Symmetrical Theory and the Excellence Study
As the chart on the left clearly shows, one of the main functions found throughout the Excellence Study of Grunig was finding publics that were related to an organization. The purpose in doing so would be to consider the opinions of all stakeholders before moving towards a specific goal. The belief was that by creating a system of communication that allowed for the free flow if information between both an organization and its constituents was that this would ultimately produce the best results within an organization. Specifically, this would provide for:
Aside from the said, this work of Grunig would also allow for the inclusion of the previously mentioned models of his work to operate in a symmetrical way, thus facilitating an approach that both met the needs of the company while still allowing for the wider audience at large to have their voice heard. As a result, applying this approach would allow customer and clients to be more satisfied and this would reduce any potential litigation and/or crises that may occur due to a sense of being "left out of the loop".
Note: click on the above chart to enlarge
- more satisfied employees
- more involved customers and consumers
Aside from the said, this work of Grunig would also allow for the inclusion of the previously mentioned models of his work to operate in a symmetrical way, thus facilitating an approach that both met the needs of the company while still allowing for the wider audience at large to have their voice heard. As a result, applying this approach would allow customer and clients to be more satisfied and this would reduce any potential litigation and/or crises that may occur due to a sense of being "left out of the loop".
Note: click on the above chart to enlarge
Analysis of Issues of James Grunig
Grunig’s take on power and strategic management
“Power is often described as a capacity, or something possessed, that allows one to get things done or to get others to do what you want them to do” (Grunig, 1992, lauren & Dozier, 1992). Recognizing that, Grunig believed very strongly that if any organization was going to operate successfully, management must delegate and exercise its authority in a manner that considers the voices of its subordinates. In doing so, those who are in a position of power will seek out and attempt to balance the opinions of the many public that are involved in such an endeavor. Integral to this plan is the use of public relations which would act as "the management of communication between an organization and its publics”(Grunig and Hunt, 1984, p.6-8).
From this compressed view of Grunig’s theory, we can see that there is an attempt at a certain democratic way of governing an organization. It rests on the hope that if everyone agrees, and if all ideas are heard and considered, then new and better ideas can emerge that are even better than those that could have been promulgated by a minority in power. It does not seek to control nor does it seek to appease all stakeholders; it simply seeks to offer a chance for all choices to be heard.
One of the newest and most recent examples of this mentality is the implementation of blogs and other social networking tools into use within an organization. In this model, management has an opportunity to present its ideas and give explanation of how it would like to proceed and advance its plans while giving the opportunity for whose working under them to have their voices heard in an open forum.
Conversely, one can see that inherent within such an edifice is an aversion to management. This is not to say that Grunig was against management, but more specifically, a dominant coalition. In general, when getting down to the nuts and bolts of the two-way symmetrical theory, we can see that crises occur within organizations when there is a perceived slight to a particular population. In the words of Grunig, “ [practitioners should] identify potential problems in the relationship and define the categories of stakeholders that are affected by the problem” (H-H and Neff, p. 13)
Grunig’s take on ethics
Although considered by many to be one of the greatest minds within the field, Grunig’s work does very little to address the aspect of ethics. At his own admission, Grunig admitted that his literature was focused on output rather than ethics (Porter, p.129). As such, Grunig provides very little specific guidance as to how a PR practitioner should conduct himself, only that one must be tuned into the values, beliefs, and views of varied publics (Bowen, pg. 162). Be that as it may, in his excellence theory and embedded within the fundamentals of the two-way symmetrical theory is a sense of fairness and balance, ergo, any communication that would transpire would be ethical (Grunig et al, p.308).
Personally, I find this area of Grunig’s work to be highly presumptuous and overly idealistic. Simply stated, an edifice that does not specifically address an aspect of a certain field does not, nor should it, have the ability to assert that it has going to have any immediate impact on an issue. To say that because everyone’s opinion would be hypothetically heard and considered within an organization does not guarantee that any preferential treatment or bias would not be given to certain groups. In the real world, specific measures are put into place that not only clarify and spell out for management and staff how ethical behavior should look like, it is a requirement of their employment to comply with such policies. And although instances of corruption and abuses do still occur, measures have put in place that have at least ensured a certain level of ethical behavior.
