Download T - WordPress.com

The Role of Marketers in
Corporate Communications Management
Richard J Varey
A Working Paper presented to the Annual Conference of the Marketing Education Group:
“Making Marketing Work”, University of Bradford, July, 1995
Abstract
Where does expertise and responsibility for strategic business communication lie?
Marketing (including publicity) and public relations vie for supremacy since both groups
specialise in communication, using managed communications to pursue their respective
objectives. Convincing arguments for one being subsumed by the other abound. A
clarifying discussion of the often confused vocabulary is the starting point for a review of
the nature and role of publicity and public relations and how they are portrayed in
textbooks. The emerging field of corporate communication and its relationship to PR is
placed in a framework for the integration of corporate strategy, organisational
development, human resource management, and marketing. Corporate communication
has a dominant role in achieving organisational growth, by being concerned with
learning, showing the organisation to itself, and as a mode of organisation.
'Communication' in the business organisation context is reconsidered. The pervasive view
of communication as one-way information transfer to passive audiences is challenged.
Real communication requires a particular attitude and skills and must be a legitimate
priority on a proactive corporate and personal development agenda. Communication is
taken for granted, is a necessary social function of organisation, and doesn't just happen.
It must be both managed and 'mindful'.
Few doubt that PR can help marketing, so now we must ask how marketing can
contribute to corporate communication as a strategic management tool. Corporate
communication is a development of PR which includes marketing communications by
emphasising the integration of specialist skills in communication. The marketer's
contribution is: ensuring a superior 'marketing image'; co-ordinating customer
communications with those of strategic (corporate) communications; expanding their role
beyond promotional messages, mostly one-way; providing communication tools to others
in the organisation.
Considerable attention has been afforded in the academic literature to debating the nature
of the relationship between marketing and public relations. This paper deals with their
respective roles within Corporate Communication Management presents and supports an
argument for the integration of marketing and PR with strategic management as part of a
disciplined corporate communications management tool. The object is to integrate all
company communication and to draw constituent minds together. The particular
contribution which, at least potentially, the marketer can make is highlighted - this
requires a particular perspective in marketing thinking.
Revisiting Some Terminology & Territory
The past 30 years has been witness to considerable attempts at shifting the provincial
boundaries of the fields of marketing and public relations, both in practice and in
theoretical development. The terminology has not been clarified and neither have the
2
arguments for “imperialism and encroachment” (Lauzen, 1991) by either party. Current
literature carries arguments for marketing being subsumed under public relations, and for
public relations being part of marketing communications.
For example, Broom et al (1991) concluded that public relations and marketing use the
same techniques to build and maintain relationships, but that these relationships are
different. Public relations and marketing must therefore work together to achieve
organisational goals, but they draw on fundamentally different philosophies to achieve
their different business missions.
Public relations
Public relations theory and practice are different. According to the Institute of Public
Relations, public relations:
“is the planned and sustained effort to establish and maintain goodwill and
mutual understanding between an organisation and its publics” (in Hart, 1995,
p. 24).
Yet, managers, and even some academics, see PR as press relations, i.e. publicity (= “free
advertising”.
I agree with the view that public relations is:
“the discipline which looks after reputation with the aim of earning
understanding and support and influencing opinion and behaviour” (Beard in
Hart, p. xviii).
“..... PR is the function which builds reputation or corporate image .....” (Hart,
1995, p. 42).
Whether an organisation achieves its objectives can depend on what people think about it,
what it does, and what it says, i.e. on its reputation. PR is not simply ‘press relations’!
According to Jefkins (1984) the PR task is:
“to present untreated credible facts in order to overcome misunderstanding
and the resulting hostility, prejudice, apathy, and ignorance”.
White (1991) sees public relations as much part of management as human resource
management or financial management - the management of relationships between the
organisation and its various ‘publics’: employees, shareholders, customers, and other ‘key
groups’ on which the organisation depends for support and/or understanding.
3
The 1978 ‘Mexican Statement’ from an international gathering of PR societies provides a
broader and more precise description of the role of PR:
“Public relations practice is the art and social science of analysing trends,
predicting their consequences, counselling organisation leaders, and
implementing planned programmes of action which will serve both the
organisation’s and the public interest” (In Jefkins, 1990, p. 181).
Strategic PR identifies and anticipates issues likely to affect key relationships and
responds for the development of those relationships. Thus PR contributes to planning,
cohesion and effectiveness through managed communication with a range of key groups.
If only the practice were like this! This attention to all of the members of the web of
relationships may result in organisational change if current or intended activities, policies,
and plans, do not fit with the needs and expectations of other parties.
Thus public relations must enter White’s planning RACE (White, 1991):
Research  Analysis  Communication (action)  Evaluation
Barich and Kotler (1991) introduced the notion of ‘marketing image’ in an attempt to deal
with the apparent conflict of interest between marketers and PR specialists. This provides
the marketer with a role in managing the corporate identity in order to foster the desired
corporate image.
Kotler (1986) argued that public relations should be part of 'megamarketing', along with
power - the 6 Ps! The marketer takes responsibility for the supply of benefits to parties
other than target consumers, for example, government, unions, or other interested thirdparties, who may act as gatekeepers. This ‘multi-party marketing’ power and public
relations in ‘protected’ markets which the organisation may wish to enter. It is sometimes
necessary to arrange additional incentives, inducements or sanctions to gain desired
responses from groups other than customers. This approach is the strategically coordinated application of economic, psychological, political, and public relations skills to
gain the co-operation of a number of parties in order to enter and/or operate in a given
‘protected’ market. This approach requires co-operation and co-ordination between
marketers, company officers, public relations and public affairs, and legal specialists in
the organisation.
White (1991) disagrees, arguing that PR is a central management concern which
complements marketing communications, and is firmly strategic, forward-looking, and
co-ordinating in scope and nature.
