A major study of top corporate executives contains some
troubling findings for PR executives. Several hundred top
brass--including CEOs--believe their corporations' communications
efforts are having limited effect, according to the research conducted
for the American Management Association, New York.
These executives also have doubts about PR's understanding of
"mission, vision and values" and "financial and market objectives."
Perhaps worse, these executives ranked marketing, sales,
information systems, and human resources as likely to be of greater
importance in helping their organizations to formulate communications
strategies and reach communications goals (see chart, page 2).
The AMA findings, released late last month, reinforce the
assessments of PR NEWS readers about management's understanding and
valuing of the public relations function.
A 1995 survey of PR NEWS readers revealed that explaining the
function and its value to management was among the greatest challenges
that PR executives believe faces them.
The study shows that there is "an ongoing challenge for public
relations or communications departments," said J. Duncan Muir, manager
of public and financial relations at J.C. Penney Co. Inc..
Proving the value of the function "is a day-to-day challenge for
any corporate PR person," he said.
Nearly 600 executives responded to the AMA survey. More than one
quarter (26 percent) of the survey respondents were presidents or
CEOs.
The survey was developed and analyzed for AMA by Business
Communication Strategies, Westwood, Mass., and Reimus & Associates,
Boston.
Execs Say Communications Failing
Among almost every group except investors, top corporate
executives believe there is poor understanding of their companies and
missions.
Slightly more than one-half of responding executives said
investors understand their company's mission, vision and values "very
well." Ironically, only 35 percent believed their employees had a
strong understanding.
Clearly seen as in the dark were local communities (4 percent),
the business press (5 percent) and prospective customers (9 percent).
To Muir, one bright side of this is that the data shows that,
among all audiences, corporations are doing a better job communicating
internally than they are externally.
He believes this may stem from executives placing a higher value
on internal communications rather than external communications (with
the exception of the investor community).
PR's Weak Grasp of Mission
One of the most troubling findings of the AMA survey is PR's low
standing with management in terms of perceived understanding of
"mission, vision and values" and organizations' "financial and market
objectives."
On the mission/vision question, only 45 percent of responding top
managers said PR understands these very well. Scoring better in this
regard were marketing (61 percent), finance (53 percent), sales (53
percent) and human resources (51 percent).
PR's low score on understanding of corporate missions and values
was no surprise, said Al Geduldig, a principal with New York
communications planning firm Geduldig & Ferguson. "Our experience is
that PR is often the group that drives the process and almost
invariably defines the messages. Why, then, does PR get tagged with
the failure to communicate? It may be that, in most companies, PR has
never outgrown its image of being 'wordsmith' of the organiztion. It
is not seen as a creator of ideas, but as a packager."
Only 30 percent of top executives said that PR understands "very
well" their organizations' financial and market objectives. Outpacing
PR on this question were finance (68 percent), marketing (51 percent),
sales (48 percent), investor relations (40 percent) and even
administrative services (34 percent).
On this point, PR did rank ahead of human resources, judged to
understand financial and market objectives very well by just 27
percent of responding executives.
To Geduldig, it is obvious why finance and marketing score ahead
of PR on this question: "The finance function has to know, and sits in
on the corporate planning process. Marketing is the end game of every
company's activity: if you don't sell what you produce, you're out of
business." Among other things, he believes the study should be a
wake-up call for those who think marketing public relations is
"beneath them."
Future: Technology, Marketing
Where will management focus its communications attention in the
future? At the customer, according to the AMA study. Eighty-seven
percent of respondents selected "customer interaction" as a
communications tool or method of increasing importance. By contrast,
public relations was selected as of increasing importance by only 42
percent.
In between these two selections are approaches centered around
technology and marketing. Judged of increasing importance were e-mail
(73 percent), the Internet (63 percent), voice mail (47 percent), and
videoconferencing and teleconferencing (44 percent). Showing
marketing's credibility, marketing communications and advertising were
selected by 57 percent and 45 percent, respectively.
Muir confirmed the growing importance of technology in his
company's communications, mentioning increasing use of satellite-based
videoconferences to communicate with employees in remote locations.
(AMA, 212/586-8100; Geduldig, 212/682-4100; Muir, 214/431-1329)