final dissertation pambuka

The place of corporate communication in the governance of higher institutions of learning in
Zimbabwe: The Case of Midlands State University.
2012
Takesure Pambuka R0825436H BSc (Hons) Media& Society Studies – May 2012 vii
Table of Contents
CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION...............................................................................................................1
1.0 Introduction.................................................................................................................................1
1.1 Background to the study ........................................................................................................3
1.3. Statement of the Problem.....................................................................................................6
1.4. Research questions...............................................................................................................7
1.5. Justification of the study .......................................................................................................7
1.6. Research objectives ..............................................................................................................7
1.7. Assumptions.........................................................................................................................8
1.8. Delimitation of the study.......................................................................................................8
1.8. Limitations of the study.........................................................................................................9
CHAPTER 2: LITERATURE REVIEW AND THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK...................................................10
2.0. Introduction ..........................................................................................................................10
2.1. Definition of corporate communication................................................................................10
2.2. Corporate communication or corporate communication(s) ...................................................13
2.3. The roots of corporate communication. ...............................................................................14
2.4. Roles, place and organisation of the corporate communication function................................19
2.4.1. Roles and skills for corporate communication in organizations............................................20
2.5. Themes associatedwith corporate communication...............................................................23
2.5.3. Corporate reputation .......................................................................................................24
2.7. Theoretical framework ..........................................................................................................27
2.7.1. Agenda setting and gate-keeping theories.........................................................................27
2.7.2. Strategic management role and the excellence model of public relations............................29
2.7.3. The Press Agentry Model..................................................................................................31
2.7.4. Two-way asymmetrical.....................................................................................................31
2.7.5. The Two-way symmetrical model......................................................................................32
2.7.6. Lasswell’s model of communication..................................................................................33

2012
Takesure Pambuka R0825436H BSc (Hons) Media& Society Studies – May 2012 viii
2.7.7. Two-step flow theory of communication ...........................................................................33
CHAPTER 3: RESEARCH METHODS AND METHODOLOGY ...................................................................36
3.1. Introduction ..........................................................................................................................36
3.2. Research design.....................................................................................................................37
3.2.1. Case study as research design...........................................................................................37
3.3. Sampling techniques...........................................................................................................38
3.3.1. Convenience Sampling......................................................................................................39
3.3.2. Purposeful Sampling.........................................................................................................40
3.3.3. Population.......................................................................................................................40
3.4. Research Methodology..........................................................................................................41
3.4.1. Qualitative and quantitative paradigms.............................................................................41
3.4.2. Quantitative Research......................................................................................................41
3.4.3. Qualitative Research ........................................................................................................42
3.4.4. Triangulation ...................................................................................................................43
3.5. Data collection techniques.....................................................................................................44
3.5.1. Interviews........................................................................................................................44
3.5.2. Questionnaires.................................................................................................................46
3.5.3. Participant Observation....................................................................................................46
3.5.4. Document analysis...........................................................................................................47
3.5.5. Descriptive Survey............................................................................................................49
3.6. Data analysis.........................................................................................................................50
3.6.1. Content Analysis ..............................................................................................................50
3.6.2. Thematic analysis.............................................................................................................50
3.6.3. Discourse Analysis............................................................................................................51
3.7. Conclusion..........................................................................................................................51
CHAPTER 4: ORGANIZATIONAL ANALYSIS .........................................................................................52
4.0. Introduction ..........................................................................................................................52
4.1. Background of MSU ...............................................................................................................52
4.1.2. Location and campuses ....................................................................................................53

2012
Takesure Pambuka R0825436H BSc (Hons) Media& Society Studies – May 2012 ix
4.2. The University Vision, Mission, Core Values and symbols.....................................................53
4.2.2. Mission Statement...........................................................................................................53
4.3. Organogram/ Organizational Structure...................................................................................54
4.3. Linking communication to governance.................................................................................58
4.4. How departments link to meet organizational goals..............................................................60
4.4. Conclusion..........................................................................................................................61
CHAPTER 5: PRESENTATION AND ANALYSIS OF DATA........................................................................62
5.1. Introduction ..........................................................................................................................62
5.2. Response rate and nature of questions ................................................................................62
5.3. Organization of the communication function........................................................................64
5.3.1. Existing communication management activities.................................................................65
5.3.2. Degree of centralization of communications......................................................................68
5.4. IPR as the corporate communication function/department...................................................69
5.5. Management values the IPR as the corporate communication department............................72
5.6. Corporate communication has a place in the governance of MSU..........................................73
5.7. The need for quality assurance in communication taken for granted......................................75
5.8. Conclusion..........................................................................................................................77
CHAPTER 6: CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS .....................................................................78
6.1. Introduction ..........................................................................................................................78
6.2. The context of Corporate Communication at MSU................................................................78
6.3. Summary of Findings/Conclusions........................................................................................79
6.4. Recommendations..............................................................................................................81
6.5. Recommendations for further research................................................................................82
6.7. Conclusion..........................................................................................................................82
REFERENCES.....................................................................................................................................83
Appendix 1....................................................................................................................................xi
Appendix 2..................................................................................................................................xiii
Appendix 3..................................................................................................................................xiv

2012
Takesure Pambuka R0825436H BSc (Hons) Media& Society Studies – May 2012 1
CHAPTER 1:INTRODUCTION
1.0 Introduction
Communication has become the cornerstone of the success of many organisations in today’s
business world. This study contextualises the importance of communication to higher institutions
of learning in Zimbabwe. Corporate communication has been defined variously by different
scholars to describe a process whereby an organisation encodes, sends, receives and decodes
messages within its internal and external environment. This is because corporate communication
is grounded in communication theories. It is therefore imperative for this introduction to define
what communication is. ‘Communicate’ is closely related to the word ‘common.’
‘Communicate’ has its roots in the Latin verb ‘communicare’ which means ‘to share’, ‘to make
common’ which is also related to another Latin word, ‘communis’ meaning community
(Rosengren, 2000). So communicating is sharing or making things common in a community.
Community was described by Jankowski (2006) as relationships (ties) established between
individuals, groups or institutions. This view of community was echoed by Ledwith (2005: 32),
who calls it “a complex system of interrelationships woven across social differences, diverse
histories and cultures, and determined in the present by political and social trends.”
Baran (2008; 5) defines communication as “the process of creating shared meaning” which
suggests that communication is reciprocal as it involves all parties involved in creating and
sharing meaning. So communication is some kind of interaction that exists through exchange of
messages arising from the need for survival, co-operation, relationships and persuasion (Burton
and Dimbleby, 2007: 41). In this context, sharing implies an equitable division of what is being
shared, which is why communication should almost be naturally associated with a balanced, two-
way flow of information. This is in line with Watson and Hill’s (2006) view of communication
as a process which starts when:
a message is conceived by a sender, encoded [translated into a signal], transmitted via a particular
medium or channel to a receiver who then decodes it and interprets the message, returning a signal
in some way the message has or has not been understood.

2012
This is the nature of corporate communication which has been defined by various scholars to
refer to a function and a process of managing communication between an organisation and its
stakeholders.
Franklin, et al, (2009; 61), view ‘corporate communication’ as “the umbrella expression to
describe how an organisation talks to itself and to the outside world.” Argenti and Forman (2002;
4) also see corporate communication as a collection of the “corporation’s voice and the images it
projects of itself on a world populated by its various audiences.” This ‘corporation’s voice’
encompasses corporate reputation, corporate advertising and advocacy, employee
communications, investor relations, government relations, media management and crisis
communication. When defining corporate communication as, “ a framework in which various
communications specialists - working from a mutually established strategic framework – can
integrate their own communications effort”, van Riel (1992; xi) also talk of the organisation of
corporate communication as demarcating:
who should do what, and how to organize the communication processes and integrate all corporate
messages from a variety of specialized sources (marketing, public relations, investor relations,
CEO communications, etc).
The above definitions concur with Herle and Rustema’s definition of corporate communication
as “the management function within an organisation (profit or non-profit) which is responsible
for communication processes that are initiated from within the organisation and trying to
promote a sustainable interaction between the organisation and groups of the public in the
internal and external environment” (2005; 17).
It is Cornelisen’s (2004: 23) definition of corporate communication that combines all the above
definitions. He sees corporate communication as:
a management function that offers a framework and vocabulary for the effective coordination
of all means of communications with the overall purpose of establishing and maintaining
favourable reputations with stakeholder groups upon which the organization is dependent.

