Search results

Presents a communications relationship model for setting promotional goals. The model divides promotional objectives into short, mid‐ and long‐range goals and helps present advertising and related promotional tools as an ongoing process. Its focus is primarily on how advertising and related communications engineer situations and the importance of gearing advertisements that maximize subsequent advertisements′ effectiveness. The model has multiple uses and can be used by different advertising stakeholders such as advertising designers, sellers and managers, as well as end users.

The purpose of this paper is to examine and analyze the prevailing form of rationality that governs the challenges, goals and roles of communication professionals. The authors will also explore alternative forms of rationality and discuss what these would imply.

The paper is based on survey results from The European Communication Monitor (ECM) and qualitative interviews with communication managers in Sweden. First, the authors present the ECM data and the Swedish interview material, i.e. the authors depict the practitioners’ perceptions of what they understand as important work tasks and roles. The interviews focus on the actual practices of linking communication goals to business goals. Second, the results are challenged from a reflexive perspective, using theories from the paradox turn and questioning the “taken-for-granted thinking” in corporate communications.

The ECM data show that the main challenge in practice is “linking business strategy and communication.” The Swedish respondents stand out when it comes to “building and maintaining trust” since this is considered to be almost as important. The qualitative interview study strengthens the results in the ECM. The interviewees seem to do their work according to the traditional management agenda – i.e. they break down overall business goals and translate these to measurable communication goals. The results are reflected upon using paradox theory. Two paradoxes are discussed: between managerialism and professionalism, and strategic generalists and operational specialists.

The study is based on survey data that have been collected through a convenience sample, and the interview study is a pilot study.

The paper focuses conflicts between normative practitioner ideals and reality, and helps practitioners to reflect upon mainstream thinking.

Based on the empirical findings in the ECM, the interviews and the theoretical framework, the authors conclude that if the idea of The Communicative Organization is to be fruitfully realized, it is necessary to depart from a multi-dimensional rationality and question ideas that are taken for granted. The use of paradox theory and concepts such as functional stupidity is rather original in corporate communication research. Additional research could further explore paradoxes in order to spark dialogue, which may undermine one-dimensional thinking and functional stupidity.

The purpose of this paper is to analyze what the concept of agility means for communication evaluation and measurement and to challenge assumptions of goal-oriented and organization-centric approaches to evaluation and measurement.

This paper is a development debate based on a literature review, regarding agility, evaluation theory, communication evaluation approaches and what agility means for communication measurement.

Agility teaches that what works is more important than what was agreed upon in advance, so it is with more emphasis on needs rather than objectives. Regarding evaluation, the findings show that in today’s communication evaluation theory, evaluation is equated with summative evaluation of smart designed and fixed objectives. In agility, evaluation is always formative, to foster development and improvement within an ongoing activity. Consequently smart objectives are no longer valid as fixed benchmarks and ex ante and ex post evaluations do not exist; instead evaluation is an on-going and forward looking activity during action. Regarding measurement, the basic focus in agility on user needs implies that qualitative methods are more obvious than quantitative. The classic Weberian idea of “Verstehen” is helpful to understand how to focus on needs rather than objectives. This paper finally explores the merits of action research and sense-making methodology as applicable measurements in which “Verstehen” is the basis.

Agility is a very radical concept. The practical and theoretical implications of agile evaluation and measurement mean a total change for practice as well as for communication measurement and evaluation theory building.

The value of this paper is that it is the first to include agility into communication evaluation and measurement and that it, consequently, moves beyond organization-centric concepts of evaluation and measurement by bringing the often overlooked user needs into the game.

The purpose of this paper is to report on a multi-step research project which explores concepts that explain communication value across different disciplines and builds a framework that identifies and systematizes communication goals linked to generic corporate goals.

Based on a literature review of work on value creation through communication, drawn from 815 publications in 36 international journals across several disciplines (public relations, marketing, management, etc.) and published from the year 2000 onward, the authors have developed a framework, named “Communication Value Circle.” The application of the framework was discussed with chief communication officers from global companies and was used during a communication alignment process in a global healthcare company.

Empirical surveys across several continents show that communication professionals use a multitude of rationales to explain the value of their work to top executives. These range from building reputation, brands and identity, to gaining thought leadership, boosting sales, motivating employees, preventing crises and listening to stakeholders. The researchers have identified four major value dimensions of communication (enabling operations, building intangibles, adjusting strategy, and ensuring flexibility). The framework encompasses 12 specific goals for communication that can be derived from corporate strategy.

The framework stimulates the debate on the diverse concepts of communication value, performance and measurement, and the need to integrate those approaches into theory and practice. Additional qualitative studies to verify the framework are proposed.

The communication value circle can be used as a management tool for planning, evaluating, and revising strategic directions for communication in any corporation.

Explaining the value of communication continues to be one of the most important challenges for professionals and scholars alike. This paper proposes a consistent explanation for the theory and practice of what constitutes corporate communication.

This monograph presents a review of the frontiers' ideas in marketing communications as of today, in six exploratory steps. It begins with an examination of the nature of acceptable goals for marketing communications and then examines what and with whom we should communicate. Where and when communications should be placed is next discussed in terms of the objective functions of multimedia models and frequency effects. The sixth step focuses on the match between evaluative instruments and initial objectives and exhorts communicators to experiment better and more often and indicates how. A Self‐Audit questionnaire enables the reader to score himself badly or well according to conscience, whilst acting as a device for defining improvements that can sensibly be made. The monograph is empirically based on the Cranfield Programme's findings from 1972–1976 of which the author was Co‐Director; he is now its Co‐Chairman.

