The increasing importance of employee relations

I-aul Keekley

The Increasing Importance of Employee Relations Employee relations has been a traditional public relations concern, and, according to the survey reported in this article, will be of greater importance in the future . In this third study commissioned by the Foundation for Public Relations Research and Education , Paul Keckley reports that public relations officers of the 50 largest companies in the United States believe that employee communications will become more important in the future, primarily because of unionization. Public relations officers also report that their companies have experienced internal communication breakdowns and that training managers in oral and written communication skills can help to avert such breakdowns. He also concludes that communication training should be extended to hourly and clerical employees as well as managers, and that both oral and written communications techniques should be taught in public relations programs. Keckley is assistant professor of advertising and public relations at Middle Tennessee State University, Murfreesboro , Tenn. and president of Ethos, Inc. advertising and public relations firm.

O

f increasing concern and interest to public relations practitioners and educators is the development of an academic curriculum on the college level which accurately and successfully prepares its majors for employment in the field after graduation. Traditionally, public relations education has concerned itself with the theory and practive of communicating organizational messages via the mass media to a variety of publics. I The employee public is usually considered in a listing of traditional publics, but the literature in the field has only recently given substantial consideration to programming for this public." This study was commissioned by the Foundation for Public Relations Research and Education to survey corporate public relations executives for information about their level of involvement and concern for employee relations programming in their respective companies. A second concern of this study is the analysis of public relations education today as it relates to these findings.

'70

Employee Relations Background In recent years, departments of communication, psychology, sociology, marketing, management and business administration have introduced courses in their curricula which address concepts of organizational climate, management communication, communication channels and human relations in business. Tracing its heritage as an academic concern to the famed Hawthorne studies by Elton Mayo and his Harvard colleague Fritz Roethlisberger in 1927, scholars in these disciplines developed scientific methods for measuring those SOcial and psychological factors which influence an employee's work behavior.' Each discipline isolated favorite facets of the question producing an avalanche of published research about the puzzling relationships between internal communication and job satisfaction, productivity, turnover, absenteeism and other non-economic factors . As the '50's approached, courses in communication began to appear in college catalogs. The evolution of theory about communication behavior, channels, systems, message sources and receivers gave rise to the departmentalization of communication studies. Prominent in the pioneer movement were Franklin Knower of Ohio State and, later, Charles Redding of Purdue." At the same time, public relations education was coming of age. In the 1950's, education in public relations suddenly spurted. In 1951, there were 12 schools with new major programs in public relat ions. By 1955, there were 28, and a total of 66 schools were offering some instruction in the subject . Growth cont inued in the 1960's. By 1964, at least 43 colleges and universities gave major programs or sequences in public relations and 280 institutions provided some classroom work in the field. The latest count , in 1970, shows there are now at least 89 schools that offer concentrated work in public relations, and more than 303 schools provide at least one full course, dealing directly with the profession. •

Albert walker has updated this information noting there were more than 320 schools teaching public relations in 1975.' That the department or school of journalism or mass communications is the academic home for these pro&rams has been well established by Hiebert , Walker and others. This is not to say, however, that the curricular needs are being met. The data in the survey reflect one area in particular that should be considered. Survey On August 1, 1976, a survey was mailed first class postage to the corporate Public relations officer in each of the companies listed in Fortune's top 50 largest companies in the United States. The survey was composed of both direct and open-ended questions, thereby requiring manual decoding. Several of the direct questions were taken from the 1953 survey of Fortune's top 500 U.S. companies by Charles Redding ." Redding sought information about the internal communication activities of management with special conCern for its communication strategies. With the four introductory open-ended questions about the perceptions of the role of public relations in employee re-

Public Relations Review lations programming by the respondents, the survey required information relevant to a more accurate understanding of employee relations activities of corporate public relations executives. Twenty-two respondents completed and returned the survey (44 %) and four returned the survey with letters explaining company policies which prohibit participation in projects such as this. 1. Does your public relations office (or corporate communications office) actively involve itself with internal organizational communication programming in your company7 If so, in what ways7 (n-22) yes No

22 (100%) O

Publications i.e. newsletters 19 Audio-visual communication . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 8 Training programs .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 4

These data depict the involvement of the public relations in the traditional role of house organ editor. Only four respondents indicated any involvement in the employee relating programming beyond the role of media consultant. 2. Do you believe that internal communication as an area of concern will expand or diminish7 Why7 (n-22) Expand Diminish Stay same

18 (81.8 %) 1 (4.5%) 3 (13.7%)

WHY7 Union demands for information 16 Employees need information 14 Public pressure . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 2

