Upload
others
View
9
Download
0
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
AN EXPLORATION OF CONTINGENCY THEORY OF ACCOMMODATION: COMMUNICATING ENVIRONMENTAL SUSTAINABILITY MEASURES IN
NORWAY
__________________________________
A Thesis
presented to
the Faculty of the Graduate School
at the University of Missouri
________________________________________________
In Partial Fulfillment
Of the Requirements for the Degree
Master of Arts
__________________________________
by
SARAH A. STRASBURG
Dr. Fritz Cropp, Thesis Supervisor
JULY 2016
The undersigned, appointed by the dean of the Graduate School, have examined the
thesis entitled
AN EXPLORATION OF CONTINGENCY THEORY OF
ACCOMMODATION: COMMUNICATING ENVIRONMENTAL SUSTAINABILITY
MEASURES IN NORWAY
presented by Sarah A. Strasburg,
a candidate for the degree of master of arts,
and hereby certify that, in their opinion, it is worthy of acceptance.
Professor Fritz Cropp
Professor Glenn Cameron
Professor Amanda Hinnant
Professor Antonie Stam
ii
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
Foremost, I’d like to acknowledge the people I interviewed for this research who
gave me insight into their professional lives, and to those who touched my life with
positivity throughout my travels in Norway.
Deep thanks to each member of my committee for being a part of my “team” and
offering guidance at different stages of this research.
I also wish to acknowledge Dorothy Carner, head librarian at the Donald W.
Reynolds Journalism Library and Martha Pickens, graduate advisor at the Missouri
School of Journalism.
iii
TABLE OF CONTENTS ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ................................................................................................ ii LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS ............................................................................................. vi ABSTRACT ...................................................................................................................... vii Chapter
1. INTRODUCTION ...................................................................................................1
2. LITERATURE REVIEW ........................................................................................4 2.1 Contingency Theory of Accommodation’s in Public Relations ........................4 2.2 Contingency Theory’s Central Concepts ...........................................................5 2.3 Contingency Theory in Action ...........................................................................8 2.4 Leadership & Culture .......................................................................................11 2.5 The Norwegian Landscape: Corporate Social and Environmental Responsibility ........................................................................................................14
3. METHODOLOGY ................................................................................................18 3.1 Participants .......................................................................................................19 3.2 Sampling ..........................................................................................................22 3.3 Semi-structured Interviewing ...........................................................................23 3.4 Minimizing Cultural Differences, Maximizing Theory Building ....................25
4. ANALYSIS ............................................................................................................29 4.1 Category-by-Category Factor Manifestations ..................................................30
4.1.1 External Variables: Threats ...............................................................30 4.1.2 External Variables: Industry Environment .......................................33 4.1.3 External Variables: General Political/Social Environment/External Culture ........................................................................................................35 4.1.4. External Variables: The External Public ..........................................35 4.1.5 External Variables: Issue under Question .........................................37 4.1.6 Internal Variables: Organization’s Characteristics ...........................37 4.1.7 Internal Variables: Public Relations Department Characteristics .....39 4.1.8 Internal Variables: Characteristics of Dominant Coalition (Top Management) .............................................................................................41 4.1.9 Internal Variables: Internal Threats ..................................................42 4.1.10 Internal Variables: Individual Characteristics (Public Relations Practitioner, Dominant Coalition and Line Managers) ..............................42 4.1.11 Internal Variables: Relationship Characteristics .............................45
4.2 Best Practices Arising from Interviews ...........................................................46 4.2.1 Publish a Sustainability Report .........................................................46 4.2.2 Integrate Sustainability into Daily Thinking of People across the Organization ...............................................................................................47
iv
4.2.3 Release Research Reports to the Press ..............................................48 4.2.4 Sponsor a Music Festival ..................................................................49 4.2.5 Silence ...............................................................................................49 4.2.6 Be an Immediate Part of the Conversation .......................................50 4.2.7 Garner Employee Support through a Bike Program .........................50 4.2.8 Hold a Seminar or Participate in a Conference .................................51 4.2.9 Leverage Established Communication Channels Outside the Organization ...............................................................................................54 4.2.10 Be Transparent ................................................................................54 4.2.11 Get and Maintain the “Social License to Operate” .........................55 4.2.12 Tie Company Practices to Science/Technology/Innovation ...........55 4.2.13 Tie Company Practices to Norwegian/International Standards ......56
5. DISCUSSION ........................................................................................................57
5.1 Influences of Political-Social Support .............................................................57 5.2 Fact-Based Orientation ....................................................................................60 5.3 Lack of Individualism ......................................................................................63 5.4 Best Practices along the Continuum ................................................................64
5.4.1 Publish a Sustainability Report .........................................................68 5.4.2 Integrate Sustainability into Daily Thinking of People across the Organization ...............................................................................................69 5.4.3 Release Research Reports to the Press ..............................................70 5.4.4 Sponsor a Music Festival ..................................................................70 5.4.5 Silence ...............................................................................................71 5.4.6 Be an Immediate Part of the Conversation .......................................71 5.4.7 Garner Employee Support through a Bike Program .........................71 5.4.8 Hold a Seminar or Participate in a Conference .................................71 5.4.9 Leverage Established Communication Channels Outside the Organization ...............................................................................................72 5.4.10 Be Transparent ................................................................................72 5.4.11 Get and Maintain the “Social License to Operate” .........................73 5.4.12 Tie Company Practices to Science/Technology/Innovation ...........73 5.4.13 Tie Company Practices to Norwegian/International Standards ......74
5.5 Strengths and Limitations ................................................................................74
6. IMPLICATIONS & FUTURE RESEARCH .........................................................77 6.1 Structural Stability of Contingency Theory across Cultural Contexts .............78 6.2 Contingency Decision Matrix: A Quantitative Tool ........................................79
7. CONCLUSION ......................................................................................................82
REFERENCES ..................................................................................................................84 APPENDICES ...................................................................................................................88 Appendix A: Preliminary Interview Instrument ....................................................88 Appendix B: Revised Interview Instrument ..........................................................89
v
Appendix C: Contingency Theory Factors ............................................................91
vi
LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS Figure Page
1. The advocacy-accommodation continuum .................................................................6
2. Jin, Pang and Cameron’s (2006) Strategies for building an analytic framework for crisis communication ...........................................................................................65
3. Best practices along the continuum ..........................................................................67
vii
ABSTRACT
Public relations literature suggests that there is a gap between existing public
relations theory in a global context and what’s needed, and this research aims to help fill
that gap by testing existing manifestations of the Contingency Theory of Accommodation
in Europe for the first time, specifically in Norway. The research is similar in nature to
contingency theory tests in China (Li, Cropp, & Jin, 2010; Zhang, Qui & Cameron,
2004), South Korea (Bae and Park, 2011; Choi & Cameron, 2005; Shin, Heath, & Lee,
2011) and Singapore (Jin, Pang, & Cameron, 2006). The study finds that factors in all 11
categories of contingency theory manifest, suggesting that the principles of contingency
theory are relevant to the practice of conflict management for communication
practitioners in Norway. While no entirely new factors manifest, a clear fact-based
orientation emerges for the existing factor “how individuals receive, process and use
information and influence” emerges. Additionally, this analysis suggests that internal
variables related to characteristics of individual people not be as relevant to the practice
of conflict management in Norway on the issue of corporate environmental responsibility
concerns.
1
Introduction
Thepurposeofthisstudyistotestandextendexistingapplicationsofthe
ContingencyTheoryofAccommodation.Contingencytheoryemergednearlytwo
decadesagointheUnitedStatesasanelaborationandrevisionofexcellencetheory,
themostcommonlycitedpublicrelationstheoryofthetime(Cameron,Cropp,&
Reber,2000,p.242-243).Sincethenitsprincipleshavebeentestedandfurther
developedinlimitedinternationalsettingssuchasChina(Li,Cropp,&Jin,2010;
Zhang,Qui&Cameron,2004),SouthKorea(BaeandPark,2011;Choi&Cameron,
2005;Shin,Heath,&Lee,2011)andSingapore(Jin,Pang,&Cameron,2006).This
studyproposestotestitforthefirsttimeinEurope,specificallyNorway.
Theissueunderexaminationisaparticularlyglobalissue:climatechange.
Everycountryandindeedmanycompaniesmustchoosenotwhethertheyengagein
issueofenvironmentalsustainability,butwithwhom,towhatextentandhow.
Withinandacrossnationalborders,governments,people,activistorganizationsand
companiesallputpressureononeanotherinwhatisagreatersocialdialogueon
theissue.Tocomplicatematters,manyentitieswithhighenvironmentalimpactare
thesameentitiesthatprovidemanypeoplewithnecessitiessuchasheatandfood.
Theglobalpopulationtodayis7billionandcounting.Topulltheplugonanyandall
activitiespotentiallydamagingtotheenvironmentishardlyanoption.Thismeans
government,companiesandpeoplemustgrapplewiththeissue,andNorway,given
itsrelativelystableeducation,welfareandsocialsystemshasbeenagloballeaderin
2
thisarea.InMarch2015,Norwaybecamethe3rdnationtosubmit2030climate
changegoalstotheUnitedNations.InMarch2015theNorwegianParliamentalso
decidedtomoveforwardwithcreatingaclimatechangelawwithlegallybinding
benchmarks(Lonstreth,2015;“Norwegianparliamentvotes”,2015;Solholm,2015).
Publicrelationsscholarsshouldfindthisresearchofinterestbecauseithas
thepotentialtoaddrobustnesstoamajortheoryinthefield.Asoursocialworlds
andthebusinessworldbecomeincreasinglyglobalized,researchonhowpublics
relatetooneanothermustalsogrowandaccountforthechangingnatureof
communication.
Publicrelationspractitionersshouldfindthisresearchofinterestbecause
governments,businessesandpeopledecidehowtospendtheirdollars,regulate
othersandcompeteinthemarketplacebasedonenvironmentalconcerns.Asone
example,Norway’s$850billionsovereignwealthfund,thelargestintheworld,is
divestingitselfofcoalinvestments,andothersareexpectedtofollowsuit
(Carrington,2015).
Whatfollows,perUniversityofMissouri’sthesisguidelinesareinorderthe
researchquestionsguidingthisproposedinquiry,thetheoreticalframework,
literaturereview,methodsdiscussion,analysisincludingreflectiononstrengthsand
limitations,andconcludingremarksandareasforfurtherstudy.
ResearchquestionsRQ1:WhatfactorsfromthecontingencytheoryofaccommodationmanifestwhenNorwegiancommunicationsmanagersdiscusshowtheydealwithkeypublicsoncorporateenvironmentalresponsibilityconcerns?
3
RQ2:ArethereadditionalconsiderationsthatNorwegiancommunicationsmanagerstendtoemphasizewhendiscussinghowtheydealwithkeypublicsoncorporateenvironmentalresponsibilityconcerns?
Answeringthesequestionswilladdtotherobustnessandinternational
applicationofcontingencytheoryofaccommodation.
4
Literaturereview
TheoreticalFramework:ContingencyTheoryofAccommodationinPublicRelations
ContingencyTheoryofAccommodationinPublicRelationsisanapproachto
publicrelationsdecisionmakingthatembracesdynamismandcomplexityandseeks
tocomprehensivelydescribethefactorsthatgointopublicrelationsdecisionswhen
dealingwiththedesiresordemandsofpublics(Cancel,etal.,1997;Cancel,Mitrook,
&Cameron,1999;Reber,Cropp,&Cameron,2003).Many“contingency”theories
exist,e.g.,contingencytheoryofbusinessstrategy,contingencytheoryof
socialization,andit’snotablethatasabroaderclass,contingencytheoriesreferto
organizationalorbehavioralprocessesthatcannotbereducedtoasinglebest
practice(Shenkar&vonGlinow,1994).Tothepoint,thewayinwhichan
organizationinteractswithitspublicsiscontingentuponordependsuponavariety
ofinternalandexternalvariables.Furthermore,theinteractionofthesevariablesis
dynamic,andorganizationalstancechangesasthesituationdemands.
TherootsofContingencyTheoryofAccommodationinPublicRelations
(referredtoascontingencytheoryfromhereon)lieinGrunigandGrunig’s(1992)
ExcellenceTheoryinPublicRelations(excellencetheoryfromhereon),which
conveysatwo-waysymmetricalmodelofconflictresolution.Conflictscanarise
fromactionsoutsidepartiessuchasactivistgroupsorfromwithinanorganization
(suchasfraudulentactivity).Excellencetheorystatesthatthemostethicalpractice
ofpublicrelationsandnormativetheoryofpublicrelationsinvolvestwo-way,
symmetricalcommunicationbetweenanorganizationanditspublic.Contingency
5
theoryattemptstoovercomethecriticizedshortcomingsofexcellencetheorywhen
appliedtothepracticeofpublicrelations.Itisbothanextensionofandareactionto
oneofthecoreprinciplesofexcellencetheory(Cameron,Cropp&Reber,2001p.
242-243).
ContingencyTheory’sCentralConcepts Contingencytheorypositsthatsometimesitwillbemostethicalandbestfor
anorganizationtoaccommodateapublic,andsometimesitwillbemostethicaland
bestforanorganizationtofirmlystanditsgroundandwhollyadvocateforthe
organization.Whilethetwo-waysymmetricalmodelofexcellencetheorydictates
theremustalwaysbegiveandtakeonbehalfoftheorganization,contingency
theoryrecognizesthattherearescenariosinwhichthiswouldnotbethebest
practiceornormativeaction.Forexample,whendealingwithamorallyrepugnant
public,itwouldbeunethicaltotakeanaccommodativestance.Byopeningthe
questionofrightandwrongtodialogue,collaborationandcompromise,the
contingencymodelisinherentlyethical(Zhang,Qui&Cameron2004,p.392).
Contingencytheoryproposesacontinuumofaccommodationandamatrixof
factorsthatinfluencewhereonthiscontinuumanorganization’sstanceonagiven
issuewithagivenpublicfalls.Thecontinuumisorganizedalongascaleofpure
accommodationtopureadvocacyasfollows:
6
Figure1.Theadvocacy-accommodationcontinuum
Figure1.Theadvocacy-accommodationcontinuumoftheContingencyTheoryofPublicRelationspositedbyCancel,etal,1997,p.37.
Pureadvocacyonthiscontinuummeanschoosingthestanceofpleadingon
another’sbehalforinsupportofsomething.Publicrelationspractitionershave
comparedadvocacytobeinglikeanattorneyrepresentingonesideofanissue
towardtheendofcreatingpublicacceptanceforagivenideaorcommodity.Some
practitionerstakeissuewithdefiningadvocacyinthisway,andperhapseven,that
advocacyispartoftheconversationbecauseitraisesunsavoryaccusationsof
manipulationorspin.Here,advocacymeansethicallyandeffectivelypleadingthe
organization’scasetogivenpublics(Canceletal.,1997,p.35-36).
Pureaccommodationonthiscontinuummeanscapitulatingtothedemands
ofthepublicorpublicsinquestion,nomatterwhetheroddswithwhatthe
organizationwoulddootherwise.Theaccommodativerolecanbeseenashavinga
missionoftrustbuilding,andestablishingandmaintainingmutuallydependent
relationshipsbetweentheorganizationanditspublics(Canceletal.,1997,p.36).
Betweenthetwopolesoftheadvocacy-accommodationcontinuumlieawide
rangeofoperationalstancesandthereforeanumberofstrategiesthatoffersome
combinationofaccommodationandadvocacy.Canceletal.(1997)arguesthat
whetherconsciousornot,publicrelationspractitionerschooseastancesomewhere
7
betweenpureaccommodationandpureadvocacy.Thecontinuumoffersapractical
viewthatdeviatesfromthenormativetheorythatallactorsinthecrisisseekto
resolvetheconflictinamostefficientandamicablemanner.
Further,researchersargue,“communicationactsreflectingbothextremes
[pureaccommodationandpureadvocacy]canactuallyoccursimultaneouslyin
dealingwithonepublic.”(p.37).
Contingencytheoryattemptstoidentifyacomprehensivelistoffactorsthat
influencethedecision-makingprocessthatpractitionersusetodeterminean
organization’sstance(Cameron,Cropp,&Reber,2001;Cancel,Cameron,Sallot,&
Mitrook,1997;Cancel,Mitrook,&Cameron,1999).Aprocessofexploringacademic
literatureinpublicrelationsandin-depthinterviewswasusedtouncoverroughly
87variablesthataffectthestanceanorganizationtakestowardapublicorpublics
onanissue.Thesevariableswerethenconfirmedandvettedthroughadditionaland
follow-upinterviews.Forpracticalpurposes,these87variablesaredividedinto11
categoriesontwodimensionsofexternalandinternalvariables(Cancel,Mitrook&
Cameron,1999).Theycanbedescribedasfallingontoorganizational,individualand
sociallevels(Shin,Heath&Lee,2011).
Fromahighlevel,externalfactorsarethoseoverwhichtheorganization
can’tdirectlyexertcontrol:threatssuchasgovernmentregulationorlitigation,the
industryenvironment,generalpoliticalandsocialenvironment,characteristicsof
theexternalpublicandmore.Internalfactorsincludehowmuchisatstakeforthe
organizationinthesituation,characteristicsoftheorganization,thepublicrelations
department,thedominantcoalitionandindividualsinvolved.Morespecifically
8
theserangefromeconomicstabilityoftheorganizationtoanopenorclosedculture,
publicrelationsrepresentationinthedominantcoalition,staffeducationlevelsand
more.(Canceletal.,1997).
Cancel,Mitrook&Cameron(1999)alsologicallydividedthe87factors
differentlyintopredisposingvariablesandsituationalvariables.Predisposing
variablesinfluencehowanorganizationislikelytoapproachordealwithissuesas
theyarise.Situationalvariablesarespecificand“oftenchangingdynamicsatwork
duringparticularsituationsinvolvinganorganizationandtheparticularpublic”(p.
177).Themostsupportedpredisposingvariablesincludecorporationsize,
corporateculture,corporatebusinessexposure,publicrelationsaccesstothe
dominantcoalition,enlightenmentofthedominantcoalition,linemanagers,
enlightenmentoflinemanagersandindividualcharacteristics.
The“Contingent”or“ItDepends”ideologypresentsasystematicmannerin
whichfactorsinacrisiscanbeevaluatedatdifferentpointsindynamicallychanging
situations.Becauseofitsrobustness,itlaysanexcellentfoundationtoevaluate
conflictmanagementwithintherealmofpublicrelations(Canceletal.,1997).
ContingencyTheoryinActionLet’snoteseveralrevealingpoints:
• “Organizationswilltendtoviewadvocacyofitspositionasnotonly
bestforitselfbutbestfortheworldinthelongrun,”(Canceletal.,
1997p.39).
• Organizationsareunlikelytopracticepublicrelationssymmetrically
untilapublicgainsroughlyequalpower.Throughthelogicofgame
9
theoryitfollowsthatorganizationscangetthegreatestbenefitby
practicingasymmetricformsofcommunicationsinsituationsin
whichtheorganizationhasgreaterpowerthanitspublics(Cancelet
al.,1997,p.47).
Theprinciplesofcontingencytheoryhavebeentestedandfurtherdeveloped
inlimitedinternationalsettings:China(Li,Cropp,&Jin,2010;Zhang,Qui,&
Cameron,2004),SouthKorea(Bae&Park,2011;Choi&Cameron,2005;Shin,
Heath,&Lee,2011),andSingapore(Jin,Pang,&Cameron,2006).
Culturalvarianceisachallengetoglobalpublicrelations.TheworkofChoi
andCameron(2005)investigatedtheinternationalpublicrelationsdynamicsof
contingencytheoryinKorea,specificallyasanexplorationtobuildasetof
internationalcontingencyvariablesinordertoextendthetheoryandprovidea
moreholisticpictureofpublicrelationspractices.Previousliteraturefindsthat
societalandculturalfactorsstronglyaffectpublicrelationspractices,andthisstudy
focusedonKoreannationalidentity(p.173-174).Throughinterviewing,
researchersuncoveredwhatisessentiallyaConfucianvariablethat,tooversimplify,
addressesthe“we-ness”versus“collectiveness”and“emotionoverlogic”ofthe
KoreanculturethatisincontrasttoWesternculture(p.183).AdditionallyChoiand
CameronfoundthatlocalCEO’sdecisionpowerhasabiginfluenceonstancesof
multinationalcorporationsinSouthKorea.
