Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
Corporate communicationpractice and pedagogy at thedawn of the new millennium
Michael B. GoodmanCorporate Communication Institute, Madison, New Jersey, USA
Abstract
Purpose – To explore the case for, and value of, corporate communication practice in professionaldevelopment.
Design/methodology/approach – This article, based on the findings of the CorporateCommunication Institute’s (CCI) Corporate Communication Practices and Trends 2005 Study, aimsto offer a positive relationship between corporate communication practice and productive globalrelationships as the underpinning of a sustainable business strategy.
Findings – Successful global businesses recognize the value of corporate communication in meetingthe challenges of global business.
Originality/value – Successful professional development of the next generation of corporatecommunication executives will focus on understanding of corporate communication functions and onstrategic implementation capabilities.
Keywords Corporate communications, Continuing professional development
Paper type Viewpoint
Executive summaryThe practice of corporate communication has profound implications for professionaldevelopment programs world wide. Recent studies confirm corporate communicationas a strategic management function centered on these challenges:
. the need to build trust with all internal and external audiences;
. the expectation by the corporation to accomplish more with less;
. the demand to build a responsible and accountable global corporate culture inresponse to a hostile environment for multinational corporations;
. the perception of the corporate communication executive as “counsel to the CEO”and “manager of the company’s” reputation;
. the understanding of the global impact of the local act, and the local impact of theglobal act;
. the demand for greater transparency and disclosure have made media relationsmore complex and strategic;
. the expectation that the company be a good citizen and make money;
. the reality of global terrorism makes crisis communication planning a criticalsuccess factor for corporate communication professionals;
. the understanding of transparency as a best practice strategy for reputationmanagement; and
. the knowledge that writing remains the core skill for corporate communication.
The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available at
www.emeraldinsight.com/1356-3289.htm
CCIJ11,3
196
Corporate Communications: AnInternational JournalVol. 11 No. 3, 2006pp. 196-213q Emerald Group Publishing Limited1356-3289DOI 10.1108/13563280610680803
An emerging trend is the role of business in public diplomacy. Global companies and theirbrands touch the lives of more people than government representatives ever could.Businesses have often served a larger role in our society than that of carrying on theactivities of commerce. They can serve a diplomatic function because of their interculturalsensitivity, as well as their understanding of the global enterprise they work for and of theworld at large. In a world of instantaneous media coverage, transparency, and intangiblevalue drivers, successful companies will welcome the challenge.
Corporate communication professional development program have been a growtharea in higher education. To underscore the trend, leaders met in May 2006 at anArthur W. Page Society academic symposium at the Tuck School of Business todiscuss improved teaching, research, and collaboration among an interdisciplinarygroup of professionals and scholars. In an interdisciplinary and applied field such ascorporate communication, current practices and trends can inform the academiccommunity on what to offer in professional degree programs.
A program in corporate communication responsive to the demands of the professionshould focus on the strategic challenges that executives face:
. building trust;
. efficiency;
. building a culture of accountability;
. counseling the corporation and the CEO;
. managing the company reputation;
. managing the impact of globalization;
. transparency in media relations and reputation management;
. managing corporate citizenship and corporate social responsibility;
. managing issues and crises; and
. writing as the core skill for corporate communication;
The Corporate Communication Institute Practices and Trends Studies from 2000 to2005 (www.corporatecomm.org/studies) and the CCI benchmark study of CorporateCommunication Practices and Trends in China offer some guidance.
Corporate communication in western publicly-traded companiesCorporate communication (Goodman, 2004) is the term used to describe a variety ofstrategic management functions. Depending on the organization, corporatecommunication includes: public relations; crisis and emergency communication;corporate citizenship; reputation management; community relations; media relations;investor relations; employee relations; government relations; marketing communication;management communication; corporate branding and image building; advertising.
Corporations use it to lead, motivate, persuade, and inform employees – and thepublic as well. Understanding corporate communication provides the vision acompany requires in an information-driven economy for strategic planning.
Corporate communication is more art than science. It is interdisciplinary,drawing on the methods and findings of an thropology, communication, languageand linguistics, management and marketing, sociology, and psychology.
Ihator (2004) looked at:
Corporatecommunication
practice
197
. . .developments in corporate communications during the twentieth century [andconcluded] that communication between organizations and their publics during thetwentieth century has been changing and substantially improving due to a changingsociety, corporate values, information technology, enhanced connectivity and sharedvalues among nations.
The USC Annenberg Strategic Public Relations Center GAP III findings for 2005 show“that according to hundreds of senior-level PR people, their CEOs now believe that PRis the number-one contributor to organizational success.” (Cripps and Swerling, 2005).Management Research News declared that “corporate communication is the centralskill in the global workplace of the twenty-first century.” (Huang).
And in the wake of the collapse of Enron and Arthur Anderson, PR News (2003)concluded:
The “C-Suite” needs an enhanced structure that promotes truth-telling – and it needs a newlyempowered corporate voice of reason, at the topmost level, to deliver public-spirited messagesthat might be unwelcome.
The importance of corporate communication to the health of the corporate enterprisehas not always enjoyed such recognition. Dolphin and Ying (2000) studied the role ofthe corporate communication director in 20 UK organizations and observed, “Corporatecommunications has a key role to play in the strategic planning of an organization”because of the importance of corporate reputation and the development of corporatebranding, image, and identity.
