Search results

This study aimed to find possible answers to whether U.S. universities are merely looking good or doing good regarding their third mission using elements of the triple bottom line (people, planet, prosperity) and the 2030 Agenda.

Qualitative exploratory empirical study based on an in-depth analysis of publicly available documents (i.e. mission statements and strategic planning) and information from the Impact Rankings 2020 edition (webpages). The study uses a multilevel analysis to capture the parameters “looking good” and “doing good.” The sample consists of 15 U.S. universities.

The findings demonstrate that universities are looking good in terms of their effort to support their third mission. Data show that all universities covered themes related to people and prosperity in their mission statements and strategic planning. However, when the authors dived into the managerial metrics, KPIs, benchmarks and other evidence to characterize them as doing good, the authors encountered some challenges in identifying evidence. The data suggest that universities most likely participated in the Impact Ranking act as “cherry pickers” and might participate in unproblematic goals for their organization.

The 3Ps and the 17 Sustainable Development Goals used in this study to examine the university public mission never used in other studies. The goal in this study was not to evaluate those universities in terms of looking good and doing good but rather to contribute to the gap in the literature and provide suggestions to university C-suite.

The current inquiry advances the public relations field and practice in several ways. First, this research addresses a clear gap in research on subjective well-being, specifically among PR professionals across career stages and generations. Second, the findings reveal important generational similarities and differences in how PR practitioners talk about well-being. This provides an empirical basis for developing tailored, multi-generational approaches to supporting well-being in PR workplaces. Lastly, this research provides practical implications for PR professionals to understand generational perspectives and to implement flexible policies to improve well-being.

The current study explored subjective well-being (SWB) across generations of public relations professionals. Using a qualitative approach, semi-structured interviews were conducted with 12 PR practitioners at various career levels – entry, mid-level and senior.

Analysis revealed several similarities but a key disparity among cohorts. Senior-level professionals specifically reported struggling with work–life balance and the perceived ability to be autonomous, while entry-level professionals expressed commitment to setting boundaries on their time. These findings highlight a need for the PR industry to establish flexible workplace standards that enable employees at different career stages to collaborate and support one another’s well-being.

Our findings will appeal to your readers who seek to cultivate employee subjective well-being and understand generational issues via qualitative methods. By conducting a qualitative study in an understudied area, PR industry leaders and managers can support employee well-being across generations and career stages.

Our study is the first to examine generational dispositions as it relates to SWB across the public relations industry.

In Decolonizing Methodologies (1999), Linda Tuhiwai Smith asserted that “the master’s tools of colonization will not work to decolonize what the master built.” Smith challenged Indigenous researchers to fashion “new tools for the purpose of decolonizing and Indigenous tools that can revitalize Indigenous knowledge” (p. 22). A quarter of a century later, this paper reflects on the powerful impact that Smith’s call to action has had upon recent generations of bright, politically active and culturally grounded Native Hawaiian researchers, many of whom are innovatively turning to the Native epistemologies embedded in our traditional cultural practices to craft (k)new research tools and methodologies.

This paper features three Native Hawaiian scholars who are simultaneously hula and mele (traditional Hawaiian dance and song) practitioners and who instinctively turned to their hula training to guide and indigenize their research practice.

Each of these three scholars describes how they creatively applied the Hawaiian epistemologies embedded in their hula and mele training to fashion (k)new, Indigenous methodologies to guide (1) their research conduct, (2) their data analyses or interpretations and (3) the presentation of their research findings, respectively.

These three Hawaiian scholars and hula practitioners represent a larger groundswell of Native Hawaiian researchers who are bravely and creatively drawing upon the traditional wisdom and sensitivities embedded in our cultural practices to craft and wield (k)new research tools to “dismantle the master’s house” (Lorde, 1981) and build an Indigenous hale (house) of our own.