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

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

blogs.unpad.ac.id
from blogs.unpad.ac.id More from this publisher
31.12.2014 Views

Table 20.3 Comparing mean scores between responses from October 2001 and March 2002 Mean scores Levene’s test for t-test for equality equality of variances of means October March F Sig. T Sig. 2001 2002 Question Do you agree the events of September 11, 2001 changed how your company communicates 3.59 3.67 0.533 0.469 0.080 0.937 Do you agree the events of September 11, 2001, have had any impact on your organization’s public relations and communications function 4.03 3.96 1.78 0.188 0.591 0.558 executives. A small minority did not believe the terrorist attacks were having any lasting impact upon corporate communication and public relations. The other three groups included those who suggested the impact of September 11 upon corporate public relations was highly pronounced, respondents who said an impact was evident but moderate, and those who thought that the terrorist attacks had served as a catalyst for change along with other contributing factors – mainly the Enron scandal and the sluggish economy. Those who perceived the impact of September 11 to have been the most prominent were most likely to have been relative newcomers to the position of an organization’s chief PR officer. RQ4 and RQ5: (4) Do senior-level corporate public relations executives believe the events of September 11, 2001 precipitated a paradigm shift advancing communications and public relations into a more significant role in corporate America (5) Are corporate executive teams more aware of the importance of communicating openly, effectively, and in a timely manner since September 11, 2001 There was only moderate agreement and a fair amount of uncertainty in terms of findings to research questions 4 and 5. As Table 20.4 shows, a majority (52 per cent) of the March respondents agreed the September 11 attacks had precipitated a paradigm shift advancing communication and public relations into a more significant role in corporate America. However, 23 per cent disagreed this was the case and 27 per cent were uncertain. There was slightly greater agreement (64 per cent) regarding whether or not corporate executive teams have been more aware of the importance of communicating openly, effectively, and in a timely manner since September 11. Qualitative results A careful examination of open-ended responses combined with the realization of which subjects agreed with these statements and which respondents did not, sheds an interesting and important light on the situation. More than half of those who disagreed with the two questions articulated in Table 20.4, did so mainly because they believe that © 2004 Sandra Oliver for editorial matter and selection; individual chapters, the contributors

Table 20.4 Responses of senior-level, US PR and corporate communication professionals to additional questions in March 2002 (%) Question Strongly Agree Uncertain/ Disagree Strongly Mean agree no opinion disagree Do you agree the September 11, 2001, terrorist attacks precipitated a paradigm shift advancing communications and public relations into a more significant role in corporate America 18 32 27 23 0 3.45 Do you agree your company’s executive teams have been more aware of the importance of communicating openly, effectively, and in a timely manner since September 11, 2001 18 46 14 23 0 3.59 prior to September 11: (1) corporate public relations had established a strong tradition of playing a significant role in their company; and (2) their organization’s executive teams recognized years ago the importance of communicating openly, effectively and in a timely manner. Given the reality, these respondents essentially were not disagreeing with the questions reported on in Table 20.4, the level of agreement actually would be considerably higher – nearly 65 per cent for RQ4 and greater than 75 per cent for RQ5. Furthermore, while taking precautions not to violate the study’s promises of anonymity and confidentiality, it is important to point out that several of those who disagreed with these two questions are very senior-level corporate communication officers who have earned the utmost respect from their professional peers. Essentially, then, their responses to these questions might need to be overlooked. They disagreed with the paradigm shift thesis because corporate public relations already was extremely significant in their organization. And, they disagreed with the executive teams question because that kind of open communication has been taking place in their company for many years. Although this research was conducted with promises of anonymity and confidentiality, several subjects identified their responses and provided additional permission to be quoted directly in results reports. This included five very senior-level corporate public relations professionals. Each of these individuals was asked to provide a direct quote in October 2001 assessing the impact the September 11 terrorist attacks were having on their jobs. The same five senior-level professionals were asked to review their quotes in March 2002 and explain how, if at all, their opinions might have changed. Quotes from these five professionals follow. Bill Nielsen, Corporate Vice President, Public Affairs and Corporate Communications, Johnson & Johnson October 2001 My company’s employee communications came to the forefront following September © 2004 Sandra Oliver for editorial matter and selection; individual chapters, the contributors

Table 20.4 Responses <strong>of</strong> senior-level, US PR <strong>and</strong> corporate communication pr<strong>of</strong>essionals to additional<br />

questions in March 2002 (%)<br />

Question Strongly Agree Uncertain/ Disagree Strongly Mean<br />

agree no opinion disagree<br />

Do you agree the September 11, 2001,<br />

terrorist attacks precipitated a paradigm<br />

shift advancing communications <strong>and</strong><br />

public relations into a more significant<br />

role in corporate America 18 32 27 23 0 3.45<br />

Do you agree your company’s executive<br />

teams have been more aware <strong>of</strong> the<br />

importance <strong>of</strong> communicating openly,<br />

effectively, <strong>and</strong> in a timely manner since<br />

September 11, 2001 18 46 14 23 0 3.59<br />

prior to September 11: (1) corporate public<br />

relations had established a strong tradition <strong>of</strong><br />

playing a significant role in their company;<br />

<strong>and</strong> (2) their organization’s executive teams<br />

recognized years ago the importance <strong>of</strong> communicating<br />

openly, effectively <strong>and</strong> in a timely<br />

manner. Given the reality, these respondents<br />

essentially were not disagreeing with the<br />

questions reported on in Table 20.4, the level<br />

<strong>of</strong> agreement actually would be considerably<br />

higher – nearly 65 per cent for RQ4 <strong>and</strong><br />

greater than 75 per cent for RQ5. Furthermore,<br />

while taking precautions not to violate<br />

the study’s promises <strong>of</strong> anonymity <strong>and</strong> confidentiality,<br />

it is important to point out that several<br />

<strong>of</strong> those who disagreed with these two<br />

questions are very senior-level corporate communication<br />

<strong>of</strong>ficers who have earned the<br />

utmost respect from their pr<strong>of</strong>essional peers.<br />

Essentially, then, their responses to these<br />

questions might need to be overlooked. They<br />

disagreed with the paradigm shift thesis<br />

because corporate public relations already<br />

was extremely significant in their organization.<br />

And, they disagreed with the executive<br />

teams question because that kind <strong>of</strong> open<br />

communication has been taking place in their<br />

company for many years.<br />

Although this research was conducted with<br />

promises <strong>of</strong> anonymity <strong>and</strong> confidentiality,<br />

several subjects identified their responses <strong>and</strong><br />

provided additional permission to be quoted<br />

directly in results reports. This included five<br />

very senior-level corporate public relations<br />

pr<strong>of</strong>essionals. Each <strong>of</strong> these individuals was<br />

asked to provide a direct quote in October<br />

2001 assessing the impact the September 11<br />

terrorist attacks were having on their jobs. The<br />

same five senior-level pr<strong>of</strong>essionals were<br />

asked to review their quotes in March 2002<br />

<strong>and</strong> explain how, if at all, their opinions might<br />

have changed.<br />

Quotes from these five pr<strong>of</strong>essionals follow.<br />

Bill Nielsen, <strong>Corporate</strong> Vice President,<br />

<strong>Public</strong> Affairs <strong>and</strong> <strong>Corporate</strong><br />

<strong>Communication</strong>s, Johnson & Johnson<br />

October 2001<br />

My company’s employee communications<br />

came to the forefront following September<br />

© 2004 S<strong>and</strong>ra Oliver for editorial matter <strong>and</strong> selection;<br />

individual chapters, the contributors

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!