In fact the marketing and sales element of corporate communication has been seenas the dominant characteristic, as Kitchen (1997) observed, “Corporate communicationsis seen as consisting of three potentially interactive and synergistic dimensions –public relations, marketing communications and human resource management,”recognizing the central nature of corporate communication. Varey’s (1997) survey of:
. . .directors and managers of corporate communications, communications, public relations,human resource management and marketing. . . in UK organizations predictably concludedthat, practitioners are working ahead of any major developments in significant underpinningprinciples of theory.
According to Varey:
Corporate communication. . . is emerging through the convergence around fundamentalbusiness processes. . . such as public relations, employee communications, personnel,marketing, and quality management. . . .While there are growing calls for the integration ofcommunications functions, many managers seem to lack recognition of the total, holisticperspective on integrated internal and external communications.
Certainly corporate communication is an applied field in which internal and externalpractice is a fundamentally defining factor.
The field has evolved dramatically and strategically from Murry’s (1976) observationin that “Corporate communications is a vital and sophisticated marketing disciplinewhose mission it is it sell the company continuously and effectively.”
Research on corporate communication practiceInformation gathering for this discussion included an evaluation of thefindings of The USC Annenberg Strategic Public Relations Center, 2004 GAP III
CCIJ11,3
198
(www.ascweb.usc.edu) which surveyed 8m500 practitioners from public companies,agencies, and independent practitioners. The National Investor Relations Institute(NIRI), 2005 Center for Strategic Communication Study, “The Strategic CommunicationImperative,” (2005) (www.niri.org) consisted of 50 one-on-one interviews with the CEO,CFO, the chief communication officer, and the investor relations officer at 11 selectedcompanies. We also compared the results of CCI’s (2005) research with the CCI Studiesfrom 2000 to 2003. (www.corporatecomm.org/studies information gathered for the 2005study compared with the previous studies can be found in 2005 report in a section titledSurvey Data CCI Study 2005. It consists of 56 PowerPoint graphs.)
The CCI (2005) Study[1]For 2005 the overall goal of the CCI Practices and Trends Study was to outline and analyzethe state of the art for corporate communication in Fortune 1000 companies. With the firststudy in 2000, it was determined to focus on publicly traded companies for several reasons.First, information in such companies is public and more readily accessible. Second, publiccompanies are often in the vanguard of corporate practices because the pressures of thecapital market, of their need to respond to the media, and the realities of the globalmarketplace. And finally, public companies have a greater understanding that theirlicense to operate comes from public approval and is maintained by public trust.
The 2005 study is the latest and continues the CCI studies from 2000 to 2003. TheCorporate Communication Institute determined that the practices and trends studycould be conducted every two years, and this cycle of research was implemented with the2005 research. In years the practices and trends study was not conducted, the focus ofCCI’s research would be on particular issues that have an impact on the profession. Forexample, in 2006 CCI embarked on a Benchmark Study of the Corporate CommunicationPractices and Trends in China. Information gathering for the CCI China BenchmarkStudy was based on previous CCI research studies. For this research we also comparedthe results with the CCI Studies from 2000 to 2005 (www.corporatecomm.org/studiesresults of the China Benchmark will be posted on the CCI website in late 2006).
Implications for future practice and professional developmentThe insights we have drawn from the background information, the survey, theinterviews, and the site visits. What follows is a discussion of the trends, as well as anopportunity for future practice, professional development, and development of acurriculum for higher education.
The need to build trust with all internal and external audiencesIn their comments and in the interviews, corporate communication executives indicated aclear need to build trust with all audiences. This has been so since the 2002 study. Inpractice this means that the corporation’s relationships with external and internalcommunities matter a great deal. Customers, vendors, and business partners need a firmrelationship of trust in the wake of the attack on the World Trade Center, the accountingscandals that followed in the fall of 2001, and the erosion of confidence in the capitalmarkets. “Formal trust,” as I noted in the Journal of Business Strategy (Vol. 26 No.4, 2004):
. . .includes the rule of law, transparency, and publicly evident rules. Informal trust isculturally defined by the values and norms that allow people to communicate and deal withothers who share those values.
Corporatecommunication
practice
199
Trust is the key objective for global companies today because it underpins corporatereputation and gives them license to operate,” said Michael Deaver, Vice Chairman,Edelman in a note about the Edelman Annual Trust Barometer presented in January2006 at Davos. “To build trust, companies need to localize communications, betransparent, and engage multiple stakeholders continuously as advocates across abroad array of communications channels.”
The business case is a simple one – the license to operate is either granted, or revoked,by the society you are in. This concept is clear for companies in the European Union andthe United Kingdom, which emphasize sustainability, or the triple bottom line –financial, environmental, and social performance measures. The trend has become a bestpractice among global corporations – engage the public, customers, employees, andbusiness partners on the social, financial, and environmental accomplishments andactions of the corporation. A new era of transparency has created an opportunity forbuilding trust through strategic corporate communication initiatives.
The expectation by the corporation to accomplish more with lessEven though budgets for corporate communication increase slowly, as indicated byresponses to question 15, staff responsibilities increase more rapidly. So following a trendthat our research has noted since 2000, and what one communication officer described as“always more to do,” professionals will continue to be asked to be more productive ascompanies continue to expect corporate communicators to accomplish more with fewerresources. The opportunity is there in this constant escalation of the volume of work forprofessional development and cross-fertilization of skills in order to make each member of acorporate communication staff more capable in all functional corporate communicationareas. The challenge for communication officers is to develop measures for corporatecommunication value – as their corporations turn to various measures, several aredeveloping corporate communication criteria to fit with the “balanced score-card” that theircorporations use to judge performance.
