Search results

The contemporary business environment for public companies is much more multinational and multicultural than at any previous time. It is now driven by complex economic, political, technological and demographic forces such as these six: multipolarity eclipses globalization; the internet of things; corporate business model; uncertainty; privacy, big data and alternative data; and shifting demographics. The communication function has been central to this transformation.

The corporate communication international (CCI) studies have revealed three periods of transformation, namely, the focus, practices, perceptions, and the strategic aim of corporate communication to establish coherence by managing the messages reflects a top-down mind-set of communicating from the corporation to its stakeholders. The CCI study data indicated that the approaches to communication started changing; the fragmented media landscape of businesses reveals an awakening of a new kind of corporate communication whose aim is not to control and order, but to endure and to accept the “truth” being constantly challenged.

Findings from the CCI practices and trends studies validate the field’s strategic role in engagement and amplification of corporate messaging. Forces that have an impact on the practice of corporate communication include continuation of rapid changes, unintended consequences of changing reporting structures, core functions remain unchanged Budget and staff increases reflect economic confidence, Search for talent, Integrity, Core competencies focus on “business acumen” to drive corporate value, Employee engagement to build corporate culture, “Counsel to the CEO” suffers as the role of the communication officer changes.

Corporate Communication Practices and Trends studies underscore corporate communication as a strategic management function and, increasingly, as a strategic business partner for the enterprise. The integration of marketing and communication in many corporations, changes the corporate communication function. This special issue of the Journal of Business Strategy is focused on the transformation of corporate communication strategy. Six experts share their perspectives.

With China's economic development over the last two decades, the spirit and practice of Chinese companies have been radically transformed from administrative functions in a centrally planned economy toward that of market‐oriented enterprises. As Chinese enterprises restructure, the communication function is also undergoing dramatic changes. Discussion of the CCI Corporate Communication Practices and Trends 2005 Study and the CCI Corporate Communication Practices and Trends: A China Benchmark 2006 allow some insight into the state of the art in China, and help us to infer how best to communicate with the Chinese for a successful business relationship.

The observations in this article are based on the CCI Corporate Communication Practices and Trends: A China Benchmark Study 2006, which was underwritten by Prudential Financial, Inc., and conducted in Beijing, China, in December 2005 and July 2006 through a partnership of the Corporate Communication Institute, Beijing Horizon Market Research Group, and Dr Jian “Jay” Wang of Purdue University.

Business communication and relationships are integral to success for Chinese companies and their executives. Five years into its membership of the World Trade Organization, China is the world's fastest growing economy. Its companies are developing global business cultures and corporate communication management functions as they make the transition from government control to market‐driven enterprises. This development is revealing when compared with the corporate communication best practices of multinational corporations in relationships with customers, the media, employees, the community and society, and the government, as well as communication in a crisis. Understanding these contemporary practices can lead to healthy business relationship in China. Like any new venture, communication for Chinese businesses is focused on branding, marketing, and identity building. Their executives are developing global practices for relations with employees, and they are developing media relations practices. Many companies are well on their way to creating socially responsible policies and practices for the environment, energy, and relationships with the community. They are rapidly taking on responsibility, once entirely that of the government, for communication in crises.

Based on the findings of the CCI Corporate Communication Practices and Trends: A China Benchmark Study 2006, the Corporate Communication Institute at Fairleigh Dickinson University will conduct a study of Chinese companies and foreign companies operating in China, using a much larger sample.

This discussion should provide some insight into the state of the art in China, and help us to infer how best to communicate with the Chinese for a successful business relationship.

This paper discusses the findings of a first‐of‐its‐kind study of corporate communication practices and trends among Chinese companies.

The purpose of this paper is to discuss the future of corporate communication professionals and researchers; to present the findings of the Corporate Communication International (CCI) Corporate Communication Practices and Trends Study 2009; and to introduce the issues presented in the papers from the CCI Conference on Corporate Communication 2009 published in this special issue.

The paper presents a discussion of the future of the corporate communication and the findings of the CCI Corporate Communication Practices and Trends Study 2009.

The paper implies strategic knowledge of business processes and practice for effective corporate communication.

The paper implies several areas for further research.

The paper articulates complex challenges facing corporate communicators.

An ever‐increasing number of companies are recognising the reputational risks and opportunities that corporate responsibility brings, and for these companies aligning corporate behaviour with stakeholder expectations is an ongoing business priority. Communication, however, often remains the missing link in the practice of corporate responsibility. The information requirements of a range of opinion leader and mass stakeholder audiences are not currently being satisfied by many companies, so they are not getting full credit for their responsible corporate behaviour. Of course, there are specific challenges in communicating corporate responsibility – including scepticism towards company messages and potentially hostile reactions from the media, campaign groups and others. The diverse information requirements of different stakeholder groups also present special communication challenges, and these requirements are examined in turn. Using MORI’s British opinion research to illustrate the case, this paper first examines communication to opinion leader audiences (such as legislators, business press, investors and non‐governmental organisations), and in particular the opportunities and limitations of the social report. It then goes on to address communication of corporate responsibility to the general public and the need to trigger wider consumer engagement in this topic. Lastly, it covers the communication opportunity presented by companies’ own employees and the internal communication challenges surrounding corporate responsibility. The paper suggests, in conclusion, that effective communication of corporate responsibility depends on a clear strategy which evaluates both the opportunities and the risks to the brand, and which tailors messages to different stakeholder groups. It calls for a coordinated approach, which ideally embeds corporate responsibility messages into mainstream communications. The paper also identifies internal communication as an under‐utilised and potentially powerful channel for enhancing a company’s reputation for responsibility among its key stakeholders.

