Archive for Juli, 2008

Facebook: Was wird aus der EU?

Etwas Bemerkenswertes ist passiert: Eva Lichtenberger hat mich auf Facebook als friend geadded und mir auch persönlich auf eine Frage geantwortet (warum sie mich geadded hat, das hab ich gefragt). Ziel ist offenbar, Mitglieder für die Gruppe Was wird aus der EU? zu werben. Ein legitimes Anliegen, ich bin gespannt, was daraus wird.

Einige der LeserInnen hier wurden auch zu friends von Eva Lichtenberger, was haltet ihr davon?

15.07.2008. at 10:10 Hinterlasse einen Kommentar

BledCom 2008 presentations & papers

(This post is part of the series BledBlog, blogged live from BledCom 2008)

… can be found at BledCom Knowledge.

I personally think BledCom 2008 was great! I will post my personal résumé right here either tonight or tomorrow.

06.07.2008. at 17:49 1 Kommentar

Competitive paper session 3

(This post is part of the series BledBlog, blogged live from BledCom 2008)

chaired by Danny Moss.

===

Lynette M. McDonald: „Identity crisis: the changing functions of public relations“

The erosion of PR functions: they are being stolen by Marketing (e.g. relationship marketing) and management (e.g. stakeholder relations), i.e. being integrated into those areas.

3 functions of PR: communication, relationship management and strategic management.

  • Communication: PR has evolved into corporate communications – focus on the communication aspect.
  • Relationship building: recent theoretical shift to using communication for building relationships
  • strategic management: practitioners can become part of a company’s dominant coalition by taking part in strategic planning.

PR practitioners can gain access to the dominant coalition by taking some of the PR functions back, e.g. by engaging in CSR.

===

Ursa Golob and Klement Podnar: „Public relations and marketing: discovering common perspectives on corporate social responsibility“

CSR is an imortant topic in both, marketing and PR. In PR it is mainly linked to reputation, reporting and communication practices. In marketing: consumerism, cause-related marketing, corporate giving.

Legitimacy theory and stakeholder theory are a framework for CSR in both, marketing and PR.

(I left out some of this presentation, although it was interesting)

===

Ganga Sasidharan: „Corporate Social Responsibility and Marketing: a cause lost in frame alignment?“

In order to make CSR more attractive for NGOs, academia and business leaders, CSR had to be framed (instead of continued vagueness). This way it was embraced by corporations. „To frame“ means to select some aspects of a perceived reality, make them more salient and promote a particular problem aspect.

Frame alignment & reframing: from CSR beyond profit to CSR for profit.

Cause lost? Frame alignment was successful, but over-simplification can be dangerous.

===

David McKiee and Margalit Toledano „Perfect match? Public relations and social marketing“

(good presentation, but I am really tired – trying to follow instead of blogging)

===

Discussion: about where CSR and Social Marketing should be located in organizations: PR, Marketing, …? CSR: Discussion about dropping the „C“ – because it is an issue for all kinds of organizations.

Bye, bye Bled and BledCom 2008!

Bled Lake

05.07.2008. at 18:11 Hinterlasse einen Kommentar

Relationships in public relations and marketing (Panel 4)

(This post is part of the series BledBlog, blogged live from BledCom 2008)

chaired by James Grunig. With: Yi-Hui (Christine) Huang, Zlatko Jančič, Chun-ju (Flora) Hung, Majken Schultz.

Introduction by James Grunig. Many similarities between marketing and PR; the focus of this panel will be on these 3 topics: the nature of exchange relationships, functions of PR and markeing in organizations, and concepts of relationships.

Panel 4

===

Yi-Hui (Christine) Huang: „An Exploratory of Study of Marketing-oriented Public Relations: A Dual Perspective“

Management perspectives vs. PR practitioners perspectives – study on how PR values are seen by these 2 different groups.

(Yi-Hui Huang presented visuals of the results which are hard to blog here … in addition, the presentation was a little bit too fast for me.)

Conclusion: activity-based perspectives and functional perspectives are not the only ones – there should be more emphasis on a value-generating perspective of PR.

===

Zlatko Jančič: „New Developments in Relationship Marketing“

Many changes in the marketing environment (e.g. service-centered economy) lead to a need for a second revolution. Relationship Marketing (RM) is the outcome of service and inter-organizational marketing developments. David Ogilvy was one of the first to use the term RM.

(I didn’t blog the rest of this presentation).