2012
This study looks into the ways corporate communication is understood and how it is applied at
the Midlands State University (MSU). It is a study into how planning, organization and
execution of strategic communication decisions are done at MSU. Major questions that this study
addresses are: Is communication at MSU considered a management function; Is there a
framework that clarifies roles of communication at the university; and if it exists what is the
vocabulary (manual/policy) is it based on and how are communications organized; how and from
which level of management are they coordinated. The purpose of this study is to locate where
corporate communication stands in the university system by looking at how it is organized.
1.1 Backgroundto the study
As a fourth year student; in coming up with a dissertation topic as a requirement for the
fulfilment of the Bachelor of Science Honours Degree in Media and Society Studies, the
researcher has been looking at the competition that exists between institutions of higher
education in Zimbabwe and identified corporate communication as the means through which
universities in Zimbabwe articulate and express their corporate stories.
There has been a mushrooming of higher education institutions in Zimbabwe since 1990, be they
private or public. MSU joined a myriad of other tertiary education institutions that include long
established universities like the University of Zimbabwe (UZ) in Harare, National University of
Science and Technology (NUST) in Bulawayo, Solusi University in Bulawayo and Africa
University in Mutare. The establishment of MSU in 2000 was met with government economic
incapacities to fund public education due to economic structural adjustment programmes that
advocated reduction of government expenditure towards public education. Other universities that
were established contemporaneously with MSU are Zimbabwe Open University (ZOU),
Chinhoyi University of Technology, Catholic University, Women’s University of Africa and
more recently Lupane State University.
Such mushrooming of public and private universities, colleges and vocational training centres
took place amidst dire economic challenges facing the country which entails negative economic
and socio-political impact on the nation’s education sector (MSU Strategic Plan 2001-2015).

2012
Having considered this background, the researcher was prompted to investigate how these
institutions strive for continued existence given that there must be some competition for
recognition, donors, financial resources and best students, investors, affiliate colleges, and best
lecturers. Holmes (2003:14) says, “Though competition is now occurring on a widespread scale
between education providers, the concept of competition remains unacceptable for many
educators.” Holmes prefers the concept of differentiation on the basis of organisational culture.
The call for differentiation calls for these institutions to engage in some sort of talk, advocacy
and rhetoric. Thus the study is inspired to look at how one of these institutions is employing
communication in differentiating itself from the rest; be it with external environment or in its day
to day handling of stakeholders.
As one of many universities that has joined or has been joined by other universities, MSU
needed to strive for, and demonstrate, a differentiation to stakeholders; a sustainable
differentiation that sticks to people’s minds and this must be a result of a continuous process of
communicating with the university’s stakeholders.
Having worked for Midlands State University’s Information and Public Relations department for
a full year, the researcher learnt that the university system is run differently from small
companies because the structure of authority is formally decentralized to various academic and
administrative units and departments. Governance of the university rests on the authority of
committees. This means that governance of universities is more democratic. This structure of
governance prompted the researcher to dig deeper into the ways in which corporate
communication is organized in the whole governance structure of universities in Zimbabwe in
general and at Midlands State University in particular. It is therefore imperative for the
researcher to provide background insights into the governance system of the university as
practiced at MSU.
Universities carry out large amount of business through channels of communication and power is
decentralized. The committee system as an administrative tool has contributed to the

2012
effectiveness of the university system through promoting all the four elements of management: -
planning, control, motivation and coordination. Citing Eno-Ibanga’s article in Wilolud Online
Journals, (2008), Moodie and Eustance (1974), identified the uses of committees as (i)
exchanging views and information; (ii) recommending action; (iii) generating ideas; (iv) making
policy decisions. Given that the university system is diverse, and without a central system of
control, the study is motivated to find out how communication is harmonised within the whole
system to produce consistent messages. The study is inspired by the need to ascertain the design
and approach of the communication function and its contribution to strategic management of the
university.
The growing recognition of communication in organisational effectiveness has seen many
organisations internalising the communication function. In other organisations this is manifesting
through the setting up of marketing departments, public affairs departments, public relations and
corporate affairs (Cornelissen 2004). This has also seen the rise of Marketing Directors, PR
directors and managers as specialists appointed to represent organisations’ communications at
different levels. Corporate communication function is an attempt to integrate and co-ordinate all
communications of an organisation. In this case there should be an agreed stand towards
communication, between various sources of information in an organisation in order to come up
with a comprehensive communication strategy that produces consistent messages (van Riel
1992). The role of public relations and marketing will be considered. However, communication
at the institution takes place at various levels of management which do not necessarily involve
the IPR. So the major question that arises here is that; is there a communication manual or
training available to all staff to spell out how they should communicate in line with overall
communication strategy of the university.
According to Franklin (2009), the success of corporate communication rests in its integration
with the rest of business putting it on an equal footing with other lead departments. This means
establishing a department of communication at an organisation is not enough unless it commands
enough power to contribute to strategic decision making. Franklin (2009), argued, “The success

2012
of corporate communications strategy depends on where the communication function sits within
the organisation,” thus this study on the place of corporate communication in the governance of
education institutions with particular focus on higher institutions in Zimbabwe.
Upon joining the IPR in June 2010, the researcher and his colleagues drafted the communication
policy for MSU. The policy would provide grounds of communication by staff members. This policy
would act as a communication manual to staff at MSU. The purpose of the communication policy
was to advice all staff members on their roles in the corporate communication effort, because it spelt
out who should say what, to whom, when and how in order to achieve consistency in the institution’s
communication strategy. However, the policy took long to pass and until now (2012) it has not been
passed. Without a communications policy, the researcher wonders how the institution is linking its
communication objectives to corporate objectives. The need to look into this area of study was
reinforced when there existed inconsistencies in communication between the Registrar’s office and
the university security department regarding the use of laptops during lectures by students. In such a
situation one naturally wonders if the need for consistent communication has ever been taken
seriously by the management team if such instances of discord in communication arise.
1.3. Statement ofthe Problem
This study investigates how the corporate communication of higher education institutions is
organised within the governance system of universities. In this case, the study looks into the
treatment of Midlands State University integral communications at all levels of management and
how it contributes to strategies and activities of management. The value of corporate
communication depends on its place within the management of an organisation. How
communication is organised and qualifications of communication specialists, their roles and their
reporting relationship to management varies from organisation to organisation. This depends on
the size and nature of business an organisation is involved in. The university system is formally
organized and coordinated to meet academic and administrative goals and objectives. Therefore
the study of corporate communication at MSU is an effort to establish whether what is
happening in their communication function is ideal or it falls far short. Whether staff members are

2012
guided in their communications or they simply communicate the way they deem necessary at any
point of delivery especially, is what this study seeks to establish.
1.4. Researchquestions
1. What role in information dissemination and communication management is assigned to
the IPR department?
2. Does management value the importance of corporate communication?
3. Who are tasked to monitor corporate communication?
4. For the purposes of information regulation is there a communication manual/policy or
orientation or some sort of training to guide the day to day communication delivery of
MSU staff?
1.5. Justificationofthe study
This study will add knowledge to the field of corporate communication as an academic area in
that students and researchers may be interested in understanding how relevant are
communication theories to everyday business of an education institution. This study opens up
room for further research in the area of corporate communication for higher education in a Third
World country like Zimbabwe. The research is also worthy taking in that it outlines the need for
organisations to integrate their communications as well as carving communication policies to
avoid contradictions of information dissemination at different levels of management. In this case
the research is going to benefit communication specialists especially in universities. The
researcher who developed an interest in corporate communication is about to get into the world
of work, so the study provides room for him to understand more on corporate communication as
well as enlightening him with relevant information and skills of managing the communication
function of an organisation.
1.6. Researchobjectives
By the end of the study, the researcher must be able to:
 Show how the communication function is organized within the system of governance of
the university affairs.