The demand to build a responsible and accountable global corporate culture in responseto a hostile environment for multinational corporationsRespondents when asked open-ended question number 23 responded thatAnti-Americanism and anti-globalism create a hostile environment for multinationalcorporations, making daily operations more challenging than ever. The trend towardbuilding a responsible and accountable global corporate culture is vital to organizationalhealth. Corporations that operate globally work hard to harmonize their corporatecultures with the local culture. Look to companies that have operated globally fordecades, some for more than 100 years for best practices in creating an effective globalcorporate culture. The opportunity and challenge is for the corporation to address andembrace global issues for competitive advantage, and for multi-nationals engage in“Public Diplomacy” to create a stable and peaceful business environment.
The perception of the corporate communication executive as “counsel to the CEO” and“manager of the company’s” reputationCommunication is now more strategic than ever; corporate communication executivessee “counsel to the CEO” and “manager of the company’s reputation” almost equally astheir primary role in the company. A large majority have a seat at the table, with
CCIJ11,3
200
approximately 75 percent of communication officers reporting to the CEO (53.8 percent),the CFO (14 percent), the COO (3.2 percent), or the Corporate Counsel (5.4 percent).
In this role, the trend toward strategic communication counsel for the corporationaccompanies the role of “Chief Communication Officer” (2001, 2002, 2003, 2005).
However, a counter trend – a business model that is worth watching – is emerging.The model involves a CEO who sees little value added in communicating with anyconstituency other than a handful of key investors. The role of the communicationofficer is then greatly diminished, as some corporations merge, or as corporatecommunication executives retire and the position is restructured or fragmented.Essential functional responsibilities such as crisis communication and media relations,or legally mandated financial reports, have been decentralized.
For the majority of corporate communication executives, with such responsibilitiesfor corporate decision-making, come great opportunities and challenges to become atrusted advisor to the corporation and its leaders.
The understanding of the global impact of the local act, and the local impact of theglobal actGlobal issues – anti-globalism, outsourcing, terrorism – place corporatecommunication executives as strategic counsel to the corporation. Often the successof an offshore initiative is directly attributed to intangibles such as corporate culture orcorporate communication. The trend is for corporate communicators to understand theglobal impact of the local act, and the local impact of the global act. The opportunityand challenge is to move from preaching “global,” to embracing it with stories andmessages.
In a forthcoming (June 2006) Special Issue on Public Diplomacy of the Journal ofBusiness Strategy is this observation:
Contemporary business can be a powerful force for global change. A consensus is buildingthat it is proper, and in some cases preferable, for business to marshal its resources to solveproblems on a global stage. Business has a considerable role to play in Public Diplomacy,which was defined in 1965 by diplomat Edmund Guillion, and later Dean of the FletcherSchool of Law and Diplomacy at Tufts University, as dealing with the influence of publicattitudes on the forming and carrying out of foreign policy. And it is an activity ininternational relations beyond traditional political diplomacy that includes actions bygovernments to “cultivate” public opinion in other countries and to communicate with foreigncorrespondents. It is also the county to country interaction and intercultural communicationof private groups such as businesses.
Substantial agreement now exists that global business can and must act to solve problemsthat have often been handled by government. In the decades following the end of the ColdWar government systematically backed away from issues of economic development, as the“conflicts” at the core of the aftermath of World War II seemed to evaporate along with thefall of the Soviet Union. However, the economic and social issues that were masked during theideological conflict of the Cold War surfaced, as did the suppressed desires for political andsocial ambition (Goodman, 2006).
The demand for greater transparency and disclosure has made media relations morecomplex and strategicNews media and technologies are pervasive, instantaneous, and global. More news outletsdemand more attention and new tools and techniques to meet the challenges of blogs,
Corporatecommunication
practice
201
really simple syndication and consumer generated media. transparency and disclosurelaws and practices have made media relations more complex, and strategic. One executivesays the answer is to “become a ‘glass-box’ company.” Since, the trend is toward more, notless disclosure of information, expect more demand for transparency. The opportunity forsuccess lies in how soon a corporation can embrace new communication tools andtechnologies. The challenge for professionals is how to manage the messages.
The expectation that the company be a good citizen and make moneyThe company is expected to be a good citizen and make money.
The community your company is in expects a strong and open dialog about whatyour corporation believes, and what it values. A strong relationship of trust closes thegap between perceptions of your company and its performance. The trend is that goodcorporate citizenship is expected. The opportunity for success is to build a strongreservoir of trust – positive reputation equity with all audiences.
Business has rediscovered its purpose in this context as global citizen, expandingbeyond Nobel Prize winning economist Milton Freidman’s definition more than threedecades ago that the purpose of business is to create wealth for its owners, within therules. The understanding of the meaning of “owners” has expanded to include:
. NGOs who are also investors;
. investors who are also employees;
. employees who are also customers;
. consumers who are also local business partners;
. business partners who are also local stakeholders;
. local stakeholders who are also media;
. consumers who are also media; and
. media who are also NGOs.
All business, as legendary AT&T executive Arthur W. Page observed more than75 years ago, begins with public permission and exists by public approval. And that acompany’s enlightened self-interest will also cause it to contribute to the socialgood within its own areas of competency at intersection of society’s needs and its owninterest.