===

Chun-ju (Flora) Hung: „Types of Relationships and Cultivation Strategies Used in Public Relations and Marketing“

Transactional Marketing vs. Relationship Marketing (Chun-ju shows a table with comparisons).

(It is impossible for me to blog large parts this presentation, too. Reasons below. I think it would be best to post a link to the presentation; if it becomes available, I will do that.)

There was an interesting table highlighting the main differences btw. Relationship Management and Relationship Marketing, summarizing the results of this paper (I will try to grab hold of it).

===

Majken Schultz: „Brand Relationships: Crossing Disciplinary Boundaries“

3 waves of branding: marketing mindset -> corporate mindset (all functions engaged in creating the brand) -> enterprise mindset (brand is co-created by stakeholders).

In the second wave, the engagement of all the functions of organizations created problems from an overall perspective, because they had contradicting effects (and were partly fighting each other). In the third wave, companies feel threatened, because they realize they cannot control the creation of the brand anymore.

2 cases are being presented. One is Lego which recently has opened up itself to consumers – in order to co-create the brand.

Biggest challenge today is: not to divide the company between 2 groups, one which opens up itself to stakeholders and the other one which does not and still sticks to the „old school“, e.g. is strict about brand guidelines.

My opinion: This last point is really interesting – I think right now there are many organizations who experience both kinds of tendencies at the same time: Changing the corporate culture towards transparency and co-creation with stakeholders on the one hand and defending their „old way“ of doing business on the other hand.

===

Discussion: Distinction between Marketing & PR: Marketing chooses its customers. Public Relations has to deal with publics (and cannot choose them).

===

My opinion (on the whole panel): I think the topics of this pannel are very interesting and the presenters are experts. However, the presentations were disappointing from my point of view – they were not well prepared (I missed structure in most of them, they were way too complex, too many details in too little time), somehow hectic (there were massive problems with the microphone) and thus it was really hard to follow.

05.07.2008. at 15:45 Hinterlasse einen Kommentar

Competitive paper session 2

(This post is part of the series BledBlog, blogged live from BledCom 2008)

chaired by Ronel Rensburg.

Before this, there is an announcement of Euprera 2008 Congress in Milan, from 16 to 18 October.

===

Ralph Tench and Paul Willis: „The Truman Show: creativity, deception or ethical malpractice – a critique of marketing public relations and guerrilla campaigns“

PR is increasingly being used as support for marketing. New media and technology are challenging traditional marketing, especially through changing media consumption and more options for taking an active role in new media. Consumer behaviour is changing, too (saturation, word-of-mouth [WOM] becoming more important).

WOM has long been a key attribute of PR – this is a potential for PR in the marketing mix and requires a lot of creativity and innovation. Guerilla campaigns are increasingly being delivered by PR people. Characteristics of guerilla marketing: street focussed engagements, unconventional & irreverent (tactics ase anti-corporate in character), brand camouflage.

Case: Diageo

My opinion: This presentation is certainly a marketing presentation – interesting, but I cannot see the connection to PR as I define it. Well, guerilla marketing has a relationship aspect, but I think guerilla marketing doesn’t engage in ongoing relationships, in the development of relationships over time.

===

Brian G. Smith on „Representing PR in the Marketing Mix – A Study on Public Relations Variables – Marketing Mix Modelling
The holy grail for PR is measurement – this is being done in a markting mix model. The marketing mix model links variables to sales and other outcomes. Outcomes being measuerd: Media variables (e.g. number of press releases), impressions (e.g. page impressions of websites), environment (e.g. seasonal variables, trends, regulations), consumer engagement. Conclusion: MMM is a promoter of PR values.

My opinion: There’s a little of everything in this presentation, but there’s absolutely no in-depth analysis of the relationship marketing-PR or leitmotif I can follow.

===

Dejan Verčič and Kristina Laco on „Comparing advertising and editorials: An experimental study in TV and print“

Recently, there are many assumptions that below-the-line activities are more effective than above-the-line and budgets are being shifted towards below-the-line.

Variables of the study (experiment comparing advertising and editorial): credibility, behavioral intentions, attitude. 4 types of communcation (print ad, print editorial, TV ad, TV editorial).

Results: Credibility was not significantly higher in editorials than ads (TV and print). The same is true for behavioral intentions and attitude. But: TV was significantly more powerful than print.

