LECTURE 2:
CORPORATE COMMUNICATION IN
HISTORICAL PERSPECTIVE
Stephen Bruyant-Langer November 7, 2011
LECTURE STRUCTURE
•  Historical background to communication management
•  Marketing and public relations in the twentieth century
•  Models of the relationship between marketing and public relations
•  The case for integration
•  The emergence of corporate communication
Historical Background to Communication Management
•  1897: Establishment of the corporation
•  Early twentieth century: corporations hired press agents to generate publicity and to
respond to journalists
•  1920-1930: organizations brought writers, publicists and advertising agents ‘inhouse’ ,and communication became more systematic and skilled
•  1960-70s: from Fordism to post-Fordism: models of mass production and mass
communication replaced by more focused communication towards specific publics,
customer groups or other stakeholders
•  1970s onwards: public activism towards large corporations, consumer scepticism about
products and choice, fragmentation of markets, call for ‘corporate citizenship’ of
corporations
Marketing and Public Relations in the Twentieth Century
Organizations came to recognize the need for
•  product publicity and communication support for products → marketing
•  dissemination of information to general public and government → public relations
•  Both the marketing and public relations disciplines have since those early days (1920s)
gone through considerable professional development, yet largely in their own separate
ways. Since the 1980s, however, organizations have increasingly started to bring these
two disciplines together again under the umbrella of a new management function that we
now know as corporate communication.
•  This trend towards ‘integrating’ marketing and public relations was noted by many in the
field, including Philip Kotler, one of the most influential marketing figures of modern
times. Kotler commented in the early 1990s: ’There is a genuine need to develop a new
paradigm in which these two subcultures [marketing and public relations] work most
effectively in the best interest of the organization and the publics it serves.’
Models of the Relationship between Marketing and
Public Relations
•  M and PR as distinct functions (reasons: markets versus publics, oneway asymmetrical vs. two-way symmetrical communication)
•  M and PR as distinct but overlapping functions (reasons: effectiveness of
marketing public relations (MPR), PR as complement and corrective to
M)
•  Integration between M and PR
Marketing and Public Relations Activities and their
Overlap
A = corporate advertising (advertising by a firm where the company, rather than its products or services, is
emphasized).
B = direct marketing (direct communication via post, telephone or e-mail to customers and prospects) and sales
promotions (tactics to engage the customer including discounting, coupons, guarantees, free gifts, competitions,
vouchers, demonstrations and bonus commission).
C = distribution and logistics, pricing and development of products
D = ‘corporate’ public relations (public relations activities towards ‘corporate’ stakeholders, which excludes customers
and prospects in a market); includes issues management, community relations, investor relations, media relations,
internal communication and public affairs.
E = ‘marketing’ public relations (the use of what are traditionally seen as public relations tools within marketing
programs); includes product publicity and sponsorship.
F = mass media advertising (advertising aimed at increasing awareness, favorability or sales of a company’s products
or services).
The Case for Integration
•  Development of the concept of Integrated Marketing Communications (IMC): ‘a
concept of marketing communications planning that recognizes the added value of a
comprehensive plan that evaluates the strategic roles of a variety of communications
disciplines (for example, general advertising, direct response, sales promotion, and
public relations) and combines these disciplines to provide clarity, consistency, and
maximum communications impact’ (e.g., Schultz andf Kitchen, 1997).
•  Corporate Communication (see definition lecture 1): there is a need for an integrated
managerial framework that ‘inserts the various communication disciplines into a holistic
perspective, drawing from the concepts, methodologies, crafts, experiences, and
artistries of marketing communication and public relations’ (Gronstedt, 1996: 302).
Drivers for Integration
Market and environment-based drivers
Stakeholder roles – needs and overlap
Societal and market demands
Increased competition – need for differentiation
Greater levels of audience communications literacy
Greater amounts of message clutter
Media and audience fragmentation
Organizational drivers
Improved efficiency (increasing profits)
Increased accountability
Provision of strategic direction and purpose through consolidation
Corporate/organizational positioning
Streamlining of activities in complex organizations (global, multi-national and/or multi-divisional businesses)
Communication-based drivers
Increased message effectiveness through consistency and reinforcement of core messages
Need to build corporate and/or brand reputations and to provide clear identity cues
Complementarity of communications techniques and media cost inflation
Media multiplication requires control of communication channels
The Emergence of Corporate Communication
•  Since the 1980s, communication disciplines have been consolidated in corporate
communication departments.
•  Organizations realized that communication had to be used more strategically to position
the organization in the minds of important stakeholder groups of the organization.
•  Since the early 1990s, organizations have started to become concerned with ideas
such as ‘corporate identity’, ‘corporate reputation’ and ‘corporate branding’ which
emphasize the importance of linking communication to the organization’s corporate
strategy as well as the importance of positioning the organization in the minds of
important stakeholders groups. The Figure displays this move from a tactical orientation
in communication to an orientation that emphasizes the strategic role of communication
in ‘positioning’ the organization. Obviously, when organizations adopt a strategic
perspective on communication and aim to build a distinctive reputation for their
organization, the activities of marketing and public relations practitioners need to be
actively coordinated so that messages to different stakeholders communicate the same
corporate values and image for the organization.
The Shift from a Tactical to Strategic
Orientation to Communication
Publicity
seeking
1900
Information
dissemination
1930/40s
TACTICAL
Relationship
management
1960/70s
→
Organizational
positioning
1980/90s 21st century
STRATEGIC
Example: BP
•  1920s/1930s: stylish adverts to publicize the BP name and link the brand
to some higher ideals – publicity seeking.
•  1940s/1950s: lobbying and mediation tactics to ease the company’s
relationships with the Iranian government -- information dissemination.
•  1980s/1990s: a greater emphasis on partnership with stakeholders and
on strategic business alliances -- relationship management.
•  1997 and beyond: proactive stance on climate change, new logo, BP has
positioned itself as a company that in a responsible and sustainable way
aims to meet the world's current and future energy needs -- organizational
positioning.
Summary
Historically, marketing and public relations were seen
as distinct, then as complementary, and finally as
integrated.
This move towards integration provides a stepping
stone for understanding the emergence of corporate
communication.
Corporate communication is a management framework
to guide and coordinate marketing communication and
public relations.
Corporate Communication as an Integrated
Framework for Managing Communication
Corporate
Communication
Public
Affairs
Issues
Manage
ment
Investor
Relation
s
Media
Relati
ons
Adver
tising
Internal
Commun
ication
Commun
ity
Relations
Publicity
/Sponsor
ship
Direct
Marke
ting
Sales
Promo
tions