av y, A bbott N utr itio nals , T om pkin s Fin an cia l, a n d J o hnso n C ontr o ls . T he a u th or o f f o urte en b ooks, s h e is a f re q uen t sp eak er a t c o nfe re n ces a n d p riv ate e x ecu tiv e b rie fin gs.

Tam ara L . G illis , E d.D ., A BC, i s p ro fe sso r a n d c h air m an o f t h e D ep artm en t o f Com munic atio ns a t E liz ab eth to w n C olle g e, P en nsy lv an ia . S he h as a ls o s e rv ed a s 28 a c o m munic atio ns c o nsu lta n t w ith C ooper W rig ht L LC . I n h er c are er, s h e h as le d co m munic atio n p ro gra m s fo r h ig her ed ucatio n in stitu tio ns, asso cia tio ns, an d a health c are c o rp ora tio n. S he h as s e rv ed a s f a cu lty in S w azila n d, N am ib ia , a n d th e Sem este r a t S ea p ro gra m . T he IA BC R ese arc h F oundatio n h onore d h er w ith th e 2004 F oundatio n L if e tim e F rie n d A ward . In 2 001–2002 sh e c h air e d th e IA BC Rese arc h Foundatio n. She has held le ad ers h ip positio ns at th e dis tr ic t an d in te rn atio nal le v els o f IA BC, a n d sh e re cen tly le d th e o rg an iz atio n’s e ffo rts to re v is e th e A BC a ccre d ita tio n p ro gra m . T he a u th or o f n um ero us a rtic le s a n d b ook ch ap te rs , sh e is co au th or o f Esse n tia ls o f E m plo yee C om munic a tio n: B uild in g Rela tio nsh ip s th at C re a te B usin ess Success (IA BC, 2008) an d IA BC P ro file Stu dy: T re n ds in C om munic a tio n P ro fe ssio n C om pen sa tio n (IA BC, 2 008), a n d au th or o f The H um an E le m en t: E m plo yee C om munic a tio n P ra ctic es in S m all Busin esse s ( IA BC, 2 008). S he h old s a d octo ra te in e d ucatio n f ro m th e U niv ers ity of P itts b urg h ( P en nsy lv an ia ).

Patr ic k G ra d y is se n io r vic e pre sid en t an d m an ag in g partn er of CM S Com munic atio ns I n te rn atio nal, a n i n novativ e c o m munic atio n a g en cy b ase d i n L os Angele s. H e h ead s u p th e C M S co nsu ltin g b usin ess an d is b ase d in O rla n do, Flo rid a. Prio r to jo in in g CM S he held num ero us positio ns in m ark etin g co m munic atio ns, e v en ts m an ag em en t, a n d s tr a te g ic a n d in te rn al c o m munic atio ns with co m pan ie s in clu din g R ad io S hack C orp ora tio n, co m merc ia l ra d io sta tio ns, an d a n i n te rn atio nal t e le v is io n n etw ork . H is c are er h as i n clu ded m ed ia p ro ductio n, ex ecu tiv e pro ducer, on-a ir ta le n t, an d pre se n ta tio n co ach as w ell as str a te g ic co m munic ato r.

Lin G ren sin g-P op hal, M .A ., S PH R, P C M , i s a c o m munic atio ns c o nsu lta n t a n d busin ess j o urn alis t w ith a n e x te n siv e b ack gro und i n s tr a te g ic m ark etin g, c o rp ora te co m munic atio ns, a n d e m plo yee re la tio ns. S he h as le d s e v era l s tr a te g ic p la n nin g in itia tiv es in th e are as of cris is m an ag em en t an d m ark etin g pla n nin g. A s a Natio nal B ald rig e ex am in er, P ophal h as b een in volv ed in th e d ev elo pm en t o f ap plic atio ns an d th e in div id ual an d co nse n su s re v ie w an d sc o rin g o f B ald rig e ap plic atio ns f o r la rg e a n d s m all o rg an iz atio ns. S he is th e a u th or o f s e v era l b ooks, in clu din g Mark etin g w ith th e E nd In M in d (IA BC, 2 005) a n d Hum an R eso urc e Esse n tia ls ( S H RM , 2 002). S he is th e c o au th or o f Writin g a C onvin cin g B usin ess Pla n , t h ir d e d itio n ( B arro n’s E ducatio nal S erie s, 2 001).

Jam es E . G ru nig i s p ro fe sso r e m eritu s i n t h e D ep artm en t o f C om mu​ n ic atio n a t th e U niv ers ity o f M ary la n d. H e h as w on th re e m ajo r a w ard s in p ublic re la tio ns:

th e P ath fin der A ward fo r e x celle n ce in p ublic re la tio ns re se arc h o f th e In stitu te fo r P ublic R ela tio ns R ese arc h a n d E ducatio n, th e O uts ta n din g E ducato r A ward o f th e P ublic R ela tio ns S ocie ty o f A m eric a (P R SA ), a n d th e J a ck so n, J a ck so n a n d Wag ner A ward f o r b eh av io ra l s c ie n ce r e se arc h o f th e P R SA F oundatio n. H e a ls o won t h e p re stig io us l if e tim e a w ard o f t h e A sso cia tio n f o r E ducatio n i n J o urn alis m an d M ass C om munic atio n, th e P au l J. D eu ts c h m an n A ward fo r E xcelle n ce in Rese arc h .

29 Laris sa A . G ru nig i s p ro fe sso r e m erita i n t h e D ep artm en t o f C om munic atio n a t th e U niv ers ity o f M ary la n d. S he s e rv ed a s s p ecia l a ssis ta n t to th e p re sid en t o f th e univ ers ity f o r w om en ’s is su es. S he h as r e ceiv ed th e P ath fin der A ward , s p onso re d by th e U .S . In stitu te fo r P ublic R ela tio ns, fo r ex celle n ce in public re la tio ns re se arc h , th e O uts ta n din g E ducato r A ward o f th e P ublic R ela tio ns S ocie ty o f Am eric a (P R SA ), a n d th e Ja ck so n, Ja ck so n a n d W ag ner A ward fo r b eh av io ra l sc ie n ce re se arc h of th e P R SA F oundatio n. S he co au th ore d th e fir s t book on wom en i n p ublic r e la tio ns.

Shel H olt z , A BC, IA BC Fello w , is prin cip al of H oltz C om munic atio n + Tech nolo gy, a c o nsu lta n cy th at h elp s o rg an iz atio ns a p ply o nlin e te ch nolo gy to th eir o rg an iz atio nal c o m munic atio ns. H e h as s p en t m ore th an th ir ty y ears in th e co m munic atio ns f ie ld a s a d ir e cto r o f c o rp ora te c o m munic atio ns f o r tw o F ortu ne 500 co m pan ie s an d as a se n io r co m munic atio ns co nsu lta n t fo r tw o hum an re so urc e c o nsu ltin g fir m s. H e is th e a u th or o f Public R ela tio ns o n th e N et a n d Corp ora te C onversa tio ns.

Joh n L arse n , A BC, is prin cip al of C orp en G ro up, In c., an in dep en den t co nsu lta n cy s p ecia liz in g in r e p uta tio n m an ag em en t a n d g overn m en t r e la tio ns. H e has h eld s e n io r c o m munic atio ns p ositio ns w ith v ario us o rd ers o f g overn m en t a n d in th e c o rp ora te s e cto r, in clu din g m an ag er o f e x ecu tiv e c o m munic atio ns fo r th e City o f C alg ary a n d a sso cia te v ic e p re sid en t w ith a n in te rn atio nal p ublic a ffa ir s an d g overn m en t r e la tio ns c o nsu ltin g a g en cy . L ars e n h as l e ctu re d a t f o ur C an ad ia n co lle g es a n d u niv ers itie s, is a p opula r in dustr y a n d a cad em ic c o nfe re n ce s p eak er, an d has a gra d uate deg re e in co m munic atio ns; he is an A ccre d ite d B usin ess Com munic ato r, a certif ie d m em ber of th e Am eric an In stitu te fo r Cris is Man ag em en t, a m em ber o f th e U .S .- b ase d I s su e M an ag em en t C ouncil, a n d h old s fo rm al U nite d N atio ns s ta tu s a s a n In te rn atio nal P erm an en t O bse rv ato ry E xpert.

Jo hn i s a ls o a s e n io r r e se rv e o ffic er i n t h e C an ad ia n F orc es P ublic A ffa ir s B ra n ch .

Wilm a K . M ath ew s, A BC, IA BC F ello w , h as m ore th an th re e d ecad es o f ex perie n ce in dom estic an d in te rn atio nal public re la tio ns an d co m munic atio n man ag em en t. S he is a u th or a n d c o au th or o f n um ero us b ooks a n d a c o ntr ib uto r to se v era l m ag azin es, n ew sle tte rs , a n d r e p orts . M ath ew s is a n in te rn atio nally k now n sp eak er, pro vid es co unse l to org an iz atio ns on str a te g ic an d m ed ia re la tio ns pla n nin g, an d cu rre n tly se rv es as ch air of th e IA BC E th ic s C om mitte e. S he pre v io usly se rv ed as ch air of th e IA BC Rese arc h Foundatio n an d th e Accre d ita tio n C ouncil a n d a s a m em ber o f th e IA BC e x ecu tiv e b oard . S he is a Gold Q uill w in ner f o r m ed ia r e la tio ns a n d w ritin g. S he i s a m em ber o f t h e R ow an Univ ers ity P R H all o f F am e a n d h as ta u ght a t th e W alte r C ro nkite S ch ool o f Jo urn alis m & M ass C om munic atio ns a t A riz o na S ta te U niv ers ity .

Mary A nn M cC au le y , A BC, p re sid en t a n d p rin cip al o f C ata ly st C om muni​ - catio ns, pro vid es str a te g ic co m munic atio n co unse l to a bro ad sp ectr u m of busin esse s an d n onpro fits . M cC au le y p ro vid es g en era l co m munic atio n co unse l with a fo cu s o n s tr a te g ic c o m munic atio n p la n nin g a n d im ple m en ta tio n. P rio r to 30 fo undin g C ata ly st C om munic atio ns in 1 987, sh e h eld p ositio ns in c o rp ora tio ns in clu din g H allm ark C ard s, U nite d T ech nolo gie s C om munic atio ns C om pan y, a n d Fir s t U nio n B an co rp ora tio n. A fo rm er jo urn alis t, s h e w as a re p orte r a t a n Io w a daily a n d la te r o w ned a n d o pera te d a c o m munity n ew sp ap er in K an sa s. S he h old s a b ach elo r o f j o urn alis m d eg re e f ro m t h e U niv ers ity o f M is so uri.

Mark M cE lr ea th , A BC, A PR , P h.D ., is a p ro fe sso r a t T ow so n U niv ers ity in Mary la n d, a n d a m em ber o f I A BC f o r m ore th an th ir ty y ears . H e c an b e r e ach ed at mmcelr e ath @ to w so n.e d u .

Geo rg e M cG ra th is a p artn er a n d fo under o f M cG ra th M atte r A sso cia te s, a public re la tio ns a n d p ublic a ffa ir s c o nsu ltin g fir m . O ver th e c o urs e o f a tw en ty - fiv e-y ear c are er in c o m munic atio ns, M cG ra th h as h elp ed c lie n ts id en tif y is su es th at a re k ey to th eir s u ccess a n d d ev elo p b usin ess s tr a te g ie s a n d c o m munic atio ns cam paig ns to in flu en ce th e c o urs e o f d eb ate s o ver p ublic p olic y . H e h as w ork ed with b usin esse s, tr a d e asso cia tio ns, an d n onpro fit o rg an iz atio ns o n a ra n ge o f is su es, in clu din g en vir o nm en ta l pro te ctio n, en erg y co m petitio n, health care deliv ery , a n d e d ucatio n. H e s e rv ed o n t h e I A BC i n te rn atio nal b oard b etw een 1 989 an d 1 994 a n d w as I A BC’s i n te rn atio nal c h air m an b etw een 1 992 a n d 1 993.

Rit a L in ju an M en is a d octo ra l s tu den t in p ublic r e la tio ns a t th e U niv ers ity o f Mia m i’ s Sch ool of Com munic atio n. She is a m em ber of A sso cia tio n fo r Educatio n in Jo urn alis m an d M ass Com munic atio n an d Public Rela tio ns Pro fe ssio nals Asso cia tio n in Hong Kong. She is a co -o rg an iz er fo r th e In te rn atio nal Public R ela tio ns R ese arc h C onfe re n ce an d a co au th or fo r th e in str u cto r’s m an ual c o m pan io n to D on W . S ta ck ’s Prim er o f P ublic R ela tio ns Rese a rc h , 2 nd e d itio n. S he e arn ed h er m aste r o f p hilo so phy in c o m munic atio ns stu die s fro m H ong K ong B ap tis t U niv ers ity a n d a B .A . in c o m munic atio n fro m Zhejia n g U niv ers ity .

Sherw yn M orrea le is a sso cia te p ro fe sso r a n d d ir e cto r o f g ra d uate stu die s in co m munic atio n a t U niv ers ity o f C olo ra d o a t C olo ra d o S prin gs. F or e ig ht y ears , sh e s e rv ed a s a sso cia te d ir e cto r o f th e N atio nal C om munic atio n A sso cia tio n. S he has w ritte n o r co au th ore d n um ero us jo urn al artic le s, b ooks, m onogra p hs, an d book c h ap te rs . S he h old s c o m munic atio n d eg re es f ro m U niv ers ity o f C olo ra d o a t Colo ra d o Sprin gs an d Univ ers ity of Colo ra d o, Den ver, an d a Ph.D . in co m munic atio n f ro m U niv ers ity o f D en ver.

Alis ta ir J. N ic h ola s is a fre q uen t w rite r an d co m men ta to r on re p uta tio n man ag em en t. H is c are er o f m ore t h an t w en ty -fiv e y ears s p an s j o urn alis m , p olitic s, dip lo m acy , in -h ouse co m munic atio ns co unse l, an d co m munic atio ns co nsu ltin g acro ss A ustr a lia , th e U nite d S ta te s, a n d C hin a. H e is c u rre n tly th e p re sid en t a n d CEO o f A C C ap ita l S tr a te g ic C onsu ltin g, a f ir m h e e sta b lis h ed in B eijin g in 2 003 to pro vid e re p uta tio n man ag em en t, public affa ir s , an d is su es an d cris is man ag em en t se rv ic es to org an iz atio ns opera tin g in C hin a. T he fir m ’s clie n ts in clu de g lo bal F ortu ne 5 00 c o m pan ie s, C hin ese s ta te -o w ned e n te rp ris e s, C hin ese an d f o re ig n g overn m en t a g en cie s, a n d n onpro fit o rg an iz atio ns.

31 Morg an L eu P ark hurst is o w ner o f B lu e + L in en , a n o rg an iz atio n f o cu se d o n help in g b usin esse s t o d ev elo p t h eir m ark etin g c o m munic atio ns s tr a te g ie s. S he h as been a s u bje ct m atte r e x pert o n i n te g ra te d m ark etin g c o m munic atio ns f o r S C O RE an d Sm all Busin ess Dev elo pm en t Cen te r se m in ars , has ta u ght m ark etin g co m munic atio ns co urs e s to busin ess ow ners an d m an ag ers , an d has been a fe atu re d sp eak er at busin ess co nfe re n ces. S he has w ritte n fo r natio nally an d in te rn atio nally dis tr ib ute d public atio ns on th e to pic s of en tr e p re n eu rs h ip , mark etin g, m ed ia r e la tio ns, n etw ork in g, a n d c o nsu m er b eh av io r. S he h as a n M BA in m ark etin g f ro m I o w a S ta te U niv ers ity . S he i s t h e p ast p re sid en t o f I A BC/I o w a.

Leste r R . P otte r, A BC, M BA , IA BC Fello w , is a se n io r le ctu re r in th e Dep artm en t of M ass C om munic atio n an d C om munic atio n S tu die s at T ow so n Univ ers ity in M ary la n d. H e is als o a docto ra l can did ate in in str u ctio nal te ch nolo gy at T ow so n. H e se rv es as fa cu lty ad vis o r to T ow so n’s S tu den t P R Gro up, w hic h in clu des P R SA an d IA BC stu den t ch ap te rs . P otte r b lo gs ab out str a te g ic co m munic atio n an d public re la tio ns an d in te g ra te d mark etin g co m munic atio n in More w ith L es , a t http ://le sp otte r0 01.w ord pre ss.c o m . P rio r to jo in in g T ow so n’s fa cu lty , P otte r w as p re sid en t o f L es P otte r In co rp ora te d , an in te rn atio nal c o nsu lta n cy th at h e fo unded . P otte r w as c h air m an o f IA BC fro m 1991 t o 1 992. H e h ad p re v io usly s e rv ed o n I A BC’s e x ecu tiv e b oard , a ccre d ita tio n board , a n d a s a tr u ste e o f th e I A BC R ese arc h F oundatio n. H e is th e a u th or o f The Com munic a tio n P la n: th e H ea rt o f S tr a te g ic C om munic a tio n (IA BC, 2 008) a n d Busin ess M anagem en t fo r C om munic a to rs: B eyo nd Str a te g ic C om munic a tio n (IA BC).

Pau l M . S an ch ez, A BC, A PR , is fo under o f C SF C onsu ltin g, a re se arc h a n d co m munic atio ns f ir m . P rio r t o h is c u rre n t p ositio n, h e w ork ed f o r M erc er, S to orz a Com munic atio ns, a n d W ats o n W yatt W orld w id e. H is p ast I A BC a ctiv itie s i n clu de ex ecu tiv e b oard m em ber, e x ecu tiv e c o m mitte e f in an ce d ir e cto r, e th ic s c o m mitte e ch air , board m em ber of IA BC’s U .K . ch ap te r, an d ch air m an of th e IA BC Rese arc h F oundatio n ( 2 005–2006). H e h as a B .S c. in p sy ch olo gy a n d a M .S c. in org an iz atio nal co m munic atio ns. H e als o atte n ded th e Execu tiv e Lead ers h ip Dev elo pm en t a t th e H arv ard B usin ess S ch ool. W hile in th e U nite d K in gdom h e was e le cte d to th e R oyal S ocie ty o f A rts a n d M ech an ic s. H e h as c o ntr ib ute d to pro fe ssio nal jo urn als a n d w ro te Tra nsfo rm atio n C om munic a tio ns, p ublis h ed b y IA BC.

Caro lin e S ap rie l is th e f o under a n d m an ag in g d ir e cto r o f C S& A, a g lo bal r is k an d c ris is m an ag em en t c o nsu ltin g fir m w ith o ffic es in H ong K ong, th e U nite d Kin gdom , B elg iu m , F ra n ce, th e N eth erla n ds, th e U nite d S ta te s, th e U nite d A ra b Em ir a te s, a n d S in gap ore . S he re g ula rly sp eak s a t in te rn atio nal c o nfe re n ces a n d se m in ars o n ris k a n d c ris is m an ag em en t, h as w ritte n n um ero us jo urn al a rtic le s, an d h as b een a g uest le ctu re r a t th e g ra d uate s c h ool o f p ublic a d m in is tr a tio n o f Leid en U niv ers ity . S he h as b een a m em ber o f t h e I A BC s in ce 1 987 a n d s e rv es o n th e b oard o f its B elg ia n C hap te r. S he h old s a B .A . in C hin ese s tu die s a n d a B .S c.

32 deg re e i n i n te rn atio nal r e la tio ns f ro m t h e H eb re w U niv ers ity o f J e ru sa le m .

D. M ark Sch um an n, ABC, is passio nate ab out all th in gs bra n d an d co m munic atio n r e la te d . A s a c o nsu lta n t, h e h as c re ate d e m plo yer b ra n ds f o r m ore th an a h undre d c o m pan ie s a ro und th e w orld ; a s a n a u th or, h e h as c o au th ore d tw o books o n e m plo yer b ra n ds, Bra nd fr o m th e I n sid e a n d Bra nd f o r T ale n t, a n d, a s a volu nte er, h e i s a p ast c h air o f I A BC a n d a n a ctiv e p artic ip an t i n t h e d ev elo pm en t of th e asso cia tio n’s bra n d. H e is th e w in ner of se v en te en IA BC G old Q uill Award s a n d a fre q uen t IA BC sp eak er a n d a u th or. T oday , h e m ain ta in s a d aily blo g, www.a co m munic ato rs v ie w .c o m , an d le ad s a co nsu lta n cy , H ow B ra n ds Engag e, b ase d i n R id gefie ld , C onnectic u t.

Pam ela S hock le y -Z ala b ak i s c h an cello r a n d p ro fe sso r o f c o m munic atio n a t t h e Univ ers ity of Colo ra d o at Colo ra d o Sprin gs. She als o is pre sid en t of Com muniC on, a co nsu ltin g gro up th at sp ecia liz es in le ad ers h ip dev elo pm en t, co nflic t re so lu tio n, a n d d ev elo pm en t o f te am -b ase d o rg an iz atio ns. T he a u th or o f six books an d num ero us artic le s, Shock le y -Z ala b ak fo cu se s on la rg e-s c ale org an iz atio nal a sse ssm en t a n d p la n nin g. S he re ceiv ed h er B .A . a n d M .A . fro m Okla h om a S ta te U niv ers ity a n d h er P h.D . in c o m munic atio n f ro m th e U niv ers ity of C olo ra d o a t B ould er.

Loren zo S ie rra is a m ark etin g co m munic atio n an d p ublic affa ir s co nsu lta n t base d in A riz o na an d th e m ark etin g an d public re la tio ns m an ag er fo r L V M Syste m s, a s o ftw are c o m pan y fo r h ealth c are c all c en te rs . B efo re jo in in g L V M , Sie rra w as th e re g io nal m ark etin g d ir e cto r fo r a F ortu ne 1 00 h ealth in su ra n ce co m pan y an d a co m munic atio n co nsu lta n t at a F ortu ne 5 00 h um an re so urc es co nsu ltin g fir m . H e sits o n th e b oard s o f B M A P hoen ix , th e A riz o na H is p an ic Cham ber of Com merc e, an d Pare n tin g A riz o na. H e is als o an ap poin te d co m mis sio ner on th e Ariz o na Govern or’s Com mis sio n on Serv ic e an d Volu nte eris m . L ore n zo h old s a B .A . i n j o urn alis m f ro m A riz o na S ta te U niv ers ity .

Don W . S ta ck s is pro fe sso r an d asso cia te dean fo r F acu lty R ese arc h an d Cre ativ e A ctiv ity a t th e U niv ers ity o f M ia m i’ s S ch ool o f C om munic atio n. S ta ck s is th e au th or of num ero us artic le s, ch ap te rs , books, an d pro fe ssio nal pap ers dealin g w ith p ublic r e la tio ns. H e is a m em ber o f th e A rth ur W . P ag e S ocie ty a n d Com mis sio n o n P ublic R ela tio ns M easu re m en t a n d s its o n th e b oard o f tr u ste es fo r th e I n stitu te f o r P ublic R ela tio ns. H e e arn ed h is d octo ra te f ro m th e U niv ers ity of F lo rid a.

Karen V ah ou ny, A BC, is a fo undin g partn er of Q orv is C om munic atio ns.

Earlie r, sh e w as vic e pre sid en t of co rp ora te co m munic atio ns at PR C, an in fo rm atio n te ch nolo gy c o m pan y. S he w as e le cte d to th e b oard o f tr u ste es f o r th e Natio nal E ndow m en t fo r F in an cia l E ducatio n in 2 010. T w ic e n am ed B usin ess Com munic ato r o f th e Y ear fo r IA BC/W ash in gto n, V ah ouny h as se rv ed o n th e IA BC e x ecu tiv e b oard , t h e I A BC R ese arc h F oundatio n b oard , p re se n te d a t s e v era l in te rn atio nal c o nfe re n ces, w ro te a rtic le s fo r Com munic a tio n W orld , a n d c h air e d th e IA BC T hin k T an k a n d th e IA BC in vestm en t c o m mitte e. S he se rv es o n th e 33 board o f d ir e cto rs f o r th e C ap ita l A re a C hap te r o f th e N atio nal I n vesto r R ela tio ns In stitu te . S he h old s a B .S . in m ark etin g fro m th e U niv ers ity o f V ir g in ia a n d a n M.B .A . i n f in an ce a n d m an ag em en t f ro m G eo rg e M aso n U niv ers ity .

Mark W ein er is th e ch ie f ex ecu tiv e offic er of PR IM E R ese arc h N orth Am eric a, one of th e world ’s la rg est public re la tio ns an d co rp ora te co m munic atio ns re se arc h an d co nsu ltin g pro vid ers . He is th e au th or of Unle a sh in g th e Pow er of PR: A Contr a ria n’s Guid e to M ark etin g and Com munic a tio n ( W ile y ) a n d h as c o ntr ib ute d c h ap te rs to th re e o th er te x ts . H e is a fre q uen t s p eak er a n d a v is itin g p ro fe sso r f o r T he E xecu tiv e E ducatio n P ro gra m s, S.I . N ew house S ch ool o f P ublic C om munic atio ns a t S yra cu se U niv ers ity , a n d h as guest- le ctu re d a t m an y o f th e n atio n’s le ad in g p ublic r e la tio ns p ro gra m s. H e is a re g ula r c o ntr ib uto r to le ad in g c o m munic atio n a n d p ublic re la tio ns p ro fe ssio nal med ia a n d sits o n th e e d ito ria l a d vis o ry b oard s o f th e Str a te g is t a n d PR N ew s.

Wein er is a m em ber o f T he I n stitu te f o r P ublic R ela tio ns, P R SA , I A BC. H e is a gra d uate o f t h e U niv ers ity o f M ary la n d.

Patr ic ia T . W hale n is a n e d ucato r a n d c o nsu lta n t w ith m ore th an tw en ty y ears of pro fe ssio nal w ork ex perie n ce. She has se rv ed as th e head of co rp ora te co m munic atio ns fo r a F ortu ne 3 00 co m pan y an d as m ark etin g d ir e cto r fo r an in te rn atio nal te le co m munic atio ns f ir m . S in ce 2 006 s h e h as s e rv ed a s th e g ra d uate dir e cto r fo r D eP au l U niv ers ity ’s m aste r’s pro gra m in public re la tio ns an d ad vertis in g. P rio r to th at, s h e s p en t e ig ht y ears a s a fu ll- tim e fa cu lty m em ber in th e Med ill In te g ra te d Mark etin g Com munic atio ns gra d uate pro gra m at North w este rn U niv ers ity . S he w ro te How C om munic a tio n D riv es M erg er S uccess (IA BC, 2 002). S he h as als o w ritte n b ooks o n co rp ora te co m munic atio ns an d mark etin g p ublic re la tio ns. S he h old s a d octo ra te in m ass m ed ia fro m M ic h ig an Sta te U niv ers ity , a m aste r’s o f sc ie n ce d eg re e in b usin ess a d m in is tr a tio n fro m In dia n a U niv ers ity a t S outh B en d, a n d a b ach elo r’s d eg re e in E nglis h fro m th e Ohio S ta te U niv ers ity .

Bra d W hit w orth , A BC, IA BC F ello w , is se n io r c o m munic atio n m an ag er a t Cis c o , b ase d in S an J o se , C alif o rn ia . H is w ork h as e arn ed h im re co gnitio n a s a th ought le ad er in th e fie ld o f in te rn al co m munic atio ns. A fo rm er b ro ad caste r, Whitw orth s p eak s re g ula rly to b usin ess e x ecu tiv es, c o m munic atio n g ro ups, a n d univ ers ity cla sse s aro und th e w orld . B efo re jo in in g C is c o in 2007, he le d co m munic atio n p ro gra m s a t H P, P eo ple S oft, a n d A AA. W hile a t H P h e d ev elo ped th e m erg er co m munic atio ns fo r th e $ 20 b illio n H P-C om paq P C b usin ess an d man ag ed th e co m pan y’s Y 2K co m munic atio ns pro gra m . H e hold s bach elo r’s deg re es in b oth jo urn alis m a n d sp eech fro m th e U niv ers ity o f M is so uri a n d a n MBA fro m S an ta C la ra U niv ers ity . H e s e rv ed a s IA BC c h air m an in 1 989–1990 an d h as w on s ix I A BC G old Q uills .

Anna M arie W ille y , A BC, i s p re sid en t o f T ota l C om munic atio ns S erv ic es L td ., a co m munic atio n co nsu ltin g co rp ora tio n b ase d in S ask atc h ew an , C an ad a, w ith in te re st in lo cal, n atio nal, an d in te rn atio nal p ro je cts . S he h as m ore th an th ir ty 34 years ex perie n ce sp ecia liz in g in str a te g ic co m munic atio ns m an ag em en t an d pla n nin g an d o rg an iz atio nal d ev elo pm en t an d im ple m en ta tio n. H er p rio r ro le s hav e in clu ded o vera ll r e sp onsib ility f o r g overn m en t c o m munic atio ns w hile c h ie f of co m munic atio ns fo r th e G overn m en t of Sask atc h ew an , vic e pre sid en t of co m munic atio ns w ith S ask P ow er, an d o th er ex ecu tiv e-le v el str a te g ic p ositio ns with in govern m en t an d m ajo r in stitu tio ns. Thro ughout her care er, sh e has re ceiv ed a n um ber o f h onors a n d a w ard s a n d h as e n jo yed m an y r o le s a s a n a ctiv e volu nte er w ith I A BC s e rv in g a t t h e l o cal l e v el a s w ell a s t h e i n te rn atio nal l e v el a s ch air o f t h e I A BC A ccre d ita tio n C ouncil.

Joh n W illia m s is p re sid en t o f J o e W illia m s C om munic atio ns, In c., a tw en ty - fiv e-y ear-o ld c o m munic atio ns re se arc h , tr a in in g, a n d c o nsu ltin g fir m . Jo hn h as co nducte d c o m munic atio ns m easu re m en t, in clu din g su rv ey s, fo cu s g ro ups, a n d au dits , fo r org an iz atio ns of all siz es an d in dustr ie s. H e dev elo ped his fir m ’s Perfo rm an ce I m pact A naly sis p ro gra m , w hic h id en tif ie s th e k ey c o m munic atio ns driv ers of org an iz atio nal perfo rm an ce. Jo e W illia m s Com munic atio ns has co nducte d c o m munic atio ns s u rv ey s f o r m ore th an a h undre d c o m pan ie s a n d h as a data b ase th at re p re se n ts m ore th an 5 00,0 00 g lo bal e m plo yees. Y ou m ay re ach Jo hn a t jo hn.w illia m s@ JW Com .c o m , o r v is it www.j w co m .c o m .

Note Edito r’s N ote :

T he f o llo w in g d esig natio ns a re u se d t o i d en tif y a ccre d ite d co m munic ato rs : A BC d esig nate s A ccre d ite d B usin ess C om munic ato r th ro ugh t h e I n te rn atio nal A sso cia tio n o f B usin ess C om munic ato rs ; A PR desig nate s A ccre d ita tio n i n P ublic R ela tio ns t h ro ugh t h e P ublic R ela tio ns Socie ty o f A m eric a.

35 Part O NE: F O UNDATIO NS O F BU SIN ESS C O M MUNIC ATIO N CH APTE R O NE CH ARACTE RIS T IC S O F E XCELLE N T CO M MUNIC ATIO N Jam es E . G ru nig , L aris sa A . G ru nig When th e In te rn atio nal A sso cia tio n of B usin ess C om munic ato rs (IA BC) Rese arc h F oundatio n is su ed a r e q uest f o r p ro posa ls in 1 984 f o r r e se arc h o n “H ow , W hy, an d to W hat Exte n t Com munic atio n Contr ib ute s to th e Ach ie v em en t of Org an iz atio nal Obje ctiv es,” we fir s t th ought of th e opportu nity to m ove b ey ond e v alu atin g in div id ual c o m munic atio n p ro gra m s su ch a s m ed ia , c o m munity , o r e m plo yee r e la tio ns, w here w e h ad p re v io usly co nducte d re se arc h , to c o nstr u ct a th eo ry o f th e o vera ll v alu e o f th e p ublic re la tio ns f u nctio n to th e o rg an iz atio n. T hus, th e E xcelle n ce s tu dy o ffe re d th e possib ility o f c o nstr u ctin g a th eo ry o f h ow p ublic re la tio ns c o ntr ib ute s to org an iz atio nal e ffe ctiv en ess.

A t t h e s a m e t im e, o ur c o lla b ora to rs o n t h e p ro je ct ( D av id D ozie r, W illia m E hlin g, F re d R ep per, a n d Jo n W hite ) n ote d th at th e p ro je ct w ould m ak e it p ossib le to i n te g ra te a num ber of mid dle -ra n ge co ncep ts th at ex pla in ed how th e c o m munic atio n fu nctio n sh ould be org an iz ed to in cre ase its valu e to th e o rg an iz atio n. J a m es G ru nig b ro ught h is c o ncep ts o f p ublic s, o rg an iz atio nal t h eo ry a n d d ecis io n m ak in g, m odels o f p ublic re la tio ns, e v alu atio n o f p ublic re la tio ns, a n d re se arc h on em plo yee co m munic atio n to th e pro je ct. Dav id Dozie r c o ntr ib ute d h is a n d G le n B ro om ’s ro le s th eo ry . W illia m E hlin g c o ntr ib ute d h is k now le d ge o f o pera tio ns re se arc h a n d h is v ie w s o n th e c o ntr o vers y o ver p ublic r e la tio ns a n d in te g ra te d m ark etin g c o m munic atio n. L aris sa G ru nig b ro ught h er k now le d ge o f g en der, d iv ers ity , p ow er, a ctiv is m , a n d o rg an iz atio nal s tr u ctu re a n d c u ltu re . Jo n W hite co ntr ib ute d his id eas ab out public re la tio ns an d str a te g ic m an ag em en t. T o th is m ix , F re d R ep per, o ur p ra ctitio ner m em ber o f th e te am , a d ded h is u nders ta n din g o f h ow t h eo rie s w ork ed i n p ra ctic e. T he p ack ag e b ecam e w hat w e n ow k now a s t h e E xcelle n ce t h eo ry .

Base d o n o ur re se arc h , w e d ev elo ped a gen eric b en ch m ark (F le is h er, 1 995) o f 36 critic al s u ccess f a cto rs a n d b est p ra ctic es i n c o m munic atio n m an ag em en t. I n m ost public re la tio ns b en ch m ark in g stu die s, a re se arc h er c o m pare s a c o m munic atio n unit w ith o th er u nits in its o w n in dustr y th at a re g en era lly r e co gniz ed a s th e b est.

The E xcelle n ce s tu dy, b y c o ntr a st, id en tif ie d b est p ra ctic es a cro ss d if fe re n t ty pes of org an iz atio ns— co rp ora tio ns, govern m en t ag en cie s, nonpro fit org an iz atio ns, an d a sso cia tio ns. G en eric b en ch m ark in g is m ore v alu ab le th an b en ch m ark in g a sin gle c ase b ecau se it is u nlik ely th at o ne o rg an iz atio n w ill b e “ a w orld -c la ss perfo rm er a cro ss th e b oard ” (F le is h er, 1 995, p . 2 9). In th e E xcelle n ce s tu dy, w e fo und th at a fe w o rg an iz atio ns ex em plif ie d m ost o f th e b est p ra ctic es, m an y ex em plif ie d so m e, an d oth ers had fe w of th ese ch ara cte ris tic s. A gen eric ben ch m ark d oes n ot p ro vid e a n e x act f o rm ula o r d eta ile d d esc rip tio n o f p ra ctic es th at a c o m munic atio n u nit c an c o py to b e e x celle n t. R ath er, it p ro vid es a s e t o f prin cip le s th at p ro fe ssio nals c an u se to g en era te id eas fo r sp ecif ic p ra ctic es in th eir o w n o rg an iz atio ns.

We te ste d th e E xcelle n ce th eo ry th ro ugh su rv ey re se arc h o f h ead s o f p ublic re la tio ns, c h ie f e x ecu tiv e o ffic ers (C EO s), a n d e m plo yees in 3 27 o rg an iz atio ns (c o rp ora tio ns, n onpro fit o rg an iz atio ns, g overn m en t a g en cie s, a n d a sso cia tio ns) in th e U nite d S ta te s, C an ad a, a n d th e U nite d K in gdom . T he su rv ey re se arc h w as fo llo w ed b y q ualita tiv e in te rv ie w s w ith h ead s o f p ublic re la tio ns, o th er p ublic re la tio ns p ra ctitio ners , a n d C EO s in tw en ty -fiv e o rg an iz atio ns w ith th e h ig hest an d lo w est s c o re s o n a s c ale o f E xcelle n ce p ro duced b y s ta tis tic al a n aly sis o f th e su rv ey data . T hre e books w ere publis h ed fro m th e re se arc h (G ru nig , 1992; Dozie r, G ru nig & G ru nig , 1 995; & G ru nig , G ru nig , & D ozie r, 2 002).

In our fir s t book, Excelle n ce in Public Rela tio ns and Com munic a tio n Managem en t , R ep per ( 1 992) e x pla in ed h ow th e th eo ry o f E xcelle n ce c an b e u se d to a u dit c o m munic atio n p ro gra m s: “ O ne th in g c o m munic ato rs n ev er h av e b een ab le to d o is to c o m pare o ur c o m munic atio n p ro gra m s w ith a p ro gra m th at is co nsid ere d th e b est a n d m ost e ffe ctiv e. H ow ev er, th e n orm ativ e th eo ry p ro vid ed in th e book giv es us an opportu nity to m easu re th e effe ctiv en ess of our co m munic atio n p ro gra m s ag ain st th at o f an id eal p ro gra m ” (G ru nig , 1 992, p .

112). A ny p ro fe ssio nal c o m munic ato r o r e x ecu tiv e to w hom th e c o m munic atio n fu nctio n r e p orts c o uld c o nduct a f o rm al o r i n fo rm al a u dit t o c o m pare t h at f u nctio n with th e gen eric ben ch m ark w e hav e dev elo ped . P ro fe ssio nal co m munic ato rs ask ed to se rv e as peer re v ie w ers fo r oth er org an iz atio ns co uld use th e ch ara cte ris tic s a s a q ualita tiv e b en ch m ark t o f ra m e t h eir e v alu atio n.

The V alu e o f C om munic a tio n t o a n Org an iz a tio n IA BC’s e m phasis o n e x pla in in g th e v alu e o f p ublic r e la tio ns s tim ula te d u s to p ut measu re m en t a n d e v alu atio n in to a b ro ad er p ers p ectiv e th an th e p ro gra m le v el.

37 Alth ough p ro gra m e v alu atio n r e m ain ed a n i m porta n t c o m ponen t o f o ur t h eo ry , w e re aliz ed th at it c o uld n ot s h ow th e o vera ll v alu e o f th e p ublic r e la tio ns f u nctio n to th e o rg an iz atio n. O ur r e v ie w o f th e lite ra tu re o n o rg an iz atio nal e ffe ctiv en ess f ir s t sh ow ed th at p ublic r e la tio ns h as v alu e w hen it h elp s th e o rg an iz atio n a ch ie v e its goals . H ow ev er, th e lite ra tu re als o sh ow ed th at it h as to d ev elo p th ose g oals th ro ugh in te ra ctio n w ith str a te g ic c o nstitu en cie s (s ta k eh old ers a n d p ublic s). W e th eo riz ed th at c o m munic atio n a d ds v alu e w hen it h elp s th e o rg an iz atio n id en tif y sta k eh old ers a n d s e g m en t d if fe re n t k in ds o f p ublic s fro m s ta k eh old er c ate g orie s.

CEO s in th e q ualita tiv e p ortio n o f th e stu dy, fo r e x am ple , e m phasiz ed th at th e co m munic atio n fu nctio n has valu e becau se it pro vid es a bro ad , div ers e pers p ectiv e b oth in sid e an d o uts id e th e o rg an iz atio n. S eco nd, w e sh ow ed th at public re la tio ns in cre ase s its v alu e w hen it u se s sy m metr ic al c o m munic atio n to dev elo p an d cu ltiv ate re la tio nsh ip s w ith str a te g ic p ublic s. If it d ev elo ps g ood re la tio nsh ip s w ith str a te g ic p ublic s, an o rg an iz atio n is lik ely to d ev elo p g oals desir e d by both th e org an iz atio n an d its public s an d to ach ie v e th ose goals becau se it sh are s th e goals an d co lla b ora te s w ith public s. Sim ila rly , C EO s em phasiz ed th e v alu e o f p ublic re la tio ns in h elp in g th e o rg an iz atio n d eal w ith cris e s a n d c o nflic ts w ith a ctiv is t g ro ups.

Alth ough w e co nclu ded th at it is dif fic u lt to pla ce a m oneta ry valu e on re la tio nsh ip s w ith p ublic s an d th e o uts id e p ers p ectiv e o f p ublic re la tio ns, o ur in te rv ie w s w ith C EO s an d se n io r p ublic re la tio ns o ffic ers re v eale d n um ero us ex am ple s o f h ow p ublic re la tio ns h ad re d uced th e co sts o f litig atio n, re g ula tio n, le g is la tio n, a n d n eg ativ e p ublic ity c au se d b y p oor r e la tio nsh ip s, i s su es, a n d c ris e s; re d uced th e ris k of m ak in g decis io ns th at affe ct dif fe re n t sta k eh old ers ; or in cre ase d re ven ue b y p ro vid in g p ro ducts an d se rv ic es n eed ed b y sta k eh old ers .

Those ex am ple s p ro vid ed p ow erfu l q ualita tiv e ev id en ce o f th e v alu e o f g ood re la tio nsh ip s w ith s tr a te g ic p ublic s.

In ad ditio n to ex pla in in g th e v alu e o f co m munic atio n, th e E xcelle n ce stu dy pro vid ed so lid th eo ry an d em pir ic al ev id en ce o f h ow th e fu nctio n sh ould b e org an iz ed to m ax im iz e th is valu e. T he ch ara cte ris tic s of an ex celle n t public re la tio ns fu nctio n can b e p la ced in to fo ur cate g orie s, each co nta in in g se v era l ch ara cte ris tic s t h at c an b e a u dite d .

For public re la tio ns to co ntr ib ute to org an iz atio nal effe ctiv en ess, th e org an iz atio n m ust e m pow er p ublic re la tio ns a s a c ritic al m an ag em en t fu nctio n.

Em pow erm en t o f t h e p ublic r e la tio ns f u nctio n i n clu des f o ur c h ara cte ris tic s:

1.

The se n io r c o m munic a tio n e xecu tiv e is in vo lv ed w ith th e str a te g ic managem en t pro cesse s of th e org aniz a tio n, and co m munic a tio n pro gra m s a re d evelo ped fo r str a te g ic p ublic s id en tifie d th ro ugh th is pro cess.

Public re la tio ns co ntr ib ute s to str a te g ic m an ag em en t by sc an nin g th e en vir o nm en t to id en tif y th e public s affe cte d by th e co nse q uen ces o f d ecis io ns o r t h at m ig ht a ffe ct t h e o utc o m e o f d ecis io ns.

An ex celle n t public re la tio ns dep artm en t co m munic ate s w ith th ese 38 public s to b rin g th eir v oic es in to s tr a te g ic m an ag em en t, th us m ak in g it possib le f o r p ublic s to p artic ip ate in o rg an iz atio nal d ecis io ns th at a ffe ct th em .

2.

Com munic a tio n pro gra m s org aniz e d by excelle n t dep artm en ts to co m munic a te w ith s tr a te g ic p ublic s a ls o a re m anaged s tr a te g ic a lly .

To be m an ag ed str a te g ic ally m ean s th at th ese pro gra m s are base d on fo rm ativ e re se arc h , th at th ey h av e c o ncre te a n d m easu ra b le o bje ctiv es, an d th at th ey a re e v alu ate d e ith er fo rm ally o r in fo rm ally . In a d ditio n, th e co m munic atio n sta ff can pro vid e ev id en ce to sh ow th at th ese pro gra m s a ch ie v ed th eir s h ort- te rm o bje ctiv es a n d im pro ved lo ng-te rm re la tio nsh ip s b etw een t h e o rg an iz atio n a n d i ts p ublic s.

3.

The se n io r p ublic re la tio ns e xecu tiv e is a m em ber o f th e d om in ant co alitio n o f th e o rg aniz a tio n o r h as a d ir e ct r e p ortin g r e la tio nsh ip to se n io r managers who are part of th e dom in ant co alitio n.

The co m munic atio n fu nctio n se ld om w ill hav e th e pow er to affe ct key org an iz atio nal d ecis io ns u nle ss th e c h ie f c o m munic atio n o ffic er is p art of o r h as a ccess t o t h e g ro up o f s e n io r m an ag ers w ith t h e g re ate st p ow er in t h e o rg an iz atio n.

4.

Div ersity is e m bodie d in a ll p ublic r e la tio ns r o le s.

The p rin cip le o f re q uis ite varie ty su ggests th at org an iz atio ns need as m uch div ers ity in sid e a s i n t h eir e n vir o nm en t i f t h ey a re t o i n te ra ct s u ccessfu lly w ith a ll str a te g ic ele m en ts of th eir en vir o nm en t. Excelle n t public re la tio ns dep artm en ts em pow er b oth m en an d w om en in all ro le s as w ell as pra ctitio ners o f d iv ers e r a cia l, e th nic , a n d c u ltu ra l b ack gro unds.

Com munic a to r R ole s Public re la tio ns re se arc h ers h av e id en tif ie d tw o m ajo r ro le s th at c o m munic ato rs pla y in org an iz atio ns: th e m an ag er an d te ch nic ia n ro le s. Com munic atio n te ch nic ia n s are esse n tia l to carry out m ost of th e day -to -d ay co m munic atio n activ itie s o f p ublic r e la tio ns d ep artm en ts , a n d m an y p ra ctitio ners p la y b oth r o le s.

In le ss e x celle n t d ep artm en ts , h ow ev er, a ll o f th e c o m munic atio n p ra ctitio ners — in clu din g th e s e n io r p ra ctitio ner— are te ch nic ia n s. If th e s e n io r c o m munic ato r is not a m an ag er, it is not possib le fo r public re la tio ns to be em pow ere d as a man ag em en t fu nctio n. T hre e c h ara cte ris tic s o f e x celle n ce in p ublic re la tio ns a re re la te d t o t h e m an ag eria l r o le :

1.

The co m munic a tio n u nit is h ea ded b y a str a te g ic m anager ra th er th an a te ch nic ia n or an adm in is tr a tiv e m anager.