Managing relationships
A critical part of Grunig’s work has been spent on how to manage relationships with publics. In his work, not only has he spent time exploring how to maintain and care for relationships, but also how to stop and prevent crises where they may occur. Be that as it may, a major motivation for this work has been a call for justification of the necessity of public relations officials within organizations. As such, to validate the Return on Investment (ROI) for such a vocation, Grunig has identified six key elements that make for lasting healthy relationships between constituencies: trust; mutuality of control; commitment; satisfaction; exchange relationship; and communal relationships. Taking those into account, Grunig asserts that these relationship building strategies will benefit a company in the following way:
Reducing the costs of litigation, regulation, legislation, pressure campaigns, boycotts, or lost revenue that resulted from bad relationships. Public relations also helps the organization make money by cultivating relationships with donors, consumers, shareholders, and legislators who are needed to support organizational goals. (p.14)
This area of Grunig’s work, in my estimation, is where his genius really expresses himself. With a firm foundation in two-way symmetrical theories and his excellence theory in hand, Grunig’s work has given legs to an industry that has been in dire need of a clarification of its contribution to industry. In a world that has been shaped by downsizing and labor cuts and an upswing in litigation and conflict resolution specialists invading the field, Grunig’s work here shines a light on the need for genuine in-house public relations specialists.
“Power is often described as a capacity, or something possessed, that allows one to get things done or to get others to do what you want them to do” (Grunig, 1992, lauren & Dozier, 1992). Recognizing that, Grunig believed very strongly that if any organization was going to operate successfully, management must delegate and exercise its authority in a manner that considers the voices of its subordinates. In doing so, those who are in a position of power will seek out and attempt to balance the opinions of the many public that are involved in such an endeavor. Integral to this plan is the use of public relations which would act as "the management of communication between an organization and its publics”(Grunig and Hunt, 1984, p.6-8).
From this compressed view of Grunig’s theory, we can see that there is an attempt at a certain democratic way of governing an organization. It rests on the hope that if everyone agrees, and if all ideas are heard and considered, then new and better ideas can emerge that are even better than those that could have been promulgated by a minority in power. It does not seek to control nor does it seek to appease all stakeholders; it simply seeks to offer a chance for all choices to be heard.
One of the newest and most recent examples of this mentality is the implementation of blogs and other social networking tools into use within an organization. In this model, management has an opportunity to present its ideas and give explanation of how it would like to proceed and advance its plans while giving the opportunity for whose working under them to have their voices heard in an open forum.
Conversely, one can see that inherent within such an edifice is an aversion to management. This is not to say that Grunig was against management, but more specifically, a dominant coalition. In general, when getting down to the nuts and bolts of the two-way symmetrical theory, we can see that crises occur within organizations when there is a perceived slight to a particular population. In the words of Grunig, “ [practitioners should] identify potential problems in the relationship and define the categories of stakeholders that are affected by the problem” (H-H and Neff, p. 13)
Grunig’s take on ethics
Although considered by many to be one of the greatest minds within the field, Grunig’s work does very little to address the aspect of ethics. At his own admission, Grunig admitted that his literature was focused on output rather than ethics (Porter, p.129). As such, Grunig provides very little specific guidance as to how a PR practitioner should conduct himself, only that one must be tuned into the values, beliefs, and views of varied publics (Bowen, pg. 162). Be that as it may, in his excellence theory and embedded within the fundamentals of the two-way symmetrical theory is a sense of fairness and balance, ergo, any communication that would transpire would be ethical (Grunig et al, p.308).
Personally, I find this area of Grunig’s work to be highly presumptuous and overly idealistic. Simply stated, an edifice that does not specifically address an aspect of a certain field does not, nor should it, have the ability to assert that it has going to have any immediate impact on an issue. To say that because everyone’s opinion would be hypothetically heard and considered within an organization does not guarantee that any preferential treatment or bias would not be given to certain groups. In the real world, specific measures are put into place that not only clarify and spell out for management and staff how ethical behavior should look like, it is a requirement of their employment to comply with such policies. And although instances of corruption and abuses do still occur, measures have put in place that have at least ensured a certain level of ethical behavior.
Managing relationships
A critical part of Grunig’s work has been spent on how to manage relationships with publics. In his work, not only has he spent time exploring how to maintain and care for relationships, but also how to stop and prevent crises where they may occur. Be that as it may, a major motivation for this work has been a call for justification of the necessity of public relations officials within organizations. As such, to validate the Return on Investment (ROI) for such a vocation, Grunig has identified six key elements that make for lasting healthy relationships between constituencies: trust; mutuality of control; commitment; satisfaction; exchange relationship; and communal relationships. Taking those into account, Grunig asserts that these relationship building strategies will benefit a company in the following way:
Reducing the costs of litigation, regulation, legislation, pressure campaigns, boycotts, or lost revenue that resulted from bad relationships. Public relations also helps the organization make money by cultivating relationships with donors, consumers, shareholders, and legislators who are needed to support organizational goals. (p.14)
This area of Grunig’s work, in my estimation, is where his genius really expresses himself. With a firm foundation in two-way symmetrical theories and his excellence theory in hand, Grunig’s work has given legs to an industry that has been in dire need of a clarification of its contribution to industry. In a world that has been shaped by downsizing and labor cuts and an upswing in litigation and conflict resolution specialists invading the field, Grunig’s work here shines a light on the need for genuine in-house public relations specialists.
