- Email: [email protected]
How firm is your digital handshake?: Mission statements and transparency
G Model PUBREL-1509; No. of Pages 3
ARTICLE IN PRESS Public Relations Review xxx (2016) xxx–xxx
Contents lists available at ScienceDirect
Public Relations Review
Short communication
How firm is your digital handshake?: Mission statements and transparency Clay Craig a,∗ , Prisca S. Ngondo a , Mark A. Flynn b a b
School of Journalism & Mass Communication, Texas State University, 601 University Drive, San Marcos, TX 78666, United States Department of English, Emmanuel College, 400 The Fenway, Boston, MA 02115, United States
a r t i c l e
i n f o
Article history: Received 29 September 2015 Received in revised form 4 May 2016 Accepted 16 May 2016 Available online xxx Keywords: Transparency Public relations Mission statements Content analysis
a b s t r a c t This study examined the effectiveness of mission statements of the 2014 top 100 and bottom 100 Fortune 500 list based on their inclusion of 10 key components and if they represented the four themes of transparency. Analysis revealed product/service and customers were the most prevalent mission statement components, while excellence topped the transparency variable. Published by Elsevier Inc.
1. Introduction As digital media has grown in popularity, it has caused public relations (PR) practitioners to reevaluate how they develop and maintain relationships with their publics (Christ, 2005). This research provides a preliminary step into examining the possibility of mission statements serving as a method of conveying transparency by exploring a sample of Fortune 500 companies’ online mission statements. With a focus in PR research, the analysis provides insight and recommendations on how organizations can utilize mission statements to communicate with stakeholders. Mission statements provide a purpose for PR functions and develop a framework for practitioners to cultivate PR goals and objectives (Broom & Sha, 2013). Practitioners and academics endorse nine components for an effective mission statement as a tool for communicating with stakeholders (e.g. David, 2011; Robbins & Coulter, 2012) and can help strengthen organizationpublic relationships. Online organization-public relationships have become an important aspect of PR (Ki & Hon, 2006). Additionally, as online platforms continue to proliferate, publics and organizations are continuously connected resulting in a greater need for transparency. Transparency is connected to the organizational-public relations (OPR) variables of openness and trust, but it is still in the developing stage of research as an individual concept (Rawlins, 2009). While the mission statement is one way of conveying transparency, little empirical inquiry has addressed mission statements from a transparency framework. The following hypotheses and research questions address this. H1: Most of the companies analyzed will have online mission statements. H2: Customers will be the most mentioned mission statement component. RQ1: How many of the companies analyzed included mission statement components?
∗ Correspondence to: School of Journalism & Mass Communication, Texas State University, 601 University Drive, San Marcos, TX 78666, United States. E-mail addresses: [email protected] (C. Craig), [email protected] (P.S. Ngondo), mafl[email protected] (M.A. Flynn). http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.pubrev.2016.05.002 0363-8111/Published by Elsevier Inc.
Please cite this article in press as: Craig, C., et al. How firm is your digital handshake?: Mission statements and transparency. Public Relations Review (2016), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.pubrev.2016.05.002
G Model PUBREL-1509; No. of Pages 3
ARTICLE IN PRESS
2
C. Craig et al. / Public Relations Review xxx (2016) xxx–xxx
RQ2: Is there a difference between companies analyzed based on content included in mission statements? RQ3: How often are the values of transparency reflected in the mission statements? RQ4: Is there a difference in values of transparency between the top 100 and the bottom 100 Fortune 500 mission statements? RQ5: Is there a relationship between mission statement components and the values of transparency? 2. Methods A content analysis of the top 100 and bottom 100 companies from the 2014 Fortune 500 list was conducted. Authors served as coders and Krippendorff’s alpha was established for each variable using 10% of the sample (Wimmer & Dominick, 2013). Mission statements were collected from organizational websites. David’s (2011) mission statement components and an additional item (concern for shareholders (␣ = 0.811)) were used: customers (␣ = 0.883), products/services (␣ = 0.885), markets (␣ = 0.883), technology (␣ = 1.00), concern for survival, growth, and profitability (␣ = 0.844), philosophy (␣ = 0.849), self-concept (␣ = 0.883), concern for public image (␣ = 1.00), and concern for employees (␣ = 0.861). Derived from Rawlins’ (2009) transparency measures the presence of the following values in the organization’s mission statement suggests that it is aspiring to practice being transparent: mutual respect (␣ = 0.865); accountability (␣ = 1.00); trust (␣ = 0.883); and excellence (␣ = 0.865). Each value was coded as present or absent. 