Excelle n t public re la tio ns u nits m ust h av e a t le ast o ne se n io r c o m munic atio n m an ag er who c o ncep tu aliz es a n d d ir e cts c o m munic atio n p ro gra m s. O th erw is e , mem bers of th e dom in an t co alitio n w ho hav e little know le d ge of co m munic atio n m an ag em en t w ill s u pply th is d ir e ctio n. I n a d ditio n, th e 39 Excelle n ce stu dy dis tin guis h ed betw een a str a te g ic m an ag er an d an ad m in is tr a tiv e m an ag er. A dm in is tr a tiv e m an ag ers ty pic ally m an ag e day -to -d ay o pera tio ns o f th e c o m munic atio n fu nctio n, p ers o nnel, a n d th e budget; th ey gen era lly are su perv is o rs of te ch nic ia n s. S tr a te g ic man ag ers p ro vid e c o m munic atio n str a te g ie s th at su pport th e b usin ess goals . I f t h e s e n io r p ublic r e la tio ns o ffic er i s a n a d m in is tr a tiv e m an ag er, th e d ep artm en t u su ally w ill n ot b e e x celle n t.

2.

The s e n io r c o m munic a tio n e xecu tiv e o r o th ers in th e p ublic r e la tio ns unit m ust h ave th e kn ow le d ge n eed ed fo r a str a te g ic ro le .

Excelle n t public re la tio ns p ro gra m s a re s ta ffe d b y p ra ctitio ners w ho h av e g ain ed th e k now le d ge n eed ed to c arry o ut th e s tr a te g ic m an ag er ro le th ro ugh univ ers ity e d ucatio n, c o ntin uin g e d ucatio n, o r s e lf -s tu dy.

3.

Both m en a nd w om en m ust h ave eq ual o pportu nity to o ccu py th e manageria l ro le .

The m ajo rity of public re la tio ns pro fe ssio nals are wom en . If w om en are not co nsid ere d fo r m an ag eria l ro le s, th e co m munic atio n fu nctio n is dim in is h ed becau se m an y of th e m ost know le d geab le p ra ctitio ners a re e x clu ded fro m th at ro le . W hen th at is th e c ase , th e s e n io r p ositio n in th e c o m munic atio n d ep artm en t o fte n is fille d by so m eo ne fro m an oth er m an ag eria l fu nctio n w ho has little know le d ge o f p ublic r e la tio ns.

Org an iz a tio n o f t h e C om munic a tio n F unctio n an d I ts R ela tio n sh ip t o O th er M an agem en t Functio n s Man y org an iz atio ns hav e a sin gle dep artm en t dev ote d to all co m munic atio n fu nctio ns. O th ers hav e se p ara te dep artm en ts fo r pro gra m s aim ed at dif fe re n t public s su ch as jo urn alis ts , em plo yees, th e lo cal co m munity , o r th e fin an cia l co m munity . S till o th ers p la ce c o m munic atio n u nder a n oth er m an ag eria l fu nctio n su ch a s m ark etin g, h um an re so urc es, le g al, o r fin an ce. M an y o rg an iz atio ns a ls o co ntr a ct w ith o r c o nsu lt w ith o uts id e f ir m s f o r a ll o r s o m e o f t h eir c o m munic atio n pro gra m s o r f o r s u ch c o m munic atio n te ch niq ues a s a n nual r e p orts o r n ew sle tte rs .

Tw o c h ara cte ris tic s a re r e la te d t o t h e o rg an iz atio n o f t h e f u nctio n:

1.

Public r e la tio ns s h ould b e a n i n te g ra te d c o m munic a tio n f u nctio n.

An ex celle n t p ublic re la tio ns fu nctio n in te g ra te s c o m munic atio n p ro gra m s in to a sin gle dep artm en t or pro vid es a m ech an is m fo r co ord in atin g pro gra m s m an ag ed by dif fe re n t dep artm en ts . O nly in an in te g ra te d sy ste m i s i t p ossib le f o r p ublic r e la tio ns t o d ev elo p n ew c o m munic atio n pro gra m s fo r c h an gin g str a te g ic p ublic s a n d to m ove re so urc es fro m pro gra m s d esig ned f o r f o rm erly s tr a te g ic p ublic s t o t h e n ew p ro gra m s.

40 2.

Com munic a tio n sh ould be a m anagem en t fu nctio n se p ara te fr o m oth er fu nctio ns.

Even th ough th e c o m munic atio n f u nctio n is in te g ra te d , it s h ould n ot b e p la ced u nder a m an ag em en t f u nctio n s u ch a s m ark etin g or h um an r e so urc es. W hen t h e p ublic r e la tio ns f u nctio n i s s u blim ate d t o oth er fu nctio ns, it c an not b e m an ag ed str a te g ic ally b ecau se it c an not move re so urc es fro m o ne s tr a te g ic p ublic to a n oth er— as a n in te g ra te d public r e la tio ns f u nctio n c an .

Mod els o f P ublic R ela tio n s Public re la tio ns sc h ola rs hav e co nducte d ex te n siv e re se arc h on th e ex te n t to whic h o rg an iz atio ns p ra ctic e fo ur m odels o f p ublic re la tio ns— fo ur ty pic al w ay s of c o ncep tu aliz in g a n d c o nductin g th e c o m munic atio n fu nctio n— an d to id en tif y whic h o f th ese m odels p ro vid es a n orm ativ e f ra m ew ork f o r e ffe ctiv e a n d e th ic al public re la tio ns. These m odels are th e (1 ) tw o-w ay sy m metr ic al m odel of dia lo gue, c o lla b ora tio n, a n d p ublic p artic ip atio n; (2 ) p re ss a g en tr y (e m phasiz in g fa v ora b le public ity ); (3 ) public in fo rm atio n (d is c lo sin g accu ra te , but m ostly fa v ora b le , in fo rm atio n an d co nductin g n o re se arc h o r o th er fo rm o f tw o-w ay co m munic atio n); o r (4 ) tw o-w ay a sy m metr ic al (e m phasiz in g th e in te re sts o f th e org an iz atio n a n d e x clu din g th e in te re sts o f p ublic s). T he tw o-w ay sy m metr ic al model p ro duces b ette r lo ng-te rm re la tio nsh ip s w ith p ublic s th an d o th e o th er models . S ym metr ic al p ro gra m s b ala n ce th e in te re sts o f o rg an iz atio ns a n d p ublic s in s o cie ty .

The r e se arc h f o r t h e E xcelle n ce s tu dy r e fin ed o ur u nders ta n din g o f t h ese m odels by id en tif y in g fo ur dim en sio ns th at underlie th em : (1 ) sy m metr ic al or asy m metr ic al, (2 ) tw o-w ay o r o ne-w ay , (3 ) m ed ia te d o r in te rp ers o nal, a n d (4 ) eth ic al or uneth ic al. The tw o-w ay sy m metr ic al m odel em bodie s th e m ost desir a b le of th ese ch ara cte ris tic s: sy m metr ic al, tw o-w ay , both m ed ia te d an d in te rp ers o nal, a n d e th ic al. T he o th er m odels p osse ss so m e b ut n ot a ll o f th ese ch ara cte ris tic s.

Four c h ara cte ris tic s o f E xcelle n ce, th ere fo re , a re re la te d to m odels o f p ublic re la tio ns:

1.

The p ublic r e la tio ns d ep artm en t a n d th e d om in an t c o alitio n s h are th e world vie w t h at t h e c o m munic atio n d ep artm en t s h ould b ase i ts g oals a n d its co m munic atio n activ itie s on th e tw o-w ay sy m metr ic al m odel of public r e la tio ns.

2.

Com munic atio n p ro gra m s d ev elo ped f o r s p ecif ic p ublic s a re b ase d o n tw o-w ay sy m metr ic al str a te g ie s fo r build in g an d main ta in in g re la tio nsh ip s.

3.

The s e n io r p ublic r e la tio ns e x ecu tiv e o r o th ers in th e p ublic r e la tio ns unit m ust h av e th e p ro fe ssio nal k now le d ge n eed ed to p ra ctic e th e tw o- 41 way s y m metr ic al m odel.

4.

The org an iz atio n sh ould hav e a sy m metr ic al sy ste m of in te rn al co m munic atio n.

A s y m metr ic al s y ste m o f in te rn al c o m munic atio n is b ase d o n th e p rin cip le s o f em plo yee em pow erm en t an d partic ip atio n in decis io n m ak in g. M an ag ers an d oth er em plo yees en gag e in dia lo gue an d lis te n to each oth er. In te rn al m ed ia dis c lo se r e le v an t i n fo rm atio n n eed ed b y e m plo yees t o u nders ta n d t h eir r o le s i n t h e org an iz atio n. S ym metr ic al c o m munic atio n fo ste rs a p artic ip ativ e ra th er th an a n au th orita ria n c u ltu re a s w ell a s g ood r e la tio nsh ip s w ith e m plo yees.

Exte n din g t h e E xcelle n ce T heo ry t o a G lo b al Theo ry Thro ugh s e v era l s tu die s c o nducte d a ro und th e w orld , th e E xcelle n ce th eo ry h as been e x pan ded in to a g lo bal th eo ry th at in clu des gen eric p rin cip le s a n d sp ecific applic a tio ns.

T his th eo ry fa lls b etw een a th eo ry th at su ggests an o rg an iz atio n sh ould pra ctic e public re la tio ns in ex actly th e sa m e w ay in ev ery co untr y — usu ally th e w ay it is p ra ctic ed in th e co untr y w here th e h ead quarte rs o f th e multin atio nal org an iz atio n is lo cate d — an d a th eo ry su ggestin g th at public re la tio ns m ust b e p ra ctic ed d if fe re n tly in e v ery c o untr y b ecau se o f c u ltu ra l a n d oth er c o nte x tu al c o nditio ns.

Gen eric p rin cip le s m ean s th at in a n a b str a ct se n se , th e p rin cip le s o f p ublic re la tio ns a re th e sa m e w orld w id e.

Specific a pplic a tio ns mean s t h at t h ese p rin cip le s m ust b e a p plie d d if fe re n tly i n d if fe re n t s e ttin gs.

As a s ta rtin g p oin t fo r re se arc h , w e p ro pose d th at th e c h ara cte ris tic s id en tif ie d in th e E xcelle n ce stu dy are g en eric p rin cip le s. W e als o p ro pose d th at p ublic re la tio ns p ro fe ssio nals m ust t a k e s ix c o nte x tu al c o nditio ns i n to a cco unt w hen t h ey ap ply th ese prin cip le s: cu ltu re , in clu din g la n guag e; th e politic al sy ste m ; th e eco nom ic s y ste m ; th e m ed ia s y ste m ; th e le v el o f e co nom ic d ev elo pm en t; a n d th e ex te n t a n d n atu re o f a ctiv is m .

Our re se arc h a n d th at o f o th ers h as p ro vid ed e v id en ce s u pportin g th is th eo ry .

The m ost ex te n siv e re se arc h w as in S lo ven ia . W e re p lic ate d th e quan tita tiv e portio n o f th e E xcelle n ce stu dy in th ir ty S lo ven ia n fir m s an d fo und th e sa m e clu ste r o f c h ara cte ris tic s a s w e d id in th e U nite d S ta te s, C an ad a, a n d th e U nite d Kin gdom in s p ite o f a d if fe re n t c u ltu ra l, p olitic al, a n d e co nom ic c o nte x t ( G ru nig , Gru nig , & V er i , 1998). T o deal w ith su ch dif fe re n ces, co m munic ato rs in Slo ven ia had to ap ply th e gen eric prin cip le s dif fe re n tly th an in th e A nglo co untr ie s. F or e x am ple , w e le arn ed th at c o m munic ato rs n eed ed to c o unse l C EO s to e m pow er p ublic r e la tio ns m an ag ers . T hey a ls o d ev elo ped c o ntin uin g e d ucatio n fo r c o m munic ato rs to d eal w ith th eir la ck o f p ublic r e la tio ns k now le d ge, a n d th ey had to em phasiz e em plo yee re la tio ns becau se of th e neg ativ e co nte x t in sid e Slo ven ia n o rg an iz atio ns.

42 The S tr a te g ic M an agem en t R ole o f P ublic Rela tio n s Alth ough th e E xcelle n ce th eo ry in co rp ora te s a n um ber o f m id dle -ra n ge th eo rie s, its m ost im porta n t c o m ponen t is th e s tr a te g ic ro le o f p ublic re la tio ns. S in ce th e co m ple tio n o f th e E xcelle n ce stu dy, sc h ola rs h av e c o ntin ued to d o re se arc h to help p ro fe ssio nals u nders ta n d a n d f u lf ill t h is r o le .

To c o ntr ib ute to str a te g ic m an ag em en t, p ublic re la tio ns sh ould b e a n in te g ra l part o f th e m an ag em en t o f e v ery o rg an iz atio n. T he p ublic r e la tio ns f u nctio n h elp s th e org an iz atio n in te ra ct with its sta k eh old ers both to acco m plis h th e org an iz atio n’s m is sio n an d to beh av e in a so cia lly re sp onsib le m an ner. In a str a te g ic ro le , co m munic ato rs m an ag e co m munic atio n w ith to p m anagers an d with public s.

T hey m an ag e c o m munic atio n b etw een m an ag em en t a n d p ublic s to build re la tio nsh ip s w ith th e p ublic s th at a re m ost lik ely to a ffe ct th e o rg an iz atio n or th at are m ost affe cte d by th e org an iz atio n. C om munic atio n pro cesse s th at fa cilita te dia lo gue am ong man ag ers an d public s in flu en ce org aniz a tio nal beh avio rs.

D ia lo gue a m ong m an ag ers a n d p ublic s, in tu rn , c an p ro duce lo ng-te rm re la tio nsh ip s d esc rib ed b y ch ara cte ris tic s re se arc h ers (G ru nig & H uan g, 2 000; Gru nig & H ung, 2 002) h av e id en tif ie d a n d d efin ed : tr u st, m utu ality o f c o ntr o l, co m mitm en t, a n d sa tis fa ctio n. R ela tio nsh ip s c an b e m easu re d a n d e v alu ate d to dete rm in e th e lo ng-te rm effe ctiv en ess an d valu e of public re la tio ns (H on & Gru nig , 1 999; G ru nig , 2 002).

An ex celle n t public re la tio ns sta ff can not se rv e th is ro le , how ev er, unle ss re se arc h a n d m easu re m en t a re a n in te g ra l p art o f th e f u nctio n. F orm ativ e r e se arc h is necessa ry to id en tif y str a te g ic public s w ith w hic h an org an iz atio n need s re la tio nsh ip s an d to dete rm in e how to cu ltiv ate re la tio nsh ip s with th em .

Com munic ato rs c an u se G ru nig ’s ( 1 997) s itu atio nal t h eo ry o f p ublic s— esp ecia lly as it h as b een u pdate d ( K im , G ru nig , & N i, 2 010)— to s e g m en t s ta k eh old ers in to public s. T he E xcelle n ce stu dy sh ow ed th at th e m ost co m mon cate g orie s of sta k eh old ers a re e m plo yees, c u sto m ers , in vesto rs , th e c o m munity , g overn m en t, mem bers o f a sso cia tio ns a n d n onpro fit o rg an iz atio ns, th e m ed ia , a n d d onors to nonpro fit org an iz atio ns. T he situ atio nal th eo ry se g m en ts th ese cate g orie s of sta k eh old ers in to public s w ith dif fe re n t le v els of activ ity , in clu din g activ is t (b elo ngin g to a ctiv is t g ro ups), a ctiv e, p assiv e, o r n onpublic . T he m ore a ctiv e th e public , th e m ore lik ely it is th at c o m munic atio n p ro gra m s w ill h av e a n e ffe ct.

Evalu ativ e re se arc h th en is necessa ry to dete rm in e th e effe ctiv en ess of co m munic atio n pro gra m s. Evalu ativ e re se arc h can dete rm in e th e sh ort- te rm effe cts o f c o m munic atio n p ro gra m s o n th e c o gnitio ns, a ttitu des, a n d b eh av io rs o f both p ublic s an d m an ag em en t an d th e lo ng-te rm effe cts o f co m munic atio n o n org an iz atio n–public r e la tio nsh ip s ( G ru nig , 2 008).

43 New R ese a rch t o E nhan ce t h e S tr a te g ic R ole of t h e C om munic a tio n F unctio n Alth ough re se arc h -b ase d know le d ge of public s an d th e ev alu atio n of public re la tio ns h as b een av aila b le fo r y ears , o th er co ncep ts an d to ols re la te d to th e str a te g ic m an ag em en t r o le o f p ublic r e la tio ns h av e b een d ev elo ped w ith in th e la st tw en ty y ears . S om e e x am ple s o f r e se arc h t o d ev elo p t h ese n ew c o ncep ts a n d t o ols in clu de:

Envir o nm en ta l s c a nnin g:

R ese arc h to id en tif y p ro ble m s, p ublic s, a n d is su es an d to ev alu ate in fo rm atio n so urc es to brin g in fo rm atio n in to th e org an iz atio n ( C han g, 2 000).

Public s:

R ese arc h to d ev elo p th e s itu atio nal th eo ry a n d to e x pla in th e s o cia l natu re o f p ublic s ( A ld oory , 2 001; K im , 2 006; K im , G ru nig , & N i, 2 010; S ha, 1995).

Scen ario b uild in g:

R ese arc h to d ev elo p th is te ch niq ue fo r ex pla in in g th e beh av io r o f p ublic s to m an ag em en t a n d p ote n tia l is su es c re ate d b y p ublic s (S ung, 2 004).

Rela tio nsh ip cu ltiv a tio n str a te g ie s:

R ese arc h to ex pan d th e co ncep ts of sy m metr ic al an d asy m metr ic al co m munic atio n to id en tif y str a te g ie s fo r cu ltiv atin g re la tio nsh ip s th at pro duce hig h-q uality re la tio nsh ip s with sta k eh old er p ublic s ( H ung, 2 002, 2 004; R hee, 2 004).

In te ra ctio ns o f re la tio nsh ip s a nd re p uta tio n:

P ublic re la tio ns p ra ctitio ners an d m an ag em en t sc h ola rs hav e paid a gre at deal of atte n tio n to an org an iz atio n’s re p uta tio n in re cen t y ears , in th e b elie f th at re p uta tio n is a n in ta n gib le asse t th at ad ds both m oneta ry an d nonm oneta ry valu e to an org an iz atio n. O ur re se arc h (G ru nig & H ung, 2 002; Y an g, 2 005; Y an g & Gru nig , 2 005) h as s h ow n, h ow ev er, th at r e p uta tio ns a re la rg ely a b ypro duct of man ag em en t beh av io r an d th e quality of org an iz atio n–public re la tio nsh ip s. T hus, atte n din g to re la tio nsh ip s w ill u ltim ate ly im pro ve an org an iz atio n’s r e p uta tio n. R ep uta tio n, h ow ev er, c an not b e m an ag ed d ir e ctly ; it is m an ag ed b y in flu en cin g th e b eh av io r o f m an ag em en t a n d th ro ugh th e cu ltiv atio n o f r e la tio nsh ip s.

Develo pm en t o f a n e th ic a l f r a m ew ork f o r p ublic r e la tio ns p ra ctitio ners t o u se as t h ey p artic ip ate i n s tr a te g ic m an ag em en t ( B ow en , 2 000, 2 004).

Em pow erm en t o f th e p ublic r e la tio ns fu nctio n.

R ese arc h to c la rif y th e n atu re of th e dom in an t co alitio n in an org an iz atio n an d how public re la tio ns pra ctitio ners b eco m e p art o f o r g ain a ccess t o e m pow ere d c o alitio ns ( B erg er, 2005).

44 Specia liz e d are a s of public re la tio ns.

R ese arc h to ex te n d th e gen eric prin cip le s o f e x celle n ce to s p ecia liz ed a re as o f p ublic r e la tio ns, s u ch a s f u nd ra is in g (K elly , 1991), in vesto r re la tio ns (S ch ic k in ger, 1998), em plo yee re la tio ns (K im , 2 005), c o m munity re la tio ns (R hee, 2 004), a n d g overn m en t re la tio ns ( C hen , 2 005).

Public r e la tio ns a nd g lo bal s tr a te g y.

R ese arc h to d ev elo p th e g lo bal th eo ry of g en eric p rin cip le s th at can b e ap plie d in m an y cu ltu re s an d p olitic al- eco nom ic se ttin gs an d sp ecif ic ap plic atio ns to ad ap t th em to dif fe re n t co nte x ts (G ru nig , G ru nig , & V er i , 1 998; V er i , G ru nig , & G ru nig , 1 996; Wak efie ld , 1997, 2000). R ese arc h ers als o hav e ap plie d th is th eo ry to a multin atio nal m ilita ry org an iz atio n (N ATO ) (V an D yke, 2005), public dip lo m acy p ro gra m s o f g overn m en ts fo r p ublic s in o th er co untr ie s (Y un, 2005), a n d g lo baliz ed a n d lo caliz ed re la tio nsh ip s tr a te g ie s o f m ultin atio nal org an iz atio ns ( N i, 2 006).

Refe re n ces Ald oory , L . (2 001). M ak in g health co m munic atio ns m ean in gfu l fo r w om en :

Facto rs th at in flu en ce in volv em en t.

Jo urn al o f P ublic R ela tio ns R ese a rc h , 13, 163–185.

Berg er, B . K . (2 005). P ow er o ver, p ow er w ith , a n d p ow er to p ublic re la tio ns:

Critic al re fle ctio ns on public re la tio ns, th e dom in an t co alitio n, an d activ is m .

Jo urn al o f P ublic R ela tio ns R ese a rc h , 1 7, 5 –28.

Bow en , S . A . (2 000).

A th eo ry o f e th ic a l is su es m anagem en t: C ontr ib utio ns o f Kantia n d eo nto lo gy to p ublic r e la tio ns’ e th ic s a nd d ecis io n m akin g . U npublis h ed docto ra l d is se rta tio n, U niv ers ity o f M ary la n d, C olle g e P ark .

Bow en , S . A . ( 2 004). E xpan sio n o f e th ic s a s th e te n th g en eric p rin cip le o f p ublic re la tio ns e x celle n ce: A K an tia n th eo ry a n d m odel fo r m an ag in g e th ic al is su es.

Jo urn al o f P ublic R ela tio ns R ese a rc h , 1 6, 6 5–92.

Chan g, Y .- C . (2 000).

A n orm ativ e exp lo ra tio n in to en vir o nm en ta l sc a nnin g in public re la tio ns . U npublis h ed m aste r’s th esis , U niv ers ity o f M ary la n d, C olle g e Park .

Chen , Y . R . (2 005).

Effe ctiv e g overn m en t a ffa ir s in a n era o f m ark etiz a tio n:

Str a te g ic i s su es m anagem en t, b usin ess l o bbyin g, a nd r e la tio nsh ip m anagem en t b y multin atio nal co rp ora tio ns in Chin a . Unpublis h ed docto ra l dis se rta tio n, Univ ers ity o f M ary la n d, C olle g e P ark .

Dozie r, D . M ., w ith G ru nig , L . A ., & G ru nig , J . E . (1 995).

Manager’s g uid e to excelle n ce in p ublic re la tio ns a nd co m munic a tio n m anagem en t . M ah w ah , N J:

45 Law re n ce E rlb au m .

Fle is h er, C . S . (1 995).

Public a ffa ir s b en ch m ark in g . W ash in gto n, D C: P ublic Affa ir s C ouncil.

Gru nig , J. E . (1 992). (E d.) .

Excelle n ce in p ublic re la tio ns a nd c o m munic a tio n managem en t . H ills d ale , N J: L aw re n ce E rlb au m .

Gru nig , J . E . (1 997). A s itu atio nal th eo ry o f p ublic s: C oncep tu al h is to ry , re cen t ch alle n ges an d n ew re se arc h . In D . M oss, T . M acM an us, & D . V er i (E ds.) , Public re la tio ns re se a rc h : A n in te rn atio nal persp ectiv e (p p. 3–46). L ondon:

In te rn atio nal T hom so n B usin ess P re ss.

Gru nig , J. E . (2 002).

Qualita tiv e m eth ods fo r a sse ssin g re la tio nsh ip s b etw een org aniz a tio ns and public s . G ain esv ille , FL : In stitu te fo r Public Rela tio ns, Com mis sio n o n P R M easu re m en t a n d E valu atio n.

Gru nig , J . E . ( 2 008). C oncep tu aliz in g q uan tita tiv e r e se arc h in p ublic r e la tio ns. I n B. V an R ule r, A . T kala c V er i , & D . V er i ( E ds.) , Public r e la tio ns m etr ic s (p p.

88–119). N ew Y ork : R outle d ge.

Gru nig , J. E ., & H uan g, Y . H . (2 000). F ro m org an iz atio nal effe ctiv en ess to re la tio nsh ip in dic ato rs : A nte ced en ts o f re la tio nsh ip s, p ublic re la tio ns str a te g ie s, an d re la tio nsh ip o utc o m es. In J . A . L ed in gham & S . D . B ru nin g (E ds.) , Public re la tio ns a s re la tio nsh ip m anagem en t: A re la tio nal a ppro ach to th e stu dy a nd pra ctic e o f p ublic r e la tio ns ( p p. 2 3–53). M ah w ah , N J: L aw re n ce E rlb au m .

Gru nig , J. E ., & H ung, C . J. (2 002, M arc h ). T he effe ct of re la tio nsh ip s on re p uta tio n a n d re p uta tio n o n re la tio nsh ip s: A c o gnitiv e, b eh av io ra l s tu dy. P ap er pre se n te d to th e In te rn atio nal, In te rd is c ip lin ary Public Rela tio ns Rese arc h Confe re n ce, M ia m i, F L .

Gru nig , L . A ., G ru nig , J . E ., & D ozie r, D . M . (2 002).

Excelle n t p ublic r e la tio ns and effe ctiv e org aniz a tio ns: A stu dy of co m munic a tio n m anagem en t in th re e co untr ie s . M ah w ah , N J: L aw re n ce E rlb au m .

Gru nig , L . A ., G ru nig , J. E ., & V er i , D . (1 998). A re th e IA BC’s e x celle n ce prin cip le s gen eric ? C om parin g Slo ven ia an d th e U nite d Sta te s, th e U nite d Kin gdom a n d C an ad a.

Jo urn al o f C om munic a tio n M anagem en t , 2 , 3 35–356.

Hon, L . C ., & G ru nig , J. E . (1 999).

Guid elin es fo r m ea su rin g re la tio nsh ip s in public r e la tio ns . G ain esv ille , F L : In stitu te fo r P ublic R ela tio ns, C om mis sio n o n PR M easu re m en t a n d E valu atio n.

Hung, C . J . ( 2 002).

The in te rp la ys o f r e la tio nsh ip ty p es, r e la tio nsh ip c u ltiv a tio n, and re la tio nsh ip outc o m es: How multin atio nal and Taiw anese co m panie s pra ctic e public re la tio ns and org aniz a tio n-p ublic re la tio nsh ip m anagem en t in Chin a . U npublis h ed d octo ra l d is se rta tio n, U niv ers ity o f M ary la n d, C olle g e P ark .

Hung, C . J. (2 004). C ultu ra l in flu en ce on re la tio nsh ip cu ltiv atio n str a te g ie s:

Multin atio nal c o m pan ie s in C hin a.

Jo urn al o f C om munic a tio n M anagem en t , 8 , 46 264–281.

Kelly , K . S . (1 991).

Fund r a is in g a nd p ublic r e la tio ns . H ills d ale , N J: L aw re n ce Erlb au m .

Kim , H . S . (2 005).

Org aniz a tio nal str u ctu re and in te rn al co m munic a tio n as ante ced en ts of em plo yee-o rg aniz a tio n re la tio nsh ip s in th e co nte xt of org aniz a tio nal ju stic e: A m ultile vel a naly sis . U npublis h ed d octo ra l d is se rta tio n, Univ ers ity o f M ary la n d, C olle g e P ark .

Kim , J.- N . (2 006).

Com munic a nt a ctiv en ess, c o gnitiv e e n tr e p re n eu rsh ip , a nd a situ atio nal th eo ry of pro ble m so lv in g . Unpublis h ed docto ra l dis se rta tio n, Univ ers ity o f M ary la n d, C olle g e P ark .

Kim , J -N ., G ru nig , J . E ., & N i, L . ( 2 010). R eco ncep tu aliz in g th e c o m munic ativ e actio n of public s: A cq uis itio n, se le ctio n, an d tr a n sm is sio n of in fo rm atio n in pro ble m atic situ atio ns.

In te rn atio nal Jo urn al of Str a te g ic C om munic a tio n , 4, 126–154.

Ni, L . ( 2 006).

Exp lo rin g th e v a lu e o f p ublic r e la tio ns in s tr a te g y im ple m en ta tio n:

Em plo yee re la tio ns in th e glo baliz a tio n pro cess . Unpublis h ed docto ra l dis se rta tio n, U niv ers ity o f M ary la n d, C olle g e P ark .

Rep per, F . C . (1 992). H ow c o m munic atio n m an ag ers c an a p ply th e th eo rie s o f ex celle n ce a n d e ffe ctiv en ess. I n J . E . G ru nig ( E d.) , Excelle n ce in p ublic r e la tio ns and co m munic a tio n managem en t (p p. 109–114). Hills d ale , NJ: Law re n ce Erlb au m .

Rhee, Y. (2 004).

The em plo yee-p ublic -o rg aniz a tio n ch ain in re la tio nsh ip managem en t: A c a se s tu dy o f a g overn m en t o rg aniz a tio n . U npublis h ed d octo ra l dis se rta tio n, U niv ers ity o f M ary la n d, C olle g e P ark .

Sha, B . L . ( 1 995).

In te rc u ltu ra l p ublic r e la tio ns: E xp lo rin g c u ltu ra l id en tity a s a mea ns of se g m en tin g public s . Unpublis h ed m aste r’s th esis , Univ ers ity of Mary la n d, C olle g e P ark .

Sch ic k in ger, P . (1 998).

Ele ctr o nic in vesto r re la tio ns: C an n ew m ed ia c lo se th e sy m metr y g ap?

U npublis h ed m aste r’s th esis , U niv ers ity o f M ary la n d, C olle g e Park .

Sung, M . J . ( 2 004).

Tow ard a m odel o f s tr a te g ic m anagem en t o f p ublic r e la tio ns:

Scen ario build in g fr o m a public re la tio ns persp ectiv e . U npublis h ed docto ra l dis se rta tio n, U niv ers ity o f M ary la n d, C olle g e P ark .

Van D yke, M . A . ( 2 005).

Tow ard a t h eo ry o f j u st c o m munic a tio n: A c a se s tu dy o f NATO , m ultin atio nal public re la tio ns, eth ic a l m anagem en t of in te rn atio nal co nflic t . U npublis h ed d octo ra l d is se rta tio n, U niv ers ity o f M ary la n d, C olle g e P ark .

Ver i , D ., G ru nig , L . A ., & G ru nig , J . E . ( 1 996). G lo bal a n d s p ecif ic p rin cip le s o f public r e la tio ns: E vid en ce f ro m S lo ven ia . I n H . M . C ulb erts o n & N . C hen ( E ds.) , In te rn atio nal p ublic r e la tio ns: A c o m para tiv e a naly sis ( p p. 3 1–65). M ah w ah N J:

47 Law re n ce E rlb au m .

Wak efie ld , R . I . ( 1 997).

In te rn atio nal p ublic r e la tio ns: A th eo re tic a l a ppro ach to excelle n ce b ase d o n a w orld w id e D elp hi s tu dy . U npublis h ed d octo ra l d is se rta tio n, Univ ers ity o f M ary la n d, C olle g e P ark .

Wak efie ld , R . I. (2 000). W orld -c la ss public re la tio ns: A m odel fo r effe ctiv e public re la tio ns in th e m ultin atio nal.

Jo urn al o f C om munic a tio n M anagem en t , 5(1 ), 5 9–71.

Yan g, S . U . ( 2 005).

The e ffe ct o f o rg aniz a tio n-p ublic r e la tio nsh ip s o n r e p uta tio n fr o m th e p ersp ectiv e o f p ublic s . U npublis h ed d octo ra l d is se rta tio n, U niv ers ity o f Mary la n d, C olle g e P ark .

Yan g, S . U ., & G ru nig , J . E . ( 2 005). D eco m posin g o rg an iz atio nal r e p uta tio n: T he effe cts o f o rg an iz atio n-p ublic re la tio nsh ip o utc o m es o n c o gnitiv e re p re se n ta tio ns of org an iz atio ns an d ev alu atio ns of org an iz atio nal perfo rm an ce.

Jo urn al of Com munic a tio n M anagem en t , 9 , 2 96–304.

Yun, S . H . (2 005).

Theo ry b uild in g fo r c o m para tiv e p ublic d ip lo m acy fr o m th e persp ectiv es o f p ublic r e la tio ns a nd i n te rn atio nal r e la tio ns: A m acro -c o m para tiv e stu dy of em bassie s in W ash in gto n, D C . U npublis h ed docto ra l dis se rta tio n, Univ ers ity o f M ary la n d, C olle g e P ark .

48 CH APTE R T W O TH E C O RPO RATE C O M MUNIC ATO R A S en io r-L ev el S tr a te g is t Nic k D uru tta Corp ora tio ns a re s u bje ct to th e s a m e c o m munic atio n d ynam ic s a s a n y o th er hum an in te ra ctio n. When ev er peo ple get to geth er— in a pers o nal re la tio nsh ip , a so cia l gro up, or a busin ess ven tu re — co m munic atio n in ev ita b ly h ap pen s. T he la rg er a n d m ore str u ctu re d th e g ro up is , h ow ev er (s u ch a s a c o rp ora tio n o r n onpro fit o rg an iz atio n), th e g re ate r th e n eed fo r co m munic atio n t o b e m an ag ed f o r i t t o b e e ffe ctiv e.

M ost co rp ora tio ns o r la rg e o rg an iz atio ns ack now le d ge, so m etim es g ru dgin gly , t h at c o m munic atio n is im porta n t, y et th e c o ncep t is o fte n m is u nders to od. “ W e n eed m ore c o m munic atio n!” is o fte n h eard in c o rp ora te b oard ro om s w hen th in gs a re g oin g w ro ng. I n f a ct, to o m uch o f th e w ro ng k in d o f c o m munic atio n m ig ht b e t h e p ro ble m .

Execu tiv es w ho d em an d “ m ore c o m munic atio n” u su ally w an t a m ore e ffe ctiv e f lo w of in fo rm atio n in th eir org an iz atio n. T his m ean s se ein g th at th e rig ht i n fo rm atio n g ets to th e r ig ht p eo ple in th e r ig ht w ay . B ut e ach o f th ese e le m en ts c an b e c h alle n gin g a n d c o m ple x . W hat is th e “ rig ht” in fo rm atio n? W ho a re th e “ rig ht” p eo ple ? W hat i s t h e “ rig ht w ay ” t o c o m munic ate w ith t h em ?

The co rp ora te co m munic ato r is th e in div id ual w ho p ro vid es co m pre h en siv e a n sw ers to th ese q uestio ns. T o d o th is , h e o r s h e m ust b e th oro ughly in te g ra te d i n to th e o rg an iz atio n, w ork in g c lo se ly w ith s e n io r a n d m id dle m an ag em en t, r a n k- a n d-file em plo yees, an d o th er k ey p ublic s in th e m ed ia , th e co m munity , an d i n dustr y . T he co m munic ato r need s to know an d unders ta n d th e in fo rm atio n r e q uir e m en ts , c o ncern s, a n d g oals o f th ese a u die n ces to d ev is e a c o m munic atio n s o lu tio n t h at m eets t h e o rg an iz atio n’s g re ate st n eed s.

In th is ch ap te r, w e ex am in e th e ro le of th e co rp ora te co m munic ato r as a s tr a te g is t a n d s e n io r-le v el a d vis e r t o t h e o rg an iz atio n.

A S tr a te g ic R ole 49 To be m ost effe ctiv e, co rp ora te co m munic ato rs m ust pla y a str a te g ic ro le , re g ard le ss o f th e ty pe o f o rg an iz atio n o r c o rp ora tio n in w hic h th ey w ork . T his mean s th at th ey m ust ta k e a b ro ad a n d in -d ep th lo ok a t th e o rg an iz atio n, tr u ly unders ta n d its n eed s, a sse ss w here c o m munic atio n w ould b e m ost e ffe ctiv e, a n d dev elo p a p la n t o m ak e i t h ap pen .

It i s t h e r e sp onsib ility o f t h e c o rp ora te c o m munic ato r t o m an ag e c o m munic atio n th at:

Supports o rg an iz atio nal g oals a n d o bje ctiv es Ensu re s a h ealth y f lo w o f in fo rm atio n in a n d a m ong a ll le v els o f e m plo yees an d m an ag em en t ( hea lth y m ean s th at th e m ost u se fu l in fo rm atio n is f lo w in g to t h e p eo ple w ho n eed i t, w hen t h ey n eed i t) Is c o nsis te n t t h ro ughout a ll t h e o rg an iz atio n’s a ctiv itie s Keep s t h e o rg an iz atio n h onest ( e th ic al b eh av io r i s m ost e ffe ctiv ely s u pporte d by o pen a n d h onest c o m munic atio n) Avoid s o r m itig ate s p ote n tia l c ris e s To c arry o ut th ese r e sp onsib ilitie s m ost e ffe ctiv ely , th e c o m munic ato r m ust b e pro activ e— th at is , h e o r s h e m ust a n tic ip ate n eed s ra th er th an re act w hen n eed s aris e . T his re q uir e s th at co rp ora te co m munic ato rs be se n io r-le v el m an ag ers , work in g a lo ngsid e t h e c h ie f e x ecu tiv e o ffic er ( C EO ) o r p re sid en t a n d o th er s e n io r co rp ora te o ffic ers w hen i s su es a re d is c u sse d a n d k ey b usin ess d ecis io ns a re m ad e.

Com munic ato rs at th is le v el are str a te g is ts ra th er th an ta ctic ia n s; th ey ofte n man ag e o th ers w ho p erfo rm s p ecif ic t a sk s a n d e x ecu te t a ctic s ( D ozie r, 1 992).

Too ofte n , how ev er, co m munic ato rs assu m e a ta ctic al ro le , re sp ondin g to dic ta te d r e q uests : to c re ate a w eb site , f o r e x am ple , o r s e n d o ut a n ew s r e le ase . I n th is m ode, co m munic ato rs are fre q uen tly m ore re activ e th an pro activ e. T his pre v en ts th em fro m ta k in g th e bro ad er vie w necessa ry to asse ss th e co m munic atio n a p pro ach es t h at a re t r u ly n eed ed .

When th ey a re p ositio ned a t a s e n io r s tr a te g is t le v el, c o m munic ato rs a re m ore lik ely to u nders ta n d th e o rg an iz atio n’s tr u e c o m munic atio n n eed s. T hey k now th e org an iz atio n’s g oals a n d o bje ctiv es, e v en if th ese a re n ot e x plic itly sta te d in a str a te g ic p la n nin g d ocu m en t. T hey k now th e h um an a n d in te rp ers o nal d ynam ic s of th e o rg an iz atio n, w hic h u su ally a re n ot e x plic itly sta te d a n yw here . T hey a re aw are o f i s su es a n d c o ncern s a m ong t h e o rg an iz atio n’s e m plo yees, a n d w ith in t h e org an iz atio n’s c o m munity , to w hic h o th er s e n io r m an ag ers m ay n ot h av e a ccess an d a re a b le to id en tif y p ote n tia l o pportu nitie s to a d dre ss th ese is su es a s w ell a s oth er o bsta cle s th at m ay s ta n d in th e w ay . T hey a re a b le to id en tif y a n d h ead o ff lo om in g c ris e s b efo re th ey h it th e fro nt p ag es o f a n ew sp ap er. T hey a re a b le to ad dre ss p ote n tia l e th ic al b re ach es o r c o nflic ts .

50 A S en io r-L ev el A dvis e r In a c o rp ora tio n, t h e p re sid en t o r c h ie f e x ecu tiv e o ffic er o vers e e s a d iz zy in g a rra y of fa cto rs th at co ntr ib ute to th e w ell- b ein g of th e org an iz atio n: re se arc h an d pro ductio n; c u sto m er a n d c lie n t se rv ic e; m ark etin g; e m plo yee re la tio ns; h um an re so urc es; le g al, sa fe ty , an d se cu rity ; fa cilitie s an d asse t p la n nin g; an d m an y more . D ir e cto rs re sp onsib le fo r e ach o f th ese a re as u su ally re p ort d ir e ctly to th e CEO . C om munic atio n is o ne o f th e p rim ary n eed s a C EO m ust a d dre ss, a n d th e co rp ora te c o m munic ato r s h ould b e p ro m in en t a m ong t h e s e n io r a d vis e r s ta ff.

Partic u la rly i n t h e c u rre n t m ed ia -s a tu ra te d e n vir o nm en t, w hen e v en t h e s lig hte st perc eiv ed o rg an iz atio nal m is ste p c an t r ig ger a s to rm o f p ublic i n te re st ( w heth er i n th e m ain str e am m ed ia or th e blo gosp here ), a se n io r co m munic ato r can be a CEO ’s m ost v alu ab le a d vis e r. T he s e n io r c o m munic ato r s h ould w ork c lo se ly to care fu lly c o nsid er (a n d fo re se e, w hen p ossib le ) th e im plic atio ns o f a n y a ctio ns, pla n ned o r u npla n ned , o n t a rg et p ublic s.

Acco rd in gly , th e c o rp ora te c o m munic ato r sh ould b e o ne o f th e le ast is o la te d mem bers o f th e se n io r m an ag em en t te am . W hile so m e ro le s, su ch a s sa le s a n d mark etin g, mig ht ex is t la rg ely in th eir ow n silo s, it is esse n tia l th at co m munic ato rs b e in c o ntin ual c o nta ct w ith a ll p arts o f th e o rg an iz atio n. T hat is th e o nly w ay t h ey c an g ain t h e k now le d ge n ecessa ry t o m ak e s tr a te g ic d ecis io ns.

A C om munic a to r’s P ortfo lio o f S kills Whic h s k ills s h ould a c o rp ora te c o m munic ato r b rin g to h er o r h is ro le ? W e a re aw are o f th e n eed fo r th e c ritic al a b ility to s tr a te g ic ally a n aly ze a n o rg an iz atio n an d re co gniz e a re as in w hic h m ore e ffe ctiv e c o m munic atio n is n eed ed . B ut th e co m munic ato r’s t o ol k it m ust c o nta in m an y o th er s k ills .

A c o rp ora te c o m munic ato r m ust h av e b asic c o m munic atio n s k ills — th at is , b e ab le to w rite a n d s p eak w ell. Y et to o m an y s e n io r-le v el c o m munic ato rs m ay b e effe ctiv e o n a s tr a te g ic le v el y et fre eze w hen m ak in g a s p eech o r a tte m ptin g to write a w ell- c ra fte d s e n te n ce. B ecau se c o m munic ato rs n ev er k now w hic h a sp ect of co m munic atio n th ey m ay need to ad dre ss, a re p erto ir e of basic sk ills is esse n tia l:

Writin g a nd e d itin g.

The a b ility to w rite w ell is th e m ost c ritic al a n d b asic co m munic atio n sk ill. W ritin g w ell m ean s unders ta n din g th e basic s of gra m mar, s p ellin g, a n d p unctu atio n a n d h av in g t h e a b ility t o p re se n t a n i s su e or t o pic i n a w ay t h at i s u nders ta n dab le t o t h e t a rg et a u die n ce— wheth er i t b e a b ro ad g ro up o f p eo ple w ith v ary in g le v els o f e d ucatio n a n d b ack gro und o r a n arro w er g ro up w ith sp ecif ic c o m munic atio n n eed s. It a ls o m ean s b ein g ab le to c ap tu re a n a u die n ce’s a tte n tio n, p ers u ad e a n d c o nvin ce th em , a n d 51 tr ig ger t h eir e m otio ns. G ood e d itin g r e q uir e s m uch o f t h e s a m e k now le d ge a s good w ritin g, b ut i s a d is tin ct s k ill. ( T here a re g re at e d ito rs w ho a re n ot g re at write rs , a n d v ic e v ers a .) Desig n s e n se .

The w id e r a n ge o f c o m munic atio n to ols th at a c o m munic ato r use s— fro m w eb site s t o p re ss m ate ria ls t o P ow erP oin t d eck s— ofte n i n volv es mak in g g ra p hic d esig n d ecis io ns. A lth ough a c o m munic ato r d oes n ot n eed t o be a d esig ner, a b asic u nders ta n din g o f d esig n p rin cip le s c an b e i n valu ab le t o pla n nin g a n d m an ag in g t h is f u nctio n.

Spea kin g.

Som etim es th e fo cu s o n w ritte n c o m munic atio n o vers h ad ow s th e im porta n ce o f g ood o ra l c o m munic atio n. A g ood c o m munic ato r k now s h ow to p ut w ord s to geth er fo r m ax im um u nders ta n din g a n d e ffe ct, in s p eech a s well a s in te x t. H e o r sh e m ust b e a b le to sp eak e ffe ctiv ely , w heth er in a priv ate c o nvers a tio n, a d dre ssin g a ro om fu l o f p eo ple , o r in a n in te rv ie w o n natio nal t e le v is io n.

Lis te n in g.

The a b ility to a ctiv ely lis te n — to a b so rb n ot o nly th e s u rfa ce f a cts of a situ atio n but th e m an y m ore su btle fa cto rs co m munic ate d by an in div id ual or gro up— is an esse n tia l sk ill fo r co m munic ato rs .

Com munic atio n is ofte n vie w ed as a one-w ay pro cess: deliv erin g in fo rm atio n to a p artic u la r au die n ce. B ut an eq ual p art o f th e p ro cess is re ceiv in g fe ed back fro m th e au die n ce, both befo re th e in fo rm atio n or messa g e is d eliv ere d an d afte r. In th is re g ard , re se arc h an d m easu re m en t beco m e i m porta n t t a sk s f o r a c o m munic ato r.

Rese arc h in volv es co lle ctin g re le v an t in fo rm atio n befo re cra ftin g an d deliv erin g a m essa g e. T he m ore e ffe ctiv ely c o m munic ato rs c an u nders ta n d fa cto rs in flu en cin g an is su e— partic u la rly th ose perta in in g to th e ta rg et au die n ces— th e m ore e ffe ctiv ely th ey c an c ra ft a n d d eliv er a m essa g e. I f a n is su e is partic u la rly co m ple x or se n sitiv e, re se arc h can beco m e quite ex te n siv e an d m ay in volv e pro fe ssio nal re se arc h fir m s or sp ecia lis ts .

Som etim es th e n ecessa ry re se arc h h as a lr e ad y b een g ath ere d a n d m ig ht b e av aila b le fro m a priv ate fir m or a public data b ase ; at oth er tim es, th e co m munic ato r m ay n eed t o c o nduct i n dep en den t r e se arc h .

