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

those in the first world. All referred to the various
ways in which differing national infrastructures
impact upon iPR programmes.
As noted, Krishnamurthy and Dejan (2001)
suggested that in some countries iPR tends to
be propagandist. This research does not sustain
this suggestion. One hundred per cent of
respondents stated categorically that they saw
no part of their communication role involved
with any sort of propaganda anywhere –
either at home or abroad. Neither was the
issue of media outreach one of concern to
those interviewed. On the other hand, all
international interviewees were significant
global players communicating either with
satellite divisions abroad or with sophisticated
publics; so this response might have been
expected.
An example of the methods used to reach
sophisticated audiences overseas was given by
the pharmaceutical organization. The spokesperson
mentioned the academic publications
produced by his organizations and circulated
worldwide – worldwide, internationally driven
he remarked – which, he indicated, were a
communication vehicle used to influence important
research audiences around the world.
Twenty-five per cent of respondents do
business around the world on a daily basis.
Each confirmed that the computer has
become central to their iPR activity, as Neff
(1998) thought probable. Organizations like
the rubber company manufacturing tyres in
Mexico and the tobacco firm selling its products
in India reported that they mainly used
technology for communicating with employees.
Evidence from the airline was that IT is
being used increasingly to address local audiences
with marketing PR messages – the US
audience being one very obvious example.
The ability to communicate quickly with
external consultants used abroad was also
given; particularly by the tobacco company
who, at the time that the researcher visited it,
had engaged consultants to assist them with a
spat in India. The spokesman referred to how
little he used consultants generally; but found
them useful in overseas markets; and giving
the Indian example said I have retained a PR
consultancy to handle it. Clearly, increasing use
of IT – where the infrastructure has been
developed – helps enormously.
All organizations with international operations
spoke of the challenges presented by
the need to produce iPR programmes in a
context of cultural and societal distinctions;
and all but two confirmed that these
inevitably affect the way that iPR is practised
within widely differing societies. As the telco
spokesman remarked of the international
communicator he must know his audience. One
point made by the global airline was that
these cultural differences are as apparent in first
world countries like Canada, the United States
and Australasia as they are in more remote
parts of the globe.
The airline spokesman agreed with the academic
who noted that the astute practitioner
recognizes that competence in the United
States does not necessarily translate into competence
in other countries; speaking of his
carefully chosen US media team, he explained
that this was the reason that he only employed
locally trained journalists.
Both the rubber and the pharmaceutical
companies – between them having divisions
in most parts of the world – spoke of the
need for communication programmes that
demonstrate a distinct flavour; one honed to
reflect the national characteristics of the country
in which they are transmitted. The bank
spokesman – fronting communication programmes
for an organization with long associations
in South America – confirmed Taylor’s
(2001) suggestion of a real need for crosscultural
sensitivity from iPR specialists.
© 2004 Sandra Oliver for editorial matter and selection;
individual chapters, the contributors