We also need to distinguish between PR and publicity. Publicity is generally considered a
component of marketing communications. And yet Kotler (1994) also places PR with
publicity as part of the marketing communications mix, aimed at “promoting and/or
protecting a company’s image or its individual products “ (p. 596). The tools of PR are
4
then listed as: press kits, speeches, seminars, annual reports, charitable donations,
sponsorships, publications, community relations, lobbying, identity media, company
magazine, and events. Kotler points out that not all PR departments have objectives
which support marketing objectives:
 press relations - attracting attention and providing newsworthy information
 product publicity - promoting the product to a targeted group
 corporate communication - promoting understanding through internal and external
communication
 lobbying - aims to promote or defeat legislation and regulations
 counselling - advising management on public issues, company positions and image
Generally, observes Kotler, marketing managers are concerned with contribution to
profits, whereas PR specialists are likely to be more concerned with producing
communications and creating ‘image’. Riel (1995) provides evidence that corporate
identity and corporate image are often confused, and suggests that the formation, in the
minds of key group members, of latter is strongly influenced by the former. Whilst
marketing communications is tied to product promotion and brand image, PR is broader
and more strategic, being concerned with corporate image. They can use exactly the same
channels of communication, with the essential differences being in the target audiences
and messages.
It is helpful to distinguish corporate PR from marketing PR, the latter of which, like
financial PR and community PR, serves a specific group - in this case, the marketing
department. Kotler sees Marketing Public Relations as a development of ‘publicity’
which moves beyond ‘editorial inches’ to assistance in product launches, repositioning
mature products, promoting product categories, influencing target groups, defending
products under threat, and building corporate image.
Stanton et al (1991) see PR and publicity as neglected, ill-defined parts of the marketing
promotion mix with a ‘bad press’ amongst consumers. They state that publicity is a form
of PR as well as “any promotional communication about an organisation or its products
that is presented by the media but is not paid for by the organisation” (p. 472).
A recently published text from Bradley (1995) defines PR as “any non-personal
communication in the form of news about the company or its products which is carried by
the mass media”. In a book of some 990 pages, PR gets little more than 3 pages. This is
disappointing for a book with such an alluring title! What Bradley describes is closer to
marketing public relations (MPR), but it should be pointed out that MPR is not all ‘nonpersonal’ communication, nor is it only about promotion. Fill (1995) appears to present
marketing communications are part of organisational communications.
Cutlip et al (1985) distinguish corporate PR as:
5
“a function of management seeking to identify, establish and maintain
mutually beneficial relationships between an organisation and the various
publics on whom its success and failure depend”,
whereas marketing PR is:
“not only concerned with organisational success and failure but also with
specific publics: customers, consumers, and clients with whom exchange
transactions take place”.
Mercer (1992) sees PR as the means by which the various significant ‘publics’ of the
organisation are identified and communicated with, to the advantage of the organisation,
through personal and impersonal media. This publicises a positive image of the
company’s achievements and leads to a good reputation. Mercer feels that publicity is the
dominant form of PR activity in practice.
PR is portrayed differently by PR specialists and marketers. I would like to propose that
we consider PR and marketing as having a common objective - both aim to increase the
prosperity of the organisation by improving its reputation. PR takes a wider view of the
place of the organisation in its community and economic, political, and technological
environment, although moves towards ‘social marketing’ (sometimes termed macromarketing) have even blurred this distinction. PR can advise marketing strategy and
methods by providing intelligence on important issues which impact on the business. PR
can also be a major marketing tool for building relationships. White (1994) proposes that
PR is “about creating a more favourable environment in which marketing activities can be
more successful”. To do this adequately, the PR specialist needs adequate general
knowledge of the organisation’s business and the organisation’s role and identity, detailed
knowledge of all plans with a PR impact and/or responsibility, and very clearly defined
‘publics’ (a better term is key groups). Then PR can be professional service which
supports the organisation’s various internal and external communications programmes.
I would even go further to suggest that we can clarify the situation considerably by
thinking of PR as organisational communication (van Riel, 1995). This view has also
been expressed by Jefkins (1984):
“public relations is concerned with disseminating knowledge in order to
create understanding of an organisation and its products and services. It is not
about creating favourable images or persuading people to buy. It deals with
the real world where things are not always favourable, and it leaves
promotion to the advertising experts”.
“every function of a business, from top to bottom, is involved in
communications. Public relations is not limited to the marketing function”.
6
Broom et al (1991) see PR as “the management process whose goal is to attain and
maintain accord and positive behaviours among social groupings on which an
organisation depends in order to achieve its mission. Its fundamental responsibility is to
build and maintain a hospitable environment for an organisation” (p. 223).
Marketing communications
We can contrast Broom et al (1991) who see marketing as:
“the management process whose goal is to attract and satisfy customers ..... on
a long-term basis in order to achieve an organisation’s economic objectives.
Its fundamental responsibility is to build and maintain a market for an
organisation’s products and services” (p. 223-4).
For Jefkins (1990) marketing communications consists of every form of communication
relevant to marketing and “requires attention to every aspect of the marketing strategy
where communication occurs”. Grunig (1992) supports the view that whilst strategic
public relations is a two-way form of communication, much of marketing
communications in practice is one-way, with little or no feedback or interaction. Most
textbooks use the term promotion to describe a communication process which is mostly
one-way, thus much of marketing communications is about promotion of both the
organisation and its offerings.
Marketing is a special form of communication which aims to adapt the company’s
offering to the customer’s needs and wants. Marketing communications has the role of
converting prospects into customers and retaining existing customers. Thus it includes
every form of communication relevant to marketing, i.e. all communications channels and
media that can help to move a potential customer from ignorance to decision and
purchase, and inform and remind existing customers:
Ignorance  Awareness  Interest  Evaluation  Trial  Adoption
Most advocates of relationship marketing readily recognise the centrality of 'good
communication', but may be less clear on how this is constituted. It is mostly seen as
promotion of a product or service that has already been developed (Crosier in Baker,
1991, p. 348).