Measu re m en t is th e pro cess of dete rm in in g w heth er co m munic atio n is meetin g its goal or obje ctiv e. A la rm in gly , th is is a ste p th at is ofte n overlo oked ; yet, co nductin g co m munic atio n w ith out m easu re m en t is lik e buyin g a lo tte ry tic k et an d n ev er ch eck in g th e w in nin g n um bers . U nlik e oth er a ctiv itie s s u ch a s s a le s o r p ro ductio n, t h e r e su lts o f c o m munic atio n c an be ch alle n gin g to m easu re , becau se th ey in volv e gau gin g so fte r, m ore su bje ctiv e o utc o m es: th e p erc ep tio ns, o pin io ns, an d actio ns o f g ro ups o f peo ple . Y et su ch m easu re m en t is possib le . There are m an y effe ctiv e measu re m en t t o ols a n d r e so urc es a v aila b le t o c o m munic ato rs t o day .

Str a te g ic th in kin g.

The ab ility to put ev ery th in g to geth er— to asse ss a busin ess o r o rg an iz atio nal s itu atio n ( w ith in th e c o nte x t o f m an y in flu en cin g 52 fa cto rs ) an d dev elo p a pla n to im ple m en t th e rig ht co m bin atio n of co m munic atio n s k ills a n d to ols a t th eir d is p osa l fo r m ax im um e ffe ctiv en ess —is p ossib ly a c o m munic ato r’s m ost v alu ab le s k ill. S om e p ra ctitio ners c all th is “ se ein g t h e b ig p ic tu re ”— movin g b ey ond d ay -to -d ay a ctiv itie s t o v ie w a lo ng-te rm so lu tio n. Str a te g ic pla n nin g fo llo w s a pre sc rib ed pro cess of asse ssin g org an iz atio nal need s, id en tif y in g goals , se ttin g obje ctiv es, dev elo pin g a s o lu tio n, c arry in g i t o ut, a n d m easu rin g t h e r e su lts . I t i s t h ro ugh th e str a te g ic pla n nin g pro cess th at co m munic ato rs can tr u ly dem onstr a te th eir v alu e as str a te g is ts ra th er th an ju st ta ctic ia n s w ho p erfo rm is o la te d ta sk s.

Bey ond th is k it o f e sse n tia l s k ills , th ere a re c erta in q ualitie s th at a re fo und in good co m munic ato rs , so m e of w hic h can not be le arn ed . It is im porta n t, fo r ex am ple , th at a co m munic ato r be cu rio us. The en vir o nm en t in w hic h a co m munic ato r w ork s, b oth in te rn ally an d ex te rn ally , is alw ay s ch an gin g, an d sta y in g one ste p ah ead of ch an ges is critic al to en su rin g su ccess. A cu rio us co m munic ato r is alw ay s re se arc h in g new busin ess an d in dustr y tr e n ds, te ch nolo gie s, a n d b est p ra ctic es.

The m ost su ccessfu l co m munic ato rs unders ta n d th at co m munic atio n is an ongoin g p ro cess, sim ila r to a co ntin uin g co nvers a tio n. It in volv es co ntin ually ch eck in g w ith k ey a u die n ces a n d s ta k eh old ers to m ak e s u re th e m essa g e is b ein g pro perly r e ceiv ed a n d b ein g o pen t o c h an gin g s tr a te g ie s a n d t a ctic s.

What C orp ora te C om munic a to rs N eed t o Know a b ou t T heir O rg an iz a tio n s An effe ctiv e co rp ora te co m munic ato r m ust hav e th oro ugh know le d ge of th e org an iz atio n, w ith a g ood u nders ta n din g o f its in dustr y , m is sio n an d str a te g ic fo cu s, m an ag em en t str u ctu re , pro ducts or se rv ic es, cu sto m ers an d clie n ts , co m munity , h is to ry , e m plo yees ( th eir d em ogra p hic s a n d i s su es), a n d c u ltu re .

There is ty pic ally a ra m p-u p p erio d w hen a n ew c o m munic ato r c o m es in to a n org an iz atio n, durin g w hic h he or sh e ab so rb s as m an y of th e deta ils of th e en vir o nm en t a s p ossib le b efo re in itia tin g c o m munic atio n. It h elp s, o f c o urs e , if th e c o m munic ato r h as p re v io us e x perie n ce in th e o rg an iz atio n’s in dustr y o r in a re la te d fie ld , but th is m ay not alw ay s be th e case , partic u la rly in to day ’s in cre asin gly g lo bal a n d m obile j o b m ark et. I t i s n ot u nusu al f o r c o m munic ato rs t o move fro m o ne in dustr y , o r ev en co untr y an d cu ltu re , to an oth er m an y tim es with in t h eir c are ers .

Com munic ato rs sh ould re aliz e th at n one o f th e k ey o rg an iz atio nal ele m en ts lis te d p re v io usly (w ith th e p ossib le ex cep tio n o f h is to ry ) re m ain sta tic . M ost su ccessfu l o rg an iz atio ns re in ven t th em se lv es to s o m e d eg re e o n a re g ula r b asis , 53 sh if tin g t h eir b usin ess f o cu s i n r e sp onse t o c o m petitiv e a n d e n vir o nm en ta l f a cto rs .

Even so m eth in g as se em in gly co nsta n t as a co rp ora tio n’s in dustr y m ay sh if t sig nif ic an tly o ver tim e (th in k o f la rg e c o rp ora tio ns su ch a s G en era l E le ctr ic o r Philip M orris ). T he co m munic ato r m ust be ab le to dev elo p co m munic atio n str a te g ie s t o a d ap t t o t h ese c h an ges.

Understa n din g a n O rg an iz a tio n ’s C ult u re Of th e key asp ects of an org an iz atio n or co rp ora tio n, possib ly th e m ost ch alle n gin g to u nders ta n d is its c u ltu re , sin ce c u ltu re is o fte n u ndefin ed . E ven co rp ora tio ns th at p rin t th eir c u ltu ra l v alu es o n w alle t c ard s o r lu nch ro om b an ners mig ht n ot b e f u lly c o m munic atin g t h e n uan ces o f t h eir c u ltu re s.

Unders ta n din g th e u nderly in g a sp ects o f a n o rg an iz atio n’s c u ltu re m ig ht b e a co m munic ato r’s m ost im porta n t ch alle n ge, sin ce th ese can hold th e key to effe ctiv ely o verc o m in g co m munic atio n o bsta cle s an d id en tif y in g o pportu nitie s.

An org an iz atio n th at pro udly an d public ly pro cla im s in te g rity an d eth ic s as co rn ers to nes o f its c u ltu re , y et m ak es b usin ess d ecis io ns th at a p pear to b en efit only a s e le ct f e w ( ra th er t h an t h e o rg an iz atio n o vera ll) i s n ot w alk in g i ts t a lk .

Sim ila rly , a c o rp ora tio n th at p ublic ly a p pla u ds e m plo yee lo yalty , y et d is c ard s lo ng-te rm e m plo yees in fa v or o f b rin gin g in y ounger e m plo yees (a t lo w er p ay gra d es), w ill q uic k ly lo se th e tr u st o f its w ork fo rc e. O ne o f a c o m munic ato r’s most im porta n t fu nctio ns is to id en tif y fo r m an ag em en t a n y d is c o nnect b etw een sta te d c u ltu ra l v alu es a n d th e w ay th e o rg an iz atio n a ctu ally w ork s, p artic u la rly when t h ose p ra ctic es m ig ht h av e l e g al a n d e th ic al r a m if ic atio ns.

An org an iz atio n’s cu ltu re als o can hav e a pro fo und in flu en ce on how it co m munic ate s. T he s ty le a n d to ne u se d in c o m munic atio n is o fte n a n im porta n t, an d ty pic ally u nsta te d , in dic atio n o f a c o m pan y’s c u ltu re . T his c an tr a n sla te to usin g o r n ot u sin g c erta in w ord s o r t e rm s, o r e v en c erta in m ed ia .

Corp ora te c u ltu re s c o m e i n a ll s ty le s, c o lo rs , a n d f la v ors . T hey o fte n m an if e st i n su btle w ay s a n d c an b e v ery f lu id . S om e a re f o rm ed a n d c u ltiv ate d b y d esig n a n d in te n tio n; oth er cu ltu re s sim ply hap pen . A cco rd in gly , not all cu ltu re s are effe ctiv e; so m e can se rv e as im ped im en ts to o rg an iz atio nal effe ctiv en ess an d su ccess, w hile o th ers c an a ct a s c ata ly sts . D if fe re n t c u ltu re s m ay f re q uen tly e x is t in d if fe re n t p arts o f t h e s a m e o rg an iz atio n.

Most o fte n , o rg an iz atio nal c u ltu re s a re c u ltiv ate d b y b eh av io rs t h at a re m odele d an d re w ard ed ra th er th an th ro ugh w ord s an d slo gan s. E m plo yees w ill ex hib it pre fe rre d b eh av io rs o nly i f t h ere i s a p erc eiv ed b en efit o r r e w ard a tta ch ed , s u ch a s a bonus, ch an ces fo r pro m otio n, or ev en a kin d word fro m th e boss.

Com munic ato rs c an re in fo rc e a n d p ro m ote c u ltu ra l v alu es b y sh ow in g th em in actio n a n d m ak in g t h e b en efits c le ar t o m an ag ers a n d e m plo yees a lik e.

54 Typ es o f O rg an iz a tio n s Anoth er k ey fa cto r in d ete rm in in g h ow a c o rp ora te , se n io r-le v el c o m munic ato r perfo rm s is th e n atu re o r s tr u ctu re o f th e c o rp ora tio n o r o rg an iz atio n its e lf . S om e prim ary d is tin guis h in g i d en tif ie rs i n clu de:

Priv a te ly o w ned v ersu s p ublic ly tr a ded .

Public c o m pan ie s h av e m an date d co m munic atio n re sp onsib ilitie s to th eir sh are h old ers an d th e in vestm en t co m munity , a n d th e p ublic p erc ep tio n o f a c o m pan y a n d its p ro ducts a n d se rv ic es can hav e a dir e ct im pact on th e valu e of its sto ck . The co m munic ato r m ust b e a w are o f a n y is su es th at c o uld c h an ge th is p erc ep tio n (s u ch a s u nw an te d m ed ia a tte n tio n) a n d d ev elo p p la n s fo r a d dre ssin g th ese is su es, p re fe ra b ly b efo re th ey s u rfa ce o n th e f ro nt p ag e o f a n ew sp ap er o r o n a n ig htly n ew s b ro ad cast.

Sm all v ersu s la rg e.

The la rg er th e o rg an iz atio n is , th e g re ate r th e n um ber o f au die n ces th at m ay be affe cte d by its fo rtu nes an d activ itie s. A sm all org an iz atio n m ig ht b e co ncern ed p rim arily w ith its im med ia te cu sto m ers , in vesto rs , an d em plo yees. L arg er o rg an iz atio ns m ig ht b e m ore co ncern ed ab out public s with in a la rg er sp here of in flu en ce: th e co m munity , govern m en t e n titie s (a t th e lo cal, sta te , fe d era l, o r in te rn atio nal le v el) , a n d oth er d iv ers e e x te rn al a u die n ces.

Serv ic e p ro vid er v ersu s m anufa ctu re r.

Org an iz atio ns th at p ro vid e s e rv ic es, su ch as co nsu ltin g fir m s, fin an cia l se rv ic es co m pan ie s, an d g overn m en ta l ag en cie s, can hav e dif fe re n t co m munic atio n is su es th an co m pan ie s th at man ufa ctu re o r d is tr ib ute g oods, s u ch a s a u to m ak ers o r c o m pute r f ir m s. F or ex am ple , se rv ic e pro vid ers are m ore dep en den t on th e actio ns of th eir em plo yees to e m body th e fir m ’s q uality ; th e re p uta tio ns o f m an ufa ctu re rs can b e d am ag ed b y f la w s i n t h eir p ro ducts .

For-p ro fit versu s nonpro fit.

The co m munic ato r in a pro fit- m ak in g org an iz atio n is la rg ely fo cu se d o n en su rin g th at th e o rg an iz atio n re m ain s pro fita b le a n d m eets i ts r e v en ue g oals . T his i n volv es e n su rin g t h at c u sto m ers an d clie n ts are aw are of th e org an iz atio n’s pro ducts an d se rv ic es an d ap pre cia te th eir q uality , in te g rity , an d v alu e. F or-p ro fit o rg an iz atio ns are ofte n assis te d in th is effo rt by a m ark etin g an d ad vertis in g sta ff. In a nonpro fit o rg an iz atio n s u ch a s a c h arity o r f o undatio n, th e c o m munic ato r is ofte n f o cu se d o n f u ndra is in g, r e ly in g p rim arily o n m ed ia e x posu re t o c o nvey th e v alu e o f th e o rg an iz atio n’s m is sio n a n d a ctiv itie s to p ote n tia l d onors a n d volu nte ers . T he tw o r o le s h av e s im ila ritie s, b ut th e to ne a n d c o nte n t o f th eir co m munic atio n m ay v ary .

Unio n versu s nonunio n.

If a co m munic ato r’s org an iz atio n in clu des em plo yees re p re se n te d by a barg ain in g unit or em plo yees who are co nsid erin g o rg an iz in g in th is w ay , a n oth er le v el o f c o m ple x ity is a d ded to 55 th e a u die n ce m ix . C om munic atio n to e m plo yee g ro ups m ust h av e th e rig ht to ne a n d c o nte n t.

Loca l versu s m ultin atio nal.

More an d m ore co rp ora te co m munic ato rs are fin din g th at th eir org an iz atio ns are dev elo pin g a glo bal re ach . This in tr o duces new para m ete rs th at can in flu en ce co m munic atio n: m ultip le cu ltu re s, m ultip le r e g ula to ry e n vir o nm en ts , a n d m ultip le l a n guag es.

Man y co rp ora te co m munic ato rs sp ecia liz e in w ork in g w ith sp ecif ic ty pes o f org an iz atio ns. T here a re c o rp ora te c o m munic ato rs , fo r e x am ple , w ho m ay w ork only with nonpro fit health care gro ups or multin atio nal pharm aceu tic al co m pan ie s. T hro ugh th is f o cu s, a c o rp ora te c o m munic ato r c an b uild a s p ecia liz ed know le d ge b ase t h at c an c erta in ly b e v alu ab le , b ut n ot a ll c o m munic ato rs h av e t h e opportu nity t o b e s o s p ecia liz ed .

It is esse n tia l, th ere fo re , th at a co m munic ato r b e a g en era lis t— th at is , fu lly fa m ilia r w ith th e b asic p rin cip le s o f effe ctiv e co m munic atio n— to b e o f v alu e with in n early a n y ty pe o f o rg an iz atio n, re g ard le ss o f in dustr y , lo catio n, o r s iz e.

(M ore o ver, in a q uic k ly sh if tin g jo b m ark et, a g en era lis t co m munic ato r, w ith ex perie n ce in m an y ty pes o f o rg an iz atio nal en vir o nm en ts , w ill b e m uch m ore mark eta b le .) Corp ora te C om munic a to r R ole s A c o rp ora te c o m munic ato r m ay a p ply th ese b asic s k ills to s e v era l ro le s. D urin g th eir c are ers , c o m munic ato rs m ay f in d t h em se lv es i n m ultip le r o le s. T he n atu re o f th eir o rg an iz atio ns, to a la rg e e x te n t, h elp s d ete rm in e th e r o le s f o r w hic h th ey a re re sp onsib le .

Public R ela tio n s An o rg an iz atio n’s p ublic p ro file — how it is p erc eiv ed , re g ard ed , a n d v alu ed b y th e outs id e w orld — is ofte n one of th e m ost critic al fa cto rs in its su ccess.

Reg ard le ss of th e actu al quality an d in te g rity of its pro ducts or se rv ic e, an unfa v ora b le public im ag e can destr o y (a n d has destr o yed ) an org an iz atio n.

Sim ila rly , a fa v ora b le public im ag e can boost, ev en if only te m pora rily , an org an iz atio n w hose p ro ducts a n d s e rv ic es m ay b e o f l e sse r q uality .

Gone a re th e d ay s w hen p ublic r e la tio ns p ra ctitio ners w ere f a st- ta lk in g “ fla k s” who w ould d o a n yth in g to g et th eir o rg an iz atio n’s o r c lie n t’ s n am e in p rin t o r o n th e a ir . In to day ’s w orld , th e c o m munic ato r’s re sp onsib ility is to re p re se n t th e clie n t o r o rg an iz atio n fa ir ly a n d h onestly , w ith th e g oal o f c u ltiv atin g a p ositiv e im ag e o r c o unte rin g a n y u nw arra n te d n eg ativ e p ublic ity a s q uic k ly a s p ossib le .

In th is r o le , a c o m munic ato r w ork s c lo se ly w ith th e e n titie s th at m ost in flu en ce 56 th e p erc ep tio n o f th e o rg an iz atio n ( a n d its p ro ducts a n d s e rv ic es) a m ong p ote n tia l clie n ts o r c u sto m ers . T hese c an in clu de th e m ed ia , c o m munity g ro ups, a n d o th er key au die n ces (p ublic s). The co m munic ato r m ust build a re la tio nsh ip of re sp onsiv en ess a n d tr u st w ith th ese p ublic s, so th at th e in fo rm atio n re ceiv ed is co nsid ere d a ccu ra te a n d h onest.

Becau se o f th e im porta n ce o f p rin t, W eb , a n d b ro ad cast m ed ia to th e p ublic im ag e o f a n o rg an iz atio n, m ed ia r e la tio ns is o fte n a p rim ary a sp ect o f th e p ublic re la tio ns r o le a n d i s f re q uen tly c o nsid ere d a d is c ip lin e u nto i ts e lf .

In vesto r R ela tio n s Public ly tr a d ed co m pan ie s m ust pay partic u la r atte n tio n to opin io ns of th eir org an iz atio n held by th e in vestm en t co m munity , w hic h in clu des fin an cia l an aly sts , b ro kers , an d tr a d ers . It is to th e o rg an iz atio n’s ad van ta g e th at th ese au die n ces d ev elo p tr u st in th e c o m pan y’s m an ag em en t a n d its a b ility to m eet th e org an iz atio n’s busin ess goals . That tr u st m ay le ad to re co m men datio ns to purc h ase or re ta in th e co m pan y’s sto ck . T he co m munic ato r is th e in vesto rs ’ co nduit to th e o rg an iz atio n, fro m w hom th ey le arn o f d ev elo pm en ts , p ositiv e o r neg ativ e, th at c o uld in flu en ce th e c o m pan y’s s to ck p ric e. T his ro le h as b eco m e partic u la rly c ritic al in th is a g e o f g re ate r tr a n sp are n cy a n d m an date d d is c lo su re o f fin an cia l i n fo rm atio n.

Com munit y a n d G overn m en t R ela tio n s Most org an iz atio ns are not im mune to overs ig ht an d re g ula tio n fro m a govern m en t en tity , re g ard le ss of th e sc o pe or natu re of th eir busin ess. T he co m pan y m ay w ork w ith lo cal city pla n ners w hen open in g a new offic e or fa cility , a s ta te r e v ie w b oard w hen r e v is in g a n e m plo yee p ay p olic y , o r a f e d era l ag en cy w hen in tr o ducin g a n ew p ro duct. C ultiv atin g a re la tio nsh ip o f fu ll a n d open c o m munic atio n w ith t h ese e n titie s i s a s i m porta n t a s d oin g s o w ith a n y o th er key public . T he m ore hig hly re g ula te d th e org an iz atio n’s in dustr y (s u ch as en erg y, f in an cia l s e rv ic es, o r t r a n sp orta tio n), t h e m ore c ritic al t h e c o m munic ato r’s ro le beco m es. It m ust in volv e effe ctiv e re la tio nsh ip s w ith key govern m en t ag en cie s b ut a ls o c lo se tie s to th e o rg an iz atio n’s lo bbyis ts w ho w ork to in flu en ce le g is la tio n.

In te rn al C om munic a tio n s An org an iz atio n’s em plo yees co nstitu te one of th e m ost sig nif ic an t an d ch alle n gin g g ro ups fo r w hom co m munic atio n m ust b e m an ag ed . A n in fo rm ed work fo rc e t h at f e els a ck now le d ged a n d l is te n ed t o i s a n i n valu ab le a sse t. B uild in g tr u st, d ed ic atio n, a n d lo yalty a m ong e m plo yees s h ould b e a p rim ary g oal o f a ll man ag ers . B ut th e c o m munic ato r o ccu pie s a s p ecia l p ositio n in th is e ffo rt. Q uite 57 ofte n , c o m munic ato rs b eco m e th e c ata ly sts , a n d th e c o nduits , f o r c o m munic atio n betw een a n d a m ong m an ag em en t a n d e m plo yees.

In th is re sp ect, th e in te rn al c o m munic atio ns ro le re se m ble s w ork in g w ith a n y oth er au die n ce or public . It is im porta n t th at it be a tw o-w ay effo rt th at en co ura g es em plo yee en gag em en t. Perh ap s m ore th an oth er ro le s, th is one re q uir e s a g re at d eg re e o f l is te n in g.

Mark etin g C om munic a tio n s How a n o rg an iz atio n’s p ro ducts o r se rv ic es a re m ark ete d — th ro ugh a d vertis in g, pro m otio ns, b ra n din g a n d i m ag ery , o r s a le s c am paig ns— sh ould b e d ir e ctly l in ked to its c o m munic atio ns to o th er a u die n ces. I f a c o m pute r c o m pan y’s a d s p ortr a y a hip , y outh -o rie n te d , an d in novativ e im ag e, y et it cu ltiv ate s a sto dgy, slu ggis h im ag e w hen c o m munic atin g t o a n d i n te ra ctin g w ith k ey p ublic s s u ch a s i n vesto rs , em plo yees, or co m munity le ad ers , it can be a dam ag in g m is a lig nm en t. T he co nsis te n cy o f a c o m pan y’s b ra n d a n d its c o m petitiv e v alu es th ro ughout a ll its co m munic atio ns ( a n d a ctio ns) i s e sse n tia l.

The w ay in w hic h a c o rp ora tio n m ark ets its e lf c an a ls o h av e a n e ffe ct o n o th er busin ess fa cets , in clu din g, sig nif ic an tly , its effo rts to re cru it new em plo yees.

Man y p ote n tia l j o b c an did ate s k now a n e m plo yer f ro m i ts p ublic i m ag e, g en era lly fo ste re d th ro ugh a d vertis in g a n d p ublic r e la tio ns. A n o rg an iz atio n n eed s to a sk if th is i s t h e i m ag e o f t h e c o m pan y t h ey w an t e m plo yees, b oth c u rre n t a n d f u tu re , t o hold .

Corp ora te co m munic ato rs m ay not be dir e ctly re sp onsib le fo r m ark etin g co m munic atio n activ itie s, b ut b ecau se o f th e im porta n ce o f th is lin kag e, th ey sh ould h av e a re la tio nsh ip w ith th e re sp onsib le c o m pan y o ffic er. T he m ark etin g co m munic atio ns m an ag er s h ould h av e a t le ast a d otte d -lin e re la tio nsh ip w ith th e se n io r c o rp ora te c o m munic ato r.

Execu tiv e A dvis e r Quite o fte n th e m ost e ffe ctiv e c o m munic ato r in a n o rg an iz atio n— wheth er w ith em plo yees o r o uts id e a u die n ces— is th e p re sid en t o r c h ie f e x ecu tiv e o ffic er. T his pers o n is o fte n c o nsu lte d fir s t w hen a situ atio n a ris e s th at re q uir e s a c o rp ora te voic e. C orp ora te co m munic ato rs can h elp th e C EO an d o th er k ey ex ecu tiv es beco m e e ffe ctiv e s p okesp ers o ns w hen re q uir e d , c o ach in g th em o n w ork in g w ith th e m ed ia to d eliv er k ey m essa g es. M an ag em en t its e lf is a n im porta n t a u die n ce, ofte n re q uir in g sp ecia liz ed c o m munic atio n to h elp e x ecu tiv es b ette r u nders ta n d th eir r o le i n s h ap in g t h e o rg an iz atio n’s c u ltu re a n d s u ccess.

Addit io n al R ole s There m ay b e o th er ro le s th at a c o rp ora te c o m munic ato r m ay b e c alle d u pon to 58 perfo rm ( b en efits c o m munic atio ns, e v en t p la n nin g, o r te ch nic al c o m munic atio ns, fo r e x am ple ). In m an y c ase s, th e n atu re a n d s iz e o f th e o rg an iz atio n w ill d ic ta te th e co rp ora te co m munic ato r’s key re sp onsib ilitie s. It is not unusu al fo r th e co m munic ato r to b e re sp onsib le fo r an y o r all ro le s, in v ary in g d eg re es an d em phasis . B ut no one ro le sh ould be co nsid ere d or perfo rm ed in is o la tio n.

Consis te n t org an iz atio nal m essa g es an d cu ltu ra l valu es sh ould be cle arly unders to od i n a ll c o m munic atio ns t o a ll a u die n ces.

Man agin g C om munic a tio n D urin g C han ge The tr u e te st of a co rp ora te co m munic ato r’s sk ills co m es durin g perio ds of sig nif ic an t ch an ge. M ajo r ch an ges, w heth er p erc eiv ed as b en efic ia l (p ro fo und gro w th , n ew b usin ess, e x pan sio n) o r n eg ativ e (d ow nsiz in g, ta k eo vers , m erg ers , ban kru ptc ie s) can be dis ru ptiv e an d can ch alle n ge an org an iz atio n’s cu ltu re , valu es, a n d b usin ess f o cu s. C han ge p ro duces s tr e ss, f e ar, a n d d is o rie n ta tio n.

Corp ora te co m munic ato rs pro ve th eir valu e at su ch tim es by help in g th e org an iz atio n sta y fo cu se d , unders ta n din g th e need s of all sta k eh old ers , an d en su rin g a co ntin ued flo w of w ell- ta rg ete d an d tim ely in fo rm atio n. W hen situ atio ns o r c o nditio ns a re c h an gin g ra p id ly , th e d an ger o f m is c o m munic atio n an d r u m ors is a t its g re ate st. T he s u re st w ay to r e in in e sc ala tin g c h ao s is th ro ugh re sp onsiv e, t h oughtf u l, a n d t a rg ete d c o m munic atio n.

It is co m mon fo r co m pan ie s underg oin g dra stic ch an ge— partic u la rly unw elc o m e c h an ge— to c u t b ack o n c o m munic atio n. T his m ay o ccu r b ecau se th e situ atio n h as n ot b een a n tic ip ate d a n d n o re sp onse p la n e x is ts , o r b ecau se th e se v erity o f th e s itu atio n is u ndere stim ate d a n d c o m pan ie s p re fe r to r e m ain s ile n t, hopin g t h at t h e s itu atio n w ill b lo w o ver.

But it is p re cis e ly d urin g th ose tim es th at w ell- c o ord in ate d c o m munic atio n is most n eed ed . C orp ora te c o m munic ato rs w ho a re p art o f th e s e n io r m an ag em en t te am b eco m e k ey a d vis e rs in p erio ds o f m ajo r c h an ge. T hey n eed to d ev elo p th e best c o m munic atio n s tr a te g ie s t o h elp s ta b iliz e t h e s itu atio n.

Ofte n p erio ds o f c h an ge m ay ta k e a lo ng tim e; in deed , s o m e o rg an iz atio ns a re alw ay s e x perie n cin g s o m e d eg re e o f c h an ge. D urin g s u ch tim es, c o m munic ato rs sh ould se ek to re in fo rc e w hat is re m ain in g c o nsta n t a n d a rtic u la te th e u ltim ate goal b ey ond t h e c h an ge.

Com munic atio n its e lf can not co rre ct a se rio us m is ste p , su ch as th e ch ie f fin an cia l o ffic er w ho h as e m bezzle d t h e f u nds i n a c o m pan y’s p en sio n p la n . B ut i t is an esse n tia l fir s t ste p in tu rn in g aro und th e situ atio n. W ith out effe ctiv e co m munic atio n, c h an ces a re m uch g re ate r t h at t h e s itu atio n w ill c au se l a stin g, a n d perh ap s i r re p ara b le , d am ag e t o t h e o rg an iz atio n.

59 A C orp ora te C om munic a to r’s U lt im ate Resp on sib ilit y This ch ap te r ex pla in ed th e sig nif ic an ce an d bre ad th of th e co rp ora te co m munic ato r ro le a n d its im porta n ce w ith in o rg an iz atio ns. C le arly , it is a ro le th at re q uir e s b ro ad -b ase d s tr a te g ic th in kin g a n d th e a b ility to re sp ond q uic k ly to ra p id ly c h an gin g e n vir o nm en ts .

But h ow o bje ctiv e sh ould co rp ora te co m munic ato rs b e? T o w hom are th ey re sp onsib le ? A re t h ey a d vocate s f o r s e n io r m an ag em en t, e m plo yees, o r t h e p ublic at la rg e? I s th eir r o le s im ila r to th at o f a n in vestig ativ e r e p orte r: te llin g th e w hole tr u th , n o m atte r h ow r a w o r u gly ?

The a n sw er m ay s e em o bvio us: th e c o m munic ato r’s re sp onsib ility is to e n su re th e c o ntin ued b usin ess h ealth a n d in te g rity o f th e o rg an iz atio n. B ut w hat if th e co m munic ato r note s uneth ic al or ille g al beh av io r or, w ors e yet, is ask ed by man ag em en t t o b e p arty t o t h is b eh av io r?

It is in su ch cir c u m sta n ces th at th e m ost im porta n t re sp onsib ility of th e co m munic ato r ta k es p re ced en ce: to u phold th e p rin cip le s o f e th ic al a n d h onest co m munic atio n a n d e n su re th e in te g rity o f th e p ro fe ssio n. H ere c o m munic ato rs can ta k e g uid an ce f ro m th e I A BC C ode o f E th ic s ( 2 005) a n d w ork to e n su re th at th ey c o m munic ate l e g ally , e th ic ally , a n d i n g ood t a ste .

Today ’s co m munic ato rs w ork in an ex citin g an d opportu nity -fille d tim e.

In cre asin gly , th eir r o le is p erc eiv ed a s a n e sse n tia l, v alu e a d ded , s e n io r-le v el o ne, as o ppose d to a n ecessa ry e v il th at e x is ts m ostly to h elp th e o rg an iz atio n r e act to pro ble m s.

The b urd en o f e n su rin g th at th is tr e n d c o ntin ues lie s w ith c o m munic ato rs . T hey must ch alle n ge m an ag em en t an d w ork to en act co m munic atio n th at is h onest, str a te g ic ally fo cu se d , an d p ro activ e. It is a re sp onsib ility th at ta k es a certa in deg re e o f d arin g an d ris k ta k in g. It is o ne th at w ill n ot o nly re su lt in g re ate r re sp ect fo r org an iz atio nal co m munic atio n as a pro fe ssio n, but als o in m ore effe ctiv e o rg an iz atio ns.

Refe re n ces Dozie r, D . M . (1 992). T he o rg an iz atio nal ro le s o f co m munic atio n an d p ublic re la tio ns p ra ctitio ners . In J . E . G ru nig (E d.) , Excelle n ce in p ublic r e la tio ns a nd co m munic a tio n m anagem en t ( p p. 3 27–356). M ah w ah , N J: L aw re n ce E rlb au m .

In te rn atio nal Asso cia tio n of Busin ess Com munic ato rs [IA BC]. (2 005).

In te rn atio nal Asso cia tio n of Busin ess Com munic ato rs co de of eth ic s fo r pro fe ssio nal c o m munic ato rs . A vaila b le a t www.i a b c.c o m /a b out/c o de.h tm .

60 CH APTE R T H REE ORG AN IZ A TIO NAL C U LTU RE Pau l M . S an ch ez Org an iz atio ns co ntin ue to str u ggle w ith th e re alitie s of glo baliz atio n, in co rp ora tin g w av e a fte r w av e o f te ch nolo gic al d ev elo pm en ts a n d c o m ple x , su btle d em ogra p hic s h if ts . C urre n t o pera tin g e n vir o nm en ts a re a ls o fra u ght with th e ch alle n ges fro m th e overh an g of th e glo bal re cessio n, w here eco nom ic a n d p olitic al f o rc es e x ert e v en m ore p re ssu re s o n o rg an iz atio ns o f ev ery ty pe of en te rp ris e . In guid in g an d m an ag in g org an iz atio ns, in all se cto rs o f h um an a ctiv ity , l e ad ers m ust d eal w ith t h is l a n dsc ap e o f e co nom ic , so cia l, d em ogra p hic , te ch nolo gic al, a n d re g ula to ry is su es. T o n ot o nly m eet th ese c h alle n ges b ut to m ax im iz e th e o pportu nitie s in here n t in th ese tim es, le ad ers m ust a tte m pt t o u nders ta n d t h e b elie fs a n d v alu es o f t h eir w ork fo rc es aro und th e w orld to en ab le m an ag ers an d su perv is o rs to se t norm s fo r work fo rc e b eh av io rs .

I t is th e p eo ple a t a ll le v els in o rg an iz atio ns w ho m ust b e a w are a n d m otiv ate d to a ccep t an d su pport ch an ge w hen necessa ry . A ttitu des an d in dustr y of th e w ork fo rc e ultim ate ly dete rm in e how th e m is sio ns of th eir org an iz atio ns are a cco m plis h ed , h ow p ro ducts a n d s e rv ic es a re m ad e a n d d eliv ere d . T o a cco m plis h t h is d au ntin g ta sk o f le ad in g o rg an iz atio ns in th ese p erilo us tim es, le ad ers m ust n ot o nly k now th eir o rg an iz atio ns’ c u rre n t c u ltu re , b ut th ey m ust a ls o k now w hat m ust b e d one to p re se rv e b en efic ia l ele m en ts o f ex is tin g cu ltu re s an d h ow to a p pro ach t h e b uild in g o f n ew c u ltu re .

M ost ap pro ach es to o rg an iz atio n an d m an ag em en t th eo ry are in ag re em en t:

c u ltu re is o ne o f th e k ey f a cto rs u se d in e x pla in in g o rg an iz atio n p erfo rm an ce a n d r e su lts . T he q uestio n is h ow to c h an ge a n d re d ir e ct a n e x is tin g c u ltu re to e n su re o rg an iz atio n su ccess. Is c u ltu re ta n gib le ? Is it a c o nstr u ct th at tr a n sla te s in to a r e ality am en ab le to p ra ctic al actio ns to sh ap e it? Is cu ltu re m an ag eab le ? C an c u ltu re be th e obje ct of ch an ge m an ag em en t? C an le ad ers , m an ag ers , an d s u perv is o rs p la y a ro le in h elp in g c h an ge a n o rg an iz atio n’s c u ltu re ? T hese a re q uestio ns th at w eig h on th e co rp ora te m in d an d occu py th ose w ho stu dy o rg an iz atio n d ynam ic s.

W hen L ouis V . G ers tn er Jr. (2 002) to ok over a fa ilin g IB M in 1993, he d esc rib ed h is d ata g ath erin g a n d a n aly sis o f th e I B M s itu atio n. H e w as c o nvin ced t h at a b ove a ll th e f a cto rs h e id en tif ie d a s c o ntr ib utin g to I B M ’s p lig ht, th e d eep ly 61 ro ote d c u ltu re o f I B M h ad to c h an ge if th is ic o nic c o m pan y w as g oin g to s u rv iv e.

“I c am e t o s e e, i n m y t im e a t I B M , t h at c u ltu re i s n ’t j u st o ne a sp ect o f t h e g am e— it i s t h e g am e” ( p . 1 82).

The co ncep t of org an iz atio nal cu ltu re , in clu din g pra ctic al ap plic atio ns fo r str a te g y a n d ta ctic s, is e x plo re d in th is c h ap te r. C ultu re m ust b e a sse sse d a n d th e le arn in gs o f c h an ge m an ag em en t a p plie d to d ev elo p a rc h ite ctu re fo r a d dre ssin g cu ltu re c h an ge.

Defin in g C ult u re In its b asic d efin itio n, c u ltu re is how a n o rg an iz atio n a cco m plis h es a ll th at it h as to d o to fu lf ill its m is sio n o r p urp ose . C ultu re c an b e o bse rv ed in th e w ay s th at th in gs g et d one— in th e p ro cesse s th at e v ery one in th e o rg an iz atio n k now s m ust be f o llo w ed f o r w ork to b e s u ccessfu lly a cco m plis h ed . T his m ean in g o f c u ltu re is em bodie d i n t h e s ta te m en t “ T his i s t h e w ay w e d o t h in gs a ro und h ere .” A p ra g m atic a p pro ach w as fra m ed b y F ons T ro m pen aars , w ho d efin ed cu ltu re as “ th e w ay in w hic h a g ro up o f p eo ple s o lv es p ro ble m s a n d r e so lv es d ile m mas” (T ro m pen aars & H am pden -T urn er, 1 997, p . 6 ). G eert H ofs te d e (1 994) d esc rib ed cu ltu re in a m ore p hilo so phic al w ay : “ C ultu re is a d eep ly r o ote d v alu e o r s h are d norm , m ora l o r a esth etic p rin cip le s th at g uid es a ctio n a n d s e rv es a s s ta n dard s to ev alu ate o ne’s o w n a n d o th ers ’ b eh av io rs ” ( p . 6 8).

These defin itio ns dem onstr a te th at cu ltu re is in deed a fir s t prin cip le of org an iz atio nal f u nctio nin g— th at a lth ough c u ltu re i s n ot c o ncre te , i t i s a b so lu te ly a pote n t f o rc e th at c an e ith er f o ste r a n d s u pport o r im ped e a n d f ru str a te o pera tio nal ch an ge.

If th ese w id ely h eld d efin itio ns a re a ccep te d , th en it c an b e se en th at a ll th e overt a n d s u btle p atte rn s o f b eh av io r i n o rg an iz atio ns d o i n deed w eav e t h em se lv es to geth er to c re ate a n u nm is ta k ab le p ers o nality o r c h ara cte r o f th e o rg an iz atio n— its c u ltu re . T his p ers o nality e n dure s o ver tim e a n d c an b e b oth a b le ssin g a n d a cu rs e as an attr ib ute of org an iz atio nal fu nctio nin g. If th e org an iz atio n dem onstr a te s l o ng-te rm s u ccess, i ts a b id in g c u ltu re i s i d en tif ie d a s t h e c au se o f i ts cap acity n ot o nly to co pe in ch alle n gin g tim es b ut to th riv e an d p ro sp er, to main ta in i ts f o cu s, a n d d ev elo p a n a lig ned w ork fo rc e. I f t h e o rg an iz atio n i s u nab le to r e sis t f o rc es th at s a p its e n erg y, d is tr a ct f ro m its m is sio n, o r w eak en its b ra n d deliv ery , t h en t h ese f a ilu re s a re i d en tif ie d a s p ro ble m s d ue t o i ts c u ltu re .

Furth er, w hen a n o rg an iz atio n f a ils , its c u ltu re c an b e b la m ed f o r b ein g c h an ge re sis ta n t: clo se d to new id eas, la ck in g an in novativ e sp ir it, an d to o slo w to re sp ond to f a st- c h an gin g c u sto m er n eed s. T he h is to ry a n d p lig ht o f th e U .S . a u to in dustr y is re p le te w ith c ase s tu die s. C ultu re in th is v ie w is s e en a s c lo sin g th e co rp ora te m in d o n lif e -s a v in g in fo rm atio n, in te rn al o r e x te rn al, th at w ould a llo w th e o rg an iz atio n to r e co gniz e a n d d eal w ith th e f o rc es th at h av e a m ate ria l im pact 62 on its fa te . C ultu re can b e b oth b arrie r an d co nstr a in in g fo rc e th at k eep s an org an iz atio n f ro m f re ely d ev elo pin g r e sp onse s t o c h an gin g e x te rn al f o rc es.

The I m pact o f C ult u re o n O rg an iz a tio n s a n d Peo p le Cultu re is th e p erv asiv e d riv er o f h ow a n o rg an iz atio n f u nctio ns o ver tim e, u nle ss th ere is a th re at th at co m man ds ch an ge. It dete rm in es how an org an iz atio n re sp onds t o i ts b usin ess e n vir o nm en t, o rg an iz es i ts w ork , s tr u ctu re s i ts d ay -to -d ay activ itie s, an d dep lo ys th e sk ills an d ta le n ts of its m an ag ers an d em plo yees.

Cultu re a ls o d ete rm in es t h e p atte rn s o f s o cia l i n te ra ctio n u se d t o a cco m plis h w ork an d s h ap e re la tio nsh ip s in sid e th e o rg an iz atio n. C ultu re d ra m atic ally s h ap es th e co ntr a ct b etw een th e o rg an iz atio n a n d its e m plo yees, w here th e e x pre sse d v alu es of th e o rg an iz atio n a re m ad e m an if e st in th e tr a n sa ctio ns b etw een m an ag em en t an d th e w ork fo rc e. E qually im porta n t, p eo ple in te ra ctin g w ith th e o rg an iz atio n ex ert th eir co lle ctiv e in flu en ce o n th e cu ltu re . T hey als o re fle ct th eir n atio nal cu ltu re s in th e sy m bio tic re la tio n b etw een th e o rg an iz atio n an d its w ork fo rc e co m ponen ts .

Equally im porta n t is th e cu ltu ra l orie n ta tio n to cu sto m er or clie n t se rv ic e.

Becau se of th is im pact on an org an iz atio n’s pra ctic al beh av io rs , cu ltu re has en orm ous s tr a te g ic s ig nif ic an ce. T o b e s u ccessfu l, a n o rg an iz atio n m ust e n deav or to sh ap e its cu ltu re to su pport its m is sio n an d im ple m en t its str a te g y. W ork pro cesse s m ust b e a lig ned w ith th e ty pes o f p ro ducts o r se rv ic es o ffe re d , a n d hum an c ap ita l p ra ctic es s h ould b e d ev elo ped a n d w ith t h e s a m e c are . T hus t h ere i s no o ne rig ht o r w ro ng c u ltu re . In fa ct, d if fe re n t o rg an iz atio ns w ith in th e sa m e in dustr y can hav e very dif fe re n t cu ltu re s. In la rg e m ultin atio nals , th ere are mic ro cu ltu re s th at re fle ct opera tin g dif fe re n ces w ith in th e um bre lla of th e co rp ora te i d en tity .

The is su e fo r le ad ers is w heth er th e c u rre n t c u ltu re is k eep in g p ace w ith th e dem an ds o f its o pera tin g e n vir o nm en ts a n d c h alle n ges. D oes th e c u ltu re s u pport th e b usin ess s tr a te g y a n d t h e c o m ponen t o pera tio ns a n d f u nctio ns? T he b en efits o f th is s o rt o f in quir y c an b e s ig nif ic an t; r is k s o f ig norin g th e s ta te o f th e c u ltu re a re en orm ous— as s e en in th e IB M e x am ple a n d th e c ase o f th e U .S . a u to in dustr y .

Alig nm en t b etw een c u ltu re a n d o pera tin g s tr a te g y e n ab le s e ffe ctiv e p ro cesse s a n d help s t h e o rg an iz atio n d eliv er p ositiv e r e su lts t o a ll s ta k eh old ers a n d, i n p artic u la r, cu sto m ers an d em plo yees. W hen th ere is m is a lig nm en t, dysfu nctio ns an d su boptim al p erfo rm an ce r e su lt. T he o rg an iz atio n m ay b e p ro fita b le a n d s u ccessfu l in th e sh ort te rm , b ut o ver tim e, it w ill fa il to a ch ie v e its p ote n tia l. W here th e cu ltu re an d th e str a te g ie s are not alig ned , org an iz atio ns m ay lo se valu ab le em plo yees w ho h av e th e c ritic al s k ills a n d e x perie n ce to m ove e asily to a n oth er org an iz atio n.

63 Org an iz a tio n B uild in g B lo ck s a n d C ult u re Every o rg an iz atio n— la rg e o r s m all, p ublic o r p riv ate , f o r p ro fit o r n onpro fit— has only f o ur b asic c o m ponen ts w ith w hic h t o c re ate a n o rg an iz atio n f o r i ts e n te rp ris e :

str a te g y, s tr u ctu re , p eo ple , a n d p ro cesse s. T hese f o ur e le m en ts f lo w f ro m a c le ar sta te m en t o f th e o rg an iz atio n’s m is sio n o r p urp ose . T hese b uild in g b lo ck s are use d to fo rm ula te , sh ap e, in te g ra te , a n d m an ag e th e a sse ts o f th e o rg an iz atio n.

Thus, th e o rg an iz atio n’s c u ltu re is fo rm ed , sh ap ed , a n d re in fo rc ed th ro ugh th e in te rp la y o f t h ese e le m en ts . F or e x am ple :

1.

Str a te g y artic u la te s h ow re so urc es w ill b e fo cu se d an d ap plie d to acco m plis h t h e o rg an iz atio n’s m is sio n.

2.

Str u ctu re d ete rm in es p ositio nin g a n d a rra n gem en t o f re so urc es th e org an iz atio n w ill n eed to c arry o ut th is s tr a te g y to e n su re th e m is sio n is ach ie v ed .

3.

Peo ple a re d ep lo yed w ith in th e str u ctu re to c arry o ut th e re q uir e d work .

4.

Pro cesse s are th e im ple m en ta tio n of w ork an d th e w ay s th e org an iz atio n f u nctio ns.

The in te rp la y o f th ese fo ur c o m ponen ts e n ab le s m is sio n a cco m plis h m en t a n d fo rg in g o f c u ltu re . W hen th ey a re in b ala n ce, th ere is h arm onio us o pera tio n a n d fu nctio nin g; th e c u ltu re is p ositiv e a n d s u pports m is sio n a cco m plis h m en t. W hen th ere is a n im bala n ce a m ong th ese f o ur e le m en ts , th e o rg an iz atio n’s p erfo rm an ce will in ev ita b ly be su boptim al. Poorly defin ed str a te g y; outd ate d str u ctu re s; dysfu nctio nal, i n effic ie n t p ro cesse s; a n d a l a ck o f t h e r ig ht p eo ple a t c ritic al l e v els will c au se d is a p poin tm en t a n d b rin g th e o rg an iz atio n to a n u n tim ely e n d if le ft unad dre sse d . C ultu re is f o rm ed b y th e c o ntin ual in te ra ctio n o f th ese f o ur b uild in g blo ck s.