2012
 Identify the contribution of corporate communication in the achievement of corporate
objectives at MSU
 Establish perceptions of the role and importance of corporate communication by the
university management team.
 Establish elements of existing communication practices at the institution.
1.7. Assumptions
 Education institutions do not have clear communication management policies that can
produce consistent rhetoric when communicating.
 The communication function is fragmented not integrated such that there is no co-
ordination of how and what to communicate at different levels of management.
 The role and contribution of corporate communication is not fully realized in higher
education.
 Communication practitioners and communication as a strategic management function are
undervalued, under-budgeted for, their input in decision making compromised.
1.8. Delimitationofthestudy
Though corporate communication is a broad topic in business, the study focuses on the place of
corporate communication in the management of a higher education institution in Zimbabwe
using the case of the Midlands State University. The intention of the study is to gain an
understanding of the contribution of corporate communication in the decision making process
and the general appreciation of its role by key decision makers at MSU. To demonstrate the link
between corporate communication and governance of the university, Information and Public
Relations department personnel are respondents to interviews together with the Registrar, the
Bursar, and the Librarian. Administrators of faculties and non-teaching units, Deans, Directors,
and heads of administrative units like Human Resources, Exams, Admissions, Central Records
and Registration as well as chairpersons, were also interviewed particularly focusing on the way
communication at all these levels is handled. Data was collected by analysing hard copy
documents like annual reports, magazines, brochures and manuals, speeches and events as well

2012
as electronic content on the website and Facebook generated between June 2010 and March
2012.
1.8. Limitationsof the study
Since the study is being undertaken during the final semester of the researcher, his attention was
being swayed by three modules done at the same time with the study. The researcher is only a
beginner, so may not be experienced in research. Moreover the researcher is constrained due to the
lack of financial resources for necessary travelling. One more challenge may come up when the
researcher fails to get all the information from the research population. Principal Officers and the
administrative staff who are the best people able to provide the researcher with relevant information,
are always in meetings and may not be readily available to provide the necessary information in
time. The official procedure that exists in collecting some of the information is a major difficulty
especially in collecting data from administrators and secretaries.
1.9. Chapter summary
This chapter has laid the basis of this study by giving a general understanding of what
communication is, its nature and its importance when it becomes a recognized activity at corporate
level. The chapter has also outlined the general boundaries of this study by clearly stating its focus,
assumptions, research questions and objectives. Further details on the definitions of key terms and
other major areas of this study are captured in the chapters that follow.

2012
CHAPTER 2:LITERATURE REVIEWANDTHEORETICALFRAMEWORK
2.0. Introduction
This chapter introduces the concept of corporate communication as it was defined and
understood by various authors. It is a review of scholarly articles, books, dissertations,
conference proceedings and other sources relevant to the field of corporate communication. A
summary and evaluation of the historical basis of corporate communication will be given. This
chapter also outlines and defines major concepts related to corporate communication. This will
be done through an overview of relevant literature.
2.1. Definitionofcorporatecommunication.
Corporate communication refers to the ways and processes in which an organisation creates its
messages for best possible interaction with its environment. Argenti and Forman (2002) define
corporate communication from three standpoints:
a) The voice and the images an organisation projects of itself to its various audiences.
b) A means and function of crafting an organisation’s messages. An organisation can get its
messages across to its stakeholders by means of meetings, interviews, speeches, reports,
image advertising and online communications to mention just but a few. The function in
many organisations appears in organisational charts as Corporate Communication
departments, Public Relations departments.
c) An attitude toward communication or a set of mental habits that employees internalize
for purposes of dealing with customers. (Argenti and Forman, 2002).
According to Argenti and Forman, corporate communication is made up of various elements that
include corporate reputation, corporate advertising and advocacy, employee communications,
investor relations, government relations, media management and crisis communications. It is
this collection of elements of corporate communication that Franklin, et al. (2009: 61) see as the
‘umbrella’ term that describes how an organisation “talks to itself and to the outside world.” The
definition and characteristics of corporate communication as outlined by Argenti and Forman

2012
shows that communication of an organisation can either be spread out or unified as long as there
exist an attitude of communication that establishes rapport between an organisation and its
audiences. In this case, if an organisation talks and presents images about itself, there is
corporate communication; if there is a unit or department set aside for the purposes of
communication as a function that appears on the organogram (organisational) structure, then
there is corporate communication and if an organisation imparts to its employees a defined
attitude of communicating and dealing with customers, then that organisation has corporate
communication.
Van Riel (1992) categorized corporate communication into three forms of communication by
organisations and these are: management communication, marketing communication and
organisational communication. Management communication involves the communication of
senior management with the internal and external stakeholders. According to van Riel,
management communication is necessary to create and maintain a shared vision of the
organisation, to establish and maintain trust in the organisation’s leadership, to initiate and
manage the process of change as well as to win support of external stakeholders. Marketing
communication, van Riel said, is a general expression describing, paid forms of “advertising,
sales promotions, direct mail, sponsorship, personal selling and other communications in the
promotional mix” of mainstream marketing. Organisational communication ranges from “public
relations, public affairs, investor relations, labour market communication, corporate advertising,
environmental and internal communication.” Though Argenti and Forman (2002) and van Riel
(1992) agree that corporate communication is made up of various aspects of communication
relevant to the running of organisations, it is important to note that most elements of what
Argenti and Forman referred to as corporate communication fall into the category of van Riel’s
‘organisational communication’. Moreover, van Riel includes Public relations as an element of
corporate communication, which is absent in Argenti and Forman’s characterisation of corporate
communication.

2012
Van Riel argued that corporate communication of an organisation is put in place if
communication specialists for the above forms and elements of communication establish ‘a
framework’ in which they work from ‘a mutually established strategic framework and ‘integrate
their communications input.’ In van Riel’s words, corporate communication is “an instrument of
management by means of which all consciously used forms of internal and external
communication are harmonised as effectively and efficiently as possible, so as to create a
favourable basis for relationships with the groups upon which the company is dependent” (1992:
26).
Van Riel’s definition calls for ‘an instrument’ of managing all communications by various
communicators of an organisation. This definition, though it recognizes that communication of
an organisation takes place at various levels, it denies a fragmented approach to communication
such that it calls for a well coordinated management framework of all communications. Very
much in line with van Riel’s definition are the definitions of Cornelissen (2004) and Herle and
Rustema (2005):
Corporate communication is a management function that offers a framework and vocabulary for
effective coordination of all means of communications with the overall purpose of establishing
and maintaining favourable reputations with stakeholder groups upon which the organisation is
dependent (Cornelissen 2004:23).
Herle and Rustema (2005) provide the following definition:
Corporate communication is the management function within an organisation (profit or non-profit)
which is responsible for communication processes that are initiated from within the organisation
and trying to promote a sustainable interaction between the organisation and groups of the public
in the internal and external environment, (Herle and Rustema 2005; 17).
There are important elements in the above definitions. Corporate communication needs to be a
management function enabled to analyse and advise properly. This means that the
communication director or manager should know what is happening at an organisation.
Communication is a process; a multi-layered set of measures and steps necessarily taken to

