Search results

Using the theoretical frameworks of public diplomacy and public relations, we mapped how the Chinese government has used panda imagery to build its national brand on Twitter and how this ‘panda diplomacy’ has facilitated its para-diplomatic actions. Our findings uncover new attempts by the Chinese government to engage in digital diplomacy. Mobilizing panda imagery on Twitter enhanced friendly relations with foreign political leaders and people and established a friendly and peaceful image of China on Twitter.

This chapter describes the business goals, purpose, and strategy of public diplomatic services. It reinforces diplomatic organizations’ fundamental bureaucratic administrative culture (Tier 1). The bureaucratic culture of diplomacy is deconstructed, and each of the five layers is described in detail. The authors also explain why focusing on the artifacts and behavior layers are the dominant and essential starting points for analysis in diplomatic cultures. The public service culture (Tier 2) overlays and mediates the bureaucratic culture.

Additionally, the authors describe the influence that political appointees as leaders may play in shaping public service cultures. Next, the authors explain how diplomatic cultures reflect the core values of a state’s culture. Next, the chapter outlines the landscape of external influencing cultures (Tier 3) in diplomacy. Finally, the knowledge, learning, and collaboration (KLC) culture of diplomacy is considered, with opportunities for future growth.

This chapter focuses on the role played by both companies and universities on the dissemination of services and courses related to Business Diplomacy (BD). Special attention is given to the partnerships between companies and universities and to how BD is taught by universities around the world.

With an exploratory analysis technique, we have surveyed the websites of 22 companies and 20 universities and institutions, belonging to various countries, engaged in activities related to BD (i.e. services supply, courses at different stages of the academic curricula, workshops, seminars, training etc.).

The objective of the analysis was twofold: first, to give a better understanding of the concept of BD and of the various meanings associated with it; the results indicate that in both cases the practiced concept of BD is converging to the canonical set of diplomatic functions; second, to offer useful insights to practitioners in the field of BD by looking at the type of BD courses covered by the academic curricula of various universities and BD services offered by market companies.

This chapter presents a comprehensive analysis of the BD issue, going beyond its treatment as a mere auxiliary activity. It also offers a detailed overview of diplomacy’s main functions and adjuvant activities, with the purpose of advancing organisational charts’ structures inside companies, and academic syllabi offerings by universities.

In 2015, Malaysia’s investment vehicle, 1Malaysia Development Berhad (1MDB), came under international scrutiny after it amassed a debt of US$11 billion (10.3 billion) (Wright & Clark, 2015), which it had difficulty repaying. More disturbingly, investigators found that US$700 million (658 million) was transferred into the personal bank account of Malaysia’s prime minister, Najib Razak, founder and chairman of 1MDB’s advisory board (Wright & Clark, 2015). Najib was also accused of embezzling state money (Reuters, 2015) and damaging the image of the country (“Najib tried to bribe me”, 2015). This chapter aims to examine the strategies used by the Malaysian prime minister to repair his image in the 1MDB scandal, the effectiveness of these strategies, and how these impacted Malaysia’s public diplomacy efforts in restoring the country’s image and reputation. Findings showed that the prime minister denied wrongdoing, and simultaneously bolstered his position and promised to turn 1MDB around. In contrast to the current explication of Benoit and Pang’s (2008) image repair strategies, Najib’s way of attacking the accusers sheds light into how image repair strategies may be operationalized in the Asian context. A new image repair strategy – diversion – is proposed to be added to the existing framework.

Multinational corporations (MNCs) are experiencing a number of major challenges in the international business arena. Can business diplomacy help them to deal with these challenges effectively? In this introductory chapter we conceptualize and identify the relationship between MNCs’ international business diplomatic activities and firm performance.

We conducted a literature review and interviews with five large MNCs that are operating in distinctive industries. Business diplomatic activities have been classified into three particular areas to support the analysis, namely: (1) MNC–Non-Governmental Organization (NGO) relations, (2) MNC–Host Government relations, and (3) MNC–Local Community relations.

The main findings suggest that international business diplomacy has a direct positive effect on firm performance with regard to so-called soft or nonfinancial indicators. These indicators include knowledge sharing, reputation, company image, and marketing possibilities. The effect can in turn lead to a better financial performance and market stance in the long run.

The results of this study are important for the future awareness and execution of business diplomacy in large MNCs.

At many crucial moments in recent foreign affairs, relations between the United States and other nations of the world have hinged on our diplomats providing accurate and timely information to governments and foreign publics about our government's policies and our goals (Dunlop, 1996). Within the US government, our relations with other peoples of the world was coined as public diplomacy, as opposed to official diplomacy between governments, by the Kennedy administration. Despite strains in US relations with other countries, international opinion polls mostly show that Americans are still admired, even as there are disagreements with US policies (Pew Research Center for People and the Press, 2003; What the World Thinks, 2004).