What is the role of the local government PR practitioner. in a multiple service environment?

Transcription

1 What is the role of the local government PR practitioner in a multiple service environment? Wendy Moran Senior Lecturer in Communication Manchester Metropolitan University 799 Wilmslow Road Didsbury M20 2RR Supervision Team: Dr Jane Tonge, MMUBS; Professor Ruth Ashford, MMUBS; Dr Bill Campbell, MMU. Early stages of research Conceptual domain The literature review aims to first identify the role of the local government PR practitioner, examining existing knowledge of public relations roles and related research specific to the sector. This will provide a platform for the wider research project which will investigate the impact of the multiple service environment. This will consider role conflict and role ambiguity and a stakeholder orientation of practice. Methodological domain I will be adopting an inductive approach which has the potential to generate new PR role models. My study would take a qualitative investigative approach to enable me to directly engage with practitioners and probe beneath their delineated roles to explore the determining factors which shape their practice. A case study approach offers flexibility to explore the multi dimensional aspects of each practitioner s role and potentially access a wide range of data to explicate role enactment. Substantive domain The research domain will take place in local authorities, examining the practice and behaviours of the communications department.

2 Abstract The examination of the role of public relations practitioners and the development of models, which aim to reflect the main characteristics of the practice, have dominated public relations research and scholarly activity over the last three decades. Local government PR currently aspires towards community engagement and strategic management, moving beyond its origins of delivering public information. The literature review aims to first identify the role of the local government PR practitioner, examining existing knowledge of public relations roles and related research specific to the sector. This will provide a platform for the wider research project which will investigate the impact of the multiple service environment. To date, there has been little in-depth observation of the practice of public relations. This research project will use a qualitative, case study approach which will aim to uncover and explain the role of the local government PR practitioner working in a multiple service environment. 2

3 Research context Local government public relations The emergence of local government PR in the UK has been well documented. In 1948, the Local Government Group (LGG) established the Institute of Public Relations, which was chartered in 2005 to become the Chartered Institute of Public Relations (CIPR). Local government is widely recognised as delivering the public information...end of public relations. (Harrison 2000:173). However, demands to meet public accountability and professional research (LGA 2005) which recommend core communication actions to actively engage with residents, have led to local government moving away from passive information giving (Yeomans, 2009). Multiple service environment In a local authority, sharing information and coordinating service delivery with local agencies is widely recognised as part of its licence to operate. (LGID, no date). For many service areas, provision is distributed between organisations, so that at an operational and at a strategic level partnership work is a necessity. Joint working and collaboration have been at the heart of local public services for several decades, driven by the aims of improving service delivery and pooling resources to provide good value for money. Although the coalition government has since abolished some of the formalised partnership arrangements and the associated grants they once awarded, partnership and collaborative working continue to play a central role. The Localism and Devolution agenda, the Big Society, Health and Policing reforms, Local Enterprise Partnerships and Community Budgets all encourage partnership working. (LGID, 2010). In this landscape, nimble partnerships are emerging, which are results driven and mobilise around an issue rather than the static, formalised partnerships of the past. The second shift in partnership working is an increased emphasis in productivity necessitated by central government s reduction in council funding by around 26% over a four year period (HM Treasury, 2010). Whereas previously partnership working aimed to improve outcomes, in times of austerity, ensuring value for money is the top priority. Shared services, strategic integration and joint 3