Asse ssin g a n O rg an iz a tio n ’s C ult u re There are m an y ap pro ach es to unders ta n din g an d w ork in g w ith co ncep ts su rro undin g o rg an iz atio nal c u ltu re . A doptin g a n d w ork in g f ro m a m odel p ro vid es a fo undatio n an d fra m e of re fe re n ce. Org an iz atio nal cu ltu re m odels an d asse ssm en t to ols h av e b een d ev elo ped b y le ad in g o rg an iz atio ns s u ch a s G allu p, Hum an S ynerg is tic s, D en is o n, B le ssin gW hite , a n d m an y o th ers to h elp le ad ers not o nly u nders ta n d th e o rg an iz atio n’s cu rre n t cu ltu re b ut als o in fo rm ula tin g re sp onse i n itia tiv es a n d c h an ge m an ag em en t p ro gra m s.

Lead ers c an u se a n y o ne o f th e m odels a s th e b asis f o r d ia g nostic in str u m en ts , su ch a s e m plo yee a n d m an ag em en t a u dits , a n d a s p art o f w ork fo rc e e n gag em en t stu die s. S uch re se arc h c an re v eal th e n atu re o f a n o rg an iz atio n’s c u rre n t c u ltu re 64 an d h elp l e ad ers d ete rm in e w hic h a sp ects o f t h e c u ltu re m ay b e p re v en tin g i t f ro m ach ie v in g p eak p erfo rm an ce.

Most to ols a re b uilt to a sse ss a sp ects o f o rg an iz atio n p ro cesse s o r f u nctio nin g, su ch as o pen ness o f co m munic atio n, em pow erm en t, d ecis io n m ak in g, u se s o f pow er, ris k ta k in g, a n d a ch ie v em en t o rie n ta tio n; o th ers lo ok to th e e th os o f th e org an iz atio n as ex perie n ced in esp ouse d an d pra ctic ed valu es, im porta n ce of ritu als , n atu re o f w ork fo rc e in te ra ctio ns a n d re la tio nsh ip s, p ace o f c h an ge, a n d how s y m bols a n d s to rie s a re u se d .

Mea su rin g C ult u re a t t h e S ou rce Cultu re m easu re m en t c an o nly t a k e p la ce a t i ts s o urc e: t h ose w ho w ork w ith in t h e cu ltu re , its m em bers at all le v els of th e org an iz atio n. N o sin gle gro up of em plo yees is lik ely to p ro vid e a co m ple te p ic tu re o f th e cu ltu re . T his ap plie s acro ss opera tio nal an d fu nctio nal are as, w here dif fe rin g gro ups w ith in an org an iz atio n m ay sh are co m mon valu es but hav e dif fe re n t pra ctic es an d pro ced ure s. P eo ple a t v ario us o rg an iz atio nal le v els , fro m se n io r e x ecu tiv es a n d mid dle m an ag em en t to a sse m bly lin e w ork ers , w ill e x perie n ce th e o rg an iz atio n’s cu ltu re t h ro ugh t h e l e n s o f t h eir o w n e x perie n ces.

With t h is i n m in d, i t c an b e h elp fu l to c o nduct a s u rv ey f o r e ith er a ll e m plo yees or a re p re se n ta tiv e sa m ple of th e w ork fo rc e. T his ap pro ach offe rs num ero us ben efits w hen d ev elo pin g a co m pre h en siv e v ie w o f o rg an iz atio nal cu ltu re ; fo r in sta n ce:

A su rv ey is o ne o f th e b est w ay s to in volv e e m plo yees in th e p ro cess o f dev elo pin g a n d e n ab lin g a n ew b usin ess str a te g y, su ch a s p art o f m erg er in te g ra tio n. The su rv ey co m munic ate s to em plo yees th e is su es th at man ag em en t f e els a re im porta n t f o r th e f u tu re o f th e c o m pan y. I t a ls o s e rv es as a to ol to m an ag e em plo yee ex pecta tio ns ab out co m in g ch an ges.

Partic u la rly pow erfu l in th is re g ard is how th e re se arc h fin din gs are co m munic ate d b ack t o t h e w ork fo rc e.

Em plo yees c an p ro vid e p erc ep tu al in fo rm atio n in a q uan tif ia b le w ay s o th at th e c o m pan y p olic ie s a n d p ra ctic es c an b e e v alu ate d f o r e ffic acy . S urv ey in g may p ro be b ey ond th e ex am in atio n o f fo rm al str u ctu re s an d p ro cesse s to pro vid e in sig hts in to th e d riv ers th at h av e a n im pact o n m otiv atio n f o r w ork an d o rg an iz atio nal c h alle n ges. A n e m plo yee s u rv ey a ls o p ro vid es q uan tif ie d in fo rm atio n o n e m plo yees’ v ie w s o f th eir r e la tio nsh ip s w ith in th e c o m pan y.

Rese arc h lim ite d to c ata lo gin g fo rm al p olic ie s a n d p ro ced ure s a lo ne c an not re v eal w heth er e m plo yees b elie v e th ey a re b ein g tr e ate d e q uita b ly , w heth er th ey t r u st m an ag em en t, o r w heth er t h ey f e el p rid e i n t h e c o m pan y.

Em plo yees pro vid e valu ab le perc ep tio ns of how th in gs re ally work th ro ughout th e o rg an iz atio n. M ore th an ex pre ssio ns o f em plo yee m ora le , 65 when an aly zed pro fe ssio nally su ch re su lts beco m e esse n tia l in fo rm atio n ab out th e c u rre n t c u ltu re to b e u se d b y m an ag em en t in p la n nin g f o r b oth th e co m pan y’s fu tu re an d ad dre ssin g near-te rm is su es. Alth ough a co m pre h en siv e c u ltu re s u rv ey c an b e a c o m ple x p ro je ct, it is a n im porta n t an d n ecessa ry f ir s t s te p i n u nderta k in g a c u ltu re s h if t.

Curren t C ult u re V ersu s I d ea l C ult u re Once a n o rg an iz atio n h as a c le ar p ic tu re o f its c u rre n t c u ltu re , le ad ers m ay fin d th at th e c u ltu re is n ot a lig ned w ith th e f u tu re v is io n a n d b usin ess s tr a te g y in w ay s th at f a cilita te m is sio n a ch ie v em en t a n d m ax im um p erfo rm an ce. W hen t h is o ccu rs , th e p ro cess o f c h an ge b eg in s b y d efin in g th e o rg an iz atio n’s id eal c u ltu re — th e cu ltu re th at e n ab le s a n d fa cilita te s fu lf illin g th e v is io n a n d b usin ess s tr a te g y. A cle ar p ic tu re o f th e id eal c u ltu re w ill b e u se d a s a g uid e b y le ad ers a s th ey a sse ss th e d if fe re n ces b etw een w here th eir o rg an iz atio n is v ers u s w here it n eed s to b e. I t is a n a sp ir a tio nal v ie w t h at o fte n f in ds i ts w ay i n to v is io n s ta te m en ts .

Id eal c u ltu re r e se arc h a n d f o rm ula tio n s h ould b e i n fo rm ed b y t h e o rg an iz atio n’s busin ess s tr a te g y a n d b y th ose e m plo yees w ho a re c lo se st to th e b usin ess s tr a te g y an d i ts c u sto m ers o r c lie n ts . T hese i n div id uals a re t r u ly i n p ositio ns t o h elp d efin e th e id eal cu ltu re . B y ask in g le ad ers and ra n k-a n d-file em plo yees ab out th eir perc ep tio ns of th e cu rre n t an d id eal cu ltu re s, an org an iz atio n can dev elo p a pan ora m ic v ie w th at in fo rm s a n d g uid es e ffo rts to c o nfro nt th e c h alle n ges o f a ch an ge m an ag em en t p ro gra m . T his g ap a n aly sis c an p in poin t a re as s o t h at l e ad ers can d ir e ct t h e p ro cess o f m ovin g t h e c u rre n t c u ltu re t o w ard i ts i d eal c u ltu re .

Colle ctin g L ea d ers’ V ie w s o f t h e C ult u re A c u ltu ra l a u dit o f a n o rg an iz atio n’s s e n io r le ad ers c an c o m ple m en t th e in sig hts gath ere d in th e e m plo yee c u ltu re s u rv ey a n d p ro vid e a f ra m ew ork f o r d is c u ssio n am ong decis io n m ak ers ab out th e im pact of cu ltu re on an org an iz atio n. In partic u la r, i t a ls o o ffe rs a p ic tu re o f t h e d if fe re n t v ie w s o f c u ltu re t h at e x is t w ith in th e le ad ers h ip te am . E xecu tiv es a re a b le to s e e a g re em en t w ith in th eir o w n r a n ks on th e id eal c u ltu re , h ow it is s h ap ed th ro ugh th e v ario us c h an ge le v ers , a n d th eir perc ep tio ns o f t h e c u rre n t c u ltu re .

For m an y le ad ers h ip te am s, th is usu ally le ad s to dis c u ssio ns ab out th e im plic atio ns o f th ese g ap s, w hat c o uld c h an ge b y c lo sin g th e g ap s, w hic h c u ltu re build in g b lo ck s s h ould h av e p rio rity , a n d w hic h w ill h av e th e b ig gest im pact o n th e o rg an iz atio n.

A c u ltu ra l a u dit w ith se n io r le ad ers c o uld b e o ffe re d a s p art o f a n e x ecu tiv e work sh op or re tr e at. C ouple d w ith em plo yee su rv ey re su lts , th e in fo rm atio n gath ere d th ro ugh th e a u dit te lls th e s to ry o f th e c u ltu re w ith in th e o rg an iz atio n.

Tak en to geth er, th ese re su lts h ig hlig ht th e o rg an iz atio nal c u ltu re a n d s h ow h ow 66 cu ltu re m an if e sts its e lf in th e b eh av io rs th at p eo ple e x pect f ro m e ach o th er in th e org an iz atio n. T hese r e su lts m ay a ls o p ro vid e a h ig h-le v el v ie w o f h ow d if fe re n ces in c erta in i n div id ual c h ara cte ris tic s ( s u ch a s t e n ure i n t h e o rg an iz atio n, l e v el i n t h e org an iz atio n, o r o th er d em ogra p hic s) a ffe ct p eo ple ’s p erc ep tio ns a b out e x pecte d beh av io rs .

Analy zin g R esu lt s a n d E valu atin g G ap s The r e su lts o f th e e m plo yee s u rv ey a n d th e e x ecu tiv e a u dit c an b e a n aly zed in a num ber o f w ay s:

Com parin g th e c u rre n t c u ltu re a s d esc rib ed b y th e e m plo yee s u rv ey w ith th e cu rre n t cu ltu re desc rib ed by th e ex ecu tiv es in th e ex ecu tiv e au dit. T his en ab le s org an iz atio n le ad ers to dete rm in e th e ex te n t to whic h th eir perc ep tio ns m atc h o vera ll e m plo yee p erc ep tio ns o f t h e c u rre n t c u ltu re .

Evalu atin g e m plo yee s u rv ey r e su lts a cro ss d if fe re n t f u nctio nal g ro ups w ith in th e o rg an iz atio n o r e v en a cro ss s u ch v aria b le s a s o rg an iz atio nal le v el. T his help s to id en tif y su bcu ltu re s with in an org an iz atio n, whic h can be partic u la rly v alu ab le in re v ealin g a re as o r g ro ups th at c an b e e ith er c h an ge ch am pio ns o r b arrie rs to c h an ge. T o th e e x te n t th at s u ch s u bgro ups c an b e id en tif ie d e arly in a c h an ge p ro cess, a tte n tio n a n d re so urc es c an b e a p plie d th at w ill f a cilita te a s m ooth er c h an ge p ro cess.

Com parin g cu ltu re asse ssm en t re su lts in dep th help s busin ess le ad ers unders ta n d t h e c u ltu re g ap s t h at e x is t a cro ss t h e o rg an iz atio n. B y p ro bin g t h e gap s, b usin ess le ad ers c an m ak e th e str a te g ic d ecis io ns th at m ap w ay s to ch an ge o r s h ap e t h e c u ltu re .

Of co urs e , not all gap s need im med ia te atte n tio n. For in sta n ce, in an org an iz atio n w here atte n tio n to deta il is partic u la rly im porta n t (s u ch as an acco untin g f ir m o r a p re cis io n to ol- a n d-d ie m ak er), g ap s b etw een th e c u rre n t a n d desir e d cu ltu re s aro und re w ard an d re co gnitio n m ay be ig nore d in ord er to co ncen tr a te o n m ore sig nif ic an t g ap s— fo r e x am ple , in p erc ep tio ns a b out w ork pro cesse s a im ed a t a ccu ra cy a n d r e lia b ility . S ele ctin g w hic h g ap s to c lo se c an b e as i m porta n t a s t h e m eth ods e m plo yed t o c lo se t h em .

In a d ditio n, th e g ap a n aly sis a n d s e le ctio n p ro cess s h ould le ad to a d is c u ssio n ab out c h an ge i m ple m en ta tio n a n d t h e p ra ctic al i s su es s u rro undin g i t. L ead ers m ay need to in itia te fu rth er d is c u ssio ns to d ete rm in e w heth er p ro pose d c h an ges h av e man ag em en t b uy-in , asse ss w heth er th e o rg an iz atio n is re ad y an d p re p are d to em bra ce c h an ge, id en tif y p ote n tia l r o ad blo ck s to b ro ad c h an ge, a n d d ecid e w hic h re so urc es a n d to ols w ill b e r e q uir e d to a ch ie v e a n d s u sta in c h an ge th at m ove th e cu ltu re .

67 Com munic a tio n s a n d C ult u re One o f th e c le are st m an if e sta tio ns o f c u ltu re is c o m munic atio n. C om munic atio n as a pro cess, a fu nctio n, an d a re su lt is both a re fle ctio n an d cau se of th e org an iz atio n’s cu ltu re . How an org an iz atio n co nceiv es an d man ag es co m munic atio n t e lls m ore a b out i ts c u ltu re t h an a n y o th er s in gle p ro cess e le m en t.

The m an ner in w hic h an org an iz atio n ap pro ach es co m munic atio n polic y , sta ffin g, p la n nin g, a n d b udgetin g p ain ts a c le ar p ic tu re o f h ow it th in ks o f its e lf an d how it w is h es to re la te to em plo yees an d its ex te rn al co nstitu en cie s:

sh are h old ers , cu sto m ers , an d th e public at la rg e. O ne of th e m ost im porta n t asp ects in th is re g ard is w heth er th e v alu es o f th e o rg an iz atio n’s e x te rn al b ra n d are c o m munic ate d to , a n d re fle cte d b y, th e in te rn al b eh av io r o f its e m plo yees.

Wheth er b ra n d v alu es a re re fle cte d in h ow e m plo yees a re tr e ate d , h ow h um an re so urc e p ro gra m s are fa sh io ned , an d h ow th ey are co m munic ate d b eco m e a pote n t f o rc e f o r s h ap in g t h e d esir e d c u ltu re .

Open ness, a w illin gness to a ctiv ely g ath er p erc ep tio n a n d o pin io n, in fo rm atio n sh arin g, c o m munic atio n p la n nin g, th e in te g ra tio n a n d a p plic atio n o f te ch nolo gy, an d p re p ara tio n a n d d ev elo pm en t o f s u perv is o rs to c o m munic ate e ffe ctiv ely w ith th eir p eo ple a ll p ain t a c le ar p ic tu re o f t h e o rg an iz atio n’s c u ltu re . T hese v ery t o ols can h elp g uid e a n d s h ap e a n ew c u ltu re .

Com munic a tio n s I s a C rit ic a l P ro cess f o r Cult u ra l C han ge Alth ough o rg an iz atio nal c u ltu re is p ers is te n t a n d te n acio us, it is n ot im muta b le .

With a c le ar str a te g y b ase d o n a v alid ra tio nale , d eta ile d im ple m en ta tio n p la n s an d co ncerte d effo rt su sta in ed over tim e, an org an iz atio n’s cu ltu re can be ch an ged .

Man y p ro cess e le m en ts m ust b e in te g ra te d to s h ap e a n d d ev elo p a s u sta in ab le cu ltu re . T hese e le m en ts in clu de b asic s te p s in c h an ge m an ag em en t: p re se n ta tio n of th e ra tio nale fo r c h an ge a n d d ev elo pm en t o f su pport p ro cesse s, su ch a s th e desig n o f r e w ard s y ste m s ( in clu din g p ay , b en efits , p erfo rm an ce m an ag em en t, a n d tr a in in g a n d d ev elo pm en t) to th e m ore s tr a te g ic fra m in g o f v is io n a n d d efin in g valu es. B ut a ll o f th ese a re u ltim ate ly d ep en den t o n th e a ct o f c o m munic atin g th em : of co nvey in g th eir purp ose an d im ple m en ta tio n of each pro gra m fo r man ag em en t an d em plo yees th ro ughout th e en te rp ris e . T hus, co m munic atio n moves t o c en te r s ta g e i n t h e m atte r o f b rin gin g a b out c u ltu ra l c h an ge.

The tr u e p ow er o f c o m munic atio n a s a fo rc e to h elp im ple m en t a n d s u sta in a cu ltu re ch an ge is its ab ility to w in th e hearts an d m in ds of em plo yees— to esta b lis h tr u st in a c lim ate o f tr a n sp are n cy . S uch c o m munic atio n c re ate s a v alu e ch ain th at c an re su lt in im pro ved c u sto m er s e rv ic e, p ro ductiv ity , a n d u ltim ate ly 68 mis sio n a cco m plis h m en t. T o w in h earts a n d m in ds o f e m plo yees a t a ll le v els , how ev er, re q uir e s c o m pre h en siv e c o m munic atio n p la n nin g, fro m s tr a te g ic to th e ta ctic al p ro gra m ex ecu tio n. It re q uir e s su sta in ed activ ity acro ss a sp ectr u m o f co m munic atio n ch an nels an d sta k eh old ers , fro m fa ce-to -fa ce to mass co m munic atio n a ctiv ity . I t a ls o d em an ds le ad ers h ip in te ra ctiv ity a n d p artic ip atio n th ro ughout th e o rg an iz atio n, fro m th e b oard ro om to th e m ailr o om . O nly w hen co m munic atio n beco m es tw o-w ay , open an d tr u st build in g, ra th er th an th e dow nw ard dis se m in atio n of in fo rm atio n, can cu ltu re ch an ge in itia tiv es be underta k en w ith a r e alis tic h ope o f s u ccess.

The R ela tio n sh ip b etw een O rg an iz a tio n al Cult u re a n d N atio n al C ult u re One im porta n t a sp ect o f o rg an iz atio nal c u ltu re is th e in te rre la tio nsh ip b etw een org an iz atio nal cu ltu re an d natio nal cu ltu re . G lo baliz atio n is a fa ct of lif e , co nnectin g b usin esse s a n d m ark ets a cro ss d is ta n ces w id er a n d m ore c o m ple x t h an ev er b efo re . S ale s o ffic es, m an ufa ctu rin g o pera tio ns, s ta ff a n d lin e f u nctio ns n ow sp an t h e g lo be f a r f ro m a n o rg an iz atio n’s t r a d itio nal h ead quarte rs . L ead ers h ip a n d co ntr o l fu nctio ns, aid ed by te ch nolo gy, im pose th e co rp ora te bra n d of th e co rp ora te cu ltu re th ro ugh th e filte r of th e lo cal natio nal cu ltu re . G lo bal org an iz atio ns a re le arn in g m ore a b out h ow to c o nduct b usin ess s im ulta n eo usly in man y d if fe re n t e co nom ic , s o cia l, a n d p olitic al e n vir o nm en ts th ro ugh s ta n dard iz ed pro ced ure s a n d c o ntin ual c o m munic atio n, b ut th e ro le o f n atio nal c u ltu re s m ay not b e f u lly a p pre cia te d n or u nders to od.

When c o nsid erin g th e f it b etw een b usin ess s tr a te g y a n d c u ltu re , a m ultin atio nal org an iz atio n m ust c o nsid er d if fe rin g n atio nal v alu es a n d c u sto m s th at m ay p la ce co nstr a in ts o n c o rp ora te p ra ctic es in its v ario us b ra n ch a n d p la n t lo catio ns. T oo ofte n m an ag ers fin d th at a n a ccep te d h om e o ffic e p ro ced ure d oes n ot tr a n sla te easily in to opera tio ns half w ay aro und th e w orld , an d it is m ore th an ju st a la n guag e i s su e.

Multin atio nal o rg an iz atio ns a re a ffe cte d in tw o w ay s. F ir s t, o rg an iz atio ns o fte n re fle ct th e n atio nal c u ltu re o f th eir c o untr y o f o rig in . A c o m monly c ite d e x am ple is J a p an ese b usin esse s i n c o m paris o n t o U .S . b usin esse s; i n J a p an , g ro up b eh av io r an d p erfo rm an ce are em phasiz ed o ver in div id ual p erfo rm an ce. T hus, b usin ess str a te g ie s th at re q uir e a h ig h d eg re e o f te am work w ill b en efit fro m th e J a p an ese model ra th er th an th e U .S . m od el, w hic h o fte n e n co ura g es in div id ual in novatio n an d a ch ie v em en t.

Seco nd, org an iz atio ns doin g busin ess outs id e th eir hom e co untr y th at hav e su cceed ed h av e le arn ed to a d ap t th eir u su al a p pro ach es a n d p erm it d if fe re n ces in are as d eem ed n onesse n tia l; th ey re q uir e c o m plia n ce o nly in th ose a re as th at a re busin ess e sse n tia l, m in dfu l th at busin ess e sse n tia l d ete rm in atio ns r e q uir e a n aly sis 69 an d c are fu l im ple m en ta tio n. F or e x am ple , o rg an iz atio n A f ro m th e U nite d S ta te s belie v es in ta k in g a f a ir a m ount o f r is k in e x pan din g its lin es o f b usin ess. B ut its opera tio n ab ro ad d oes b usin ess in an en vir o nm en t th at d oes n ot v alu e ris k in fin an cia l d ealin gs. T o e x pan d its lin es o f b usin ess in th at c o untr y w ith m oney borro w ed lo cally m ay h av e b een th ought a d vis a b le . L ocal b an ks, h ow ev er, m ay not c o nsid er th is o rg an iz atio n a g ood c an did ate fo r a lo an b ecau se th ey p erc eiv e its beh av io r as to o ris k y. Successfu l m ultin atio nal org an iz atio ns co nsc io usly decid e to m odif y th eir b usin ess p ra ctic es to h arm oniz e w ith lo cal o rg an iz atio nal pra ctic es, partic u la rly th ose lik ely to to uch natio nal cu ltu ra l valu es. T his is partic u la rly t r u e w hen d ealin g w ith w ork fo rc e i s su es— fro m h ir in g t o s e ttin g w ag e an d b en efit le v els to d ealin g w ith lo cal la b or la w s a n d e m plo yee c o m munic atio n pra ctic es.

Modern tr e n ds in g lo bal c o m munic atio n c o uple d w ith th e g lo baliz atio n o f tr a d e may u ltim ate ly l e ad t o a m ore a ccep tin g g lo bal b usin ess c u ltu re t h at w ill s o fte n o r blu r n atio nal d if fe re n ces r e la tiv e to b usin ess o pera tin g c u ltu re s. B ut c u rre n tly it is critic al to re co gniz e an d unders ta n d th e pote n tia l in co m patib ilitie s betw een natio nal a n d o rg an iz atio nal c u ltu re s, w hile n ot o verlo okin g th e p oin ts o f c o m mon in te re st a n d c o m mon p ra ctic e.

Case i n P oin t: A m eric a O nlin e a n d T im e Warn er On J a n uary 1 0, 2 000, S te p hen C ase , c o fo under o f A m eric a O nlin e, a n d G era ld Lev in , C EO o f T im e W arn er, a n nounced th e m erg er tr a n sa ctio n b etw een A OL an d T im e W arn er— a d eal th at h ad b een v alu ed a t $ 350 b illio n. I t w ould b eco m e th e la rg est m erg er in A m eric an h is to ry a n d a g ro undbre ak in g c o m bin atio n o f s iz e an d s c ale in th e m ed ia in dustr y . B ut a s m an y n ow r e call, it is a ls o b elie v ed to b e one o f t h e m ost u nsu ccessfu l t r a n sa ctio ns i n h is to ry ( A ra n go, 2 010).

In 1 999, w hen th e tw o o rg an iz atio ns b eg an ta lk s o f a m erg er, th e v is io n w as to “cre ate u npre ced en te d a n d in sta n ta n eo us a ccess to e v ery fo rm o f m ed ia a n d to unle ash im men se p ossib ilitie s fo r eco nom ic g ro w th , h um an u nders ta n din g an d cre ativ e e x pre ssio n” ( A ra n go, 2 010, p . 1 ). A OL a n d T im e W arn er w ould c o m bin e a le ad in g c o nte n t p ro vid er w ith th e w orld ’s le ad in g In te rn et p ro vid er to c re ate co untle ss s y nerg ie s a n d d eliv er e n han ced s e rv ic es, e co nom ie s o f s c ale , p ro m ote med ia c o nverg en ce, a n d u ltim ate ly in cre ase r e v en ues. A s th e tw o p rim ary le ad ers in th eir d is tin ct m ed ia m ark ets , th e c o m pan ie s b elie v ed th at th e c o m bin atio n w as desig ned t o b e b oth p ro fita b le a n d g ro undbre ak in g ( A lb arra n & G orm ly , 2 004).

The I m pact o f P eo p le a n d C ult u re But o nly tw o y ears afte r th e m erg er re ceiv ed re g ula to ry ap pro val (in Ja n uary 70 2001), th e tr a n sa ctio n h ad a lr e ad y b een la b ele d a s a fa ilu re d ue to o ne c o lo ssa l blu nder: th e m is m an ag em en t of peo ple an d org an iz atio nal cu ltu re s. O ne key re aso n th at m erg ers do not ach ie v e in te n ded busin ess re su lts is th at m an y co m pan ie s d o n ot s p en d e n ough tim e e v alu atin g th e im pact th at th e m erg er w ill hav e o n em plo yees (G ale , 2 003). A ls o , th e ch an ce o f su ccess is in cre asin gly hin dere d if th e c o rp ora te c u ltu re s o f th e o rg an iz atio ns a re v astly d if fe re n t. “ W hen a co m pan y is acq uir e d , th e d ecis io n is ty pic ally b ase d o n p ro duct o r m ark et sy nerg ie s, b ut c u ltu ra l d if fe re n ces a re ra re ly e x am in ed o r e v en a ck now le d ged ” (G ale , 2 003, p . 6 0).

In th e c ase o f A OL/T im e W arn er, b oth s id es w ere a w are o f c u ltu ra l d if fe re n ces prio r to th e fin al tr a n sa ctio n. A OL’s fa st- p aced , y outh fu l c u ltu re re p re se n te d a sig nif ic an tly d if fe re n t a p pro ach t o d ay -to -d ay o pera tio ns t h an T im e W arn er’s l o ng se rv ic e, to w hic h th e vete ra n em plo yees w ere accu sto m ed . Tim e W arn er em plo yees h ad t h eir l o ngtim e b en efits a n d p ro fit- s h arin g p ro gra m t a k en a w ay ; t h e re p la cem en t d id n ot y ie ld th e s a m e re tu rn s. A OL’s to p-d ow n m an ag em en t s ty le cla sh ed w ith T im e W arn er’s se lf -g overn ed busin ess units . Som e em plo yees cla im ed th at k ey p ositio ns f o rm erly h eld b y T im e W arn er v ete ra n s w ere q uic k ly re assig ned to A OL sta ff— ra p id ly deg ra d in g em plo yee tr u st an d en gag em en t durin g th e tim e o f c h an ge a n d in cre asin g a ttitu des o f o ppre ssio n a n d re b ellio n am ong le g acy T im e W arn er e m plo yees ( A lb arra n & G orm ly , 2 004). S tr a te g y a n d str u ctu re w ere d if fe re n t, a s w ere k ey p ro cesse s fro m p la n nin g, b udgetin g, a n d hum an re so urc e m an ag em en t. T he m ag nitu de o f th ese d if fe re n ces an d h ow to pro ceed in th e fa ce of th e ch alle n ges of cu ltu re in te g ra tio n an d ch an ge man ag em en t w as u ndere stim ate d .

“T o b e su ccessfu l in a m erg er, y ou h av e to sh ow re sp ect fo r th e acq uir e d co m pan y’s c u ltu re a n d w ay s,” s a id B ill B elg ard , p re sid en t o f th e B elg ard G ro up.

“Y our g oal s h ould b e to a ch ie v e s o m eth in g to geth er th at n eith er c o m pan y c o uld do a lo ne” ( G ale , 2 003, p . 6 0). B ut a s R ic h ard P ars o ns, f o rm er c o -c h ie f o pera tin g offic er a n d la te r C EO , r e calls , “ I r e m em ber s a y in g a t a b oard m eetin g w here w e ap pro ved th is , th at lif e w as g oin g to b e d if fe re n t g oin g fo rw ard b ecau se th ey ’re very d if fe re n t c u ltu re s, b ut I h av e to te ll y ou, I u ndere stim ate d h ow d if fe re n t” (A ra n go, 2 010, p . 1 ).

Ten Y ea rs L ate r Experts a n d e x ecu tiv es a lik e r e call th e im pact o f th e m erg er o n th e c o m pan ie s in su bse q uen t years w ith co untle ss jo b lo sse s, dev asta te d em plo yee re tir e m en t acco unts , a n d e v en in vestig atio ns b y th e S ecu ritie s a n d E xch an ge C om mis sio n an d th e J u stic e D ep artm en t. In p re se n t- d ay c alc u la tio ns, th e c o m bin ed v alu es o f th e c o m pan ie s, w hic h h av e sin ce b een sp lit, d ro pped to n early o ne-s e v en th o f th eir w orth a s o f o ne d ay b efo re th e m erg er (A ra n go, 2 010). In a fin al th ought, Pars o ns s ta te d , “ T he b usin ess m odel s o rt o f c o lla p se d u nder u s, a n d th en fin ally 71 th is c u ltu ra l m atte r. A s I s a id , it w as b ey ond c erta in ly m y a b ilitie s to fig ure o ut how to b le n d th e o ld m ed ia a n d th e n ew m ed ia c u ltu re s. T hey w ere lik e d if fe re n t sp ecie s, a n d i n f a ct, t h ey w ere s p ecie s t h at w ere i n here n tly a t w ar” ( A ra n go, 2 010, p. 1 ).

Refe re n ces Alb arra n , A . B . & G orm ly , R . K . ( 2 004). S tr a te g ic r e sp onse o r s tr a te g ic b lu nder?

An ex am in atio n of A OL T im e W arn er an d V iv en di U niv ers a l. In R obert G .

Pic ard (E d.) , Str a te g ic re sp onse s to med ia mark et ch anges (p p. 35–46).

Jö nköpin g, S w ed en : J ö nköpin g I n te rn atio nal B usin ess S ch ool.

Ara n go, T . (2 010, J a n uary 1 1). In re tr o sp ect: H ow it w en t s o w ro ng. N ew Y ork Tim es, B 1.

Gale , S . F . (2 003, F eb ru ary ). M em o to A OL T im e W arn er: W hy m erg ers fa il.

Work fo rc e M anagem en t , 8 2(2 ), 6 0–63.

Gers tn er, L . V ., Jr. (2 002).

Who sa ys ele p hants ca n’t dance?

N ew Y ork :

Harp erC ollin s.

Hofs te d e, G . (1 994).

Unco m mon se n se a bout o rg aniz a tio ns: C ase stu die s a nd fie ld o bse rv a tio ns . T housa n d O ak s, C A : S ag e.

Tro m pen aars , F ., & H am pden -T urn er, C . (1 997).

Rid in g th e w aves o f c u ltu re :

Understa ndin g d iv ersity i n g lo bal b usin ess . N ew Y ork : M cG ra w -H ill.

72 CH APTE R F O UR C O M MUNIC ATIO N A N D T H E H IG H -T R U ST ORG AN IZ A TIO N Pam ela S hock le y -Z ala b ak , S herw yn M orrea le The g lo bal f in an cia l c ris is , w hic h b eg an in 2 008, g en era te d f e ar th at c ir c le d th e g lo be an d re su lte d in w hat m an y h av e calle d an u npre ced en te d tr u st cra sh . W hile it is im possib le to u nders ta n d a ll a sp ects o f th e f in an cia l c ris is , most ag re e th at tr u st an d dis tr u st are affe ctin g actio ns of div ers e sta k eh old ers : co rp ora tio ns, g overn m en ts , cu sto m ers , th e p ublic , in div id ual in vesto rs , r e g ula to rs , a n d g lo bal a llia n ces, to n am e o nly a f e w . I n a n a g e o f glo baliz atio n, s c an dals in a ll ty pes o f o rg an iz atio ns, fa st- p aced c h an ge, a n d new p re ssu re s fo r in novatio n in p ro cesse s, fo rm s, an d re la tio nsh ip s p la ce in cre asin g im porta n ce on th e so m ew hat elu siv e notio n of org an iz atio nal tr u st. T ru st is c o nsid ere d p iv ota l f o r n etw ork s, a llia n ces, u se s o f in fo rm atio n te ch nolo gie s, w ork pla ce d iv ers ity , c u sto m er lo yalty , d ecen tr a liz ed d ecis io n mak in g, a n d th e lis t g oes o n. Y et, f e w p eo ple f u lly u nders ta n d w hat it ta k es fo r a n o rg an iz atio n to b e c o nsid ere d tr u stw orth y. T ru st in flu en ces a w id e ra n ge o f e m plo yee a n d s ta k eh old er b eh av io rs a n d i s d ir e ctly l in ked t o o vera ll org an iz atio nal p erfo rm an ce. H ow ev er, th e e v id en ce is c le ar: f e w le ad ers a n d co m munic atio n p ro fe ssio nals r e g ula rly f o cu s d ir e ctly o n t r u st.

T his ch ap te r arg ues th at org an iz atio nal tr u st is a fu ndam en ta l le ad ers h ip r e sp onsib ility an d a gro w in g are a of re sp onsib ility fo r co m munic atio n p ro fe ssio nals . W e go so fa r as to cla im th at tr u st is th e main th in g fo r o rg an iz atio nal e x celle n ce. W e o utlin e o ur w ork fro m 2 000 to th e p re se n t w ith r e g ard to b uild in g th e h ig h-tr u st o rg an iz atio n. W e d esc rib e o rg an iz atio nal tr u st, i d en tif y its im pact o n ex celle n ce, p re se n t o ur fiv e-d riv er m odel fo r tr u st, an d a p ply th e m odel to d iv ers e o rg an iz atio nal ro le s a n d fu nctio ns. W e c o nclu de th at b uild in g tr u st is a n in cre asin gly im porta n t re sp onsib ility fo r a ll c o m munic atio n p ro fe ssio nals .

U ndersta n din g a n d V alu in g O rg an iz a tio n al Tru st 73 Num ero us d efin itio ns o f t r u st c o ncern t r u st t h at r e su lts f ro m p ositiv e e x pecta tio ns ab out a n oth er’s c o nduct, a n d d is tr u st r e fle ctin g n eg ativ e e x pecta tio ns o f a n oth er’s beh av io r. T he k ey i s b eh av io r. W hile e v ery one h as i n div id ual i n te n tio ns, a n d e v en en tir e o rg an iz atio ns h av e i n te n tio ns, t h e t r u st- d is tr u st e v alu atio n i s d ete rm in ed n ot by w hat w e in te n d but by our beh av io r. T here are num ero us ex am ple s of in div id uals a n d o rg an iz atio ns in te n din g to d eceiv e o r a t th e v ery le ast m ask th e fu ll re ality of a situ atio n. O fte n th ese decep tio ns hav e been su ccessfu l w ith beh av io rs a n d, a t le ast in itia lly , ju dged to b e tr u stw orth y. W e a ls o c an r e m em ber en te rin g a gro up an d dis tr u stin g w hat m ig ht hap pen . W hen w e co ntr a st th at ex perie n ce w ith e n te rin g a g ro up w here tr u st le v els w ere h ig h, w e q uic k ly r e aliz e past b eh av io rs a n d e x perie n ces i n flu en ce o ur e x pecta tio ns o f f u tu re b eh av io rs a n d ex perie n ces. B ase d on our re se arc h , w e desc rib e an d utiliz e th e fo llo w in g defin itio n o f o rg an iz atio nal t r u st:

The o rg an iz atio n’s w illin gness, b ase d u pon its c u ltu re a n d c o m munic atio n beh av io rs in re la tio nsh ip s a n d tr a n sa ctio ns, to b e a p pro pria te ly v uln era b le base d on th e belie f th at an o th er in div id ual, gro up, or org an iz atio n is co m pete n t, open an d honest, co ncern ed , re lia b le , an d id en tif ie d w ith co m mon goals , norm s, an d valu es. (S hock le y -Z ala b ak , E llis , & C esa ria , 2000, p . 4 ) Org an iz atio nal tr u st h as m an y fa ces. O ur e x perie n ce h elp s u s u nders ta n d th at tr u st i s m ultile vele d .

T his m ean s t r u st i n te ra ctio ns i n clu de l e ad er, c o w ork er, t e am , org an iz atio n, m ulti- o rg an iz atio n, a n d s ta k eh old er r e la tio nsh ip s.

Tru st i s c u ltu ra lly ro ote d .

It is c lo se ly tie d to th e n orm s, v alu es, a n d b elie fs o f th e o rg an iz atio n. It als o r e la te s t o b ro ad er n atio nal a n d r e g io nal c u ltu re s. T ru st b uild in g c an not i g nore ex is tin g c u ltu re s o f tr u st o r d is tr u st.

Tru st is c o m munic a tio n b ase d .

It in flu en ces an d is th e outc o m e of co m munic atio n beh av io rs su ch as pro vid in g accu ra te in fo rm atio n, g iv in g ex pla n atio ns fo r d ecis io ns, an d d em onstr a tin g sin cere an d ap pro pria te open ness. Tru st is dir e ctly lin ked to str a te g ic org an iz atio nal co m munic atio n.

Tru st is m ultid im en sio nal.

It is co gnitiv e, b ase d o n fa cts an d an aly sis . I t is e m otio nal, b ase d o n r e actio ns to p eo ple a n d e v en ts . I t is b eh av io ra l, base d on w hat org an iz atio ns co lle ctiv ely an d in div id ually do as a re su lt of co gnitiv e a n d e m otio nal r e actio ns t o p eo ple , e v en ts , c h alle n ges, a n d o pportu nitie s.

Fin ally , tr u st is d yn am ic .

T ru st is c o ntin ually c h an gin g a n d c an c y cle th ro ugh phase s o f b uild in g, s ta b iliz in g, a n d d is so lv in g. J u st a s tr u st c a n ra n ge in d eg re e fro m d is tr u st t o o ptim al t r u st, i t a ls o c an v ary f ro m f ra g ile t o r e silie n t. F ra g ile t r u st dev elo ps o ut o f p erc ep tio ns o f s h ort- te rm o utc o m es, w hile r e silie n t t r u st u su ally i s base d o n a l o ng-te rm h is to ry o f i n te g rity .

The o rg an iz atio n s tr u ctu re s re la tio nsh ip s a n d e n vir o nm en ts fo r in div id uals a n d gro ups, s u bje ct to tr u st e v alu atio ns. I t is h ard e n ough to tr u st f a m ily a n d f rie n ds, le t a lo ne in div id uals w e b are ly k now o r w ith w hom w e h av e little o r n o f a ce-to - fa ce co nta ct. W e usu ally do not get to ch oose our bosse s, te am m em bers , cu sto m ers , o r o th er s ta k eh old ers . In fa ct, th e h ie ra rc h y a n d re la tio nsh ip s d efin ed 74 by th e o rg an iz atio n c h art c an b e d esc rib ed a s a tr u st b lu ep rin t. B y d esc rib in g w ho has th e rig ht to d ecid e a n d w here th e lin kag es a re su ppose d to ta k e p la ce, th e org an iz atio n c h art is a c o m plic ate d w ay o f d esc rib in g h ow o rg an iz atio nal tr u st sh ould w ork . W hile a t so m e le v el th e o rg an iz atio nal c h art d esc rib es h ow tr u st flo w s, f e w i n div id uals w ith o rg an iz atio nal e x perie n ce w ill s a y t h at a d herin g t o t h e ch ain of th e ch art is w hat gen era te s a hig h-tr u st org an iz atio n. A s netw ork s, allia n ces, v ir tu al g ro ups, a n d o th er o rg an iz atio nal fo rm s re p la ce o ld er a n d m ore bure au cra tic m odels , fe w er a n d fe w er o rg an iz atio ns a re o pera tin g a s h ie ra rc h ie s.

Thus, t r u st t h ro ugh c o ntr o l i s r e p la ced b y t r u st t h ro ugh r e la tio nsh ip s.

It is fa ir to c o nclu de th at o rg an iz atio nal tr u st e n co m passe s a w id e v arie ty o f org an iz atio nal re la tio nsh ip s. H ow ev er, o rg an iz atio nal tr u st is a m ore in clu siv e co ncep t th an sim ply in te g ra tin g co m ple x re la tio nsh ip s. It en co m passe s re la tio nsh ip s, b ut it a ls o in clu des a v arie ty o f e n vir o nm en ta l in flu en ces a n d b asic org an iz atio nal c o m pete n cie s. T hese a sp ects o f tr u st a re m ore f u lly d esc rib ed la te r in th is ch ap te r w hen th e tr u st m odel is dis c u sse d fo r both le ad ers an d co m munic atio n p ro fe ssio nals .

Our R ese a rch W ork o n B uild in g H ig h -T ru st Org an iz a tio n s We beg an our effo rts to unders ta n d tr u st in 2000 w ith a gra n t fro m th e In te rn atio nal A sso cia tio n o f B usin ess C om munic ato rs ( IA BC) ( S hock le y -Z ala b ak et a l., 2 000). W e w an te d to u nders ta n d w hat m an y to day f in d c ritic al to s u ccess:

in th e fa ce of th e ch an gin g org an iz atio nal la n dsc ap e, with its re d uced in te rp ers o nal fa m ilia rity a m ong e m plo yees s c atte re d a ro und th e g lo be, h ow c an tr u st co ntr ib ute to an o rg an iz atio n’s ab ility to w ork effe ctiv ely ? W e re v ie w ed more th an 3,5 00 artic le s in th e re se arc h lite ra tu re on tr u st an d w ork ed w ith hundre d s o f o rg an iz atio ns o n is su es re la te d to im pro vin g co m munic atio n an d le ad ers h ip e ffe ctiv en ess. W e in te rv ie w ed a n d ta lk ed w ith le ad ers in o rg an iz atio ns in m ore th an tw en ty -fiv e co untr ie s, in clu din g th e U nite d S ta te s, A sia , A fric a, Euro pe, A ustr a lia , a n d th e M id dle E ast. W e c o lle cte d d ata w orld w id e, in m ultip le la n guag es, to dete rm in e wheth er we co uld id en tif y critic al driv ers of org an iz atio nal tr u st th at would be sta b le acro ss cu ltu re s an d ty pes of org an iz atio ns. T he a n sw er w as s o lid ly in th e a ffir m ativ e. W e c o nclu de fro m o ur re se arc h a n d o ur p ra ctic al e x perie n ces th at tr u st h as b oth h um an a n d fin an cia l co sts (S hock le y -Z ala b ak , M orre ale , & H ack m an , 2 010). It is a m yth th at w e can not d o a n yth in g a b out tr u st— ev ery th in g w e d o is a b out tr u st. T ru st is d ir e ctly lin ked to o rg an iz atio nal e x celle n ce a n d m easu ra b le o rg an iz atio nal o utc o m es. O ur co nclu sio n i s c le ar: t r u st i s t h e m ain t h in g i n a n y o rg an iz atio n.

75 Tru st a n d O rg an iz a tio n al E xcelle n ce Hig h-tr u st org an iz atio ns hav e in cre ase d valu e, accele ra te d gro w th , en han ced in novatio n, im pro ved co lla b ora tio n, str o nger partn erin g, bette r ex ecu tio n, an d heig hte n ed lo yalty . A 2002 stu dy sh ow ed th at hig h-tr u st org an iz atio ns outp erfo rm ed lo w -tr u st org an iz atio ns by 286 perc en t in to ta l re tu rn to sh are h old ers ( s to ck p ric e p lu s d iv id en ds) ( K ra m er & C ook, 2 004). A 2 005 s tu dy su pporte d th ese fin din gs su ggestin g h ig h-tr u st o rg an iz atio ns earn ed m ore th an fo ur tim es th e r e tu rn s o f th e b ro ad er m ark et o ver th e p rio r s e v en y ears ( C ovey & Merrill, 2 008; C ovey , 2 008). B y c o ntr a st, lo w -tr u st o rg an iz atio ns a p pear to f a ce a ble ak fu tu re . R ecen t ex am ple s, ra n gin g fro m E nro n to B ear S te arn s, L eh m an Bro th ers , A IG , a n d T oyota , su pport th e n otio n th at w ith out tr u st o rg an iz atio ns can not t h riv e a n d a ch ie v e e x celle n ce. I t i s n ear-im possib le t o p ic k u p a n ew sp ap er or tu ne in to th e nig htly new s w ith out hearin g of yet an oth er ex am ple of fra u dule n t o r d is h onest c o nduct b y lo cal, n atio nal, o r in te rn atio nal o rg an iz atio ns an d th eir le ad ers . C -S PA N re g ula rly b ro ad casts c o ngre ssio nal in vestig atio ns o f ch ie f e x ecu tiv e o ffic ers (C EO s) w hose in te g rity h ad o nce b een u nble m is h ed b y sc an dal. F or e x am ple , a fte r tw o y ears o f in te rn atio nal c ris e s in f in an cia l m ark ets , a d eg re e o f sta b ility h ad re tu rn ed to th e e co nom ic se cto r. T hen in A pril 2 010, mark ets w ere stu nned by new s th at U .S . se cu ritie s re g ula to rs had ch arg ed Gold m an S ach s, th e w orld ’s to p c o m moditie s b ro ker, w ith fra u d in c o nnectio n with m ortg ag e deriv ativ es (S to ry & M org en so n, 2010). A sia n sto ck m ark ets tu m ble d fo llo w in g W all S tr e et’ s slid e, afte r th is m ajo r in vestm en t ban k w as ch arg ed w ith fra u d. S uch n ew s o f u ntr u stw orth y b eh av io r in th e fin an cia l s e cto r fo ught fo r h ead lin es w ith T oyota a n d c o nsu m ers ’ c la im s re g ard in g th e s a fe ty o f th at co m pan y’s veh ic le s in th e Unite d Sta te s. Dis tr u st, or th e la ck of tr u stw orth in ess, ap pears om nip re se n t in so m e if not m an y of to day ’s to p co m pan ie s a n d o rg an iz atio ns.