The intangible risks of not acting as a good corporate citizen and public diplomatcan be numerous, such as:
. poor social and environmental performance;
. an obsession with short term financial performance;
. lack of transparency in corporate reporting;
. lack of stakeholder engagement; and
. limited risk management of critical issues.
And the company’s reputation can be put at risk by:. lawsuits (domestic/abroad);. negative media coverage;
CCIJ11,3
202
. NGO pressure;
. consumer boycotts;
. eroding public trust;
. negative analyst assessment; and
. market punishment.
Now the role of business as citizen reminds us that corporations must act as goodcitizens, or lose their license to operate.
The reality of global terrorism makes crisis communication planning a critical successfactor for corporate communication professionalsYour company will have a crisis; prepare for the ones you cannot conceive of.
The trend toward increased global terrorism makes crisis communicationplanning a critical success factor for corporate communication professionals. Theopportunity to add value to the company is through continual crisis planning, aswell as professional development and cross-functional training through quarterly“crisis drills.”
The understanding of transparency as a best practice strategy for corporate reputationmanagementReputation is an intangible, and a valuable corporate asset. It is difficult to achieve apositive one, but even more difficult to protect. And as Baruch Lev and others haveobserved, more than 50 percent of the market value of a business can be attributed tointangibles. Indeed, institutional investors now make a substantial percentage of theirdecisions based on the intangibles they see in a corporation.
These intangibles drive corporate value: corporate reputation; governance;innovation; research and development; environmental and social performance; brandequity; human capital; leadership and strategy; product and service quality.
The trend is that transparency is becoming a best practice strategy for reputationmanagement. The opportunity for corporate communicators is to add value throughoffering constructive suggestions on improving corporate reporting and corporategovernance.
The knowledge that writing remains the core skill for corporate communicationAs it has been since the first CCI study when we asked interviewees to identify theskills and capabilities needed for corporate communication, our respondents identifywriting as the core skill for corporate communication. Also an essential skill is athorough knowledge of the company and of business principles.
The skill set necessary for success as a corporate communicator in a global businessenvironment also includes:
. integrity and honesty;
. global mindset; objective perspective;
. business orientation; project management;
. critical and analytical thinking; problem-solving; synthesizing;
. communication and media skills; listening; persuasion;
Corporatecommunication
practice
203
. “grace under pressure” – confidence, composure, compassion;
. resilience; positive attitude;
. energy, discipline, passion;
. leadership; team player;
. intelligent; innovative; creative;
. social-ability; emotional intelligence;
. mentoring and coaching; quick study; and
. strategic thinking.
A clear opportunity for corporate communicators to bring value to their companies liesin the text-based nature of new media technologies.
Key functional responsibilities of corporate communication officersIn the CCI survey we asked what functions, of the 26 listed, were included undercorporate communication officer’s responsibilities. Not surprisingly more than90 percent of the people who responded to the survey included these areas:
. media relations;
. public relations;
. crisis communication;
. executive communication;
. employee relations; and
. communication policy and strategy.
The functional responsibilities listed in Table I offer a clear outline of the majorstrategic role played by corporate communication in developing and maintainingessential internal and external relationships with key audiences. Each function was
Functional area Percent responsible
Media relationsa 95.7Public relationsa 95.7Crisis communicationa 93Executive communications (speeches)a 92.5Employee relations (internal communication)a 90.3Communication policy and strategya 90.3Internet site 87.1Intranet site 82.8Identity 73.1Issues management 71Corporate citizenship (philanthropy) 59.1Advertising 55.9Corporate culture 48.4Investor relations 25.8
Note: aAlmost ubiquitous
Table I.Strategic functional areasmanaged by corporatecommunicationprofessionals
CCIJ11,3
204
listed by more than 50 percent of the respondents. A strong curriculum in corporatecommunication would include each of these areas.
The perceived role of the corporate communicatorBeginning with the 2001 survey we asked the corporate communication executives torank descriptions (from 1 to 8 in 2001, and from 1 to 12 in 2002, 2003, 2005) that bestdescribed the way they themselves thought of the role of corporate communication intheir company:
. Advocate or “engineer of public opinion,” in support of the company’s policies;
. branding and brand perception steward;
. corporate philanthropy (citizenship) champion;
. counsel to the CEO and the Corporation;
. driver of company publicity;
. manager of the company’s image;
. manager of the company’s reputation;
. manager of employee relations (internal communication);
. manager of relationships between the company and ALL of its keyconstituencies;
. manager of relationships between the company and its key NON-CUSTOMERconstituencies;
. source of public information about the company;
. support for marketing and sales;
. other.
Table II presents the descriptions our respondents ranked first. “Counsel to the CEO”was added to the choices in 2002. It and “manager of the company’s reputation” haveranked one or two in every study since 2002. In 2005 we placed “counsel to the CEO” at19.4 percent above “manager of company’s reputation” and “source of publicinformation about the company” both at 20.4 percent, because of the percentages eachwas ranked at number 2 – respectively: 17.2 percent “counsel to the CEO”; 10.8 percent“manager of the company’s reputation”; 9.7 percent “source of public informationabout the company.”
Also note that “advocate or ‘engineer of public opinion,’” a description we includedto reflected the way Edward Bernays and Ivy Lee practiced Public Relations over50 years ago, has moved from 7.2 percent in 2002 to 14.6 percent in 2003, and to17.2 percent in 2005. It could be that contemporary corporate communicationpractitioners see themselves having greater influence on the way others see them, thusthe ranking of reputation and “engineering” public opinion.
