- Email: [email protected]
Mastering internal communication: Knowledge foundations and postgraduate education
Public Relations Review 39 (2013) 615–617
Contents lists available at ScienceDirect
Public Relations Review
Research in brief
Mastering internal communication: Knowledge foundations and postgraduate education Mary Welch ∗ Lancashire Business School, University of Central Lancashire, Preston PR1 2HE, UK
a r t i c l e
i n f o
Article history: Received 6 December 2012 Received in revised form 8 April 2013 Accepted 8 April 2013 Keywords: Professionalisation Graduate education Internal communication Employee engagement Knowledge framework
a b s t r a c t Despite its importance to employee engagement and organisational effectiveness, little scholarly attention has been paid to internal communication education. Consequently there is a vacuum in guidance on particular knowledge required for effective internal communication practice. To tackle this gap, this empirical article analyses data collected in an online survey of communication professionals. The article contributes an empirically based specialist framework for internal communication knowledge, with components beyond those found in generalist frameworks. © 2013 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
1. Introduction Internal communication is a pressing issue for communication practice as organisations strive to achieve employee engagement and organisational effectiveness. It is recognised as an important area of academic study as evidenced by a special section of Public Relations Review in 2012, Volume 38, Issue 2. Internal communication varies from office gossip and informal chat, to formal corporate communication to all employees. This paper is principally concerned with internal corporate communication, which relates to communication between senior managers and all employees, positioned within the strategic public relations arm of corporate communication (Welch and Jackson, 2007). To command greater professional respect, and to make more positive strategic contributions to organisational effectiveness, internal communication professionals need specialised knowledge and skills to meet the diverse needs of internal audiences. However, surprisingly little scholarly attention has been paid to internal communication education. Decades ago, Oeckl’s Gold Paper (1976) made a case for investment in public relations education and provided three recommended sample curricula. Internal communication was clearly represented, featuring prominently within two of the curricula. Acknowledging that public relations and communication management (PR&CM) graduate education has received rather cursory attention in the past, a 2012 Commission on Public Relations Education report focused on master’s level education (CPRE, 2012). The report identified over 50 knowledge components within five categories. Some of these components are implicitly related to internal communication. For example, knowledge of the power of words and images to move audiences is covered by rhetoric and persuasion. However, given Oeckl’s (1976) focus on internal communication and the increasing contemporary recognition of the importance of internal communication, it is surprising that none of the CPRE (2012) knowledge components or categories are explicitly related to employees or internal communication.
∗ Tel.: +44 01772 894753; fax: +44 01772 892904. E-mail address: [email protected] 0363-8111/$ – see front matter © 2013 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.pubrev.2013.04.003
616
M. Welch / Public Relations Review 39 (2013) 615–617
2. Methods Given the problem outlined above, this article considers: the knowledge framework required for effective internal communication; whether required knowledge is simply the same as that found in generalist PR&CM frameworks or might specialist knowledge components be identified; and, explores how professionals might gain access to specialised knowledge. The empirical study employed an online survey research strategy to address the following research questions: RQ1: What specific internal communication component topics are of interest to professionals? RQ2: What internal communication knowledge area clusters are of interest to professionals? RQ3: What university delivery systems are valued by practitioners? A questionnaire investigated practitioner interest in curriculum content and delivery for a master’s course in internal communication. The content scale included 44 topic items (alpha .94). The items were generated from topics evident in internal communication literature (e.g. Vercic, Vercic, & Sriramesh, 2012), and from practitioner frameworks (Smith and Mounter, 2008). Participant preferences for delivery systems were explored via a question with five options including fulltime study and part-time blended learning. A series of demographic questions was also included. The survey was promoted to communication professionals in Europe by means of a snowball sampling strategy with assistance from professional bodies, resulting in 87 completed questionnaires. 3. Findings The majority of the participants (n 41, 54%) worked in private sector organisations, 36% (n 27) in the public sector, and 11% (n 8) in voluntary sector organisations or charities. Most of the participants (n 64, 84%) worked in-house and the remainder (n 12, 16%) had consultancy or agency roles. Eleven participants did not indicate sector or role. The majority of participants were female (n 67, 87%) and 13% (n 10) male, while the remainder (n 10) did not indicate gender. Almost half of the 78 respondents who answered the age question (n 37, 47.4%) were in the 26–35 age group, and over a third (n 27, 34.6%) were in the 36–45 age group. 