Sum mariz in g th e re se arc h w e re v ie w ed , it is p ossib le to c o nclu de th at tr u st is th e b asis fo r sta b ility in b oth m ark ets a n d in o rg an iz atio ns. T ru st is re la te d to div ers e cu sto m er an d sto ck hold er beh av io rs . Specif ic ally , hig h le v els of org an iz atio nal tr u st h av e b een a sso cia te d w ith (1 ) m ore a d ap tiv e o rg an iz atio nal fo rm s a n d s tr u ctu re s, ( 2 ) th e a b ility to f o rm s tr a te g ic a llia n ces, ( 3 ) e ffe ctiv e c ris is man ag em en t, (4 ) re d uced litig atio n co sts , (5 ) re d uced tr a n sa ctio n co sts , (6 ) pro duct in novatio n, a n d (7 ) e co nom ic p erfo rm an ce. T ru st c o nsis te n tly h as b een lin ked to e m plo yee p erc ep tio ns o f o vera ll jo b a n d c o m munic atio n sa tis fa ctio n.

Hig h tr u st le v els in b oth fa ce-to -fa ce a n d v ir tu al te am s p re d ic t a h ig her le v el o f perfo rm an ce th an m odera te a n d lo w tr u st le v els . H ig h tr u st le v els c o ntr ib ute to more o pen c o m munic atio n, h ig h-q uality d ecis io n m ak in g, im pro ved ris k ta k in g, lo w e m plo yee t u rn over, a n d m ore o vera ll o rg an iz atio nal c o m mitm en t. T ru st i n t o p man ag em en t o fte n is b ase d o n o rg an iz atio nal p olic ie s, p ro cesse s, p ro gra m s, a n d perc ep tio ns o f ju stic e in d ealin g w ith e m plo yees a n d o th er s ta k eh old ers . In fa ct, 76 our r e se arc h ( E llis & S hock le y -Z ala b ak , 2 001) s tr o ngly s u ggests th at tr u st in to p man ag em en t is m ore im porta n t th an tr u st in im med ia te su perv is o rs in o vera ll em plo yee p erc ep tio ns o f s a tis fa ctio n a n d e ffe ctiv en ess. I n a d ditio n, p erc ep tio ns o f tr u st in le ad ers h ip a s w ell a s tr u st in p eer g ro ups a re lin ked to p erc ep tio ns o f org an iz atio nal c o m pete n ce. T he i n tr ig uin g r e ality i s t h at e m plo yees m ay t r u st t h at man ag em en t is h onest w ith th em , b ut if th ey d o n ot tr u st th at o rg an iz atio nal mem bers ( in clu din g t h em se lv es) a re c o m pete n t t o m eet o rg an iz atio nal c h alle n ges, th ey w ill h av e l o w t r u st l e v els ( S to ry & M org en so n, 2 010).

The O rg an iz a tio n al T ru st M od el We h ope th e a rg um en t fo r d oin g s o m eth in g a b out o rg an iz atio nal tr u st h as b een co nvin cin g. Y et th e o bvio us q uestio ns r e m ain : W hat c an b e d one? H ow c an tr u st build in g b eco m e m ore i n te n tio nal a n d l e ss e lu siv e o r a ccid en ta l? T here i s n o f in al an sw er, b ut w e t h in k i d en tif y in g f iv e c ritic al d riv ers o f t r u st p ro vid es a f ra m ew ork fo r b oth le ad ers a n d c o m munic atio n p ro fe ssio nals to b eg in to c o nsc io usly a n d in te n tio nally b uild t r u st.

Earlie r w e re fe re n ced th e re se arc h w e co nducte d th at w as sp onso re d b y th e In te rn atio nal A sso cia tio n o f B usin ess C om munic ato rs R ese arc h F oundatio n. W e desc rib ed our re v ie w of more th an 3,5 00 re se arc h stu die s desc rib in g org an iz atio nal tr u st. T he s p ecif ic r e se arc h th at f o rm s th e b asis o f th e f iv e d riv ers we a re p ro posin g b eg an in fif ty -th re e o rg an iz atio ns in w hic h w e tr a n sla te d o ur su rv ey w ork in to m ultip le la n guag es. W e c o m pile d a la rg e d ata b ase to d ev elo p norm ativ e c o m paris o ns. T he c o m paris o n d ata w ere g ath ere d in th e U nite d S ta te s (tw en ty -fiv e s ta te s), I ta ly ( e le v en c itie s), S ydney , S in gap ore , H ong K ong, T okyo, Bom bay , a n d T aiw an . T he i n dustr ie s r e p re se n te d i n t h e d ata b ase i n clu de b an kin g, te le co m munic atio ns, m an ufa ctu rin g, c o m pute r s o ftw are a n d h ard w are , e d ucatio n, an d s a le s a n d c u sto m er s e rv ic e. C om pan y s iz es r a n ged f ro m a p pro xim ate ly 1 00 t o 146,0 00 em plo yees. T he w ork re su lte d in an ex pan sio n o f A neil K . M is h ra ’s (1 996) fo ur-d im en sio nal m odel o f tr u st to th e fiv e-d im en sio nal m odel p re se n te d in F ig ure 4.1 .

FIG URE 4 .1 P A TH M ODEL O F T H E F IV E D IM EN SIO NS O F ORG ANIZ A TIO NAL T R U ST 77 In F ig ure 4.1 , 1 .0 0 re p re se n ts a p erfe ct re la tio nsh ip b etw een a d im en sio n o f tr u st an d o rg an iz atio nal tr u st, an d b etw een o rg an iz atio nal tr u st an d p erc eiv ed effe ctiv en ess an d jo b sa tis fa ctio n. T he hig her th e num ber in th e fig ure , th e str o nger th e re la tio nsh ip o f th e d riv er to tr u st a n d p erc eiv ed e ffe ctiv en ess a n d sa tis fa ctio n.

The d efin itio ns o f th e fiv e d im en sio ns o r d riv ers o f o rg an iz atio nal tr u st a re a s fo llo w s.

1.

Concern fo r e m plo yees.

Concern f o r e m plo yees in clu des th e f e elin gs of c arin g, e m path y, t o le ra n ce, a n d s a fe ty t h at a re e x hib ite d w hen w e a re vuln era b le in org an iz atio nal activ itie s. S in cere effo rts to unders ta n d fe elin gs c o ntr ib ute t o h ig h t r u st l e v els i n r e la tio nsh ip s.

2.

Open ness a nd h onesty .

Open ness a n d honesty a re th e w ord s p eo ple use m ost o fte n w hen th ey a re a sk ed w hat c o ntr ib ute s to o rg an iz atio nal tr u st. This driv er in volv es not only th e am ount an d accu ra cy of in fo rm atio n th at is s h are d b ut a ls o h ow s in cere ly a n d a p pro pria te ly it is co m munic ate d .

3.

Id en tific a tio n.

Id en tif ic atio n re fle cts th e ex te n t to w hic h w e hold co m mon goals , norm s, valu es, an d belie fs asso cia te d with our org an iz atio n’s c u ltu re . T his d im en sio n in dic ate s h ow c o nnecte d w e f e el to le ad ers a n d c o w ork ers , p ro ducts o r s e rv ic es, a n d o vera ll m is sio n o f th e o rg an iz atio n.

4.

Relia bility .

Relia b ility is d ete rm in ed b y w heth er le ad ers , c o w ork ers , te am s, s u pplie rs , a n d o rg an iz atio ns a ct c o nsis te n tly a n d d ep en dab ly . I n oth er w ord s, c an w e c o unt o n th em to d o w hat th ey s a y th ey w ill d o?

Does c o ngru en cy e x is t b etw een w ord s a n d a ctio ns?

5.

Com pete n ce.

As it re la te s to org an iz atio nal tr u st, co m pete n ce in volv es th e e x te n t to w hic h w e s e e n ot o nly o ur c o w ork ers a n d le ad ers as e ffe ctiv e, b ut a ls o o ur o rg an iz atio n a s a w hole . C om pete n ce r e fle cts how s tr o ngly w e b elie v e o ur o rg an iz atio n w ill c o m pete a n d s u rv iv e in 78 th e e n vir o nm en t.

Applic a tio n o f t h e T ru st M od el f o r Org an iz a tio n al L ea d ers a n d B usin ess Com munic a to rs We n ow a p ply th e f iv e d im en sio ns o r d riv ers o f tr u st f ro m o ur m odel to d iv ers e an d c ritic al o rg an iz atio nal r o le s a n d f u nctio ns.

Top L ea d ers Org an iz atio nal le ad ers at all le v els hav e re sp onsib ility fo r tr u st. W hile m ost le ad ers w ould ag re e w ith th is sta te m en t, fe w fo cu s dir e ctly on th eir tr u st re sp onsib ilitie s. L ead ers n eed to d ev elo p a m ore c o m pre h en siv e u nders ta n din g o f what co nstitu te s tr u st beh av io rs , w ith sp ecif ic em phasis on th e dis tin ctio n betw een in te rp ers o nal an d org an iz atio nal tr u st. M an y le ad ers re ly on th eir pers o nal in te g rity w ith out u nders ta n din g th at th e p ositio ns th ey o ccu py p ro vid e fe w w ith in th e org an iz atio n th e opportu nity to in te ra ct w ith th em on an in te rp ers o nal b asis . A lth ough in te g rity a n d in te n tio ns a re c ritic al, th e im pact o f le ad ers h ip is in te rp re te d th ro ugh m ultip le n etw ork s o f re la tio nsh ip s, b eh av io rs , an d e v en ts , m ak in g c o m munic atio n b eh av io rs a n d d ecis io ns t h e c u rre n cy o f t r u st.

The use of th e tr u st model can fa cilita te le ad ers ’ unders ta n din g an d dev elo pm en t. In cre ase d u nders ta n din g is im porta n t b ut in su ffic ie n t to b uild th e hig h-tr u st o rg an iz atio n. T he q uestio n i s , W hat e ls e n eed s t o b e d one?

Mon ito r T ru st L evels .

Fir s t, le ad ers n eed to d ev elo p a n o ngoin g p ro cess fo r m onito rin g th e tr u st le v els with in th eir o rg an iz atio ns. L ead ers re g ula rly c o lle ct p erfo rm an ce d ata fo r th eir org an iz atio ns, yet fe w co lle ct data th at dir e ctly asse ss tr u st le v els . Even org an iz atio ns th at c o nduct re g ula r e m plo yee a n d c u sto m er sa tis fa ctio n su rv ey s usu ally d o n ot in clu de r e lia b le a n d v alid tr u st m easu re s. E arlie r in th is c h ap te r w e desc rib ed lin ks betw een tr u st an d org an iz atio nal perfo rm an ce. A cle ar unders ta n din g o f a n o rg an iz atio n’s tr u st le v el c an p ro vid e le ad ers w ith im porta n t data t h at m ay p re ced e o r f o re cast c h an ges i n p erfo rm an ce o utc o m es.

Develo p a n U ndersta n din g o f T ru st i n P artic u la r C on te x ts .

Seco nd, le ad ers need pro fe ssio nal dev elo pm en t in (1 ) dis tin guis h in g betw een in te rp ers o nal an d o rg an iz atio nal tr u st, (2 ) u nders ta n din g tr u st w ith in p artic u la r org an iz atio nal co nte x ts , an d (3 ) ex am in in g le ad ers h ip activ itie s w ith in th e 79 org an iz atio n f o r th eir c o ntr ib utio ns to th e tr u st e n vir o nm en t. T his u su ally c an b e acco m plis h ed th ro ugh tr a in in g an d th e dev elo pm en t of a le ad ers h ip co m munic atio n p la n .

Exam in e O rg an iz a tio n al D ecis io n s a n d P ra ctic es U sin g t h e Tru st M odel.

Thir d , le ad ers sh ould be ch alle n ged to ex am in e th eir str a te g ic dir e ctio ns, decis io ns, an d co m munic atio n p la n s w ith in th e fra m ew ork o f th e tr u st m odel.

How does th e org an iz atio n unders ta n d co m pete n ce fro m th e dir e ctio n an d decis io ns artic u la te d b y le ad ers h ip ? D oes th e o rg an iz atio n b elie v e le ad ers are open a n d h onest? I f f u ll d is c lo su re o f in fo rm atio n c an not b e m ad e f o r a v arie ty o f str a te g ic r e aso ns, h ow c an le ad ers c o m munic ate d ir e ctly w hat c an a n d c an not b e mad e know n? How can le ad ers dir e ctly ad dre ss th e in ev ita b le se em in g co ntr a d ic tio ns b ro ught a b out b y c h an gin g c ir c u m sta n ces? W hat c an le ad ers d o to re m ain o pen a n d h onest w hen u ncerta in ty is h ig h a n d im porta n t d ecis io ns r e m ain in a pen din g sta te ? T hese are co m ple x questio ns, yet re se arc h su pports th e pers p ectiv e th at le ad ers are m ore tr u ste d w hen th ey in cre ase co m munic atio n messa g es d urin g t im es o f u ncerta in ty a n d e x pre ss t h e “ I d o n ot k now ” p ers p ectiv e with d ir e ctn ess a n d a c o m mitm en t t o b rin g i n fo rm atio n f o rw ard w hen p ossib le .

Lead ers a re re sp onsib le fo r th e p olic ie s a n d p ro cesse s th at a re in te rp re te d a s co ncern f o r e m plo yees. O rg an iz atio nal p olic ie s a n d p ra ctic es s h ould b e r e g ula rly ex am in ed f o r e x pre ssio ns o f c o ncern a n d f o r im plic it a n d e x plic it m essa g es a b out tr u st. Perfo rm an ce ev alu atio n sy ste m s, acco untin g an d re p ortin g pra ctic es, monito rin g of em plo yee beh av io rs (fo r ex am ple , use of tim e, te le p hone an d co m pute r u se ), a ccess to in fo rm atio n, in volv em en t in d ecis io n m ak in g, re w ard pro gra m s, an d a h ost o f o th er p ra ctic es an d p ro cesse s all are su bje ct to tr u st ev alu atio ns.

Clo se ly re la te d to th e asse ssm en t of co ncern fo r em plo yees is th e tr u st dim en sio n o f r e lia b ility . A re p ro cesse s a n d p ra ctic es c o nsis te n t a cro ss e m plo yees an d k ey s ta k eh old ers ? D o l e ad ers d o w hat t h ey s a y t h ey a re g oin g t o d o? D oes t h e org an iz atio n re g ula rly b rin g im porta n t in fo rm atio n to th ose a ffe cte d ? R elia b ility sh ould n ot b e c o nfu se d w ith s a m en ess. R elia b ility a s a tr u st d im en sio n re fe rs to co nsis te n t beh av io rs th at ex hib it co m pete n ce, honesty , an d co ncern , not necessa rily u nw av erin g s u pport f o r p ast d ecis io ns.

Cle arly , le ad ers n eed to d ev elo p an d artic u la te o rg an iz atio nal g oals , n orm s, valu es, an d belie fs . This dev elo pm en t an d artic u la tio n is critic al to th e id en tif ic atio n d im en sio n o f tr u st. D o g oals , n orm s, a n d v alu es in clu de e m plo yees an d k ey s ta k eh old ers ? C an e m plo yees r e la te th eir o w n f u tu re s to th e d ir e ctio n o f th e o rg an iz atio n? C an v en dors a n d c u sto m ers s e e i n t h ese s tr a te g ic d ir e ctio ns t h eir ow n desir e d co nnecte d ness to th e org an iz atio n? H ow does le ad ers h ip know wheth er i d en tif ic atio n i s p re se n t o r a b se n t?

80 Str u ctu re t h e O rg an iz a tio n f o r T ru st B uild in g.

Fourth , le ad ers are re sp onsib le fo r th e pro fe ssio nal co m munic atio n fu nctio ns with in th e o rg an iz atio n. H um an r e la tio ns, c o rp ora te c o m munic atio ns, a d vertis in g, mark etin g, p ublic re la tio ns, an d o th er in fo rm atio n fu nctio ns are d esig ned an d sta ffe d as a re su lt of how to p m an ag em en t vie w s th e im porta n ce of th ese opera tio ns. T he le ad ers o f c o m munic atio n fu nctio ns sh ap e tr u st le v els b y th eir ow n u nders ta n din gs o f h ow th e fu nctio ns c o ntr ib ute to im porta n t o rg an iz atio nal outc o m es. T he v ery d esig n o f th e o rg an iz atio n re fle cts a ssu m ptio ns a b out tr u st an d w ho h as r e sp onsib ility f o r t r u st b uild in g.

Com munic a tio n P ro fe ssio n als Com munic atio n p ro fe ssio nals a re o rg an iz atio nal le ad ers in b oth jo b f u nctio n a n d sp ecif ic j o b k now le d ge p ro vid ed f o r o th er l e ad ers . N oneth ele ss, u ntil r e cen tly , t h e ro le o f th e co m munic atio n p ro fe ssio nal h as fo cu se d m ostly in dir e ctly o n tr u st build in g. In cre asin gly , c o m munic atio n p ro fe ssio nals a re c h alle n ged to e x plic itly dev elo p p ro gra m s a n d p ro cesse s fo r b uild in g o rg an iz atio nal tr u st. T he fo llo w in g dis c u ssio n d esc rib es im porta n t p ro fe ssio nal a re as lin ked to tr u st b uild in g. T he lis t is n ot m ean t t o b e e x hau stiv e b ut p oin ts t o k ey r e sp onsib ility a re as.

Mon ito r T ru st.

For org an iz atio ns to effe ctiv ely dev elo p hig h-tr u st en vir o nm en ts , re g ula r unders ta n din g o f le v els o f o rg an iz atio nal tr u st m ust b e d ev elo ped a n d in te rp re te d fo r a h ost o f p la n nin g d ecis io ns. T his m onito rin g r e sp onsib ility u su ally r e sid es in hum an re so urc es, in te rn al co m munic atio n, or co rp ora te co m munic atio ns fu nctio ns. T re n ds in tr u st le v els , w hen re la te d to tr e n ds in p erfo rm an ce d ata , pro vid e pow erfu l in fo rm atio n im porta n t to th e ev alu atio n of co m munic atio n pla n nin g, tr a in in g an d dev elo pm en t, ap pra is a l sy ste m s, an d oth er str a te g ic in itia tiv es. T he c o m munic atio n p ro fe ssio nal b eco m es r e sp onsib le f o r g uid in g to p man ag em en t in d ete rm in in g th e ty pe o f d ata to b e c o lle cte d , w ho s h ould c o lle ct th e data , th e asse ssm en t of th e re lia b ility an d valid ity of th e data , data in te rp re ta tio n, a n d th e d is se m in atio n o f th e d ata to b e in clu ded in th e p la n nin g pro cesse s o f th e o rg an iz atio n. I n str u m en ts p ublis h ed b y I A BC ( S hock le y -Z ala b ak et al., 2000) an d Jo sse y -B ass (S hock le y -Z ala b ak et al., 2010) pro vid e psy ch om etr ic ally so und w ay s to b eg in m easu re m en t.

Build in g th e H ig h-T ru st Org aniz a tio n (S hock le y -Z ala b ak et al., 2 010) p ro vid es ex te n siv e g uid an ce fo r data c o lle ctio n.

Revie w P olic ie s a n d P ra ctic es.

Polic ie s, pro cesse s, an d a host of org an iz atio nal pra ctic es carry im plic it an d 81 ex plic it m essa g es ab out tr u st. H um an re so urc e an d in te rn al co m munic atio n pro fe ssio nals in cre asin gly are ta sk ed w ith re v ie w in g polic ie s an d pro cesse s re g ula rly u se d b y th e o rg an iz atio n w ith e m plo yees, v en dors , a n d s ta k eh old ers f o r th eir im pact o n tr u st. M ark etin g a n d s a le s p ro fe ssio nals o fte n p ro vid e th is s a m e re v ie w w ith r e g ard to c u sto m ers a n d c o m petito rs . P olic y a n d p ro ced ure m an uals , em plo yee ben efits , dis c ip lin ary pro cesse s, su perv is io n re sp onsib ilitie s, perfo rm an ce a p pra is a ls , h ir in g a n d p ro m otio nal p ra ctic es, a n d o th er p ro cesse s c an be ev alu ate d in each of th e dim en sio ns of th e tr u st m ode. F or ex am ple , an em plo yee orie n ta tio n man ual may effe ctiv ely desc rib e how em plo yee co ntr ib utio ns w ill be ev alu ate d (c o m pete n ce), how co m munic atio n ex ch an ges am ong su perv is o rs a n d w ork g ro ups a re to ta k e p la ce (o pen ness a n d h onesty ), how e q uita b le sa la ry a n d b en efits p ro gra m s a re to b e a d m in is te re d (re lia b ility ), an d w hat t h e c o re g oals , v alu es a n d b elie fs o f t h e o rg an iz atio n a re ( id en tif ic atio n).

A re v ie w of th e orie n ta tio n m an ual m ay re v eal th at, w hile fo ur of th e fiv e dim en sio ns o f th e tr u st m odel c an b e id en tif ie d in th e m an ual, n o m essa g es th at co m munic ate re al co ncern fo r em plo yees are pre se n t. It is not th at th e org an iz atio n d oes n ot w an t t o e x pre ss c o ncern , b ut t h e p re p ara tio n o f a n i m porta n t docu m en t sim ply is n ot c o m pre h en siv e in its e x pre ssio n o f tr u st m essa g es. O f co urs e , a t tim es it w ill b e m ore th an th e m essa g in g th at n eed s to c h an ge. T hese co m pre h en siv e re v ie w s may re v eal polic ie s an d pro ced ure s th at need im pro vem en t to build tr u st. A dditio nally , le g al an d co m plia n ce polic ie s an d pra ctic es hav e sig nif ic an t co nse q uen ces fo r tr u st. T he use an d m onito rin g of te ch nolo gy is su bje ct to tr u st e v alu atio ns. A ll p olic ie s a n d p ra ctic es a cro ss a ll org an iz atio nal f u nctio ns h av e th e p ote n tia l to c o ntr ib ute to th e tr u st p ro file o f th e org an iz atio n.

Develo p T ra in in g a n d A ware n ess.

Tra in in g is an im porta n t co m ponen t of m ost effe ctiv e tr u st- b uild in g effo rts .

Lead ers u su ally d o n ot u nders ta n d th e c o m pre h en siv e n atu re o f o rg an iz atio nal tr u st. L ead er, m an ag er, a n d s u perv is o r tr a in in g s h ould in clu de d ev elo pm en t o f a n unders ta n din g of org an iz atio nal tr u st an d its im porta n ce to org an iz atio nal perfo rm an ce. N ex t, tr a in in g sh ould ad dre ss how in div id uals co ntr ib ute to org an iz atio nal tr u st w ith b oth th eir in div id ual b eh av io rs a n d th eir m ore s tr a te g ic co m munic atio n a ctiv itie s. E m plo yees a ls o c an b en efit fro m a n a w are n ess o f th e im porta n ce of org an iz atio nal tr u st. In cre ase d jo b sa tis fa ctio n, th e ab ility to in novate , a n d th e a b ility to id en tif y w ith a s u ccessfu l o rg an iz atio n a ll a re r e la te d to p erc ep tio ns o f tr u st. B oth in div id ual an d te am tr a in in g can fo cu s o n h ow em plo yees co ntr ib ute to tr u st netw ork s. M an dato ry tr a in in g is of partic u la r im porta n ce. M an ag em en t dev elo pm en t, em plo yee orie n ta tio n jo b tr a in in g, co m plia n ce tr a in in g, te am tr a in in g, an d pro cess tr a in in g (fo r ex am ple , perfo rm an ce ap pra is a ls , dis c ip lin ary re v ie w s, le g al re sp onsib ilitie s) all sh ould in co rp ora te co m pre h en siv e m essa g es utiliz in g th e basic dim en sio ns of tr u st.

82 Concern f o r e m plo yees s h ould b e v is ib le in n ew e m plo yee o rie n ta tio n a s w ell a s in in tr o ductio ns to th e p erfo rm an ce a p pra is a l p ro cesse s. O pen ness a n d h onesty is fo ste re d w hen a n y t y pe o f t r a in in g s u pports a n a tm osp here i n w hic h q uestio ns c an be r a is e d a b out in co nsis te n cie s o r s e em in g in co nsis te n cie s. S ev era l o rg an iz atio ns hav e s u ccessfu lly u tiliz ed v is ib le m is sio n s ta te m en ts a n d c o re v alu es s ta te m en ts alo ng w ith s tr a te g y a n d g oal m ap s to f o ste r id en tif ic atio n. T ra in in g a s a f u nctio n is c h arg ed w ith b uild in g t h e c o m pete n cy a n d r e lia b ility o f t h e o rg an iz atio n.

Engage i n S tr a te g ic O rg an iz a tio n al C om munic a tio n .

In te rn al c o m munic atio ns, c o rp ora te c o m munic atio ns, p ublic r e la tio ns, a d vertis in g, mark etin g fu nctio ns, an d oth ers (w heth er in one co m bin ed or se p ara te dep artm en ts ) lite ra lly pla n an d dev elo p str a te g y fo r how th e org an iz atio n desc rib es its e lf to its vario us public s. P la n ned org an iz atio nal co m munic atio n re fle cts str a te g ic dir e ctio n, ch an ge in itia tiv es, new pro ducts or se rv ic es, co m petitiv e positio nin g, an d re sp onse s to cris e s. Pla n ned co m munic atio n beco m es th e re ality o f h ow d iv ers e sta k eh old ers ex perie n ce th e o rg an iz atio n.

Messa g e cra ftin g an d d eliv ery are critic al re sp onsib ilitie s in th e tr u st- b uild in g pro cess. O rg an iz atio nal re sp onsiv en ess a n d lis te n in g a re g ain in g in im porta n ce.

Socia l m ed ia a n d th e I n te rn et p ro vid e c o m ple x o pportu nitie s f o r p ro fe ssio nals to cre ate in te ra ctiv e s tr a te g ie s f o r tr u st b uild in g. O f c o urs e , s tr a te g ic d ir e ctio n m ust hav e i n te g rity i n o rd er t o b uild h ig h t r u st w ith s ta k eh old ers . N oneth ele ss, i n te g rity with out c o m munic atio n th at is tr u ste d w ill n ot b uild a h ig h-tr u st e n vir o nm en t in an d o f its e lf . E m plo yees id en tif y w ith o rg an iz atio ns in w hic h co m munic atio n goals in clu de p uttin g m essa g es in to c o nte x ts th at e m plo yees u nders ta n d, n ot ju st what le ad ers u nders ta n d. C oncern fo r e m plo yees is e x hib ite d w hen e m plo yees le arn of im porta n t new s prio r to m ore public sta k eh old ers . C onsis te n cy of co rp ora te m essa g es fo ste rs re lia b ility . C om munic atio n p ro fe ssio nals k now th is .

How ev er, m ore p ro fe ssio nals h av e b een t r a in ed t o d ev elo p a ccu ra te a n d a ttr a ctiv e messa g es w ith l e ss a w are n ess o f w hat t h ese m essa g es c o m munic ate a b out t r u st.

One F ortu ne 5 00 e m plo yee re la tio ns a n d c o m munic atio n d ep artm en t p ro vid es an in te re stin g ex am ple of how tr u st build in g has beco m e an in te n tio nal dep artm en t str a te g y. The vic e pre sid en t fo r em plo yee re la tio ns an d co m munic atio n a d opte d t h e f iv e-d im en sio nal t r u st m odel d esc rib ed i n t h is c h ap te r as a fra m ew ork fo r h is d ep artm en t. H e a n d h is sta ff, w ith th e a ssis ta n ce o f a n outs id e c o nsu ltin g fir m , re v ie w ed th e m is sio n a n d v alu es o f th e o rg an iz atio n, a year’s w orth of in te rn al co m munic atio ns, an d th e an nual re sp onse s to th e em plo yee s a tis fa ctio n s u rv ey to d ete rm in e w hic h d im en sio ns o f th e tr u st m odel were re g ula rly p re se n t a n d w here o pportu nitie s e x is te d fo r im pro vem en t. T hey dis c o vere d co m pete n ce an d id en tif ic atio n w ere th e le ast re p re se n te d of th e dim en sio ns. T hey d ev elo ped a str a te g y to in co rp ora te sto rie s in th eir m onth ly new sle tte r fo cu sin g o n e m plo yee a ch ie v em en ts a n d a d van cem en t o pportu nitie s.

They ask ed fo r an d re ceiv ed co m mitm en t fro m th e en tir e le ad ers h ip te am to 83 re v ie w a ll s p eech es f o r e le m en ts o f t h e t r u st m odel. T hey a d ded t r u st d ev elo pm en t to t h eir s u perv is o ry t r a in in g p ro gra m s. F in ally , t o m easu re t r u st, t h ey i n co rp ora te d new sc ale s in to th eir em plo yee sa tis fa ctio n su rv ey . W ith in tw o years , th e dep artm en t w as a b le to p re se n t to to p m an ag em en t e m plo yee s a tis fa ctio n s u rv ey im pro vem en ts an d re d uced tu rn over ra te data fo r se v era l div is io ns of th e co m pan y. W e d o n ot cla im th eir ex perie n ce w as d ir e ctly re la te d to th eir n ew em phasis o n t r u st, b ut t h ey b elie v e, a s d o w e, t h at t r u st p la y ed a n i m porta n t p art i n th eir i m pro ved p erfo rm an ce.

Con clu sio n We c o nclu de b y e m phasiz in g w hat w e k now is tr u e: tr u st m atte rs a n d, in fa ct, tr u st i s t h e m ain t h in g!

Org an iz atio ns w ith h ig h tr u st le v els h av e b ette r re su lts th an d o th ose w ith lo w tr u st le v els . A lth ough th is m ak es s e n se , n ot e n ough e ffo rt h as b een e x pen ded in in te n tio nally tr y in g to b uild tr u st. In th e p ast, w e a s le ad ers h av e tr e ate d tr u st a s to o s u bje ctiv e to s tr a te g ic ally d ir e ct o ur f o cu s. T hat is a m is ta k e. T ru st in flu en ces co m munic atio n an d re su lts fro m co m munic atio n. W e can build tr u st w ith co m pete n t p eo ple w ho h av e in te g rity a n d k now th e im porta n ce o f str a te g ic ally usin g a v arie ty o f effe ctiv e co m munic atio n p ro cesse s. W e can b uild tr u st b y fo cu sin g on co m pete n cy , open ness an d honesty , co ncern fo r em plo yees, re lia b ility , an d id en tif ic atio n. In su m , it is fa ir to sa y th e co m munic atio n pro fe ssio nal has a co re re sp onsib ility fo r tr u st build in g. T hat re sp onsib ility , how ev er, c an not b e e x ecu te d w ith out c lo se c o lla b ora tio n w ith to p le ad ers . W ith th is c o lla b ora tio n, th e c o m munic atio n o f tr u st c an b e f a r m ore in te n tio nal th an it has b een in m ost o rg an iz atio ns. T he c o m munic atio n o f tr u st is b oth a p rim ary le ad ers h ip r e sp onsib ility a n d a c o re c o m pete n cy f o r c o m munic atio n p ro fe ssio nals .

The c h alle n ges a re r e al, b ut t h e b en efits a re e n orm ous.

Refe re n ces Covey , M . ( 2 008). T ru st i s a c o m pete n cy .

Chie f L ea rn in g O ffic er , 7 , 5 4–56.

Covey , S .M .R ., & M errill, R . R . (2 008).

The s p eed o f tr u st: T he o ne th in g th at ch anges e very th in g . N ew Y ork : F re e P re ss.

Ellis , K ., & Shock le y -Z ala b ak , P. (2 001). Tru st in to p m an ag em en t an d im med ia te su perv is o r: The re la tio nsh ip to sa tis fa ctio n, org an iz atio nal effe ctiv en ess, a n d i n fo rm atio n r e ceiv in g.

Com munic a tio n Q uarte rly , 4 9, 3 82–398.

Kra m er, R ., & C ook, K . (E ds.) . (2 004).

Tru st and dis tr u st in org aniz a tio ns:

Dile m mas a nd a ppro ach es . N ew Y ork : R usse ll S ag e F oundatio n.

Mis h ra , A . K . ( 1 996). O rg an iz atio nal r e sp onse s t o c ris is : T he c en tr a lity o f t r u st. I n 84 R. M . K ra m er & T . R . T yle r (E ds.) , Tru st in o rg aniz a tio ns: F ro ntie rs o f th eo ry and r e se a rc h ( p p. 2 61–287). T housa n d O ak s, C A : S ag e.

Shock le y -Z ala b ak , P ., E llis , K ., & C esa ria , R . (2 000).

Mea su rin g o rg aniz a tio nal tr u st: A dia gnostic su rv ey and in te rn atio nal in dic a to r . San Fra n cis c o :

In te rn atio nal A sso cia tio n o f B usin ess C om munic ato rs .

Shock le y -Z ala b ak , P ., M orre ale , S ., & H ack m an , M . (2 010).

Build in g th e h ig h- tr u st o rg aniz a tio n . S an F ra n cis c o : J o sse y -B ass.

Sto ry , L ., & M org en so n, G . (2 010, A pril 1 7). F or G old m an , a b et’ s s ta k es k eep gro w in g. New York Tim es. Retr ie v ed fro m www.n ytim es.c o m /2 010/0 4/1 8/b usin ess/1 8gold m an .h tm l .

85 CH APTE R F IV E CO M MUNIC ATIO N E TH IC S T hin k L ik e a P ro fe ssio n al: D on ’t B e I d ea lis tic When S ortin g O ut R ig h t f r o m W ro n g Mark M cE lr ea th The id eal v ir tu ous p ro fe ssio nal c o m munic ato r is n ot a n aïv e, id ealis tic f o ol.

Str e etw is e a n d s a v vy a b out th e w ay s o f th e w orld , s h e o r h e k now s h ow to mak e eth ic al decis io ns an d how to help oth ers m ak e eth ic al decis io ns an yw here i n t h e w orld — ev en i n t h e m ost c o rru pt s o cie tie s.

T ra n sp are n cy In te rn atio nal (2 010) h as c la ssif ie d th e c o untr ie s o f th e w orld in to f o ur quad ra n ts , fro m th e m ost co rru pt to th e le ast co rru pt, usin g w hat th e n onpro fit a g en cy c alls th e “ B rib e P ay ers In dex .” T he in dex is b ase d o n a n nual i n te rv ie w s w ith 1 1,0 00 b usin ess e x ecu tiv es f ro m a ro und th e w orld w ho a re a sk ed t h e lik elih ood o f a co rp ora tio n o pera tin g in a sp ecif ic co untr y b ein g ask ed to e n gag e in “ ex tr a p ay m en ts o r b rib ery ” in o rd er to d o b usin ess. T he re se arc h ers t h en c la ssif y c o untr ie s i n to f o ur c lu ste rs ; f o r e x am ple :

1.

Lea st- lik ely -to -b rib e clu ste r:

Sw itz erla n d, Sw ed en , Austr a lia , Austr ia , C an ad a, U nite d K in gdom , G erm an y, N eth erla n ds, B elg iu m , Unite d S ta te s, J a p an 2.

Next- to -le a st- lik ely -to -b rib e c lu ste r:

Sin gap ore , S pain , U nite d A ra b Em ir a te s, F ra n ce, P ortu gal, M ex ic o 3.

Next- to -m ost- lik ely -to -b rib e c lu ste r:

Hong K ong, Is ra el, Ita ly , S outh Kore a, S au di A ra b ia , B ra zil, S outh A fric a, M ala y sia 4.

Most- lik ely -to -b rib e c lu ste r:

Taiw an , T urk ey , R ussia , C hin a, I n dia Im ag in e a p ro fe ssio nal c o m munic ato r— you— work in g f o r a n in te rn atio nal f ir m w ith o pera tio ns in e ach o f th ese q uad ra n ts . Im ag in e y our fir m is e n gag ed in a c o ord in ate d g lo bal c o m munic atio ns c am paig n fo cu se d o n th e ro ll- o ut o f a n ew p ro duct. N ow im ag in e th at jo urn alis ts in each o f th e co untr ie s te lls th e lo cal p ublic re la tio ns m an ag er p ra ctic ally th e sa m e th in g: th at th e jo urn alis t w ill n ot p ublic iz e th e n ew p ro duct a s r e q ueste d w ith out s o m eth in g e x tr a . I n o th er w ord s, t h e j o urn alis t w ould l ik e a p ay m en t o f s o m e k in d— a b rib e.

In t h is h ypoth etic al c ase , h ow w ould y ou a n sw er t h ese q uestio ns:

86 Would y ou e x pect t h e p ro fe ssio nal c o m munic ato r i n e ach c o untr y t o r e sp ond to th e b rib ery s u ggestio n in e x actly th e s a m e w ay — or w ould c u ltu ra l v alu es an d l o cal e co nom ic c o nditio ns a ffe ct h ow a p ro fe ssio nal w ould d eal w ith th e atte m pte d b rib ery ?

What w ould th e id eal vir tu ous pro fe ssio nal co m munic ato r do in each co untr y ?

Would th e p ro fe ssio nal c o m munic ato r in volv e o th ers in d ete rm in in g w hat to do— or a ct a lo ne, d ecid in g f o r h ers e lf o r h im se lf t h e b est a ctio n t o t a k e?

What fa cto rs s h ould th e p ro fe ssio nal c o m munic ato r ta k e in to c o nsid era tio n befo re m ak in g a f in al d ecis io n?

These q uestio ns a re a n aly zed in th is c h ap te r fro m a n um ber o f p oin ts o f v ie w .

Fir s t, th e s tr e n gth s a n d w eak nesse s o f c u ltu ra l r e la tiv is m a re e x am in ed . T hen th e ad van ta g es o f e th ic al p lu ra lis m a re h ig hlig hte d fo r p ro fe ssio nal c o m munic ato rs , esp ecia lly th ose w ork in g in a g lo bal e n vir o nm en t. A tr ia g e a p pro ach to e th ic al decis io n m ak in g is p re se n te d , a n d fa cto rs th at a ffe ct e th ic al d ecis io n m ak in g a t se v en l e v els o f a n aly sis a re e x pla in ed .

The k ey p oin ts i n t h is c h ap te r:

Pro fe ssio nal c o m munic ato rs s h ould n ot s p en d th e s a m e a m ount o f tim e a n d en erg y on each eth ic al ch oic e th at co nfro nts th em . R ath er, pro fe ssio nal co m munic ato rs s h ould d o a s m ed ic al d octo rs a n d n urs e s d o: p erfo rm tr ia g e.

They s h ould le arn to s o rt th ro ugh a n d c la ssif y th eir c h oic es in volv in g e th ic al situ atio ns, p ro ble m s, o r d ile m mas.

It is th e p eo ple in a n o rg an iz atio n w ho m ak e th e e th ic al— an d u neth ic al— decis io ns. C onse q uen tly , e th ic al d ile m mas n eed to b e a n aly zed a t th e s m all gro up, i n te rp ers o nal, a n d i n tr a p ers o nal ( w ith in t h e p ers o n) l e v els .

Eth ic al d ecis io ns a re a ffe cte d b y o rg an iz atio nal fa cto rs ; b y c o m petito rs a n d oth er o rg an iz atio ns, in clu din g p ro fe ssio nal a sso cia tio ns, o uts id e a p artic u la r org an iz atio n; b y l a w s a n d p ublic p olic ie s; a n d b y c u ltu ra l v alu es a n d b elie fs .

By d efin itio n, eth ic al d ecis io ns are n ot easy b ecau se th ey in volv e q uestio ns ab out w hat is rig ht an d w ro ng an d w hat co nstitu te s a g ood lif e — ch alle n gin g questio ns th ro ughout h is to ry . In th e tw en ty -fir s t c en tu ry , applie d e th ic s c an b e defin ed a s t h e c rite ria p eo ple u se t o d ecid e w hat i s r ig ht, w hat i s w ro ng, a n d w hat co nstitu te s a f lo uris h in g, r o bust l if e .

Eth ic al c h oic es fo r p ro fe ssio nal c o m munic ato rs a re n ot e asy to m ak e b ecau se th ese d ecis io ns o fte n in volv e o th er in div id uals , m an y o f w hom a re p ow erfu l a n d hav e d if fe re n t w orld vie w s, c u ltu ra l v alu es, a n d b elie fs .

87 Cult u ra l R ela tiv is m Cultu ra l r e la tiv is m is a w eak c o ncep t b ecau se s o m e o f its a ssu m ptio ns a re w eak , if n ot f a ls e , e sp ecia lly in to day ’s g lo bal e co nom y. C ultu ra l r e la tiv is m c la im s th at what is g ood o r b ad a n d/o r w hat c o nstitu te s a g ood lif e a re c u ltu ra lly re la tiv e.

These a re t h e k ey a ssu m ptio ns o f c u ltu ra l r e la tiv is m :

Mora lity is c u ltu ra lly s p ecif ic ; e th ic al g uid elin es c o m e f ro m s o cie ty ; e th ic al ju dgm en ts a re r e la tiv e t o t h e c u ltu re i n w hic h t h ey a re m ad e.

Unle ss y ou a re p art o f a c u ltu re , y ou c an not u nders ta n d a ll th e re aso ns fo r why s o m eth in g is c o nsid ere d rig ht o r w ro ng in th at s o cie ty ; th ere fo re , y ou sh ould n ot j u dge t h at s o cie ty ’s m ora lity .

Ju st a s y ou s h ould n ot ju dge a n oth er c u ltu re ’s m ora lity , p eo ple fro m o th er cu ltu re s s h ould n ot j u dge y our m ora lity .

Every one s h ould b e to le ra n t o f th ose liv in g in o th er c u ltu re s, a s th ey s h ould be t o le ra n t o f y ou.

A m ajo r fa lla cy in th e lo gic o f c u ltu ra l re la tiv is m is to ju m p to th e c o nclu sio n th at b ecau se th ere a re d if fe re n t s e ts o f c u ltu ra l v alu es, th ere is n o o bje ctiv e tr u th in e th ic s— th at rig ht a n d w ro ng a re o nly m atte rs o f o pin io n, a n d o pin io ns v ary fro m c u ltu re t o c u ltu re .

Anoth er fa lla cy o f c u ltu ra l re la tiv is m is th at it im plie s th at w e sh ould d ecid e what is r ig ht a n d w ro ng b y lo okin g a t th e s o cie ty w ith in w hic h w e a re o pera tin g.

Fro m th is p oin t o f v ie w , if a c o rp ora te p olic y c o nfo rm s to a p artic u la r s o cie ty ’s se t o f e th ic al s ta n dard s, th en it is e th ic al. T his is a f a ls e a ssu m ptio n b ecau se f e w peo ple w ith in a n y s o cie ty th in k th eir s o cie ty c o uld n ot b e im pro ved ; m ost th in k all s o cie tie s c an b e i m pro ved .

The s tr e n gth o f c u ltu ra l re la tiv is m is th at it s tr e sse s to le ra n ce a n d e n co ura g es peo ple to le arn m ore a b out a c u ltu re b efo re p assin g ju dgm en t. T he w eak nesse s o f cu ltu ra l r e la tiv is m a re th at it a ssu m es y ou c an not m ak e ju dgm en ts a b out a n oth er cu ltu re , e v en if h orre n dous a cts a re c o m mitte d th ere , a n d th at n o c u ltu re c an b e im pro ved .

Most p ro fe ssio nals to day w ork fo r o rg an iz atio ns sig nif ic an tly a ffe cte d b y th e glo bal e co nom y a n d a re v ery a w are o f n ot o nly th e im porta n ce o f to le ra n ce a n d le arn in g a b out o th er c u ltu re s b ut a ls o th e im porta n ce o f e sta b lis h in g c o rp ora te co m munic atio n p olic ie s th at a re g lo bal— th at c u t a cro ss a n d o pera te e ffe ctiv ely in all c u ltu re s.

Eth ic a l P lu ra lis m Eth ic al plu ra lis m is a str o ng co ncep t becau se it cla im s th ere is no su pre m e 88 cu ltu ra l v alu e, a n d i ts a ssu m ptio ns a re p la u sib le . E th ic al p lu ra lis m i s n ot t h e s a m e as e th ic al re la tiv is m . E th ic al re la tiv is m is s im ila r to c u ltu ra l re la tiv is m : it c la im s th at w hat i s r ig ht o r w ro ng i s r e la tiv e t o t h e c ir c u m sta n ces.

Eth ic al plu ra lis m is not th e sa m e as m ultic u ltu ra lis m . M ultic u ltu ra lis m em phasiz es to le ra n ce o f o th ers w ith out n ecessa rily c ele b ra tin g th e p ossib ilitie s gen era te d by div ers ity . E th ic al plu ra lis m is m ore th an to le ra tin g th e cu ltu ra l valu es a n d b elie fs o f o th ers ; it is e x pectin g th e in te ra ctio n o f m ultip le c u ltu re s to gen era te g re ate r u nders ta n din gs b etw een a n d a m ong s o cie tie s a n d a b ette r w orld .

The m ain a rg um en t o f e th ic al p lu ra lis m is th at w e h av e m an y in co m patib le a n d ir re d ucib le m ora l v alu es, an d th at th ese v alu es are n ot d eriv ed fro m a sin gle su pre m e v alu e o r h yper-n orm . E th ic al p lu ra lis m m ak es th e c ase th at c o nflic tin g, ir re d ucib le v alu es a re w hat p eo ple e x perie n ce in th eir liv es; it is r e alis tic . E th ic al plu ra lis m a ck now le d ges th at p ara d oxes a n d e th ic al d ile m mas in o ur liv es c an not be a v oid ed ; th ere fo re , w e s h ould s e ek c o m mon g ro und a m ong c o nflic tin g v alu es —not w ith a n e x pecta tio n to fin d a s u pre m e v alu e b ut w ith th e e x pecta tio n th at th e s e arc h w ill g en era te n ew a n d b ette r e th ic al i n sig hts .

These a re t h e a ssu m ptio ns o f e th ic al p lu ra lis m :

There is n o sin gle tr u th ; b ut se ek in g th e tr u th , e sp ecia lly fo r p ro fe ssio nal co m munic ato rs , i s i m porta n t.

It i s b est t o a v oid t h e e x tr e m es o f a b so lu tis m ( th at t h ere i s o nly o ne t r u th a n d one r ig ht s e t o f a n sw ers ) a n d r e la tiv is m ( th at th ere is n o tr u th a n d th at w hat passe s f o r t r u th i s b ase d o n p ow er a n d p erc ep tio ns o f r e ality ).

Seek in g th e m id dle gro und betw een ab so lu tis m an d re la tiv is m m ean s accep tin g a certa in am ount of uncerta in ty an d ack now le d gin g an d ap pre cia tin g t h e w is d om w ith in a ll c u ltu re s a n d b elie f s y ste m s.