Interview questions and responsesAt the end of the survey we asked if respondents are willing to take part in a follow-upinterview to discuss the nature of corporate communication in their company. Eightopen-ended topics are sent by e-mail with the option to have a telephone interview orsend their comments by return e-mail:
Corporatecommunication
practice
205
Per
cen
tof
resp
ond
ents
wh
ora
nk
edth
efo
llow
ing
fun
ctio
ns
No.
120
0120
0220
0320
05
20.0
Man
ager
ofco
mp
any
’sre
pu
tati
on21
.6C
oun
sel
toth
eC
EO
and
the
corp
orat
ion
(new
-200
2)18
.4M
anag
erof
com
pan
y’s
rep
uta
tion
19.4
Cou
nse
lto
the
CE
Oan
dth
eco
rpor
atio
n(n
ew-2
002)
(17.
2p
erce
nt
No.
2)15
.1S
ourc
eof
pu
bli
cin
form
atio
nab
out
the
com
pan
y18
.0M
anag
erof
com
pan
y’s
rep
uta
tion
17.5
Cou
nse
lto
the
CE
Oan
dth
eco
rpor
atio
n(n
ew-2
002)
20.4
Sou
rce
ofp
ub
lic
info
rmat
ion
abou
tth
eco
mp
any
(10.
8p
erce
nt
No.
2)14
.1M
anag
erof
rela
tion
ship
s(C
o.an
dk
eyn
on-c
ust
omer
con
stit
uen
cies
)
15.3
Man
ager
ofem
plo
yee
rela
tion
s(i
nte
rnal
com
m.)
(new
-200
2)
14.6
Ad
voc
ate
or“e
ng
inee
rof
pu
bli
cop
inio
n”
20.4
Man
ager
ofco
mp
any
’sre
pu
tati
on(9
.7p
erce
nt
No.
2)
13.8
Ad
voc
ate
or“e
ng
inee
rof
pu
bli
cop
inio
n”
12.6
Sou
rce
ofp
ub
lic
info
rmat
ion
abou
tth
eco
mp
any
10.7
Man
ager
ofre
lati
onsh
ips
–co
.an
dN
ON
-cu
stom
erco
nst
itu
enci
es
17.2
Ad
voc
ate
or“e
ng
inee
rof
pu
bli
cop
inio
n”
12.4
Man
ager
ofth
eco
mp
any
’sim
age
12.6
Man
ager
ofre
lati
onsh
ips
–co
.an
dN
ON
-cu
stom
erco
nst
itu
enci
es
9.7
Man
ager
ofth
eco
mp
any
’sim
age
9.7
Man
ager
ofth
eco
mp
any
’sim
age
11.9
Dri
ver
ofco
mp
any
pu
bli
city
9.9
Man
ager
ofth
eco
mp
any
’sim
age
8.7
Sou
rce
ofp
ub
lic
info
rmat
ion
abou
tth
eco
mp
any
8.6
Dri
ver
ofco
mp
any
pu
bli
city
11.4
Man
ager
ofre
lati
onsh
ips
–co
.an
dA
LL
key
con
stit
uen
cies
8.1
Dri
ver
ofco
mp
any
pu
bli
city
7.8
Man
ager
ofre
lati
onsh
ips
–co
.an
dA
LL
key
con
stit
uen
cies
7.6
Man
ager
ofem
plo
yee
rela
tion
s(i
nte
rnal
com
m.)
(new
-200
2)2.
7S
up
por
tfo
rm
ark
etin
gan
dsa
les
7.2
Man
ager
ofre
lati
onsh
ips
–co
.an
dA
LL
key
con
stit
uen
cies
5.8
Dri
ver
ofco
mp
any
pu
bli
city
7.5
Bra
nd
ing
and
bra
nd
per
cep
tion
stew
ard
(new
-200
2)8.
1O
ther
7.2
Ad
voc
ate
or“e
ng
inee
rof
pu
bli
cop
inio
n”
5.8
Bra
nd
ing
and
bra
nd
per
cep
tion
stew
ard
(new
-200
2)
5.4
Su
pp
ort
for
mar
ket
ing
and
sale
s
(continued
)
Table II.Chief communicationofficer’s perception of therole of corporateCommunication inCompanies – 2001, 2002,2003, 2005
CCIJ11,3
206
Per
cen
tof
resp
ond
ents
wh
ora
nk
edth
efo
llow
ing
fun
ctio
ns
No.
120
0120
0220
0320
05
6.3
Bra
nd
ing
and
bra
nd
per
cep
tion
stew
ard
(new
-200
2)
3.9
Man
ager
ofem
plo
yee
rela
tion
s(i
nte
rnal
com
m.)
(new
-200
2)
4.3
Cor
por
ate
ph
ilan
thro
py
(cit
izen
ship
)ch
amp
ion
(new
-200
2)4.
5S
up
por
tfo
rm
ark
etin
gan
dsa
les
1.9
Su
pp
ort
for
mar
ket
ing
and
sale
s4.
3M
anag
erof
rela
tion
ship
s–
co.
and
AL
Lk
eyco
nst
itu
enci
es2.
7C
orp
orat
ep
hil
anth
rop
y(c
itiz
ensh
ip)
cham
pio
n(n
ew-2
002)
1.9
Oth
er1.