The purpose of this paper is to describe five key lessons learned from a decade of studying how scientists and science communicators think about communication strategy.

The paper is based on the experience of the researcher and the underlying literatures on strategic communication and science communication.

The key argument is that the scientific community needs to put more priority into enabling organizations to plan and implement strategic communication efforts on behalf of science. At present, there is too much reliance on individual communicators.

The value of this paper is in the degree to which it argues for a more strategic, organization-focused approach to science communication that emphasizes the setting of clear behavioral goals, followed by discussion about what communication objectives might help achieve those goals and the communication tactics needed to achieve the prioritized objectives.

The purpose of this paper is to explore why, despite the development of a hybrid investing logic, funding problems are so persistent for early-stage Cleantech ventures (“Cleantechs”). An institutional logics lens is adopted to analyze how key actors' perceptions and communications of the Cleantech value proposition shape information asymmetries (IAs).

A mixed methods approach draws on 82 Cleantech pitch decks and 31 investment guidance documents, and insights from interviews with 42 key informants and nine Cleantech CEOs and their investors.

IAs persist, first of all, because key investor and entrepreneurial actors combine different goals in the hybrid Cleantech value proposition. Interestingly, the analysis of Environmental Performance Indicators (EPIs) as a critical communication tool reveals a further mismatch in how actors actually combine logics. The authors ultimately identify three emergent actor roles – traditional laggard, developer and boundary spanner – that present a framework of how the three most influential actor groups develop EPIs and via that a hybrid Cleantech financing logic to overcome IAs.

The paper enhances the entrepreneurial finance literature primarily by showing that in contexts of hybrid investing a more nuanced understanding of institutional logics in terms of ends and means is critical to overcome IAs. While prior works highlight goal incompatibilities, the findings here suggest that the (in-)compatibility of goals as well as EPI choices of the same actors is likely to be the key explanandum for the stickiness of IAs and the funding gap. The novel emerging role framework offers additional theoretical, policy and practical advances for hybrid logic development.

A vast array of communication and behavioural theories and models has long assisted the communication management industry in its quest for excellence. While relying upon and discussing many of these theories in relation to website communication, this paper explores the development of theoretical platforms which are unique to the website mode of communication. It asserts that investigating new and varied theoretical paradigms can assist the communication management industry in analysing, extending and optimising its efforts in cyberspace. This paper explores the potential of a generic, theoretical approach to desired behavioural response via the website. It provides a modular definition of desired behavioural response to websites. This definition comprises six potential positive outputs and has been called “positive response action”. The paper proves, via comparative analysis, that positive response action parallels established communication goals and objectives. This paper also explores the concept of any one website belonging to one of three sender motivated categories: individual, strategic stakeholder communication and non‐strategic stakeholder communication. Traditional communication and behavioural response theories are analysed in relation to positive response action as are the essential cognitive needs of a website visitor. These needs are contextualised in a critical path “user gratification” format in relation to the achievement of the goal of positive response action. Excellence in effective website communication has become a priority for the public relations profession worldwide. While exploring this quest for excellence and its relation to theoretical dynamics, this paper reinforces the universally accepted requirement of accurate audience definition in order to achieve communication success and behavioural response.

Despite the proven link between internal communication and more effective business results, only a few attempts have been made to answer the essential question of who is responsible for managing internal communication in an organisation. This paper aims to examine the presence of internal communication management (ICM) practices in companies in Latvia and launch a new discussion on who should manage internal communication in a modern company to support business strategy and development.

In the first phase of the study, a survey was conducted in three business sectors in Latvia involved in managing and implementing the internal communications function. Using the multiple case study method, the second phase of the study examined in-depth, ICM and the implementation practices in four different Latvian companies. In total, 13 in-depth interviews were conducted within 4 companies, and thematic analysis was used to analyse the material gained from the interviews.

The target companies and relevant professionals from different fields have divergent opinions about who should manage the internal communication function. From the research across four companies, it was concluded that internal communication was implemented in a fragmented manner. There was a weak understanding of the meaning and goal of internal communication. The potential of effective internal communication in reaching strategic goals has not been realised. Responsibility for ICM is often limited to the reactive performance of public relations departments, human resources or marketing specialists. The companies clearly did not have a defined scope of responsibilities for managing internal communication amongst the different parts of their organisations. It can be concluded that company managers should pay attention to how internal communication is conducted, clearly delegate this function to a manager and define the expected results that meet the company’s strategic goals. The results of this research can be used to inform recommendations for integrating the ICM function.

Only a few research papers have discussed responsibility for internal communication functions. This research particularly fills this gap and emphasises the need to assign responsibility for an organisation’s ICM function as it is the core factor in strategic implementation and input related to business goals.

The purpose of this paper is to clarify and demonstrate the core contributions of communication departments to organizational success beyond traditional ideas of messaging or information distribution. The main aim is to develop a better understanding of the different facets of value that the communication function delivers by introducing a distinction between strategic and operational contributions, following established management models.

The research is based on an extensive literature review at the nexus of communication management and strategic management research and ten qualitative case studies in large, internationally operating German organizations from different industries, combining in-depth interviews and document analyses.

The newly developed Communications Contributions Framework demonstrates that communications serve the corporation in four strategic and operational dimensions and emphasizes the critical role of communications in reflecting and adjusting organizational strategies, i.e. through identifying opportunities to innovate or securing intangible assets.

The paper outlines different application scenarios for how the new framework can be used in practice, i.e. as a multi-faceted rationale for explaining the impact of communication departments in the language of top management and reporting communication success in the logic of business.

The framework provides the first theoretically and empirically based “big picture” of communications’ contributions to corporate success, designed to lay ground for further discussions both in academia and in practice.