A b ette r u nders ta n din g o f t h e w orld — an d, t h ere fo re , a b ette r w orld — is p ossib le fro m t h e i n te ra ctio n o f m ultip le a p pro ach es t o t h e t r u th , e th ic s, a n d m ora lity .

The w eak ness o f e th ic al p lu ra lis m is th at it d oes n ot s a tis fy e x tr e m is ts — neith er ab so lu tis ts n or r e la tiv is ts . T he s tr e n gth o f p lu ra lis m i s t h at i t i s a g lo bal v ers io n o f Aris to tle ’s G old en M ean (“ A ris to tle ’s E th ic s,” 2 010). It re co m men ds av oid in g ex tr e m es a n d d oin g w hat i s r ig h t b ase d n ot o n a c o m pro m is e b ut o n t h e b est i d eas fro m t h e w is e st m en a n d w om en i n t h e w orld .

Who I s a n I d ea l V ir tu ou s P erso n ?

The id eal v ir tu ous p ers o n is n ot a n u nre alis tic fo ol, s o m eo ne w ith u nre aso nab le id ealis m . T he id eal v ir tu ous p ers o n is a n in div id ual w ho, a s A ris to tle w ould s a y , has “ p ra ctic al w is d om .” T he i d eal v ir tu ous p ers o n i s s tr e etw is e a n d s a v vy.

89 The i d eal v ir tu ous p ers o n i s n ot d ogm atic o r d riv en b y i d eo lo gy b ut k now s h ow to in te g ra te th e b est id eas o f th e b est th in kers a n d to a ct a cco rd in gly , le ad in g b y ex am ple a n d n ot b y e d ic t. T he i d eal v ir tu ous p ers o n d em onstr a te s a u th en tic ity a n d mora l a u th ority . A ris to tle w ould a d d th at th e id eal v ir tu ous p ers o n h as th e rig ht motiv es, t r a its , a n d c o m mitm en ts .

Alm ost e v ery one k now s so m eo ne in h is o r h er lif e w ho is a n id eal v ir tu ous pers o n … s o m e o f t h e t im e. R are ly i s a n yone a n i d eal v ir tu ous p ers o n a ll t h e t im e.

Dif fe re n t in div id uals at dif fe re n t tim es in th eir liv es an d in dif fe re n t cir c u m sta n ces w ill s e rv e f o r o th ers a s e x am ple s o f t h e i d eal v ir tu ous p ers o n.

Acco rd in g to A ris to tle , th e h allm ark o f th e id eal v ir tu ous p ers o n is th at h e o r sh e k now s t h e r ig ht t h in g t o d o a t t h e r ig ht t im e … a n d, i f a sk ed , i s a b le t o e x pla in his o r h er a ctio ns t o o th ers .

Eth ic a l T ria ge Pro fe ssio nal c o m munic ato rs s h ould le arn to p erfo rm tr ia g e w hen c o nfro nte d w ith eth ic al c h oic es. A ll e th ic al c h oic es a re n ot th e s a m e. I t is a w aste o f tim e to tr e at th em a ll a lik e. It p ay s o ff to k now h ow to d is tin guis h a m ong e th ic al s itu atio ns, pro ble m s, a n d d ile m mas.

Eth ic al s itu atio ns a re f a ir ly s im ple a n d s tr a ig htf o rw ard ; a n d to s o lv e th em , a ll a pro fe ssio nal n eed s to d o is to a ct p ro fe ssio nally — to d o w hat is rig ht. T here is re ally n ot to o m uch to b e d eb ate d — alth ough y ou m ay n eed to s p en d s o m e tim e ed ucatin g th e m is in fo rm ed or m is g uid ed . For ex am ple , so m eo ne ask s a co m munic ato r to o m it le g ally r e q uir e d in fo rm atio n f ro m a p re ss r e le ase o r to p ut an u nsu bsta n tia te d s ta te m en t i n a n a d vertis e m en t. T he p ro fe ssio nal k now s w hat t o do, b ecau se t h at i s w hat a p ro fe ssio nal i s e x pecte d t o d o. I t m ay r e q uir e e d ucatin g an d e x pla in in g to o th ers w hat is r e q uir e d a n d w hy; b ut f o r th e p ro fe ssio nal, it is a re la tiv ely s im ple m atte r o f j u st d oin g i t r ig ht t h e f ir s t t im e.

Eth ic al p ro ble m s h av e a n um ber o f p ossib le e th ic al s o lu tio ns— an d th ere c an b e a g en uin e d eb ate a m ong e q ually s in cere , g ood p eo ple a b out w hat s h ould b e d one.

For e x am ple , a n e d ito r u nder d ead lin e p re ssu re w an ts t o u se a p hoto gra p h t a k en i n public o f a p ublic f ig ure b ut i t s h ow s t h e p ers o n i n a b ad l ig ht a n d m ig ht h old t h at pers o n up fo r rid ic u le or em barra ssm en t. It w ould be le g al to publis h th e photo gra p h; b ut w ould it b e eth ic al? T here are a n um ber o f cre ativ e, eth ic al so lu tio ns to th e p ro ble m . T he p ro fe ssio nal s h ould ta k e th e tim e to e n gag e in th at dis c u ssio n. T he d if fic u lty is le arn in g h ow to fra m e th e is su e so th at a g en uin e dia lo gue c an o ccu r w ith out s tir rin g u p e m otio ns a n d d efe n siv e r e actio ns. T he k ey to s o lv in g a n e th ic al p ro ble m is s e ek in g a “ w in -w in ” s o lu tio n— an d g iv in g y ou an d y our c o lle ag ues e n ough t im e t o c o m e u p w ith a c re ativ e, e th ic al s o lu tio n.

Eth ic al d ile m mas c re ate a d am ned -if -y ou-d o, d am ned -if -y ou-d on’t s itu atio n f o r th e d ecis io n m ak er w ho m ust c h oose t h e l e sse r o f t w o e v ils . R eg ard le ss o f w hat i s 90 done, s o m eo ne w ill b e h urt. F or e x am ple , a s e n io r e x ecu tiv e is in volv ed in a s e x sc an dal th at v io la te s c o rp ora te p olic ie s a n d h as th e m ed ia c allin g fo r a n o ffic ia l sta te m en t. N o m atte r w hat t h e p ro fe ssio nal c o m munic ato r d oes, t h e e x ecu tiv e, t h e co m pan y, a n d o th ers a ls o m ay b e h urt. B ut th e fa cts a re fa cts a n d n eed to b e dis c lo se d . T he k ey is to lim it th e a m ount o f h arm to in nocen t in div id uals a n d to le sse n th e n eg ativ e im pact o n th e co rp ora tio n. E th ic al d ile m mas re q uir e cris is co m munic atio ns m an ag em en t.

Facto rs t h at A ffe ct E th ic a l D ecis io n M ak in g A n um ber o f ch ara cte ris tic s affe ct h ow each in div id ual co m munic ato r m ak es decis io ns a b out w hat i s r ig ht a n d w hat i s w ro ng:

Matu rity .

Som e p eo ple , ev en as ch ild re n o r te en ag ers , h av e m ore eth ic al matu rity t h an o th ers . M atu rity i s n ot n ecessa rily r e la te d t o c h ro nolo gic al a g e.

Pro fe ssio nal exp erie n ce.

The le ss ex perie n ce a pers o n has w ith m ak in g eth ic al d ecis io ns, th e m ore d if fic u lt th ose d ecis io ns a re — an d th e m ore lik ely so m e o f t h ose d ecis io ns w ill b e w ro ng.

The a bility to d ea l w ith u ncerta in ty .

Som e p eo ple b eco m e r a ttle d a n d c an not th in k c le arly w hen t h e p re ssu re i s o n; o th ers b eco m e v ery f o cu se d , r is e t o t h e occasio n, a n d m ak e g ood d ecis io ns u nder d if fic u lt c ir c u m sta n ces.

Form al ed uca tio n in eth ic s , w heth er fro m hearin g se rm ons, atte n din g le ctu re s, re ad in g, o r o th er v en ues. T he m ore k now le d ge a p ers o n b rin gs to bear a n d th e m ore f a cto rs a p ers o n c o nsid ers in m ak in g a n e th ic al d ecis io n, th e b ette r.

In te rp erso n al F acto rs A ffe ct E th ic a l D ecis io n M ak in g The r e la tio nsh ip b etw een t w o i n div id uals a ls o a ffe cts e th ic al d ecis io n m ak in g. F or ex am ple , su perio r– su bord in ate re la tio nsh ip s in th e work pla ce pow erfu lly in flu en ce w ho sa y s w hat to w hom w ith w hat effe ct. R eg ard le ss of sta tu s dif fe re n ces, th e le v el o f tr u st b etw een tw o in div id uals affe cts co m munic atio n.

With g re ate r tr u st, c o lle ag ues a re m ore lik ely to m ak e e th ic al d ecis io ns. W ith out tr u st, i t i s m ore d if fic u lt t o m ak e i n novativ e, e th ic al d ecis io ns.

The natu ra l te n sio n betw een a public re la tio ns pro fe ssio nal an d in div id ual re p orte rs a n d e d ito rs in th e m ed ia — each d ep en din g u pon a n d n eed in g th e o th er, each w ork in g u nder d if fe re n t p re ssu re s an d d ead lin es— can affe ct h ow eth ic al is su es in volv in g th e m ed ia a re re so lv ed . T he b est m ed ia re la tio ns a re b uilt o n mutu al re sp ect an d tr u st b etw een th e co m munic ato r an d m ed ia re p re se n ta tiv e.

That tr u st c an o nly b e e sta b lis h ed a n d m ain ta in ed if a ccu ra te in fo rm atio n is th e 91 cu rre n cy o f t h e r e la tio nsh ip .

Sm all- G ro u p F acto rs A ffe ct E th ic a l D ecis io n M ak in g Peer p re ssu re is v ery a p pare n t in s m all- g ro up m eetin gs. S om etim es p eer p re ssu re can b e p ositiv e— en co ura g in g r e aso n a n d f a ir n ess. A t o th er t im es, e sp ecia lly w hen a g ro up is tir e d a n d ru nnin g o ut o f tim e, p eer p re ssu re o pera te s a g ain st c re ativ e, eth ic al c o nsid era tio ns. E ffe ctiv e g ro up l e ad ers l e arn t o b e a le rt t o t h ese t e n den cie s an d a v oid “ g ro upth in k.” U neth ic al l e ad ers k now h ow t o m an ip ula te g ro upth in k t o th eir a d van ta g e.

“N ot e n ough in fo rm atio n a n d n ot e n ough tim e” is o ne o f th e b ig gest e x cu se s th at in div id uals a n d s m all g ro ups g iv e f o r m ak in g d ecis io ns th at, la te r, a re ju dged to b e u neth ic al. T im e p re ssu re s a ffe ct in div id uals , b ut it e sp ecia lly a ffe cts s m all- gro up d ecis io n m ak in g. T oo m an y d ead lin es a re a rtif ic ia lly im pose d fo r u lte rio r purp ose s. W hile “ d ro p d ead ” d ead lin es a n d a g en uin e la ck o f in fo rm atio n m ay b e unav oid ab le , in m an y situ atio ns it is th e perc ep tio n of a la ck of tim e th at ad vers e ly a ffe cts d ecis io n m ak in g. E th ic al le ad ers k now w hen to s tr e ss a b so lu te dead lin es a n d w hen to s e arc h fo r, a n d fin d, m ore tim e a n d in fo rm atio n to m ak e th e b est d ecis io n p ossib le .

As o ne c o rp ora te c o de s u ggests , “ W hen in d oubt, d on’t.” If y ou s e n se y ou a re ab out to m ak e a n u neth ic al d ecis io n, th en s to p th e d ecis io n-m ak in g p ro cess. G iv e yours e lf an d your co lle ag ues m ore tim e to th in k th ro ugh th e is su es. E th ic al le ad ers k now w hen a n d h ow t o s to p a r u sh t o j u dgm en t.

Org an iz a tio n al F acto rs A ffe ct E th ic a l D ecis io n M ak in g Org an iz atio nal f a cto rs a ffe ct t h e q uan tity a n d q uality o f e th ic al d ecis io ns. T he s iz e of a n o rg an iz atio n m ak es a d if fe re n ce in a n um ber o f w ay s. E th ic al is su es in a fir m w ith th re e e m plo yees a re n ot th e s a m e a s th ey w ould b e if th ose s a m e th re e in div id uals w ere p art o f a n o rg an iz atio n w ith 3 0,0 00 e m plo yees. N ot o nly w ould th e e th ic al p ro ble m s b e d if fe re n t, s o lu tio ns to th ese p ro ble m s w ould b e d if fe re n t.

Larg e s iz e r e q uir e s a d if fe re n t s e t o f m an ag em en t s k ills .

Certa in t y pes o f t e ch nolo gie s b re ed t h eir o w n s e t o f e th ic al s itu atio ns, p ro ble m s, an d dile m mas. Consid er, fo r ex am ple , nucle ar pow er in dustr ie s, hosp ita ls , univ ers itie s an d sc h ool sy ste m s, gro cery sto re s, an d fo od-p ro cessin g fir m s.

Pro fe ssio nal c o m munic ato rs le arn , to o o fte n th e h ard w ay , th at th e b asic w ork o f th e o rg an iz atio n c arrie s w ith i t c erta in e th ic al d ile m mas.

The m in dse t o f se n io r m an ag em en t m ay b e o ne o f th e b ig gest p re d ic to rs o f su ccess o r fa ilu re in d ealin g w ith e th ic al is su es. If c an dor a n d h onesty a re th e hallm ark s o f s e n io r m an ag em en t, th is s e t o f a ttitu des a n d b eh av io rs w ill s p re ad th ro ughout th e org an iz atio n. If th e actio ns of se n io r m an ag em en t gen era te dis tr u st, th ese n eg ativ e a ttitu des w ill a ffe ct a w id e ra n ge o f d ecis io ns, e sp ecia lly 92 th ose t h at r e q uir e a j u dgm en t a b out w hat i s r ig ht a n d w hat i s w ro ng.

Man y o rg an iz atio ns h av e d ev elo ped p ro cesse s fo r d ealin g w ith e th ic al is su es.

Som e— esp ecia lly o rg an iz atio ns a n xio us to b e in c o m plia n ce w ith g overn m en ta l re g ula tio ns— hav e esta b lis h ed tr a in in g p ro gra m s an d d ep artm en ts d ealin g w ith eth ic s. M ost m atu re org an iz atio ns dev elo p th eir ow n co de of eth ic s— an d re co gniz e th at th e pro cess of dev elo pin g an d re v is in g th e co de m ay be as im porta n t a s t h e c o de i ts e lf .

Facto rs O uts id e a n O rg an iz a tio n ’s I m med ia te C on tr o l Affe ct E th ic a l D ecis io n M ak in g Com petito rs h elp k eep y ou h onest. M is sta te a f a ct a b out a c o m petito r’s p ro duct o r se rv ic e a n d y ou w ill f in d o ut h ow c lo se ly y our c o rp ora te s ta te m en ts a re w atc h ed .

The a ctiv is t p ublic s c ru tin iz es a c o rp ora tio n’s w ord s a n d a ctio ns, a s d o r e g ula to rs .

Lots o f p eo ple o uts id e t h e c o ntr o l o f a n o rg an iz atio n h elp k eep i t h onest.

Pro fe ssio nal asso cia tio ns su ch as th e In te rn atio nal A sso cia tio n of B usin ess Com munic ato rs (IA BC) a n d th e P ublic R ela tio ns S ocie ty o f A m eric a, to n am e tw o o f th e la rg est in th is fie ld , a re sig nif ic an t so urc es o f p re ssu re . T here is a Glo bal A llia n ce of pro fe ssio nal co m munic atio n asso cia tio ns; its w eb site has in fo rm atio n an d re so urc es th at co m munic ato rs can u se to id en tif y an d re so lv e eth ic al i s su es.

There is a p re d ic ta b le a m ount o f re d undan cy a m ong th e v ario us p ro fe ssio nal co des in th is fie ld . T hey o ffe r g uid elin es th at e sse n tia lly e n co ura g e te llin g th e tr u th an d n ot en gag in g in h arm fu l b usin ess p ra ctic es. T he IA BC co de cle arly ad dre sse s th e r e la tiv ely u niv ers a l n atu re o f e th ic al c o rp ora te c o m munic atio n. T he IA BC co de sta te s it is “b ase d o n th re e d if fe re n t y et in te rre la te d p rin cip le s o f pro fe ssio nal c o m munic atio n th at a p ply th ro ughout th e w orld ” ( IA BC, 2 005, p ara .

2).

These prin cip le s assu m e th at ju st so cie tie s are govern ed by a pro fo und re sp ect fo r h um an rig hts an d th e ru le o f la w ; th at eth ic s, th e crite ria fo r dete rm in in g w hat is r ig ht a n d w ro ng, c an b e a g re ed u pon b y m em bers o f a n org an iz atio n; a n d, th at u nders ta n din g m atte rs o f ta ste re q uir e s s e n sitiv ity to cu ltu ra l n orm s ( IA BC, 2 005, p ara . 3 ).

Acco rd in g to th e IA BC co de, “th ese prin cip le s are esse n tia l: Pro fe ssio nal co m munic atio n is le g al. Pro fe ssio nal co m munic atio n is eth ic al. Pro fe ssio nal co m munic atio n i s i n g ood t a ste ” ( p ara . 4 ).

It is bey ond th e sc o pe of th is ch ap te r to dis c u ss le g al is su es affe ctin g co m munic ato rs . M ost p ro fe ssio nal c o m munic ato rs a re e x pecte d to b e b oth le g al an d e th ic al. B ut, it is p ossib le fo r a p ro fe ssio nal c o m munic ato r to b e e th ic al y et not le g al. Consid er, fo r ex am ple , civ il dis o bed ie n ce in volv in g public co m munic atio n, s u ch a s a n a n im al rig hts c am paig n th at d elib era te ly v io la te s th e 93 la w in o rd er to g ain m ed ia a tte n tio n, w ith m em bers o f th e o rg an iz atio n w illin g to pay t h e c o nse q uen ce o f b re ak in g t h e l a w .

Cultu ra l v alu es a n d b elie fs s tr o ngly i n flu en ce e th ic al d ecis io n m ak in g. P ro fo und dif fe re n ces in c u ltu re s c an b e s e en a t th e in te rn atio nal le v el. B ut th ey a ls o o ccu r am ong s m all c o m munitie s. E th ic al c o m munic ato rs t a k e c u ltu ra l v alu es a n d b elie fs of k ey s ta k eh old ers in to c o nsid era tio n w hen d ev elo pin g c am paig ns. W hile th ese cu ltu ra l d if fe re n ces a re im porta n t, p ra ctic ally a ll c u ltu re s a ro und th e w orld a g re e to th re e b asic c o ncep ts : s e ek in g a n d te llin g th e tr u th ; tr e atin g o th ers a s y ou w is h to b e tr e ate d ; a n d d oin g n o h arm to th e in nocen t. S ch ola rs , r e lig io us le ad ers , a n d eth ic is ts h av e ack now le d ged th at th ese eth ic al co ncep ts are im porta n t in m ost cu ltu re s in th e w orld , esp ecia lly th ose w here p ro fe ssio nal co m munic ato rs are em plo yed . For pro fe ssio nal co m munic ato rs , th ere are m ore sim ila ritie s th an dif fe re n ces a m ong c u ltu re s i n w hat i s t h e r ig ht w ay t o c o m munic ate .

Case i n P oin t: M ed ia B rib ery In th is a n aly sis , a ssu m e th at th e m ed ia b rib ery c ase to ok p la ce in C an ad a ( C lu ste r 1), F ra n ce (C lu ste r 2 ), S outh K ore a (C lu ste r 3 ), an d C hin a (C lu ste r 4 ). E ach co untr y is f ro m a d if fe re n t q uad ra n t u se d b y T ra n sp are n cy I n te rn atio nal ( 2 010) to cla ssif y c o untr ie s a cco rd in g t o d eg re es o f c o rru ptio n.

Questio n:

W ho a re t h e m ora l a cto rs ? A re t h ey t h e s a m e i n e ach c o untr y ?

Answ er:

T he p rin cip al m ora l a cto rs (th e lo cal p ublic re la tio ns m an ag er a n d th e lo cal jo urn alis t, a m ong o th ers ) a re th e s a m e, b ut th e w eb o f c o nta cts a n d sig nif ic an t o th ers w ho m ay b eco m e in volv ed in th e b rib ery sc h em e m ay ex pan d i n th e m ore c o rru pt c o untr ie s. F or e x am ple , th e c o ncep t o f Guanxi in Chin a e m phasiz es th e im porta n ce o f m utu ally b en efic ia l r e la tio nsh ip s w hen co nductin g busin ess: it su pports th e notio n of an ex pan ded netw ork of re la tio nsh ip s b oth fo r le g itim ate b usin ess d ealin gs a n d ille g al a rra n gem en ts su ch as b rib ery sc h em es. T he em phasis o n in div id ualis m in C an ad a an d Fra n ce w ould s u ggest fe w er a n d s m alle r n etw ork s o f re la tio nsh ip s fo r b oth le g itim ate a n d o r ille g al a ctiv itie s th an m ig ht b e e x pecte d in S outh K ore a o r Chin a w here c o lle ctiv is m i s a l o ngsta n din g c u ltu ra l v alu e.

Questio n:

Is it a n e th ic al s itu atio n, p ro ble m , o r d ile m ma? Is it th e s a m e in each c o untr y ?

Answ er:

I f th e b rib ery s itu atio n is n ot d is c u sse d ( fo r e x am ple , it is a ssu m ed to be a re g ula r part of busin ess), it does not beco m e a pro ble m — it is co nsid ere d “ b usin ess a s u su al.” I f th e s itu atio n is d is c u sse d , th en it b eco m es an e th ic al p ro ble m w ith a p ossib le w in -w in s o lu tio n ( fo r e x am ple , a m ong c o - co nsp ir a to rs n ew a rra n gem en ts m ig ht b e m ad e in clu din g o ne in w hic h th e underc o ver b rib ery d ecre ase s a n d p ay m en ts b eco m e m ore o pen , tr a n sp are n t, an d ev en tu ally le g itim ate ). For ex am ple , w e w ould ex pect a re p orte r’s 94 atte m pt a t b rib ery i n C an ad a ( w here t h e r u le o f l a w i s s tr o ng) t o b e t r e ate d a s an e th ic al s itu atio n: th e p ublic re la tio ns m an ag er w ould re je ct p artic ip atio n out o f h an d a n d r e p ort th e a ctio ns o f th e jo urn alis t n ot o nly to th e r e p orte r’s bosse s b ut a ls o t o p ro fe ssio nal a sso cia tio ns a n d, p ossib ly , t o l a w e n fo rc em en t ag en cie s.

Questio n:

W hat is m ora lly p erm itte d ? W hat is m ora lly p ro hib ite d ? Is it th e sa m e i n e ach c o untr y ?

Answ er:

B rib ery , b y d efin itio n, is ille g al. B ut n ot e v ery th in g th at is ille g al is necessa rily u neth ic al. I f b rib ery c au se s h arm to th e in nocen t, th en th e a ct is uneth ic al. E ven if th ere is little o r n o h arm , b rib ery is u neth ic al b ecau se it does n ot p ro m ote a g re ate r g ood. B rib ery m ig ht c re ate s h ort- te rm g ain s f o r a lim ite d n um ber o f p eo ple ; b ut it d oes n ot e lic it th e b est fro m o th ers , n or cre ate a g re ate r g ood f o r s o cie ty . F or e x am ple , in C hin a m ed ia b rib ery m ay be m ore c o m mon th an in S outh K ore a o r F ra n ce; a n d n ot p artic ip atin g in a brib ery sc h em e in C hin a m ay hav e m ore harm fu l co nse q uen ces th an in Fra n ce o r S outh K ore a. F ro m a u tilita ria n p oin t o f v ie w , e n gag in g in b rib ery in F ra n ce o r S outh K ore a m ay n ot b e m ora lly p erm itte d b ecau se th ere a re le g al an d eth ic al optio ns fo r void in g it. But in Chin a, in ex tr e m e cir c u m sta n ces ( fo r e x am ple , w hen th ere is th e th re at o f v io le n ce if s o m eo ne does n ot p artic ip ate ), it m ay b e m ora lly p erm itte d to p artic ip ate in a b rib ery sc h em e if not partic ip atin g w ould cre ate m ore harm . H ig hly co rru pt eco nom ie s c an m ak e c o nditio ns “ o n th e g ro und” su ch th at p artic ip atin g in brib ery m ay b e th e le sse r o f tw o e v ils a n d, th ere fo re , m ora lly p erm itte d , if oth er a ctio ns a re t a k en t o r e d uce b rib ery a n d o th er f o rm s o f c o rru ptio n.

Questio n:

W ould t h e i d eal v ir tu ous p ers o n a ct d if fe re n tly i n e ach c o untr y ?

Answ er:

Y es, t h e i d eal v ir tu ous p ers o n w ould t a k e i n to c o nsid era tio n c u ltu ra l dif fe re n ces; b ut th e id eal v ir tu ous p ers o n w ould a ls o s y nth esiz e th e w is d om in a ll c u ltu re s a n d a ct a cco rd in g to p rin cip le s th at w ould a p ply a cro ss a ll cu ltu re s. For ex am ple , th e co re valu es of a pro fe ssio nal co m munic ato r tr a v elin g to an d fro m an d w ork in g in C an ad a, F ra n ce, S outh K ore a, an d Chin a w ould n ot c h an ge d ra m atic ally ; b ut in e ach c o untr y , th e p ro fe ssio nal co m munic ato r w ould ta k e in to co nsid era tio n sp ecif ic cu ltu ra l v alu es an d belie fs . If co nfro nte d w ith a m ed ia brib ery sc h em e, th e id eal vir tu ous pro fe ssio nal co m munic ato r w ould tr y , in th e sh ort te rm , to m ak e th e tr a n sa ctio ns as tr a n sp are n t as possib le — if not im med ia te ly , as so on as possib le . T he p ro fe ssio nal c o m munic ato r w ould w ork , in th e lo ng te rm , to re d uce th e ro ot cau se s of th e brib ery in th at eco nom y an d to tu rn th e cla n destin e c rim in al a ctiv ity i n to a n o pen ly d is c u sse d l e g itim ate t r a n sa ctio n.

Our a n aly sis in dic ate s th e w eak ness o f c u ltu ra l re la tiv is m , w hic h w ould a rg ue th at w e c an not j u dge t h e r ig htn ess o r w ro ngness o f m ed ia b rib ery i n o th er p arts o f th e w orld . Y ou c an a n d s h ould m ak e ju dgm en ts a b out m ed ia b rib ery : w here v er it occu rs , it is w ro ng. E ven in e x tr e m e c ir c u m sta n ces w hen v io le n ce is th re ate n ed 95 an d it m ay n ot b e a v oid ab le , m ed ia b rib ery is s till w ro ng; it is ju st th e le sse r o f ev ils .

Our an aly sis als o poin ts out th e str e n gth s of plu ra lis m . E th ic al plu ra lis m em bra ces th e c o ntr a d ic tio ns o f v alu es th at fo rc e p eo ple to m ak e c h oic es a m ong th e le sse r o f e v ils . E th ic al p lu ra lis m d oes n ot lo ok fo r a su pre m e v alu e o r th e sim ple rig ht a n sw er b ut o nly th e p ossib ility o f n ew e th ic al in sig hts . E ven in th e most c o rru pt e co nom y, a p ro fe ssio nal c o m munic ato r u sin g e th ic al p lu ra lis m a s a fra m ew ork fo r m ak in g e th ic al d ecis io ns w ill fo cu s o n lo ng-te rm s o lu tio ns to th e ro ot c au se s o f c o rru ptio n, w ill a ck now le d ge ir re d ucib le a n d c o nflic tin g v alu es in so cie ty , a n d s e arc h fo r in novativ e a n d e th ic al s o lu tio ns to th e p ro ble m o f m ed ia brib ery .

Eth ic al p lu ra lis m a llo w s th e p ro fe ssio nal c o m munic ato r to a v oid th e e x tr e m es of rig hte o usly s a y in g “ N ev er, n ev er e v er” e n gag e in m ed ia b rib ery ; o r th e s illy re la tiv is t’ s e x pre ssio n o f “ W hate v er,” d o i t i f t h at i s w hat e v ery body e ls e i s d oin g.

Apply in g th e f ra m ew ork o f e th ic al p lu ra lis m to m ed ia b rib ery k eep s th e f o cu s o n fin din g c o m mon g ro und a m ong c o nflic tin g v alu es a n d s e ek in g n ew in sig hts in to eth ic al d ecis io n m ak in g.

Con clu sio n Fro m a p ers o nal a n d a c o rp ora te p oin t o f v ie w , it p ay s to th in k th ro ugh e th ic al ch oic es b efo re th ey h ap pen — to k now in ad van ce h ow y ou in te n d to m an ag e co m munic atio n eth ic ally — an d to re co gniz e th e m an y fa cto rs th at in flu en ce eth ic al d ecis io n m ak in g.

Cultu ra l re la tiv is m is a w eak co ncep t, use fu l only becau se it em phasiz es to le ra n ce. P lu ra lis m i s a s tr o ng c o ncep t f o r t w o r e aso ns: ( 1 ) b ecau se i t i s b ase d o n Aris to tle ’s G old en M ean : i t a v oid s t h e e x tr e m es o f a b so lu tis m a n d r e la tiv is m ; a n d (2 ) b ecau se it s e ek s th e w is e p ers o n’s c o m mon g ro und w here n ew in sig hts c an em erg e fro m co nflic tin g valu es, prin cip le s, an d lo yaltie s— if th e w is e pers o n hold s s te ad y a n d l is te n s h ard .

Basic a ssu m ptio ns a n d p rin cip le s o f e th ic al c o m munic atio n a p ply th ro ughout th e w orld — fo r e x am ple , to s e ek a n d te ll th e tr u th ; to b e f a ir b y tr e atin g o th ers a s you w is h t o b e t r e ate d ; a n d t o d o n o h arm t o t h e i n nocen t.

Here a re s o m e p ra ctic al s u ggestio ns f o r p ro fe ssio nal c o m munic ato rs w ho w an t to m ak e b ette r e th ic al d ecis io ns:

Know y ours e lf . W rite y our o w n p ers o nal c o de o f e th ic s b ase d o n o ne o f th e pro fe ssio nal c o des. I t w ill h elp y ou th in k th ro ugh h ow y ou w ould d eal w ith eth ic al d ile m mas b efo re t h ey h ap pen .

Learn h ow to re co gniz e a n d d eal c re ativ ely a n d p ro fe ssio nally w ith e th ic al situ atio ns, p ro ble m s, a n d d ile m mas.

96 Know y our c o lle ag ues— esp ecia lly h ow th ey a ct in sm all g ro ups— an d th e in te rn al a n d e x te rn al c h ara cte ris tic s o f y our c lie n t o r e m plo yer.

Resp ect th e c u ltu ra l v alu es a n d b elie fs o f a ll y our s ta k eh old ers . R eco gniz e th at th ey , to o, if th ey a re g ood p eo ple , sh are y our v alu es o f se ek in g a n d te llin g t h e t r u th , b ein g f a ir , a n d d oin g n o h arm t o t h e i n nocen t.

Refe re n ces In te rn atio nal Asso cia tio n of Busin ess Com munic ato rs [IA BC]. (2 005).

In te rn atio nal Asso cia tio n of Busin ess Com munic ato rs co de of eth ic s fo r pro fe ssio nal c o m munic ato rs . A vaila b le a t www.i a b c.c o m /a b out/c o de.h tm .

Aris to tle ’s Eth ic s. (2 010, M arc h 29). Sta n fo rd en cy clo ped ia of philo so phy.

Availa b le a t http ://p la to .s ta n fo rd .e d u/e n tr ie s/a ris to tle -e th ic s .

Tra n sp are n cy In te rn atio nal. (2 010). 2008 brib e pay ers in dex . A vaila b le at www.t r a n sp are n cy .o rg .

97 CH APTE R S IX CO RPO RATE S O CIA L R ESP O NSIB IL IT Y The C om munic a to r’s R ole a s L ea d er a n d Advoca te Mary A nn M cC au le y Corp ora te s o cia l r e sp onsib ility ( C SR ) e n co m passe s a b ro ad r a n ge o f b usin ess in itia tiv es th at h av e a co m mon th re ad . E ach aim s to im pro ve o ur w orld , wheth er b y o pera tin g a n e n vir o nm en ta lly f rie n dly b usin ess, e n su rin g h um an rig hts , e n ab lin g e m plo yees to v olu nte er th eir tim e a n d ta le n ts , o r p ro vid in g fin an cia l s u pport to o rg an iz atio ns e n gag ed in im pro vin g th e q uality o f liv es.

A G oogle se arc h fo r a d efin itio n o f C SR tu rn s u p m ore th an 2 6 m illio n re su lts an d man y dif fe re n t la b els . These la b els in clu de co rp ora te re sp onsib ility , co rp ora te acco unta b ility , co rp ora te eth ic s, co rp ora te citiz en sh ip , su sta in ab ility , ste w ard sh ip , tr ip le b otto m lin e, a n d re sp onsib le busin ess. M ost o f t h e p ostin gs i n dic ate t h ere i s n o s ta n dard d efin itio n.

T he W orld B an k d efin itio n ap pears to b e am ong th e m ost g lo bal: “C orp ora te s o cia l r e sp onsib ility is th e c o m mitm en t o f b usin esse s to c o ntr ib ute to s u sta in ab le e co nom ic dev elo pm en t by w ork in g w ith em plo yees, th eir fa m ilie s, th e lo cal c o m munity a n d s o cie ty a t la rg e to im pro ve th eir liv es in w ay s th at a re g ood fo r b usin ess a n d f o r d ev elo pm en t” ( 2 010, p ara . 2 ).

Com munic ato rs h av e th e o pportu nity to ta k e a la rg er le ad ers h ip ro le in C SR b usin ess str a te g y th an ev er befo re becau se of th e ex pecta tio ns of our o rg an iz atio ns’ sta k eh old ers . Sta k eh old ers — fro m cu sto m ers to in vesto rs an d e m plo yees— in cre asin gly a re m ak in g d ecis io ns a n d d ev elo pin g o pin io ns a b out o ur o rg an iz atio ns b ase d o n h ow th ey tr e at th e e n vir o nm en t, th eir c o m munitie s, a n d t h e p eo ple w ho l iv e a n d w ork i n t h em .

This ch ap te r d esc rib es in -d ep th th e im pact o f co rp ora te so cia l re sp onsib ility s tr a te g ie s o n o ur o rg an iz atio ns’ b usin ess m odels an d h ow C SR str a te g ie s are i m ple m en te d .

Tow ard S ta n dard iz a tio n o f C SR 98 The p hra se co rp ora te so cia l re sp onsib ility w as co in ed in 1 953 w hen H ow ard Bow en w ro te th e b ook Socia l R esp onsib ilitie s o f th e B usin essm an , in w hic h h e ad dre sse d th e q uestio n o f th e b u sin ess c o m munity ’s m ora l o blig atio ns to s o cie ty .

As C SR e v olv ed , b usin esse s a ro und th e w orld h av e m oved fro m s im ply m ak in g co ntr ib utio ns an d pro vid in g volu nte ers to co m munity cau se s to in co rp ora tin g CSR in to th eir prim ary busin ess str a te g ie s. T oday , C SR is a w ay of doin g busin ess fo r m an y co m pan ie s w orld w id e. C orp ora te so cia l re sp onsib ility is beco m in g a n e sse n tia l c o m ponen t o f t h e b usin ess m odel a s s h are h old ers , b usin ess partn ers , c u sto m ers , a n d v en dors g iv e v oic e to e x pecta tio ns th at a n y o rg an iz atio n with w hic h th ey d o b usin ess m eet c erta in sta n dard s fo r e th ic al, e n vir o nm en ta l, an d h um an r ig hts .

Acco rd in g to L ondon-b ase d In te rn atio nal In stitu te o f B usin ess E th ic s (Z ak i, 2010), co m pan ie s dem onstr a tin g a public co m mitm en t to hig h sta n dard s of co rp ora te b eh av io r o n a v era g e p ost 1 8 p erc en t h ig her p ro fits . F or e x am ple , in Austr a lia , a n in cre asin g n um ber o f in stitu tio ns m an ag in g re tir e m en t in vestm en ts re p ort th at th ey “ are s ta rtin g to ju dge c o m pan ie s o n th eir e n vir o nm en ta l, s o cia l an d g overn an ce i s su es” ( G ettle r, 2 007, p ara . 7 ).

Acco rd in g t o e th ic is t A ttr a cta L ag an , “ B usin ess w ill d ete rm in e t h e q uality o f t h e air w e b re ath e, t h e f u el w e b urn , t h e f o od w e e at a n d t h e w ate r w e d rin k. S o t o o, i t is b usin ess th at w ill s h ap e th e e m erg en ce o f a g lo bal s o cie ty b y d ete rm in in g w ho is in clu ded , w ho is in fo rm ed , w ho gets w hat an d w hic h hum an rig hts are en sh rin ed in th e g lo bal w ork pla ce. B usin ess n ow h as to h av e th e p ote n tia l to en han ce o r d esta b ilis e s o cia l p ro gre ss i n e q ual m easu re ” ( a s c ite d i n G ettle r, 2 007, para . 2 ).

Man y c o m pan ie s h av e re sp onded to s ta k eh old er a n d re g ula to ry p re ssu re s w ith CSR pro gra m s th at are fo cu se d on im pro vin g th e glo bal co m munity .

Com munic ato rs a re p ois e d to e m bra ce le ad ers h ip ro le s b ecau se th e su ccess o f CSR in itia tiv es is tig htly tie d to th e effe ctiv en ess of th e co m munic atio n su pportin g th em . I n E uro pe s o m e c o untr ie s, in clu din g F ra n ce a n d D en m ark , h av e passe d la w s th at re q uir e re p ortin g b ase d o n th e tr ip le b otto m lin e m odel, w hic h re q uir e s busin ess perfo rm an ce to be ad dre sse d base d on its im pact on th e eco nom y, e n vir o nm en t, a n d s o cie ty .

As glo bal sta n dard s fo r le an , su sta in ab le busin ess opera tio ns hav e been dev elo ped an d are re q uir e d in so m e se cto rs in ord er to co nduct busin ess, guid elin es h av e c o m e in to e x is te n ce th at o utlin e th e k ey e le m en ts o f a n y C SR re p ort. T here are v ast se le ctio ns o f aid s accessib le in cre atin g an d d ep lo yin g effe ctiv e co m munic atio n pro gra m s. Thre e of th e m ost im porta n t to ols to unders ta n d are Glo bal Rep ortin g In itia tiv e (G RI) Susta in ab ility Rep ortin g Guid elin es ( www.g lo balr e p ortin g.o rg ); Acco untA bility (A A) 1000 se rie s ( www.a cco unta b ility 21.n et ); an d In te rn atio nal Sta n dard s O rg an iz atio n (IS O ) 26000 s ta n dard ( www.i s o .o rg /s r ).

99 Glo b al R ep ortin g I n it ia tiv e CER ES, an en vir o nm en ta l o rg an iz atio n, an d th e U nite d N atio ns E nvir o nm en t Pro gra m me dev elo ped th e G RI guid elin es in 1997 as a co lla b ora tiv e effo rt.

Update d in 2 006, th e g uid elin es are th e m ost w id ely u se d sta n dard fo r C SR re p orts . T hey i d en tif y e ig ht k ey e le m en ts o f c re atin g a r e p ort:

1.

Colle ctin g, a n aly zin g, a n d o rg an iz in g d ata 2.

Id en tif y in g i m pact 3.

Engag in g s ta k eh old ers 4.

Dete rm in in g s u bsta n tiv e i s su es t o i n clu de 5.

Defin in g s c o pe 6.

Dis c u ssin g m an ag em en t a p pro ach es 7.

Com munic atin g s ig nif ic an t d ata 8.

Asse ssin g p ro gre ss a n d p rio ritie s g oin g f o rw ard In s u m mary , th e re p ort m ust p ro vid e c o nte x t to th e c o nte n t a n d b e m ore th an ju st a l ita n y o f d ata w ith n o a sse ssm en t o f l e sso ns l e arn ed , p ro gre ss, a n d i m pact.

Tele fó nic a ( 2 008), o ne o f th e w orld ’s la rg est te le co m munic atio ns c o m pan ie s, is an ex am ple of an org an iz atio n th at fo llo w s th e G RI guid elin es. T heir re p ort in clu des in fo rm atio n a b out in itia tiv es in tw en ty c o untr ie s, G RI in dic ato rs , c ase stu die s, a n d o th er in fo rm atio n th at s h ed lig ht o n T ele fó nic a’s a ch ie v em en ts a n d fu tu re c h alle n ges i n t h e f ie ld o f C SR .

Acco u ntA bilit y 1 000 The A A1000 se rie s w as dev elo ped by A cco untA bility , a glo bal org an iz atio n ded ic ate d t o a cco unta b ility f o r s u sta in ab ility . T he s e rie s p ro vid es g uid an ce r e la te d to s u sta in ab ility p ra ctic es a n d d ata t h ro ugh t h re e s ta n dard s:

1.

The A A1000 A cco untA bility Prin cip le s Sta n dard (A A1000A PS) 2008 p ro vid es a b ette r f ra m ew ork f o r a n o rg an iz atio n to u se in o rd er to bette r id en tif y , u nders ta n d, p rio ritiz e, a n d re sp ond to its su sta in ab ility ch alle n ges.

2.

The A A1000 A ssu ra n ce S ta n dard (A A1000A S) 2 008 is a le ad in g in te rn atio nal s ta n dard u se d to p ro vid e a ssu ra n ce o n p ublic ly a v aila b le su sta in ab ility i n fo rm atio n, p artic u la rly C SR /S usta in ab ility r e p orts .

3.

The A A1000 S ta k eh old er E ngag em en t S ta n dard ( A A1000S E S) 2 005 pro vid es a fra m ew ork to help org an iz atio ns en su re th at sta k eh old er en gag em en t p ro cesse s a re r o bust a n d d eliv er r e su lts .

In te rn atio n al S ta n dard s O rg an iz a tio n 2 6000 The IS O 26000 sta n dard s w ere la u nch ed in N ovem ber 2010 an d pro vid e a pra ctic al g uid e f o r c o m munic atin g s u sta in ab ility . T he s ta n dard s e n co m pass s e v en 100 co re su bje cts : o rg an iz atio nal g overn an ce, fa ir o pera tin g p ra ctic es, e n vir o nm en t, hum an r ig hts , l a b or p ra ctic es, c o nsu m er i s su es, a n d c o m munity i n volv em en t.

While m ost o f th ese su bje cts fa ll o uts id e th e c o ntr o l o f c o m munic ato rs , it is esse n tia l th at w e f u lly c o m pre h en d h ow o ur o rg an iz atio ns a d dre ss a n d im ple m en t str a te g ie s in th ese are as. A s sta te d in th e co des o f eth ic s o f all p ro fe ssio nal co m munic atio n a sso cia tio ns, w e h av e a n e th ic al re sp onsib ility to c o m munic ate tr u th fu l i n fo rm atio n.

That p uts c o m munic ato rs i n t h e p ositio n o f b ein g t h e o rg an iz atio n’s c o nsc ie n ce.

As c o m pan ie s h av e le arn ed th e v alu e o f bein g g re en , s o m e h av e b een a ccu se d o f gre en w ash in g.

G re en w ash in g is a te rm u se d to d esc rib e a p ro duct, c o m pan y, o r se rv ic e th at cla im s to be en vir o nm en ta lly frie n dly an d co ntr ib ute to a m ore su sta in ab le w orld w hen in f a ct th at c la im is a t le ast q uestio nab le o r e v en u ntr u e.

To av oid possib le accu sa tio ns, w e need to unders ta n d th e lif e cy cle s of th e pro ducts o ur c o m pan ie s p ro duce to m ak e c erta in th at th ose p ro ducts a n d th eir co m ponen ts , e v en if w e o uts o urc e th em , a re p ro duced a cco rd in g to su sta in ab le guid elin es f ro m i n cep tio n t o d is tr ib utio n t o c o nsu m ptio n a n d d is p osa l.

Bein g re sp onsib le fo r c o m munic atio n c h alle n ges u s to a sk q uestio ns a b out th e CSR g oals a n d s tr a te g ie s, s u ch a s:

What i s t h e b oard p olic y r e la te d t o s u sta in ab ility ?

How i s t h at b ein g i m ple m en te d ?

How a n d w ho i s m onito rin g c o m plia n ce?

What a re e m plo yees’ r o le s a n d o pportu nitie s t o c o ntr ib ute ?

An o rg an iz atio n c o m mitte d to a c o rp ora te s o cia l r e sp onsib ility a g en da p ro vid es sig nif ic an t o pportu nitie s to b uild tr u st a m ong a ll s ta k eh old ers . It m ean s w alk in g th e ta lk a n d a ssu rin g th at C SR c o m munic atio n is a h ig h p rio rity . B ase d o n th e BSR /G lo beS can S ta te o f S usta in ab le B usin ess P oll (2 009), 6 6 p erc en t o f th ose re sp ondin g in dic ate d th ey pla n ned to in cre ase ex te rn al an d in te rn al co m munic atio n a b out th eir C SR p ro gra m s. I n a d ditio n, 5 0 p erc en t r e p orte d p la n s to in cre ase c h ie f e x ecu tiv e o ffic er ( C EO ) in volv em en t, a n d 3 8 p erc en t p la n ned to in cre ase sta ffin g le v els . It is cle ar th ere is a str o ng co m mitm en t to C SR co m munic atio n w ith in m an y c o m pan ie s.

Befo re a C SR r e p ort is p ro duced , m uch w ork m ust p re ced e it. C om muni​ c ato rs ’ re sp onsib ilitie s s h ould f o cu s o n s tr a te g ie s s u ch a s le ad in g e m plo yee e n gag em en t, alig nin g b ra n d r e p uta tio n w ith C SR in itia tiv es, a n d le v era g in g th e C SR in itia tiv es th ro ugh p ublic r e la tio ns, t r a d itio nal, a n d s o cia l m ed ia r e la tio ns.

In te g ra tin g C SR C om munic a tio n s 101 Str a te g ic p la n nin g i s a s c ritic al t o C SR a s i t i s t o a n y o th er i n itia tiv e. T he k ey i s t o alig n th e C SR c o m munic atio n p la n w ith b usin ess, c o rp ora te c o m munic atio n, a n d mark etin g p la n s.