4M
anag
erof
rela
tion
ship
s–
coan
dA
LL
key
con
stit
uen
cies
0.9
Oth
er1.
0C
orp
orat
ep
hil
anth
rop
y(c
itiz
ensh
ip)
cham
pio
n(n
ew-2
002)
1.1
Man
ager
ofre
lati
onsh
ips
-co
.an
dN
ON
-cu
stom
erco
nst
itu
enci
es
Note:
Fou
rn
ewop
tion
sad
ded
in20
02;
all
fig
ure
sar
ep
erce
nta
ges
Table II.
Corporatecommunication
practice
207
(1) the top three critical issues in corporate communication;
(2) strategic importance of corporate communication in your organization to you; toyour CEO;
(3) top three trends in corporate communication;
(4) trends unique to your corporation’s industry or sector;
(5) corporate communication contribution to overall success of the corporation;
(6) core competencies: for individual practitioners; for the corporation as a whole;
(7) impact of transparency and disclosure on the relationship between ethics andadvocacy in the practice of corporate communication; and
(8) additional comments.
Many corporate communication executives are concerned with how to measure anddemonstrate the effectiveness and value of the communication function to thecorporation as a whole. There is, according to one executive, an:
. . .ongoing need to engage business leaders in communication strategy before events occur sothat we can be proactive (contribute to the business strategy) and not just react to the storyfrom a communication perspective.
They are challenged by an increasingly global environment, and the need for “creatingrelevant global messages; delivered locally in context.”
They understand important issues presented by “the changing face of mediarelations – 24 £ 7 factor of global media,” and the challenge of “staying on top of,understanding, and learning to leverage new and changing communication mediums(blogs, pods, chat rooms, instant messaging. . .)” and of “real-time” news coverage.
Here are some of the verbatim responses from the interviews grouped by issues:Impact of terrorism: It was still as much a surprise in 2005 as it was in 2002 that we
received more than 15 responses like this:
“Minimal impact, if any”and “Very little impact.”
Comments on the impact of terrorism such as these from corporate executives in theFinancial Services sector were more informative:
Substantial impact. Specifically because we were identified as a possible target and becausewe have numerous locations in foreign countries.
It has not prevented us from being successful, but as a large, very public and global brand, wecan always be a target.
As well as these comments on the impact of terrorism:
. . .large issue in the hospitality industry. . . our hotels are public and private spaces whosedoors are open 24/7 and large groups congregate.
. . .producing a new crisis communications plan that includes elements of terrorism.
Increased security has created communications challenges.
As. . .owner of US nuclear plants, we have seen plant security become a much larger issue forus, both externally and internally.
CCIJ11,3
208
Transparency was a major concern as illustrated by these comments:
Transparency has been critical in driving our credibility and leading the charge onencouraging and enabling employees to blog has been a part of this transparency.
Minimal. Company has long been committed to open communication.
Not much. . . We’re regulated and transparent already.
We have always been open, but even more so now.
Greater frequency and depth of press releases, particularly earnings statements. Greater useof webcasting.
Communications are less crisp and clear – and more legalese.
Extensive. . . Sarbanes-Oxley has added significantly to our work load.
Created a much larger paperwork burden. . .On the other hand, . . .significant advantages forour image and reputation.
Several comments addressed the necessary capabilities for corporate communicators:
Trying to keep pace with changing technologies.
Still struggle to come up with effective measurements that are truly valuable and easy toimplement.
Remains a “critical” part of the corporation.
Spread thin, do the best with resources we’re given. Always more we can do to add value tothe organization.
Comments on corporate communication strategy illustrated its importance:
Becoming more policy-oriented.
Transparency has been a key driver of our communications strategies, both externally andinternally. We have devoted considerable resources to improving and expanding upon ourdisclosures and to becoming a “glass-box” company.
The CEO, COO, CFO, and General Counsel are the main engineers of corporatecommunications and do the job directly themselves.
Other comments highlighted the value of the corporate communication function:
Its role has become more essential than ever to the success of business overall. Theimportance of this function is a fairly recent change and is now fully ingrained in the dailypractice of the most successful businesses.
While the function has made great strides at getting the proverbial seat at the table, we stillneed – particularly in Fortune 1000 companies – to have an institutionalized seat at the table,like legal or finance.
CC has gained in importance for us. We have executed a remarkable turnaround and theinterrelationship between improved business performance, increased external coms., andincreased employee pride has been critical.
Corporatecommunication
practice
209
In our organization, the Global Communications Department is centralized and supportsvirtually every business and corporate function by providing communications counsel andexecution.
Observations from site visitsSite visits were conducted with a corporation in the high tech electronics andcommunication sector (several visits in August to November 2005), and one in theautomotive manufacturing sector (one visit in September 2005). The two industrysectors are of interest because of their global nature, their economic impact, and theirmaturity as a sector. Each site visit allowed an opportunity to observe and to interviewthe team of corporate communication professionals. All interviews were open-ended andconfidential. Interviews began with a statement that CCI was interested in a“conversation” with them about what they do, what their challenges were, and what theywere proud of – and a clear assurance that their comments would be kept anonymous.