3. Results H1 was supported. Of the 200 companies analyzed, 116 (58%) contained a formal mission statement. H2 was not supported. The most common elements mentioned were product/service and customers, which were present in 80.2% and 74.1% of mission statements, respectively. For RQ1, data revealed 0.9% of mission statements did not include any components, 6.0% included one, 18.1% included two, 15.5% included three, 21.6% included four, 7.8% included five, 13.8% included six, 6.0% included seven, 6.0% included eight, 2.6% included nine, and 1.7% included all ten components. The mission statement components in order from greatest number of mentions to least is as follows: products/services 93 (80.2%), customers 86 (74.1%), self-concept 56 (48.3%), philosophy 54 (46.6%), markets 46 (39.7%), concern for survival 42 (36.2%), concern for public Image 33 (28.4%), concern for employees 31 (26.7%), concern for shareholders 31 (26.7%) and technology 24 (20.7%). RQ2 was answered through a series of t-tests and revealed a significant difference for customers only. The bottom 100 included customers more frequently (M = 1.16, SD = 0.65) than the top 100 (M = 0.8, SD = 0.68), t(114) = 2.84, p < 0.01. Additionally, there was no significant difference in the total number of components included in the top 100 (M = 4.06, SD = 2.25) and bottom 100 companies (M = 4.56, SD = 2.18), t(114) = 1.20, p = 0.23. RQ3 results show that mission statements (73.1%) contained at least one value. The most common was excellence, featured in 59 (50.9%) of the statements, followed by trust 44 (37.9%), mutual respect 34 (29.3%), and accountability 13 (11.2%). For RQ4 excellence was the only value that significantly differed between groups. The bottom 100 included excellence more frequently (M = 0.62, SD = 0.49) than the top 100 (M = 0.42, SD = 0.50), t(114) = 2.11, p < 0.05. Additionally, there was no significant difference between the number of elements in the top 100 (M = 1.20, SD = 1.09) and bottom 100 companies (M = 1.42, SD = 1.13), t(113) = 1.06, p = 0.29. RQ5 correlation analysis revealed a strong positive correlation (r = 0.61, p < 0.01) in that as the number of mission statement components increased, so did the presence of transparency values. Concern for employees has a positive correlation with both mutual respect and accountability (r = 0.46, p < 0.01 and r = 0.50, p < 0.01, respectively). The strongest correlation between mission statement components and transparency value was between self-concept and excellence (r = 0.75, p < 0.01). 4. Conclusion This research assesses the possibility of mission statements serving as a method of conveying transparency as a focus of PR research. Thus, this study provides an initial response to Rawlins’ (2009) observation that little effort has been put forth to study the abstract concept of transparency despite the rise of public mistrust of large organizations. The inquiry provides PR insight and recommendations on how organizations can better utilize online mission statements to strategically communicate with all stakeholders. Organizational websites are effective tools for implementing organization-public relationship maintenance strategies, as they allow for low-cost communication and can help improve transparency (Ki & Hon, 2006). As an online PR resource, practitioners should pay attention to the components of the mission statements as they may well serve as the digital handshake and introduction of the company to a potential stakeholder. Consistent with prior findings, Fortune 500 companies continue to place emphasis on products/service and customers (Jones, Lovett, & Blankenship, 2007). Additionally, by analyzing transparency, this study provides the PR field with another useful tool in assessing the relationship between an organization and its publics. Interestingly, the absence of certain aspects of transparency in mission statements (accountability) seem to parallel a growing sense of public skepticism or mistrust of corporations. It is possible that the language associated with accountability leaves perceived opportunities for lawsuits when expectations are not met or in a crisis. Additionally, organizations may have relocated this value to their corporate social responsibility (CSR) section of the website. Please cite this article in press as: Craig, C., et al. How firm is your digital handshake?: Mission statements and transparency. Public Relations Review (2016), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.pubrev.2016.05.002
G Model PUBREL-1509; No. of Pages 3
ARTICLE IN PRESS C. Craig et al. / Public Relations Review xxx (2016) xxx–xxx
3