SignificantfindingsofcontingencytheoryapplicationsinKorea(Baeand
Park,2011)includethatofferingfinancialcompensationasanapologytoonepublic,
namelythenationalgovernment,doesnotsatisfyallpublics,namelymassmediain
10
thiscase.BaeandParklookedintothesocio-contextualinfluencesoftheKorean
newsmediawhenhugecorporateplayerSamsungofferedabout$850millionasan
apologytotheKoreangovernmentafterastringoflegalissues.Thisstudywas
conductedbycontentanalysisofthecompany’sofficialstatementaswellasnews
mediacoverageofit,andfoundthatdifferentinterpretationsofthismajordonation
stemfromsocio-contextualfactorsaswellasasuddenswinginSamsung’sstance
fromadvocatingthatlegalaccusationshadnogroundingtoaccommodatingtothe
tuneofnearly$850million.Thetakeawayhereisthesocialcontextinwhich
contingencytheoryoperatescannotbeignored.Thesocio-contextualfactorsof
Koreanculturethatmajorconglomerateshavebeenaccusedofillegalactivitiesfrom
bribinggovernmentofficerstomanipulatingstockpricestoillegalinheritancesand
embellishingcorporateaccounts.Forthisreason,Koreanpublicsdon’tnecessarily
givefullcredittoacompanyofferingalargemonetarydonationtothegovernment
oragoodcause.
FurthercontingencyfindingsinKoreaconcludeaculturalandsituational
contingencyperspectiveofpublicrelationsleadershipcanhelpexplaindifferences
betweenleadershippreferencesforpublicrelationspractitionersintheU.S.and
SouthKorea(Shin,Heath,&Lee,2011).Researchershavepredictedthatintothe
future,leadershipinpublicrelationswillmeantheabilitytointegrateatseveral
levelsofbusinessandsocietyforamoreintegratedmanagementprocessandfor
helpingorganizationsmakesocietymorefunctionalthroughcontingent,strategic,
skilledandreflectiveleadership.Basedonasurveyof1,000practitioners:
11
Shinetal.(2006)foundthatindividuallevelfactorshaveprimaryinfluence
onresponsetosituations.Someofindividualleveloffactorsincludes
individualcommunicationcompetency,personalethicalvalues,abilityto
handlecomplexproblems,andfamiliaritywithexternalpublicsorits
representatives.Thiscontingencyframeworkguidesdeploymentofthe
individualqualificationsnecessaryforeffectiveconflictmanagement(pp.
171).
Leadership&CultureNationalcultureislikelyanimportantelementinthecontingencynatureof
effectivepublicrelationsbecauseculturepowerfullyshapesthewaypeopleinteract
witheachother,socialenvironmentsandorganizations.Sin,Heath,&Lee(2011)
arguethatit’sthe“sharedsense-makingofeachculturethatdefinesleadershipin
general,aswellasthequalitiesofrelationshipsbetweenorganizationsandtheirkey
publics,”(p.173).Socialpsychologyresearchbycross-culturalpsychologistGeert
Hofstedesuggeststhatleaderswhogrowupwithcertainenvironmentalrestraints
fromnationalandregionalforcescannothelpbutreflecttheirmilieu.
Hofstededevelopedamodelthatisgenerallyacceptedbybusinessculture
scholarsasthemostcomprehensiveframeworkofthenationalvaluesofcultures.
Whilethismodelisnotwithoutcritics,itservestopointoutmeasurabledifferences
betweenU.S.andNorwegianbusinessculturethatcouldmeandifferencesin
applicationofcontingencyfromthethreeinternationalsettingsinwhichit’sbeen
developedandtested.Whatfollowsisabriefcomparisonofmajorconstructsinthe
U.S.andNorwayviaHofstede’swebsiteasofMarch30,2015.
12
Thewebsiteattemptstoofferanoverviewof“thedeepdrivingfactorsof
Americanculturerelativetootherculturesinourworld.”Again,whilethisis
certainlynotacomprehensivecomparativeanalysis,itoffersajumpingoffpointfor
readers,astheUnitedStates’positionintheglobalbusinessworldisquite
prominent;itmakesforatouchstonecomparison.
• Powerdistance.U.S.:40.Norway:31.
Definition:Theattitudeoftheculturetowardpowerinequalitiesamongstits
people.Also,strengthofsocialhierarchy.
• Individualism.U.S.:91.Norway:69.
Definition:Thedegreeofinterdependenceasocietymaintainsamongits
members.
• Masculinity.U.S.:62.Norway8.
Definition:Conceptualizedhereasbasemotivation.Hofstedecallsa
masculinesocietyonethatismotivatedbywantingtobethebest,anda
femininesocietyaslikingwhatyoudo.Asasociety,ahighmasculinityscore
meansthesocietyisdrivenbycompetition,achievementandsuccess,with
successdefinedas“winning”orbeing“best-in-the-field.”Alowmasculinity
scoremeansdominantvaluesareincaringforothersandthefocusismore
onqualityoflife.Qualityoflifeisthesignofsuccessandstandingoutfrom
thecrowdisnotadmirable.Also,taskorientationversusperson-orientation.
• Uncertaintyavoidance.U.S.:46.Norway:50.
Definition:Thewayasocietydealswiththefactthatthefuturecanneverbe
known.
13
• Long-termorientation.U.S.:26.Norway:35.
Definition:Howasocietymaintainslinkswithitspastwhiledealingwith
presentandfuturechallenges.
• Indulgence.U.S.:68.Norway:55.
Definition:Theextenttowhichpeopletrytocontroldesiresandimpulses.
(http://geert-hofstede.com/countries.html).
Somescholarsarguethatpublicrelationsresearchreliestooheavilyon
particularworldviews,suchasthatoftheUnitedStates:
Theformerinternationalmodelsofpublicrelationsaregroundedin
positivism(Dozier&Lauzen,1998;Grunig,1992;Holtzhausen,2000)and
largelypredicatedonneoliberaleconomics,whichproposesthatthegreatest
social,political,andeconomicgoodresultsfromthefreeflowofcapitalanda
free-marketsystem.Thesemodelsaregroundedinassumptionsof
democracy,capitalism,economicandpressfreedom,andcivilliberties,
amongotherconsiderations(Holtzhausen,2000;Kruckeberg,1995;Pearson,
1990;Sharpe,1992;Vercicetal.,2001;Wilson,1990).Becausesignificant
partsoftheworlddonotfitthesedefiningcriteriaandoperateunder
dramaticallydifferentpoliticalandeconomicsystems,atrendofretrofitting
theWesternneoliberalmodeltoothercultureshasevolvedinthe
scholarship,withproblematicimplications:“Manyoftheassumptionsthat
guideWesterntheoriesandpracticesarenotapplicableinotherregionsof
theworld”(Taylor&Kent,1999,p.131).(Gaither&Curtin,2008,p.117).
14
Sometheoristsarguethataddingcultureasavariablewhenapplyingpublic
relationsmodelstointernationalscenarioscouldhelp,andsomehaveadded
generalizedculturalindicessuchasHofstede’sdiscussedabove.Gaither&Curtin
(2008)writethattheWest’sisonlyonereferencepointforwhatitmeanstostudy
andpracticepublicrelations.Notably,theyproposeaculturalmodeltobe
incorporatedwithpublicrelations.Thiscircuitofculturemodelencompassesthe
interrelationsandinteractionsofregulation,identity,production,consumptionand
representation(Gaither&Curtin,2008,p.118).
Contingencytheoryisrelevanttoapplytocommunicatingenvironmental
sustainability.Communicatingenvironmentalsustainabilitycanbeseenas
managingtheconflictbetweenpublicswithclimatechangeconcerns,suchas
governmententities,activistpublicsandthegeneralpublic’sconsciousness,and
organizationsunderconsiderationthatareinapositionofneedingtocommunicate
onthistopic.Somecompanies,byvirtueoftheirmainfunctionormeansof
operationhaveahighimpactontheenvironmentbydefinition.Companies
conductingpetroleumexplorationandproduction,forexamplehaveahighimpact
intheenvironment.Agriculturecompaniesfromthosethatusefertilizer(a
petroleumproduct)tothoseengagedintheharvestingoftreescomeunderfire
fromclimatechangegroups.
TheNorwegianLandscape:CorporateSocialandEnvironmentalResponsibility
Norwayisamodernandhighlydevelopedcountrywithasmallbutrobust
economy.Grossdomesticproductpercapitaisamongthehighestintheworld
(2014InvestmentClimateSurvey–Norway,June2014,p.1),anditssovereign
15
wealthfundisthelargestintheworldat$830billionin2013(p.10).Thereare
approximately5,500foreign-ownedcompaniesinNorway,andforeigndirect
investmenthasmorethandoubledinthepastdecadeto$183billionattheendof
2012(p.5).WhenthesecompaniesareoperatingonNorwegiansoil,theymust
abidebyNorwegianlaw,andtotheextentthatNorwegianpublicswieldpowerinits
democraticsystem,theymuststayinthegoodgracesofvotingpublics.
Corporatesocialresponsibilityis“verymuchapartofNorwegiancorporate
andpoliticalconsciousness,”(2014InvestmentClimateSurvey–Norway,June
2014,p.10).ThegovernmentisamajorownerintheNorwegianeconomy,(p.1)
andclimatepolicy,procurementpolicyanddevelopmentpolicyareallpartofthe
governmentguidelinesfor“ethicalandresponsibleconductingovernment-owned
enterprises,”(p.10).
Pastresearchhassoughttodescribehowafirmarrivesatitslevelof
commitmenttowardcorporateenvironmentalandsocialresponsibility.Afour-part
conceptualmodeldiscussedbyLynesandAndrachuk(2008)showstheinfluences,
motivationsandcatalystsonafirm’slevelofcommitmenttotheseissues.PartIof
themodeliscomposedoffourkeyinfluencesystems—markets,socialsystem,
politicalsystemandsciencesystem—andtheirinterplaythatmakeupinfluences
onthegivenfirm.Motivationstowardcorporateenvironmentalandsocial
responsibility,suchasfinancialbenefits,competitiveadvantageandimage
enhancementmakeupPartIIofthemodel.InPartIIIarecatalystssuchasculture,
internalleadershipandfinancialpoliciesandfinally,theoutputofthemodel,and
PartIVisthefirm’slevelofcommitmenttocorporatesocialandenvironmental
16
responsibilityasdemonstratedbypledgestotakeaction,responsibilitytakenforits
action,levelofinvolvementinsocialandenvironmentalissuesanddedicationto
improvingthegivenfirm’sperformance.(p.379).Whilethesepartsaresimplified
hereforthesakeofbrevity,theimportanttake-awayfromthemodelisthekey
market,socialsystem,politicalsystemandscienceinfluencesatplay.These
influencesaredynamicallygroupedintothosethatareinternal,externalandsector-
specific(Lynes&Andrachuk,2008),someofwhicharenotablyparallelto
contingencytheoryfactordivisions.
AcasestudyofScandinavianAirlines’adoptionofcorporatesocialand
environmentalpracticesinvolvesdifferentmarketinfluencesbutkeyoverlapwith
thepresentlyproposedstudyinpoliticalsystem,socialsystem,andscience
influences.Politically,airtravel’scloseassociationwithglobalizationheightensthe
needforittoexaminesocialandenvironmentalsustainability(Lynes&Andrachuk,
2008).Lynes&AndrachukwritethatinScandinaviatherearehighlevelsofsocial
security,highaveragewages,apowerfullabormovementwiththehighestunion
membershipratesintheworld,stronglaborrightsforwomen,thehighest
proportionofwomeninparliamentforEuropeanUnioncountries,44percentin
Sweden,andahighlevelofcooperationbetweenorganizationsandthestate.“The
stabilityoftheScandinaviancountriesalongwiththeirsolideducationsystemand
stronghealthcareandsocialsecuritysystemsmeansthatpeoplecanconcentrateon
otherissues,suchastheenvironmentalresponsibilityoffirms.“(Lynes&
Andrachuk,2008,p382).Further,astudyacross22countriesfoundthatfor
managersandprofessionals,collectivismanduniversalismarepositivelyrelatedto
17
corporatesocialandenvironmentalresponsibility,whileindividualismisnegatively
related.(Egrietal.,2004)
Lynes&Ancrachukarguethatmodelsthatdonottakeinfluenceson
corporatecommitmenttowardsocialandenvironmentalresponsibilityriskfailure.
18
Methodology
Inafirstpushintoexaminecontingencytheory’smanifestationsin
Norwegianpublicrelations,qualitativeresearchmethodologysurfacesasthebest
option.Itiscommonforexploratoryresearchtobequalitativeinnatureandtolater
followwithquantitativeandthereforemoregeneralizableanalysis(Silverman,
2010a).Finedetailsthatmakeastudystrongcomethroughbestinaninterview
formatthatoffersaplatformforelaborationandexpandedinquirywherenecessary
(Spangler&Pompper,2011,p.9).
Semistructuredinterviewswereconductedwith10communications
professionalswhocommunicateenvironmentalresponsibilityaspartoftheirjob.
Thisfallswithintheproposedrangeof10-20interviews,whichisbasedon
previouslypublishedstudies(Cameron,Cropp,&Reber,2000;Curtin1999;Marra
1998;Rollins,Nickell,&Ennis,2014),butultimatelyinterviewscontinueduntilno
newpatternsemerged,andideasaturationwasreached.
Afullpapertrailincludingfieldnotesfrominterviews,audiorecordingsof
interviewsandnotesonprocessaccompanytheresearchprocessasrecommended
byscholars.Anonymousquotesfromparticipantsareinthewriteupwhererelevant
(Silverman,2010b).Tofurtherprotecttheanonymityofparticipants,namesof
companyproductsandotheridentifiableinformationhasbeenremoved.
Interviewswererecordedonaudiodevice,andfilessavedwithafilename
codingsystemthatremovedallidentifiableinformationfortheindividuals
19
interviewed.Oncecollected,audiodatawasthentranscribedandcodedusing
focusedcoding.Integrativememoswerewritten,thenthemesselectedand
connectiontotheorysought(Emerson,1995).Alldatawasthenanalyzedfor
patternsuntilideasaturationwasreached.Fileswerethentranscribedandsavedin
textdocumentsusingthesamenomenclatureandsavedonapassword-protected
laptop.Oneaudiofiledidnotrecordproperly,butimmediatelyupondiscoveringthe
issue,theresearcherwrotenotesontheconversation.Whilethedataissufficientas
notesfordataanalysisviatheconstantcomparativemethodwiththeother
transcripts,thisoneoutofteninterviewsdoesconstituteaweaknessinthe
methodology,albeitminor.
Thisresearchwasdesignedtomaximizeunderstandingoffactorsatplaydue
tothepreliminarynatureofthiscross-culturalresearch.Thebestmaterialcame
fromthestoriesabouttheconflicts,andinresponsetoquestionsaboutwhycertain
actionswerechosen,whethertheaction(s)hadthedesiredoutcome,whatelsewas
considered,etc.,andrelevantquotesareincludedthroughout.
ParticipantsInterviewswerewithrepresentativesofcompaniesorwithagenciesthat
handlestrategiccommunicationofenvironmentalissues.Alloftheindividuals
interviewedweretheprimaryindividualhandlingenvironmentalcommunication
fortheorganizationathand.Interviewswerewiththecommunicationsdirectoror
topindividualwhocommunicatesenvironmentalissues.Jobtitlesincludedvice
presidentofcommunicationsandcorporateaffairs,directorofexternalrelations
andcommunication,communicationmanager,managingpartnerandmore.While
20
therearecertainlyotherpeopleanddepartmentswithinanorganizationthatcould
beinterviewedoncommunicatingenvironmentalsustainability(CEO,
environmentalspecialists,etc.),professionalcommunicatorsweretheprimary
interestbecausenomatterwhattheyaretaskedwithexecutingmessaging.
Individualsweregenerallypartoforganizations’executiveteam.Individualshad
experiencerangingfrom35yearsofgovernmentworktobusinessdevelopment
turnedgovernmentregulatorturnedcommunicationandexternalaffairsdirector
(RS10).Mostwerecareercommunicators,butparticipantsnonethelesshadvaried
backgroundsandeducationsoutsidecommunication.Somewereschooledin
economicsinNorwayandabroad(GHI02,RS10,MNO24)andsomehadexperience
onthepoliticalscene(ABC04,MNO24).Anothertrainedasapoliticalscientist,
educatedfurtherwithineconomicsandjournalismwithtwentyyearsofexperience
inenvironmentalcommunication(MNO24).Yetanothertrainedasamarine
biologistwithfouryearsasaprojectmanagertaskedwithcommunication
(BEBH0611).
Participatingcompaniesincludeglobalindustryleadersoperatingin
Norway’sprimarysectorincludingthepetroleum,agricultureandaquaculture
industries.CompaniesarebasedinNorway,NorwegianStockExchange(ABC04),
oneindustryassociation(JKL05),multinationalcorporationsheadquarteredinthe
U.S.,Norwayandothers(RS10).Companiesrangedinsizefromfewerthan10to
80,000globallywith800to900inNorway(RS10).Onecompanydoes
environmentaltestingonbehalfofindustryandonecompanyisacommunication
21
agencythatdoescontractworkfortheagricultureandaquacultureindustries
amongothers.
Experiencerangedfromupto35yearsinpolitics.Notablycommunication
directorpositionsinthesecompaniesismergedwithotherfunctionsevenatlarge
companies,forexample,acommunicationdirectorwhoisalsoresponsiblefor
portionsoffinance(CDNS),corporateaffairsdirectoranddirectorof
communicationsfor7years(GHI02)dealingwithsustainabilityissuesforthose7
yearsaswellas12yearsprioratoneoftheworld’slargestfoodcompanies.Dealing
withavastrangeofissuesrelatedtobothenvironmentalandsocialsustainability
issues:childlabor,obesity,sourcingqualities,marketing,andbeforethat
governmentservicefortheministryofagricultureandbeforethattheNorwegian
ForeignServiceinBrusselsanddealingwithtradenegotiationswiththeWorld
TradeOrganizationdealingwithagreementsfortradeandtariffs(GHI02).
Companieshadmadevariouslevelsofcommitmentstoenvironmental
responsibility,includinghavingsignedtheUNGlobalCompact,arememberofthe
GlobalCompactNordicNetwork(CDNN),whereparticipantsfromDenmark,
Finland,NorwayandSwedendiscusscommonchallengesandtheimplementationof
thetenprinciplesintheUNGlobalCompact(ABC04AnnualReport).
Companiesrepresentedincludethosethebusinessworlddeemsprimary
sectorbusinesses,i.e.,companiesthathavetheircorebusinessfunctiontiedtothe
environmentornaturalresources.Suchindustriesincludepetroleumexploration&
production,agricultureandaquaculture.It’sworthnotingthatthispeculiar
situation—onewherethecompanyinherentlyhasahighimpactonthe
22
environment,yetthecompanyistaskedwithcommunicatingmeasuresof
environmentalsustainability—accentuatestheinadequacyofthetwo-way
symmetricalexcellencemodelproposedbyGrunig&Grunig,1992.Inthismodel,
onewouldbeexpectedtoadvocateonbehalfoftheorganization,andthereisno
roomforaccommodatingapublic.Approximatelyhalfofintervieweeswereinthe
petroleumindustry,andthiswasdueinparttothelargesizeofandprominentrole
thepetroleumsectorplaysintheNorwegianeconomy.
Sampling Twosamplingtechniques,purposiveandsnowballingwereusedto
complementeachotherduetothedifficultyoffindingqualifiedintervieweeswith
bothtimeandwillingnesstoparticipate.Theresearcherbeganwithdiscussions
withthefounderofoneofNorway’slargestpublicrelationsfirms,whohasa
UniversityofMissouriconnection,toserveasastartingpointforsnowballing.
Thesemembersarechosenfortheirhighestlikelihoodofhavingthetaskof
communicatingenvironmentalfriendliness.