===

Donald Wright on „Public Relations Education at the Crossroads: Global Questions and Concerns“

Problems in quality of PR education in the US: too many students, only 10-15% of the graduates are being hired in PR and communications, universites make huge profits but aren’t using these profits for the quality of programs, unhelathy balance btw theoretical and practical, outdated course materials, top-rated PR programs are at smaller, regional institutions, most PR education remains part of journalism schools, […], most PR education is undergraduate, lack of reaserch agendas, […]

International implications: similar problems exist in other countries, but there are unique problems in other countries on top of that.

===

Discussion:

Larissa Grunig had a similar impression as me on the first presentation about guerilla campaigns 😉 The reply is that PR people are carrying out these activities (my opinion: this is really a weak, well off-topic argument). There is discussion about this kind of tactics being not ethical (due to brand camouflage).

(the discussion here is very lively, I follow it and thus cannot blog everything)

05.07.2008. at 13:12 1 Kommentar

Competitive paper session 1

(This post is part of the series BledBlog, blogged live from BledCom 2008)

chaired by Jon White.

===

Graeme Sterne on PR among the functions of management: A New Zealand Perspective.

Where does PR sit in NZ? Depends on the type of the company. 80% of companies in NZ are SME. This research is based on 20% of „big“ companies:

  • 20% PR reports to Marketing (Marketing PR = publicity)
  • 27% have no PR, CEO does it (they call it communications)
  • 37% alongside and under Marketing
  • 16% independent, overlapping (working together with Marketing)

===

Yuna Rhee on „Organizational Culture and Public Relations: Testing the Competing Values Model (CVM) and Employee Communication Strategies (ECS) Model in Korea

In this paper Yuna Rhee focusses on measuring organizational culture in order to find out what effects it has on PR and how it interacts with PR. The Competing Values Model (CVM) and Employee Communication Strategies (ECS) are the theoretical background and used for measurement.

(This presentation is very fast – too fast to be blogged. However, quite interesting for me!)

===

Elsamari Coetzee on „Exploratory study on the relationship between communication and marketing practitioners in South Africa“

Focus of the exploratory study: Perceptions of key marketing and communication practioners in South Africa regarding the relationship between marketing and communication: 50% say that marketing and communications are completely integrated, 25% say they are distinct functions but there is a lot of cooperation, 25% say that these functions are completely separate.
===

Ronel Rensburg on „A successful relationship between marketing and communication management: the story of a South African academic department“

University of Pretoria, Faculty of Economic and Management Sciences, School of Management Sciences: Department of Marketing and Communication Management (found in 1994). This presentation is a presentation of the department and its context within the university and the society in South Africa.

===

Maria Aparecida Ferrari: „An overview of Public Relations in Latin America“

Study of 10 countries, 182 million speak Spanisch, 189 million Potuguese. These languages are a cultural barrier in Latin America (lack of integration). PR first appeared in Brazil in 1950, in most other countries 30 years later. Big influence of censorships and dictatorships in all countries. Also economy (which is linked to politics) is an important factor, as well as culture. There are more and more PR programs in universities. There is a strong influence of foreign PR (theories from the US, less from Europe).

===

Discussion: Larissa Grunig asks, if PR is able to or should change culture. Yuna Rhee thinks that this can be achieved although this is hardly possible yet.

How top managers view PR (Graeme Sterne): For PR practitioners it is absolutely necessary to learn how to communiate with senior managers and how to get the message of the value of PR across. The C-Suite, generally speaking, are still not aware of the value of communications. A lot of bridging work between scholars and practitioners reamains to be done (Yuna Rhee). Same applies for South Africa, says Maria Ferrari.

05.07.2008. at 10:27 Hinterlasse einen Kommentar

Public Relations Metrics: Reasearch and Analysis (Book Presentation)

(This post is part of the series BledBlog, blogged live from BledCom 2008)

I am a little late and missed the introduction … however, I had thought of buying this book many times and am very interested in it.

Betteke van Ruler started presenting the book. She states that this book goes into depht, especially in regards of methodology. The book would not have been there without BledCom – some of the topics were presented on BledCom 2005 and many others were drawn from discussions at the BledCom 2005.

(One of the authors summarized her chapter, I missed her name.) James Grunig now comments on the book – saying that conceptualization must always come before research (measurement, evaluation). Now, Larissa Grunig: Qualitative research needs methodology to research some of the imortant PR problems and for questions that don’t stay on the surface. Dejan Verčič: There is a Public Relations reasearch grid that gives an overview. The book also includes a chapter on network analysis.
James Grunig

05.07.2008. at 10:06 Hinterlasse einen Kommentar

Government and non-profit public relations (Panel 3)

(This post is part of the series BledBlog, blogged live from BledCom 2008)

chaired by: Krishnamurthy Sriramesh. With: Fraser Likely, Chris Skinner, David McKie.