2012
formulate the vocabulary and policy of communication within and outside the organisation. It
involves several steps; it is not an event but a process (Windahl, et al, 2009). Herle and Rustema
(2005) observed that corporate communication is initiated by an organisation which means that
an organisation should take a leading role in starting a communication activity. Therefore
communication initiated by the press without the input of communicators at the organisation
cannot be regarded as corporate communication. However, this is not to suggest that
communication is one-way because organisations often respond to events taking place in their
environments whenever they communicate.
The current study makes use of the term corporate communication to cover definitions by van
Riel (1992), Argenti & Forman’s (2002) and Cornelissen’s (2004) as well as Herle and Rustema
(2005) to establish how MSU has considered corporate communication as a management tool
and how the function is treated within management ranks. So products of communication at the
institution will be studied to try and establish the existence of management vocabulary as well as
determining whether the function contributes to decision making within the framework of
university governance.
Scholarship on corporate communication as outlined above has tried to emphasise the
importance of corporate communication in the successful running of organisations. However,
this need for a deeper understanding of corporate communication by different scholars has not
been complimented to demonstrate practical relevance for higher education institutions, which is
why it is necessary to focus research towards this direction.
2.2. Corporatecommunicationorcorporatecommunication(s)
Luontama (2009) sees the difference between ‘corporate communication’ and ‘corporate
communications’ not only as a matter of pronunciation but also as a conceptual difference.
Argenti & Forman (2002:4) provide definitions for both. They posit that ‘corporate
communication’ is a function, the processes and a theoretical basis upon which the overall
attitude toward communication within an organisation takes form. On the other hand they define
‘corporate communications as “...the products of communication; be they memos, letters,

2012
reports, Web sites, e-mails, speeches, or news releases” (Argenti & Forman 2002: 4).
Cornelissen (2004) used the term “communications” for the specific communications, which
Argenti & Forman (2002) preferred to call “corporate communications” or products of
communication. Van Riel also prefers to use corporate communication without an ‘s’ because it
is the one that denotes an integrated communication function while the one with an ‘s’ refers to
communication methods. Jackson (1987) as cited in van Riel, (1992) also goes for the one
without the final ‘s’ because it is associated with telecommunications specialists. This study
adopted corporate communication without an ‘s’ for the sake of clarity.
The same confusion is also characteristic in the use of ‘corporate’ communication when referring
to public and non-for-profit institutions. This is because the word ‘corporate’ has been
understood as the adjective linked to ‘corporations’. This created a tendency of associating
corporate communication with enterprises. However, the term ‘corporate’ should be taken in
connection to the Latin word, ‘corpus’, meaning ‘body’ or ‘relating to the whole’ corporare,
which emphasize a unified way of looking at ‘internal’ and ‘external’ communication disciplines
(Cornelissen (2004). This means that institutions; private enterprises, public organizations and
government institutions should communicate after strict analysis of the whole organisations’
situations.
2.3. The rootsofcorporatecommunication.
Harvard Business School Press (2006:4) cites Argenti referring to corporate communication as
“a new field of study”. Corporate communication is still an evolving concept and terminology
that is emerging prior to the “growing recognition by top management of communication as a
strategic resource in determining and achieving corporate goals and objectives” (Harvard
Business School Press, 2006:4). This new field of study is concerned with analysing the ways of
harnessing and coordinating various sources/elements of communication in an organisation so
that messages can be managed and consistency achieved (http://factoidz.com/corporate-
communication). Harvard Business School Press (2006:4) postulated that “what is today most
commonly called the corporate communication department has been in the past more often

2012
referred to as public relations or public affairs.” Thus (Steyn 2002) sees corporate
communication as a concept and a term used in practice to describe the management role of
‘public relations.’ It is against this background that a brief account of public relations is given in
order to show how it evolved in to corporate communication. A historical account of public
relations is provided in this study because in its history there are issues that concern us today in
corporate communication.
The origins, growth and development of public relations into corporate communication are
credited to Arthur Page, Paul Garrett, Ivy Ledbetter Lee and Edward L Bernays. These have been
described as fathers of corporate communication. Paul Garrett who was Vice President for Public
Relations at General Motors in 1931 believed that employees should come first in the
communication line of information and that communication with the public involves the use of
words and deeds with meanings they understand. The 1927 Vice President of Public Relations at
AT&T Arthur Page believed that communication is a management function with a voice in
senior executive team. Page also developed an ethical code for PR which still concerns corporate
communicators today. The ethical code includes:
a) Tell the truth
b) Prove it with your actions
c) Conduct public relations as if the company depends on it
d) Manage for tomorrow
e) Remain calm, patient and good humoured
Ivy Ledbetter Lee who died in 1934 is known for his contribution to corporate communication
and public relations management when he proposed the following:
 Business and industry alignment with the public interest is acting in a socially
responsible manner
 Counselling top management directly and only developing communication programs
supported by senior executives

2012
 Building a network of news contacts to maintain effective media relations
 Bringing internal and external communications to a ‘human level’ for all audiences.
(http://www.slideshare.net/9924927019/corporate-communication-2444333) accessed
on 11/02/2012.
Cornelissen (2004) argues that the best way to study corporate communication is to look at the
way in which the function has developed in companies. He said that in the 1970s,
communication practitioners employed the term public relations to describe communication with
stakeholders. The public relations function largely consisted of communication with the press.
When other stakeholders, internal and external to the company, started to demand more
information from the company, practitioners subsequently started to look at communication as
being more than just ‘public relations’. This is when the roots of the new corporate
communication function started to take hold. This new function came to incorporate a whole
range of specialized disciplines, including corporate design, corporate advertising, internal
communication to employees, issues and crisis management, media relations, investor relations,
change communication and public affairs (Cornelissen 2004). An important characteristic of the
new function is that it focuses on the organization as a whole and on the important task of how
an organization presents itself to all its key stakeholders, both internal and external. This
relationship is therefore based on the following definitions of ‘public relations’:
Public relations is a communication function of management through which organisations adapt
to, alter, or maintain their environment for the purpose of achieving organisational goals , (Long &
Hazelton 1987:6).
The Public Relations Institute of Southern Africa (PRISA, 2000:41) defines public relations as:
The management, through communication, of perceptions and strategic relationships between an
organisation and its internal and external stakeholders.
There is a growing trend among university students to use corporate communication and public
relations interchangeably. Dolphin (2000) observed that emphasis of nomenclature varies with

2012
the country of origin. In the United Kingdom, but not in the United States, PR has become
debased. What used to trade under the name of PR is now known variously as: corporate affairs,
corporate communications, and public affairs. In line with this Herle and Rustema (2005) stated
that, it is ‘not done’ to talk about public relations especially in the northern, north western and
Central European countries because there, the term ‘conjures’ up images of ‘wheeling and
dealing’ or ‘spin doctoring’, influencing people instead of entering into an honest dialogue with
them.
In Zimbabwe, the politics of nomenclature is not serious as both public relations and corporate
communication are used to label departments responsible for communication within
organisations. This may be a result of the nature and development of the public relations
profession in Zimbabwe. Public relations companies are registered under the Zimbabwe Institute
of Public Relations (ZIPR), a professional body that is responsible for ethical conduct of
registered partners.
The major public relations consultants comprise MHPR Public Relations Consultants and Network
Public Relations. All are based in the capital city in Harare and ownership is still limited to a few
white people. Although this can be accredited to the political economy of Zimbabwe, the other
reason is that expertise in the field of public relations campaigns is still very low amongst the
blacks (Moyo, 2005).
Most studies conducted by Media and Society Studies students at the Midlands State University
focus on public relations in organisations, and most of them do not concentrate on the
communication aspect of education institutions but that of various companies. While these
studies have not used corporate communication as the basis of their studies, most of them used
the term in defining and examining the communication aspect as contained in the practice of PR.
Munemo (2009) looks at the role of PR and how it is being employed by Kadoma City Council
in establishing “cordial relations with Kadoma residents.” Munemo’s study aimed at “pointing
out that, the core aspect of all operations of an organization, are governed by effective public
relations” (2009:4).