In its widest sense, marketing communications can be employed as the process by which:





Persuasive information is transmitted
Participative decision-making is fostered
Programmes are co-ordinated
Power is exercised
Commitment and loyalty to each other are encouraged
7
Marketing communications contributes to business profit objectives by creating sales and
market share through creating awareness and changing perceptions. Users of the
promotion concept (Shimp, 1993) attempt to adapt the customer to the marketer’s needs
and wants through persuasive communications (messages designed to enhance the
customer’s impressions of the basic offer, delivered via advertising, publicity, and
personal selling - ‘promotion’ comes from the Latin promovere meaning to move forward
(Shimp, 1993, p. 8)) and promotional inducements (free samples, discounts, etc.). Most
marketers therefore need to use both the marketing concept and the promotion concept to
achieve their aims.
However, the various 'communications' models adopted in the marketing literature have
applied a very limited part of an extensive communication theory, and are essentially oneway information transfer mechanisms based on the stimulus-response model. For
example, Kotler (1994, p. 602) seems to favour one of the popular(ist) linear cause-effect
models:
Exposure  Reception  Cognitive response  Attitude  Intention  Behaviour
(thinking)
Even in the services marketing literature, which claims that services have a special nature
and therefore require special treatment, the role of communications strategy is stressed as
to inform, persuade, or remind customers. But there are at least 9 models of human
communication readily available in the literature (see McQuail and Windahl, 1993;
Fisher, 1993; and Clampitt, 1991, for the development of interactive communication
models).
The mechanistic perspective, in which communication is viewed primarily as a
persuasive information transmission event (i.e. promotion), often one-way and only
sometimes with feedback, is favoured in marketing texts. Several popular models of
communication do however include a feedback loop, e.g. customer communication and
satisfaction measurement. This appears to suggest that communication is done to the
customer by the supplier, and that feedback is a response to the stimulus - but this is not a
sharing of ideas. Students do not always recognise that models stress some very
simplified and general notions, and can impair consideration of the inherent complexity,
context and change within a situation. This seems to occur in most texts which discuss
communication with customers where the author means sending persuasive messages 'to'
customers!
Are marketers communicators or promoters - do we make a clear distinction? I think not,
in most cases. According to Coulson-Thomas (1986, quoted in Dibb et al, 1994, p. 376):
“The role of promotion ..... is to communicate with individuals, groups or
organisations with the aim of directly or indirectly facilitating exchanges by
8
informing and persuading one or more of the audiences to accept the firm’s
products”.
Marketing channel problems are caused primarily by communications difficulties. Calls
for "more communication", "improved communication", and "open communication" are
simplistic and may be inappropriate in building a stronger relationship, for example if
threats or other forms of coercive power are conveyed. Rarely do marketing texts really
deal with the 'what' and 'how' of human relationships.
The total configuration of the organisation undoubtedly exerts a strong influence on the
characteristics of communication within it. Fisher (1993, p. 3) goes further:
"To a large extent, an organisation is communication".
Frequency, direction, medium, and content are important facets of communication in both
communications theory and organisation theory. ‘Communication strategy’ (Mohr and
Nevin, 1990) to refers to a particular combination of these facets and suggest that the
appropriate strategy for a relational situation would be:




High frequency (the amount of contact that is required to conduct activities
adequately)
Highly bi-directional (flowing both upward and downward between the parties, who
may differ in their relative power - and laterally)
Highly indirect (designed to change the target's beliefs and attitudes about the
desirability of an intended behaviour, rather than implying or requesting a specific
action that the source wants the target to take - a promise or recommendation is an
example of a direct communication strategy)
Highly informal (perceived as spontaneous and non-regularised, rather than
regularised and structured).
This combination of facets has been called 'collaborative' communication strategy, and is
contrasted with 'autonomous' communication strategy. This collaborative communication
strategy is expected to produce enhanced outcomes, initially in terms of satisfaction, then
impacting on quantitative measures such as performance, when relational rather than
market structures are present. This may be associated with supportive climates and
symmetrical power conditions.
There is an enlightened view! Shimp (1993) states that “marketing communications
represents the collection of all elements in an organisation’s marketing mix that
facilitates exchanges by establishing shared meaning with the organisation’s customers
.....” (p. 8) (emphasis added). “Whereas promotion management is restricted to
communications undertaken by the subset of mechanisms catalogued under the promotion
variable in the marketing mix, marketing communications is a general concept that
encompasses communications via all of the marketing mix variables” e.g. product, price,
placement, as well as promotion (p. 9).
9
Even the Chartered Institute of Marketing has confused communication and promotion
and taken a mechanistic perspective:
“communication is a critical part of marketing and the promotional tools are
the heart of the marketer’s toolbox” (Marketing Success examination guide,
1993).
Integrated marketing communications
The notion of integrated marketing communications first aimed to achieve uniformity
across all text and visual modes of communication to create a cumulative effect. Thus all
external agencies would be required to discuss their respective approaches at least with
their client, if not with other agencies. Later, integration was seen as integration of all
messages by bringing them to the attention of all key groups.
The current thinking, by Schultz et al (1992), and Smith (1993), is that integrated
marketing communications is about integration of content and form for all commercial
messages, aimed at increasing the effectiveness and efficiency of the company’s total
communication effort. The final image in the mind of the target group must be coherent
and consistent. This requires careful co-ordination during the initial planning if synergy is
to be created.
