Communication managers in the dominant coalition

Kanihan, Stacey Frank; Hansen, Kathleen A.; Blair, Sara; Shore, Marta Dykhuizen; Myers, Jun

doi:10.1108/13632541311318747

Cited by 22 publications

(7 citation statements)

References 19 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Dozier, 1992). However, earlier research shows that communication managers are seldom members of the dominant coalition (Kanihan et al, 2013) but are called in as experts on some occasions -especially in terms of crisis and change (see Heide and Simonsson, 2014a).…”

Section: Challenges Goals and Evaluationsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Doing the right things or doing things right?

Falkheimer

Heide

Simonsson

et al. 2016

Corporate Communications: An International Journal

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose – The purpose of this paper is to examine and analyze the prevailing form of rationality that governs the challenges, goals and roles of communication professionals. The authors will also explore alternative forms of rationality and discuss what these would imply. Design/methodology/approach – The paper is based on survey results from The European Communication Monitor (ECM) and qualitative interviews with communication managers in Sweden. First, the authors present the ECM data and the Swedish interview material, i.e. the authors depict the practitioners’ perceptions of what they understand as important work tasks and roles. The interviews focus on the actual practices of linking communication goals to business goals. Second, the results are challenged from a reflexive perspective, using theories from the paradox turn and questioning the “taken-for-granted thinking” in corporate communications. Findings – The ECM data show that the main challenge in practice is “linking business strategy and communication.” The Swedish respondents stand out when it comes to “building and maintaining trust” since this is considered to be almost as important. The qualitative interview study strengthens the results in the ECM. The interviewees seem to do their work according to the traditional management agenda – i.e. they break down overall business goals and translate these to measurable communication goals. The results are reflected upon using paradox theory. Two paradoxes are discussed: between managerialism and professionalism, and strategic generalists and operational specialists. Research limitations/implications – The study is based on survey data that have been collected through a convenience sample, and the interview study is a pilot study. Practical implications – The paper focuses conflicts between normative practitioner ideals and reality, and helps practitioners to reflect upon mainstream thinking. Originality/value – Based on the empirical findings in the ECM, the interviews and the theoretical framework, the authors conclude that if the idea of The Communicative Organization is to be fruitfully realized, it is necessary to depart from a multi-dimensional rationality and question ideas that are taken for granted. The use of paradox theory and concepts such as functional stupidity is rather original in corporate communication research. Additional research could further explore paradoxes in order to spark dialogue, which may undermine one-dimensional thinking and functional stupidity.

show abstract

Section: Challenges Goals and Evaluationsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Frank Kanihan et al (2013) conducted a large survey of communication managers in US S&P 500 companies. The results identify four dimensions of informal power of high importance: expertise, trust, involvement in strategic decisions and likeability.…”

Section: Challenges Goals and Evaluationsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Doing the right things or doing things right?

Falkheimer

Heide

Simonsson

et al. 2016

Corporate Communications: An International Journal

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The proposed perspective allows for a more comprehensive view of dominant coalitions in organizations and thus of the issue of power (Grunig et al, 2002;Kanihan et al, 2013;Neill, 2014). Communication channels are at the center of this discourse.…”

Section: Rq1: Formal and Informal Structures In Strategic Organizatio...mentioning

confidence: 99%

Informality in strategic communication. Making the case for a forgotten concept

Hoffjann

2023

CCIJ

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

PurposeAlthough current strategic communication research is particularly interested in deviations from normative ideals, there is a surprising lack of interest in the structures that lead to such deviations from formal specifications. To this end, this paper explores the classic, but of late largely forgotten concept of informality. The aim is to develop a theoretical framework and a systematization that can be used to answer central questions in strategic communication research. The focus is on three research questions: How can formal and informal structures of strategic organizational communication be systematized? How are formal and informal organizational structures thematized in strategic organizational communication? What is the relationship between (in)formal structures of strategic organizational communication and the thematization of (in)formal organizational structures?Design/methodology/approachThe conceptual contribution is based on systems theoretical organization theory, which understands formal structures as decided decision premises and informal structures as undecided decision premises.FindingsThe understanding of informal expectation structures presented here has enormous potential for describing and researching central issues in strategic communication research in a far more significant way, both theoretically and empirically. For example, decoupling can be described in a much more differentiated way than is possible using the neo-institutionalist perspective.Practical implicationsThe systematizing framework for researching informal structures enables a deeper understanding of informal structures and thus a better handling of them in practice. In addition, the framework provides a basis for future empirical studies.Originality/valueInformal phenomena and structures seem to be the elephant in the room in many discourses in strategic communication research. With the theoretical perspective and systematization presented here, these phenomena can finally be explored in a differentiated and meaningful way.

show abstract

“…The second theme is gaining access to the dominant coalition and becoming a strategic management partner, which by many researchers is regarded as the key to increased status and professionalization (e.g., Bowen, 2009Bowen, , 2015Kanihan et al, 2013). Along similar lines, it is argued that communication practitioners need to shift from the role of technicians executing orders from others and instead take the role of managers with the power to influence strategic decisions on communication.…”

Section: Research On Communication Practitioners As a Professionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In other words, the situation for communication practitioners is still challenging, and to enhance their status they are often advised to take on more managerial roles and to make sure that they gain a seat at the table (Bowen, 2009(Bowen, , 2015Grunig, 2006;Grunig et al, 2002;Kanihan et al, 2013;White & Dozier, 1992).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Developing a Communicative Logic –The Key to Communication Professionalism

Simonsson

Heide

2021

International Journal of Strategic Communication

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Communication practitioners still struggle to increase their status and legitimacy, and the value of their work is often questioned. The general perception of the occupation is often related to the idea that communication practitioners manipulate with misleading information and primarily are involved in superficial activities such as image and reputation building. In attempting to defend themselves from criticism and enhance their status, communication practitioners have strived to be regarded as a management function, which comes with pressure to follow a managerial logic. However, the managerial logic works as a double-edged sword -it brings some status in the short run but takes communication practitioners further away from their core competence in communication. In this article, we challenge the one-sided belief in the managerial logic -managerialism -and explore its hidden, negative implications for the practice and professionalization of communications practitioners. The implications are illustrated with interviews with communication practitioners and survey data on communication practitioners' views and communication processes. Further, we propose that an alternative logic -a professional communicative logic -needs to be further developed and embraced to additionally advance the professional project.

show abstract

Communication managers in the dominant coalition

Cited by 22 publications

References 19 publications

Doing the right things or doing things right?

Doing the right things or doing things right?

Informality in strategic communication. Making the case for a forgotten concept

Developing a Communicative Logic –The Key to Communication Professionalism

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About