4 strategic commissioning are just some examples of the radical approaches being considered. (LGID: 2010) It is in this setting that local authorities are working not just with partners but crucially as partners and council PR teams must increasingly represent and work across multiple organisations. What are the roles of local government public relations practitioners? Academic enquiry into the roles of local government PR practitioners is extremely limited, with searches identifying just two articles. In the literature review, I therefore considered research into PR roles which was not sector specific. I also included studies commissioned by local government representative bodies. However, both the academic and professional research examining local government PR roles were limited further in only considering senior practitioners. Searches identified one relevant academic journal article by Hogg and Doolan (1999) which examined the role of local government PR practitioners in Scotland and research by Gregory (2008), which examined the competencies of senior practitioners in the public sector. Grunig et al (2002) argued that the dynamic nature of public relations suggests that any role set needs constant revision, based on intensive observation. This will be considered when examining these studies since they were both undertaken more than three years ago. Hogg and Doolan (1999), as Moss et al (2000, 2004) did, identified that the environment affects public relations practice. Hogg and Doolan (1999) highlighted that the organizational context was particularly significant for local government PR practitioners, as they were operating in a system, which had essentially two sets of expectations; those of the politicians and those of the senior administrative officers. They suggest that the roles we play are governed in part by the behaviour that is expected of us or that we perceive is expected of us. They therefore identify two related problems which emerge when the practitioner is unclear about what is expected, citing Katz and Khan (1978), role ambiguity and secondly role conflict when there is the existence of two or more sets of role expectations as there is in local government. This aspect of roles research will be even more pertinent for research examining practitioners operating in a multiple service environment, where they will be working to at least three sets of expectations; the council senior administrative team, the politicians and the senior management team of one or more partner organisations. 4

5 Although 51% of respondents in the Hogg and Doolan study (1999) reported directly to the chief executive, only 6% were members of the management team suggesting they were not part of the dominant coalition or playing a strategic role. The three participant groups of senior administrators, practitioners and politicians generally agreed in their understanding of the PR practitioner role. Although the technician role was predominant, there was support for a managerial role such as the communication facilitator. However, the results indicated that employers believed that PR is one dimensional and undeserving of a place at the top table. Hogg and Doolan (1999) expressed concern that this was also reflected in the responses of the practitioners themselves. Gregory (2008) undertook a study examining the competencies of senior practitioners in the UK, drawing on the work of Hogg and Doolan (1999) and Moss et al (2000, 2001, 2004) and including interviews with local government PR practitioners in the mix of those from the public sector. Gregory departed from the traditional PR role set (Broom, 1979), typology (Broom and Smith, 1979) and technician-manager dichotomy (Dozier and Broom, 1995) and used competency frameworks from HR, designed to measure behaviours. Occupational psychologists were employed to undertake field work. These were independent of the public relations field which Gregory (2008) claimed potentially enabled them to bring their knowledge from other fields to bear, but conversely they would not have knowledge of the profession. Gregory (2008) concluded that findings from the public sector identified that the majority of participants were either main board members or worked with or for the CEO in a senior advisor role. This is a departure from the research undertaken by Hogg and Doolan (1999), though the mix of public sector organisations and extended reach of Gregory s UK wide research and the time lapse must be acknowledged. Gregory identified that the; Building strong relationships and Consulting and involving competencies were regarded by public sector practitioners as most important. Gregory, (2008:220), suggests that in the public sector collaborative, consensual working both internally (with political as well as office managers), and externally is critical. She identifies that practitioners require the necessary expertise in liaising with a range of stakeholders to reach agreement. 5

6 However, public sector participants also revealed that the competency Investigating and analyzing did not feature. Discussion revealed that this work was undertaken by specialist departments or at lower levels within the organisation. Gregory suggests that this could be related to the findings of Moss et al (2000) who identify that dynamic, threatening environments demand proactive scanning and analysis whilst the stable, low threat environment of the public sector doesn t demand this type of work. Gregory highlights that this competence was identified by Dozier and Broom (1995) and Grunig et al (2002) as a key feature of PR as a management role. She further suggests that the lack of this competency could explain the findings of Hogg and Doolan (1999) that only 6% were part of the senior management team. Sector specific academic research has revealed that the organizational environment is of significance in shaping the role of the local government PR practitioner. The landscape of 2008, when Gregory suggested the public sector was operating in a low threat, stable condition has evolved. This provides the opportunity for public relations practitioners to demonstrate their strategic contribution through the analyzing and investigating competency, (Moss, 2000, 2004), which is a crucial component in a multiple service environment. The second theme which is particular to local government is the stakeholder orientation which Moss et al (2000) highlighted as an opportunity for practitioners to play a managerial role, and Gregory (2008) confirmed was the competency most frequently cited by public sector practitioners. Operating in a multiple service environment provides the opportunity for local government PR practitioners to further develop this practice. These two elements have the potential to open the managerial door for local government PR practitioners, which research studies have found has previously been a challenge. (Hogg and Doolan, 1999; Karian and Box, 200; LGComms, 2008) Research aim: To identify the roles of the local government PR practitioner operating in a multiple service environment. Objectives 1. To identify the roles of the local government PR practitioner. 2. To identify the impact of the multiple service environment on the roles of the local government PR practitioner 6