There has been, in recent years, growing demand from several quarters, including from
within the growing numbers of marketing communications specialisms, for 'integrated
marketing communications'. This aims for synergy between the various specialist
marketing communications functions from integrating the media and techniques of PR
and publicity, advertising, sales, direct mail, sales promotion, telemarketing, internal
communications, etc. (Schultz et al, 1992; Linton and Morley, 1995) - but this call is not
new (Turnbull, 1974). A number of benefits accrue from channelling all marketing
programmes through a central co-ordinator, to be handled by a single marketing
communications agency (Linton and Morley, 1995):










creative integrity
consistency of messages
unbiased marketing recommendations
better use of all media
greater precision
improved operational efficiency
cost savings by removing duplicated effort
high calibre, consistent service
easier working relationships
greater accountability.
10
Truly integrated marketing has all marketing activities integrated around strategic
marketing planning and is thereby integrated with corporate strategic management.
Integrated marketing communications (IMC) is the integration of all the forms of
marketing communications, considered by Jefkins (1990) to be all forms of
communication relevant to marketing.
Shimp (1993) requires that IMC is the co-ordination of the elements of the promotion
mix with each other and with other elements of the marketing mix (p. 10) which are all
communication devices and “all must speak with one voice” (p. 11).
The growing problem facing marketers was stated clearly by Mitchell (1992):
“if seeing things from the consumer’s point of view is their strong point, why
do so many marketers develop communication strategies which ignore the
way consumers consume media?”.
“if two-way relationships are so important, why is it that still, most marketers
place heaviest emphasis on TV and press advertising which are essentially
one-way message systems?”.
Integrated marketing looks at the media from the consumer’s point of view. All potential
communication channels leverage each other through co-ordination. Sales promotion,
advertising, publicity, etc. ‘sing from the same song sheet’ and this requires a teamworking approach from the start. In practice “every company is inevitably cast into the
role of communicator and promoter” (Kotler, 1994, p. 596). Kotler recognises, however,
that whilst communication is described as something done with customers, it seems to
boil down in practice to “what to say, to whom, and how often” (op. cit.).
Corporate communication
Communication is an essential aspect of organisation and management. It can be argued
that organisation is simply structured communication and that responsibility lies with
management for constructing and maintaining clear communication channels (Barnard,
1938). Clearly, this is not a new idea - it just hasn’t been mindfully adopted (Langer,
1989).
So what are the communication needs of a business enterprise? I think that they are
essentially centred on decision-making (making choices), relationships (social fabric) and
learning (updating mental models). Information, in the form of hard data (‘facts’), and
peoples’ ideas, feelings, attitudes, and beliefs, must flow within and between co-operating
groups, and across the boundary between the internal and external operating
environments.
11
Internal communication flows will include orders and directives, performance data, and
task instructions. External flows may be outward in the form of promotional messages via
mass communication media, and inward in the form of market information (news, market
research, etc.) about the micro-environment, and economic information (about the macroenvironment).
Information is a raw material in the business organisation which enables ‘managers’ to
make choices in the areas of:






Strategy
Resource utilisation
Resource procurement
Administration
Innovation
Relationships
These are the essential areas for decisions according to Dawson (1992), and are often
identified with particular groups of specialists within the organisation, but are also
influenced by information and opinion from other interested parties.
Beer’s Viable Systems Model (Beer 1979) provides a framework of management
functions onto which communication requirements can be mapped:





Implementation - what the organisation is doing
Co-ordination - co-operation between the parts for the benefit of the whole
Control - guaranteeing internal stability
Policy - sets the organisation’s desired identity, based on creative strategic decisions
Intelligence - selectively provides information for decision-making
The kinds of communication requirements suggested by these two models can be mapped
onto a ‘whole enterprise’ system of inter-related communication flows and channels
which have become identified with the established functions of business organisation:
?
External key groups
on non-marketing
problems: e.g.
 litigation
 investment
 labour
 regulation &
legislation
 environment
?
Market research
Customer
relationship
management
Integrated marketing
communications
Internal
relationships
(internal marketing)
?
Training &
development
Involvement
Localised action
planning
12
?
Mission & strategy
Performance
measurement
Competitive
position
Internal key group employees
I have intentionally left blank the column headings to see if distinct categories can be
discerned by the associations I have implied by grouping these communication flows.
All communication
by (senior)
managers which
affects access to
required resources,
e.g. planning,
decision-making,
negotiation,
supporting
CORPORATE
STRATEGY
Product advertising
Sales promotions
Direct mail
Sponsorship
Personal selling
Exhibitions
Public relations
Public affairs
Investor relations
Corporate advertising
Internal communication
Environmental
Labour market
Figure 1: Map of management, organisational, and marketing communications
Figure 1 is based on van Riel’s definition of the field of corporate communication (Riel,
1995). This locates PR within organisational communication and publicity within
marketing communications. Importantly, corporate communication is defined as:
“an instrument of management by means of which all consciously used forms
of internal and external communication are harmonised as effectively and
efficiently as possible, so as to create a favourable basis for relationships with
groups on which the company is dependent” (Riel, 1995, p. 26).
Corporate communication is a management process - the glue that binds together the
organisation’s parts in pursuit of an enterprise. Goodman (1994) describes corporate
communication as the total managed corporate effort (discipline) to communicate
effectively and profitably in a co-ordinated, structured, skilled manner with a clear policy
and capability enhancement focus, using a wide variety of management activities to make
information accessible and to involve stakeholders in mutually beneficial activities.
This is distinct from corporate communications which are the communication events or
vehicles which convey an individual’s position on an issue or provide information which
results in learning. White (1991) argues that communication is the action phase of public
relations. Thinking must shift away from corporate communications as messages devised
13
and sent by senior management to inform, persuade, and motivate others, as a single
element of the total communication mix, to a view that corporate communication is the
co-ordinated total communication effort of the organisation, i.e. the total managed
communication mix. Corporate communication is the co-ordination of integrated
marketing communications, integrated public relations, and management communication
as symbolic action , i.e. “explanations, rationalisations, and legitimation for the activities
undertaken in the organisation” (Pfeffer, 1981).