3.1. Curriculum content Participants indicated their preferences for curriculum content rating 44 topics on a five point scale (strong disagreement 1; strong agreement 5). Of the 44 topics, 29 were rated 4 or above indicating firm agreement on the importance of these knowledge items. Surprisingly, ten of these items are absent from the CPRE (2012) general knowledge base for PR&CM. The absent items are listed next (in descending order), along with their means and standard deviation in parentheses: employee engagement 4.78 (.474); leadership communication 4.74 (.470); employee internal communication needs 4.38 (.708); organisational context 4.35 (.699); internal communication theory 4.34 (.754); the concept of internal communication 4.32 (.802); internal communication effects 4.22 (.907); interaction with human resources 4.13 (.779); trust 4.08 (.829); and, informal communication in organisations 4.05 (.804). Given that these ten components are recognised as important for internal communication by participants, but are absent from the CPRE general knowledge framework, these elements could be considered specific specialist internal communication knowledge components. 3.2. Knowledge area clusters Internal communication knowledge clusters were identified via iterative logical analysis of the 29 top ranked topics. This resulted in ten clusters, arranged in four categories: (A) Fundamental specialist knowledge: employment relations. (B) Strategic communication management: leadership; management; strategy. (C) Underpinning theory and research: communication science; concepts and theory; research and evaluation. (D) Context and tactical considerations: organisational culture and context; issues and crisis communication; and, emergent communication methods. 3.3. Education delivery The study found that participants ranked part-time blended learning delivery of university graduate education as most preferred (M 4.18, SD .924), with traditional full-time education least preferred (M 1.99, SD 1.056). These preferences differed from CPRE (2012) report where the traditional model of delivery was most preferred, and the blended model was No. 2. This difference might be due to the inclusion of educator as well as practitioner preferences in the CPRE data, while the current study focussed exclusively on practitioner views. Additionally, the current study concentrated on internal communication while the CPRE looked at PR&CM in general. 4. Analysis and conclusions This paper addresses a perplexing loss of focus on internal communication within PR&CM education frameworks. This is puzzling because it has occurred during a period characterised by growing recognition of the importance of internal
M. Welch / Public Relations Review 39 (2013) 615–617
617
communication as a branch of PR&CM practice. The paper set out to tackle this vacuum and the results indicate a knowledge framework consisting of 29 topics of special relevance to internal communication professionals. Ten of these can be considered of unique importance to internal communication since they are absent from the CPRE framework (Section 3.1). Analysis of the 29 topics resulted in the identification of ten internal communication knowledge clusters in four categories (Section 3.2). This framework represents a fresh articulation of knowledge needs of professionals engaged in the internal communication branch of the PR&CM profession. Specialist education is a fundamental requirement of every profession, since it equips professionals with a distinctive knowledge and skill set. If PR&CM is to be considered a profession it is reasonable to expect that, as with other professions, clear specialist areas can be identified. In medicine, general practitioners have valuable knowledge, but specialists have in-depth knowledge of particular disciplines or branches of medicine. Just as we wouldn’t expect our family doctor to perform brain surgery, perhaps we should not assume that general PR&CM knowledge is enough to equip internal communication specialists. Clearly there are some shared general knowledge requirements for external and internal communication. Indeed, one could argue that PR&CM should concentrate on developing generalist rather than specialist knowledge. However, this would hamper the internal communication discipline from developing further as a profession. Furthermore, it raises a key question about the contribution of PR&CM to organisational effectiveness. Why should organisations concerned with developing employee engagement be content with the help of “general practitioners” rather than specialist internal communication “surgeons” with distinctive employee communication knowledge and skills? If this argument is accepted, the internal communication framework indicated above could inform specialist internal communication education curricula. Despite the limitations inherent in cross-sectional survey research, this paper contributes fresh data and new insights on the knowledge needs of internal communication professionals. So, it has practical implications for educators interested in serving the education needs of internal communication professionals. On delivery, contrary to the CPRE (2012) findings, participants in this study expressed a preference for part-time blended learning (Section 3.3). Therefore, further research seems called for to explore delivery preferences. Internal communication professionals need the knowledge identified in the new framework to serve the multifaceted communication needs of diverse employees and complex organisations. Blended learning delivery provides a means of access to this specialist knowledge for professionals committed to studying part-time. Armed with this specialist knowledge, they will be better able to contribute to employee engagement and organisational effectiveness. References CPRE. (2012). Standards for a master’s degree in public relations: Educating for complexity. Commission on Public Relations Education., available at: www.commpred.org (accessed 31.10.12) Oeckl, A. (1976). Gold Paper No. 2: Public relations education worldwide. London: International Public Relations Association. Smith, L., & Mounter, P. (2008). Effective internal communication. London: Kogan Page. Vercic, A. T., Vercic, D., & Sriramesh, K. (2012). Internal communication: Definition, parameters, and the future. Public Relations Review, 38(2), 223–230. Welch, M., & Jackson, P. R. (2007). Rethinking internal communication: A stakeholder approach. Corporate Communications: An International Journal, 12(2), 177–198.