Opposing Theorists of Grunig
It goes without saying that James Grunig is, at the very least, one of the greatest public relations minds of the 20th century. His work has shaped and influenced countless scholars and has set into motion either directly or indirectly, an untold number of workplace policies that are now considered commonplace in the working environment. That said, his work is not thought to be free of flaws and and glitches. The following will take you through some of the main areas of debate about his work that currently exist.
Obliteration Effect and Practical Relevance
First and foremost, there seems to be a belief that perhaps the reason that Grunig’s work gets so much attention and that his ideas have had such staying power in the field was no accident. In fact, research has suggested that due to the fact that the IABC has spent upwards of 400,000 dollars for Grunig to establish and produce his findings, a certain “obliteration effect” (Hoy, p.197) has occurred where other theorists are not given the same credence for their own findings. And while this has not been explicitly stated, it seems that to a certain extent, his worked is given credit even when numerous reports have shown that his work is either impractical or even harmful when applied in a professional environment specifically because of its unwillingness to recognize a centralized source for decision making beyond its all encompassing Excellence Theory. Not surprisingly, a growing body of evidence also suggests that Grunig’s work is much too idealistic to be applied. This finding has casted doubt on the profession’s value as a whole; consequently, communicators are not readily admitted into the inner-circle of strategic decision-makers (Batchelor, p.13).
As an individual who has worked in the field and played an active role in managing the flow of communication between stakeholders, one thing that has been true in every instance is that at some point, someone has to make a decision. And whether good or bad, just or unjust, fair or unfair, not everyone who is a stakeholder can have their voice heard and included. The sheer volume of requests and ideas alone would inundate a company with demands and would render any sort of strategic plan impotent. As such, while applying parts of Grunig’s theories seems plausible, taking it in its fullest form seems not only unrealistic, but also foolish.
Steady evolution away from metanarratives
As mentioned in Holtzhausen’s work, a slow but steady march towards a postmodern approach is currently taking place in the field of public relations. And while this may still be in it’s “infancy” (Holtzhausen, p.254), a growing consensus is being reached where metanarratives no longer serve as the cure-all for issues in communication. In days gone by, one could look to theories to be able to establish a certain edifice in which to construct the specifics of how communication is applied in a professional setting. Now, however, theorists and practitioners alike are now being asked to constantly critique themselves and to consider new ways of doing things (Holtzhausen, p.256). Ironically, in as much as Grunig believed that free communication between all publics would facilitate the best ideas being put forth in a company, postmodernists now also believe that that is the very reason why metanarratives are unnecessary: no reliance upon a construct to color your ideas working in concert with dialogue will inevitably allow the best ideas to surface.
First and foremost, there seems to be a belief that perhaps the reason that Grunig’s work gets so much attention and that his ideas have had such staying power in the field was no accident. In fact, research has suggested that due to the fact that the IABC has spent upwards of 400,000 dollars for Grunig to establish and produce his findings, a certain “obliteration effect” (Hoy, p.197) has occurred where other theorists are not given the same credence for their own findings. And while this has not been explicitly stated, it seems that to a certain extent, his worked is given credit even when numerous reports have shown that his work is either impractical or even harmful when applied in a professional environment specifically because of its unwillingness to recognize a centralized source for decision making beyond its all encompassing Excellence Theory. Not surprisingly, a growing body of evidence also suggests that Grunig’s work is much too idealistic to be applied. This finding has casted doubt on the profession’s value as a whole; consequently, communicators are not readily admitted into the inner-circle of strategic decision-makers (Batchelor, p.13).
As an individual who has worked in the field and played an active role in managing the flow of communication between stakeholders, one thing that has been true in every instance is that at some point, someone has to make a decision. And whether good or bad, just or unjust, fair or unfair, not everyone who is a stakeholder can have their voice heard and included. The sheer volume of requests and ideas alone would inundate a company with demands and would render any sort of strategic plan impotent. As such, while applying parts of Grunig’s theories seems plausible, taking it in its fullest form seems not only unrealistic, but also foolish.
Steady evolution away from metanarratives
As mentioned in Holtzhausen’s work, a slow but steady march towards a postmodern approach is currently taking place in the field of public relations. And while this may still be in it’s “infancy” (Holtzhausen, p.254), a growing consensus is being reached where metanarratives no longer serve as the cure-all for issues in communication. In days gone by, one could look to theories to be able to establish a certain edifice in which to construct the specifics of how communication is applied in a professional setting. Now, however, theorists and practitioners alike are now being asked to constantly critique themselves and to consider new ways of doing things (Holtzhausen, p.256). Ironically, in as much as Grunig believed that free communication between all publics would facilitate the best ideas being put forth in a company, postmodernists now also believe that that is the very reason why metanarratives are unnecessary: no reliance upon a construct to color your ideas working in concert with dialogue will inevitably allow the best ideas to surface.