From this panel I will just blog the key messages as I am already a bit exhausted (due to the fact that I got up at 5 am this morning).

Introduction (Krishnamurthy Sriramesh): PR is not only corporate public relations, but a lot more – examples from the non-profit sector and politics are often neglected.

„Public Relations in Government: Governing Communication or Communicating Government?“ by Fraser Likely

Corporate PR or communications is more unified across the world as corporations work more or less the same. This is different for governments – as there are a lot of different forms of governments: from democtratic to dictatorial.

Unique features of PR in government:

  1. Stakeholder & publics compexity. For governments there are subjects, citizens, clients & customers. Individuals can be and are part of all of these groups at the same time (many hatted individual stakeholders). Publics are part of a „nervous system“. For governments the relationships between the publics are particularely important, too.
  2. Tacit to explicit knowledge: Governments are eager on writing down policies and procedures.
  3. Dominant coalitions: In governments there are a lot of dominant coalitions, which PR professionals must involve themselves with.

Social Marketing & Government PR: Government product marketing makes up 10%. In addition: Government Service Marketing as a PR campaign, no 4Ps – individuals are clients, not customers, no exchange relationship. And government social/policy marketing: public education behavioral-change program (no 4Ps / no exhange either).

===

Chris Skinner on „The changing role of the public relations practitioner in the NPO sector

Success of PR in the NPO has different 4Ps than marketing:

  1. Perception: vision, mission and value statements must be communicated.
  2. Personalities: personalities and their networks that are running organizations are crucial.
  3. Politics: monitoring and responding to political changes is vital
  4. Priorities: most important tasks must be identified, that is very important due to limited resources.

In NPO PR people learn more than in any other sectors – because success strongly depends on PR.

===

David McKie with is presentation on „De-colonising PR: Corporate copycats and not-for-profit innovators“

The NPO sector is way bigger than corporate – so PR for NPO is what people need to learn.

(this speech is hard to blog … as it is fast and there are many messages between the lines, so I am trying to follow instead of blogging)

Discussion: (I’m not gonna blog that either, except if there’s something extremely revealing for myself.)

Bled

04.07.2008. at 17:19 Hinterlasse einen Kommentar

The Marketing PR Revolution: Progression, Regression or Digression? (Panel 2)

(This post is part of the series BledBlog, blogged live from BledCom 2008)

to follow after the lunch break from 14:15. Looking forward to that.

chaired by Dubravka Sinčić Ćorić. With Maja Makovec Brenčič, Larissa Grunig, Danny Moss.

Maja will start with the topic „PR as a forefront of integral marketing approach: do firms understand its role?“

The more we move toward the real customer orientation the more the stand of PR grows. Increasing marketing sophistication means a shift from product orientation to sales orientation, to marketing and to customer/market orientation. PR values play a key role in this context.

An illustration: Gorenje in France. PR values proved to be valuable for – in the end – increasing sales. What the firm really believes in is finally valued at the market. Integrated communications, including PR, is a major driver for success.

===

Public Relations as a Strategic Consulting Function, Larissa Grunig.

PR deals with „herds“, groups, publics. They all matter – and their relationships.

Now, Larissa will concentrate on the organizational aspects of PR, where in the organization this function should be located: close to the key decision-makers. PR is an umbrella type of function that shall not be subordinated to other departments. PR departments should be structured horizontally to reflect strategic publics. These are the results of the Excellence Study.

It does not make a difference if PR and Marketing are located in one or separate departments and what size of budgets they have. The ideal scenario is that management equally and heavily supports both functions.

25 qualitative case studies: Excellence was affected negatively if PR was subordinated to Marketing.

Hunter on Fortune 500 firms: PR & Marketing work together well and do not compete.

GAP Studies from USC: results mirror those from Excellence Study: PR function is more successful id it directly reports to C-Suite. Including public relations in organizational strategic management is crucial.

Dubravka Sinčić Ćorić, Larissa Grunig, Danny Moss

Marketing and Public Relations: Challenging the stereotype; re-examining evidence of conflict and collaboration, Danny Moss

Danny starts by pointing out some stereotypical views about marketing and PR. In the 1990s marketing attempted to reinvent itself – MPR-CPR, IMC concelt, relationship marketing. All these efforts tried to challenge the position of PR. Reasons: power-control / strategic choice perspective and contingency perspectives.