2012
Shoko (2010:4), was motivated by the need to “explore the effectiveness of public relations
departments of universities in performing the roles they were established to carry out.” In his
study, Shoko considered public relations departments of MSU and Africa University as
“effective or not effective on the basis of how closely they align their objectives to the goals of
the entire institution.” While Shoko’s study gives a foundation to this current research regarding
the roles set for the Information and Public Relations department at MSU, the current study goes
further to investigate the value attached to these roles by senior management at the University.
Moreover this study will not only look at Public Relations, but will look at corporate
communication which is an emerging management function that integrates and provides the basis
for the coordination of all communications; a resource which if properly harnessed leads to the
success of corporate strategies (Steyn 2002).
Mbofana (2009) investigated the effectiveness of public relations department in the conduct of
corporate social responsibility (CSR) at Redcliff Municipality. Mbofana’s preoccupation urged
him to study CSR as an element of public relations, upon which, its successful conduct can be
useful in ascertaining the effectiveness of public relations. This study is not about public
relations as PR is one of the elements of corporate communication. The studies reviewed above
used the term public relations to express the communication function of organisations studied.
These studies and many others focused on elements of corporate communication like CSR, crisis
communication and media relations among many forms of human communication. The literature
reviewed also revealed that while an attempt on the role of public relations departments was
made, communication that took place outside public relations offices could not be investigated.
For the current study to thrive, the researcher decided to digress from the commonplace usage of
public relations to the use of corporate communication which according to Argenti (2006) should
be ‘pulled out’ of the tradition and be placed in the management studies. This study makes use of
the term corporate communication, fully aware of the historical links it shares with public
relations. It is in this vein that theoretical underpinnings for public relations are still relevant in
the study and practice of corporate communication. However one must note that corporate
communication seeks to “upgrade public relations, organizational communication and

2012
advertising into the level of scientific discipline quite removed from the level of a technical
function” where PR practitioners are seen as technicians and sometimes labelled as journalists
within organisations. Therefore the term and concept of ‘corporate communication’ is not a
rehash of public relations.
Moreover to simply look at the roles and effectiveness of public relations and its elements
without focusing on the attitudes with which the communication function and its personnel
confront from management teams within organisations, will be looking at the end of
communication without enough expression of the forces and contexts within which
communication takes place. Thus the current study will consider the roles and attitudes of
corporate communication as expressed by communicators and attitudes of both key management
and staff towards the communication function and how these attitudes are manifest in
communication output. In short the study seeks to establish the relationship between
communicators and management teams at MSU.
2.4. Roles,placeand organisationofthecorporatecommunicationfunction
Corporate communication as understood by van Riel (1992) is the total of marketing
communication, organizational communication and management communication. However it is
important to state that these forms of communication make an ideal corporate communication
framework if the various people who communicate at each level begin to work from a mutual
strategy adopted to streamline their communication activities. Corporate communication should
be corporate; that is to say all who communicate, no matter from which level, should focus, first
and foremost, on the problems of the organization as whole (corpus) and “only subsequently
should they look at implicit and explicit functions of communication with respect to contributing
to the achievement of the company’s objectives” (Van Riel 1992:21).

2012
2.4.1. Rolesandskillsforcorporate communicationinorganizations.
Van Riel summarised the responsibilities of corporate communication as follows:
 To develop initiatives in order to minimise non-function discrepancies between the
desired identity and the desired image, taking into account the interaction of ‘strategy-
image-identity’
 To flesh out the profile of the organisation behind the brand
 To indicate who should perform which tasks in the field of communication, to formulate
and execute effective procedures in order to facilitate decision making about matters
concerning communication.
Corporate communication is not just about drawing up advertisements and writing propaganda
but Dolphin (2000) suggests that the role of corporate communication departments in
organizations includes being a “planner, watchdog, catalyst, communicator, savant, stimulant,
advisor and confidant” to management. The corporate communicator is often described as a
boundary spanner, implying that he or she must have one leg in the organisation and the other
among the publics. He or she identifies the needs, interests and concerns of each stakeholder,
which he then uses to segment the various audiences. Further, the corporate communicator has to
represent the various interests of the publics to the organisation, and at the same time carry the
organisation’s message to the publics through lobbying, advocacy, community relations and
corporate citizenship. Seen from this perspective, the function of a corporate communicator is
necessary in strategy formulation and implementation of decisions.
As Cornelissen (2004) observes, corporate communication transcends the specialties of
individual communication practitioners (e.g., branding, media relations, investor relations, public
affairs, internal communication, etc.) and crosses these specialist boundaries to harness the
strategic interests of the organization at large. This means that communication is the organizing
principle behind many business decisions. After strategy formulation, it is the corporate
communicator who disseminates the organisational ‘strategic intent’ to the stakeholders

2012
Cornelissen (2004). This can be done through posters, speeches, annual reports, intranet, and
press releases, among others. For the corporate communicator to effectively pass on such
information, he or she must have writing, editing, presentation, public speaking and listening
skills.
In the following section theoretical framework, the various models and theories of
communication will be discussed to spell out some of the key roles and skills that may be handy
in the practice of corporate communication. However it is important to mention here that a
communication practitioner has to be aware of various types of communication each with its
dynamics and theories. The communication of an organisation is not only performed by the
communication officer, but also done by other people who deal with the public, from the
receptionist to the CEO. Therefore the corporate communicator has at his or her disposal a
number of communication models through which he or she can pass on information about the
organisation’s strategy.
2.4.2. Howotheruniversities applycorporatecommunication
According to Paola Catenaccio (2011), corporate communication for higher education
institutions covers roles in relationships with alumni, faculty and administration, students, and
the general public promoting the college image, recruiting students, and raising funds.
(http://www.lincom.unimi.it/deposito/02_a_linguistic_approach_to_corporate_communication.p
df, accessed on 12/02/2012). The University of Liverpool defined the role of corporate
communication at the university as to provide “a range of communications, marketing,
fundraising and alumni relations support services designed to help the University to achieve its
strategic goals” (http://www.liv.ac.uk/corpcomms/). The website also states that the department
responsible for communication is involved in raising the profile of the University internally and
externally, developing communication and media strategies that promote core University
activities. This includes management of corporate events and marketing communications
activities in order to build strong relationships with key institutional stakeholders.

2012
The department of Corporate Communication and Marketing (CC&M) at the University of
Pretoria (http://web.up.ac.za/default.asp?ipkCategoryID=5836) is responsible for the “marketing
of the University of Pretoria, as well as for internal and external communication with
stakeholders in support of the University’s endeavours of becoming a world-class teaching and
research tertiary institution”. The department is also responsible for creating and managing a
comprehensive and integrated strategic marketing communications programme that includes:
advertising, function and event-management, internal communication strategies, media liaison,
production of promotional materials and university-wide publications and stakeholder
relationship management.
It is the organisation of the corporate communication function at the Heriot-Watt University that
has most striking features (http://www.hw.ac.uk/ppr/index.htm). At Heriot-Watt University the
Corporate Communication Office is a division of Corporate Affairs and Management Services. It
is responsible for media management and public relations, university publications, monitoring
and commissioning University photography, providing general information and up-to-date news
about Heriot-Watt University, managing the corporate University website, and taking a leading
role in developing University web strategy, managing the University’s visual identity and brand.
Its role also involves co-ordinating major university events, co-ordinating community relations
activities, developing effective internal communications including distributing Heriot-Watt news
via the News and Events electronic Newsletter and staff magazine Network. Staff in this office
are also responsible for “providing professional support and guidance to members of the
University in their marketing, promotional and everyday workplace communications”, managing
corporate resources including exhibition, display, information and publicity materials. The
department has a comprehensive communication policy for staff members to communicate
effectively. Their communication policy outlines the following:
a) General complaints procedures providing a platform for members of the public to voice
their concerns about the university