Several recommendations can be prescribed for the PR practitioners, educators, and scholars. First, investigating to what extent the companies actually aspire for transparency can help explain why these values were either present or absent. Second, the lack of specific transparency elements, such as accountability, are worthy discussion points for PR professionals. Third, the positive correlation between the number of mission statement components and transparency elements suggest mission statements can serve as an optimal platform to convey an organization’s desire to demonstrate transparency with its publics. Further strengthening these recommendations, Robbins and Coulter (2012) note that a relevant mission statement serves as a continual reminder of what the company stands for and helps guide goals and objectives. References Broom, G. M., & Sha, B.-L. (2013). Cutlip and center’s effective public relations. Prentice Hall. Christ, P. (2005). Internet technologies and trends transforming public relations. Journal of Website Promotion, 1, 3–14. http://dx.doi.org/10.1300/J238v01n04 02 David, F. R. (2011). Strategic management: concepts and cases (13th ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Education, Inc. Jones, I. S., Lovett, M., & Blankenship, D. (2007). Reevaluating mission statements on Fortune 500 websites: accessibility, readability and purpose. Journal of Business and Accounting, 1(1). Ki, E.-J., & Hon, L. C. (2006). Relationship maintenance strategies on Fortune 500 company web sites. Journal of Communication Management, 10(1), 27–43. http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/13632540610646355 Rawlins, B. (2009). Give the emperor a mirror: toward developing a stakeholder measurement of organizational transparency. Journal of Public Relations Research, 21, 71–99. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/10627260802153421 Robbins, S., & Coulter, M. (2012). Management (11th ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Prentice Hall. Wimmer, R. D., & Dominick, J. R. (2013). Mass media research: an introduction (10th ed.). Boston, MA: Wadsworth.
Please cite this article in press as: Craig, C., et al. How firm is your digital handshake?: Mission statements and transparency. Public Relations Review (2016), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.pubrev.2016.05.002
ARTICLE IN PRESS Public Relations Review xxx (2016) xxx–xxx
Contents lists available at ScienceDirect
Public Relations Review
Short communication
How firm is your digital handshake?: Mission statements and transparency Clay Craig a,∗ , Prisca S. Ngondo a , Mark A. Flynn b a b
School of Journalism & Mass Communication, Texas State University, 601 University Drive, San Marcos, TX 78666, United States Department of English, Emmanuel College, 400 The Fenway, Boston, MA 02115, United States
a r t i c l e
i n f o
Article history: Received 29 September 2015 Received in revised form 4 May 2016 Accepted 16 May 2016 Available online xxx Keywords: Transparency Public relations Mission statements Content analysis
a b s t r a c t This study examined the effectiveness of mission statements of the 2014 top 100 and bottom 100 Fortune 500 list based on their inclusion of 10 key components and if they represented the four themes of transparency. Analysis revealed product/service and customers were the most prevalent mission statement components, while excellence topped the transparency variable. Published by Elsevier Inc.
1. Introduction As digital media has grown in popularity, it has caused public relations (PR) practitioners to reevaluate how they develop and maintain relationships with their publics (Christ, 2005). This research provides a preliminary step into examining the possibility of mission statements serving as a method of conveying transparency by exploring a sample of Fortune 500 companies’ online mission statements. With a focus in PR research, the analysis provides insight and recommendations on how organizations can utilize mission statements to communicate with stakeholders. Mission statements provide a purpose for PR functions and develop a framework for practitioners to cultivate PR goals and objectives (Broom & Sha, 2013). Practitioners and academics endorse nine components for an effective mission statement as a tool for communicating with stakeholders (e.g. David, 2011; Robbins & Coulter, 2012) and can help strengthen organizationpublic relationships. Online organization-public relationships have become an important aspect of PR (Ki & Hon, 2006). Additionally, as online platforms continue to proliferate, publics and organizations are continuously connected resulting in a greater need for transparency. Transparency is connected to the organizational-public relations (OPR) variables of openness and trust, but it is still in the developing stage of research as an individual concept (Rawlins, 2009). While the mission statement is one way of conveying transparency, little empirical inquiry has addressed mission statements from a transparency framework. The following hypotheses and research questions address this. H1: Most of the companies analyzed will have online mission statements. H2: Customers will be the most mentioned mission statement component. RQ1: How many of the companies analyzed included mission statement components?
