2010 - Public Relations Society of America

effective company management, increased transparency of the connections between
building effective public relationships with achieving organizational goals (particularly
the bottom line), and trust in the organization-publics relationship all achieved through
“real client” relationship instruments. (For a synopsis of organization-public relationship
research published between 1985 and 2004, see Ki & Shin, 2006.)
Public Relations Power, Leadership Styles, and Organizational Culture
Examining leadership styles and their power/influence to enhance public relations
excellence is crucial to this study. Berger and Reber (2006) define power and influence as
“the ability to get things done by affecting the perceptions, attitudes, beliefs, opinions,
decisions, statements, and behaviors of others” (p. 5). Drawing from this definition, the
power-control perspective (Berger, 2005, 2007; Dozier & L. A. Grunig, 1992; L. A.
Grunig, 1992; Plowman, 1998) suggests that leaders will set up organizational structures
that merely satisfice, and beyond that make decisions based on their own interests in
power/control. Although public relations practitioners with power in the dominant
coalition can best influence the organization’s worldview of public relations (L. A.
Grunig et al., 2002), they sometimes risk co-opting their professional voice and values
(Berger, 2007; Holtzhausen, 2000, 2007; Holtzhausen & Voto, 2002), and may need to
resist usual power structures (Berger & Reber, 2007; Holtzhausen, 2007; Holtzhausen &
Voto, 2002) to gain additional power and influence to accomplish organizational goals
(Hay & Hartel, 2000) and give voice to less powerful publics (Karlberg, 1996).
Although authoritarian leadership is not conducive to excellent public relations (J.
E. Grunig, 1992), relatively little research has further explored types of leadership styles
that most effectively contribute to an organization’s public relations excellence.
Exceptions include Aldoory and Toth (2004), who found strong preference among
practitioners for transformational style combined with employment of situational (a
combination of transformational and transactional) style in more turbulent times, and
McCown (2005a, 2006), who found strong connections between transformational
leadership style and internal public relations excellence.
One emerging leadership style theory explored transformational leaders who
recognized follower needs beyond transactional exchanges (Burns, 1978). Bass (1985)
argued that these leaders “can move those influenced to transcend their own self-interest
for the good of the group, organization, or country” (p. 15). Ultimately, “transformational
leadership is closer to the prototype of leadership that people have in mind when they
describe their ideal leader and is more likely to provide a role model with which
subordinates want to identify” (Bass, 1990a). Yukl (2002) described behaviors that most
often draw followers to such leaders, including unconventional behavior in order to
accomplish a vision; willingness to self-sacrifice or risk personally for the vision; and use
of persuasive or “visioning” appeals rather than authority or participative decisionmaking
processes. Other charismatic leader behaviors sway follower attitudes/behaviors,
such as articulating appealing vision; strongly communicating vision; communicating
high expectations; expressing follower confidence; modeling behaviors consistent with
vision; building organization identification; and empowering followers (p. 244). These
leaders also influence followers through social identification (employing slogans,
symbols, rituals, ceremonies, or storytelling), internalization, augmentation of individual
and collective self-efficacy, and celebration of reaching organizational goals (Yukl,
174