2012
b) Corporate identity guidelines for members of the staff to know how best to engage and
respond to media services
c) Web guidelines
d) Visual identity procedures
e) The university brand guidelines which act as a communication toolkit to members of the
university staff providing the house style in all communications. The University Brand
Guidelines describe key themes, specific messaging guidelines and target audiences. The
policy also outlines best practices when communicating at and for the university by staff
members and students: tone of voice in verbal communication, effective words, writing
the brand, style guide including the use of brand elements like the logo, positioning of the
logo, corporate palette for staff and students, typefaces, photography guidelines, image
library, image use, web design and interface (http://www.hw.ac.uk).
2.5. Themesassociatedwithcorporatecommunication
Central to corporate communication are the following themes: corporate identity, corporate
strategy, corporate image, corporate reputation and communication strategy, mission, vision and
values of an organisation.
2.5.1 Corporateidentity
Corporate identity refers to the profile and values communicated by an organization over time
(Cornelissen 2004). Van Riel (1992:30) identified a number of definitions of corporate identity
by various scholars. Below are three of them:
Corporate identity is the strategically planned and operationally applied internal and external self-
presentation and behaviour of a company. It is based on an agreed company philosophy, long-term
company goals, and a particular desired image, combined with the will to utilise all instruments of
the company as one unit, both internally and externally, Birkigt and Stadler (1986)

2012
The definition above emphasises an ‘agreed’ organisational philosophy which suggests a strategy
of using all communication tools as a single unit to project an organisation to its stakeholders.
This definition concurs with the one given below:
Corporate identity is the sum of all methods of portrayal which the company uses to present itself
to [stakeholders] (Antonoff, 1985).
For most organisations, communication is that which they say to their environments through
spoken and written methods. However, corporate identity communications goes beyond that, it
includes non-verbal and other extra linguistic communications:
Corporate identity embodies, besides all visual expressions, also all non-visual expressions and
behaviour in the social, economic and political field (Henrion, 1980).
2.5.2. Corporateimage
This is the immediate set of associations of an individual in response to one or more signals or
messages from or about a particular organization at a single point in time. Healy (1969) contends
that the corporate image is not a possession of the company but rather the impression which exists in
the minds of other people.
Broomley (2001) defined a firm’s image as ‘the internal collective state of mind that underlies its
corporate communications efforts (successful or not) to present itself to others’. In contrast of
perspective and understanding, Whetten and Mackey (2002: 401) observe that an image is “that
organizational agents want their external stakeholders to understand and is most central, enduring
and distinctive about their organization.” Therefore image can be understood as an external not
internal element of the organization. It manifests itself through other people’s reactions to what the
organization does.
2.5.3. Corporatereputation
An individual’s collective representation of past images of an organization (induced through
either communication or past experiences) established over time. Companies have become very

2012
sensitive about their reputation. Reputation has more depth and is more involving, it is a
judgment from the market which needs to be preserved. Reputation signals that although the
company has many different stakeholders, each one reacting to a specific facet of the company
(as employee, as supplier, as financial investor, as client), they are all sensitive to the ability of
the company to meet the expectations of all its stakeholders. Marketing the reputation of the
name among other methods, the communication of the corporate brand is aimed at making the
company their first choice.
2.5.4. Stakeholders/ Publics
This refers to any group or individuals who can affect or is affected by the achievement of the
organization’s objectives. The word stakeholders can be interchangeably used as publics.
Cornelissen (2004) defines stakeholders as “persons or groups with legitimate interests in aspects
of corporate activity; and they are identified by these interests whether the corporation has any
direct economic interests in them or not.” In the same vein, Freeman cited in Cornelissen (2004),
identify stakeholders as “any group or individual who can affect or is affected by the
achievement of the organization’s purpose and objectives.” Grunig J.E (1992) who contends
that, “publics can refer to any group, with some common characteristics with which an
organization needs to communicate with.” Business Dictionary, (2007) defines a stakeholder as
“a person, group or organization that has direct or indirect stake in an organization because it can
affect or be affected by the organization's actions, objectives, and policies”. For universities these
are students, government, captains of industry and commerce, other universities and affiliate
colleges.
2.5.5. Mission
This is an overriding purpose in line with the values or expectations of stakeholders. Philip
Kotler (1972:291) defines a company’s mission statement as “a broad statement that explains the
reason for the existence of the organization and should form the strategic plan.” In the vein
Cornelissen (ibid) points out that a mission is “a general expression of the overriding purpose of
the organization, which, ideally, is in line with the values and expectations of major stakeholders

2012
and concerned with the scope and boundaries of the organization.” For MSU these are provided
in chapter four.
2.5.6. Vision
Desired future state: the aspiration of the organization. A vision or a strategic intent is, as
Cornelissen (2004) notes, “the desired future state of the organization.” In other words a vision
espouses an overall aspiration and a general direction in which an organization wants to go as set
by senior management (dominant alliance). As a result it deserves the energies and commitment
of the members of an organization to actively work towards the same direction. (see chapter
four).
2.5.7. Corporateobjectivesandgoals
This refers to a precise statement of aims or purpose of a company. Strategies involve actions
and communications that are linked to objectives, and are often specified in terms of specific
organizational functions (e.g., finance operations, human resources, etc.).
2.5.8. Strategy
These are the ways or means in which the corporate objectives are to be achieved and put into
effect. Ac cited in Steyn (2002), Robert (1997:22) strategy could be seen as the thinking, the
logic behind the actions. Drucker (1954) as cited in Steyn (2002) sees it as an indication of an
organisation’s positioning for the future, deciding what should be done rather than how it should
be done. Strategy requires choices—deciding what particular kind of value an organisation wants
to deliver to whom. Communication strategies are planned efforts undertaken by corporate
communicators and management to address specific objectives of the organisations.
2.6. Governanceofinstitutionsoflearning
Merriam Webster dictionary describes governance as made up of “persons (or committees or
departments etc.) who make up a body for the purpose of administering...” The United Negro
College Fund (www.uncf.org) says governance:

2012
is the manner in which institutions organize themselves to manage and distribute their resources,
to resolve conflicts among competing actors and to effectively achieve their mission.
This concept is linked to corporate governance which is defined in the OECD Principles of
Corporate Governance which states that:
Corporate governance involves a set of relationships between a company’s management, its board,
its shareholders and other stakeholders. Corporate governance also provides the structure through
which the objectives of the company are set, and the means of attaining those objectives and
monitoring performance are determined.
Though governance and management are different with regard to private corporations, this
research will refer to governance of higher education to mean the organization of internal
governance composed of a council, a governing board, the university executive team,
administrative staff, senate, academic deans, department chairpersons, administrative and
specific committees and student representation as well as staff who are responsible for meeting
the organization’s objectives through delivery. Management and governance in post-secondary
institutions refers to the manner in which colleges and universities are organized and managed.
This involves developing and sustaining key relationships with multiple actors and stakeholders
and channelling everyone’s efforts towards a common goal. Though Kezar and Eckel (2004) see
university governance as a broader term that goes beyond internal management of campus this
research will treat governance as internal management and organization of university affairs
aiming at satisfying its various stakeholders.
2.7. Theoretical framework
2.7.1. Agendasettingandgate-keepingtheories
Agenda setting describes a powerful influence of the media; their ability to influence audiences
on what issues are important for discussion. David Manning White (1950) submits that agenda
setting refers to the power to give or withhold access of information to different voices in
society. Primary sketches of the theory were outlined by Walter Lippmann in his 1922

2012
archetypical topic, Public Opinion, with a chapter, “The World Outside and the Pictures in Our
Heads” in which he stressed the power of the media to present images to the public. McCombs
and Shaw who investigated presidential campaigns in USA in 1968, 1972 and 1976 focused on
two elements: awareness and information. Agenda-setting is the creation of public awareness
and concern of salient issues by the media where the media agenda becomes the agenda for the
public.
In line with agenda setting there comes the gate keeping theory, priming and framing of issues in
communication media. In this case it can be argued that the press and the media do not reflect
reality; they filter information through ‘gates’ and shape it in line with control and ownership as
well as contexts of communication resources. At the same time media concentration on some
issues and subjects while relegating others leads the public to perceive those issues as more
important than other issues. Cohen (1963: 45) stated “The press may not be successful much of
the time in telling people what to think, but it is stunningly successful in telling its readers what
to think about.” Lazarsfield (1948) suggested that the theory describes the power of the media to
structure issues.
Using the agenda setting theory, corporate communication will enable an organization to define
and communicate who they are and what they believe in. It will enable them to honestly spot and
work to close the gaps between their beliefs and their performance. Corporate communicators
can use this theory to set the agenda for stakeholders while at the same time, mobilising their
opinions for strategic innovations. In the end, this makes an organization a better, more
successful one. Reputation is not an ‘asset’ in the traditional sense but an invaluable intangible
asset which cannot be owned by an organization. Reputation resides in the minds of a varied
collections of stakeholders and ‘influencers’ whose influence is based on direct customer
experiences, employee advocacy, direct and indirect communication (Eisenmann, 2005). An
institution can make use of the theories of agenda setting and gate keeping by giving priority to
information that best serve the corporate goals.