This approach can be related to Beer’s VSM as corporate communication is researched
(intelligence), planned (policy), co-ordinated (co-ordination), actioned (implementation),
and evaluated (control). Corporate communications are managed through carefully
constructed and regularly reviewed systems of information dissemination, face-to-face
debate on key business issues, and team-based problem-solving with sharing throughout
the organisation of day-to-day learning on how best to deal with the operating
environment, including all stakeholders’ needs and expectations for improved
performance. The components recognisable from traditional communication thinking are:
management communications (internal and external communication by those authorised
to exert influence on stakeholders, affecting access to resources essential to the
organisation), organisational communications, and marketing communications (see Fig.
1).
O'Hair and Friedrich (1992) define organisational communication as:
"the exchange of oral, non-verbal, and written messages within (and across
the boundaries of) a system of interrelated and interdependent people working
to accomplish common tasks and goals".
The concept of corporate communications management as a system of planned, measured
communication efforts is akin to the creation of a ‘corporate intelligence’, and is
uncannily comparable with Kelley’s (1968) proposals for the introduction of a marketing
intelligence system, with major benefits which include:
 Help in expanding time horizons in decision-making and planning
 Recognises and responds to increasing complexity in decision-making as known and
unknown factors and their interdependent relationships multiply
 Handles the proliferation of data in the ‘Information Age’
 Protects management from specialists’ distortions, filtering, etc.
 Offsets the tendency for top management to become divorced from reality
 Opens up new and better sources of information
 Allows creative intelligence functions
 Provides responsibility for communication and aids the organisation in its
communication
Gayeski (1993) has defined corporate communications as:
14
"the professional practice of developing and implementing communication
rules and tools in order to enhance the dissemination, comprehension,
acceptance, and application of information in ways that will help to achieve
an organisation's goals".
This is a much broader and deeper view than the traditional view of the communications
field. The professional communicator of the future will necessarily have to master the
deployment of complex techniques and technologies of internal and external
communication in order to become a ‘knowledge manager’ (Jensen, 1994) if their
organisation is to succeed.
The idea of managed corporate communications with policy and responsibility is a
recognition of the need to co-ordinate organisational communications, educational
technology, organisation development, telecommunications systems, technical writing
and publications, information science, PR, and the mass media. Information exchange is
increasing in demand, importance, and specialisation. Many areas of communication flow
are clearly beyond the boundaries of customer groups: public affairs, employee
communications, training & development, documentation, IT, corporate media,
advertising & marketing, policies & procedures, and library & information systems.
What is required is managed strategic communication (O’Hair and Friedrich, 1992, p. 26)
which is characterised by:






Goal setting
Situational knowledge
Communication competence
Control of anxiety
Information
Organisational growth & change
Corporate communications management sets out and drives formal, official systems and
practices for communication and is concerned with co-ordinating all managed
communication in interdependent relationships to contribute strategically to overall
corporate performance and capability enhancement.
Gayeski (1993) has suggested a range of reasons that organisations communicate. These
fall into categories of HRM, sales & marketing, stakeholder relations, co-ordination and
decision-making, organisational development. Communication is the primary activity of
an organisation - information is processed to reduce uncertainty and to co-ordinate actions
in order to achieve goals - frequent and effective communication is a necessity when tasks
vary, employees are inter-dependent, and the environment is uncertain.
Corporate communicators are essentially concerned with:
15
 Internal communications - in-house publications, meetings, displays, management
information systems, e-mail
 External communications - advertising, public affairs, annual reports, customer
communications, community relations
 Performance improvement - feedback and incentive systems, expert systems, job aids,
information retrieval systems, work redesign, human and computer interfaces
Communication and Relationships
Are marketers always clear about what they mean and intend by the term
‘communication’? Communication allows the exchange of meanings and depends on
contact and feedback from the recipient. Without this, and the resulting behaviour change,
there is no real communication.
Kreps (1986, p. 5) defines communication as:
"the process that enables people to co-orient their behaviours ..... [and]
empowers people to establish functional interpersonal relationships that allow
them to work together toward goal attainment."
Further, communication and relationship are co-dependent:
"any communication implies commitment and thereby defines the sender's
view of his relationship with the receiver" (Watzlawick et al, in Corner and
Hawthorn, 1980, p. 25).
To get a sense of what Cherry means by 'communication' we should consider his view
that a group can be defined as 'people in communication' (Cherry, in Corner and
Hawthorn, 1980, p. 9):
"communication means a sharing of elements of behaviour or modes of life,
by the existence of sets of rules" (op cit., p. 12) (emphasis added).
Penman (1980) believes that:
"communication is an act of participation in a relationship" (p. 1).
Fisher (1978) sees:
".... communication as an act of 'participation' or 'entering' a communication
system or relationship ... " and "... communication as a process of
interrelating".
16
When two or more people make behavioural exchanges (through a process of
communication), then integration as a group can arise. This is through a dynamic process
of ongoing interrelationships between members of the group.
According to Penman, individuals may interact with others, but they do not
'communicate' with them, they engage in communication or are part of the process of
communication (1980, p. 2). Individuals do not originate communication, they participate
in it (Watzlawick et al, 1967) - they are an aspect of it. Relationships are constituted in an
ongoing process of exchanges. The communication process is the 'how' whilst the
relationship is the 'what' and can only be deduced from the flow of exchanges. Penman
evens argues that communication can occur without interaction (p. 124), and concludes
that to be meaningful, the study of human communication must recognise the multifaceted, hierarchical and concatenous nature which both constitutes and is constituted by
all human systems.
Cherry (1978), in discussing communication and organisation, is clear that "true
communication" is cyclical with continual stimulus-response between two individuals
whose behaviour becomes concerted, co-operative, and directed toward the same goal. He
states that "one-way communication is not strictly true communication", arguing that this
is so because it is not co-operative. Often when speaking of communication we have in
mind data transfer, rather than 2-way conversation in which thoughts are interchanged in
dialogue, which implies that either or both party may change their attitude or learn.
