Handbook of Corporate Communication and Public ... - Blogs Unpad
Handbook of Corporate Communication and Public ... - Blogs Unpad Handbook of Corporate Communication and Public ... - Blogs Unpad
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
- Page 302 and 303: The Turnbull Report encompasses iss
- Page 304 and 305: Data recovery Technology recovery B
- Page 306 and 307: as electrical supplies, voice and d
- Page 308 and 309: direction the media would take so t
- Page 310 and 311: on top of the building. Meridian we
- Page 312 and 313: the system/building failure was dow
- Page 314 and 315: Scotiabank’s incident response In
- Page 316 and 317: Scenario: phases 1 and 2 Info sourc
- Page 318 and 319: As vice president, Rex Engstrand, d
- Page 320 and 321: Luftman, J. N. (2003) Managing Info
- Page 322 and 323: Issues Issues management is part of
- Page 324 and 325: Agency Agency Agency Agency Transpa
- Page 326 and 327: tent. Such lack of website maintena
- Page 328 and 329: inging people in to work from home
- Page 330 and 331: e) deployed. In addition, the conse
- Page 332 and 333: Figure 19.5 Tesco has statements ab
- Page 334 and 335: organization is something that has
- Page 336 and 337: Mojo Wire, 11 is the website which
- Page 338 and 339: Someone got your copyright: you got
- Page 340 and 341: prevent a mass of comment in dozens
- Page 342 and 343: NOTES 1 Grunig, J. E. (1982), ‘Th
- Page 344 and 345: lifetimes. 2 A study by CBS News an
- Page 346 and 347: • Do you agree the events of Sept
- Page 348 and 349: Table 20.1 Responses of senior-leve
- Page 350 and 351: important and more significant assi
- Page 354 and 355: 11th because stockholders and emplo
- Page 356 and 357: email conversational interviews wit
- Page 358 and 359: CHAPTER 21 Public relations and dem
- Page 360 and 361: about public policy options. This t
- Page 362 and 363: international flux and transformati
- Page 364 and 365: etween organizations and publics. A
- Page 366 and 367: elations. Some of these took their
- Page 368 and 369: By the late 1950s and early 1960s m
- Page 370 and 371: PART IV THE FUTURE IS NOW
- Page 372 and 373: developed in this chapter as an aid
- Page 374 and 375: composition can be judged by visual
- Page 376 and 377: Figure 22.1 Toyota Source: Permissi
- Page 378 and 379: Response The represented participan
- Page 380 and 381: (11) Is the linearity (position of
- Page 382 and 383: (3) What is the integration of diff
- Page 384 and 385: Response The text is concerned with
- Page 386 and 387: CHAPTER 23 Methodological issues fo
- Page 388 and 389: The whole management endeavour is t
- Page 390 and 391: awareness of what is involved in in
- Page 392 and 393: • In making sense of the world, u
- Page 394 and 395: CHAPTER 24 Communication for creati
- Page 396 and 397: simultaneously de-emphasizes the va
- Page 398 and 399: y what the organization values and
- Page 400 and 401: Opportunities for providing a varie
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