7 3. To explore whether the impact of the multiple service environment includes role conflict and role ambiguity 4. To explore the impact of the stakeholder orientation of practice 5. To develop a model to reflect the roles of the local government PR practitioner operating in a multiple service environment. Methodology As my study aims to identify and explain PR roles within an emerging environment, I will be adopting an inductive approach following in the tradition of European researchers (Moss, Warnaby and Newman, 2000; DeSanto and Moss 2004). These researchers recognised the need for a more flexible approach in the development of PR roles research in moving beyond identifying what practitioners do (Broom, 1982; Broom and Smith, 1979; Dozier and Broom, 1995) towards explaining the how and why of role enactment. An empirically grounded approach has the potential to generate new PR role models, denied by the quantitative, deductive research studies employed in traditional US roles research. I envisage that my study would take a qualitative investigative approach to enable me to directly engage with practitioners and probe beneath their delineated roles to explore the determining factors which shape their practice. A case study approach offers flexibility to explore the multi dimensional aspects of each practitioner s role and potentially access a wide range of data to explicate role enactment. Yin, 2009:18, suggests that case studies are particularly relevant when the boundaries between the phenomenon and context are not clearly evident. The methods I propose within the case study are participant observation, in-depth interviews and examination of documents. Contribution to knowledge Although there is extensive literature examining the roles of the PR practitioner, there is limited academic research and questionable professional research on the roles of the local government public relations practitioner. There is currently no published academic or professional research examining the role of the local government public relations practitioner operating in a multiple service environment. 7

8 References Broom, G. M. (1982) A comparison of sex roles in public relations Public Relations Review 8(3):pp17-22 Broom, G, M and Smith, G.D (1979) Testing the practitioners impact on clients. Public Relations Review 5 (3): pp DeSanto B and Moss D, (2004) Rediscovering what PR managers do: Rethinking the measurement of managerial behaviour in the public relations context. Journal of Communication Management. 8(2), pp Dozier, D.M and Broom, G.M (1995) Evolution of the manager s role. Journal of Public Relations Research, 7(1) 3-26 Gregory. A (2008) Competencies of senior communication pracititoners in the UK: an initial study. Public Relations Review, 34(2008):pp Grunig, L.A, Grunig,J.E and Dozier,D.M. (2002) Excellent public relations and effective organisations. Mahwah, NJ, Lawrence Erlbaum Associated Harrison, S (2004) Public Relations: An introduction, 2 nd edition. London: Routledge HM Treasury, (2010) Spending Review, [online] [Accessed on 10 November 2011] Hogg, G and Doolan, D. (1999). Playing the part. Practitioner roles in public relations. European Journal of Marketing, 33 (5/6):pp Katz, D and Kahn, R.L (1978), The Social Psychology of Organisations, 2 nd ed., John Wiley & Sons, New York, NY. Karian and Box (2007) LG07 Study. A comprehensive view of local government communications today. London:LGComms LGA (2005) Reputation Campaign. Unknown place of publication. [Online] [Accessed on 10 November 2011] Available from LGComms (2008) Chief Executives Challenge Report: London: LGComms LGID. (no date) Partnerships. [Online] [Accessed on 10 November 2011] 8

9 LGID (2010) Reshaping the Partnership Landscape. [Online] [Accessed on 10 November 2011] Moss D and Green R (2001) Re-examining the manager s role in public relations: what management and public relations research teaches us. Journal of Communication Management 6 (2) Moss, D.A, Warnaby, G and Newman, A (2000). Public relations role enactment at the senior management level within UK companies. Journal of Public Relations Research, 12(4), Tench, R. and Yeomans L. (2009) Exploring public relations ( 2 nd ed). Harlow: FT Prentice Hall White, J and D.M. Dozier (1992) Public relations and management decision making in J.E Grunig Excellence in public relations and communications management Hillside, NJ, Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Yin, (2009) Case study research: design and methods (4 th ed). London: Sage 9