Each corporation was well aware of the daunting challenges of their respectiveindustries. Each was concerned with developing performance measures – one based onthe “balanced scorecard”; and the other a corporate “Image Barometer” and a corporateequity measure. One corporation had a “Manager of Communication Intelligence,” thatwas created to parallel a similar manager of “Market Intelligence,” to collect and analyzeexisting data from inside and outside the company. The goal is to create a single tool tomanage the corporate brand – product brands, reputation, internal communication.
Both companies had professional and effective crisis communication, mediarelations, and corporate citizenship policies and plans. Both chief communicationofficers had created teams of highly talented, motivated, and professional experts whowere cross-trained. Each corporation had a global mind-set and had created aneffective internal network to help one another and to share information.
The chief communication officer and the members of the team in both corporationswere well versed in the company business from R&D to labor relations to the internetand intranet sites. And each had the corporate communication skills that are describedon page 13 above. And members of the teams genuinely liked the work they weredoing, the people they were working with, and the corporation they worked for.
The value of corporate communicationThe corporation is profoundly different than it was a hundred years ago – a vehiclecreated to acquire and manage enough capital so that owners could build the hardwareto run a plant and to maintain a manufacturing operation. Do people who want to makemore money need a corporation with shareholders? There are many successfulcompanies that do not make anything, even though they sell hardware products,because they have got vendors doing it for them. With all the capital markets today,owners do not need the kind of investment in facilities to get more money to expand.
A contemporary corporation is a way of harnessing and focusing human capital.It is capable people with smart ideas, who know how to innovate and run things. It isabout people, and a network of people. Individual corporations are powerful because oftheir alliances.
When there is a question or concern, people expect responsiveness from thecorporation, and speed and transparency in its communications. In a crisis it isthe corporation that has to step up, not its products or brands.
CCIJ11,3
210
The role of corporate communication is fundamental to the success of thecorporation. And successful professional development of the next generation ofcorporate communication executives will focus on understanding of corporatecommunication functions and on strategic implementation.
Note1. The CCI corporate communication practices and trends research study was carried out in
three phases:(1) a 27-question survey that could be completed both on paper or online;(2) additional interviews with respondents who filled out the survey and checked the
box for their willingness to be interviewed; and(3) site visits with corporate communication executives for a deeper investigation into
their philosophy, processes, operations, and performance measures.Survey. The survey asked specific information about the company: business sector, totalsales in US dollars, number of corporate communication staff worldwide, reporting linesfor corporate communication, and the dollar value for corporate communication activitiesrelated to the budget responsibilities indicated in the survey. Demographic questionsabout the chief communication officer were also asked: age, gender, education, salary,company title.
Respondents were also asked to indicate which of 26 functional areas for corporatecommunication were included in their responsibility, and which of the same 26 functionalareas were part of their budget responsibility. They were also asked about their expectedchanges in budget and staff from the previous year. They were asked to indicate in whichof the 26 functional areas they used agencies or vendors in a substantial way From 12possible descriptive phrases, they were asked to rank from 1 to 12 the one that bestdescribed the role of corporate communication in their company. There were also openended questions on the impact of anti-Americanism and terrorism, and transparency onthe practice of corporate communication in their corporation. A final question asked foradditional information or comment.
The 2005 survey was distributed by mail and the cover letter indicated that it wasavailable online with password access. It was mailed directly by name to the chiefcommunication officer of Fortune 1000 companies in March 2005, with a follow-uppostcard reminder in April 2005, a second postcard reminder in May 2005, and a mailingagain in July 2005. Also in May 2005, an additional Email containing the cover letter withinstructions to ask for a paper survey, or to access the online survey, was sent to corporatemembers of the Arthur W. Page Society, a membership organization made up of about 300chief communication officers. The response rate was 9.3 percent. (Compared to the 3.7percent rate from the GAPIII Study, we felt confident in the information we collected).
Interviews. We also completed 16 interviews with those who indicated they wouldparticipate. The interviews consisted of eight open-ended topics. (See the list below onpage 16). They were conducted by telephone and email.
Site visits. For 2005 we conducted two site visits from August to November 2005 with acorporation in the high tech electronics and communication sector, and the other in theautomotive manufacturing sector. Site visits were selected on the basis of industry sectorsthat were undergoing change, or a particular company that was doing innovativeprograms in corporate communication, as well as (most importantly) a corporation thatwas willing to participate by allowing CCI to visit, observe, and interview the corporatecommunication professionals at the corporate site. For example, a corporatecommunication executive from the transportation sector, specifically railroads,expressed a willingness to participate, but scheduling proved to be a major hurdle. Arailroad might seem an anachronism in the twentyfirst century, but the interview revealed
Corporatecommunication
practice
211
some very innovative communication technologies and processes, thus a good candidatefor the site visit.
References
Corporate Communication Institute (2005), Communication Practices and Trends, available at:www.corporatecomm.org/studies
Cripps, K. and Swerling, J. (2005), “The third annual GAP study makes a strong case for PR”,PRWeek, Vol. 8 No. 29, p. 5.
Dolphin, R.R. and Ying, F. (2000), “Is corporate communications a strategic function?”,Management Decision, Vol. 38 Nos 1/2, pp. 99-106.
Goodman, M.B. (2004), “Today’s corporate communication function”, in Oliver, S.M. (Ed.),Handbook of Corporate Communication and Public Relations: Pure and Applied, Routledge,London, pp. 200-27.
Goodman, M.B. (2006), “The role of business in public diplomacy”, Journal of Business Strategy,Vol. 27 No. 3, pp. 5-7.