Additionallytheresearcherreachedoutonanindividualbasistopublic
relationspractitionersfromleadingorganizationsintheseindustries.Anothernote
onthepetroleumindustry:Nearlyhalfofthisstudy’sparticipantscamefromthe
petroleumindustryforseveralreasons.Thepetroleumindustryisprominentin
Norway,andtheresearcherwasabletomakeearlyandfruitfulconnectionswith
membersofthisindustry.Becauseitisalargeandactiveindustry,onemembership-
basedindustryorganizationwasabletomakeanumberofsuggestedconnections
23
forinterviewees.Interviewinganumberoforganizationsfromoneindustrycould
biastheresultsiftherewasapatternwithinthatindustry.
SemistructuredInterviewingSemistructuredinterviewsofferampleopportunityforintervieweestooffer
informationtheyseeasmostpertinentandmeaningfultotheexperienceathand
whileallowingtheinterviewertheabilitytoprovideguidancetotheinterviewand
makesurehighpointsarehit.Hearingandprobing,whichgetatthequestionof
how,andexploringmotivations,whichgetattheheartofwhy,arecitedbyscholars
asjustafewfortesofinterviewing.Contextisalsoimportanttothesequestions
(Berger,2014,p112),whichthroughobservationssuchasareaeconomicand
censusdata,mightbeabletomorefullyexplainphenomena.
Spangler&Pompper(2011,p.9)notethatinterviewsarecommonly
conductedwhenaresearcheridentifiesgivenexpertswhoseknowledgeofaspecific
fieldcanilluminatetheparticularareaofresearchinterest.Thepremiseofthe
presentstudyistodrawonpersonalexperiencesandanecdotesofpractitioners.
Qualitativemethodologyprovidesnuanceddescriptionscanalsobecapturedby
qualitativemethods(Silverman,2010a).Interviewingallowsforexploring
motivationsandattitudesofthepastandpresentandhearingandprobing(Berger,
2014,p.113).
Atopicguideinstrumentofapproximately10-15probeswaspilotedwitha
layperson,aNorwegiancitizen,tominimizeanyunclearmeaningsarisingfromthe
wordingbytheAmericaninterviewerandNorwegianinterviewees.Asclarifications
24
wereanabsoluteminimum,theresearcherwasabletoproceedwithadded
confidencethatthelanguagebarrierwouldindeedbemarginalasanticipated.
Anaddedbenefitofthepilotinterviewwasitprimedtheinterviewerfor
someoftheresponsesthatmightcomeupandconfirmsomeofthebig
environmentalplayersthatmightanddidcomeupinactualinterviews.
Theinstrumentguidewasmadeavailabletorespondentsinadvanceif
requested,butnonedid.Informedconsentformsweresuppliedpriortothe
interviewinaccordancewiththeresearchers’universityInstitutionalReviewBoard
requirements.Respondentswereaskedavarietyofquestionsabouttheirpublic
relationsexperienceasitpertainstotheenvironmentandimageandforexamples
tosupportstatements.Probeswereopen-endedtoensureconversationsweren’t
restrictiveandtoencourageintervieweestoself-reportinasmuchdetailasthey
werecomfortable.Intervieweeswereaskedtodefinekeytermsinaccordancewith
Berger’s(2014,p.115)suggestion.Floatingpromptswerebeusedwhere
appropriatetoelicitelaboration.Keyquestionsforelaborationinclude“Andthen
whathappened…Whowasinvolved…Whendidthishappen…Whydidithappen…
Wheredidithappen…Whatwastheresult?”(p.115).
Tohelpremedyhesitationsforrevealingless-than-flatteringpracticesin
communicatingenvironmentalfriendliness,suchasthehypocriticalpracticeof
greenwashing,thequestionofhowtheyperceiveothercompaniesinNorway
strategizeandexecuteonthetopicwasasked.Thevalueofthisparticularquestion’s
responselayinhelpingtheresearcherbetterrecognizeanyhintsatsuch
25
communicationpracticesinsubsequentinterviews,sofloatingpromptscouldbe
employedmoreeffectively.
MinimizingCulturalDifferences,MaximizingTheoryBuildingBuildingrapportwasparticularlyimportantwiththisgroup,asthe
researcherwasanAmericanwithaboutfiveyearsofprofessionalexperience,and
intervieweeswereNorwegiancitizenswithmoreextensiveexperienceinpublic
relations.Onetechniqueforthis,easilyappliedtosemi-structuredinterviews,is
whenaquestionofunderstandingarisestoinquire,“Whenwouldyoudothat?,”or
“Whatwouldyouusethatfor?,”ratherthan“Whatdoyoumeanbythat?,”which
mightmorereadilyhighlightdifferencesbetweenhowthetwouselanguageand
causetheintervieweetoseetheinterviewerasdifferentthantheyare(Leech,2002,
p.666).
Thisresearchwas100percentself-fundedbytheprimaryresearcher,which
isworthnotingbecausemultipleintervieweesandovercamehesitancyto
participateuponlearningthis.
Ingeneral,demonstratinggenuineinterestandconsiderableinvestment
intimeandresourcestoexplorecontingencytheory’sapplicationsto
communicatingenvironmentalresponsibilityinNorwayhelpedmaximizethe
likelihoodofpotentialintervieweesbeingwillingtoparticipate.Inparticular,
travelingfromtheU.S.toconductface-to-faceinterviewsinNorwayhelp
demonstratethisinterest.
Additionally,Norway’sesteemforhighereducationmighthavemademore
participantswillingtosharetheirtimeandexperienceswithapersontheydidn’t
26
personallyknowandhadn’tmetbefore.AdditionallyNorway’sopenculturemight
havehelpedaswell.
Thesignaturelineofallemailcommunicationsincludedtheresearcher’s
professionalportfoliowebsitedescribingthecurrentresearchathand,related
researchpresentedbytheresearcherattheInternationalPublicRelationsResearch
Conference,andpastprofessionalworkinthepetroleumandagricultureindustries.
Themajorityofinterviews—allbutone—wereheldatthepractitioners’
placesofworkforthesakeofconvenienceforthepractitioner.Interviewswere
approximatelyonehour,andthesetupofinterviewquestionsreflectedthis.This
constraintwasimposedbywhatisconsideredatypicallengthforabusiness
meeting,sothatitwouldconvenientlyfitintotheinterviewee’sday.
Theinterviewsfocusedonkeypublicsthecompanyconsiderswhen
communicatingenvironmentalsafety,sustainabilityand/orcorporatesocial
responsibility.Interviewsfocusedontheinternalandexternalfactorsacompany
takesintoconsiderationwhencommunicatingtothesepublics.Refertotheresearch
questionsguidingthestudyabove.
Interviewsofferintrospectiononthetopicbytherespondentwhilestill
beingcontrolledbytheresearcher.Byusingtheinterviewtechniquetheresearcher
gainsaccesstothespiritofcommunicationsintheNorwegianlanguagethatwould
otherwiserequireatranslator’sservice.Nuancecanbetterbeconveyedthan
throughasurveyandclarificationsought,whichwillbeimportantgiventhecultural
differencesbetweentheresearcherandtherespondents.Advantagesof
interviewingincludeachievingmaximummutualunderstandingofthephenomena
27
beinginvestigated.Richdescriptivequalitativeinterviewdatacollectionmayserve
asafirststepindevelopingahypothesisthatcouldlaterbetestedusing
quantitativetechniques,whichwouldallowforgeneralizationtoalargerpopulation
atthattime.
Intermsofminingforcontent,itwouldhavebeenveryeasyforthese
interviewstolastlonger.It’sworthnotingthattheinterviewerwasmetwithsome
resistanceintalkingindetailaboutparticularcrisesorriskstances,particularlyfor
ongoingissues.
Inthefirstfewinterviews,thefirsttheresearcherdidnotsuggestfactorsfor
consideration,butinCameron,Cropp&Reber(2000),in“GettingPastPlatitudes”,
thiswasacceptable.Theauthorswritethatthesociallydesirableresponsein
discussingcommunicationstrategyisto“makenice”andnottobetooawfully
strategicorgoaloriented,whichmeansneedingtogivepermissiontofolkstoopen
up.Afterexhaustingvoluntaryconsiderationsbytheinterviewees,theresearcher
thenaskedintervieweestosharetheirmostmemorableconflictandhowitwent
down,essentiallyprobingtotriggerrecognitionandelaborationfromthe
respondent’spart.
Theinitialconcernwastodotoomuchpressingandprobing,andbeultra-
carefulnottoleadpeopletoanyofthefactors.Moreexplicitlyaskingaboutthe
actions,whythataction,outcomeandotherconsiderationsshouldnotultimatelybe
misleadingtoaprofessional.Time-wiseanotherdifficultywasinthetime
constraints.Acommonpatternwasforcompaniestofocuson,explainanddefend
theenvironmentalmeasuresbeforediscussinganycommunicationstrategy.While
28
notaproblem,everyminutecountsina1-hourinterview.Sowhilethepreliminary
interviewinstrumentdidcontainalineofquestionsaboutrecentorotherwise
memorableconflicts.
Inaccordancewithmethodologyforsemi-structuredinterviews,the
instrumentcanbeadjustedbasedonwhattheresearcherislearningfrom
interviewsalreadyconducted.Itisdesignedtoallowtheresearchertoimprovethe
qualityofinformationwitheachsubsequentinterview.
29
Analysis
Thisstudywassuccessfulinansweringitstwodrivingresearchquestions,
whichagainare:
RQ1:WhatfactorsfromthecontingencytheoryofaccommodationmanifestwhenNorwegiancommunicationsmanagersdiscusshowtheydealwithkeypublicsoncorporateenvironmentalresponsibilityconcerns?
RQ2:ArethereadditionalconsiderationsthatNorwegiancommunicationsmanagerstendtoemphasizewhendiscussinghowtheydealwithkeypublicsoncorporateenvironmentalresponsibilityconcerns?
Whatfollowsisabriefoverviewofanswerstotheseresearchquestionsbeforea
roadmaptotheanalysissectionanddiscussiononthemeaningthatcanbedrawn
fromthedatainthediscussionsection.
InansweringRQ1,factorsinall11categoriesofcontingencytheorymanifest.
Inparticularthisstudyfoundtheubiquityofthreatsrelatedtofactorsinfluencing
politicalandsocialsupportforthesecompaniesmanifestthroughoutinterviewing.
InansweringRQ2,atendencytoemphasizeonfact-basedcommunicationemerged
asaloudandclearpreferenceemergedfortheexistingfactor“howindividuals
receive,processanduseinformationandinfluence”,whichisinthecategoryof
internalvariables,individualcharacteristics(ofpublicrelationspractitioner,
dominantcoalitionandlinemanagers).Finally,althoughthisstudydidnotseekto
discovercontingencytheoryfactorsthatdidnotmanifest,internalvariablesrelated
tocharacteristicsofindividualpeople—PRpractitionersandtopmanagement—
aroselessfrequentlythanotherinternalorexternalfactors.
30
Foreaseofmanaging86factorsacrosstendifferentinterviews,discussion
willsurroundthe11categoriesofinternalandexternalvariablesincontingency
theory,whicharefullylistedinAppendixC.Categoriesofexternalvariablesinclude:
1)threats,2)industryenvironment,3)generalpolitical/social
environment/externalculture,4)externalpublicand5)issueunderquestion.
Categoriesofinternalvariablesinclude:1)organizationcharacteristics,2)public
relationsdepartmentcharacteristics,3)characteristicsofdominantcoalition,4)
internalthreats5)individualcharacteristicsand6)relationshipcharacteristics.This
structureisinaccordancewithPyrczak&Bruce(2005a,p.104),whichsays
qualitativeresearchresultsshouldbeorganizedinasstraightforwardmanneras
possibleandthatorganizationbemadecleartothereader.Forexample,Pyrczak&
Brucerecommendreportingonmajortrendsandthemesthatemergefrom
subjectiveandobjectiveanalysesofdatasuchastranscribedinterviews.
Subheadingsbelowwillguidethereaderthroughthisstudy’sresults.
Noteachandeveryfactorwasspecificallyaddressedineveryinterviewfora
“yes”or“no”astowhetherthefactormanifestsasaconsiderationthoughthe
researchconcludesthatthemajoritydidmanifestevenwithoutcomprehensive
probing,buthighlightsareincludedineachcategoryincludingrelevantquotes
throughout.
Category-by-CategoryFactorManifestations
Externalvariables:Threats. Ofallthefactorsthatmanifestedthroughinterviewing,threatswerethe
mostfrequent.Communicationmanagersclearlyhadathoroughunderstandingof
31
repercussionsifconflictgotoutofhand.Thisconclusionisreachednotonlyfrom
thenumberoftimesthefactorsof“governmentregulation”,“potentiallydamaging
publicity”and“scarringoforganization’sreputationincommunity”arose,butalso
becauseofthenonverbalcuesassociatedthatsuggestedfamiliarity,clarityand
confidence.
Oneparticipantfromthepetroleumindustrycompany,forexample,explains
theimplicationsofbeingviewedasnotenvironmentallysustainablenotnecessarily
asanimmediateordirecteconomicimpact,butonethateventuallyendsin
governmentregulation:
“Thegovernmentisbiannuallygivelicensestotheoilcompanies,andhowmuchnewareastheyareopeningupforoilexplorationisdependingonhowisthe,howmuchwillparliamentandopinionofthepeople,society,accepttoopen.Andofcoursethemorepeoplethataremoreagainstexplorationandagainsttheoilindustry,lessnewareastobeopenedforthisindustry.Soinnextphase,wearesufferingofcourseasanindustry,”(PQ31).
Sointhecaseofthepetroleumindustry,thesociallicensetooperateisalso
literallyagovernment-issuedlicensetooperate,becausethereareliterallyfewer
licensesavailableonthewholethatalimitednumberofcompaniescangetinon.
(PQ31).
Many,manydiscussionsofthreatsultimatelycamebacktoanaversionto
additionaloronerousgovernmentregulationsasarepercussionofnothandling
conflictwell,andthatcanleadtoexpenses,losttimeandmore.Infactdiscussionof
mostimportantpublicsfrequentlyledbacktothesethreatsandultimatelythe
threatofgovernmentregulation.Mostimportantpublicstypicallyincludedthe
government/ministries/regulators,localandregionalcommunities,andmediaand
32
thegeneralpublic.Somecitedpoliticiansareimportantpublicsbecausetheyarethe
ones“puttinguptheramifications”atthelocal,regionalandnationallevel(ABC04).
Multipleintervieweesexpressedthatlosingthesupportofpoliticianscouldleadto
newregulations,andifthegeneralpopulationwasn’thappywithpoliticians’
regulations,therewouldbenohesitationtoreplacethosepoliticianswithoneswho
wouldregulatecorporateenvironmentalresponsibilityastheysawfit.
Anotherintervieweealsoplacesreputationasintegraltounderstanding
threats:
“Incompetenceisourmostdifficultenemy,andit’sthebiggestthreat.Itcandestroythereputation…TodaythereareinNorwaymaybe20-25environmentalorganizations,andtherearesomebig.Andsomeofthebigareverysmart.Theyhaveveryskilledpeoplethatunderstandwhatwe’redoing;wearecooperatingwiththem...[Others]don’tseethewhole,every,thebigpicture,they’rejustpickingoutpartofthepictureandmakingastoryaboutit…That’swhatwearecopingwith,Ithink,whenitcomestothiskindofpublicrelationswhenyoucanteardownyourreputationinasecondbyincompetentpeople(ABC04).
Reputationcameupmanytimes,asintervieweesexplained,becauseapoor
reputationcanleadtomanynegativepolitical,socialandthereforefinancial
consequences.
“Legitimizingactivists’claims”didnotcomeupdirectlyinanyofthe
interviews;however,havingtoavoidpublicconversationsonquestionabletopics
did.Inoneinterviewee’swords:
Incompetenceaboutthisbusiness,aboutwhat’seffectingenvironment,fromthiskindoforganization,wearelikehelplessagainstit…Andthat’swhywearenotontheFacebook.Becauseyougetalotofpeoplecommentingthewrongthings.It’slikekids,likesmallkidsgettingharassedonFacebookandonotherkindsofchannels.Wecan’tallowit.That’swhywecan’tbethere.(ABC04).
33
Sothiswasn’tspokenofdirectlyaslegitimizingaclaimbyaddressingit,butrather,
thathavingsocialmediaplatformswhereactivistscouldmakeanyclaimsunderthe
sunwasdetrimentalforthiscompanyasitcoulddamagethecompanyordrain
resourcesinaddressingthem.
Externalvariables:Industryenvironment. Mostexternalindustryenvironmentvariablesmanifestinconversationas
well.Somanyinterviewscamebacktohavingagoodreputationinordertonot
leaveoneselfvulnerabletolosingthatsociallicensetooperateortoexposeoneself
tothepossibilityforneedingadditionalindustryregulation.Inthisway,thefactthat
themostintervieweespointedoutadditionalregulationscouldeasilyhappenand
theydidnotwantthemtohappen,theindustryenvironment’sabilitytochange(be
dynamicandnotstatic)definitelykeptcommunicatorsontheirtoes,andit’s
“changing(dynamic)orstatic”naturefactoredintocommunication.The“numberof
competitors/levelofcompetition”matteredaswell.
Multiplecommunicatorsintheaquacultureindustryexplainedgovernment
regulationsonthesizeofearlyfishingoperationsthroughoutNorwayuntilthe
1990shasshapedtheindustrysothattherearemostlysmalllocalcompanieswith
nowtwoorthreecompaniesthathavebecomelargesinceindustrylicensing
regulationschangedinthe1990stoallowmorethanonepermitpercompany.One
personexplainshavingsomanysmall,localoperations:
Thatimpactsverymuchhowalsohowindustryisseenandhowtheindustryassociationcanwork…Alittlecompanyinalocalcommunity[is]normallyhighlyrespectedinthatlocalcommunitybecauseitemployspeople.Itspeopletheyknow.Theytrustthatcompany,andwhyshouldasmallcompanywithafewlicensesthatishighlyrecognizedintheirlocalcommunity,whyshouldtheyputalotofresourcesintomakingabig
34
sustainabilityreport?Whowouldbeinterestedinthat?Noone.Thestakeholderslocally,theytrustthecompany,ahsowhywouldtheyhavetomakeabigreport?(GHI02).
Bycontrast,severalintervieweesmentionedthepetroleumindustryhadno
sizeregulationsfromthestart,solargecompanieswereabletoenterthemarket
fromthestart,competewiththehelpoftheNorwegiangovernment,oraggressively
growinsizewithnoregulatorylimitations.Thatsaid,oneintervieweenotedthe
highnumberofsmallcompetitorsintheuniqueaquacultureindustrydoesnot
necessarilyleadittohandleitsenvironmentalconflictswiththeaccommodative
stance(GHI02).Thisvariablelikelywouldnothavesurfacedifnotforthecontrasts
beingdrawnbetweenthepetroleumandaquacultureindustries.
Interviewssuggestthatwhencompilingasustainabilityreportismandated,
thefavorabilityofacompany’ssustainabilityfiguresandtrendoffailingor
improvingcanbeviewedaseitheradvocacy(ifthenumbers/trendsaregood)or
viewedasaccommodation(ifthenumbersareneutralpoor).
Relativepoweralsomatters,asoneintervieweecommented:“AndIthink[anewregulationonoilcompanieshavingtosupplyoffshoreinstallationswithonshorepower]reflectstheincreasedpowerfromtheseNGOs,whichhaveamajorimpactonmajorpoliticalpartiesintheparliamentactuallyIthink.Ithinkalsohavingalotofimpactonthedebategoingoninthemedia(PQ31).Companiesmustbeconsciousofwhatthatdebateinthemedialookslike,
whichintervieweesexpressedfactorsintothewaytheirorganizationschooseto
accommodateoradvocate.
