Handbook of Corporate Communication and Public ... - Blogs Unpad

their time on communication. Argenti (1998)
argues that most companies’ CEOs ‘should
have a direct link to the corporate communication
function. Without this connection, the
communication function will be much less
effective and far less powerful.’
Van Riel (1995) outlines forms of internal
and external communication that might be
employed in a company and he demonstrates
that communication as a management tool is
used in many areas of the organization other
than PR marketing.
Van Riel (1995) believes that the responsibility
of communication stretches across all
levels of an organization including senior,
middle and junior management who use
communication to achieve desired results,
and he states that externally, management
especially the CEO has to be able to accommodate
the vision of the company in order to
win support of external stakeholders (Figure
6.4). Emphasizing the importance of communication
to the success of an organization,
Van Riel (1995) states that ‘communication is
too vital for organisational success to leave
it solely to managers’ and he argues that
experts in communication at various levels
and in various areas of expertise may be
required and that ‘general managers should
never consider hiring communication experts
as the panacea of organisational communication’.
Van Riel (1995) continues this view by
stating that
CorpCom is primarily corporate; it only
subsequently encompasses communication;
that is to say communication specialists
must focus initially on the problems of
the organisation as a whole (corpus) and
only subsequently should they look at
implicit and explicit functions of communication
with respect to contributions to the
realization of the company’s objectives.
No academic research could be found that
specifically addresses the roles of the board
of directors in this important field, especially
as all CorpCom writers address the external
issues, the impacts on CorpCom strategies,
policy, image, identity and reputation (Oliver,
Van Riel, Argenti). Listed companies governance
structures offer two options of the position
of the Chairperson and CEO as being held
jointly or separately. Where joint Chairperson/
CEO is concerned we see that Argenti (1998)
cites the management reporting structure to
the CEO, and where the chairperson is also
the CEO (in listed enterprise) there is obviously
a governance issue to be addressed – yet
there appears to be no literature to examine
this. Dolphin (1999) addressing corporate
abstention touches on an apparent common
approach by companies (listed) in relation
to meeting the communication need when he
says that some corporations ignore their
publics altogether: ‘This approach (clearly
stemming from the top) may demonstrate the
general perception of the CEO and the executive
committee of the communication function.
It also demonstrates the corporate view
of the level of power of strategic communication’
(Dolphin, 1999).
Werther, Kerr and Wright (1995) argue that
a key impediment to effective and relevant
governance activity may be the CEO who generally
controls the information flow to the
board and its agenda.
Even if board members pursue an activist
approach to their responsibilities, their ability
to do so is bounded in large measure by
the CEO’s control over the amount and
type of information they receive. Where
the CEO also chairs the board of directors,
control extends to the conduct of board
meetings. Although the board technically
has the ultimate power to sack the CEO or
© 2004 Sandra Oliver for editorial matter and selection;
individual chapters, the contributors