Ihator, A.S. (2004), “Corporate communication: reflections on twentieth century change”,Corporate Communications, Vol. 9 No. 3, pp. 243-53.
Kitchen, P.J. (1997), “Was public relations a prelude to corporate communications?”, CorporateCommunications, Vol. 2 No. 1, pp. 22-30.
Murray, L. (1976), “Corporate communications – management’s newest marketing skill”, PublicRelations Quarterly, Vol. 21 No. 1, p. 18.
The National Investor Relations Institute (NIRI) (2005), “Center for strategic communicationstudy”, The Strategic Communication Imperative, available at: www.niri.org
The USC Annenberg Strategic Public Relations Center (2004), “The USC Annenberg strategicpublic relations center, 2004 generally accepted practices (GAP) III study”, available at:www.ascweb.usc.edu and www.prfirms.org
Varey, R.J. (1997), “A picture of corporate communications management in the UK”, CorporateCommunications, Vol. 2 No. 2, pp. 59-69.
Further reading
Argenti, P.A. (2007), Corporate Communication, 4th ed., McGraw Hill/Irwin, New York, NY.
Argenti, P.A. (1996), “Corporate communication as a discipline: toward a definition”,Management Communication Quarterly, Vol. 10 No. 1, pp. 73-98.
Eales, R. (1989), “Multinational corporate communications: a growth sector”, MultinationalBusiness, No. 4, p. 28.
Gilsdorf, J.W. (1987), “Written corporate communication policy: extent, coverage, costs, benefits”,The Journal of Business Communication, Vol. 24 No. 4, p. 35.
Goodman, M.B. (1994), Corporate Communication Theory and Practice, SUNY Press, Albany,NY.
Goodman, M.B. (1998), Corporate Communication for Executives, SUNY Press, Albany, NY.
Goodman, M.B. (2000), “Corporate communication: the American picture”, CorporateCommunications, Vol. 5 No. 2, pp. 69-74.
Goodman, M.B. (2005), “Restoring trust in American business: the struggle to changeperception”, Journal of Business Strategy, Vol. 26 No. 4, pp. 29-37.
CCIJ11,3
212
Harris, T.E. and Jennings, B. (1986), “The corporate communication manager”, The Journal ofBusiness Communication, Vol. 23 No. 3, p. 19.
Huang, N. and Keiner, B.H. (2005), “New developments concerning corporate communications”,Management Research News, Vol. 28 No. 10, pp. 57-64.
Lennon, K. and Sheldon, K.A. (1992), “From Canada to California: new directions in corporatecommunication”, Communication World, Vol. 9 No. 1, p. 43.
Oliver, S. and Riley, D. (1996), “Perceptions and practice of corporate communication in smallbusinesses”, Corporate Communications, Vol. 1 No. 2, pp. 12-18.
PR Coalition (2003), “Restoring trust in business: models for action”, White Paper, PR Coalition,available at: www.corporatecomm.org/pdf/PRCoalitionPaper_9_11Final.pdf
Rindova, V.P. (1999), “Competing for the mind: corporate communications and observers’interpretations of specialty coffee chains”, PhD dissertation, New York University,Graduate School of Business Administration, New York.
Steyn, B. (2003), “From strategy to corporate communication strategy: a conceptualisation”,Journal of Communication Management, Vol. 8 No. 2, pp. 168-84.
PR News (2003), “The time has come for the chief communications officer”, PR News, Vol. 59No. 48, p. 1.
Webster, P.J. (1990), “Strategic corporate public relations: what’s the bottom line?”, The PublicRelations Journal, Vol. 46 No. 2, p. 18.
Wright, D.K. (1997), “Perceptions of corporate communication as public relations”, CorporateCommunications, Vol. 2 No. 4, pp. 143-54.
Regina Chen, Yi-Ru (2004), “Effective public affairs in China: MNC-government bargainingpower and corporate strategies for influencing foreign business policy formulation”,Journal of Communication Management, Vol. 8 No. 4, pp. 395-413.
About the authorMichael B. Goodman, PhD is the founder and director of the Corporate Communication Institute,and Professor of Corporate Communication at Fairleigh Dickinson University, serving asdirector of Graduate Programs in Corporate Communication for sixteen years. He has taughtbusiness and corporate communication courses at Bangkok University (Thailand), BaruchCollege CUNY, New York University, New York Institute of Technology, North-easternUniversity, and SUNY at Stony Brook. Since, 1981 Dr Goodman has been a consultant incorporate communication, managerial communication, problem solving, new business proposals,change, and corporate culture. He has published widely, most recently: Work with AnyoneAnywhere: A Guide to Global Business; “Today’s Corporate Communication Function” inHandbook of Corporate Communication and Strategic Public Relations; CorporateCommunication for Executives. He is at work on “While you were looking the other way –forces redefining corporate communication strategy” with Cleve Langton and Peter Hirsch. He isa member of the Arthur W. Page Society, a Fellow of the RSA (The Royal Society for theencouragement of Arts, Manufactures and Commerce), and a Fellow of The Society for TechnicalCommunication. He is VP Eastern Region and Member of the Board of Directors of theAssociation for Business Communication. He received his BA from the University of Texas atAustin, and his MA and PhD from the State University of New York at Stony Brook. MichaelB. Goodman can be contacted at: [email protected]
Corporatecommunication
practice
213
To purchase reprints of this article please e-mail: [email protected] visit our web site for further details: www.emeraldinsight.com/reprints