2012
This can only happen if the corporate communication function is part of the executive team so as
to come up with strategic messages that toe the line of strategic decisions. Simpson (2004) noted
that corporate communication is part of the ‘warp and weft of [an organization’s] life and who
we are.’ On university life, Simpson (2004:24) says:
Communication issues surround every discussion or decision that a university takes and obvious
problems arise when the agenda forgets to respect or understand its omnipresence.
Communications are much about what not to say as what to say, what to defer as much as what to
publicise, what to lobby for, and when to hold one’s tongue.
In this case communication is not a separate subject to be tacked on at the end as a tool but
should be included when setting the agenda or strategic decisions of an institution.
Communication goes with business; it manages the corporate story (Larse, 2000) as cited in
Gutierrez-Garcia (2008). Gutierrez-Garcia (2008) argues that corporate communication
practitioners help to shape the reality of an organization by influencing public opinion. This is
because an organization and stakeholders share a common public sphere (Gutierrez-Garcia,
2008). The company’s success depends, as a result, on adjustment to the expectation and
demands of publics.
2.7.2. Strategicmanagementroleandthe excellencemodel ofpublicrelations
As cited by Steyn (2002) Greene, Adam & Ebert (1985:536) define strategic management as:
a continuous process of thinking through the current mission of the organisation,
thinking through the current environmental conditions, and then combining these
elements by setting forth a guide for tomorrow’s decisions and results.
Strategic management focuses on strategic decisions which deal with the determination of
strategy, provide the definition of the business and the general relationship between the
organisation and its environment. A key concept in this process is ‘strategy’, the organisation’s
pre-selected means or approach to achieving its goals and objectives while coping with current
and future external conditions (Digman 1990 cited in Steyn 2002).The question of how relevant

2012
corporate communication is to the achievement of organizational goals is answered by Grunig’s
Excellence model of public relations. The model is made up of a number of elements such as
strategic management, the situational theory of publics, practitioner roles, the organisation of the
public relations function, and internal communication.
Strategic management perspective focuses on the participation of public relations executives in
strategic decision-making so that they can help manage the behaviour of organisations. While
strategic management theorists may treat strategic constituencies as a threat to organisational
performance, Van den Bosch and Van Riel, (1998) in Hubner (2007) view public relations as a
bridging, rather than a buffering, function—between stakeholders and the organisation by
linking them to management. The strategic management paradigm emphasises two-way
communication of many kinds to provide publics a voice in management decisions and to
facilitate dialogue between management and publics both before and after decisions are made.
This refers to a process of an organisation listening to its strategic environment through
environmental scanning. Some theorists argue that the problem with PR is its failure to prove
effectiveness and its value to top management; therefore PR practitioners need to engage in
research both to diagnose issues in the environment as well as monitoring and evaluating their
activities through continuous research. Corporate communication according to this perspective
refers to the process of mediation between top management or ‘dominant coalition’ (Grunig
2001) and stakeholders.
Cited in Hubner, (2007: 12), Grunig et al, (2002:11) states that “for public relations to be
excellent, public relations must be viewed as symmetrical, idealistic and critical, and
managerial.’ Writing on public relations strategic role Grunig (2002: 11) explains:
To be symmetrical means that organisations have the worldview that public relations practitioners
serve the interests of both sides of relationships while still advocating the interests of the
organisations.... To be idealistic and critical means that public relations practitioners have the
freedom to advocate the interests of publics to management and to criticize management decisions
that affect publics adversely. To be managerial means that public relations fulfils the managerial

2012
role of negotiating and mediating the conflict that occurs between management and strategic
publics.
This suggests a considerable autonomy for corporate communication departments.
Gerstein (2008) cites Girsky who says “If you want to know how a company communicates,
understand how it manages. If you want to know how a company manages, understand how it
communicates.” This suggests that the relationships of management and employees are central to
the organization’s ability to authentically tell its story and that internal communications are
external. The research is pinned on the assumption that brand communication must be consistent
and that management and its employees apart from products and services are the brand, thus the
institution’s values must find expression through service delivery which entails the use of
strategic communications.
2.7.3. ThePressAgentryModel
The Press Agentry model was propounded in the 1850’s by Barnum. He stated that PR activities
seek to attract the attention of the media and advocate for positive publicity for the organisation. In
this model, practice of corporate communication is done through seeking of media attention in
almost any way possible. It describes the propaganda element of PR. It is almost in line with the
propaganda model that seeks to persuade people’s personal opinions. Grunig (1989) observed that
those who practice the press agentry model believe that truth is not essential and the sole purpose is
to get favourable publicity from the media. It employs Agenda-Setting to make people focus on the
positive aspects of the organisation only and to influence the people’s personal opinions which
collectively amount to public opinion. Corporate communicators in organisations approach their
work using this model by way of press briefings and writing press releases to media outlets.
2.7.4. Two-wayasymmetrical
The two-way asymmetrical model uses research to develop messages that are likely to persuade
strategic publics to behave as the organization wants. The organization itself does not change its own
behaviour. This model has an element of feedback but is largely one way. Thus the model sees

2012
public relations as a dialogue dominated by the organization. As a result of the fact that the two-way
asymmetrical model uses scientific research on the attitudes of publics, it more often achieves its
objectives than do press agentry or public information models. This model works well with Herle &
Rustema’s definition of corporate communication as provided in the literature review above, which
puts the organisation as the sole initiator of communication. It also falls in the effects tradition of
communication and media theories.
2.7.5. TheTwo-waysymmetrical model
Grunig, 2002 suggests that excellent communication programs are anchored on two-way
symmetrical model of communication instead of press agentry, public information, or two-way
asymmetrical models. Two-way symmetrical model emphasises that corporate communicators try to
balance the interests of the organisation with those of the stakeholders through research. Research in
this case becomes an instrument of listening to stakeholders and communication with management
to manage issues and conflicts with strategic stakeholders. It uses the dialogical form of
communication. Apart from it being a better communication model that establishes sustainable
long-term relationships with stakeholders, Grunig argues that “symmetrical programmes generally
are conducted ethically than are other models.”
Basing on this model, corporate communicators engage in dialogue and negotiation with
stakeholders and management for the benefit of all. Unlike in other models mentioned above,
corporate communicators who operate within the parameters of two-way symmetrical models
become excellent in that they do not only function as information sources to the public, but also act
as a bridge that brings together stakeholders and management. Instead of telling the organisation’s
story only, this model provides that corporate communicators be responsible to stakeholders by not
manipulating them through pervasive organization-centric communication only, but to ethically and
socially seek their acceptance of the organisation’s innovations.
Guided by this model, this study will be effective as it seeks to establish if two-way communication
exists in activities of IPR at MSU in meeting communication objectives as well as contributing to the