Contents lists available at ScienceDirect
Public Relations Review
Research in brief
Mastering internal communication: Knowledge foundations and postgraduate education Mary Welch ∗ Lancashire Business School, University of Central Lancashire, Preston PR1 2HE, UK
a r t i c l e
i n f o
Article history: Received 6 December 2012 Received in revised form 8 April 2013 Accepted 8 April 2013 Keywords: Professionalisation Graduate education Internal communication Employee engagement Knowledge framework
a b s t r a c t Despite its importance to employee engagement and organisational effectiveness, little scholarly attention has been paid to internal communication education. Consequently there is a vacuum in guidance on particular knowledge required for effective internal communication practice. To tackle this gap, this empirical article analyses data collected in an online survey of communication professionals. The article contributes an empirically based specialist framework for internal communication knowledge, with components beyond those found in generalist frameworks. © 2013 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
1. Introduction Internal communication is a pressing issue for communication practice as organisations strive to achieve employee engagement and organisational effectiveness. It is recognised as an important area of academic study as evidenced by a special section of Public Relations Review in 2012, Volume 38, Issue 2. Internal communication varies from office gossip and informal chat, to formal corporate communication to all employees. This paper is principally concerned with internal corporate communication, which relates to communication between senior managers and all employees, positioned within the strategic public relations arm of corporate communication (Welch and Jackson, 2007). To command greater professional respect, and to make more positive strategic contributions to organisational effectiveness, internal communication professionals need specialised knowledge and skills to meet the diverse needs of internal audiences. However, surprisingly little scholarly attention has been paid to internal communication education. Decades ago, Oeckl’s Gold Paper (1976) made a case for investment in public relations education and provided three recommended sample curricula. Internal communication was clearly represented, featuring prominently within two of the curricula. Acknowledging that public relations and communication management (PR&CM) graduate education has received rather cursory attention in the past, a 2012 Commission on Public Relations Education report focused on master’s level education (CPRE, 2012). The report identified over 50 knowledge components within five categories. Some of these components are implicitly related to internal communication. For example, knowledge of the power of words and images to move audiences is covered by rhetoric and persuasion. However, given Oeckl’s (1976) focus on internal communication and the increasing contemporary recognition of the importance of internal communication, it is surprising that none of the CPRE (2012) knowledge components or categories are explicitly related to employees or internal communication.
∗ Tel.: +44 01772 894753; fax: +44 01772 892904. E-mail address: [email protected] 0363-8111/$ – see front matter © 2013 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.pubrev.2013.04.003
616
M. Welch / Public Relations Review 39 (2013) 615–617
2. Methods Given the problem outlined above, this article considers: the knowledge framework required for effective internal communication; whether required knowledge is simply the same as that found in generalist PR&CM frameworks or might specialist knowledge components be identified; and, explores how professionals might gain access to specialised knowledge. The empirical study employed an online survey research strategy to address the following research questions: RQ1: What specific internal communication component topics are of interest to professionals? RQ2: What internal communication knowledge area clusters are of interest to professionals? RQ3: What university delivery systems are valued by practitioners? A questionnaire investigated practitioner interest in curriculum content and delivery for a master’s course in internal communication. The content scale included 44 topic items (alpha .94). The items were generated from topics evident in internal communication literature (e.g. Vercic, Vercic, & Sriramesh, 2012), and from practitioner frameworks (Smith and Mounter, 2008). Participant preferences for delivery systems were explored via a question with five options including fulltime study and part-time blended learning. A series of demographic questions was also included. The survey was promoted to communication professionals in Europe by means of a snowball sampling strategy with assistance from professional bodies, resulting in 87 completed questionnaires. 3. Findings The majority of the participants (n 41, 54%) worked in private sector organisations, 36% (n 27) in the public sector, and 11% (n 8) in voluntary sector organisations or charities. Most of the participants (n 64, 84%) worked in-house and the remainder (n 12, 16%) had consultancy or agency roles. Eleven participants did not indicate sector or role. The majority of participants were female (n 67, 87%) and 13% (n 10) male, while the remainder (n 10) did not indicate gender. Almost half of the 78 respondents who answered the age question (n 37, 47.4%) were in the 26–35 age group, and over a third (n 27, 34.6%) were in the 36–45 age group. 