35
Externalvariable:Generalpolitical/socialenvironment/externalculture. Thisentirecategorymanifestedfrequentlywithitsfactors,“degreeof
politicalsupportofbusiness”and“degreeofsupportofbusiness”.Thismaybe
becauselossofsupportintheseareasleadstotherepercussionsthatcompaniesare
mosttryingtoavoid.Multipleintervieweesusedthesameterm,“sociallicenseto
operate”,todescribesupport,andreportedthatiftheircompanieslostthethatlocal
governmentofficialswouldstepupandbeginregulatoryaction,possiblyleadingto
furthergovernmentalregulation,whichwasviewedasabadthingbythese
companies.
Externalvariable:Theexternalpublic.Morethanhalfoftheexternalpublicvariablesmanifested.Forexample,
“size/numberofmembers”mattersbecauseintervieweesexpressedconcernthat
onceacommunity—thegeneralvotingpublic—turnsagainstacompanyanditloses
its“sociallicensetooperate”thatthecompanyisindangerofnewregulationsor
gettingshutdownaltogetherinanarea.Oneintervieweesaid:
Youcansplitsocietyinthreegroups.YouhavethosewhohaveamajortrusttotheNGOsandbelievethattheoilcompanies[are]onlybad.Theyarepollutinganddestroyerofenvironment.Andyouhaveonegroupthathavetrusttotheindustryandtothedifferentcompanies,andthisokay.It’sabsolutelypossibletohavethisbusinessgoingon,toproduceoilandusetheoilanddoitmoreenvironmentaltomakethatquitesustainable.Thenyouhaveagroupthathavebeenquitebiginthesocietythatjustdoesn’tcare…Butinthepastfewyears,Ithinkthatgrouphasdeclined…themajorpart[ofthepreviouslyundecidedgroup]IthinkaresympathizingwiththeNGOs.” Thisintervieweewentontoexplainthatperhaps60percenthadpreviously
beenundecided,with20percentoneitherside,butnowthesplitisshiftingto,
“maybe30percentontheNGOside,maybe15-20percentonourside,thecompany
36
side.Thenthelargegroupinthemiddle.”(PQ31).Shiftinpublicsupportmight
meanhavingtoadjuststrategy.
Thefactorof“whetherrepresentativesofthepublicknoworlike
representativesoftheorganization”alsomanifest.Oneintervieweerelayeda
conversationfromearlyinhercareerthathasstuckwithher.Intheearlystagesof
theinterviewee’scareer,sheattendedoneofNorway’slargestenvironmental
conferenceswheresherecognizedandwantedtointroduceherselftoaleading
environmentalcriticwhoshehadbeencommunicatingwithonTwitter.She
introducedherself,and:
He[got]10centimetersclosetomynoseandhejustaskedme,“Howisittomakealivingfromlies?Really?Howisit?”Um,andthenhejuststarted,justlikeaccusingmeofbeingabadperson,howcouldIsleepatnight,you’reruiningtheworld…andhescaredtheshitoutofme.BecauseIhadnevermetsomeonebeingso,actingsochildishandalsothreatening,likeonaprofessionalarena.Sothatkindofdidsomethingtome…Ithinkithastoughenedme,butIthinkithasalsomadememorecriticaltomyownmessages.Thattheyneedtostick,theyneedtobetrue,theyneedtobeverygoodexplainedsothattheycanbeaschildishastheywant,butatleastI’mprofessionalandwhatI’msayingisactually,it’sreal.(JKL05).
Thisdoesnotnecessarilytranslatetoanadvocativeoraccommodativestance,butit
demonstratesthatlikeabilitycanhaveanimpactoncommunications.
Anotherfactorinthiscategorythatsurfacedwas“degreeofsource
credibility/powerfulmembersorconnections”beingcredibleversus“small”or
“ignorant”publics.Otherfactorsthatmanifesthereinclude“community’s
perceptionofpublic:reasonableorradical”,“levelofmediacoveragethepublichas
receivedinthepast”and“whetherrepresentativesofthepublicknoworlike
representativesoftheorganization”,andviceversa.
37
Externalvariables:Issueunderquestion. Allfactorsinthiscategorymanifest,including“size”,“stakes”and
“complexity”.Whileapublicmighttrytoblowasizeissueoutofproportion,for
example,anactivistgroupwithoutmuchcredibility,thecompanymightstillchoose
toadvocateforitselfbasedonthesize,nottheperceptionofthesizeoftheissue
despiteavocalactivistgroup’sperceptionofthesizeoftheissue.Forexample,one
intervieweedescribedanoilspillofapproximately20liters,whichisrelatively
minorinthegrandschemeofoilspills:
Suddenlyitwaslike[whoosh],tenorganizationsoutsideevenasmallspillover,small,verysmall…itlooksenormousbecauseitgetsonthetopofthewater.Soitlookslike,itlooksenormous.Soifyouspilljustthis[holdsupcoffeecup],itwillbeforabigarea,butitlooksreallybad.Soifyouhadoutboardmotorengine,andyoufillwithgas,petroltoit,andyouseeit’sfull,justafewdrops,and20litersjustlooksreallybig.Anditwasnothing.Sothegovernmentagencysaidthatthisisnothing.Whataretheymakingnoiseof?...Wetookitupimmediately,buttheymadeabigfussofit.(ABC04).
Hadthegovernmentchosentoimplementheavyfinesjeopardizing
operationsoftheorganization,thecompanymighthavebeenmoreinclinedto
accommodate,butinthiscaseastanceofadvocacywasadequate.
Internalvariables:Organization’scharacteristics. Intervieweesdescribed“economicstabilityoftheorganization”,
“organization’spastexperienceswiththepublic”,bothplayingapartinchoosingto
accommodateoradvocateoncertainconflictscenarios,butmanyofthefactorsin
thiscategoryweremoreambiguousastodirectconsequencesforaccommodation
oradvocacy.Otherfactorsarosebuthadamoreambiguousimpacton
accommodationoradvocacyinagivenscenario.Intervieweesexpressed
satisfaction—especiallywith“openorclosedculture”and“stratification/hierarchy
38
ofpositions”withtheircompany’s—andmorebroadlyNorway’s—opencultureand
flathierarchy.Acrosstheboard,intervieweessuggestedthesecharacteristicsare
bothpositives,thoughtthemselvesmoresuccessfulandeffectiveincommunication
becauseofit.Inoneinterviewee’swords:
Ithinkwehavequiteopenculture.AndIthinkactuallythat’scommonwithNorwegiancompanies.Thehierarchyisnotthatsignificanthereasitisinalotofothercountries.Soyouhavethiscultureisalotmoreopen,justgodirectlytotheCEOandtellyouropinionofthecase,youcandiscusswithcolleaguesveryopen.Allissittinginthesameopenofficelocationoropenofficeenvironment.SoIthinkit’squiteeasytocommunicateacrossdifferentdepartments,acrossdifferentlevelsintheorganization.”(PQ31).
Severalfactorsthataroselessfrequentlyinclude,“dispersedwidely
geographicallyorcentralized”,“homogeneityorheterogeneityofemployees”,
distributionofdecision-makingpower”and“formalization:numberofrulesor
codesdefiningandlimitingthejobdescriptions”.
Interestingly,technologyseemstoberelatedstancesofaccommodationin
someinstancesandadvocacyinothers.The“leveloftechnologytheorganization
usestoproduceitsproductorservice”canbearguedasafactorleadingtogreater
advocacy—asintheorganizationcanpointtoallofthetechnologybeingused
towardtheendsofenvironmentalresponsibility—orgreateraccommodation—asin
technologyisbeingdevelopedtodoso.
Wealsochoosetechnology,whichisreallyimportant,becausethenthatshowsyouthatwe’realwaysthinkingaboutgettingbetteranddoingitsustainable….Werecycle90%ofthewatertoproduce[product],andthat’salsoimportantforustocommunicateout,andthat’salsoduetotechnology.Andit’sthetechnologypartinaquacultureisthemostfast-growing,whatcanIsay,thanoil.It’smuch,itgrowsfasterthatthetechnologydoesinoil.
39
Throughtechnology,thesecompaniesareaccommodatingpublic’sdemand
forincreasedcorporateenvironmentalresponsibilityconcerns.Inturn,whenthey
arecriticized,theycanadvocateforthemselvesbypointingtothesetechnology-
basedsustainabilitymeasuresanddemonstratingtheirsuccess.
Itisinterestingtospeculateonpossiblereasonswhytechnologyispartof
theconversationoncommunicatingsustainabilitymeasuresbeyondobvious
measurementandreportingreasons.CognitiveDissonanceTheorycouldsuggest
thatastrategybringingtechnologyintothediscussiononcorporateenvironmental
responsibilitycouldlendtechnology’sgeneralsocietalacceptance,goodsentiment
totheorganizationadvocatingitscorporateenvironmentalresponsibility.By
helpingpeopleunderstandthattechnologyishelpingthecompanysolve
environmentalproblems,it’spossiblethefavorableattitudetowardtechnology
couldbelenttothecompany.
Internalvariables:Publicrelationsdepartmentcharacteristics. Althoughthisresearchdidnotseektoidentifyfactorsthatdidnotmanifest,
fewerthanhalfofthiscategory’sfactorsinfactdid.Additionally,manyofthefactors
inthiscategorymanifestedthroughprobinganddidnotcomeupasfront-of-mind
responsestowhatfactoredintohowrecentconflictorcriseswerehandled.The
mostprominentfactorsmanifestinginthiscategoryinclude“typeofpasttrainingof
employees”and“representationinthedominantcoalition”,howeverthewaythat
thisfunctionsisnotnecessarilywhatonemightexpect.
Severalpractitionersmentionedearningtheirseatatthedecisionmaking
tablebyhavingasolidunderstandingofbusiness,economicsandpolitics.Evenin
40
training,nearlyallparticipantscitedexperienceoutsideofPRstudyastheir
qualifications,withoneintervieweeevenbeingtrainedasamarinebiologistwithno
formalcommunicationtraining.
Resoundingly,participantssaidtoonlyknowcommunicationisnotenough.
Theconsultantworkingwithprimarysectorbusinessesnoted,
Myclients,theydon’tcometomeonlybecauseIhavetheedgeofcommunication.Theycometomelookingforsomeonewhoknowsbusiness,whoknowstheirindustry…Frommybeliefyouwon’tbeableasacommunicationguytoearnyourchairatthetablewiththemanagementandtheboardwithouthavingthatkindoflocalknowledgewithineconomics,business,research,otherwiseyouwon’tbeinvitedtothetable.Youhavetoknowhowtorunabusiness.Youhavetoknowwhatthedriversarewithinthisbusinessinordertocreatevalue…I’vebeenwiththisindustrysince’93,andit’scompletelydifferentnowthanitwas10yearsago.Becauseyouwon’tbeinvitedtothemanagementtableortotheboardswithoutprovingthatyoureallyhavesomecompetenciesandknowledgeabouttheirbusinessaswell.”(MNO24).
Hewentontosaythatunderstandingchangingtechnologyanditseffectson
channelsofcommunicationareverysmallcomparedthingslikepolitical
understandingthat“takesyouthroughthewholewayandremainslargelythe
same.”(MNO24).
Whiletechnicalcompetencetoadheringtoverystrictregulationsfora
companypublicallylistedontheOsloStockExchangeisalsoneededandeffectshow
companiescommunicatetothemarket,bothinpressreleasesandstatementstothe
stockexchange,thisisminorintermsofstrategy(PQ31).Whiletraininginresearch
andresearchmethodscanberelevanttocompanycommunication,oneinterviewee
choosesto“buythatservicefromPRagencyorconsultant,externalconsultantsfor
example,butforaccompanyofabout525employees,thatwouldbehardtohavein
house.”
41
Otherfactorsthatarosethroughprobinginclude“Gender:percentageof
femaleupper-levelstaff/managers”and“physicalplacementofdepartmentin
building(nearCEOandotherdecisionmakersornot).
Internalvariables:Characteristicsofdominantcoalition(topmanagement). Surprisingly,onlyonefactormanifestedfromthiscategory,the“supportand
understandingofPR”expressedbymanagement.Multipleintervieweesexpressed
bothhavingaseatatthedecisionmakingtableaswellasfeelingheard,withthis
affectingcompanystance.Oneintervieweesaid,“Ofcoursewhenwehavesome
decisionsmakeexecutiveteam,andIsaythatokay,youhavetolistentomehere,
wehaveahugeriskonourreputation,whetherit’stothegovernmentortothe
massmarketorindustriesorsomething.Thenmyexperienceisthatthey’re
listeningtome,absolutely,yeah,”(PQ31).Thissameintervieweeelaboratedthat
despiteconstantback-and-forthwiththelegaldepartmentoncommunication
issues,thatheisheardandrespectedbytopmanagement.
Twopossibleexplanationssurfaceforthiscategory’slowmanifestations.
Oneissimplythattheresearchershouldhaveprobedmoreinthisarea,butmost
probingtookplaceeitherwithincategoriesorwithrelatedfactorssuchasinternal
andexternalreputation.Theoryoffersanotherpossibility,whichisthatNorwegian
culturesimplyhaslessemphasisonhierarchyandindividualismthanU.S.culture
wherethistheorywasdeveloped.Asdiscussedintheliteraturereview,Hofstede
describesNorwegiancultureasemphasizingbothpowerdistanceandindividualism
lessthanthatintheU.S.Lowerpowerdistanceandlessdesiretostandoutcould
42
removesomeofthecharacteristicsAmericanPRpractitionersmightthinkofwhen
thinkingoftopmanagement.
Internalvariables:Internalthreats. Twoofthethreefactorsinthiscategorymanifest—“economiclossorgain
fromimplementingvariousstances”and“marringofemployee’sorstockholders’
perceptionofthecompany”—whilethethirdisaglaringomissiongiventhe
precedingsection’sdiscussiononalackofemphasisontheindividual.Thisthird
factorthatdidnotmanifestthroughinterviewingwasthe“marringofthepersona
reputationsofthecompanydecisionmakers”.
Intervieweesemphaticallyandrepeatedlydescribedindetailtheir
understandingofpossiblerepercussionsifacorporateenvironmentalresponsibility
concernweremishandled,so“economiclossorgainfromimplementingvarious
stances”manifestquiteobviously.
The“marringofemployee’orstockholders’perceptionofthecompany”also
manifestquiteobviously,withseveralintervieweesusingnearlyidenticallanguage
inexpressingtheconsequencesforemployees—thatemployeeswould“feelbad”
aboutworkingforthecompanyandfortheindustry(GHI02),andthatsuchpoor
sentimentwouldbebadforthecompany’sbottomline.
Internalvariables:Individualcharacteristics(publicrelationspractitioner,dominantcoalitionandlinemanagers). Hereagain,characteristicsofindividualPRpractitioners,topmanagersand
linemangersdidnotmanifestnearlyasfrequentlyasothercategories,especially
externalfactors.Aninterestingdiscussionongenderensuedwiththehelpof
probing.
43
Throughout,intervieweestalkabout“personalethics”matteringtopto
bottomintheorganization,onthejobandoutsidethejob.The“extenttowhichtop
managementcangraspothers’worldviews”factorsinbecauseasoneinterviewee
putsit,theycan’texpecttogotoanewcountryandoperateonlybyNorway’srules
ortrytodictatealltherules,asthatwouldbetooboldorbrash.
“Cognitivecomplexity:abilitytohandlecomplexproblems”matters,butin
choosingtoaccommodateoradvocate,itreallycomesdowntotheabilityto
communicatethosethingsinasimplified:excellentengineersinformingsmarttop
managementwillnotnecessarilyleadtoacertainstance.“TraininginPR,
marketing,journalism,engineering,etc.”,matters,butparticularlywiththe
communicationaspect,abilitymattersoverformaltraining.Topmanagement’s
“communicationcompetency”matters.Oneintervieweecommented,
Ithinkourindustryiscommunicatingtoocomplexaroundthistopic.AndthesuccessifyousayamongtheNGOsandlikesomeorganizationslikeBellonaandWWFandsoon,thathassucceededtosimplifythecommunicationthatmakesiteasytopeople,usepictures,movies,simplifycommunication,thenourindustryistrytocommunicatefactsandcommunicatequitecomplexandtellhow/whatprecautionswetake,allthoseregulationspointingbacktothegovernment.It’stoocomplexIthink.(PQ31)
Commentaryongenderasafactordidnotevermanifestnaturallyin
conversation,butwasaresultoftheresearcher’sprobing.Generallyspeaking
intervieweesdidn’tcomedownhardongenderfactoringintoanaccommodationor
advocacystance,butoneintervieweedidexpressthatitmattersalot.Thisperson
saidthatherindustryis,
Fullofmeninsuits,oldmeninsuits.Greyhair,notverycommunicative,oftenabitclosed,andIthinkIhaveseenthatit’sagoodthingwithcommunicationtoactuallyshowoffother[rolemodels]…becauseitmakes
44
usaveryeasytarget.It’sveryeasytosayyoudon’tlisten,youdon’tdoanything,youdon’tcareaboutenvironment…”(JKL05)
Beinganeasytargetmakesitmoredifficultfortheorganizationtoadvocate.What’s
more,itmattersbecauseofmediaplacement:
“It’smucheasierbeingachallengergettingmediaspacethanitisformecallingfroman[industry]tryingtogetsomepositivecoverage…Thejournalistsareimmediatelyabitcritical,whichtheyshouldbe,butthechallengerstheygetthisplacewithnoquestionsasked.Sothat’swhyIthinkit’sveryimportantforpeopleworkinglikeinaconservativeenvironmentandorganizationsthatpollutealottohavespokespersonthatarelikeable,likefriendly,open,nice!BecauseIknowforafactthatintheU.S.,Icanclearlyseethatthecommunicationpeopleareoftheoldschoolanditdoesn’treallyhelptellingtheworldhowgoodyouareworkingwithenvironmentalsolutions.Nobodybelievesyou.(JKL05)
ThismeansgenderofpeopleinthePRdepartmentortopmanagementmight
matterastheyareseenbymediamembersandoutsidepublicsasrepresentative
qualitiesorcharacteristicsoftheorganization’sconservativeortraditionalviews,
likeability,etc.It’snotamatterofhowpeopleunderstandorcommunicateorexpect
tounderstandorcommunicatewithoneanother,butrather,outsideperceptionsof
organizationalcharacteristicsbasedongenderorganizationrepresentatives.
Anotherintervieweedeemphasizedgenderasafactor:
NormallyI’mveryconcernedaboutgender,butthisisaverymaleindustry,thefarmingindustry,andincommunicationit’smostlywomen,andIdon’tthinkthatisimportant.Ithinktheimportantpartiswhenyoudocommunicationit’snotallaboutsustainability.It’salsoabouteconomyanddecidingthebusiness,thefinances,yeah,ofthebusiness.Andit’s,ifyoudon’tconnectwiththesortofthedriversofthebusinessandthesortoftheeconomyofthisbusinessyoucan’tsucceedincommunicatingsustainabilityeither.(GHI02).
45
Evenifotherfactorsmattermorethangenderasthispersonsuggests,
gendercouldstillplayarole,albeitminor,inthestanceanorganizationultimately
takes.
Internalvariables:Relationshipcharacteristics. Thefactorthatmostoftenmanifestininterviewsfromthiscategoryis“level
oftrustbetweenorganizationandexternalpublic”.Aprimeexampleofthisisa
companythatwasenthusiasticaboutitssuccessfulcompanyeffortscommunicating
corporateenvironmentalresponsibility.Thecompanyheldaseminartopresentits
annualsustainabilityreporttothepublic,sharedanadvancecopyofthereportwith
aprominentNGO,theninvitedtheNGOtoparticipate.Eventhoughtheyweren’t
trustingtheNGOtonotcriticizethemattheseminarandinpublic,theywere
trustingthemtobringacertainamountofcredibilityandpredictabilitytotheir
argumentsbasedonanongoingrelationshipdealingwithoneanother.
Additionally,inaddressingthefactorof“ideologicalbarriersbetween
organizationandpublic”,oneintervieweeactuallyexplainedthattherearenonein
theirviewandwentontodescribehowtherearedisagreementsonfactsaswellas
degree,butnotonphilosophy.Forexample,adebategoesonandon“abouthow
muchyoushouldandhowmuchyoushouldpayforfarmingincommonwaters”due
toalackofprivatelandorrentagreementforfishfarmers,whichhasbecomea
largerissuesincelicensinghasopenedupbecausecorporatetaxesarenolonger
necessarilypaidtothelocalcommunitywherethefisharebeingharvested,but
insteadtocompanyheadquartersinBergenorOsloforinstance.