Communication cannot take place without learning.
"Some people erroneously think that communication is a tool,
something to be turned off and on at will, to be used or not. Such a
view is short-sighted" (Wilmot, 1987, p. 12).
Relationship definitions and communication episodes reciprocally frame one another.
Communication is interpreted in the light of the relationship, and relationships are judged
according to the episodic events that unfold. Metcalf (1976) describes communicative
integration as a key variable in inter-organisation relationships. Relational
communication (Ruesch and Bateson, 1951) is an exchange comprising content (the
message) and a statement about the implied relationship between the participants.
Bennis et al (1968) made predictions about tendencies toward effective information
sharing about task and maintenance issues in the four types of relationship they described.
Type of Relationship
Attitudes to Information sharing
17
Friendly co-operation
Antagonistic competition *
Friendly competition *
Antagonistic co-operation *
High trust orientation promotes risktaking in raising difficult issues; cooperative orientation motivates team
working - striving and sharing together free & open, constructive discussion of
differences over task and maintenance of
the relationship (win-win)
Low willingness to deal with issues due to
low trust - little information sharing since
this could hurt one by helping the other any information shared is calculated to
mislead or distort (win-lose)
Information sharing may mean a lost
advantage (lose-win)
Negative feelings and mistrust - task
motivation could become less important
than desires to get out of the relationship
or to protect one's self from the other parties find it difficult to share
information due to tensions generated by
working together (lose-lose)
* according to Nye (1975) "any competition contains the seed for mutual hostility".
A major precursor of trust is communication, defined by Anderson and Narus (1990, p.
44) as "the formal as well as informal sharing of meaningful and timely information
between firms". Timely communication fosters trust when the source is credible (Morgan
and Hunt, 1994, p. 24), and by assisting in resolving disputes and aligning perceptions
and expectations.
"Relationships characterised by trust are so highly valued that parties will
desire to commit themselves to such relationships" (Hrebiniak, quoted in
Morgan and Hunt, 1994, p. 24).
Relational competence is a function of the appropriateness and effectiveness of
communication behaviours (Spitzberg and Cupach, 1984, cited in Wilmot, 1987).
"The management of the separate (communication) transactions is the single
most important determiner of the quality of the relationship" (Wilmot, 1987,
p. 222).
This requires attention to communication mindfulness, apprehension and conversational
skills to ensure personal effectiveness in initiating, maintaining, and terminating
individual transactions.
18
The professional communicator faces two major problems. Firstly, ‘communication’ is
still being taken for granted (Gayeski, 1993). We all fail to review our communication
behaviour because we believe that we are good communicators - it’s the stock-in-trade of
the manager and the marketer - so it must the receiver that is at fault! If we succumb to
pressures for communication improvement, we concentrate on skills training but do little
to deal with communication attitudes. Secondly, our language lacks precision when
speaking of 'communication ' - what is actually practised is one-way information
transmission to promote an idea or call for action favoured by one party and persuade the
second party to act in a way desired by the first party.
Communication is the process in which verbal and non-verbal symbols are exchanged
between two or more persons, i.e. a negotiation of shared meaning. It is systematic,
interactional, transactional - the use of symbol systems to share meaning and information.
The sharing of meaning implies the transmission of information. - but, one-way
information transmission is selling/persuading rather than marketing which requires
dialogue (two-way communication) to create mutual understanding.
The Marketer’s Contribution
Marketers should recognise that joining the corporate communication fold is a major
opportunity for them to achieve a central role for marketing management. There is still
the problem that whilst marketing is described as a key management process, it is often
the case that the conditions of possibility are set by others who have not adopted the
marketing concept. We can do this by pursuing integrated marketing communications in
co-operation with corporate communication policy, by pursuing the application of the
marketing concept to ensure appropriate basic offerings, and the promotional concept to
effect ‘profitable’ exchanges.
It is time to shift our thinking away from the still prevailing focus on persuasive
promotional messages alone to relationship management by recognising interdependence
with other ‘non-customer’ groups. This must be based on a corporate intelligence system
which helps the organisation to adapt to meet the needs of its customers whilst
recognising the interests and concerns of, and impact of decisions and actions on, all key
groups. Marketers should carefully segment their key groups, so that they can identify
with them and so co-ordinate with, and be consistent with, the creation of a strong
corporate identity which produces the desired overall corporate image. This requires
collaboration with PR specialists about common goals and interests, through joint
planning and linked performance measures. The marketing specialist should be
contributing information to co-ordinated communications to key groups other than
‘markets’, for example via the organisation’s annual report/AGM, and market research
which delves deeper than product preferences and purchase intentions.
19
The marketer also has a responsibility to manage the organisation’s ‘marketing image’,
that is, how the various key groups view the important attributes of the company’s
performance (Barich and Kotler, 1991). This responsibility is subsumed under corporate
image management, but is broader than product and brand image management
responsibilities. The marketer must be aware of the complex and dynamic product of
beliefs, attitudes, and feelings created by the impressions of the company’s marketing
policy and behaviour.
Co-ordination of marketing communications with managerial and organisational
communications is necessary as part of corporate communication, and this requires cooperation and collaboration at the early stages of marketing planning.
Marketing managers are also encouraged to take responsibility for ensuring a marketing
orientation in the organisation, to ensure market-oriented strategic management: meeting
customer needs, wants, and expectations at a profit is central to decision-making; the
organisation of marketing management and operations is appropriate for the marketing
and general business environment and the personality of the organisation; marketing
information is timely, relevant, and available to advise corporate decision-making;
managers have a long-term customer and competitor focus; marketing planning and
operations are efficient and effective. Clearly, communication is an issue for each of these
requirements for marketing effectiveness.