CSR co m munic atio n pro gra m s can not be se p ara te d fro m oth er co rp ora te co m munic atio n i n itia tiv es. I t s h ould b e c o nsid ere d o ne o f t h e m an y e le m en ts u se d in positio nin g a co m pan y an d its pro ducts or se rv ic es. T he opportu nitie s to le v era g e a c o m pan y’s C SR i n itia tiv es a re t o o b en efic ia l t o m is s.

Dep en din g o n p ro gra m siz e, C SR m ay n eed a d ed ic ate d p ers o n o r sta ff to man ag e it. If th is is th e c ase , it is im porta n t to k eep th is e ffo rt in te g ra te d w ith oth er p ublic r e la tio ns, c o rp ora te c o m munic atio ns, a n d m ark etin g a ctiv itie s. I f th e public re la tio ns, m ark etin g, or co rp ora te co m munic atio n dep artm en ts are not dir e ctly re sp onsib le fo r CSR , it is th e re sp onsib ility of th eir re sp ectiv e co m munic atio n p ro fe ssio nals t o e sta b lis h t h e l in ks a m ong t h e t h re e i n itia tiv es.

Bein g in te g ra te d th ro ugh a p la n nin g o r str u ctu ra l o rg an iz atio n w ill m ak e th e ta sk o f m an ag in g C SR m ore e ffe ctiv e, sin ce m an y o f th e in itia tiv es, in clu din g co ntr ib utio ns, h av e th e p ote n tia l f o r e x te rn al v is ib ility . I n te rn ally th ere is m uch to be g ain ed b y k eep in g e m plo yees i n fo rm ed .

CSR p ro gra m s o ffe r c o m pan ie s a w ealth o f o pportu nitie s to b e v is ib le . P ublic re la tio ns a n d a d vertis in g s tr a te g ie s s h ould c o nsid er C SR i n itia tiv es w hen p la n s a re bein g d ra w n to m ark et th e co m pan y an d its p ro ducts o r se rv ic es. O ne o f th e re aso ns cau se -re la te d m ark etin g is se en as valu ab le is th at it cre ate s an opportu nity t o m ark et i n w ay s t h at s p eak t o a c o m mon i n te re st.

For th e co m pan y th at h as a b usin ess-to -b usin ess p ro duct o r se rv ic e, g ain in g vis ib ility in th e c o m munity c an b e d if fic u lt, s in ce th e a v era g e r e ad er o f th e lo cal new sp ap er o r v ie w er o f l o cal n ew sc asts h as n o d ir e ct in te re st i n w hat y ou m ark et.

Vis ib ility th ro ugh y our C SR c o m munity re la tio ns e ffo rts c an b e a g re at a sse t.

Enab lin g key au die n ces to se e your co m pan y activ e in lo cal su sta in ab ility pro je cts , lo cal ch arity ev en ts , m eet em plo yees volu nte erin g on board s an d co m mitte es, a n d s e e y our c o m pan y’s n am e a m ong c o ntr ib uto rs to n onpro fits a ll help t o c re ate a p ositiv e i m ag e o f y our c o m pan y.

Tele fó nic a’s ( 2 009) p ro gra m , I n té g ra m e, te am s w ith lo cal g overn m en ts in r u ra l are as to r e d uce p overty a n d p ro m ote d ev elo pm en t. T hro ugh th ese p ublic – priv ate partn ers h ip s, Tele fó nic a has in sta lle d th e in fra str u ctu re s need ed to en ab le te le co m munic atio n a ccess to th ousa n ds o f p eo ple in th e m ost is o la te d lo catio ns.

More th an 2 00 c o m munitie s h av e a ccess to fix ed , m obile , a n d p ublic w ir e le ss te le p hony an d bro ad ban d, ben efitin g m ore th an 58,0 00 peo ple . They use YouT ube t o t e ll t h eir s to rie s.

Vis ib ility c an in clu de p ublic ity re su ltin g fro m sp ecia l e v en ts , a n nouncem en ts ab out board ap poin tm en ts , eq uip m en t, pro duct or se rv ic e donatio ns, an d sp onso rs h ip s. I f y ou a re c o nsid erin g c au se -re la te d m ark etin g in itia tiv es a s p art o f your c o m munity r e la tio ns e ffo rt, t h ere a re a d ditio nal c rite ria t o c o nsid er:

102 Is t h e o pportu nity a lig ned w ith C SR g oals ?

Is th ere a lo gic al tie b etw een o ur p ro ducts a n d se rv ic es a n d th e p ro pose d sp onso rs h ip ?

What d o w e e x pect f ro m th is r e la tio nsh ip : le ad s, s e llin g p ro duct o r s e rv ic es dir e ctly , h ig her v is ib ility , v olu nte er o pportu nitie s?

What i s t h e p ro bab ility t h is o rg an iz atio n c an m eet o ur e x pecta tio ns?

What does th e org an iz atio n ex pect fro m us: pro duct or se rv ic es, hig her vis ib ility , i n -k in d s u pport, f in an cia l s u pport, v olu nte ers ?

What w ill it co st us to affilia te w ith th is org an iz atio n: tim e, m oney , in ven to ry ?

Im pact o f C SR o n B ra n d R ep uta tio n Corp ora te a n d p ro duct b ra n ds a re e sp ecia lly v uln era b le to p ublic o pin io ns b ase d on in div id uals ’ p erc ep tio n o f o ur o rg an iz atio ns’ im pacts o n th e e n vir o nm en t a n d our c o m munitie s. A p oll c o m mis sio ned b y t h e U .S .- b ase d B ette r B usin ess B ure au (2 008) re v eale d th at d urin g a six -m onth p erio d fro m S ep te m ber 2 007 to A pril 2008 U .S . b usin esse s a v era g ed a 1 4 p erc en t d ro p in tr u st a cro ss 1 3 o f th e 1 5 in dustr ie s polle d . T hese in clu ded busin esse s th at pro vid e basic pro ducts an d se rv ic es, s u ch a s p harm acie s a n d d ru g s to re s, b an ks, g ro cery s to re s, d ep artm en t sto re s, a n d h om e i m pro vem en t c en te rs .

Com munic ato rs h av e th e o pportu nity to se e th at C SR in itia tiv es are alig ned with b ra n ds w heth er w e a re o n t h e b ra n d m an ag em en t s id e o r t h e C SR s id e o f t h e eq uatio n. F or e x am ple , T he B ody S hop (2 010) w as o ne o f th e e arly a d opte rs o f alig nin g busin ess goals an d valu es w ith su sta in ab ility . T heir m ark etin g has fo cu se d o n th eir so cia lly re sp onsib le a p pro ach to th eir p ro ducts , fro m so urc in g th ro ugh e co nom ic d ev elo pm en t o f s m all b usin esse s f o r w om en i n u nderd ev elo ped co m pan ie s t o m an ufa ctu rin g p ro ducts t h at d o n ot h arm t h e e n vir o nm en t.

Body S hop f o under A nita R oddic k is a r o le m odel f o r b usin ess le ad ers w ho a re co m mitte d to a se t o f v alu es th at en ab le co m munic ato rs to alig n v alu es w ith bra n d. O n th e co m pan y’s w eb site sh e co ncis e ly artic u la te d th ose v alu es: “W e belie v e th ere is o nly o ne w ay to b e b eau tif u l, n atu re ’s w ay . W e’v e b elie v ed th is fo r y ears a n d s ti ll d o. W e c o nsta n tly s e ek o ut w onderfu l n atu ra l in gre d ie n ts f ro m all fo ur co rn ers of th e glo be, an d w e brin g you pro ducts burs tin g w ith effe ctiv en ess t o e n han ce y our n atu ra l b eau ty a n d e x pre ss y our u niq ue p ers o nality .

And w hils t w e’re d oin g th is , w e a lw ay s s tr iv e to p ro te ct th is b eau tif u l p la n et a n d th e p eo ple w ho d ep en d o n i t. W e d on’t d o i t t h is w ay b ecau se i t’ s f a sh io nab le . W e do i t b ecau se , t o u s, i t’ s t h e o nly w ay ” ( B ody S hop, 2 010, p ara . 1 ).

More r e cen tly , in 2 008 T im berla n d a n nounced a lo ng-te rm C SR p ro gra m b ase d 103 on fo ur str a te g ic goals , or pilla rs . E ach pilla r is su pporte d by se v era l key in itia tiv es w ith n ear- a n d lo ng-te rm q uan tita tiv e ta rg ets a n d w as v ette d th ro ugh a rig oro us s ta k eh old er e n gag em en t p ro cess:

1.

Energ y:

Beco m e c arb on n eu tr a l b y 2 010 2.

Pro ducts :

Desig n r e cy cla b le p ro duct 3.

Work p la ces:

Fair , s a fe , a n d n ondis c rim in ato ry 4.

Serv ic e:

Com munity g re en in g One of th e uniq ue qualitie s of T im berla n d’s pro gra m is an in vita tio n fo r co nsu m ers t o a ctiv ely p artic ip ate i n t h e c o m pan y’s q uarte rly C SR p ro gre ss r e p orts by p ro vid in g f e ed back .

Com munic ato rs need to unders ta n d how th e lif e cy cle of a pro duct fro m co m ponen t or in gre d ie n t su pplie r to pro ductio n to pack ag in g an d fin ally co nsu m ptio n an d dis p osa l meets our org an iz atio ns’ sta te d valu es ab out su sta in ab ility . I f a ll e le m en ts a lig n, w e h av e a g re at o pportu nity to e n han ce b ra n d re p uta tio n. If th ey do not, we ris k dam ag in g bra n d re p uta tio n th ro ugh gre en w ash in g w hile v io la tin g o ur p ro fe ssio nal c o de o f e th ic s.

Engagin g E m plo yees i n t h e C om munit y Busin esse s hav e a gre at deal to gain by cre atin g str o ng em plo yee volu nte er pro gra m s. T hese p ro gra m s c an ra n ge fro m p ro vid in g tim e o ff to p artic ip atin g in co rp ora te -e n dors e d c o m munity a ctiv itie s to p ro vid in g m atc h in g f in an cia l g if ts f o r sp ecif ic a m ounts o f t im e v olu nte ere d b y t h e e m plo yee.

The ben efits to th e em plo yer an d em plo yee are m an y. U .S .- b ase d W alk er In fo rm atio n c ite s a stu dy (D riz in , 2 007) th at in dic ate s 7 o f 1 0 e m plo yees w ho fa v ora b ly v ie w th eir e m plo yers ’ c o m munity s u pport s ta te th ey w ill re m ain w ith th at e m plo yer tw o y ears lo nger th an th ose w ho d o n ot h av e fa v ora b le v ie w s o f th eir e m plo yer’s c o m munity p ro gra m s.

Man y v olu nte er o pportu nitie s g iv e e m plo yees a fo ru m in w hic h to s tr e n gth en ex is tin g sk ills o r h one little -u se d sk ills . S uch activ itie s als o b en efit n onpro fits sin ce th ey g et a ssis ta n ce a t a ll le v els , f ro m e n tr y le v el to s e n io r m an ag em en t, th at th ey c o uld n ot o th erw is e a ffo rd . S om e in itia tiv es th at h av e g lo bal a p plic atio ns f o r co m pan ie s d oin g b usin ess i n te rn atio nally i n clu de:

Lite ra cy p ro gra m s Tuto rin g s tu den ts a t a ll l e v els o f e d ucatio n Men to rin g p ro gra m s f o r y outh s Hunger-fig htin g p ro gra m s Health c are p ro je cts f o r t h e p oor Housin g p ro gra m s f o r t h e p oor o r d is a ste r v ic tim s Sm all b usin ess d ev elo pm en t i n i m poveris h ed o r d is tr e sse d c o m munitie s 104 Opportu nitie s s u ch a s t h ese f re q uen tly a lig n w ell w ith t h e c o rp ora te C SR g oals .

In vitin g e m plo yees f ro m a v arie ty o f b usin ess u nits a n d s k ill le v els to s it o n th e co ntr ib utio ns c o m mitte e a llo w s a n o rg an iz atio n to a lig n its c o ntr ib utio ns g oals with th e in te re sts o f its e m plo yees a n d n eed s o f th e c o m munity w hile g ain in g in te rn al b uy-in f o r t h e C SR p ro gra m s. I t i s a m ora le b uild er t o a sk a r e p re se n ta tiv e gro up o f e m plo yees to p artic ip ate in th is im porta n t d ecis io n-m ak in g p ro cess. It als o is a n o pportu nity fo r a n e m plo yee to d ev elo p le ad ers h ip s k ills , le arn m ore ab out c o m munity ’s n eed s, a n d g et a f ir s th an d lo ok a t w hat a s o cia lly r e sp onsib le co m pan y m ean s t o t h e c o m pan y a n d t o t h e c o m munity .

For ex am ple , in H ong K ong th e nonpro fit org an iz atio n, B usin ess in th e Com munity ( 2 009), a n d its E N GAGE n etw ork o f b usin esse s o rg an iz e th e a n nual Jo urn ey o f O pportu nity , th ro ugh w hic h v olu nte ers f ro m m an y b usin esse s e n gag e with d is a d van ta g ed y outh . I n 2 009, th ey p air e d 5 2 e m plo yees a s m en to rs f ro m 1 8 le ad in g H ong K ong c o m pan ie s w ith 6 5 y oung p eo ple fro m s c h ools in T in S hui Wai— one o f t h e p oore st d is tr ic ts i n H ong K ong. T he 2 009 p ro gra m r e p re se n te d a 44 p erc en t in cre ase in y oung p eo ple p artic ip atin g a n d a n 1 8 p erc en t in cre ase in volu nte ers fro m 2 008. T his p ro gra m g av e y oung p eo ple a c h an ce to le arn th at th ere are o pportu nitie s to ris e o ut o f th e p overty in w hic h th ey liv e. F or th e volu nte ers , it w as o ne w ay in w hic h th ey c o uld s h are th eir w ork e x perie n ces a n d pro vid e s o m e i n sp ir a tio n f o r d is a d van ta g ed y outh .

Reg ula r s u rv ey s o f c o m munity in volv em en t b y e m plo yees w ill p ro vid e a s e n se of th e is su es th at a re im porta n t to e m plo yees a n d a llo w c o m munic ato rs to se e tr e n ds an d id en tif y co m monalitie s. T his is im porta n t in fo rm atio n as y ou p la n co m munity r e la tio ns p ro gra m s, e sp ecia lly if o ne g oal is to g ain e m plo yee s u pport fo r your in itia tiv es. Y ou als o m ay fin d an ex is tin g co nnectio n th ro ugh an em plo yee’s in volv em en t in an org an iz atio n, whic h giv es your fir m th e opportu nity f o r a s p ecia l in itia tiv e th at w ill b en efit b oth th e c o m munity a n d y our co m pan y. I n e sta b lis h in g c rite ria , c o nsid er t h ese q uestio ns:

Where a re t h e g re ate st u nm et n eed s i n o ur c o m munity ?

How d o t h ese a lig n w ith o ur C SR g oals a n d s tr a te g ie s?

In w hat w ay s d o t h ose n eed s m atc h o ur s tr a te g ic b usin ess g oals ?

What v alu es d o t h ese o rg an iz atio ns h av e i n c o m mon w ith u s?

What a re s o m e b en efits to th e c o m pan y a n d o ur e m plo yees if w e s u pport a n org an iz atio n?

In w hat w ay s a re w e a b le a n d w illin g t o c o ntr ib ute ?

Anoth er w ay in w hic h e m plo yees c an b eco m e m ore e n gag ed is to s e rv e o n th e co m pan y’s c o ntr ib utio ns c o m mitte e. M an y o rg an iz atio ns ta k e th eir c o ntr ib utio ns pro gra m s to m ore g ra ssro ots le v els w ith g uid elin es th at e n ab le b ra n ch o ffic es a n d 105 re m ote lo catio ns to m ak e g ra n ts w ith out f ir s t c o m in g to th e c o rp ora te c o m mitte e.

Reta ilin g g ia n t W alm art ( 2 010) h as a c o m munity g ra n t p ro gra m t h at e n ab le s s to re man ag ers a n d re g io nal v ic e p re sid en ts to a w ard lo cal g ra n ts b ase d o n c o rp ora te guid elin es w ith out f u rth er c o rp ora te a p pro val.

The G re en M ounta in C offe e R oaste rs , In c., C om munity A ctio n fo r E m plo yees (2 010) p ro gra m g iv es e m plo yees t h e a b ility t o v olu nte er 5 2 h ours a n nually d urin g re g ula r w ork h ours . T heir w eb site s ta te s, “ W e b elie v e v olu nte erin g is a g re at w ay fo r e m plo yees to d ev elo p le ad ers h ip s k ills , c o nnect to th eir c o m munitie s, a n d f e el bette r a b out th em se lv es a n d th eir w ork . S in ce 1 993, w e h av e p ro vid ed p aid tim e off fo r e m plo yees w ho w an t to v olu nte er fo r n onpro fits in th eir c o m munitie s” (p ara . 1 ). F or f is c al 2 008, 4 2 p erc en t o f G re en M ounta in e m plo yees d onate d m ore th an 5 ,7 00 h ours o f v olu nte er t im e i n t h eir l o cal c o m munitie s.

The b usin ess c ase f o r s u ch v olu nte er p ro gra m s i s v alid ate d i n a s tu dy c o nducte d by C orp ora te C itiz en sh ip of L ondon (2 010). T he stu dy an aly zed 16 L ondon busin esse s w hose 5 46 e m plo yees w ere e n gag ed in a n e d ucatio n-b ase d v olu nte er activ ity . T hey fo und th at th e av era g e co st fo r th e sk ill dev elo pm en t th ro ugh volu nte er a ctiv ity w as £ 381 c o m pare d t o £ 400 a n nually p er e m plo yee f o r r e le v an t tr a in in g c o sts .

Fin ally , th e overa ll co m munity re la tio ns pro gra m need s to be ev alu ate d re g ula rly a g ain st its g oals a n d d esir e d o utc o m es. T his o fte n in clu des q uarte rly a s well a s a n nual e v alu atio ns o f in div id ual in itia tiv es, u su ally in volv in g s ite v is its , in te rv ie w s w ith e m plo yee v olu nte ers , a n d a r e v ie w o f th e a g en cy ’s b ala n ce s h eet.

That a n a g en cy w ill b e h eld a cco unta b le is in cre asin gly a n e x pecta tio n o f m ost fu nders .

Usin g C SR a s a P ublic R ela tio n s T ool Com pan ie s c o m mitte d to C SR h av e th e c h alle n ge o f e n han cin g th eir c o rp ora te re p uta tio ns u sin g p ublic re la tio ns, tr a d itio nal m ed ia re la tio ns, a n d so cia l m ed ia ch an nels w hile ach ie v in g th e delic ate bala n ce betw een pro m otin g th e C SR in itia tiv es to k eep k ey s ta k eh old ers in fo rm ed a n d b ein g s e en a s u sin g C SR a s a gim mic k . T his p re se n ts a n o pportu nity fo r c o m munic ato rs to p ro vid e str a te g ic co unse l t h at a ch ie v es t h e a p pro pria te t o ne, t im in g, a n d t o ols .

Ju st as w ith an y co m munic atio n str a te g y, w e hav e to beg in by beco m in g know le d geab le a b out th e re alitie s o f a n y C SR in itia tiv e w e c h ose to p ro m ote .

Once w e a re a ssu re d t h at w e h av e a ll t h e n eed ed d ata a n d h av e v alid ate d t h em , w e can dev elo p public re la tio ns goals an d str a te g ie s th at w ill le v era g e th e C SR pro gra m . T he ch an nels se le cte d d ep en d u pon th e sta k eh old ers to b e re ach ed .

Again , b ala n ce is e sse n tia l w hen c h oosin g tr a d itio nal a n d s o cia l m ed ia c h an nels .

Man ag em en t te am mem bers sh ould be ab le to re ly on co m munic ato rs ’ ex perie n ces t o s e le ct t h ose c h an nels .

Med ia re la tio ns p re se n ts a c o nduit to th ose w e w an t to e d ucate o r in flu en ce 106 ab out s p ecif ic a re as o f a c o rp ora te C SR p ro gra m . F or e x am ple , M acy ’s ( “ R ead in g Is F undam en ta l,” 2010), a U .S .- b ase d re ta ile r, use s m ed ia re la tio ns to ols to an nounce a lite ra cy p ro gra m ; th eir Rea din g I s F undam en ta l m ulti- y ear c am paig n partn ers w ith c o nsu m ers to ra is e fu nds to su pport c h ild re n ’s lite ra cy p ro gra m s.

The e d ito ria l c o vera g e:

Rais e s a w are n ess a b out t h e i m porta n ce o f e n ab lin g c h ild re n t o r e ad Pro vid es a m ean s by w hic h co nsu m ers can co ntr ib ute to an im porta n t pro gra m i n e asy w ay s Positio ns M acy ’s c au se -re la te d m ark etin g p ro gra m i n a p ositiv e l ig ht Nonpro fit o rg an iz atio ns a ls o u se p ublic re la tio ns e ffe ctiv ely in th eir a d vocacy pro gra m s fo r C SR . In A ustr a lia , th e A ustr a lia n C en tr e fo r C orp ora te S ocia l Resp onsib ility (2 009) ad vocate s fo r th e in te g ra tio n o f C SR in to th e co rp ora te en vir o nm en t. O ne of th eir key to ols is to publis h opin io n pie ces in le ad in g natio nal b usin ess p ublic atio ns. T he c en tr e a ls o h as g arn ere d c o vera g e o n n atio nal te le v is io n a n d r a d io p ro gra m s. T heir p ublic r e la tio ns p ro gra m is r o unded o ut w ith num ero us sp eak in g e n gag em en ts a t n atio nal a n d in te rn atio nal c o nfe re n ces. A ll th ese o utle ts s e rv e t o k eep C SR t o p o f m in d a n d t o e d ucate b usin ess l e ad ers a b out th e b en efits a n d o blig atio ns o f a n e ffe ctiv e C SR p ro gra m .

Socia l m ed ia to ols sh ould b e e v alu ate d a s c o m munic ato rs d ev elo p p la n s fo r CSR i n t h e s a m e w ay t h ey w ould e v alu ate u sin g a ll o th er t o ols t o d ete rm in e w hen an d h ow t h e c o m munic atio n c h an nel a lig ns w ith t h e a p pro pria te s ta k eh old ers . F or ex am ple , co nsu m er busin esse s hav e beco m e ad ro it at usin g Faceb ook to co m munic ate asp ects o f th eir C SR p ro gra m s to cu sto m ers . U .S .- b ase d T arg et Corp ora tio n (2 010) use s F aceb ook fo r its “T urn S um mer P la y in to S um mer Learn in g” p ro gra m d ev elo ped i n c o nju nctio n w ith t h e S earc h I n stitu te .

Tw itte r a cco unts f o r g lo bal o rg an iz atio ns in clu din g C ER ES ( @ cere sn ew s) a n d th e G RI ( @ GRI_ S ecre ta ria t) e n co ura g e o ngoin g c o nvers a tio ns a b out C SR .

Brin gin g I t A ll T ogeth er— Why C SR M atte rs The R ep uta tio n In stitu te ’s (2 010) re se arc h in 2 008 a n d 2 009 s h ow s th at C SR ’s im pact on co rp ora te re p uta tio n acco unts fo r 40 perc en t of an org an iz atio n’s overa ll re p uta tio n. T he in stitu te als o re p orts th at fo r th e m ost p art co nsu m ers dev elo p th eir opin io ns fro m co rp ora te co m munic atio ns, m ed ia co vera g e, an d word o f m outh .

The G lo beS can C orp ora te S ocia l R esp onsib ility M onito r ( 2 010) s u rv ey r e p orts th at 8 4 p erc en t o f ex ecu tiv es in 1 16 co untr ie s ag re ed w ith th e sta te m en t th at busin ess sh ould “g en era te hig h re tu rn s to in vesto rs but bala n ce th at w ith co ntr ib utin g t o t h e b ro ad er p ublic g ood.” I n a d ditio n, t h e e d ito rs o f t h e Eco nom is t 107 (“ Ju st G ood B usin ess,” 2 008) r e v ers e d th eir lo ng-s ta n din g p ositio n o f c o m pan ie s en gag ed in C SR as “d o gooders ” to sta te th at C SR now is m ain str e am in busin esse s w orld w id e.

The c o m munic ato r’s r o le is to g uid e th e c o m munic atio n s u rro undin g C SR a n d to e n su re th at c o rp ora te a n d b ra n d r e p uta tio n is a lig ned w ith r e ality . T his r e q uir e s tr a n sp are n cy in how w e co m munic ate an d th at w e be fu lly en gag ed in our org an iz atio ns’ s tr a te g ic p la n nin g, i m ple m en ta tio n, a n d e v alu atio n.

Refe re n ces Austr a lia n C en tr e fo r C orp ora te S ocia l R esp onsib ility . (2 009). A bout us/O ur su sta in ab ility re p ort 2009. Availa b le at www.a ccsr.c o m .a u /h tm l/s u str e p ort2 009_im pacts .h tm l .

Bette r B usin ess B ure au . ( 2 008). B BB/G allo p tr u st in b usin ess in dex . A vaila b le a t www.b bb.o rg /u s/s to ra g e/0 /S hare d % 20D ocu m en ts /S urv ey % 20II% 20- %20B BB% 20G allu p% 20-% 20E xecu tiv e% 20S um mary % 20- %2025% 20A ug% 2008.p df .

The B ody S hop. (2 010). V alu es a n d c am paig ns. R etr ie v ed Ju ly 2 5, 2 010, fro m www.t h eb odysh op.c o m /_ en /_ w w/v alu es-c am paig ns/in dex .a sp x .

Bow en , H . ( 1 953).

Socia l r e sp onsib ilitie s o f t h e b usin essm an . N ew Y ork : H arp er.

Busin ess fo r S ocia l R esp onsib ility (B SR ). (2 009). In novatin g fo r su sta in ab ility .

Availa b le a t www.b sr.o rg /f ile s/b sr_ re p ort_ 2009.p df .

Busin ess in th e C om munity . (2 009). E N GAGE in H ong K ong. A vaila b le at www.b itc .o rg .u k/r e so urc es/c ase _ stu die s/e n gag e_ in _hong_kong.h tm l .

Corp ora te C itiz en sh ip o f L ondon. ( 2 010, M ay ). V olu nte erin g: T he b usin ess c ase .

Availa b le at www.c o rp ora te -c itiz en sh ip .c o m /a rc h iv e/v olu nte erin g-th e-m ost- c o st- effe ctiv e-w ay -to -tr a in -a n d-d ev elo p-y our-s ta ff .

Driz in , M . (2 007, F eb ru ary 3 ). D o e m plo yees c are th at e m plo yers g iv e? W alk er In fo rm atio n. Availa b le at www.w alk erin fo .c o m /k now le d ge-c en te r/w alk er- lib ra ry /a rtic le .a sp ?id = 180 .

Gettle r, L . (2 007, A ugust 1 4). S ocia l re sp onsib ility . W A T oday . A vaila b le at www.w ato day .c o m .a u /e x ecu tiv e-s ty le /m an ag em en t/s o cia l- re sp onsib ility - 20090518-b a3 g.h tm l .

Glo beS can . (2 010). 2 010 co rp ora te so cia l re sp onsib ility m onito r. A vaila b le at www.g lo besc an .c o m .

Gre en M ounta in C offe e R oaste rs , I n c. ( 2 010). E m plo yee v olu nte eris m . R etr ie v ed Ju ly 25, 2010, fro m www.g m cr.c o m /e n /c sr/S upportin gL ocalC om munitie s/E m plo yeeV olu nte eris m .a sp x 108 Ju st g ood b usin ess. ( 2 008).

The E co nom is t , I (8 563), 3 –6.

Read in g Is F undam en ta l a n d M acy ’s la u nch b ook a b rig hte r fu tu re . (2 010, J u ne 30). C SR w ir e R etr ie v ed fro m www.c srw ir e .c o m /p re ss_ re le ase s/2 9952-R ead in g- Is -F undam en ta l- a n d-M acy -s -L au nch -B ook-A -B rig hte r-F utu re .

Rep uta tio n I n stitu te . ( 2 010). W hy C SR m atte rs in 2 010.

Rep uta tio n In te llig en ce , 2(1 ), 4 –10.

Targ et. ( 2 010). T urn s u m mer p la y i n to s u m mer l e arn in g. R etr ie v ed J u ly 2 5, 2 010, fro m www.f a ceb ook.c o m /ta rg et# !/ta rg et? v = ap p_118532098173841 .

Tele fó nic a. (2 008). The re p ort in brie f. Retr ie v ed Ju ly 25, 2010, fro m www.t e le fo nic a.c o m /e x t/r c 0 8/e n /te le fo nic a/I N FO RM E_E N _B REV E/in dex .h tm l Tele fó nic a. (2 009). Geo gra p hic div id e: In té g ra m e. Availa b le at www.c ra n dsu sta in ab ility .t e le fo nic a.c o m /e n /in novatio n/g eo gra p hic _ div id e.p hp .

Tim berla n d. (2 008). CSR str a te g y. Retr ie v ed Ju ly 25, 2010, fro m www.t im berla n d.c o m /c o rp /in dex .j s p ?p ag e= csr_ str a te g y .

Walm art. (2 010). G iv in g pro gra m s: W e w ork hard to giv e back to our co m munitie s. Retr ie v ed Ju ly 25, 2010, fro m http ://w alm arts to re s.c o m /C om munity G iv in g/8 979.a sp x .

World B an k. (2 010). C orp ora te so cia l re sp onsib ility . R etr ie v ed Ju ly 2 5, 2 010, fro m www.f ia s.n et/if c ex t/e co nom ic s.n sf/C onte n t/C SR -In tr o P ag e Zak i, N . A . (2 010). D o M id dle E aste rn b usin esse s re ally n eed c o rp ora te so cia l re sp onsib ility ? Orie n t Pla n et. Retr ie v ed Ju ly 27, 2010, fro m www.o rie n tp la n et.c o m /V ie w poin t_ C SR .h tm .

109 CH APTE R S E VEN CO RPO RATE S O CIA L R ESP O NSIB IL IT Y AN D S U ST A IN ABIL IT Y Rob B rig gs There a re m an y d efin itio ns o f c o rp ora te s o cia l r e sp onsib ility ( C SR ). F or th e busin ess c o m munic ato r, C SR c o vers a b ro ad s p ectr u m o f is su es: m an ag in g re p uta tio n, dealin g w ith sta k eh old er activ is m , an d sh arin g valu es-b ase d messa g es w ith b oth e m plo yees a n d p ublic s. T he w ay s in w hic h c o rp ora tio ns beh av e, th e w ay s in w hic h th ey a re e x pecte d to b eh av e, a n d th e w ay s th ey are p erc eiv ed to b eh av e a re a ll a re as in w hic h b usin ess c o m munic ato rs c an an d d o h av e a s ig nif ic an t i m pact.

I f w e a ssu m e th at s o cie ty is a c o rp ora te c o nstitu en cy a n d th at th e ru le s, e th ic s, n orm s, a n d v alu es e x pre sse d b y s o cie ty f o rm p art o f th e r ig ht o f c o ntr a ct b etw een t h at c o nstitu en cy a n d th e c o rp ora tio n, in e ffe ct, th is c o ntr a ct p ro vid es th e fir m ’s l e g itim acy , its lic en ces to o pera te . O ne o f th e c o re te n ets o f C SR is th e s c o pe it g iv es o rg an iz atio ns t o m an ag e t h is k ey i n ta n gib le a sp ect o f r e p uta tio n.

One o nly h as t o l o ok a t t h e w eb site o r a n nual r e p ort f o r a lm ost a n y m ajo r p ublic c o m pan y to f in d s ta te m en ts o f c o rp ora te v alu es s u ch a s “ W e a p pro ach a ll a sp ects o f o ur b usin ess w ith h onesty a n d in te g rity ” ( M cD onald s C an ad a) a n d “ p ro te ctin g a n d ad van cin g … fre ed om of ex pre ssio n” (M ic ro so ft) . M alle n B ak er, of th e U nite d K in gdom ’s E th ic al C orp ora tio n A dvis o ry B oard , d efin es C SR a s b ein g “ ab out how co m pan ie s m an ag e th e busin ess pro cesse s to pro duce an overa ll p ositiv e im pact o n s o cie ty ” (2 010, p ara . 2 ). A fu rth er c o m mon d efin itio n s ta te s, “ C SR is ab out how busin esse s alig n th eir valu es an d beh av io r w ith th e e x pecta tio ns an d n eed s o f sta k eh old ers — not ju st cu sto m ers an d in vesto rs , b ut a ls o e m plo yees, su pplie rs , c o m munitie s, re g ula to rs , sp ecia l in te re st g ro ups a n d s o cie ty a s a w hole . C SR d esc rib es a c o m pan y’s c o m mitm en t to b e a cco unta b le to i ts sta k eh old ers ” (C SR A ward , 2 010, p ara . 2 ). C SR d em an ds th at b usin esse s m an ag e th e e co nom ic , so cia l, a n d e n vir o nm en ta l im pacts o f th eir o pera tio ns to m ax im iz e t h e b en efits a n d m in im iz e t h e d ow nsid es.

Key C SR is su es in clu de g overn an ce, e n vir o nm en ta l m an ag em en t, s ta k eh old er e n gag em en t, la b or sta n dard s, e m plo yee a n d c o m munity re la tio ns, so cia l e q uity , r e sp onsib le s o urc in g, a n d h um an r ig hts . C SR is n ot o nly a b out f u lf illin g a d uty to s o cie ty ; it can als o brin g co m petitiv e ad van ta g e. T hro ugh an effe ctiv e C SR 110 pro gra m , c o m pan ie s c an im pro ve a ccess to c ap ita l; s h arp en d ecis io n m ak in g a n d re d uce ris k ; en han ce bra n d im ag e; unco ver pre v io usly hid den co m merc ia l opportu nitie s, in clu din g n ew m ark ets ; re d uce c o sts ; a ttr a ct, re ta in , a n d m otiv ate em plo yees.

Alte rn ativ e vie w s of C SR positio n so cia l re sp onsib ility as gre en w ash —as phila n th ro pic g iv in g b y th e o rg an iz atio n in th e h ope o f m an ag in g its im ag e r a th er th an a ffe ctin g re al c h an ge to th eir o pera tin g p ra ctic es. H ow ev er, o rg an iz atio nal re p uta tio n is f a r m ore th an a p ublic r e la tio ns e x erc is e . L ook to c o m pan ie s s u ch a s Coca-C ola , w here t h e m ark et c ap ita lis z atio n f a r e x ceed s t h e t a n gib le a sse ts . H ere , goodw ill a n d re p uta tio n h av e a v alu e fa r g re ate r th an th e ta n gib le v alu e o f th e co m pan y’s p hysic al a sse ts . C oca-C ola ’s b ra n d v alu e i n 2 010 w as U S$68 b illio n.

Susta in ability w as defin ed by th e W orld C om mis sio n on E nvir o nm en t an d Dev elo pm en t in 1 987 a s th e s u ccessfu l m eetin g o f p re se n t s o cia l, e co nom ic , a n d en vir o nm en ta l n eed s w ith out c o m pro m is in g th e a b ility o f fu tu re g en era tio ns to meet th eir o w n n eed s. C orp ora te su sta in ab ility fo cu se s o n lo ng-te rm e co nom ic an d so cia l sta k eh old er ex pecta tio ns both by optim iz in g th eir su sta in ab ility perfo rm an ce an d by partic ip atin g in netw ork s with govern m en ts , nongovern m en ta l o rg an iz atio ns (N GOs), a n d o th er s ta k eh old ers th at c an p ro vid e th e c ap acity f o r t h e w orld ’s s u sta in ab le d ev elo pm en t.

This c h ap te r d esc rib es b est p ra ctic es o f R oyal B an k o f C an ad a (R BC) in fo ur key a re as o f i n te re st t o b usin ess c o m munic ato rs :

1.

Str u ctu rin g C SR i n l a rg e o rg an iz atio ns 2.

Com munic atin g c o rp ora te r e sp onsib ility 3.

Build in g c o m munity r e la tio ns o n a l o cal l e v el 4.

Susta in ab ility a n d r e p uta tio n RBC is re co gniz ed am ong th e w orld ’s fin an cia l, so cia l, an d en vir o nm en ta l le ad ers a n d i s l is te d o n t h e 2 009 –2010 D ow J o nes S usta in ab ility W orld I n dex a n d th e D JS I N orth A m eric an In dex . It is re co gniz ed a s o ne o f C an ad a’s G re en est Em plo yers , o ne o f C an ad a’s B est D iv ers ity E m plo yers , o ne o f C an ad a’s 5 0 M ost Socia lly R esp onsib le C orp ora tio ns a n d o ne o f t h e B est W ork pla ces i n C an ad a.

RBC is a ls o lis te d o n th e J a n tz i S ocia l In dex , th e F T SE 4G ood In dex , a n d th e Can ad ia n C arb on D is c lo su re Pro je ct L ead ers h ip In dex . A s one of C an ad a’s la rg est c o rp ora te d onors , R BC s u pports a b ro ad ra n ge o f c o m munity in itia tiv es, th ro ugh d onatio ns, s p onso rs h ip s, a n d e m plo yee v olu nte er a ctiv itie s. In 2 009, th e gro up co ntr ib ute d m ore th an C $105 m illio n to co m munity cau se s w orld w id e, th ro ugh d onatio ns o f m ore th an C $52.6 m illio n a n d a n a d ditio nal C $52.5 m illio n in s p onso rs h ip o f c o m munity e v en ts a n d n atio nal o rg an iz atio ns.

Str u ctu rin g C SR i n L arg e O rg an iz a tio n s Today , co rp ora te so cia l re sp onsib ility is hig h in th e head lin es— fro m B P’s 111 en vir o nm en ta l d is a ste r in th e G ulf o f M ex ic o to p ublic a n d g overn m en ta l d is tr u st of fin an cia l in stitu tio ns fo llo w in g th e near co lla p se of th e w orld ’s fin an cia l sy ste m i n 2 008–2009. T he a ctio ns a n d p erfo rm an ce o f m ajo r o rg an iz atio ns h av e a sig nif ic an t im pact on peo ple , co m munitie s, an d co untr ie s. M an ag in g th at perfo rm an ce a n d m eetin g th e e x pecta tio ns o f b oth s ta k eh old ers a n d s h are h old ers is esse n tia l fo r co m pan ie s to o pera te . T his se ctio n o f th e ch ap te r p re se n ts an overv ie w o f h ow C SR i s s tr u ctu re d a t R oyal B an k o f C an ad a.

The v is io n, v alu es, a n d str a te g y o f th e b an k se t th e c o nte x t fo r R BC’s C SR fra m ew ork . It is o vers e en b y v ario us b oard c o m mitte es, in clu din g th e C orp ora te Govern an ce a n d P ublic P olic y C om mitte e, th e C onduct R ev ie w a n d R is k P olic y Com mitte e, a n d t h e H um an R eso urc es C om mitte e.

Share h old er r e so lu tio ns w ere m ad e to C an ad ia n b an ks in e v ery y ear f ro m 2 005 to 2 008 o n c lim ate c h an ge, b io div ers ity , a n d s u sta in ab ility p erfo rm an ce. P en sio n fu nds a n d o th er p ro sp ectiv e R BC c lie n ts r e g ula rly r e q uest C SR in fo rm atio n. T he busin ess has a ded ic ate d C orp ora te C itiz en sh ip dep artm en t th at en co m passe s co rp ora te r e sp onsib ility , c o rp ora te e n vir o nm en ta l a ffa ir s , a n d d onatio ns. K ey s ta ff in o th er d ep artm en ts are re sp onsib le fo r p ro gra m s an d p erfo rm an ce in is su e- sp ecif ic are as, in clu din g fin an ce, in vesto r re la tio ns, gro up ris k m an ag em en t, pro cu re m en t, co rp ora te re al esta te , h um an re so urc es, co m munity sp onso rs h ip s, an d g overn m en t re la tio ns. A s w ell a s a c en tr a liz ed c o m munic atio ns fu nctio n a t glo bal head quarte rs (re sp onsib le fo r str a te g y), R BC at glo bal, natio nal, an d re g io nal l e v els e m plo ys p ro fe ssio nal b usin ess c o m munic ato rs w ho a re r e sp onsib le fo r C SR c o m munic atio ns a t th e lo cal le v el. E ach o f its b usin ess u nits h as its o w n fra m ew ork f o r c u sto m er s e rv ic e, q uality m an ag em en t, a n d g overn m en t r e la tio ns.

With o ne o f its s ta te d c o re v alu es lis te d a s “ tr u st t h ro ugh in te g rity i n e v ery th in g we do,” R BC co nsid ers co rp ora te re sp onsib ility to in clu de eth ic al busin ess pra ctic es, hav in g a positiv e eco nom ic im pact, opera tin g w ith in te g rity in th e mark etp la ce, pro vid in g a su pportiv e work pla ce, bein g en vir o nm en ta lly su sta in ab le , a n d c o ntr ib utin g to c o m munitie s. T hese p rio ritie s a re illu str a te d in Fig ure 7.1 .

FIG URE 7 .1 R BC B LU EPR IN T F O R D OIN G B ETTER 112 Com pan ie s b oth l a rg e a n d s m all c o ntr ib ute t o t h e e co nom ie s o f t h e c o m munitie s an d c o untr ie s in w hic h th ey d o b usin ess th ro ugh ta x es, p hila n th ro py, a n d d ay -to - day b usin ess d ecis io ns a n d a ctio ns. R BC a im s t o h av e a p ositiv e e co nom ic i m pact by p ro vid in g a ttr a ctiv e re tu rn s to s h are h old ers , c re atin g e m plo ym en t, s u pportin g sm all busin ess an d eco nom ic dev elo pm en t, fo ste rin g in novatio n an d en tr e p re n eu rs h ip , a n d p urc h asin g r e sp onsib ly .

RBC h as a f o rm al p olic y t h at e v alu ate s p ro ducts f o r a r a n ge o f r is k s a n d e n su re s th ey a lig n w ith c lie n t n eed s, la w s a n d re g ula tio ns, a n d th e v olu nta ry c o nsu m er pro te ctio n c o des th e b an k h as s ig ned . It p ro vid es c re d it a n d b an kin g s e rv ic es to co m pan ie s in m an y in dustr ie s, a d herin g to s p ecif ic e n vir o nm en ta l re sp onsib ility an d a n tic o rru ptio n p olic ie s. T he b an k is a s ig nato ry to th e E quato r P rin cip le s, a se t o f v olu nta ry g uid elin es a d dre ssin g e n vir o nm en ta l a n d s o cia l ris k s a sso cia te d with p ro je ct f in an ce.

Pro te ctin g a n o rg an iz atio n’s r e p uta tio n a n d k eep in g k ey s ta k eh old ers in fo rm ed is critic al. If it does not activ ely en gag e key sta k eh old ers , th e org an iz atio n su rre n ders in flu en ce o ver th e C SR in fo rm atio n a g en da. L arg e o rg an iz atio ns c an man ag e th eir re p uta tio ns th ro ugh re g ula rly p ro vid in g in fo rm atio n to th e s o cia lly re sp onsib le in vestm en t co m munity an d en gag in g w ith sta k eh old er gro ups to dis c u ss e n vir o nm en ta l is su es r e la te d to p olic y d ev elo pm en t, o pera tio nal im pacts , an d busin ess dev elo pm en t opportu nitie s. F or R BC, th ese gro ups in clu de th e Can ad ia n B ore al In itia tiv e, D urre ll W ild lif e P re se rv atio n T ru st, F ore stE th ic s, World W ild lif e F und, a n d N atu re C onse rv ​ a n cy o f C an ad a.

Susta in ab ility re p ortin g p ro vid es in fo rm atio n fo r sta k eh old ers in a v arie ty o f fo rm ats . W hile th ere is a p ro lif e ra tio n o f in te re ste d p artie s, la rg e o rg an iz atio ns sh ould d ev ote s u ffic ie n t c o m munic atio ns re so urc e to s u pply th e w id est ra n ge o f 113 sta k eh old ers . T he c o rn ers to ne o f R BC’s s u sta in ab ility re p ortin g c an b e fo und a t www.r b c.c o m /r e sp onsib ility .

Oth er C SR -re la te d p ublic atio ns in clu de th e RBC B lu ep rin t fo r D oin g B ette r , a n an nual C orp ora te R esp onsib ility R ep ort an d Public A cco unta b ility Sta te ​ m en t (P atte rs o n, 2009b), w hic h fe atu re s a year-e n d sn ap sh ot of R BC’s eco n​ o m ic , so cia l, an d en vir o nm en ta l im pact in th e work pla ce, mark etp la ce, an d co m munitie s.

The b usin ess o bse rv es re p ortin g g uid elin es s u ggeste d b y th e G lo bal R ep ortin g In itia tiv e a n d r e g ula rly a n d p ro activ ely p ro vid es in fo rm atio n to a n um ber o f k ey so cia lly re sp onsib le re se arc h c o m pan ie s fo r th e c re atio n o f in dic es, ra tin gs, a n d ra n kin gs th ey p ro vid e o r se ll to a n aly sts a n d in vesto rs . It a ls o p ro duces is su e- sp ecif ic r e p orts , in clu din g a n a n nual D iv ers ity P ro gre ss R ep ort a n d a s u bm is sio n to t h e C arb on D is c lo su re P ro je ct.

RBC has been ex am in in g to pic s re la te d to natu ra l re so urc es an d th e en vir o nm en t s in ce a s e arly a s th e 1 940s. O ver th e y ears , th e RBC L ette r , a n e ssa y se rie s th at tr ie s to h elp p eo ple u nders ta n d th e w orld a ro und th em , h as c o vere d su ch t o pic s a s s o il, f o re sts , a n d w ate r:

There i s n ot a b usin ess o f t h e h um an r a ce, n ot a n a rt, s c ie n ce, c o m fo rt or b eau ty , w hic h d oes n ot i s su e f ro m a t r e e, a n d w ith out t r e es t h e w hole earth w ould b e a h id eo us S ah ara . C an ad a’s fo re sts a re th e c o untr y ’s w ate r ta p , r e g ula tin g t h e s to ra g e a n d f lo w o f w ate r; t h ey p re v en t s o il w aste , pro vid e c o ver fo r w ild lif e , s c re en th e s o il fro m th e h eat o f th e s u n’s ra y s, open a n i m men se s u rfa ce t o t h e c o olin g p ro cesse s o f r a d ia tio n, a n d g iv e off a n i n calc u la b le e v ap ora tio n o f m ois tu re . N ow t h e f o re sts a re c allin g upon m an to r e p ay s o m e o f th at d eb t in c are a n d p re se rv atio n. ( RBC L ette r , 1944, p . 1 ) Giv en th e p le th ora o f C SR , s u sta in ab ility , a n d e n vir o nm en ta l is su es c u rre n tly ex ta n t, se ttin g dir e ctio n, str a te g y, goals , an d fo cu s is esse n tia l fo r an y org an iz atio n. R BC p ublis h es th re e m ain C SR -re la te d b lu ep rin ts th at fo rm th e heart o f its a p pro ach . T he fir s t o f th ese is th e RBC B lu ep rin t fo r D oin g B ette r (P atte rs o n, 2009b). T he se co nd is th e RBC C om munity B lu ep rin t (P atte rs o n, 2009a), a d ocu m en t th at la y s o ut th e b an k’s v is io n fo r h elp in g c re ate str o nger co m munitie s ( s e e F ig ure 7.2 ).