46
BestPracticesArisingFromInterviewsWhilethefactor-by-factorandcategory-by-categoryanalysisaboveisboth
usefulandnecessary,itisalsousefultocollectivelyexaminethetacticsand
strategiesthatarosethroughconversationaswellaspractitioners’own
commentaryontheperceivedlevelofsuccessofthosestrategiesandtactics.
Overarchingstrategiesmentionedincludetyingcompanypracticesto
Norwegian/Internationalstandardsandenhancingimage.Tacticsincluded
publishingsustainabilityreports,sendingpressreleases4to7timesperyear,
sponsoringmusicfestivals,beingsilent,garneringemployeesupportthroughabike
program,beinganimmediatepartoftheconversation,holdingaseminaror
participatinginaconference,integratingsustainabilityintodailythinkingofpeople
acrosstheorganizationandtyingcompanypracticesto
science/technology/innovation.Eachisdescribedinthissection,withmore
practicaltakeawaysappearinginthediscussionsection.
Publishasustainabilityreport.Themostcommontacticintervieweesreportedincommunicatingcorporate
environmentalresponsibilitywaspublicallyreportingonsustainabilitymeasures.
Thisactuallycameinmanyforms,fromanannualreportincorporatingcorporate
environmentalresponsibilityandsustainabilitymeasures,toastand-alone
sustainabilityreport.
Publishingareportisreallyabouttransparency,andwhatdataacompanyis
requiredtorevealandwhen,andanyinformationbeyondthatitchoosestoreveal
whetheritbefavorableorunfavorable.Oneintervieweenotes,“Myperceptionis
that[ourcompany]issortoftrustedforbeingtransparent,andalsowhatis
47
importantwhenwehaveoursustainabilityreportingisitisbeingreviewedby
auditors,whichwebelieveisimportant.Ifyoutakethereportingseriouslyitshould
bereviewedbyauditorsjustlikethefinancialreporting.”(GHI02).
Againandagainitshinesthroughintheinterviewsthatcompanies
conductingadvancedreportingarequiteproudofdoingso.Oneintervieweesaid
themainissueofcommunicatingsustainabilityisactuallyprovingsustainabilityand
nothavingitbejustwords(GHI02).Anotherdescribedthisashavingnotthe
wrappingonthebox,butthecontentsofthebox.Also,it’svitaltounderstandwhere
theinterestofthestakeholderslie,andwhattheyarereallyconcernedaboutin
ordertofindthepieceofinformationthattheyarelookingforandbeableto
presentthatinanunderstandablewayandalsobeingabletocommunicate
internallytoexecutiveleadershipthatit’sgoodtocommunicatethis,disclosethe
informationandtellthestory.(GHI02).
Integratesustainabilityintodailythinkingofpeopleacrosstheorganization.
Intervieweesresoundinglyrespondedthatcommunicatingenvironmental
responsibilityconcernsisnotastand-alonetask.Oneofthemostilluminatingand
directresponsesisthatenvironmentalissuesshouldbebuiltintoeachleaders’daily
workas“partofhisdailythinking”(ABC04).Thispersonexplainedthatinthe
1970s,environmentalbreakthroughscameincleaningupthemessofthe50years
ofpollutionthatprecededthedecade,thatleadershadtobetrainedtothink
environmentallyineverythingtheydid.“Theyhadtothinksustainabilityintheir
mindallthetime,”(ABC04)andsaidthatinthisparticularcompany,onedoesn’t
findleadersthatdon’tunderstandthemessagethattheenvironmentandcorporate
48
socialresponsibilityareveryimportant.Withintheorganization,itisembeddedin
thepoliticsoftheorganization(ABC04).Foroverallcommunicationasone
intervieweeputit,“It’sabasisforeverything.Becauseifyoudon’thavethisasa
base,youwillgeteventuallyaproblembecauseit’sexpectedfromyou.”(ABC04)
Notonlythis,buttheunderstandingpermeatestheorganization:
Youdon’tfindanyleaderinourcompanythatdon’tunderstandthemessagethattheenvironmentthatCSR,youknow,CorporateSocialResponsibility,isveryimportant.Itcancostyoualotofmoneynotunderstandingitandnotfollowingit.Soitshouldbeembeddedinthethinkingofeachperson.Ithinkthat’sveryimportant.Theenvironmentiskindofinsidetheheadofeachleader(ABC04).
Anotherintervieweecomparedthinkingaboutenvironmentalsustainability
tothinkingaboutsafety:“It’snotjustsafetyatwork;it’ssafety24hours.Youshould
bringthesafetystandardbacktoyourhome.Andyoudrivecar.Andyoucanbicycle.
Youshouldthinkthiskindofsafety.”(ABC04).
Severalintervieweeshighlightedcorporateenvironmentalresponsibility
communicationcomesdowntooperations:implementingenvironmentally
sustainableprojectsandoperationsthatareenvironmentallysustainablethatcan
betalkedabout(RS10).Asoneintervieweeputit,it’snotaboutthewrappingonthe
box;it’swhat’sinsidethebox(XY05),socommunicatingenvironmental
sustainability,yesisthejobofcommunicators,butitcan’tbedoneinameaningful
waywithoutotherpartiesonboard.
Releaseresearchreportstothepress.Theorganizationwiththeleastrobustcommunicationstrategyofallused
newsreleasesonitsresearch—whetherpositiveornegativeresearchresults—
49
directlytothemedia.Theorganizationwaspleasedwiththisstrategyalbeit
simplisticintheinterviewee’swords.
Sponsoramusicfestival. Multiplemembersofthepetroleumindustrymentionedsponsoringlocal
festivalsandeventswithmixedresults.Somecameunderheavycriticismfrom
activistgroupsandboycotterssayingit’stoessentiallybuycommunitysupport.In
fact,oneofthecompaniesinterviewedandothersanecdotallycameundervery
publiccriticismforsponsoringsuchfestivalsinNorway.Someartistsandmusicians
refusedtoplayinthesponsoredfestivals,andthe,“NGOstogetherwithmusicians
madealotofnoiseinthemedia,”(PQ31).Thepublicdebatestartedwithone
newspaperbutthenwasonDanishradiostations,andalotofpeoplebecamequite
engagedinthetopic.Theintervieweeengagedindebateandmediainterviews,and
ultimatelyalotofpeoplestooduptoargueforthecompany.(PQ31).
Silence.Silencecancomeinseveralforms.Inoneformanintervieweereportedthe
organizationnolongermaintainingasocialmediapresencebecauseithadbecome
tooeasyorganizationswithquestionablecredibilitytoattackthecompanyand
makebigandextendedissuesbasedonfaultyinformation(ABC04).Althoughnot
beingonsocialmediawasnotconsideredideal,theintervieweesaidithadtobe
done.Inanotherformofsilence,adifferentcompanyreportedpurposefullylaying
lowandnotraisingthecorporate“voice”todrawattentiontoitselfaspartofthe
ongoingpublicconversation(GHI02).
50
Beanimmediatepartoftheconversation.Oneofthesameintervieweesthatsaidsilencewaseffectivealsosaidthatthe
companyispurposefullyheadedtowardbecomingmoreofanimmediatepartofthe
conversation.Multipleintervieweesnotethelocusofcontrolforwhattoreportand
whenalsomatters.Onesaidreporting,evenwhennumbersareunflattering,is
effectivebecause,“Youavoidalotofsortofnegativesurprisesbecausenobodycan
sortoffindoutaboutyou,becauseyoudisclosedit.Sothatputsyoumuchmorein
thepositionwhereyouhavecontrol,”(GHI02).
Alsorelatedtothelocusofcontrolinrevealinginformation,another
intervieweesaid,“Whenwesucceedinplanningwhatwewanttogooutwith,we
getmuchbetterresults,butquiteoftenwearetakenbysurprisebecausewearenot
well-organizedinternally.Ifmanythingswecouldhaveplannedbetter,andthenwe
wouldbeincontrol,butwe’renotincontrolwhenthingscomefromoutside,”
(GHI02).Thisacknowledgesthatanypublicreportingmighttakeunexpectedturns,
butthispersonatleast,thinksthatispreferabletocompletelycomingfromthe
outside.
Garneremployeesupportthroughabikeprogram.Oneintervieweepointedoutthathavinganemployeebikeprogramisinits
repertoireofcommunicatingandsupportingenvironmentalsustainabilityonan
ongoingbasis.Itincludessupportingemployeestowalk,ridebikeortakethebusby
offeringdays,forexamplewhereeverybodythatcomestoworkonabikecanget
themservicedforfree.ThisallcombinesinreducingC02emissions,reducing
queuingandgettingpeoplemorefit,andisviewedasameasureforbuilding
51
employeeawarenessandsocialsupportforenvironmentalresponsibilityinall
aspectsoflife,aswellasitsactualimpact,(RS10).
Holdaseminarorparticipateinaconference. Themostenthusiasticsuccessandsatisfactionwiththeircompany’sefforts
communicatingcorporateenvironmentalresponsibilitycamefromaninterviewee
whodescribedgoingastepbeyondannualreportingtoholdingaseminartoshare
findingswiththemediaaswellastheveryNGOsthatoftenputtremendous
pressureonthecompany,(GHI02).
Goingbacksevenyears,thecompanywasinalotofconflictbetweenthe
industryandNGOsinparticular,bothinsideandoutsideofNorway,sayingthe
industrywasirresponsible,notcaringfortheenvironment,notcaringforfish,etc.
Thecompanydecidedthatwhatthemajorityoftheindustryandthiscompanyin
particulardid,whichwastosay,“Yes,wearedoingfine,weareresponsible…There
isnotreasontocriticizeus,”didnotbringthecompanynortheindustryforwardin
anyway.Byfishfarminginopenwaters,thecompanydependsonthe“sociallicense
tooperate”,whichmeansthecompanydependsonbeing“sortofwantedinthelocal
areas…[because]thisallowsemployeestobeproudofworkingintheindustryand
nothaveanyreasontofeelashamedornotwanttotellwherethey’reworking,”
(GHI02).
Atthetimementionedabove(GHI02),thecompanywasmajorityownedby
theNorwegiangovernment,sothegovernmentdislikedcriticismsofthecompany.
Theintervieweesaidthiscausedthecompanytolookintopreciselywhatitmeans
tobeoperatingsustainably…
52
Notjustsayingthatwearesustainable…Wehavetosay,whatdowemeanwithsustainableoperations?Sowelaiddownafewshortprinciplesandalsosaidweneedtodocumenthowwearedoingthoseprinciples.Sowestartedreporting…[This]tookalotofwork,startingwithdefiningtheindicatorswewantedtouse,globalreportinginitiativehasalotofgreatindicators,buttheyareapplicabletoindustriesacrossallsectors,andweneedsomeindicatorsalsothat,isveryspecifictoourindustry…setagoalsystemandwereportedoneyeartoseethatthereportingwouldwork.”(GHI02).
Butthecompanywentastepbeyond:Inadditiontopublishingthereportinweb
andprint,thecompanyalsoheldaseminarinwhich,
Wetrytosetagendaaboutsustainabilityissuesinoursector,andthatwasalsoameanstotakecontrolofthedebatebecausewehaddemonstratedcomingtoourmeeting,andtheywouldvisittheparliamentandnewsstationsandministriesaspartoftheirtourprotestingagainstusinNorwayandalsoprotestingothercompanies.Andsowesetseminartosetagenda,andwereportedourresults,”(GHI02).Theintervieweenotedthattherewasalotofinternaldebateaboutallofthe
issuestobeincluded.Onetopic,beingtooreactiveandsensitive,wastakenoffthe
agendabecausecompanyleadershipthought,“Itwillprobablynotbeworthwhat
theyexpectfromusso,soit’sbettertogetitout.”Andtheseminarworked:The
discussionchangedfrombeing:
Sortofallegationsanddiscussionsaboutthingsthatpeopledon’tknowtobediscussionsabouthowtoimproveandotherareas.Soallthoseareaswherewepublisheddetailedreportonourperformance,wewerenotcriticizedanymorebecauseitwasno,itwasn’tthatbad,itwasquitegoodresults.Sowewerenotcriticized,andallegationthatweweredoingwrongintheseareasjuststopped,butwegotrequestformoreinformation,moredetailedinformation,andothertypesofinformation,etc.andthatwillofcoursecontinueandwewillneverbeabletopublishalltheinformation,allthestakeholderwouldliketosee,butwehavemovedintoastagewherewediscussmoreonthebasisofknowledge,onthebasisoffacts,whichismuchmorefruitful,soIthinkthathasbeenourstrategytosolve[this],”(GHI02).
53
Theseminarwasconsideredanabsolutesuccessbythecompany.Infactthe
seminarwasenteringitssixthyearuponinterviewing.
Theintervieweereportedcompanyleadershiphadfeltverybravethefirst
yearpresentingthesustainabilityreport,confidentiallysharingthereportfindings
inadvancetooneofNorway’smostactiveenvironmentalgroupsandtheninviting
themtotheseminartotalkabouthowgooditwas,etc.Sincethatfirstyear,the
companyhasincorporatedmoreandmoreexternalpartiestotheagenda.Thefirst
yearitwasonlythecompany,thesecondyear,thecompanyandoneoutsidegroup,
thenmoreandmoreexternalgroups,whichwasrisky:
[Thisyear]wehadinvitedIthinkthemostprofiledNGOleader,orthemostprofiledNGOleader….Andshe’sverycriticalanddoesn’tthinkthat[operations]shouldbeallowedatall...She’s[veryskilled]andveryreasonablewhenshe’sprofessionalandgoodwhenshe’spresenting.
Theresult?:“AndthenoneoftheTweetsfromtheseminar,wasoneotherNGOwas
thathewouldcredit[thecompany]forinvitingthisNGOtopresent[onthistopic]at
thisseminar.(GHI02).Again,thiswasviewedasahugewinbythecompany.
Inordertoimprove,thissameintervieweenotesyouhavetofirstgetthe
issueontheagenda,andthenafact-baseddiscussioncancommence:
Thewaytogetthereisactuallytoput[yourownsensitiveissue]ontheagenda,andinvitingthemost,themostengagedstakeholdersthatyoucandiscusswithbasedonknowledge,basedonfact,todiscusswiththem,Ithinkthat’sawayforward.It’salsoawaywecanpresenttothemwhatwearedoing.Sothatis,thatisourapproach.(GHI02).Yetanothercompanyparticipatedinaconferenceinordertodiscussandbe
veryopenaboutsomeofthefindings—butnotall—offindingsarisingfromajoint
examinationofcompanyfacilitiesbyamajorNGO(MNO24).Inadditiontobeing
54
involvedinordertohelpsetanddirecttheagenda,morebroadlythere’sapractice
ofpositioningoneselftobeanimmediatepartoftheongoingconversation:
Thebiggestchallengeforusissortofbuildingthepositionfor[ourcompany]tobemuchmoreactiveinpublicdebate.Sortofbeforethedebatecloses,beforethedebateisnotanymoreinterestinthepublic,thetopicisnotanymoreinteresting,wearestillabitslowtosaythisisouropinion.Andifyou’renotabletostateyouropinionimmediatelywhenthetopicarisesinpublicdebatethennobody’sinterestedinouropiniontwodayslaterorthreedayslater.(GHI02)
Leverageestablishedcommunicationchannelsoutsidetheorganization.
Asanextbestpractice,lookingatusingestablishedchannelsoutsidethe
organization,suchasEuropeanUnionpartnershipproject,tocommunicateissues.
Otherpublicsincludegovernmental,researchbodies,industryitself.Additionally
thiscompanyusesanEUprojectwherethelocalgovernmentsaretheproject
managersandNorwayiscollaboratingwithfivedifferentcountriestodeveloppilot
projects.ThatcommunicationpersonisusingtheEUcommunicationchannelsto
discussindustrysuccessesandfailure.
Betransparent.Othergeneralrulestoutedincludetransparency:“Bybeingverytransparent
youavoidalotofsurprises.Youavoidalotofsortofnegativesurprisesbecause
nobodycansortoffindoutaboutyou,becauseyoudisclosedit.Sothatputsyou
muchmoreinthepositionwhereyouhavecontrol,”(GHI02).
55
Getandmaintainthe“sociallicensetooperate”.Anothergeneralrulethroughoutinterviewswastogetthe“sociallicenseto
operate.”Hereadvocacycouldlooklikearguingthevalueoftheindustrytosociety.
Accommodationcouldlooklikethis:
Alittlecompanyinalocalcommunitynormallyhighlyrespectedinthatlocalcommunity,becauseitemployspeople,it’speopletheyknow,theytrustthatcompany,andwhyshouldasmallcompanywithafewlicensesthatishighlyrecognizedintheirlocalcommunity,whyshouldtheyputalotofresourcesintomakingabigsustainabilityreport?Whowouldbeinterestedinthat?Noone.Thestakeholderslocally,theytrustthecompany,ahsowhywouldtheyhavetomakeabigreport?”(GHI02).
Whilethisexamplealsospeakstoreporting,largecompanieslikelyhavetoworkto
earnthatlocalrespectinsomewayorintervieweessaidtheycouldhavedifficulty
operatingorevenlosepoliticalsupportandliterallicensingneededtoallowthe
companytoremain.Multipleintervieweesreportedperceivingahighlevelofvoter
agency—thatifthecommunitylostitssupportforacompany’soperationsbut
politiciansdidn’treflectthis,thenvoterswouldreplacethepoliticianwithonethat
wouldreflecttheconstituents’desires.
Tiecompanypracticestoscience/technology/innovation. Manyintervieweestalkedaboutenvironmentalsustainabilitymeasuresand
communicatingenvironmentalresponsibilityintermsofthescience—forinstance
innovationtocombataparticularbacteria(TU04)orusingnewtechnologytoboost
efficienciesprovidingutilitiesandservicestoanoffshoresite(XY05).Ratherthan
talkintermsofthewaythatpeoplefeelabouttheenvironment,whichispartofthe
discussion,theemphasisismoreonscience,technology,innovation,researchand
thelikeandisstronglypresentedintermsoffacts.
56
TiecompanypracticestoNorwegian/internationalstandards.Anotherbestpracticetheseinterviewsuncoveredinvolvestyingincompany
objectivesandcommunicationstothoseoflargerormorebroadorganizationswith
similarsustainabilitygoals,forexampleintheworldofaquaculture,GlobalSalmon
Initiative,whichinvolveslargesalmoncompaniesworldwide,with14companies
coveringaroundhalfofthesalmonindustrygloballytobandtogetherandaddress
severalissuestheindustryfaces,forinstance,sourcingfeed,andaddressingsealice.
(GHI02).
Thissectioncloseswithasentimentexpressedbyanintervieweethatis
sharedwholeheartedlybytheresearcher.Therewillnotbeanysilverbulletor
perfectlystraightforwardoptionforcommunicatingenvironmentalsustainability,
butrather,it’samatteroffindingsomethingthatworksandthenexpandingonit,
maybegivingitanewtwisteveryyear.Thegoodnewsisthatit’snotalluphillwork
(GHI02).
57
Discussion
Thediscussionthatfollowselaboratesonthreekeyobservationsofthis
study,whichincludetheprevalenceoffactorsrelatedtopolitical-socialsupport,a
fact-basedorientationandalackoffactorsrelatedtoindividualpeople.Thenthe
strategiesandtacticsthatarosethroughtheinterviewingprocessaresummarized
andlinkedtotheorybymappingthemontothecontingencytheory’scontinuum.
Lastlyisadiscussionofthisstudy’sstrengthsandlimitations.
InfluencesofPolitical-SocialSupportInterviewsrevealedadominant,extensiveandrecurringthemerevolving
aroundfactorsrelatedtosocialandpoliticalsupportfortheorganization,andthis
findingissupportedbyresearchonsustainabilitystudies(Lynes&Andrachuk,
2008)andresearchtestingcontingencytheory’sapplicationinoutsidetheU.S.(Li,
Cropp&Jin,2010)previouslymentionedinthereviewofliterature.
