Public relations and the new institutionalism: In search of a theoretical framework

Abstract

The aim of this conceptual article is to study a possible dual relationship between public relations and the new institutionalism. How can neo-institutional organizational theory contribute to public relations research, including answering the question: How is public relations (corporate communication or strategic communication) institutionalized in private and public organizations? And how, vice versa, can public relations contribute to the neo-institutional study of organizations, including answering the question: How does public relations institutionalize? In the first part of the article, a short upto-date précis of the new institutionalism is given demonstrating how this theoretical framework within organizational sociology has developed through various stages and in various directions. The focus is on the shift towards a more complex and interactive understanding of how and why organizations adopt institutionalized norms. In the second part of the article, the new interest in rhetorical, discursive and communicative aspects among neo-institutional scholars is discussed with special reference to Lammers's theory of institutional messages. An outline of a new theory about how public relations institutionalizes is presented. Each of the two parts of the article ends with a set of research questions to be addressed by future cross-disciplinary research in public relations and neo-institutional organizational theory.

Towards a theory of rent-seeking in activist public relations

“…In 2013, a special section of Public Relations Inquiry related the sociological aspects of neo-constitutional theory to PR (Fredriksson, Pallas and Wehmeier, 2013;Frandsen and Johansen, 2013) a topic that has roots in economics and the governance of common pool resources that are owned neither by the state nor private interests.…”

Audience Enabling as Corporate Responsibility for Media Organizations

“…Frandsen & Johansen, 2013), the idea of translation resonates more widely, as noted in "social translation" (Fuchs, 2009). According to this view, translation is part of all social life, as translation is needed to understand social heterogeneity-that is, the different forms of life in society (Fuchs, 2009;Wolf, 2011).…”

“…According to Frandsen and Johansen (2013) the importance of communication and communicative actions has grown as neo-institutional theory has developed: the institutional context is no longer seen as the sender and the organization as the receiver, as, overall, institutional change is seen less as structural determinism and more as a result of the choices and interactions of different actors. The role of public relations in institutionalization has been suggested to be the translator, maintainer, and creator of institutional elements, and thus, public relations is seen to take part in framing and narrating institutional change (Fredriksson et al, 2013).…”

Organizing and Disorganizing Strategic Communication: Discursive Institutional Change Dynamics in Two Communication Departments

“…In a study by Verhoeven, Zerfass and Tench (2011), based on a survey of European professionals, the authors conclude that a majority of the participants describe themselves as strategic facilitators involved in defining and implementing business goals. However, practice is also embedded in social structures and influenced by professional norms (Coombs & Holladay, 2009;Frandsen & Johansen, 2013;Fredriksson et al, 2013;Grandien & Johansson, 2012;Sandhu, 2009;Swerling & Sen, 2009;Zerfass, 2009) and the societal and organizational structures influence the ways the practice is institutionalized.…”

“…Some elements within neo-institutional theory that address how discursive and communicative activities are involved in change when managerial ideas and models are introduced and translated within organizations, are particularly relevant for strategic communication research. Also Frandsen and Johansen (2013) advocate that neo-institutional organizational theory is useful for the empirical study of how strategic communication has been institutionalized over time in private and public organizations. It can help us answer questions like, for example, how homogeneous or heterogeneous the process is within an organization and across organizational fields.…”