The provision of communication tools and skills to others in the organisation, such as
techniques of market research, advertising (inc. direct mail (inc. e-mail)), publicity, and
personal selling, is a key role for marketing specialists. They should be training line
managers in a range of approaches for gathering attitudinal knowledge about how their
business actually works, and for changing attitudes, and turning detached, frustrated
workers into ‘part-time marketers’, and consumers into long-term loyal and satisfied
customers.
Of course, marketers should also be improving their own understanding of public affairs
and issues management, in order to make a competent contribution to the development of
relationships with the range of key groups.
There remains for now, the problem of 'marketing' being equated with promotion of a
product or service to external parties - consumers, intermediaries, sales force, etc. - often
with one-way information transmission - marketers need to think and practice relationship
management - this requires interactive communication as dialogue.
It is still true that much of what goes under the title 'marketing communications' is
actually one-way message transmission, therefore is not true communication (i.e.
interactional). Marketing texts, courses, and behaviour needs to incorporate the view that
communication is a dialogue and is not simply about firing ‘persuasive arrows’ at
customers (Clampitt, 1991). Integrated marketing communications should be integrated
into the overall corporate communication policy to ensure that the range of marketing
20
communications methods are available to the organisation to persuade people to act by
creating coherent impressions which shape their opinions.
The obvious distinction between marketing communications and corporate
communication is that the former is part of the external element of the latter. But with
internal marketing, the marketer's philosophy of business and tools of communication are
utilised inside the organisation - marketing principles are applied to internal
communications programmes. Internal marketing requires two-way communication rather
than one-way promotion - marketers are responsible for pushing the voice of the customer
and the marketing philosophy and related tools and techniques into all parts of the
organisation’s thinking and activity - there must be a widely understood link between the
what and the why of the organisation’s existence, and business objectives must be aligned
with the personal needs and wants of all organisation members, and not just those of the
senior management group.
There is an important role for marketers in change management, to ensure that the
organisation is willing to consider the need, and is capable, for adapting what it does to
meet the changing needs of customers. Thus marketers also have a role in managed
internal communication, and the application of an internal marketing model of
communication which aims to align business and personal needs and wants is gaining
popularity. Internal marketing is a co-ordination of marketing, human resource (including
recruitment and training) and organisation development management to design and
operate processes for responsive joint learning amongst specialist groups since many
‘internal customers’ are also ‘part-time marketers’ (Gummesson, 1991).
Marketing communications and behaviour have a major role in forming, and
confirming/disconfirming, perceptions of quality - marketers should be encouraged to see
themselves as involved in the quality management process throughout the stages of
customer quality perception formation - quality perceptions are formed when recipients of
promotional messages compare the experience of product/service delivery with what they
believe was promised.
A Tentative View on the ‘State-of-the-Art’?
There is a growing recognition of the need to respond to the realisation of multiple
interconnected stakeholder groups and interrelationships between the various and
proliferating external and internal channels of communication which are used to address
them with a relationship orientation.
Marketing communications is often described as including PR, and yet its aim, as widely
practised, is primarily promotion and persuasion. Many PR specialists, on the other hand,
claim a counselling, policy development, and environmental scanning role. Managers
have three major concerns: the internationalisation of business; environmentalism; and
social responsibility. It is hard to see how PR as a sub-function of marketing management
21
can deal with these issues adequately. Much general practice in marketing
communications is not appropriate for the corporate communication role of building
aligned and consistent relationships with multiple stakeholder groups. Few doubt that PR
can help marketing, so now we must ask how marketing can contribute to corporate
communications as a strategic management concern? Perhaps marketing and PR can be
integrated with strategic management as part of the disciplined corporate communications
management tool which integrates all company communication and draws all constituent
minds together. As well as promoting a marketing orientation in which all organisation
members feel connected with the “management process responsible for identifying,
anticipating and satisfying customer requirements profitably” (CIM definition of
marketing), marketers can contribute to the co-ordination of total communication effort at
all stages of preparing for and effecting exchanges, as well as helping to develop lasting
and satisfying relationships, for further exchanges. Since marketing and public relations
philosophies each seek to create awareness, understanding and favourable perceptions of
the organisation and its product/brand, they will come together in developing behavioural
intent which converts to repeat purchase - whether it be the product itself or the notion of
a positive relationship with the particular supplier. This can be enabled and facilitated by
the corporate communications management perspective which is emerging.
Multi-disciplinary team-working, which must always involve those who do not claim to
be marketing experts, can provide profitable solutions directly for their external
customers, and also for their internal customers in support of their own external
customers. In this sense marketing communication includes internal communication.
Marketing specialists are beginning to act as internal consultants and facilitators of valueadding relationships between organisation members, suppliers, customers, and
intermediaries. They must co-operate and collaborate with the corporate communication
effort to achieve profitable strategic business relationship management, and recognise that
they must keep communication strictly human to align internal and external customers’
needs. The approach will foster co-ordinated, consistent statements, decisions, priorities,
intentions, aims, and behaviour. This will help to release and mobilise the corporate
knowledge, and personality, and the linkage between individual and collective intent,
effort, and performance.
Corporate communication is in its infancy as an academic discipline, and practice is
clearly leading theoretical developments. There is confusion over the central concepts, as
well as confusion over the scope and nature of integrated marketing communications,
internal marketing, and public relations. What is required is a body of documented and
rigorously analysed knowledge of good practice and lessons learned in attempting to
integrate the total corporate communications effort, and the distillation and dissemination
of a framework which can guide practitioners, academic researchers, teachers, and
consultants.
Far from fearing subservience to public relations or a new ‘corporate communications’
discipline, and feeling the need to compete or conflict with ‘usurpers’ to the
22
communication throne, marketers should be able to recognise and grasp the lead role as
integrators, communicators (in the widest sense), and relationship managers.