Itseemsthatrepercussionsaffectingstancesometimesbutnotalwaystied
backtofinancialrepercussionsthatresultedormightresultfromlosingsocialor
politicalsupport.
Otherssaidgovernmentsareimportanttwofoldbecauseofpoliticsaswellas
thegovernmentitselfactuallybeingoneaninvestor.Inthewordsofoneofthose
interviewees:
Theyareputtinguptheirmoney,shareholders,investors,bankers,especiallygovernmentinNorwaywehavebiggovernmentfunds,huge,hugefundstheyareinvestinginbusiness.Andtheyareverypickyshareholders.TheyhaveallthesequestionsrelatingtoCSRallthetime.Theydon’tlooksomuchatthe
58
financialperformance.Theyareveryconcernedaboutthatyouarefollowingthecompliance.(ABC04)
AnotherintervieweesaidthatunderstandingtheNorwegianmodelsof
conflictmanagementmeanslookingthoughahistoricallens,andpolitically
speaking,notonlytalkaboutNorway,butlookintothe“Nordickindofmodel
regardingthe,yeah,callitthesocialdemocraticmodelsofwelfaremodel,
democracy,wehaveaNordicmodelwhichisthekindofbasisforthinkinglikewe
doregardingethical,environmentalissues,sustainability,andallthatandyoucan
gobackandlookatGroHarlemBrundtland…Shewasapersonwhoreallyput
sustainabilityandenvironmentalquestionsontheglobalagenda.”(MNO24).
Anotherintervieweenotedthatthewaysustainabilityissuesarehandledand
communicateddidn’tchangewhentheNorwegiangovernmentsolditssharesand
thecompanywaspurchasedbyamultinationalcorporationheadquarteredinAsia.
Theintervieweesaid,
Wehavefoundthewayweaddresssustainabilityfitsverywellwiththelong-termperspectivethat[thenewparentcompany]holds…Theyhavesaidtheywanttopursuethewaythatweworkwithsustainability,sotherewerenotchangesthere.StillIthinkthattheneedtobeverytransparentcomesstrongerwithgovernmentalownership.Becausetheywillbeveryhard,sortofvery,muchcriticizedifthecompaniestheyownedholdinformationback.”(GHI02).
Repercussionsincludedinthelong-termhavingdifficultiesinsellingproductsto
differentmarkets.Oneintervieweereportstheoverallgoalofcommunicating
environmentalsustainabilityisimprovingthecompany’sbottomline:“Theoverall
goalwastryingtoprovethattakingenvironmentalissuesseriouslyyoucanactually
improveyourbusiness,”(MNO24).
59
Thatsameintervieweesaidfrankly,notallmanagementholdsthevaluesof
beingenvironmentallyresponsibleorhavingsustainableapproaches.Hesaysbeing
inthecommunicationfieldmeanshelpingmanagementfullyunderstandthe
financialimpactofpoliticalandsocialmatters.Hesaid:
“Thisisallaboutmakingtheowners,theboard,themanagement,reallytoseethatbydoingthisyoucanactuallyimproveyourbusiness.Bydoingthistherightwaystepbystepyoucanactuallyimproveyourbusiness.TechniquesforthisincludedoingyourresearchwelltryingtofindallthecasesandexamplesshowinghowcompanieswhohavenotdonetheirhomeworkregardingCSR,howtheycanreallybehitbyboycotts,byconsumers,byNGOsstartingcampaigns,andsoon…Becauseatthebottomline,ownersandmanagement,itallcomesdowntofiguresandhowtheyreallycanbehitiftheydon’tdothisright.That’stheonlylanguagethatattheendtheyreallyunderstand,"(MNO24).
Thisdynamicofpolitical,socialandfinancialfactorsandconsequencesis
verymuchinlinewiththefour-partconceptualmodeldiscussedbyLynesand
Andrachuk(2008),whichiscomposedoffourkeyinfluencesystems—markets,
socialsystem,politicalsystemandsciencesystem—andtheirinterplaythatmake
upinfluencesonthegivenfirm.Whilethesepartsaresimplifiedhereforthesakeof
brevity,theimportanttake-awayfromthemodelisthekeymarket,socialsystem,
politicalsystemandscienceinfluencesatplay.Theseinfluencesaredynamically
groupedintothosethatareinternal,externalandsector-specific(Lynes&
Andrachuk,2008),someofwhich,again,arenotablyparalleltocontingencytheory
factordivisions.
Thispolitical-socialinfluenceisalsoseeninLi,Cropp&Jin’s(2010)
quantitativeresearchonthatsupportedcontingencytheory’sapplicationwithin
conflictmanagementinChinesepublicrelations.Whilethecurrentstudydoesnot
60
offerquantitativeorreliable—i.e.,randomlysampled—supportforthis,thefactthat
theseweretwoofthetopitemssurfacinginmanyinterviewssuggeststhiscouldbe
trueintheNorwegianPRcontextaswell.
Finally,thepoliticsandsocialsupportofanissuesuchasenvironmental
sustainabilityandresponsibilitymayvaryfromcountrytocountryaswellasfrom
sectortosector,whichcanultimatelyboildowntodifferingvalues,differing
economicdemandsforpreservationofsocialsupport,etc.
Fact-BasedOrientationAfact-basedorientationforthecommunicationmanagers’approachto
communicatingwithkeypublicsoncorporateenvironmentalresponsibility
concernscameupagainandagain:
• “Thenwepreparedforhandlingpotentialcriticism,thenexplainedhowmuchC02theyplannedtoemitaccordingtotheupdatedplan.Averyfact-baseddocument…AsIsaidwe’vetriedtohaveveryfact-basedinformation,becausethatiswhattheexternalandtheinternalisaskingfor.Nottryingtoconvincepeople,butmorebefactual.”(RS10)
• Wecommunicateinternally,externallyandwetrytosticktothefacts,andthefactisverybroadly,takethispowercableforinstance.It’snotonlytheenvironmentalaspectofit,wealsoneedtotellwhywehavedoneitbecauseit’saneconomicalfactorwithinvolvedwithit.(RS10)
• “Well,Ithinkthatwehavetocontinuouslytellpeopleaboutfacts,because
someofthisNGOs,theyhavetheirownagenda,theyaretryingtopaintapicturethatisalotworsethantherealityis.”(PQ31).
• “AndIthinkthemediainNorwayisdifferentthanforinstance…theUnited
Kingdom.Theyaremorefact-orientedhereismyimpressionthantheU.K.”(RS10).
• Onethingiswhatyou’resaying,andwhatyou’resayingisbasedonthefactsyou’regivenfromthedifferentdepartments.(VW04)
• “[Activistgroups]makethediscussionshappen,soandItalktoalotofthemallthetime.Someofthemareeasiertodiscusswithbecausetheyarekindof
61
fact-founded.Othersareveryblackandwhiteandthediscussionsveryoftenturnpersonal.Sotthatmakesitabitdifficult.”(JKL05).
O’Leary(2004p.196)writesthatexploringwordscanleadtothemesby
theirrepetitionorthoughexplorationoftheircontextandusage.Specifictothe
“fact”-basedcommunication,thisaroseassomethingthatmaybeculturally
significant.O’Learywritesthatspecificculturalconnotationsofparticularwordscan
alsoleadtorelevantthemes,referredtoas‘indigenouscategories’byPatton(2001)
and‘invivo’codingbyStraussandCorbin(1998).
Onlyoneintervieweeacknowledgedtheemotionalaspectofcompany
communicationsasveryimportant:
Sowhenyoutalktomediayouhavetobeawareofbecausetheydon’thavealltheknowledgeorthetechnicalaspectandtechnicallyit’snoissueatalltobeaware,butit’sanissuebecauseoftheperceptionofitandthenyouhavetodealwithitaccordingtothatandnotjustfact-based,thateverythingisfinebasedonthefactofit…Thatemotionalaspectofit,that’saveryimportantone.Thatsameparticipantgaveahighlynuancedunderstandingofthegeneral
public’swillingnesstodigintofacts:
Interviewee:Ifyou’renot,ifyou’renotespeciallyinterestedtodiveintobigsubjectandlearnalot,whatishereimmediatelyisallthescopeyouknowaboutitandyoumakeyourassessmentbasedonthislittlepieceofinformationyouhave,andit’slikeapieceofinformationonmortalityorantibioticsthatissortoftheconceptofsalmonfarming,soit’sourtaskwhencommunicatingtomakethatstory,thewholepicture
Researcher:Thewholepicture,forinstanceofagrowingworldpopulation.Interviewee:Yeah,yeah.Andalmostrespectingthatnobodyknow,willsacrificeourcoastlinesandcostalenvironmenttofeedalltheworld,sotheyhavetofindtherightstorynotdisregardingfacts,becausefactsisimportant,butwhenwefocusonlyonsalmon,thefactsthatareimportantforthosemanagingtheseafarm,it’snotthesamefactsasweshouldcommunicate
62
externallyornotcommunicateonlythosefacts…Ithinkwhenwecommunicateweshouldbesortofbettertotellthewholestoryandnotsortoffocusingonthe,sortofwhatthespecificsthateverybodyseesasbig,bigproblems,becausethenyoudon’t,wejustcommunicateproblemsinsteadofcommunicatingsolutions.”(GHI02)Whenthisfact-basedorientationkeptarisingfromtheinterviews,the
researcherbeganaskinghowtochoosewhichsetoffactstocommunicate,andthe
generalresponsewastocommunicateeitherbasedonaudienceorinordertotell
thelargerpictureasmentionedabove.
Thisbringstomindtheparableofthesixblindmendescribinganelephant,
whichdemonstrateshowfactsdon’talwaystellthewholestory.Onemantouches
thetrunkandinsistselephantsarelikesnakes,anotherthesideoftheelephantand
insistselephantsarelikebrickwalls.Onetouchesanear,describingafan,another
thetusk,whodescribeselephantsasaspear.Stillfurtheronemantouchesthe
elephant’slegandsayselephantsareliketreetrunks,andfinallyamanholdingthe
elephant’stailconcludesthatelephantsarelikeropes.Factsarenotsosimple,anda
compilationoffactsdoesnotnecessarilyleadonetothetruth.
MortimerJ.Adler,inhisvastworksynthesizing2,500yearsofcollectively
definedWesternthoughtinto102so-called“GreatIdeas”,dedicatesnotonebutfour
oftheseideastothismatter:knowledge,truth,andwisdomandbyalternative
definition,opinion,whichstandalongsidewide-rangingandfar-reachingideassuch
asmetaphysics,medicine,slavery,immortalityandmore.Theseideasthatdescribe
factsareconsideredbybigthinkersandprolificwriterssuchasAristotle,Augustine,
Aquinas,Hobbes,Descartes,Spinoza,Locke,Hume,Kant,Planckandothers.The
authorpersonallyalignswithHobbes’viewthat“trueandfalseareattributesof
63
speech,notofthings.Andwherespeechisnot,thereisneithertruthnorfalsehood,”
(Adler,1992).Fact,opinion,knowledgewisdom,truthhavevastnuancewhichthe
practiceofpublicrelationsdoesnotharnessseparatelyfromsociety.
Thefact-basedorientationdoesnotfitneatlyasanadditionalfactor,asthe
ConfucianvariableuncoveredbyChoiandCameron’s2005studyofcontingency
theory’sapplicationsinKorea.ThatConfucianvariablethat,tooversimplify,
addressesthe“we-ness”versus“collectiveness”and“emotionoverlogic”ofthe
KoreanculturethatisincontrasttoWesternculture(p.183).Previousliterature
findsthatsocietalandculturalfactorsstronglyaffectpublicrelationspractices(p.
173-174),soit’snotshockingthatNorway’ssecularandsciencereveringsociety
mightholduplogicandthefactsthatarepluggedintologicinordertoarriveat
conclusionsforproperconduct.
Thisfact-basedorientationpermeatesorisanapproachforthinkingabout
otheralreadyexistingfactors,butitisnotablenonetheless.
LackofIndividualismAnunexpectedobservationfromthisinterviewdatarevealsaminimal
manifestationoffactorsrelatedtoindividualcharacteristics,particularlythoseof
membersoftopmanagementandpublicrelationsprofessionals.
Twopossibleexplanationssurfaceforthiscategory’slowmanifestations.
Oneissimplythattheresearchershouldhaveprobedmoreinthisarea,butmost
probingtookplaceeitherwithincategoriesorwithrelatedfactorssuchasinternal
andexternalreputation.Theoryoffersanotherpossibility,whichisthatNorwegian
culturesimplyhaslessemphasisonhierarchyandindividualismthanU.S.culture
64
wherethistheorywasdeveloped.Asdiscussedintheliteraturereview,Hofstede
describesNorwegiancultureasemphasizingbothpowerdistanceandindividualism
lessthanthatintheU.S.Hofstede’smeasureofindividualism,whichcomparesas91
intheU.S.wherecontingencytheorywasdevelopedversus69inNorway.Whilethis
isameasureofdegreeofinterdependenceamongstasociety’smembers,itcan
contributetowardanunderstandingofleadershipwherethefocusisnotonthe
individual.Indeed,CEOpayinNorwayismuchclosertothepayofworkersas
comparedtointheU.S.wherecontingencytheorywasdeveloped.Lowerpower
distanceandlessdesiretostandoutcouldremovesomeofthecharacteristics
AmericanPRpractitionersmightthinkofwhenthinkingoftopmanagement.
BestPracticesAlongtheContinuumThissectiontakesthestrategiesandtacticsdiscussedininterviewsandmaps
themontocontingencytheory’scontinuumofadvocacytoaccommodation.Muchin
thesamewaythatJin,PangandCameron(2006)mappedCoombs’(1998)crisis
communicationstrategiesontothecontingencyframeworkinordertobuildan
analyticframeworkforcrisissituations,thebeginningsofaframeworkfor
Norwegianconflictmanagementofenvironmentalissuesispresented.Thisisone
steptowardbuildingafullyfleshed-outtheoreticalframeworkthatcouldbeof
practicalpurposeforcommunicationmanagersofNorwegianprimarysector
businessesaddressingcorporateenvironmentalresponsibility.
Asastartingpoint,hereareJin,PangandCameron’sstrategiesalongthe
contingencytheorycontinuumofadvocacy-accommodation:
65
Figure2.Jin,PangandCameron’s(2006)Strategiesforbuildingananalyticframeworkforcrisissituations
Figure2.ThisfigureshowsJin,Pang&Cameron’s(2006)strategiesforbuildingananalyticframeworkforcrisissituationsalongcontingencytheory’sadvocacy-accommodationcontinuum.
Whilethesestrategiesarefordealingwithcrisis,andthescenariosdiscussedin
interviewsrangedfromimmediatecrisessuchasoilspills,toongoing,long-term
conflict,theyaresimilarenoughforthismappingtobeusefultheoreticallyandfor
practitioners.AnexampleofdenialonJin,Pang&Cameron’sframeworkistodeny
responsibilityforanaction.Ontheothersideofthecontinuum,accommodatinga
publicmightlooklikecooperatingthroughinformationsharingoroffering
resourcestohelpsolveaproblem.
Mappingparticularstrategiesandtacticsontocontingencytheory’s
continuumcanonlybedoneforaparticularmomentintimewithoneparticular
publicinmind,andtakingintoconsiderationallofthepredisposingandsituational
variablesthatgivescontexttotheorganization’ssituation.
Thefavorabilityorunfavorabilityofacompany’spositionisanimportant
considerationwhenmappingthesestrategiesandtacticsontothecontinuum.For
66
instance,acompanywithstellarenvironmentalsustainabilityfiguresmightlookat
itasadvocatingforitselftopublishthosenumbersinanannualsustainability
report,becauseitreflectspositivelyonthecompanyandhelpsbuildagoodimage.
Onthecontrary,acompanywithverypoororfailingsustainabilityfiguresthatis
forcedtopublishanannualsustainabilityreportwouldbepublishingbasedonthe
regulatoryrequirementtodoso.
Whenallofthesestrategiesandtacticsareshowntogetheronthe
continuum,aninterestingobservationisthatthosestrategiesandtacticstowardthe
centerofthecontinuumweretheonesmostoftentalkedaboutwiththemost
enthusiasmforthesuccessofthetacticorstrategy.
67
Figure3.Bestpracticesalongthecontinuum
Figure3.Practicesarisingfrominterviewsmappedontotheadvocacy-accommodationcontinuumoftheContingencyTheoryofPublicRelationspositedbyCancel,etal.,1997,p.37.
Thetakeawayhereisthebigpicture;thatthepracticeswiththemostenthusiasm
fortheirsuccessseemtofalltowardthemiddleofthecontinuum.Thismiddle
groundisaplacewherethecompanyisnotpurelyactinginitsowninterestand
68
disregardingitspublicsonaparticularissueatagivenpointintime,norisittaking
actiontoaccommodateorappeaseitspublicanddisregardingramificationssuchas
financialonesthatcouldresultinthecompanygoingbankrupt.
Theoverarchingpurposeofthissectionistodiscussstrategiesandtactics
thatcameupininterviews,notnecessarilytoprovideafully-fleshedoutandall-
encompassingrangeofstrategiesandtactics.Thisinformation,however,couldbe
highlyusefulincreatingsuchaframework.Strategiesherecanbethoughtofasthe
endgoal,andtactics,ameansofachievingagreatergoal,oftentowardtheimageof
thecompanyandthewayitwantstobeperceived.Sotacticscanbethoughtofas
thehowandstrategiesasthewhy.Theexactorderofstrategiesandtacticsfalling
ontheadvocacysideofthecontinuumismerelyapproximated.Thegeneralthought
process,howeverforlocationisasfollows.
Publishasustainabilityreport.Acompanywithoutstandingsustainabilitynumbersmightconsider
revealingthosenumbersanactofadvocacybecauseitimprovesitsimageor
reputationbydoingso.Thatmightappeartowardtheendofpureaccommodation
alongthecontinuum.
Revealingnegativeinformation,however,canbeadifficultdecisiontomake,
andpreviousresearchshowsit’snotalwaysthefavoredtactic.AstudybyShin,Park
&Cameron(2006)foundthatwhenaskedwhetheranorganizationshouldalways
releaseallinformation,evenwhenitnegativelyimpactstheorganization,only42
percentofPRpractitionerssurveyedreported“yes”,suggestingasignificant
willingnesstowithholdnegativeinformation.Further,thetendencyproveddeeper,
69
aswhenaskedaboutpractitioner’srespectiveorganization,onlyabout38percent
reportedactuallyreleasingnegativeinformation(Shin,Park&Cameron,2006).This
study,however,wasnotlookingatenvironmentalsustainabilitymeasuresof
primarysectorbusinessesandwasnotconductedinNorway,sokeycontextislost.
Thetakeawayhereisthatcompaniesareexpressingadesiretohaveasmuch
controlaspossibleoverrevealingtheirsustainabilityinformation.Whereonthe
continuumpublishingareportfallswillvary,likelyaccordingtothefavorability
figuresandwhetherornotacompanyisrequiredtodisclosethem,ortheyaregoing
aboveandbeyond.
Ontheotherhand,publishingasustainabilityreportrevealingless-than-
desirablefiguresisastrongactofaccommodation,perhapscomingfrom
accommodatingagovernmentmandate.
Integratesustainabilityintodailythinkingofpeopleacrosstheorganization.
Manyintervieweesnotedthegeneralmindsetofenvironmental
responsibilitypermeatingtheirorganizationsbeingnecessarytosuccessful
environmentalactionsandcommunications—andcommunicationsismerelyone
facet.Consciouslyandstrategicallygettingenvironmentalsustainabilityintothe
thoughtprocessesofcompanyleadershipandemployeesatalllevelsisthe
managerialequivalentofgettingtheissueontheagendaintheworldofjournalism
forthepublicsphere.Bydoingthis,ainitialstepismadetorecognize
environmentalissues,andthatisthefirststeptounderstandingpositionand
possibilities.Bygettingenvironmentalissuesintoeachleaders’dailyworkas“part
ofhisdailythinking”(ABC04),morehastohappenformeaningfulaccommodation
70
totakeplace,butitsetsthestage.Forthisreason,thepracticeofintegrating
sustainabilityintodailythinkingofpeopleacrosstheorganizationfallstowardthe
middleofthecontinuum,thoughitisarguablymoreonthesideofaccommodation.