2012
university’s effectiveness in both decision formulation and delivery. Two-way model will help the
researcher identify the importance of corporate communication and the nature of communication
strategies employed by corporate communicators at the institution. Existence of two-way
communication corroborates the link that is necessarily important between corporate communication
activities and management in organisations as (Grunig, Grunig and Dozier 2002: 4-5) contends:
Public relations managers who are part of the dominant coalition communicate the views of
publics to other senior managers, and they must communicate with publics to be able to do so.
They also communicate to other senior managers the likely consequences of policy decisions after
communicating with publics affected by the potential policy.
2.7.6. Lasswell’smodel ofcommunication
The model stresses that a source (sender) transmits information (a message) through a channel
(medium) to an audience on whom the message can have an effect. Lasswell’s model is
summarized in the question; who says what in which channel to whom with what effect. This
perspective on communication falls in the sender-message-channel-receiver paradigm. For the
purposes of this study, the model becomes handy in that, the researcher is enabled to study the
nature and status of the communicators at MSU, the type of messages they disseminate, the tools
or channels they use to get their messages across, the relevance of stakeholders addressed by
corporate communicators at each given time they communicate. While the model goes on to the
effects of communication, this study will only focus on the four first elements of the model.
2.7.7. Two-stepflowtheoryofcommunication
Cited in Windahl, Signitzer & Oslon ( 2009: 80) Rodgers 1987: 79 defines communication as “a
process in which participants create and share information with one another to reach a mutual
understanding.” The two step flow theory of communication was formulated by Lazarsfeld and
Kartz (1955) to explain how individuals receive information from the mass media and how
information moves from one point to the other within a communication context. The model
describes the process messages spread through the media and interpersonal channels from source
to receiver. Rodgers (1983) cited in Windahl (1996) identifies the two steps as composed of

2012
firstly the transfer of information from the source to the opinion leader and secondly as the
transfer of influence from the opinion leader to the opinion followers. The model posits that
audiences are social beings who communicate among themselves and are more or less influential
in many contexts. The theory informs this research in that corporate communication is a form of
planned communication which requires communication planners to take advantage of this model
by actively identifying the two steps and enlists support of opinion leaders who capture
messages, process them and disseminate them to opinion followers.
Cited in Windahl (1996) McCombs and Becker (1979) view the interaction between
interpersonal discussions and reception of mediated communication as cyclic in that people learn
about events or issues from the media and this stimulates them to discuss it with other people. De
Fleur (1962:262) as cited in Windahl, Signitzer & Oslon (2009: 83) describes the social context
in which such a model can work. He says:
An important information content or subject matter exists to which the opinion leader has greater
access than other [members in a social context]. By controlling the transmission and interpretation
of this information to the group he can influence decisions and consensus within the group
regarding the content.
What is important here is the communicator’s manipulation of the trust the audiences have in the
opinion leader. So the communication planner in most cases needs to strive for control over the
process by identifying and reaching opinion leaders. This theory also implies that the opinion
follower must be motivated to seek information from the opinion leader while the opinion leader
must find it worthwhile to provide such information. In the case of corporate communication, the
corporate communication department or PR Director may engage management staff to come up
with communication content, he/she identifies and gathers together opinion leaders representing
different sections of the organization; in a more interpersonal or face to face context and
provides information and urge them to spread it to colleagues and or their constituencies. The
point here is that at a university staff representing different units, faculties, divisions and
departments may be influenced with the institution’s brand values which they can use to

2012
influence their fellow, students, parents and even their friends when they discuss about work in
different settings. In an organizational setting the mass media refers to newsletters, pamphlets,
reports, websites, prospectuses, social media platforms, intranet facility, notice boards, memos,
emails and speeches among many other internal communications that seek to establish the
institutional brand image. The organization’s communications practitioners may use this to
inform opinion leaders (staff and management) and motivate them to further the University
communications.
Conclusion
This chapter defined corporate communication and laid boundaries of the usage of the term and
practice of corporate communication. The chapter also focused on the theories that explain the
factors that impact on the practice of corporate communication. Both the theoretical framework
and literature review helped to show how corporate communication theories and practice meet.
While the theoretical framework has outlined how corporate communication works, the literature
review has provided examples of the practice in other organisations including universities at
international and regional levels.

2012
CHAPTER 3:RESEARCH METHODS ANDMETHODOLOGY
3.1. Introduction
This chapter presents and discusses the means, methods and tools used in this study to achieve
research objectives and answer the questions raised in chapter one. It also explains how the data
presented herein was gathered. To get down to the practice of corporate communication at MSU,
the researcher had to work within a framework of research methodology and techniques. Some
of the objectives of this study were to show how the communication function is organized within
the system of governance of the university affairs and to establish perceptions of the role and
importance of corporate communication by the University management team.
Achieving these objectives and answering research questions was not just a theoretical exercise.
As much as there are a number of theoretical standpoints from which to approach corporate
communication, there is also a variety of research tools available to communication researchers.
Hilde Van den Bulck (2002: 55) observed, “using these tools...requires a certain methodological
rigour.” It is also important to note that different research topics require different research
methodologies and techniques and that “every research method has its own rules of the game,
which the ... researcher is required to follow” (Hilde Van den Bulck, 2002: 55). For this study to
produce acceptable data, this chapter provides the main tools central to communication research
stating their main approaches in respect to best practices and importance to the study.
Research can be approached from various paradigms depending on the field of research.
Scientific studies emphasise on empirical evidence and accuracy since the scientific paradigm
“aims at the best description of characteristics (ontology), methods and practices (praxiology),
and causes and consequences (epistemology) of phenomena for the purpose of prediction,
control and understanding” so as to benefit humanity and society (Hilde Van den Bulck (2002:
58). With particular regard to communication research, Melody and Mansell (1983) cited in
Hilde Van den Bulck (2002: 58), argue that emphasis “lie not with empirical evidence as such
but with decision as to what questions will be asked, what kind of data will be sought, how it will
be gathered, and to what use it will be put.” This shows differences in paradigms researchers can

2012
adopt for enquiry in particular fields of study. A paradigm according to Kuhn (1996) is
universally recognized scientific achievements that, for a time, provide model problems and
solutions for a community of researchers.” In other words it is a “worldview or conceptual model
shared by members of a scholarly community that determines how enquiry within the
community should be conducted” (Hilde Van den Bulck (2002: 58). Therefore paradigms serve
to provide the basis of how and what questions are worth asking as well as what kind of data are
required to provide ‘acceptable’ answers to research questions. This study considers a number of
paradigms that are relevant to communication research especially to understanding how
corporate communication works in higher institutions of learning in Zimbabwe.
3.2. Research design
Gray (2009:131) defines a research design as “the overarching plan for the collection,
measurement and analysis of data”. A research design therefore describes the purpose of the
study and the kinds of questions the research is addressing, the techniques to be used for
collecting data and the ways the data are going to be analysed. Green and Tull (2010) note that,
“a research design is the specification of methods and procedures for acquiring the information
needed. It is the over-all operational pattern or framework of the project that stipulates what
information is to be collected from which source by what procedures”
(www.managementparadise.com/forums/marketing-research/206790-definiton accessed on 26
February 2012). Research objectives and questions have been provided in chapter one.
3.2.1. Casestudyas researchdesign
In trying to understand and establish the place of corporate communication in the governance of
institutions of higher learning in Zimbabwe, the researcher used the case study of the Midlands
State University. A case study presents the analysis of a single unit which can be an event, an
organisation or an aspect of organisational function (Polonsky and Waller 2005). Yin (2003: 13)
defines the case study as:
...an empirical inquiry that:
 Investigates a contemporary phenomenon within its real-life context, especially when

final dissertation pambuka

Empfohlen

Empfohlen

Weitere ähnliche Inhalte

Was ist angesagt?

Was ist angesagt? (20)

Ähnlich wie final dissertation pambuka

Ähnlich wie final dissertation pambuka (20)

final dissertation pambuka