3.1. Curriculum content Participants indicated their preferences for curriculum content rating 44 topics on a five point scale (strong disagreement 1; strong agreement 5). Of the 44 topics, 29 were rated 4 or above indicating firm agreement on the importance of these knowledge items. Surprisingly, ten of these items are absent from the CPRE (2012) general knowledge base for PR&CM. The absent items are listed next (in descending order), along with their means and standard deviation in parentheses: employee engagement 4.78 (.474); leadership communication 4.74 (.470); employee internal communication needs 4.38 (.708); organisational context 4.35 (.699); internal communication theory 4.34 (.754); the concept of internal communication 4.32 (.802); internal communication effects 4.22 (.907); interaction with human resources 4.13 (.779); trust 4.08 (.829); and, informal communication in organisations 4.05 (.804). Given that these ten components are recognised as important for internal communication by participants, but are absent from the CPRE general knowledge framework, these elements could be considered specific specialist internal communication knowledge components. 3.2. Knowledge area clusters Internal communication knowledge clusters were identified via iterative logical analysis of the 29 top ranked topics. This resulted in ten clusters, arranged in four categories: (A) Fundamental specialist knowledge: employment relations. (B) Strategic communication management: leadership; management; strategy. (C) Underpinning theory and research: communication science; concepts and theory; research and evaluation. (D) Context and tactical considerations: organisational culture and context; issues and crisis communication; and, emergent communication methods. 3.3. Education delivery The study found that participants ranked part-time blended learning delivery of university graduate education as most preferred (M 4.18, SD .924), with traditional full-time education least preferred (M 1.99, SD 1.056). These preferences differed from CPRE (2012) report where the traditional model of delivery was most preferred, and the blended model was No. 2. This difference might be due to the inclusion of educator as well as practitioner preferences in the CPRE data, while the current study focussed exclusively on practitioner views. Additionally, the current study concentrated on internal communication while the CPRE looked at PR&CM in general. 4. Analysis and conclusions This paper addresses a perplexing loss of focus on internal communication within PR&CM education frameworks. This is puzzling because it has occurred during a period characterised by growing recognition of the importance of internal
M. Welch / Public Relations Review 39 (2013) 615–617
617
communication as a branch of PR&CM practice. The paper set out to tackle this vacuum and the results indicate a knowledge framework consisting of 29 topics of special relevance to internal communication professionals. Ten of these can be considered of unique importance to internal communication since they are absent from the CPRE framework (Section 3.1). Analysis of the 29 topics resulted in the identification of ten internal communication knowledge clusters in four categories (Section 3.2). This framework represents a fresh articulation of knowledge needs of professionals engaged in the internal communication branch of the PR&CM profession. Specialist education is a fundamental requirement of every profession, since it equips professionals with a distinctive knowledge and skill set. If PR&CM is to be considered a profession it is reasonable to expect that, as with other professions, clear specialist areas can be identified. In medicine, general practitioners have valuable knowledge, but specialists have in-depth knowledge of particular disciplines or branches of medicine. Just as we wouldn’t expect our family doctor to perform brain surgery, perhaps we should not assume that general PR&CM knowledge is enough to equip internal communication specialists. Clearly there are some shared general knowledge requirements for external and internal communication. Indeed, one could argue that PR&CM should concentrate on developing generalist rather than specialist knowledge. However, this would hamper the internal communication discipline from developing further as a profession. Furthermore, it raises a key question about the contribution of PR&CM to organisational effectiveness. Why should organisations concerned with developing employee engagement be content with the help of “general practitioners” rather than specialist internal communication “surgeons” with distinctive employee communication knowledge and skills? If this argument is accepted, the internal communication framework indicated above could inform specialist internal communication education curricula. Despite the limitations inherent in cross-sectional survey research, this paper contributes fresh data and new insights on the knowledge needs of internal communication professionals. So, it has practical implications for educators interested in serving the education needs of internal communication professionals. On delivery, contrary to the CPRE (2012) findings, participants in this study expressed a preference for part-time blended learning (Section 3.3). Therefore, further research seems called for to explore delivery preferences. Internal communication professionals need the knowledge identified in the new framework to serve the multifaceted communication needs of diverse employees and complex organisations. Blended learning delivery provides a means of access to this specialist knowledge for professionals committed to studying part-time. Armed with this specialist knowledge, they will be better able to contribute to employee engagement and organisational effectiveness. References CPRE. (2012). Standards for a master’s degree in public relations: Educating for complexity. Commission on Public Relations Education., available at: www.commpred.org (accessed 31.10.12) Oeckl, A. (1976). Gold Paper No. 2: Public relations education worldwide. London: International Public Relations Association. Smith, L., & Mounter, P. (2008). Effective internal communication. London: Kogan Page. Vercic, A. T., Vercic, D., & Sriramesh, K. (2012). Internal communication: Definition, parameters, and the future. Public Relations Review, 38(2), 223–230. Welch, M., & Jackson, P. R. (2007). Rethinking internal communication: A stakeholder approach. Corporate Communications: An International Journal, 12(2), 177–198.