Evidence-based perspective: in many organizations a flexible, balanced relationship becomes evident; not integration but cooperation. There is a lot of evidence for close collaboration between marketing, advertising. There is little hostility between these functions. Web based communication (impact of new technologis) has a huge impact on all of these functions.

===

Discussion: The question „who does the PR function report to“ proved to be crucial in the US-studies and remains to be researched in Europe (Gap 6 will be international). Integration of PR with functions like HR, Finance, Law do not work (qualitative research from the US).

(there was a lot of discussion here that I didn’t blog)

PR perception and its relationship with marketing depends a lot on how we (the scholars) define PR. PR value does not only come from media and publicity – but from relationship and economic input. It is important to define it that way – that is an important perspective to cinsider (Yi-Hui Huang).

04.07.2008. at 12:43 Hinterlasse einen Kommentar

Fads in Marketing and Public Relations (Panel 1)

(This post is part of the series BledBlog, blogged live from BledCom 2008)

chaired by Dejan Verčič. With Sašo Dimitrievski, Francesco Lurati and Simon Torp.

There’s a short break before this next session. So I have the chance to describe the setting of this conference. The room is a little strange because of its shape. There are just 6 rows of tables for the participants, but about 24 people fit in one row. Thus, we also have 2 screens. There are more people here than I had expected, I would say around 120. Many seem to be scholars, but I reckon there are quite some professional PR guys present as well.

BledCom

OK, the panel has started …

Sašo: will concentrate on Social Media Marketing.

Fads vs. trends: A trend lives for a longer time, fads are short-lived. Trends have deeper cultural roots and are mainstream. Fads are taken up by small groups and can easyly be transferred to other groups.

Web 2.0 is good tool to spot trends.

New 4P’s of marketing: Personalization, Participation, Peer-to-Peer and Predictive Modeling.

My opinion: up until now, I don’t really get the point of Sašo … I guess he is trying to tell us way too much of his thoughts in too little time. So it’s all a little hectic.

New marketing funnel: due to Web 2.0 (friends‘ recommendations, etc.).

BledCom audience

Sašo is now talking about Cannes 08 fads … his own favorite fads: meaningful experiences, engagement, cross-channel integration and Social Media. Social Media is already a trend in marketing.

We’re watching some funny YouTube videos now … what people made out of a Bud-video. The last video was an Obama video, probably produced by Obama’s team. It has a lot more views than the original Bud video. Obama is much more present in blogs and in Twitter than Clinton.

===

Now, Francesco started his presentation on Public Relations and Corporate Communications – called „Corporate Communication(s) as Fad(s)„. The terms „PR“ and „Corporate Communications“ are used interchangeably. But are they the same?

Characteristics of Corporate Communications: has a focus on bias (external, internal), measurement, multi-functionality, alignment.

It’s the task of Corporate Communications to explore and protect the cultural roots of a company in order to be able to change anything else. It is important to believe in something and not to hyper-adapt.

-> a fad? no, but a long mapping process. People from PR, advertising, organization, marketing, strategy are working together, contributing in different ways, but aiming at the same target (which has many different names). Common ground is corporate communications (Francesco showed a definition). He concludes by saing CC is not a fad but a reality.

===

Simon, on „Is I(M)C a Fad?

(I didn’t blog this presentation.)

===

Discussion about the terms/concepts of PR, Marketing, Integrated (Marketing) Communications, Public Affairs and Corporate Communications, etc. and why there’s always a debate about what terminology to use. There seems to be agreement that there is one common goal to all these concepts, but different perspectives e.g. the relationship perspective of PR.

My opinion: Oh my god, still the same discussion? I remember that from university (Communication Sciences at the University of Vienna) in the early 90s. I do have the impression that PR people always have the feeling that they have to „defend“ their profession/discipline against Marketing people. I just don’t get why? (I am a PR person myself, I would say, but don’t feel I have to defend or justify anything).

04.07.2008. at 12:04 Hinterlasse einen Kommentar

Ältere Beiträge


Share

Bookmark and Share

Feeds

Gib deine E-Mail-Adresse ein, um diesem Blog zu folgen und per E-Mail Benachrichtigungen über neue Beiträge zu erhalten.

Schließe dich 5 anderen Followern an

Interessante Publikationen

Juli 2008
M D M D F S S
 123456
78910111213
14151617181920
21222324252627
28293031  
W3Counter Web Stats


Österreicher Blog Verzeichnis


Blogverzeichnis - Blog Verzeichnis bloggerei.de