The respondents almost unanimously mentioned unionization as a major cause of their response. They explained that often unions use inaccurate information in their negotiation either because accurate information was not available or because accurate information was distorted as it passed through "appropriate" channels. 3. Public relations is often described as a management function. what college courses are most well suiited for the equipping of the PR practitioner7 (n-19) Economics Journalism Political science English Management Speech

,

15 12 12 9 7 7

4. In your opinion, what skills are essential for entry level employment in your public relations program7 (n-22) Communiaction skills (writing, speaking) Business skills Personality traits

17 (72.7%) 11 (SO.O%) 9 (40.9%)

These questions produced data consistent with the thrust of the existing public relations education program in that communication skills are perceived

72

Employee Relatlonli as important qualifications for employment. However, these data also show a strong desire for credit in business courses and in oral communication. 5. If you wanted to get across some very important management policy to your personnel, you might use some of the following methods. Which two of these methods would you consider the most likely to get the best results? (n-18) Inter-office memorandum . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Call a meeting and discuss Announce policy in management letter .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Hold personal meeting with key people . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

7 (38.9%) 18000%) 7 (38.9%) 8 (44.4 % )

Face-to-face communication is given emphasis in these data suggesting the need for more interpersonal training in the public relations curricula. 6. Do you feel there is a relationship between communication "breakdowns" (between management and employees) and labor disputes or strikes7 (n-21) yes

No

14 (66.7%)

7(33 .34%)

7. Which of the following factors are the most important causes of breakdowns in business and industrial communication? (n-21) lack of management ability to communicate 14 (66.7% ) management withholds information 13 (61.9%) inadequate use of channels 12 (57.1 % ) inadequate communication training program 9 (42 .9 %) lack of communication ability in foremen .' _. . . . . . . 6 (28.6 %) management doesn 't listen to subordinates . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 (23.8%) little opportunity for upward communication _ 4 (19.0% ) confusion of authority " Z( 9.5 % ) management is not wen Iiked . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 0 union meddling "upsets" employees. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 0 clashing personalities. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 0

These questions address the topic of communication breakdowns-those perplexing situations that inevitably arise. The communication breakdown ?emands the utmost in professionalism from the public relations practitioner Involved for it is he/she that must mediate between rival groups. In the data ?bo ve, the respondents perceived the gravity of the communication process In the negotiation situation. Moreover, responses to question seven show a marked tendency by the respondents to believe that their management is often reSPonsible for the breakdowns that occur. It may be concluded from these data that the downward flow of messages from management is the root of the breakdown problem as perceived by these public relations practitioners. 8.00 you believe that communicative ability in an individual.. .(check all the statements which you believe are true (n-22) .. .is a skill that can be learned 16 (72.7%) 16 (72.7%) ...is a combination of talent and skill ...ran never be developed in some because of personality traits . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 (27 .3 %) ... is best developed by experience. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 (22.7%) ...is an ability all managers possess . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 408.2%) . ..is primarily a natural gift or talent. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 (13.6% ... is closely related to the amount offormal education one has. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 ( 9 .1%)

73

p .. bUe Ilelatlons Ilcvlcw 9. Do you believe that training in communication should be provided for the following? (n-21) top management yes...21 no ...0 middle management yes 21 no O first line supervisors yes 21 no O hourly-clerical employees yes... 9 no ... 6

Consistent with responses to question 6 and 7, the respondents believe communication training can be taught and that it should be taught to all employees in decision-making capacities. It is curious, however, that hourlyclerical employees are not perceived as important recipients of this training. 10. Would you please indicate how important you believe it is to have training or competence in the following communication skills for a person in middle or top management in your company? (n-21) absolutely essential public speaking listening informal speaking to small groups person-to-person communication conference leadership media utilization letter writ ing speed read ing nonverbal communication debate ...

important

good to have

not very important

7(33.3%) 12 (57.1)

9(42.9) 7(33.3)

4 (19.0)

1 (4.8)

1 (4.8)

o

9(42 .9)

11 (52.4)

1 (4.8)

o

8 (38.1) 5 (23.8)

11 (52.4) 10 (47.6) 10 (47.6) 8 (38 .1) 4 (19.0)

1 (4.8) 4 (19.0)

o

6(28.6) 10 (47.6) 13(61.9 )

6 (28.6) 4 (19 .0)

9 (42.9) 10 (47.6)

2(9.5) 3 (14 .3)

o

3 (14.3) 0

o

3 (14.3)

o 4(19 .0) 3 (14.3)

5 (23.8)

These data show interpersonal, oral forms of communication as more important to effective management as perceived by the sample. 11. Has your company hired an outside consultant to deal with communication activities such as those listed in question ten? (n-22) yes no

12 (54.5%) 10 (45 .5 % )

In what respects have they been helpful to you7 ... in the evaluation of internal communication 8 (36.4%) .. .in the development of management ability 7 (31.8%) .. .inj the development of employee relat ions programming . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 (22.7%)