∗ Correspondence to: School of Journalism & Mass Communication, Texas State University, 601 University Drive, San Marcos, TX 78666, United States. E-mail addresses: [email protected] (C. Craig), [email protected] (P.S. Ngondo), mafl[email protected] (M.A. Flynn). http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.pubrev.2016.05.002 0363-8111/Published by Elsevier Inc.
Please cite this article in press as: Craig, C., et al. How firm is your digital handshake?: Mission statements and transparency. Public Relations Review (2016), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.pubrev.2016.05.002
G Model PUBREL-1509; No. of Pages 3
ARTICLE IN PRESS
2
C. Craig et al. / Public Relations Review xxx (2016) xxx–xxx
RQ2: Is there a difference between companies analyzed based on content included in mission statements? RQ3: How often are the values of transparency reflected in the mission statements? RQ4: Is there a difference in values of transparency between the top 100 and the bottom 100 Fortune 500 mission statements? RQ5: Is there a relationship between mission statement components and the values of transparency? 2. Methods A content analysis of the top 100 and bottom 100 companies from the 2014 Fortune 500 list was conducted. Authors served as coders and Krippendorff’s alpha was established for each variable using 10% of the sample (Wimmer & Dominick, 2013). Mission statements were collected from organizational websites. David’s (2011) mission statement components and an additional item (concern for shareholders (␣ = 0.811)) were used: customers (␣ = 0.883), products/services (␣ = 0.885), markets (␣ = 0.883), technology (␣ = 1.00), concern for survival, growth, and profitability (␣ = 0.844), philosophy (␣ = 0.849), self-concept (␣ = 0.883), concern for public image (␣ = 1.00), and concern for employees (␣ = 0.861). Derived from Rawlins’ (2009) transparency measures the presence of the following values in the organization’s mission statement suggests that it is aspiring to practice being transparent: mutual respect (␣ = 0.865); accountability (␣ = 1.00); trust (␣ = 0.883); and excellence (␣ = 0.865). Each value was coded as present or absent. 3. Results H1 was supported. Of the 200 companies analyzed, 116 (58%) contained a formal mission statement. H2 was not supported. The most common elements mentioned were product/service and customers, which were present in 80.2% and 74.1% of mission statements, respectively. For RQ1, data revealed 0.9% of mission statements did not include any components, 6.0% included one, 18.1% included two, 15.5% included three, 21.6% included four, 7.8% included five, 13.8% included six, 6.0% included seven, 6.0% included eight, 2.6% included nine, and 1.7% included all ten components. The mission statement components in order from greatest number of mentions to least is as follows: products/services 93 (80.2%), customers 86 (74.1%), self-concept 56 (48.3%), philosophy 54 (46.6%), markets 46 (39.7%), concern for survival 42 (36.2%), concern for public Image 33 (28.4%), concern for employees 31 (26.7%), concern for shareholders 31 (26.7%) and technology 24 (20.7%). RQ2 was answered through a series of t-tests and revealed a significant difference for customers only. The bottom 100 included customers more frequently (M = 1.16, SD = 0.65) than the top 100 (M = 0.8, SD = 0.68), t(114) = 2.84, p < 0.01. Additionally, there was no significant difference in the total number of components included in the top 100 (M = 4.06, SD = 2.25) and bottom 100 companies (M = 4.56, SD = 2.18), t(114) = 1.20, p = 0.23. RQ3 results show that mission statements (73.1%) contained at least one value. The most common was excellence, featured in 59 (50.9%) of the statements, followed by trust 44 (37.9%), mutual respect 34 (29.3%), and accountability 13 (11.2%). For RQ4 excellence was the only value that significantly differed between groups. The bottom 100 included excellence more frequently (M = 0.62, SD = 0.49) than the top 100 (M = 0.42, SD = 0.50), t(114) = 2.11, p < 0.05. Additionally, there was no significant difference between the number of elements in the top 100 (M = 1.20, SD = 1.09) and bottom 100 companies (M = 1.42, SD = 1.13), t(113) = 1.06, p = 0.29. RQ5 correlation analysis revealed a strong positive correlation (r = 0.61, p < 0.01) in that as the number of mission statement components increased, so did the presence of transparency values. Concern for employees has a positive correlation with both mutual respect and accountability (r = 0.46, p < 0.01 and r = 0.50, p < 0.01, respectively). The strongest correlation between mission statement components and transparency value was between self-concept and excellence (r = 0.75, p < 0.01). 