Recent environmental trends are forcing senior managers to give greater import to corporate identity and corporate communications. They are discovering that conventional methods of redressing identity problems are becoming progressively less effective because, in our opinion, the traditional focus has viewed corporate identity and corporate communication as functional rather than as strategic. We suggest a much broadened view that looks at corporate communication as a three‐part system process – primary, secondary and tertiary. In many companies these three are out of balance. Primary communication should present a positive image of the company and set the stage for a strong reputation. Secondary communication should be designed to support and reinforce primary communication. Tertiary communication should be positive and result in a superior reputation if the other two stages of corporate communication are properly conceived. The authors postulate that senior managers who implement this can invest their organisation with a competitive advantage.

Recent environmental trends are forcing senior managers to give greater import to corporate identity and corporate communications. They are discovering that conventional methods of redressing identity problems are becoming progressively less effective because, in our opinion, the traditional focus has viewed corporate identity and corporate communications as functional rather than as strategic. We suggest a much broadened view that looks at corporate communications as a three‐part system process – primary, secondary, and tertiary. In many companies these three are out of balance. Primary communication should present a positive image of the company and set the stage for a strong reputation. Secondary communication should be designed to support and reinforce primary communication. Tertiary communications should be positive and result in a superior reputation if the other two stages of corporate communication are properly conceived. The authors postulate that senior managers who implement this can invest their organisation with a competitive advantage.

Institutions and organizations are increasingly using the digital media to communicate with stakeholders on a day-to-day basis and during crisis situations. Therefore, this chapter presents a bibliographic analysis on digital corporate communication technologies. The grounded theory’s inductive approach was used to capture and interpret the findings from Scopus-indexed publications. The articles were scrutinized in their entirety, including their research questions, methodologies and interpretation of the findings. Afterwards, this contribution identifies the opportunities and challenges that emerged during an unprecedented coronavirus (COVID-19) outbreak. In conclusion, it implies that there is scope for institutions and organizations to incorporate digital and social media in their crises’ communications and risk management plans. This will enable them to be in a better position to engage in credible and transparent dialogic communications with different stakeholders.

The purpose of this paper is to contribute to science communication literature by further highlighting the underexplored role of organizational and corporate perspectives in science communication.

The paper takes the form of a conceptual article that uses two illustrative vignettes to highlight the power of corporate science communication.

The key argument is that corporate science communication is a compound ideology that results from merging the hegemonic corporate voice with the ultimate/god-term science (see the work of Kenneth Burke) to form a mega-ideological construct and discourse. Such communication can be so powerful that vulnerable publics and powerful advocates speaking on their behalf have little to no recourse to effectively challenge such discourse. While critiques of corporate science communication in practice are not new, what the authors offer is a possible explanation as to why such discourse is so powerful and hard to combat.

The value of this paper is in the degree to which it both sets an important applied research agenda for the field and fills a critical void in the science communication literature. This conceptual article, in the form of a critical analysis, fills the void by advocating for the inclusion of organizational perspectives in science communication research because of the great potential that organizations have, via science communication, to shape societal behavior and outcomes both positively and negatively. It also coins the terms “compound ideology” and “mega-ideology” to denote that while all ideologies are powerful, ideologies can operate in concert (compound) to change their meaning and effectiveness. By exposing the hegemonic power of corporate science communication, future researchers and practitioners can use these findings as a foundation to combat misinformation and disinformation campaigns wielded by big corporate science entities and the public relations firms often hired to carry out these campaigns.

This chapter attempts to broaden corporate communications and public relations research by introducing a theoretical foundation for the inbound (in contrast to the outbound) perspective of communication. The idea of organisational listening has recently been introduced by a small number of researchers. However, current concepts are mostly based on the relational paradigm of public relations. Listening is positively connoted in those concepts because it might help to foster mutual understanding, advance favourable relationships with stakeholders and support normative ideals of deliberation in democratic societies. This is not convincing from the point of view of communication managers who align their strategies and budgets to overarching organisational goals. The chapter aims to develop a new approach beyond the relational approach by linking corporate listening to corporate value. In a first step, current definitions and concepts of organisational listening are discussed in order to underline the need for a new approach. Secondly, the need for an inbound perspective of communication is explained by referring to Giddens’ structuration theory and its consequences for managing communications. Thirdly, corporate listening is conceptualised as a strategic mode of communication by referring to the overarching concept of strategic communication. Last but not least, the chapter elaborates on the value of listening for corporations and concludes with a broadened understanding of strategic communication.