Though the respondents recognize the need for communication training, only half (approx.) of their companies have invested in this training. Analysis The public relations executives surveyed in this study clearly perceive the need for communication training in their companies, however, as noted in question one, their involvement in the employee relating programming has been limited to producing the house organ, publications and media activities. These data suggest that training for public relations should expand beyond its traditional journalistic niche to include a broader expertise in communica-

74

Employ~~

Relations

tion training. Accordingly, the following observations are forwarded based on the data in the survey. 1. Both oral and written communication skills are desirable components oE the public relations curriculum. The respondents clearly assigned as much value to oral communication skill as written. So that the public relations office may more effectively serve the communication training needs of management, courses in public speaking, group communication and interpersonal communication are advised. 2. Employee relations and internal communication are directly related; I.e, a cause-effect relationship exists between the ability oE corporate management to communicate and the success oE the employee relations program. The survey data suggest that corporate public relations practitioners perceive the significance of this relationship. It would be wrong to suggest that internal communication is the only factor that determines the success Or failure of an employee relations program. Coldhaber, Schneider , Donaghy , Newman, Sanford, Hunt, Bracey and others have identified other factors which influence the communication personality of the organization.! They properly maintain that communication is a process which influences all other processes in the company. So that our curriculum will address the complex question 'what makes or breaks the organization', students should be urged to participate in at least one course in organizational behavior or human relations in industry. 3. Communication training should be extended to hourly and clerical employees in the corporate setting. The respondents felt that training was essential for all levels of management but were split on its value for hourly and clerical employees. It should be noted that most companies would take this position on the question basing their response on the turnover and volume factors for hourly and clerical employees. However, personnel psychologists have determined that the involvement of these personnel in training programs for self improvement accrues several organizational advantages such as reduced turnover, increased job satisfaction, and more Positive attitudes toward the organization. The public relations advantage would, therefore, be greatly enhanced while internal communication Would be made more efficient. One might imagine the daily routine of the secretary who meets the public , answers the telephone, greets the public, types memoranda and sispenses business in terms of these communication functions . The value of training for these personneL then, is worth consideration. Conclusion . This survey produced data about the perceived importance of communication behavior in the employee relations program of the company. The public rel?~ions practitioners surveyed supported the traditional need for effective WritIng skills as the basis of the PR curriculum. Moreover, they indicated a thference for students with ability in business and in oral communication. ese findings are consistent with the report of the Commission on Public

75

J·ublle Relations Review Relations Education although college PR curricula have been deficient in the last two areas.' It may be concluded that our present approach to public relations education is meeting the essential needs of the business though falling short in the areas of business and oral communication. Many instructors have bridged these gaps by requiring majors to take courses outside the department of journalism or mass communication. It remains that the evolving of the curriculum must consider the broader aspects of communication as a psychological process that demands close inspection. If public relations graduates seek employment in the corporate sector, the evidence of this study is that concern for and study in the area of internal organizational communication will be advantageous.

footnotes 1. Scott Cutliop and Allen Center, Effective Public Relations (Englewood Cliffs, N.J. : PrenticeHall Inc., 1971). pp . 5-8. 2. Leading public relations texts devote only one chapter to the employee public. 3. The studies by the two Harvard Business School researchers were called the Hawthorne stud ies because they were conducted at the Hawthorne plant of the Western Electric Company near Chicago between 1927 and 1933. 4. See Keith Brooks, The Communicative Arts and Sciences of Speech (Columbus, Ohio: Merrill Publishing Co." 1967), pp . 98-106. 5. Ray Eldon Hiebert, Trends in Public Relations Education, 1964-70 (New York: Foundation for Public Relations Research and Education, 1971), p. 8. 6. Albert Walker , Status and Trends of Public Relations Education in U.S. Senior Colleges and Universities (New York: Foundation for Public Relations Research and Education, 1975) p. 1. 7. Dr. Redding, a Purdue professor of communication, survey the Fortune 500 in 1953 and again in 1962 to see if there was a noticeable trend in communication behavior by management. 8. See Gerald Goldhaber, Organizational Communication (Dubuque. Iowa: Wm. C. Brown Co ., 1974); Arnold Schneider, William Donaghy and Pamela Jane Newman, Organizational Communication (New York : McGraw Hill Co ., 1975) and Aubrey Sanford. Gary Hunt and Hyler Bracey, Communication behavior in Organizations (Columbus , Ohio : Merrill Publishing Co., 1976). These texts are the most up-to-date in the field. 9. See A Design for Public Relations Education: The Report of the Commission on Public Relations Education (New York: Public Relations Division of the Association for Education in Journalism and the Public Relations Society of America, 1975).