Bibliography
Baker, M J. (ed.) (1991) The Marketing Book, Butterworth-Heinemann
Barich, H. and Kotler, P. (1991) A Framework for Marketing Image Management, Sloan
Management Review, Vol. 32, No 2, pp. 94-104
Barnard, C. (1938) The Functions of the Executive, Harvard University Press
Beer, S. (1979) Diagnosing the System for Organisations, Wiley
Bennis, W G., Schein, E H., Steele, F I. and Berlew, D E. (1968) Interpersonal
Dynamics: Essays and Readings on Human Interaction, The Dorsey Press Inc.
Bradley, F. (1995) Marketing Management: Providing, communicating and delivering
value, Prentice-Hall
Broom, G M., Lauzen, M M. and Tucker, K. (1991) Public Relations and Marketing:
Dividing the Conceptual Domain and Operating Turf, Public Relations Review, Vol. 17,
No. 3, pp. 219-225
Cherry, C. (1980) On Human Communication: A Review, A Survey, and a Criticism, 3rd
Edition, MIT Press
Clampitt, P G. (1991) Communicating for Managerial Effectiveness, sage Publications
Corner, J. and Hawthorn, J. (eds.) (1980) Communication Studies: an introductory
reader, Edward Arnold
Cutlip, S M., Center, A H. and Broom, G M. (1985) Effective Public Relations, 6th
Edition, Prentice-Hall
Dawson, S. (1992) Analysing Organisations, 2nd Edition, Macmillan Press
Dibb, S., Simkin, L., Pride, W M. and Ferrell, O C. (1994) Marketing: Concepts and
Strategies, Houghton Mifflin
Fill, C. (1995) Marketing Communications: Frameworks, Theories and Applications,
Prentice-Hall
Fisher, D. (1978) Communication in Organisations, West Publishing
23
Fisher, D. (1993) Communication in Organisations, 2nd Edition, West Publishing Co.
Gayeski, D. (1993) Corporate Communications Management: The Renaissance
Communicator in Information-Age Organisations, Focal Press
Goodman, M B. (ed.) (1994) Corporate Communication: Theory and Practice, State
University of New York Press
Grunig, J E. (ed.) (1992) Excellence in Public Relations and Communication
Management, Lawrence Erlbaum Associates
Gummesson, E. (1991) Marketing-Orientation Revisited: The Crucial Role of the PartTime Marketer, European Journal of Marketing, Vol. 25, No 2, pp. 60-75
Hart, N. (ed.) (1995) Strategic Public Relations, Macmillan Press
Jefkins, F. (1984) A PR Career for the Business Graduate, Business Graduate,
September, pp. 33-34, Association of MBAs
Jefkins, F. (1990) Modern Marketing Communications, Blackie Academic & Professional
Jensen, B. (1994) A Study of Knowledge Management’s Impact on Corporate Success,
New York: Jensen Communications Group
Kelley, W T. (1968) Marketing Intelligence: The Management of Marketing Information,
Staples Press
Kotler, P. (1986) Megamarketing, Harvard Business Review, March-April, pp. 117-124
Kotler, P. (1994) Marketing Management: Analysis, Planning, Implementation, and
Control, 8th Edition, Prentice-Hall
Kreps, G L. (1986) Organisational Communication, Longmans
Langer, E J. (1989) Mindfulness: Choice and Control in Everyday Life, HarperCollins
Lauzen, M M. (1991) Imperialism and Encroachment in Public Relations, Public
Relations Review, Vol. 17, No. 3, pp. 245-255
Linton, I. and Morley, K. (1995) Integrated Marketing Communications, ButterworthHeinemann
McQuail, D. and Windahl, S. (1993) Communication Models for the Study of Mass
Communication, 2nd Edition, Longman
24
Mercer, D. (1992) Marketing, Blackwell Business Books
Metcalf, J. (1976) Organisational strategies and interorganisational networks, Human
Relations, Vol. 29, pp. 327-343
Mitchell, A. (1992) A Clear Message, Marketing, 17th February, p. xvii
Mohr, J. and Nevin, J R. (1990) Communication Strategies in Marketing Channels: A
Theoretical Perspective, Journal of Marketing, Vol. 54, October, pp. 36-51
Nye, R. (1975) Conflict Among Humans, New York: Springer-Verlag
O’Hair, D. and Friedrich, G W. (1992) Strategic Communication in Business and the
Professions, Houghton Mifflin
Penman, R. (1980) Communication Processes and Relationships, Academic Press
Pfeffer, J. (1981) Management as symbolic action: The creation and maintenance of
organisational paradigms, in Staw, B M. and Cummings, L L. (eds.) Research in
Organisational Behaviour, Vol. 3, pp. 1-53, Greenwich, CT.: JAI
Riel, Van C. (1995) Principles of Corporate Communication, Prentice-Hall
Ruesch, J. and Bateson, G. (1951) Communication: The social matrix of society, Norton
Schultz, D E., Tannenbaum, S I. and Lauterborn, R F. (1993) Integrated Marketing
Communications: Putting It Together & Making It Work, NTC Business Books
Shimp, T A. (1993) Promotion Management & Marketing Communications, 3rd Edition,
Dryden Press
Smith, P R. (1993) Marketing Communications: An Integrated Approach, Kogan Page
Stanton, W J., Etzel, M J. and Walker, B J. (1991) Fundamentals of Marketing, 9th
International Edition, McGraw-Hill
Turnbull, P W. (1974) The Allocation of Resources to Marketing Communications in
Industrial Markets, Industrial Marketing Management, Vol. 3, pp. 297-310
White, J. (1991) How to Understand and Manage Public Relations: A Jargon-Free Guide
to Public Relations Management, Business Books
White, J. and Mazur, L. (1994) Strategic Communications Management: making Public
Relations Work, Addison-Wesley
25
Wilmot, W W. (1987) Dyadic Communication, 3rd Edition, McGraw-Hill
papers/meg95.doc
26