4. Conclusion This research assesses the possibility of mission statements serving as a method of conveying transparency as a focus of PR research. Thus, this study provides an initial response to Rawlins’ (2009) observation that little effort has been put forth to study the abstract concept of transparency despite the rise of public mistrust of large organizations. The inquiry provides PR insight and recommendations on how organizations can better utilize online mission statements to strategically communicate with all stakeholders. Organizational websites are effective tools for implementing organization-public relationship maintenance strategies, as they allow for low-cost communication and can help improve transparency (Ki & Hon, 2006). As an online PR resource, practitioners should pay attention to the components of the mission statements as they may well serve as the digital handshake and introduction of the company to a potential stakeholder. Consistent with prior findings, Fortune 500 companies continue to place emphasis on products/service and customers (Jones, Lovett, & Blankenship, 2007). Additionally, by analyzing transparency, this study provides the PR field with another useful tool in assessing the relationship between an organization and its publics. Interestingly, the absence of certain aspects of transparency in mission statements (accountability) seem to parallel a growing sense of public skepticism or mistrust of corporations. It is possible that the language associated with accountability leaves perceived opportunities for lawsuits when expectations are not met or in a crisis. Additionally, organizations may have relocated this value to their corporate social responsibility (CSR) section of the website. Please cite this article in press as: Craig, C., et al. How firm is your digital handshake?: Mission statements and transparency. Public Relations Review (2016), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.pubrev.2016.05.002
G Model PUBREL-1509; No. of Pages 3
ARTICLE IN PRESS C. Craig et al. / Public Relations Review xxx (2016) xxx–xxx
3
Several recommendations can be prescribed for the PR practitioners, educators, and scholars. First, investigating to what extent the companies actually aspire for transparency can help explain why these values were either present or absent. Second, the lack of specific transparency elements, such as accountability, are worthy discussion points for PR professionals. Third, the positive correlation between the number of mission statement components and transparency elements suggest mission statements can serve as an optimal platform to convey an organization’s desire to demonstrate transparency with its publics. Further strengthening these recommendations, Robbins and Coulter (2012) note that a relevant mission statement serves as a continual reminder of what the company stands for and helps guide goals and objectives. References Broom, G. M., & Sha, B.-L. (2013). Cutlip and center’s effective public relations. Prentice Hall. Christ, P. (2005). Internet technologies and trends transforming public relations. Journal of Website Promotion, 1, 3–14. http://dx.doi.org/10.1300/J238v01n04 02 David, F. R. (2011). Strategic management: concepts and cases (13th ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Education, Inc. Jones, I. S., Lovett, M., & Blankenship, D. (2007). Reevaluating mission statements on Fortune 500 websites: accessibility, readability and purpose. Journal of Business and Accounting, 1(1). Ki, E.-J., & Hon, L. C. (2006). Relationship maintenance strategies on Fortune 500 company web sites. Journal of Communication Management, 10(1), 27–43. http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/13632540610646355 Rawlins, B. (2009). Give the emperor a mirror: toward developing a stakeholder measurement of organizational transparency. Journal of Public Relations Research, 21, 71–99. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/10627260802153421 Robbins, S., & Coulter, M. (2012). Management (11th ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Prentice Hall. Wimmer, R. D., & Dominick, J. R. (2013). Mass media research: an introduction (10th ed.). Boston, MA: Wadsworth.
Please cite this article in press as: Craig, C., et al. How firm is your digital handshake?: Mission statements and transparency. Public Relations Review (2016), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.pubrev.2016.05.002