Releaseresearchreportstothepress. Sendingpressreleasestypicallyfallsmoreonthesideofpureadvocacy.It’s
worthnotingthattheorganizationinterviewedheresaysitspracticeistoconduct
itsstudiesandreleasethefindingswhethergood,badoramixofthetwo.The
organizationwaspleasedwiththisstrategy,andthewillingnesstopublishstudy
resultsthatbodepoorlyenvironmentaleffortsmeansthere’saccommodationofa
greaterpublicdiscourseatplay.Similarly,foracompanytocompileandsendnews
releases,ortobeentirelysilentonanissue,thisisamatterofinformationbeing
pushedoutbyanorganization,andit’sprobablygoingtobeinasfavorablelightas
possibleforthecompany.Ifacompanyhasapolicytodonewsreleasesonstudies,
forexample,whethertheyaregoodorbadforthecompany,thiswouldlikelyfallon
theaccommodationsideofthecontinuum.Particularlyinthecaseofpublishing
unflatteringinformation,therehastobeareasonforthis,sothatisamatterof
accommodatingthatparticularpublic.
Sponsoramusicfestival. Sponsoringamusicfestivalfallstowardthesideofpureadvocacy,becauseit
isamovethatsupportsalocalcommunity,butdoesn’tofferanoutletofchangefora
company’spolicyorpractices.Whensponsoringamusicfestival,norealdataor
companyinformationisshared.Thecompanyisspendingitsresourceswhenit
mightnototherwise,butsuchanevent’spurposeistoincreasepositiveexposure
71
andagoodimageasacommunitypartner.Norealchangeonanenvironmental
issueismeanttobegrappledwithatthefestival.
Silence. Beingsilentisultimatelyastrategyofcontinuingthecurrentpositonofthe
company,soitcanbeseenasanactofstrongadvocacyonbehalfofthe
organization,particularlyifthecompanyisreceivinginquiriesandremainingsilent.
Beanimmediatepartoftheconversation.Beingpartofthatongoingconversationmightmeanaskinghardquestions
andbeingcriticized,butitalsoincreasesopportunitiesforpositivecoverage,
familiarityandunderstandinginadditiontopotentiallyhelpingsettheagendaor
focusdiscussion.
Garneremployeesupportthroughabikeprogram. Alongthecontinuum,thismightfallmoreonthesideofadvocacybecause
thecompanycanwhollycontroltheprogramandanditsmessaging.Garnering
employeesupportthroughbikeprogramscouldalsobeviewedasadvocative
becauseit’ssupport-buildingforthecompany.Thatsaid,ifemployeeswerereally
pushingforsuchaprogramfortheactualenvironmentalimpactinmind,itmight
nearerthemiddleofthecontinuum.
Holdingaseminarorparticipateinaconference. Holdingaseminarorconferencefallsinaboutthemiddleofthecontinuum,
becauseononehand,theorganizationisofferingitsownplatformonwhichto
engagewithkeypublics.Itcannot,howeverbeconsideredpureadvocacy,because
byinvitingopposingviewholdersintothefoldandallowapubicalbeitguided
discussion,isopeningoneselfuptocriticismpushingforaccommodation.
72
Severalcaveats,onthissectionaswell:It’simportanttonotethat
contingencytheorywasdevelopedinordertorefineandimprovethemoreone-
size-fits-allstrategyofexcellencetheoryofpublicrelations,sofromitsbeginnings,
contingencytheorydoesnotprescribebestpracticesformanagingconflictpersay.
Additionally,it’svitaltonotethatthisstudywasnotdesignedtoandthereforeit
cannotconcludethatcontingencytheory,asithasbeendescribedin20yearsof
studyandpreviousliterature,definitivelyappliestothepracticeofNorwegian
conflictmanagement.However,theconceptsofadvocatingforanorganization
versusaccommodatingpublicscanberecognized,andthereforeitisaworthwhile
exercisetoexaminetheeffectivenessoftheseapproachesasdescribedby
interviewees.
Leverageestablishedcommunicationchannelsoutsidetheorganization. Thiscouldreallybeviewedasaccommodationoradvocacy,dependingon
thecompany’ssituation.Acompanylookingtoreallypushandgainincreasing
speedinenvironmentalsustainabilitymeasuresmightfallmoreonthe
accommodationsideofthecontinuum,whereasacompanylookingtocontrolits
ownmessagingbutnotnecessarilymakesubstantiveaccommodationsaswellmight
placethismoreonthecontinuum’ssideofadvocacy.
Betransparent.Apolicytobetransparentonenvironmentalresponsibilityissuesnomatter
howbadtheorganizationcouldlookandnomatteritseffectonorganizational
stabilitywouldplacethispracticeontheendofaccommodation.Onthecontinuum
above,itfallsmoretowardthemiddleofthecontinuum,becausethegeneral
73
commentwhentransparencycameupininterviewsisthatinterviewees’companies
trytobeastransparentastheycan—whichisnota100%transparencypolicy.
Getandmaintainthe“sociallicensetooperate”.Thiswassuchanimportantpracticethroughoutallindustriesinterviewed,
andallsizesofcompanies.Anothergeneralrulethroughoutinterviewswastoget
the“sociallicensetooperate.”Hereadvocacycouldlooklikearguingthevalueofthe
industrytosociety.Accommodationcouldlooklikethis:
Alittlecompanyinalocalcommunitynormallyhighlyrespectedinthatlocalcommunity,becauseitemployspeople,it’speopletheyknow,theytrustthatcompany,andwhyshouldasmallcompanywithafewlicensesthatishighlyrecognizedintheirlocalcommunity,whyshouldtheyputalotofresourcesintomakingabigsustainabilityreport?Whowouldbeinterestedinthat?Noone.Thestakeholderslocally,theytrustthecompany,ahsowhywouldtheyhavetomakeabigreport?”(GHI02).
Whilethisexamplealsospeakstoreporting,largecompanieslikelyhavetoworkto
earnthatlocalrespectinsomewayorintervieweessaidtheycouldhavedifficulty
operatingorevenlosepoliticalsupportandliterallicensingneededtoallowthe
companytoremain.Multipleintervieweesreportedperceivingahighlevelofvoter
agency—thatifthecommunitylostitssupportforacompany’soperationsbut
politiciansdidn’treflectthis,thenvoterswouldreplacethepoliticianwithonethat
wouldreflecttheconstituents’desires.
Tiecompanypracticestoscience/technology/innovation.Onepossibleexplanationforseeingtiesbacktoscience/technologyand
innovationisbecausescience,technologyandinnovationholdanesteemedposition
withinsocietyasawhole,tyingcompanypracticesbacktothisborrowsfromthe
goodreputation.Therefore,talkingaboutenvironmentalsustainabilitymeasuresin
74
thesetermsismoretowardadvocacyonthecontinuum.Totiecompanypracticesto
science,technologyandinnovationistoborrowfromthecredibilityandsocial
supportforthem.Thisfocusisalsohighlyconducivetoprimarydiscussionwith
facts,whichisdiscussedearlierasanoticeablepatternemergingfromthese
interviews.
TiecompanypracticestoNorwegian/internationalstandards.Toadheretostateorinternationalstandardsonlywhenrequiredbylawisa
ratherextremeexampleofaccommodation.Ifcompanypolicieswerecuttingedge
andcommunicatorscouldthensay,lookweareaheadofthewave,aheadofthe
curve,thenthiscouldactuallybeconsideredadvocacyfortheorganization.Butat
thispoint,we’renolongertalkingaboutconflictcommunications—thiswouldbe
cooperation.Forthisreason,thispracticeisshownontheaccommodationendof
thecontinuum.
Strengths&Limitations Thisstudyismethodologicallystronginthatinaccordancewithitbeinga
preliminarycross-culturalstudy,itisforemostconcernedwiththevalidityof
responsesandunderstandingfactorsatplaybyallowingforelaborationand
explanationneededformaximumunderstandingandclarification.Stepstakenin
interviewsetuphelpedensurethis.
Althoughthisresearchcontributespreliminaryinsightintothemanifestation
ofcontingencytheoryfactorsatplayinconflictmanagementinNorway,itisnot
withoutlimitations.Thisresearchonlyexaminesaparticularsectorofafully
developedeconomy(theprimarysector)andmanagingconflictononeparticular
75
issue,(communicatingcorporateenvironmentalresponsibilityconcerns).Inorder
togetarounderorfullerperspectiveonconflictmanagementsurroundingtheissue
ofenvironmentalissuesforinstance,moretypesofplayerswouldneedtobe
interviewed:particularlycommunicatorsfromenvironmentalactivistgroup,
governmentofficialsatthestateandlocalslevelsandindustryassociations
advocatingonthepartofspecificindustries.Thisweaknesswasanticipated;
however,andbyallowingthisweaknesstheresourcesoftimeandmoneywere
maximized,giventhatthisisapreliminarystudyanyway.
Withtenpeoplebeinginterviewedforthisresearch,thisisonthelowendof
theanticipated10to20interviewssuggestedbypreviousstudies.Therewereboth
timeandresourcelimitationsthatlimitedthenumberofinterviews.Theresearcher
couldonlybeincountryfor90dayswithoutextensiveandexpensivepaperwork,
andsummer2015isthetimeframethatfitfortheresearcher.Giventhatmuchof
NorwaytakesfamilytimeinJuly,nointerviewswereconductedinthatmonth.
Whilethenumberofinterviewsconductedwasonthelowsideofwhatwas
proposed,about10interviewsoutoftheproposed10-20,todoadditional
interviewsatthistimewouldintroduceatimevariablethatwouldneedtobe
accountedforintheresponses.Publicopinioncanswayorevolveovertimeon
issues,sofactorstakenintoconsiderationhandlingaconflictscenarioforaprimary
sectorbusinessonenvironmentalsustainabilityissuesmightneedtobeadaptedto
fit.Thewayinwhichanorganizationinteractswithitspublicsiscontingentuponor
dependsuponavarietyofinternalandexternalvariables.Furthermore,the
76
interactionofthesevariablesisdynamic,andorganizationalstancechangesasthe
situationdemands,whichmaychangeovertime.(Reber,Cropp,&Cameron,2003).
Also,asnotedbyLi,Cropp&Jin(2010)intheChinesecontext,conflict
managementisnotsynonymouswithpublicrelations,soexaminingpublicrelations
practitionersfortheirconflictmanagementpracticesdoesnotcomprehensively
acknowledgethechallengesandcomplexitiesineffectiveandethicalconflict
managementinNorway.Resultsofthecurrentstudyandproposedfuturestudy,
however,willfacilitateresearchersandpractitionersinobtainingnewperspectives
forexaminingNorwegianPRpracticeandprovidingpracticalandtheoretical
insightsofhowtostrategicallyidentifyandcombinethemostinfluentialfactors.
PreviousstudieshavefoundwhetherapractitionerworksforthePR
departmentofanorganizationversusworkingforaPRfirmimpactstheinfluenceof
certainfactors.Forinstance,itseemsthatpractitionersworkinginaPRdepartment
aremoreinfluencedbytheorganization’scharacteristicsthanthoseworkinginaPR
firm,duetothedifferentenvironment,natureofclients,workstyle,etc.(Li,Cropp&
Jin,2010,p.254).
Finally,severalintervieweeshesitatedtosharemuchdetailedinformationon
particularcrises,andbecauseofthat,it’sworthnotingthatinasmallway,this
researcherwaslikeapublicthatneededtobedealtwithtoacertaindegree.
77
Implications&FutureResearch Perhapsthemostinterestingandnoveltakeawaysfromthisresearchliesin
itsimplicationsandfutureresearch.Futurequantitativeresearchcouldrevealthe
structuralsoundnessoftheContingencyTheoryofAccommodationinNorway.A
logicalnextstepforthisresearchistoconductaquantitativeonlinesurvey,theover
80individualcontingentvariablesasperceivedbyNorwegianpublicrelations
practitionerscouldbeexaminedforinfluence,potentiallyallowingthemost
influentialvariablesforNorwegianpublicrelationspracticetosurface.Astudyof
publicrelationspractitionersacrossindustrieswithouttopicallimitationscouldgo
furthertosuggestthestructuralstability—orinstability—ofthecontingencymatrix
intheNorwegianbusinessandsocialclimate.
Continuedresearchinthisveincouldsuggestthatcontingencytheoryof
accommodationcanbeeffectivelyappliedtoNorwegianpublicrelationspracticeto
helppractitionersunderstandandimprovetheirinvolvementofstrategic
communicationpractitionerswithamoresophisticatedunderstandingofthe
complexcommunicationenvironment,whichcouldeventuallyequipNorwegian
practitionerswithhighercommunicationcompetencyinhandlingdifferentconflict
situations.Additionally,astheglobaleconomycontinuestodevelop,studiesthat
seektopushbeyondthebordersofonecountry,suchastheU.S.,oronetradition,
suchastheWesternTradition,becomemoreandmorerelevanttounderstanding
78
theglobaleconomywithallitsnuanceandunleashitforbettermentofqualityoflife
aroundtheglobe.
Canceletal(1997)notesthatsituationalvariablesareoftenmore
challengingthanpredisposingvariables,whichsupportstheideaofpursuingapre-
programmedquantitativetool.
StructuralStabilityofContingencyTheoryacrossCulturalContextsThefindingsofthispreliminaryresearchsuggeststructuralstabilityof
contingencytheoryinNorway.Itisoutsidethescopeofthisstudytodetermine
whetherornotcontingencytheory’sfactorsdefinitivelyholdintheNorwegian
conflictmanagementcontext,butthisstudydoesprovideinsightsonhow
Norwegianpractitionersmakestrategicdecisionsfortheirorganizationsand
clients.Findingsofthispreliminarystudydoseemtofitwellalongsideamore
developedfieldofstudiesapplyingContingencyTheoryinChina,Koreaand
SingaporeofthisU.S.-developedtheorythatsuggestcontingencytheoryof
accommodationcouldserveavaluableroleincontinuallyreflectingthecomplex
realityofpublicrelationspracticeindifferentcountriesandregionsaswellas
informingpractitionersontheeffectivestrategicconflictmanagementbasedona
solidunderstandingofinternalandexternalinfluences.
Aspreviouslymentionedintheliteraturereview,contingencytheorystudies
inKoreasuggestaculturalandsituationalcontingencyperspectiveofpublic
relationsleadershipcanhelpexplaindifferencesbetweenleadershippreferences
forpublicrelationspractitionersintheU.S.andSouthKorea(Shin,Heath,&Lee,
2011).Researchershavepredictedthatintothefuture,leadershipinpublic
79
relationswillmeantheabilitytointegrateatseverallevelsofbusinessandsociety
foramoreintegratedmanagementprocessandforhelpingorganizationsmake
societymorefunctionalthroughcontingent,strategic,skilledandreflective
leadership.Basedonasurveyof1,000practitioners:
Shinetal.(2006)foundthatindividuallevelfactorshaveprimaryinfluenceonresponsetosituations.Someofindividualleveloffactorsincludesindividualcommunicationcompetency,personalethicalvalues,abilitytohandlecomplexproblems,andfamiliaritywithexternalpublicsoritsrepresentatives.Thiscontingencyframeworkguidesdeploymentoftheindividualqualificationsnecessaryforeffectiveconflictmanagement(pp.171).
Cameronetal.(2001)noted,“itisonething,however,forpractitionersto
monitortheenvironmentandaddtoweightmanyfactorsinarrivingatastance.Itis
anotherforteachersandtheoriststomanageover80distinctfactorsinanyuseful
way”(p.247).Theauthorpositsthatit’sthiswide-ranging,parsimonyeluding,
difficult-to-managegroupoffactors,thatisexactlywhatallowsforthedynamic
applicationofthetheoryacrosssocialboundariesasit’sbeentestedthusfar.Itis
beyondthelimitsofthisstudytosaythatthetheoryindeedholdstrueinside
Norwegianconflictmanagementpractices,butagainitappearstobeholdingtrue.
ContingencyDecisionMatrix:AQuantitativeToolAspreviouslymentionedintheliteraturereview,leadershipandcultureare
relevanttocontingencytheory.Culturaldifferences,however,donotonlyexist
betweenonecountryandthenext.Manysubculturescanexistwiththeirown
definingcharacteristics,histories,visionsforthefuture,similargoalsandsoforth.
Soitisreasonabletosegmentthebusinessworldintodistinctcultures:the
80
petroleumindustryculture,theagricultureindustryculture,aquacultureindustry
culture;primarysectorcultureversusretailsectorcultureversusfinancialservices
sector;bigbusinesscultureversusentrepreneurialculture;thosepublicallylisted
onastockexchangeversusprivatelyheldversuspartgovernment-owned,andso
forth.
Inthissamevein,previousresearchbySinetal.,hasfounddifferencesinthe
waythatcrisisresponsesofnon-profitandfor-profitorganizationstendtodiffer,
namelyinthatnon-profitorganizationsweremorelikelytobemore
accommodativetowarditspublicsandvice-versa,thannon-profitorganizations
whenanalyzingtheactionsfollowingratherthanscenariosprecedingacrisis(Jin,
Pang&Cameron,2006,p.99).
Apromisingapplicationofthiswouldbetodevelopindustry-specificmodels
fortheContingencyDecisionMatrix(CDM)proposedin2015conference
proceedingsoftheInternationalPublicRelationsResearchConference.Suchmodels
fortheCDMcouldhelpquantifyandultimatelyexpeditedecisionstoaccommodate
oradvocateforagivencorporateenvironmentalresponsibilityconcernatacertain
pointintimewithacertainpublic.Strasburg,Tham&Cameronin2015proposed
thismodel,whichincorporatesprinciplesandmechanicsofdecisionandgame
theorieswithcontingencytheory’sbroadanddynamicspectrumoffactorsinorder
toanalyzemulti-facetedproblemsfacedbypublicrelationsprofessionals.
Theinterestingimplicationsherearebypattern,sosimilarlytherecouldbe
industrydefaultsordefaultsbycountry.Themodelwouldbemostusefulallowing
81
practitionerstosetupitsowndefaultsettings-forspeedyapplicationwhena
conflictorcrisisarises.Thosefactorswouldalreadyhaveapproximatescores.
82
Conclusion AsContingencyTheoryofAccommodationentersitsthirddecadeof
research,itflexesitsstrengthanddynamicapplicationsthroughresearchinthe
formofinterviews,casestudies,contentanalysis,factoranalysis,surveysandmore
tobuild,bolsterandwhereneeded—modify—thetheory’scentralpropositions
(Cameron,1997;Cameron,Cropp&Reber,2001;Cancel,Cameron,Sallot&Mitrook,
1997;Cancel,Mitrook&Cameron,1999;Reber&Cameron,2003;Shin,Cameron&
Cropp,2002;Shin,Cheng,Jin&Cameron,2005;Yarbrough,Cameron,Sallot&
McWilliams,1998).Thetheoryhasbeensuccessfullystretchingoutsidethebounds
oftheU.S.geographicalbordertoproverelevantandofferinsightsintoconflict
managementinChina,KoreaandSingapore(Li,Cropp&Jin,2010;Bae&Park,
2011;Shin,Heath&Lee,2011;Zhang,Qiu&Cameron,2004).
Thisexplorationofcontingencytheory’sapplicationinNorway,thefirstofits
kindinEurope,indicatessupportforthisalreadyrobusttheory.Findingswill
contributetoanacademicdialoguethathasthusfarseenitstestingand
developmentmainlyintheU.S.,China,SouthKoreaandSingapore.Amorerobust,
applicableanddynamictheoryisgoodforpublicrelationspractitionersaswell,
particularlybecausemuchhasbeendonetorootthistheoryinpracticalexperience
(Cameron,Cropp&Reber,2000).
Inparticularthisstudyfoundtheubiquityofthreatsrelatedtofactors
influencingpoliticalandsocialsupportforthesecompaniesmanifestthroughout
83
interviewing.Whilenoentirelynewfactorsmanifested,aloudandclearpreference
emergedfortheexistingfactor“howindividualsreceive,processanduse
informationandinfluence,”inthatinmostinterviews,afact-basedorientation
surfaced,whichoftenultimatelywasamethodofadvocacy,specificallyhowand
whyagivenorganizationeitherismakingstridesinenvironmentalresponsibility
concerns.