FIG URE 7 .2 R BC C O M MUNIT Y B LU EPR IN T 114 The th ir d is th e RBC E nvir o nm en ta l B lu ep rin t (P atte rs o n, 2 009c), a v is io n o f how th e b an k ad dre sse s is su es lik e clim ate ch an ge, b io div ers ity , fo re sts , an d wate r. Its o bje ctiv es a re to m an ag e ris k s, d riv e re tu rn s, a n d p ro te ct a n d e n han ce re p uta tio n. T he RBC E nvir o nm en ta l B lu ep rin t d esc rib es w ork p la n s f o r r e d ucin g th e in te n sity o f th e b an k’s e n vir o nm en ta l fo otp rin t, p ro m otin g e n vir o nm en ta lly re sp onsib le b usin ess a ctiv itie s, a n d o ffe rin g e n vir o nm en ta l p ro ducts a n d s e rv ic es.

Thro ugh se ttin g its C SR fra m ew ork in c o nte x t a n d p ro vid in g a fu ll su ite o f blu ep rin ts , r e p orts , a n d w ork p la n s, R BC c an c o m pre h en siv ely c o ver m ost, if n ot all, a sp ects o f C SR th at a re e x pecte d o f a la rg e o rg an iz atio n. T he re st o f th is ch ap te r fo cu se s o n h ow R BC c o m munic ate s C SR th ro ugh sp ecif ic p ro gra m s a t th e g lo bal a n d l o cal l e v els a n d e x am in es h ow c o m pan ie s a n d t h eir c o m munic ato rs can e n gag e w ith e n vir o nm en ta l a ctiv is ts o n c o ntr o vers ia l i s su es.

Com munic a tin g C SR a n d S usta in ab ilit y With a p le th ora o f s ta k eh old ers to p le ase , c o m munic atin g C SR c an b e a d au ntin g pro positio n. A s w ell as re g ula to ry re q uir e m en ts , o rg an iz atio ns n eed to en gag e in te re ste d a u die n ces s u ch a s e m plo yees, N GOs, m ed ia , a n d l o cal c o m munitie s.

Effe ctiv e an d tr a n sp are n t co m munic atio n is v ita l to en gag in g an d in fo rm in g opin io n le ad ers in each au die n ce. S uch co m munic atio n aim s to le g itim iz e th e org an iz atio n’s a ctio ns a n d b eh av io r. T he th re e k ey c h an nels to fo cu s o n a re th e org an iz atio n’s so cia l re sp onsib ility re p ort, in te rn al c o m munic atio ns, a n d p ublic re la tio ns.

115 CSR co m munic atio n w ith em plo yees can help cre ate public ity an d a good re p uta tio n th ro ugh word of mouth . Em plo yees’ sa tis fa ctio n le v els an d co m mitm en t a re l in ked ( B ev an & W ilm ott, 2 002). A t t h e t o p o f t h e h ouse , R BC’s Corp ora te C itiz en sh ip dep artm en t activ ely pro m ote s em plo yee en gag em en t in en vir o nm en ta l p ro gra m s s u ch a s th e R BC B lu e W ate r P ro je ct— a w id e-ra n gin g, multi- y ear p ro gra m d esig ned to h elp f o ste r a c u ltu re o f w ate r s te w ard sh ip s o th at peo ple h av e c le an f re sh w ate r t o day a n d t o m orro w .

RBC fir s t s ta rte d ta lk in g a b out th e im porta n ce o f w ate r in a n o pen le tte r fro m 1950: “ W ate r is b en ev ole n t, w hen p ro perly m an ag ed . It c an b e p ro ductiv e a n d will su pport pro sp ero us co m munitie s if its flo w is w is e ly use d . O ur w ate r pro ble m s a re th e o utc o m e o f o ur e ffo rts to a d ap t o ur p hysic al e n vir o nm en t to o ur eco nom ic a n d s o cia l n eed s, w ith out r e ck onin g s u ffic ie n tly o n n atu re ’s u nch an gin g way s. S o, in s p ite o f th e f a ct th at C an ad a is r ic h ly e n dow ed w ith w ate r r e so urc es, we h av e n o r o om f o r c o m pla cen cy ” ( RBC L ette r , 1 950, p . 1 ).

Part o f t h e R BC B lu e W ate r P ro je ct i s a g ra n t p ro gra m o f C $50 m illio n o ver t e n years . T hro ugh th e R BC B lu e W ate r P ro je ct, th e c o m pan y a im s to re d uce th e in te n sity o f R BC’s o w n w ate r fo otp rin t, ru n e d ucatio n a n d a w are n ess p ro gra m s fo r em plo yees an d clie n ts to pro m ote su sta in ab le w ate r use , an d cre ate an unders ta n din g o f t h e v alu e a n d v uln era b ility o f o ur w ate r r e so urc es.

Today , R BC u tiliz es a d ed ic ate d w eb site , a F aceb ook p ag e, a n d p ublic r e la tio ns (P R ) a g en cie s b oth g lo bally a n d lo cally to sp re ad th e w ord o n w ate r. F re e th e Child re n , a C an ad ia n n ot- fo r-p ro fit, u se d its R BC B lu e W ate r P ro je ct g ra n t o f C$300,0 00 to la u nch a n “ H 2O 4 U S peak in g T our,” w hic h v is ite d 1 00 sc h ools acro ss C an ad a t o e d ucate y outh a b out g lo bal w ate r i s su es a n d i n sp ir e t h em t o t a k e actio n in th eir d aily liv es to c o nse rv e a n d p ro te ct w ate r. T he stu den ts w ill b e en co ura g ed to f u ndra is e to p ro vid e c le an w ate r a n d e d ucatio n p ro gra m s f o r r u ra l co m munitie s in C hin a an d In dia . F re e th e C hild re n w ill help pro vid e th ese co m munitie s w ith l o caliz ed c le an w ate r s o urc es a n d s a n ita tio n f a cilitie s.

The R BC B lu e W ate r P ro je ct a ls o a im s to in cre ase R BC’s a b ility to p ro vid e fin an cia l se rv ic es to in novativ e w ate r te ch nolo gy co m pan ie s an d w ate r-re la te d se rv ic es a n d e n co ura g e o th er o rg an iz atio ns to g et in volv ed . A t th e lo cal le v el, RBC W ealth M an ag em en t in th e B ritis h Is le s (U nite d K in gdom an d C han nel Is la n ds) e m plo ys a n e n vir o nm en ta l o ffic er a n d a c o m munity r e la tio ns m an ag er to org an iz e a n d ra is e a w are n ess o f e n vir o nm en ta l a ctiv itie s s u ch a s b each c le an in g an d h elp in g to b uild a s u sta in ab le g ard en a t th e W ild fo w l a n d W etla n ds T ru st’ s London C en tr e . This gard en open ed on Sep te m ber 15, 2010, dem onstr a te s pra ctic al lo w -w ate r g ard en in g id eas, a n d e n co ura g es v is ito rs to r e d uce th eir o w n en vir o nm en ta l f o otp rin ts .

Build in g C om munit y R ela tio n s o n a L oca l 116 Lev el Build in g lin ks w ith th e c o m munity o n a lo cal le v el b in ds e m plo yees to geth er a n d illu str a te s fir s th an d h ow a n o rg an iz atio n liv es th e v alu es it p ro sc rib es. O ne o f RBC’s m ain b usin ess d iv is io ns, R BC W ealth M an ag em en t, e m plo ys m ore th an 1,2 00 s ta ff i n t h e C han nel I s la n ds a lo ne. A s o ne o f t h e l a rg est l o cal e m plo yers i n a sm all c o m munity , R BC’s C SR a n d su sta in ab ility p ro gra m s h av e a v ery v is ib le public i m pact o n i ts r e p uta tio n.

In th e C han nel I s la n ds, th e c o m pan y s u pports lo cal c h aritie s s u ch a s th e L io ns Clu b o f Je rs e y an d th e G uern se y R ound T ab le . In Je rs e y , R BC sp onso rs th e Sw im ara th on in a id o f th e L io ns C lu b, a n d th is a n nual e v en t is th e la rg est lo cal fu ndra is e r o n th e is la n d. O pen ed an d su pporte d b y th e lie u te n an t g overn or o f Je rs e y , th e S w im ara th on a ttr a cts m ore th an 1 ,0 00 sw im mers a y ear a n d ra is e s more th an £ 120,0 00 a n nually . T he G uern se y H arb our C arn iv al ra is e s m ore th an £10,0 00 fo r lo cal cau se s. RBC volu nte ers su pport each ev en t th ro ugh ad m in is tr a tio n a n d p ublic ity w hile e n te rin g t e am s t o t a k e p art.

On a pure ly pra ctic al le v el, R BC is co m mitte d to in tr o ducin g su sta in ab le en vir o nm en ta l p ra ctic es in its w ork pla ces. In th e B ritis h Is le s re g io n a lo ne, th e lo cal fa cilitie s m an ag em en t te am has im ple m en te d su sta in ab le pra ctic es in purc h asin g, w aste d is p osa l, r e cy clin g, e n erg y e ffic ie n cy , a n d w ate r m an ​ a g em en t.

The b usin ess h as a ch ie v ed t h e E co -A ctiv e f o r B usin ess a ccre d i​ t a tio n i n J e rs e y , t h e Keep G uern se y G re en A ward , a n d t h e L ondon C le an C ity A ward .

The c o m munic atio ns p la n d is p la y ed in E xhib it 7 .1 s e ts o ut h ow R BC’s W ealth Man ag em en t d iv is io n u se s effe ctiv e co m munic atio ns to h elp k ey sta k eh old ers both in te rn ally an d ex te rn ally unders ta n d th e busin ess’s co m mitm en t to th e en vir o nm en t.

Exh ib it 7 .1 R BC W ea lt h M an agem en t, B rit is h I sle s an d t h e E nvir o n m en t C om munic a tio n s P la n 2 009 Pro je ct V is io n RBC W ealth M an ag em en t, B ritis h Is le s to b e re co gnis e d a s e n vir o nm en ta lly re sp onsib le a n d co m mitte d t o r e d ucin g o ur e n vir o nm en ta l i m pact i n t h e l o catio ns i n w hic h w e o pera te .

Pro je ct O bje ctiv es To r e d uce o ur o pera tio nal e n vir o nm en ta l f o otp rin t i n t h e B ritis h I s le s.

To b uild o ur c o rp ora te r e p uta tio n l o cally a s a s o cia lly r e sp onsib le c o m pan y.

To e n co ura g e o ur e m plo yees to b e e n vir o nm en ta lly re sp onsib le in th e w ork pla ce a n d in th eir co m munity .

117 Key D riv ers RBC d ecla ra tio n o f o ur c o m pan y E nvir o nm en ta l B lu ep rin t P olic y .

In cre ase in e x te rn al p re ssu re fo r c o m pan ie s to d em onstr a te th eir e n vir o nm en ta l c o m mitm en ts , in clu din g t h e l a u nch o f E co A ctiv e B usin ess i n J e rs e y .

Britis h I s le s L ead ers h ip T eam ’s c o m mitm en t t o r e d uce o ur e n vir o nm en ta l i m pact.

Opportu nity to im pro ve o ur r e p uta tio n in te rn ally a s p art o f o ur o bje ctiv e to b eco m e r e co gnis e d as e m plo yer o f c h oic e.

Key S pon so r Ron N utte r, C hie f O pera tin g O ffic er, B ritis h I s le s Key A udie n ces Prim ary All R BC W ealth M an ag em en t e m plo yees i n t h e B ritis h I s le s Local r e sid en ts i n o ur B ritis h I s le s l o catio ns i n cl. p ro sp ectiv e e m plo yees Local m ed ia i n o ur B ritis h I s le s l o catio ns Seco n dary Local g overn m en t i n o ur B ritis h I s le s l o catio ns Local r e g ula to rs RBC co rp ora te offic e dep artm en ts , i.e ., Corp ora te Resp onsib ility an d Corp ora te Com munic atio ns Com munic a tio n s V is io n Beco m e r e co gnis e d i n te rn ally a n d e x te rn ally a s a n e n vir o nm en ta lly r e sp onsib le o rg an is a tio n Com munic a tio n O bje ctiv es Rais e aw are n ess am ongst th e key au die n ces of R BC’s glo bal an d lo cal en v ir o nm en ta l co m mitm en ts a n d i n itia tiv es.

118 Ach ie v e a m in im um o f te n p ie ces o f e x te rn al p re ss c o vera g e a cro ss th e B ritis h I s le s th at p ro file our e n vir o nm en ta l e ffo rts .

Engag e a m in im um o f 1 0% o f R BC W ealth M an ag em en t B ritis h Is le s em plo yees in lo cal en vir o nm en ta l c o m munity p ro je cts .

In flu en ce e m plo yee b eh av io ur in th e w ork pla ce to h elp a ch ie v e o ur e n vir o nm en ta l m an ag em en t ta rg ets .

Com munic a tio n s S tr a te g y Lev era g e e n vir o nm en ta l in itia tiv es a n d su ccess sto rie s in R BC W ealth M an ag em en t, B ritis h Is le s t o c o m munic ate o ur k ey m essa g es i n te rn ally a n d e x te rn ally .

Key M essa ges RBC i s c o m mitte d t o b ein g e n vir o nm en ta lly r e sp onsib le a n d r e d ucin g o ur e n vir o nm en ta l i m pact in t h e l o catio ns w here w e o pera te .

We h av e a lo ng h is to ry o f g lo bal le ad ers h ip in th is a re a. O ur f ir s t g lo bal e n vir o nm en ta l p olic y was d ev elo ped i n 1 991.

RBC is co m mitte d to a path of en vir o nm en ta l su sta in ab ility . This m ean s re d ucin g our en vir o nm en ta l f o otp rin t, p ro m otin g e n vir o nm en ta lly r e sp onsib le b usin ess a ctiv itie s a n d o ffe rin g en vir o nm en ta lly r e sp onsib le p ro ducts a n d s e rv ic es.

When it co m es to re d ucin g o ur o pera tio nal fo otp rin t, in th e B ritis h Is le s w e are cu rre n tly fo cu se d o n r e cy clin g a n d r e d ucin g o ur r e so urc e u se a n d t h e a m ount o f w aste w e c re ate .

We b elie v e th at th e p re se rv atio n o f th e e n vir o nm en t is f u ndam en ta l to th e s u sta in ab ility o f o ur co m munitie s, o ur c lie n ts a n d o ur c o m pan y.

One o f o ur k ey g lo bal c o rp ora te re sp onsib ility g oals is to c o ntr ib ute to a fu tu re o f s u sta in ab le wate r r e so urc es w orld w id e.

Com munic a tio n s T actic s In te rn al 119 120 N.B . A ll i n te rn al a ctiv itie s t o b e i n co rp ora te d i n t h e m onth ly C ore T eam B rie f s c h ed ule Exte rn al 121 122 Mea su re m en t Anecd ota l e v id en ce f ro m s ta ff a n d m an ag em en t Unso lic ite d p ositiv e f e ed back Ben ch m ark in g onlin e su rv ey to esta b lis h co re le v els of sta ff en vir o nm en ta l m an ag em en t aw are n ess Positiv e c o vera g e i n t a rg et m ed ia Rais e d a w are n ess o f e n vir o nm en ta l m an ag em en t p ro gre ss in th e B ritis h Is le s a n d its b usin ess ben efits a m ong s e n io r m an ag em en t The e n vir o nm en ta l c o m munic atio ns c am paig n h as b een ru nnin g fo r tw o y ears as o f N ovem ber 2 010. B y th e e n d o f 2 009, 3 4 p erc en t o f e m plo yees in R BC Wealth M an ag em en t’ s B ritis h Is le s re g io n had ta k en part in co m munity or en vir o nm en ta l in itia tiv es. O vera ll em plo yee en gag em en t sc o re s in th is re g io n, acco rd in g t o R BC’s b ie n nia l e m plo yee o pin io n s u rv ey , h ad r is e n b y m ore t h an 1 2 perc en t— th e b ig gest ris e o ut o f a n y re g io n w ith in th e e n tir e R BC G ro up. M ore th an 9 1 p erc en t o f a ll R BC e m plo yees s a id th at it w as v ery im porta n t to th em to work f o r a c o m pan y w ith a s tr o ng r e co rd o f c o rp ora te s o cia l r e sp onsib ility .

Susta in ab ilit y a n d R ep uta tio n Fin an cia l s e rv ic es c o m pan ie s m ust c are fu lly b ala n ce e n vir o nm en ta l c o ncern s a n d 123 eco nom ic o pportu nity b y p ro vid in g c re d it re sp onsib ly to a ll s e cto rs . In C an ad a, RBC h as b een ta rg ete d b y th e R ain fo re st A ctio n N etw ork (R A N) a m ong o th ers fo r p ro vid in g fin an cia l se rv ic es to co m pan ie s in volv ed in o il ex tr a ctio n fro m Alb erta ’s o il s a n ds. R A N i s a U .S .- b ase d N GO t h at u se s c am paig nin g a ctiv itie s— usu ally ta rg ete d at bra n d se n sitiv e, co nsu m er-fa cin g org an iz atio ns— to m ak e ch an ges t o p ra ctic es t h at i n dir e ctly a ffe ct t h e e n vir o nm en t.

The b an k h as co nducte d ex te n siv e sta k eh old er en gag em en t w ith th e A lb erta govern m en t, N GOs, acad em ic s, A borig in al le ad ers , in dustr y asso cia tio ns, an d co rp ora te c lie n ts r e g ard in g th e e n vir o nm en ta l a n d s o cia l im pacts o f th e o il s a n ds (O den dah l, 2 010a, 2 010b). E nerg y is a p re cio us a n d in cre asin gly s c arc e r e so urc e; both s h are h old ers a n d e m plo yees e x pect b an ks to b eh av e e th ic ally w ith r e sp ect t o th e en vir o nm en t. T here are ex pecta tio ns am ong so m e sta k eh old ers th at b an ks sh ould n ot le n d to p ollu tin g in dustr ie s, s u ch a s th e o il s a n ds a n d n ucle ar p ow er, an d t h at t h e b an ks s h ould t r a ck t h e e m is sio ns o f t h eir c lie n ts .

NGOs a re h old in g b an ks re sp onsib le fo r th e im pacts o f th eir c lie n ts w ith th e aim o f m ak in g a ccess to c ap ita l a b arrie r to d ev elo pm en t. A m ong th e d em an ds mad e b y R A N are th at R BC p ro vid e ev id en ce o f co nse n t fro m F ir s t N atio ns peo ple ( C an ad ia n A borig in al p eo ple s); th at R BC p hase s o ut f in an cin g to p ro je cts th at a d vers e ly im pact th e e n vir o nm en t, a n d d ev elo p a n a ctio n p la n to re d uce th e em is sio ns o f c lim ate c h an ge p ollu tio n r e la te d t o l e n din g a ctiv itie s.

RA N ta rg ete d R BC o ver 1 8 m onth s b y p ic k etin g re ta il b ra n ch es, o rg an iz in g pro te st d em onstr a tio ns, a n d o rc h estr a tin g a le tte r-w ritin g c am paig n a im ed a t th e wif e o f th e b an k’s ch ie f ex ecu tiv e o ffic er. In re sp onse , R BC to ok a fo ur-p art ap pro ach to d ealin g w ith b oth th e N GO a n d th e is su es it ra is e d . T he a p pro ach fo cu se d o n en gag em en t, p ro vid in g in fo rm atio n, actin g (w here n ecessa ry ), an d co m munic atin g.

RBC m et a n d c o m munic ate d w ith R A N o n a p erio dic b asis . It a ls o e n gag ed oth er key sta k eh old ers , su ch as oil se cto r clie n ts , govern m en ts , em plo yees, modera te N GOs, A borig in al gro ups, an d oth er ta rg ete d ban ks, in oil sa n ds dis c u ssio ns. T he b an k h oste d a n O il S an ds L earn in g D ay fo r o th er b an ks a n d sta k eh old ers a n d f o llo w ed r e g ula to ry d ev elo pm en ts , c o nsu lte d o n, a n d r e se arc h ed th e i s su es h ig hlig hte d b y R A N a n d o th er g ro ups.

As a re su lt of th ese in vestig atio ns, RBC update d its co rp ora te le n din g en vir o nm en ta l r is k m an ag em en t g uid elin es a n d r e se arc h ed t h e i m pact o f o il s a n ds ex tr a ctio n o n F ir s t N atio n g ro ups. F ro m a c o m munic atio n p ers p ectiv e, th e b an k has dev elo ped key m essa g es fo r th e m ed ia , kep t em plo yees an d ex ecu tiv es in fo rm ed , a n d e n gag ed w ith g overn m en t o n p ublic p olic y a ro und c lim ate c h an ge, wate r, a n d e n erg y. B y c o nfro ntin g th e is su es ra is e d h ead -o n a n d e n gag in g w ith multip le s ta k eh old ers , in clu din g a ctiv is t N GOs, th e b an k h as n ot o nly s u cceed ed in m an ag in g its o w n re p uta tio n; it h as a ls o le arn ed w here it c o uld fe asib ly d o more o n a c o ntr o vers ia l t o pic a n d w here i t c o uld o r s h ould n ot.

124 Con clu sio n For co m munic atio n on CSR an d su sta in ab ility is su es to be effe ctiv e, co m munic atio n n eed s to b e d eriv ed fro m c o rp ora te str a te g y a n d v alu es. W hile overa ll p olic y a n d d ir e ctio n n eed to b e s e t fro m th e to p, lo cal im ple m en ta tio n is esse n tia l i n m an ag in g b oth e m plo yee e n gag em en t a n d s ta k eh old er e x pecta tio ns.

Any o rg an iz atio n lo okin g to im ple m en t a fu ll C SR a n d su sta in ab ility p olic y sh ould t a k e o n a p rin cip le o f o pera tin g w ith i n te g rity , i d en tif y in g i ts p rio ritie s, a n d activ ely e n gag in g w ith b oth e m plo yees a n d s ta k eh old ers . C om munic atin g C SR — both g lo bally a n d l o cally — will r e q uir e p la n nin g a n d p atie n ce.

Note While t h e a u th or w as d elig hte d t o c o m pile t h is c h ap te r, f u ll c re d it f o r R BC’s Corp ora te R esp onsib ility i n itia tiv es i s d ue t o t h e h ard w ork a n d d ed ic atio n o f a n um ber o f k ey e m plo yees: S hari A ustin , v ic e p re sid en t a n d h ead o f Corp ora te C itiz en sh ip , R BC; F ra n cis B in ney , e n vir o nm en t o ffic er, R BC Wealth M an ag em en t, B ritis h I s le s; N ic o la C arro ll, c o m munity r e la tio ns man ag er, R BC W ealth M an ag em en t, B ritis h I s le s; S an dra O den dah l, dir e cto r, C orp ora te E nvir o nm en ta l A ffa ir s , R BC; a n d L ynn P atte rs o n, dir e cto r, C orp ora te R esp onsib ility , R BC.

Refe re n ces Bak er, M . (2 010). D efin itio ns of CSR . Retr ie v ed A ugust 9, 2010, fro m www.m alle n bak er.n et/c sr/d efin itio n.p hp .

Bev an , S ., & W ilm ott, M . (2 002).

The e th ic a l e m plo yee . L ondon: W ork F utu re Foundatio n/F utu re F oundatio n.

CSR A ward . (2 010). D efin itio n of C SR . R etr ie v ed A ugust 9, 2010, fro m www.c sra w ard .c o m .

Oden dah l, S. (2 010a). R BC an d th e en vir o nm en t: Prio ritie s an d pro gra m s.

Pre se n ta tio n t o R BC W ealth M an ag em en t B usin ess C om munic ato rs , T oro nto .

Oden dah l, S . (2 010b). R BC an d th e oil sa n ds, P re se n ta tio n to R BC W ealth Man ag em en t B usin ess C om munic ato rs , T oro nto .

Patte rs o n, L . ( 2 009a).

RBC c o m munity b lu ep rin t . T oro nto : R oyal C an ad ia n B an k.

Patte rs o n, L. (2 009b).

RBC co rp ora te re sp onsib ility re p ort and public acco unta bility s ta te m en t . T oro nto : R oyal C an ad ia n B an k.

Patte rs o n, L . (2 009c).

RBC en vir o nm en ta l b lu ep rin t . T oro nto : R oyal C an ad ia n Ban k.

125 Royal B an k o f C an ad a. (1 944). T he im porta n ce o f fo re sts .

RBC L ette r , 2 5(3 ).

www.r b c.c o m /r e sp onsib ility /le tte r/p df/m arc h 1944.p df .

Royal B an k of C an ad a. (1 950). L if e dep en ds on w ate r.

RBC L ette r , 31(3 ).

www.r b c.c o m /r e sp onsib ility /le tte r/p df/m arc h 1944.p df .

World C om mis sio n o n E nvir o nm en t a n d D ev elo pm en t. ( 1 987).

Fro m o ne e a rth t o one w orld : A n o verv ie w . O xfo rd , U K: O xfo rd U niv ers ity P re ss.

126 Part T W O: M AN AG IN G CO M MUNIC ATIO N CH APTE R E IG H T S T R ATE G IC A PPR O ACH ES T O M AN AG IN G TH E C O M MUNIC ATIO NS F U NCTIO N Dia n e M . G ayesk i Com munic atio n a ctiv ity i n o rg an iz atio ns h ap pen s a ll t h e t im e— it i s a n atu ra l an d n ecessa ry m ean s t h ro ugh w hic h i n div id uals a cco m plis h t a sk s, c o ord in ate activ itie s w ith o th ers , a n d fo rg e re la tio nsh ip s. F or th e m ost p art, p eo ple a s in div id uals s p eak fo r th em se lv es. B ut w ho s p eak s fo r th e c o m pan y, b oth to in te rn al an d ex te rn al au die n ces? T he fo rm al asp ects o f co m munic atio n— esta b lis h in g a n d m an ag in g th e v oic e o f th e c o m pan y— are th e r e sp onsib ility of p ro fe ssio nal c o m munic ato rs . T hese f u nctio ns i n clu de:

Exte rn al c o m munic atio n, s u ch a s in vesto r re la tio ns, m ed ia re la tio ns, p ublic re la tio ns (P R ), g overn m en t a n d c o m munity a ffa ir s , p hila n th ro py, c o rp ora te web site s a n d b lo gs, a n d m an ag in g t h e c o rp ora te r e p uta tio n In te rn al co m munic atio n, su ch as em plo yee new sle tte rs , busin ess update meetin gs, em plo yee b en efits an d p olic y m ate ria ls , In tr a n ets , co lla b ora tio n sy ste m s, a n d e le ctr o nic n ew s d is p la y s Mark etin g co m munic atio ns, su ch as ad vertis in g an d sa le s m ate ria ls , tr a d e sh ow s, c u sto m er h elp a n d f e ed back f u nctio ns, m obile p ro m otio nal a p ps, a n d e-c o m merc e t o ols Each o f th ese is a co m ple x sp ecia lty , an d th eir is su es an d activ itie s are co vere d in d eta il in s u bse q uen t c h ap te rs . T he p urp ose o f th is c h ap te r is to ex plo re s o m e s tr a te g ic d ecis io ns th at a ffe ct h ow a n d w here th is w ork g ets done:

Where d o p ro fe ssio nal c o m munic atio ns f u nctio ns r e sid e o rg an iz atio nally ?

How d o c o m munic ato rs a lig n t h eir m essa g es w ith t h e o rg an iz atio n’s s tr a te g y 127 an d w ith e ach o th er?

Do e m plo yees o r e x te rn al c o ntr a cto rs p erfo rm t h e w ork ?

How d o p ro je cts a n d s ta ff g et f u nded ?

How d o c o m munic atio ns m an ag ers d em onstr a te v alu e?

Where D oes C om munic a tio n s R esid e o n t h e Org an iz a tio n al C hart?

Com munic atio ns p ro fe ssio nals c an f ill m an y d if fe re n t r o le s in o rg an iz atio ns, a n d th ose jo bs c an r e sid e in a v arie ty o f d ep artm en ts . U nder th e u m bre lla o f b usin ess co m munic ato rs , we fin d meetin g pla n ners , sp eech w rite rs , fin an cia l co m munic ato rs , W eb a n d g ra p hic d esig ners , s o cia l m ed ia s tr a te g is ts , a d vertis in g an d P R m an ag ers , an d co m munic atio n an aly sts . T here is n o o ne b est w ay to co nstr u ct th e r e p ortin g s tr u ctu re s, b ut th e s tr a te g ic d ecis io ns a b out h ow to d esig n jo bs an d w here to pla ce th em certa in ly do affe ct th e daily w ork lif e of th e co m munic ato rs in th ese positio ns. T ypic ally , ro le s dir e cte d to w ard em plo yee co m munic atio n are pla ced with in hum an re so urc es (H R), while ex te rn al co m munic atio n m ay re sid e in a co rp ora te co m munic atio ns or m ark etin g dep artm en t. Larg er an d more co m ple x co m pan ie s usu ally em plo y man y co m munic atio ns pro fe ssio nals w ho fill fa ir ly sp ecia liz ed ro le s, w hile sm all org an iz atio ns m ay h av e j u st o ne p ers o n w ho i s a j a ck o f a ll t r a d es.

In re ally sm all o rg an iz atio ns, th ere is g en era lly n o o ne p ers o n w hose to ta l re sp onsib ility re la te s to co m munic atio ns. E m plo yee co m munic atio ns, su ch as occasio nal re cru itin g, ex pla in in g co m pan y ru le s an d ben efits , an d org an iz in g so m e m eetin gs pro bab ly fa lls to th e pers o n in ch arg e of hum an re so urc es.

Pro m otio nal co m munic atio ns, su ch as m ain ta in in g th e w eb site , dev elo pin g bro ch ure s, a n d d ev elo pin g p ro posa ls a n d p re se n ta tio ns g ets d one b y m ark etin g. I n org an iz atio ns o f f e w er th an tw en ty e m plo yees, th e c h ie f e x ecu tiv e o ffic er ( C EO ) ta k es c h arg e o f te llin g th e c o m pan y sto ry to im porta n t c u sto m ers , in vesto rs o r donors , an d em plo yees. B y th e tim e an org an iz atio n has m ore th an fif ty em plo yees, it is tw ic e a s lik ely to h av e s o m eo ne o th er th an th e C EO o r o w ner desig nate d a s t h e p rim ary c o m munic ato r ( E vatt, R uiz , & T rip le tt, 2 005).

While la rg e org an iz atio ns will hav e man y pro fe ssio nals in volv ed in co m munic atio ns, m ain ta in in g th e a ctiv e in volv em en t a n d s u pport o f th e C EO is still e sse n tia l. F or e x am ple , e v en th ough F ed E x h as g ro w n to a c o m pan y w ith more th an 2 00,0 00 w orld w id e e m plo yees, fo under F re d S m ith re m ain s a ctiv ely en gag ed in Fed E x’s co m munic atio ns activ itie s an d re v ie w s co m munic atio ns str a te g y fo r e v ery m ajo r d ecis io n. T he c o m pan y h as a c o m munic atio ns p la tf o rm calle d “O ne V is io n, O ne V oic e” th at guid es an d in te g ra te s its in te rn al an d 128 ex te rn al m essa g es a n d re p uta tio n (A rg en ti, 2 006). M an y s tu die s o f e x celle n ce in co m munic atio ns a g re e th at a lig nm en t w ith , a ccess to , a n d a ctiv e in volv em en t o f th e C EO an d th e le ad ers h ip te am is an esse n tia l fa cto r in en su rin g ongoin g su pport a n d s tr a te g ic r e su lts .

Once an org an iz atio n gets la rg er, th ere m ay be one pers o n desig nate d to pro duce co m munic atio ns, usu ally hav in g re sp onsib ility fo r both ex te rn al an d em plo yee c o m munic atio n. S o, to w hom s h ould th is p ers o n r e p ort? A lth ough th is may s e em lik e a s m all d ecis io n, it a ffe cts th e w ay th at c o m munic atio ns p ro je cts get prio ritiz ed an d m easu re d . T ypic ally , gro w in g org an iz atio ns fe el th e m ost pre ssin g n eed is in c o m munic atin g to p ote n tia l c u sto m ers o r d onors , s o th eir f ir s t fu ll- tim e co m munic atio ns pro fe ssio nal ty pic ally re sid es w ith in m ark etin g or fu ndra is in g. H ow ev er, in o rg an iz atio ns in w hic h a n e x te rn al a d vertis in g a n d P R ag en cy d oes m ost o f th e p ro m otio nal w ork , th e f ir s t f u ll- tim e c o m munic ato r m ay be i n c h arg e o f e m plo yee c o m munic atio ns.

Perh ap s t h e i d eal p la ce f o r t h e n ew c o m munic ato r t o r e sid e i s i n a s ta ff p ositio n re p ortin g dir e ctly to th e C EO . In th is cap acity , th e co m munic ato r pro vid es co unse l to th e ex ecu tiv e te am , lo okin g at lo ng-te rm co m pan y str a te g ie s an d se le ctin g c o m munic atio ns in te rv en tio ns th at r e la te to th is le v el o f o bje ctiv es. B ut why d oes i t m atte r w here t h e p ositio n r e sid es?

The c o m munic ato r’s s u perv is o r w ill b rin g h is o r h er o w n le n s in to m ak in g decis io ns ab out fu ndin g an d ev alu atin g th e w ork of th e co m munic ato r.

There fo re , if a co m munic ato r re p ortin g to a v ic e p re sid en t o f m ark etin g wan ts to in sta ll p la sm a s c re en s to p ro vid e n ew s u pdate s to e m plo yees, th at id ea m ay n ot c arry a s m uch w eig ht a s a n ew o pportu nity t o e x hib it a t a t r a d e sh ow . A v ic e p re sid en t o f h um an re so urc es m ay n ot re ally k now h ow to ev alu ate a p ro m otio nal c am paig n.

The c are er p ath s o f c o m munic ato rs d ep en d s o m ew hat o n w here t h at f u nctio n re sid es. If a p ers o n h ir e d a s a c o m munic atio ns s p ecia lis t w ith in th e h um an re so urc es (H R) d ep artm en t w an ts to a d van ce in th e c o m pan y, th e lo gic al ch oic e w ould b e to le arn m ore a b out H R a n d w ork u p th e la d der w ith in th at fu nctio n. If th e co m munic atio ns fu nctio n re sid es w ith in m ark etin g, a dif fe re n t s e t o f s k ills w ill b e n eed ed t o a d van ce w ith in t h at p ro fe ssio nal f ie ld .

In o rd er f o r th e c o m munic ato r to p la y a s tr a te g ic r o le in im pro vin g b usin ess perfo rm an ce, h e o r s h e m ust h av e a s e at a t t h e t a b le a n d h av e t h e i n sid e t r a ck on o rg an iz atio nal str a te g y a n d g oals . If c o m munic ato rs g et b urie d u nder a bure au cra tic d ep artm en t a n d d o n ot h av e re g ula r c o nta ct w ith e x ecu tiv es, th en th ey beco m e re le g ate d to a ro le as ord er ta k ers , sim ply desig nin g public atio ns o r ru nnin g m eetin gs w ith out re ally h av in g th e o pportu nity to an aly ze a n d se le ct th e m ost p o w erfu l in te rv en tio ns. T his v ery m uch p la y s in to th e questio ns of w heth er co m munic ato rs are busin ess str a te g is ts or cra fts p eo ple an d how th ey are vie w ed , valu ed , an d su pporte d by th eir 129 ex ecu tiv es.

In la rg e org an iz atio ns, pro fe ssio nal co m munic ato rs are lik ely to be pla ced with in m an y d if fe re n t d ep artm en ts . F or e x am ple , th e c o m pan y m ay h av e a c h ie f sp okesp ers o n a n d s p eech w rite r w ho m ay r e p ort d ir e ctly t o t h e C EO . P ro fe ssio nals in i n vesto r r e la tio ns m ay w ork w ith in t h e f in an ce d ep artm en t. A n e n tir e ly s e p ara te dep artm en t of co rp ora te co m munic atio ns may pro vid e med ia re la tio ns, co m munity re la tio ns, a n d p hila n th ro py su pport. E m plo yee c o m munic atio ns a n d tr a in in g f o r s u perv is o ry c o m munic atio ns u su ally r e sid es w ith in h um an r e so urc es.

Advertis in g a n d s p ecia l e v en ts s p onso rs h ip ty pic ally is p la ced w ith in m ark etin g, but it is a ls o v ery c o m mon f o r m ost a d vertis in g a n d P R w ork to b e o uts o urc ed to an a g en cy . D ep artm en ts , d iv is io ns, o r se p ara te fie ld o ffic es a ll m ay h av e th eir ow n co m munic atio ns pro fe ssio nals . E ven m ore co m ple x situ atio ns occu r in hig hly m atr ix ed o rg an iz atio ns in w hic h m an ag ers m ay b e p art o f s e v era l te am s:

geo gra p hic al, p ro duct lin e, c u sto m er b ase , o r f u nctio ns; th ese m an ag ers m ay h ir e th eir ow n co m munic ato rs , eith er as em plo yees or as co ntr a cto rs (J a ccau d & Quir k e, 2 006).

Fig ure 8.1 p re se n ts a fa ir ly ty pic al o rg an iz atio nal c h art fo r a c o m ple x n ot- fo r- pro fit o rg an iz atio n s u ch a s a h ealth c are s y ste m . C om munic ato rs r e sid e in s e v era l pla ces w ith in th e h ie ra rc h y, in clu din g b oth in in te rn al p ositio ns a n d a s e x te rn al co ntr a cto rs a n d a g en cie s.

FIG URE 8 .1 T Y PIC A L P L A CEM EN T O F C O M MUNIC A TIO NS FU NCTIO NS I N A C O M PL EX , N ONPR O FIT O RG ANIZ A TIO N 130 The la n dsc ap e of co m munic atio ns dep artm en ts ch an ges ra p id ly , an d su ch ch an ge sh ould b e w elc o m ed . A n in te rn atio nal b en ch m ark in g stu dy fo und th at with in th e U nite d S ta te s, co m munic atio ns d ep artm en ts th at h av e n ot ch an ged hav e d ip ped in im porta n ce in th eir o rg an iz atio ns. In th is su rv ey , a m ajo rity o f partic ip an ts (a ro und 80 perc en t) sa id th ey fe lt th at th e perc ep tio n of th e im porta n ce o f c o m munic atio n h ad in cre ase d d urin g th e p ast y ear. T he o nly g ro up th at dro pped sig nif ic an tly belo w av era g e re sp onse w as th ose w ork in g in dep artm en ts th at h ad n ot re str u ctu re d in th e p re v io us tw elv e m onth s (B arn fie ld , 2002).

For e x am ple , w hen M ass M utu al b ro ught in a n ew C EO a n d le ad ers h ip te am , th e co m munic atio ns dep artm en t w as ch arg ed w ith asse ssin g th e dep artm en t’ s str e n gth s an d opportu nitie s in ord er to beco m e a str a te g ic partn er. They re str u ctu re d th e co m munic atio ns fu nctio n to fla tte n th e o rg an iz atio n, elim in ate more th an U S$1 m illio n, an d positio n th em se lv es to be m ore re sp onsiv e to busin ess le ad ers . A s a re su lt, th ey q uic k ly a n d d ra m atic ally im pro ved re su lts a s measu re d b oth b y c lie n t s a tis fa ctio n a n d b y r e v ie w s o f e x te rn al r e se arc h s o urc es in th eir w eb site , th eir bra n d aw are n ess an d str e n gth , an d th eir positiv e PR co vera g e ( R hoad es & R obin so n, 2 008).

131 Brid gin g t h e I sla n ds o f C om munic a tio n One o f th e c h alle n ges fa cin g c o m munic ato rs w hen th ey a re d is p ers e d a cro ss th e org an iz atio nal c h art is c o ord in atin g th e f lo w , lo ad , to ne, a n d c o nte n t o f m essa g es.

Em plo yee c o m munic atio ns, in vesto r re la tio ns, p ublic re la tio ns, a n d su perv is o ry an d ex ecu tiv e co m munic atio ns are ofte n desig ned an d m an ag ed in se p ara te fu nctio nal s ilo s. P ro fe ssio nals in th ese a re as o fte n h av e little in cen tiv e— an d m ay hav e m an y b arrie rs to c o lla b ora tin g. T his c re ate s is la n ds o f c o m munic atio n (s e e Fig ure 8.2 ).

FIG URE 8 .2 I S L A NDS O F C O M MUNIC A TIO N When each of th ese are as cre ate s m essa g es an d co m munic atio n ev en ts , co m munic ato rs te n d to ig nore th e f a ct th at th eir m ate ria ls a n d m eetin gs r e p re se n t only a s m all f ra ctio n o f th e c o m munic atio ns lo ad f o r th eir ta rg et a u die n ces. T hey may a ls o in ad verte n tly c o ntr a d ic t th e c o nte n t a n d/o r th e to ne o f o th er ite m s in th e co m munic atio ns s tr e am . W hat h ap pen s th en ? A udie n ces b eco m e o verlo ad ed a n d fo rm t h eir o w n f ilte rs t o o pt o ut a n d t u ne o ut i n t w o w ay s:

1.

The s h eer v olu m e o f in fo rm atio n a n d d em an ds o n th eir tim e b eco m e overw helm in g, an d au die n ces sim ply o pt o ut. T hey eith er p hysic ally dele te m essa g es o r t h ey s k ip m eetin gs.

2.

The in co nsis te n cy o f m essa g es a n d to ne c au se s c o gnitiv e d is so nan ce.

Em plo yees a n d c u sto m ers d o n ot k now w hat to b elie v e a n d ju st tu ne out. P eo ple are tir e d of hearin g ab out so m e m ajo r in itia tiv e in th e new sle tte r, b ein g ta u ght s o m eth in g a b it d if fe re n t in a r e q uir e d tr a in in g cla ss, a n d th en h av in g th eir s u perv is o rs te ll th em to ig nore th e w hole th in g b ecau se i t w as j u st a f la v or o f t h e m onth .

These situ atio ns cau se poor perfo rm an ce becau se im porta n t m essa g es are 132 co m ple te ly ig nore d — or e v en w ors e — th ey c au se c y nic is m , m is tr u st, m is d ir e cte d effo rts , an d in co nsis te n t bra n d m essa g es. H ere are so m e ex am ple s of th ese situ atio ns. F or a l a rg e C an ad ia n b an k, m y c o nsu ltin g f ir m d id a s tu dy t o d ocu m en t th e co m munic atio ns lo ad o f k ey ro le s, su ch as b ra n ch m an ag er an d cu sto m er se rv ic e r e p re se n ta tiv e. W e f o und t h at if t h ey r e ad , l is te n ed to , a n d a tte n ded a ll t h e mate ria ls a n d m eetin gs th at w ere e x pecte d o f th em , th ey w ould h av e n o tim e in th e w eek le ft to d o th eir jo bs! A t a n ot- fo r-p ro fit h ealth c are o rg an iz atio n, h um an re so urc es s e n t e m plo yees a n otic e th at th ey w ould b e re ceiv in g a le ss g en ero us ben efits p ack ag e in th e fo rth co m in g y ear, an d th at em plo yees w ould n ow b e re sp onsib le fo r pay in g a la rg er perc en ta g e of th eir in su ra n ce pre m iu m s. In em plo yee m ailb oxes th at s a m e d ay w as a le tte r f ro m th e C EO a sk in g e m plo yees to c o ntr ib ute to th eir a n nual fu ndra is in g e ffo rt. N ot o nly w ere b oth th e b en efits an d f u ndra is in g m essa g es u nsu ccessfu l a n d a n noyin g, b ut t h e C EO c am e a cro ss a s out o f to uch an d u ncarin g— a tr a it th at b ra n ded h im an d cu t sh ort h is te n ure (G ay esk i, 2 007).

Stu die s hav e sh ow n th at it is esse n tia l to cre ate an in te g ra te d ap pro ach to co rp ora te c o m munic atio ns. T he b en efits o f su ch in te g ra tio n in clu de p re se rv in g co rp ora te bra n d, en han cin g re p uta tio n, weath erin g cris e s, an d m ax im iz in g org an iz atio nal p ote n tia l (A rg en ti, 2 006). S tr a te g ie s fo r b rid gin g th e is la n ds o f co m munic atio n i n clu de:

Cre atin g c ro ss-fu nctio nal p ro je ct t e am s a cro ss H R, m ark etin g, P R , e m plo yee co m munic atio ns, an d tr a in in g fo r m ajo r o rg an iz atio nal in itia tiv es su ch as quality p ro gra m s, th e in tr o ductio n o f n ew p ro ducts o r s e rv ic es, o r c o m pan y re o rg an iz atio ns.

Conso lid atin g c o m munic atio ns fu nctio ns in to fe w er d ep artm en ts . In fa ct, in man y org an iz atio ns, em plo yee co m munic atio ns, P R , ad vertis in g, in vesto r re la tio ns, e x ecu tiv e c o m munic atio ns, a n d c o m munity r e la tio ns a re a ll p art o f one d ep artm en t.

For ex am ple , Hew le tt- P ack ard (H P) cen tr a liz ed its glo bal in te rn al co m munic atio ns fu nctio n. In te rn al co m munic atio ns re p orts to th e co m pan y’s se n io r v ic e p re sid en t f o r c o rp ora te m ark etin g a n d th e e x ecu tiv e v ic e p re sid en t f o r HR. This dual re p ortin g str u ctu re en ab le s in te rn al co m munic atio ns to help co ord in ate a m yria d o f in te rn al m essa g es w ith in a fra m ew ork co nsis te n t w ith HP’s e x te rn al m essa g in g a n d b ra n din g. T he P ro gra m M an ag em en t O ffic e ( P M O) is a sta n din g in te rn al c o m munic atio