Applying Ajzen’s theory of planned behavior to predict practitioners’ intentions to measure and evaluate communication outcomes

Buhmann, Alexander; Brønn, Peggy Simcic

doi:10.1108/ccij-11-2017-0107

Cited by 19 publications

(21 citation statements)

References 31 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…The impediments or barriers of communication mostly caused by the lack of intention [12,13], trust [14,15], interest [16], distraction [17,18] or irrelevance to the receiver [19,20]. Moreover, the differences in perceptions [21] and viewpoint [22] also has the potency to be the trigger.…”

Section: B Impediments To Communicationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Educational Leaders’ Outlook on Strategic Communication Skills

Anggorowati¹,

Komariah²,

Permana³

2020

Proceedings of the 3rd International Conference on Research of Educational Administration and Management (ICREAM 2019)

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The purpose of this study was to seek out educational leaders' viewpoint on strategic communication skills at school. A reflective action research was used by doing informal, semi-structured interviews to teachers and educational leaders i.e. principals and supervisors as well as extracting information from study documentation on library research. This research proposes the importance of strategic communication skills in education in order to build trust by gathering respondents' perception on how best to communicate, align communications with school goals and values en route for develop strategic communication skills plans which will support stakeholders' engagement at work.

show abstract

Section: B Impediments To Communicationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Educational Leaders’ Outlook on Strategic Communication Skills

Anggorowati¹,

Komariah²,

Permana³

2020

Proceedings of the 3rd International Conference on Research of Educational Administration and Management (ICREAM 2019)

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…While the aforementioned obstacles provide a solid ground on which to base claims about current public diplomacy practices, nonetheless we know little about the perspectives of practitioners themselves when it comes to enacting evaluation in practice. However, gaining such perceptions are vital to better understand drivers and barriers in monitoring and evaluation practice (Buhmann & Brønn, 2018). This leads us to our first, research question: How do U.S. public diplomacy officers perceive the current state of evaluation in practice?…”

Section: Assessing Practitioner Perceptionsmentioning

confidence: 99%

The status quo of evaluation in public diplomacy: insights from the US State Department

Sommerfeldt

Buhmann

2019

JCOM

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose In recent years, expectations for demonstrating the impact of public diplomacy programs have dramatically increased. Despite increased calls for enhanced monitoring and evaluation, what texts exist on the subject suggest the state of practice is grim. However, while the current debate is based mostly on practice reports, conceptual work from academics or anecdotal evidence, we are missing empirical insights on current views of monitoring and evaluation from practitioners. Such a practice-level perspective is central for better understanding factors that may actually drive or hamper performance evaluation in day-to-day public diplomacy work. The purpose of this paper is to update knowledge on the state of evaluation practice within public diplomacy from the perspectives of practitioners themselves. Design/methodology/approach This study assesses the state of evaluation in public diplomacy through qualitative interviews with public diplomacy officers working for the US Department of State – a method heretofore unused in studies of the topic. In total, 25 in-depth interviews were conducted with officers in Washington, DC and at posts around the world. Findings The interviews suggest that practitioners see evaluation as underfunded despite increased demands for accountability. Further, the results show a previously not discussed tension between diplomacy practitioners in Washington, DC and those in the field. Practitioners are also unclear about the goals of public diplomacy, which has implications for the enactment of targeted evaluations. Originality/value The research uncovers the perceptions of evaluation from the voices of those who must practice it, and elaborates on the common obstacles in the enactment of public diplomacy, the influence of multiple actors and stakeholders on evaluation practice, as well as the perceived goals of public diplomacy programming. No empirical research has considered the state of evaluation practice. Moreover, the study uses qualitative interview data from public diplomacy officers themselves, an under-used method in public diplomacy research. The findings provide insights that contribute to future public diplomacy strategy and performance management.

show abstract

“…Thus, the authors provide new arguments for additional and alternative dimensions in the E&M barriers/drivers literature (e.g. Buhmann and Brønn, 2018;Macnamara, 2015). Gilkerson et al (2019) argue that a stronger focus on the maturity concept in E&M has the potential to advance the field by increasing both accountability and credibility for the work done by the communications function.…”

Section: Annotation Of the Articles In This Special Issuementioning

confidence: 99%

New avenues in communication evaluation and measurement (E&M): towards a research agenda for the 2020s

Volk

Buhmann

2019

JCOM

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Guest editorial 1. New avenues in communication evaluation and measurement (E&M): towards a research agenda for the 2020s 1.1 Introduction The question of how public relations and strategic communication contribute to organisations' success has been a perennial research topic since the 1970s (Stacks, 2017; Gregory and Watson, 2008; Grunig, 2006). Specifically, this question is approached in the sub-field of communication E&M. For more than five decades, scholars have explored how communication effects can be measured alongside different stages (ranging, e.g., from inputs and outputs to outcomes and impacts) and how the value of communication added to the organisational level can be evaluated. According to a recent synthesis of 40 years of literature (Volk, 2016), E&M research has explored numerous questions that can be broadly clustered into the following overarching themes: how to analyse the effectiveness of communication and messages on the output level; how to measure outcomes such as relationships and reputation; how to conceptualise intangible values or capitals and assess the value creation through communication on the impact level; how to further develop E&M methods; and how to assess the state of E&M practices. As an applied research field, E&M scholars have maintained regular and close relations to the communication industry. Hence, there was and still is a lively and unique exchange between academia and practice (cf. Buhmann et al., 2018). Pioneering scholars, some of them former professionals (earlier on, e.g., Walter Lindenmann, Don Stacks, David Michaelson, Donald Wright or Tom Watson, more recently, e.g., Jim Macnamara or Ansgar Zerfass), have stimulated an vital knowledge transfer with international and national membership organisation (e.g. the International Association for Measurement and Evaluation of Communication (AMEC)), E&M consultancies and client organisations, and various task forces or commissions (e.g. the Institute for Public Relations Measurement Commission, or the International Task Force on Standardisation of Communication Planning/Objective Setting and Evaluation/Measurement Models). Particularly, the last decade saw a considerable amount of collaborative projects, searching for more standardised models, metrics, and methods to advance E&M practices (e.g. recently, AMEC Integrated Evaluation Framework, Barcelona Principles 2.0, Social Media Measurement Standards Conclave, DPRG ICV Framework). However, according to a wide range of studies conducted worldwide to explore the state of E&M in the communication practice, the implementation of such E&M methods and standard metrics focussing on communication outcomes and impact remains low (

show abstract

Applying Ajzen’s theory of planned behavior to predict practitioners’ intentions to measure and evaluate communication outcomes

Cited by 19 publications

References 31 publications

Educational Leaders’ Outlook on Strategic Communication Skills

Educational Leaders’ Outlook on Strategic Communication Skills

The status quo of evaluation in public diplomacy: insights from the US State Department

New avenues in communication evaluation and measurement (E&M): towards a research agenda for the 2020s

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About