Althoughthisstudydidnotseektodiscoverfactorsthatdidnotmanifest,
analysissuggeststhatinternalvariablesrelatedtocharacteristicsofindividual
people—PRpractitionersandtopmanagement—maynotbeasrelevanttothe
practiceofconflictmanagementinNorwayontheissueofcorporateenvironmental
responsibilityconcerns.
FurtherstudyofcontingencytheoryinNorwaywarrantsinvestigation
becauseglobalizationmeanscommunicatingeffectivelycrossculturally.Norway
made$4.4billionofdirectpurchasesofU.S.realestatelastyear,makingitthe
biggestforeignbuyerafterCanada,accordingtocommercial-propertybrokerage
CBREGroupInc.Thetrendcontinues,asearlierthisyearNorway’sfederalfund
dropped$1.5billiononprimeNewYorkrealestate(Mulholland,2015).Further,
Norwayinvestedmorethan$9billionintheUnitedStatesin2013,whichwasa
232%increasefrom2012(OrganizationforInternationalInvestment,2014).In
Norway,oneinfourforeigninvestmentsisAmerican,whichismorethananyother
country.Ultimatelyhavingamorerobustandnuancedunderstandingof
contingencytheorywillhelpcontinueadvancingboththetheoreticalandpractical
developmentofthefieldofpublicrelationsandconflictmanagement.
84
REFERENCES
Adler,M.J.(Ed.).(1992).TheGreatIdeas:ALexiconofWesternThoughtbyMortimerJ.Adler.NewYork:MacMillanPublishingCompany.
Bae,J.&Park,S.(2011).Socio-contextualinfluencesontheKoreannewsmedia’s
interpretationofSamsung’s$847.6milliondonation.JournalofPublicRelationsResearch23(2),141-166.http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/1062726x.2010.504794
Berger.(2014).Interviews.InMediaandCommunicationResearchMethds:An
IntroductiontoQualitativeandQuantitativeApproaches(ThirdEdition)384pages.ThousandOaks,California:SAGEPublications.
CameronG.T.,Cropp,F.,&Reber,B.H.(2001).Gettingpastplatitudes:Factors
limitingaccommodationinpublicrelations.JournalofCommunicationManagement,6(3),242-261.http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/13632540110806802
Cameron,G.T.&Curtin,P.A.(1992).AnExpertSystemsApproachforPRCampaigns
Research.JournalismEducator,47(2),13-18.Cancel,A.E.,Cameron,G.T.,Sallot,L.M.,&Mitrook,M.A.(1997).Itdepends:A
contingencytheoryofaccommodationinpublicrelations.JournalofPublicRelationsResearch,9(1),31-63.http://dx.doi.org/10.1207/s1532754xjprr0901_02
Cancel,A.E.,Mitrook,M.A.,&Cameron,G.T.(1999).Testingthecontingencytheoryofaccommodationinpublicrelations.PublicRelationsReview,25(2),171-197.http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0363-8111(99)80161-1
Carrington,D.(2015February5).World’sbiggestsovereignwealthfunddumps
dozensofcoalcompanies.TheGuardian.Retrievedfromhttp://www.theguardian.com/environment/2015/feb/05/worlds-biggest-sovereign-wealth-fund-dumps-dozens-of-coal-companies
Choi,Y.&Cameron,G.T.(2005).OvercomingEthnocentrism:TheRoleofIdentityin
ContingentPracticeofInternationalPublicRelations.JournalofPublicRelationsResearch17(2).
Coombs,W.T.(1998).AnAnalyticFrameworkforCrisisSituations:BetterResponsesfromaBetterUnderstandingoftheSituation.JournalofPublicRelationsResearch,10(3),177-191.
85
Curtin,P.A.(1999).ReevaluatingPublicRelationsInformationSubsidies:MarketDrivenJournalismandAgenda-BuildingTheoryandPractice.JournalOfPublicRelationsResearch,11(1),53-90.http://dx.doi.org/10.1207/s1532754xjprr1101_03
Egri,C.P.,Ralston,D.A.,Milton,L.,Naoumova,I.,Palmer,I.,Ramburuth,P.…Rossi,A.M.(2004).Managerialperspectivesoncorporateenvironmentalandsocialresponsibilitiesin22countries.(pp.C1-C6.)AcademyofManagementBestConferencePaper.
Emerson,R.M.(1995).Processingfieldnotes:Codingandmemoing.Writingethnographicfieldnotes.(pp.142-168).Chicago,IL:UniversityofChicagoPress.
Gaither,T.K.&Curtin,P.A.(2008).Examiningtheheuristicvalueofmodelsofinternationalpublicrelationspractice:AcasestudyoftheArlaFoodscrisis.JournalofPublicRelationsResearch,20,115-137.http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/10627260701727051
Grunig,J.E.,&Grunig,L.A.(1992).Modelsofpublicrelationsandcommunication.
ExcellenceinPublicRelationsandCommunicationManagement,(pp.285-325).Hillsdale,JN:LawrenceErlbaum.
HofstedeCenter,The.http://geert-hofstede.com/countries.html
Jin,Y.,Pang,A.&Cameron,G.T.(2006).Strategiccommunicationincrisis governance:AnalysisoftheSingaporemanagementoftheSARScrisis.The CopenhagenJournalofAsianStudies23,81-104.Retrievedfrom http://rauli.cbs.dk/index.php/cjas/article/view/693Leech,B.L.(2002).AskingQuestions:TechniquesforSemistructuredInterviews.
PoliticalScience&Politics,35(4),pp665-668.http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/S1049096502001129.
Li,Cropp&Jin.(2010).IdentifyingkeyinfluencersofChinesePRpractitioner’s strategicconflictmanagementpractice:Asurveyoncontingentvariablesin Chinesecontext.PublicRelationsReview,36,249-255.Retrievedfrom
ScienceDirecthttp://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0363811110000603
Lonstreth,B.(2015,March2).Norwaycanleadinfightingclimatechange.HuffPost
GenerationChangeBlog.Retrievedfromhttp://www.huffingtonpost.com/bevis-longstreth/norway-can-lead-in-fighting-climate-change_b_6787916.html
86
Lynes,J.K.&Andrachuk,M.(2008).MotivationsforcorporatesocialandenvironmentalresponsibilitystudyofScandinavianAirlines.JournaloInternationalManagement14,377-390.http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.intman.2007.09.004
Marra,F.J.(1998).Crisiscommunicationplans:Poorpredictorsofexcellentcrisis
publicrelations,PublicRelationsReview,24(4),p.461-474,http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0363-8111(99)80111-8.
Mulholland,S.(2015,February11).Norwayfundbuys45%ofNewYork’s11Times
SquareTower.BloombergBusiness.Retrievedfromhttp://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2015-02-11/norway-fund-buys-45-of-new-york-s-11-times-square-tower
Norwegianparliamentvotesonnewclimatechangelaw.(2015,March24).Norway
News.Retrievedfromhttp://www.norwaynews.com/en/~view.php?73ayiC58djnic672V75253EA5284bTSa4544Qar084iQL388eXOb38
O’Leary,Z.(2004).DataManagementandAnalysis.InTheEssentialGuidetoDoingResearch(184-204).London,England.
OrganizationforInternationalInvestment.(2014).ForeignDirectInvestmentinthe
UnitedStates2014Report.Washington,D.C.:ContentFirst.Retrievedfromhttp://www.state.gov/e/eb/rls/othr/ics/2014/227894.htm
Pyrczak,F.,&R.Bruce.(2005a).WritingAnalysis&ResearchSections.InWriting
EmpiricalResearchReports(97-107).Glendale,CA. Pyrczak,F.,&R.Bruce.(2005b).WritingDiscussionSections.InWritingEmpirical
ResearchReports(109-115).Glendale,CA. Reber, B. H. & Cameron, G. T. (2003). Measuring contingencies: Using scales to
measurepublicrelationspractitionerlimitstoaccommodation.Journalism&MassCommunicationQuarterly,80(2),431-446.
Rollins,M.,Nickell,D.,&Ennis,J.(2014).Theimpactofeconomicdownturnson
marketing.JournalofBusinessResearch,67,2727-2731.http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2013.03.022
Shenkar,O.,&YonGlinow,M.A.(1994).Paradoxesoforganizationaltheoryand
research:UsingthecaseofChinatoillustratenationalcontingency.ManagementScience40(1),56-71.http://dx.doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.40.1.56
Shin,J.,Cameron,G.T.,&Cropp,F.(2002).Askingwhatmattersmost:Anational
surveyofPRprofessionalresponsetothecontingencymodel.Annualmeeting
87
oftheAssociationoftheEducationforJournalismandMassCommunication,Miami.
Shin,J.,etal.(2005).Goingheadtohead:Contentanalysisofhighprofileconflictsasplayedoutinthepress.PublicRelationsReview(31)3,399-406.
Shin,J.,Heath,R.L.,&Lee,J.(2011).Acontingencyexplanationofpublicrelations
practitionerleadershipstyles:Situationandculture.JournalofPublicRelationsResearch,23(2),167-190.http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/1062726X.2010.505121
Shin,J.,Park,J.,&Cameron,G.T.(2006).Contingentfactors:modelinggenericpublicrelationspracticeinSouthKorea.PublicRelationsReview,32,184-185.
Silverman,D.(2010a).Choosingamethodology.Doingqualitativeresearch(3rded.).
London,England:SagePublications.
Silverman,D.(2010b).Whatyoucan(andcan’t)dowithqualitativeresearch.Doingqualitativeresearch(3rded.).London,England:SagePublications.
Solholm,R.(2015,March30).Norway’snewclimatetarget.TheNorwayPost.
Retrievedfromhttp://www.norwaypost.no/index.php/news/latest-news/30777
Spangler,I.S.&Pompper,D.(2011).Corporatesocialresponsibilityandtheoil
industry:Theoryandperspectivefuelalongitudinalview.PublicRelationsReview,37(3),217-225.http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.pubrev.2011.03.013
Chen,Z.,Ji,Y.,&Li,Z.(Eds.).(2015).ProceedingsfromIPRRC2015:18th
InternationalPublicRelationsResearchConference.CoralGables,FL:UniversityofMiami.
U.S.StateDepartment.(June2014).2014InvestmentClimateStatement.Retrieved
fromhttp://www.state.gov/e/eb/rls/othr/ics/2014/227894.htmWimmer,R.&Dominik,J.(2011).Sampling.MassMediaResearch.9thed.(pp.87-
113).Boston,MA:WadsworthCengageLearning.
Zhang,J.,Qui,Q.,&CameronG.T.(2004).AcontingencyapproachtotheSino-U.S.conflictresolution.PublicRelationsReview,30,391-399.http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.pubrev.2004.08.014
88
AppendixA:PreliminaryInterviewInstrumentRespondent
1. Whatisyourpositioninthecompany,andhowlonghaveyouworkedforthecompany?
2. Howlonghaveyoubeenworkinginthisposition?3. Describeyourexperienceincommunicatingenvironmentalsustainability
issues?
Environmentalsustainability
4. Wheredoescommunicatingenvironmentalsustainabilityfitintothegrandschemeofyourcompany’soperations?Communicationplan?
5. Howdoesyourcompanydefineenvironmentalsustainability?6. Whataretheenvironmentalsustainabilityvaluesdefinedbyyourcompany?7. Howarethesevaluesdecidedupon?
Publics
8. Tellmeaboutthemostimportantpublicyoudealwithwhencommunicatingenvironmentalsustainability.Whyisthisonethemostimportant?
9. Tellmeaboutthemostrecenttimeyouhadtocommunicateenvironmentalissueswiththismostimportantpublic.
10. Tellmeaboutthemostdifficultpubicyoudealwithwhencommunicatingenvironmentalsustainability.Whyisthisonethemostdifficult?
11. Tellmeaboutthemostrecenttimeyouhadtocommunicateenvironmentalissueswiththismostdifficultpublic.
12. Whataretheotherpublicsyoudealwithwhencommunicatingenvironmentalsustainability?Tellmealittleabouteachandwhyeachisimportant.
Stance
13. I’dliketoexploreseveralbig,importantorotherwisememorableinstanceswhereyouhadtocommunicateenvironmentalsustainability.Canyoulistthreeinstances?Foreach:
a. Tellmeaboutthestance(s)youtookwithwhichpublic(s).b. Howdidyouarriveatthatstance?
i. Whowasinvolvedinthediscussiondeterminingthisstance?ii. Whatfactorsdidyoutakeintoconsiderationindetermining
stance?Becomprehensive.Finalthoughts
14. Isthereanythingyoubelieveisimportantthatyouwouldliketoadd?
89
AppendixB:RevisedInterviewInstrumentRespondent&Company
1. Whatisyourpositioninthecompany,andhowlonghaveyouworkedforthecompany?
2. Howlonghaveyoubeenworkinginthisposition?
Conflict&Stance
3. I’dliketoexploreamemorableinstanceofcommunicatingconflictregardingenvironmentalsustainability.Describeatimewhenaconflictarose.
a. What/howmuchwasatstakewiththeconflict?b. Tellmeabouttheactionsyoutook.Whyweretheychosen?c. Whatwasthedesiredoutcome,anddidtheseactionsachieveit?d. Whatconsiderationsoutsideyourcompany’scontrolwererelevant?
i. Whatfactorsdidyoutakeintoconsiderationindeterminingstance?Becomprehensive.
e. Whatconsiderationswithincompany’scontrolwererelevant?i. Whatcharacteristicsoftheseconsiderationsmadethemworthconsidering?
ii. Whatcharacteristicsofthecompanymattered?iii. Whatcharacteristicsoftheissuemattered?iv. WhatcharacteristicsofthePRteammattered?v. Getintothenittygritty!
f. Whatsituationalfactorswererelevant?i. Howdidyouchoosewhatfactstoincludeandhow?
g. Whowithinthecompanyandwhooutsideofthecompanyultimatelyhadaneffectontheoutcome?AnyonefromPR?
Publics
4. Tellmeaboutthemostimportantpublicyoudealwithwhencommunicatingenvironmentalsustainability.Whyisthisonethemostimportant?
a. Tellmeaboutthemostrecenttimeyouhadtocommunicateenvironmentalissueswiththismostimportantpublic.
5. Tellmeaboutthemostdifficultpubicyoudealwithwhencommunicatingenvironmentalsustainability.Whyisthisonethemostdifficult?
a. Tellmeaboutthemostrecenttimeyouhadtocommunicateenvironmentalissueswiththismostdifficultpublic.
6. Whataretheotherpublicsyoudealwithwhencommunicatingenvironmentalsustainability?Tellmealittleabouteachandwhyeachisimportant.
90
Finalthoughts
7. Generallyspeaking,howwouldyoucharacterizethiscompany’sapproachtodealingwithconflict?Why?
8. Isthereanythingyoubelieveisimportantthatyouwouldliketoadd?“mighthavetoprobetotriggerrecognition”
91
AppendixC:ContingencyTheoryFactors*Externalvariables
1. Threatsa. Litigationb. Governmentregulationc. Potentiallydamagingpublicityd. Scarringoforganization’sreputationincommunitye. Legitimizingactivists’claims
2. Industryenvironmenta. Changing(dynamic)orstaticb. Numberofcompetitors/levelofcompetitionc. Richnessorleannessofresourcesintheenvironment
3. Generalpolitical/socialenvironment/externalculture((levelofconstraint/uncertainty)
a. Degreeofpoliticalsupportofbusinessb. Degreeofsupportofbusiness
4. Theexternalpublic(group,individual,etc.)a. Size/numberofmembersb. Degreeofsourcecredibility/powerfulmembersorconnectionsc. Pastsuccessesorfailuresofpublictoevokechanged. Amountofadvocacypracticedbyorganizatione. Levelofcommunication/involvementofpublic/smembersf. Whetherthepublichaspublicrelationscounsellorsornotg. Community’sperceptionofpublic:reasonableorradicalh. Levelofmediacoveragethepublichasreceivedinthepasti. Whetherrepresentativesofthepublicknoworlikerepresentativesof
theorganizationj. Whetherrepresentativesoftheorganizationknoworlike
representativesfromthepublick. Public’swillingnesstodiluteitscause/request/claiml. Movesandcountermovesm. Relativepoweroforganizationn. Relativepowerofpublic
5. Issueunderquestiona. Sizeb. Stakesc. Complexity
Internalvariables
1. Organization’scharacteristicsa. Openorclosedcultureb. Dispersedwidelygeographicallyorcentralizedc. Leveloftechnologytheorganizationusestoproduceitsproductor
service
92
d. Homogeneityorheterogeneityofemployeese. Ageoftheorganization/valueplacedontraditionf. Speedofgrowthintheknowledgeleveltheorganizationusesg. Economicstabilityoftheorganizationh. Existenceornon-existenceofissuesmanagementpersonnelor
programi. Organization’spastexperienceswiththepublicj. Distributionofdecision-makingpowerk. Formalization:numberofrulesorcodesdefiningandlimitingthejob
descriptionsl. stratification/hierarchyofpositionsm. Existenceorinfluenceoflegaldepartmentn. Businessexposure(productmixandconsumermix)o. Corporateculture
2. Publicrelationsdepartmentcharacteristicsa. Totalnumberofpractitionersandnumberwithcollegedegreesb. Typeofpasttrainingofemployees:trainedinPRorex-journalists,
marketing,etc.c. LocationofPRdepartmentinhierarchy:independentorunder
marketingumbrella/experiencingencroachmentofmarketing/persuasivementality
d. Representationinthedominantcoalitione. ExperiencelevelofPRpractitionersindealingwithconflictf. Generalcommunicationcompetencyofdepartmentg. Autonomyofdepartmenth. Physicalplacementofdepartmentinbuilding(nearCEOandothertop
decisionmakersornot)i. Stafftrainedinresearchmethodsj. Amountoffundingavailablefordealingwithexternalpublicsk. Amountoftimeallowedtousedealingwithexternalpublicsl. Gender:percentageoffemaleupper-levelstaff/managersm. Potentialofdepartmenttopracticevariousmodelsofpublicrelations
3. Characteristicsofdominantcoalition(topmanagement)a. Politicalvalues:conservativeorliberal/openorclosedtochangeb. Managementstyle:domineeringorlaidbackc. Generalaltruismleveld. SupportandunderstandingofPRe. Frequencyofexternalcontactwithpublicsf. Departmentperceptionoftheorganization’sexternalenvironmentg. Calculationofpotentialrewardsorlossesusingdifferentstrategies
withexternalpublicsh. Degreeoflinemanagerinvolvementinexternalaffairs
4. Internalthreats(howmuchisatstakeinthesituation)a. Economiclossorgainfromimplementingvariousstancesb. Marringofemployees’orstockholders’perceptionofthecompany
93
c. Marringofthepersonalreputationsofthecompanydecisionmakers(imageinemployees’perceptionsandgeneralpublic’sperception)
5. Individualcharacteristics(publicrelationspractitioner,dominantcoalitionandlinemanagers)
a. TraininginPR,marketing,journalism,engineering,etc.b. Personalethicsc. Toleranceofabilitytodealwithuncertaintyd. Comfortlevelwithconflictordissonancee. Comfortlevelwithchangef. Abilitytorecognizepotentialandexistingproblemsg. Extentofopennesstoinnovationh. Extenttowhichindividualcangraspothers’worldviewsi. Personality:dogmatic,authoritarianj. Communicationcompetencyk. Cognitivecomplexity:abilitytohandlecomplexproblemsl. Predispositiontowardsnegotiationm. Predispositiontowardsaltruismn. Howindividualsreceive,processanduseinformationandinfluenceo. Familiaritywithexternalpublicoritsrepresentativep. Likeexternalpublicoritsrepresentativeq. Gender:femaleversusmale
6. Relationshipcharacteristicsa. Leveloftrustbetweenorganizationandexternalpublicb. Dependencyofpartiesinvolvedc. Ideologicalbarriersbetweenorganizationandpublic
*PerCameron,Cropp&Reber,2000