Lerbinger O. Corporate Public Affairs. Interacting with Interest Groups, Media, and Government

Подождите немного. Документ загружается.

and involve such tactics as total resistance, bargaining, or capitulat

ing. With coping strategies, a company decides to take substantive

action to change its behavior.

5. Implementation. The overall plan is designed and executed, fol

lowing the outline of strategic campaign management described ear

lier. This outline includes evaluation as an essential component. The

actual results of a public affairs campaign or ongoing activities are

checked against stated objectives.

Aside from the strategic question of whether to pursue activities

alone or with a coalition of other corporations or associations, a fur

ther implementation decision is whether to use internal corporate re

sources or contract out to specialized intermediaries such as

lobbyists, public affairs and relations offices, pollsters, law firms, and

so forth. As companies expanded beyond government relations to

full-fledged public affairs, they realized that a larger array of activi-

ties would be required beyond old-fashioned lobbying and campaign

contributions. Firms realized that they could not perform many ac-

tivities themselves or that it would be more efficient to have them

performed by others (i.e., agents).

This realization led scholars like

Barry M. Mitnick to view the central problem of politics as “agency,”

saying he saw democracy itself as “a system of competition over

whose agents will govern, and which goals of which principals those

agents will seek to advance.”

Public Affairs Campaign Based on an Issue’s Life Cycle

The practical value of analyzing an issue in terms of its stage in the life

cycle is that it allows public affairs strategists to select the most appro

priate and effective media for a public affairs campaign. Parts II through

IV of this book are organized by the major stages of an issue life cycle:

opinion leader communication (dealing with interest groups), public

communication (dealing with media), legislative communication and

political action (dealing with government), and litigation communica

tion (dealing with judicial aspects of the government).

Each of these life cycle stages is characterized by specific communica

tion media and strategies and activities:

Stage 1: Opinion Leader Communication. These are mostly inter

personal media—one-on-one communication, small group meetings,

and speeches to reach individuals and small audiences—and such small-

audience vehicles already familiar with it and not inadvertently to help

the opposition by disseminating the issue to larger audiences, which

would tend to promote it to the next life cycle stage of public involve

ment. The reasoning is this: Why help the opposition move the issue to

the next stage by attracting public media attention?

22 I CHAPTER 1

The range of media used includes:

• Face-to-face communication.

• Small group meetings and forums.

• Dialogue communication.

• Speechmaking.

• Newsletters, small publications, and the Internet.

• Mediation and negotiation.

Stage 2: Public Communication. Now the public is aware of an is

sue, understands it in various degrees, and may be aroused to take polit

ical action. Public opinion surveys, if taken, would indicate the degree of

public involvement. Because by definition, the issue is deemed to be on

the public agenda, the mass media cover the issue. A content analysis of

the media would confirm this status. At this point public affairs manag-

ers engage in strategic media relations and, if necessary, employ the tool

of advocacy advertising. The mass media—newspapers, magazines,

trade publications, television, and radio—are used to reach larger audi-

ences. Increasingly the Internet is being used to reach individuals in a

wide variety of social settings.

Activities include:

• Proactive media relations.

• Broadcast appearances.

• Advocacy advertising.

• Holding the media accountable.

• Bypassing the mass media.

Stage 3: Legislative Communication and Political Action. When

lawmakers become aware of an issue and consider legislation, compa-

nies that are affected must engage in efforts to influence the outcome.

The means include:

• Direct lobbying.

• Indirect (grassroots) lobbying.

• Electoral activities (fund raising and a variety of political activities).

Stage 4: Litigation Communication. After laws are passed, compa

nies may decide to challenge them in court or defend themselves against

lawsuits filed by government, public interest groups, and others. Part of

the contest is in the court of public opinion, which companies attempt to

influence through media relations and other communication.

Although specific media are listed at specific stages, some are suffi

ciently versatile in application to be used at other stages. Speeches can be

directed not only at a specific small audience, but also at larger audi

ences. For example, excerpts and copies of the speech can be used to

AN OVERVIEW OF CORPORATE PUBLIC AFFAIRS I 23

achieve greater news coverage. Speeches can also be distributed to law

makers, regulators, and opinion leaders.

In supporting various life cycle stages, public affairs strategists

choose from the entire range of media—not just the mass media but also

interpersonal media and computer technology (e.g., the Internet). Fur

thermore, supplementary strategies and activities are employed, such

as mediation and negotiation in Stage 1, holding the media accountable

and bypassing the mass media in Stage 2, electoral activities in Stage 3,

and campaigning against junk science in Stage 4.

CONCLUSIONS

This overview of corporate public affairs explains how corporations

have responded to the increasing complexity and turbulence of the

sociopolitical environment in which they do business. They have created

new public affairs departments (sometimes from existing public rela-

tions departments) and given them the assignment of making this envi-

ronment more manageable—trying to control it to preserve maximum

management autonomy.

To control the major forces in their external environment, public af-

fairs devises strategies and tactics that draw on the enormous political

resources possessed by their corporations. Resultant communication

campaigns center around controversial issues that arise among con-

tending forces. This is the reason why the management tool of issues

management has made such a major contribution to public affairs. The

four stages of a life cycle used to analyze issues are also used in this vol-

ume as the basis of selecting the audiences and communication strate-

gies and tactics most appropriate to each stage: (a) opinion leaders of

interest groups, (b) media reporters and editors, (c) government

lawmakers and administrators, and (d) judicial bodies.

ENDNOTES

1. See Roger W. Cobb and Charles D. Elder, “Communication and Public Policy,”

in Handbook of Political Communication, ed. Dan D. Nimmo and Keith R.

Sanders (Beverly Hills, Calif.: Sage, 1981), pp. 391–416.

2. Jarol B. Manheim, The Death of a Thousand Cuts: Corporate Campaigns and the

Attack on the Corporation (Mahwah, N.J.: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates,

2001), p. 17.

3. Bernard C. Hennessy, Public Opinion (Belmont, Calif.: Wadsworth, 1965), p. 25.

4. Harold Brayman, speech on “The Importance and Impact of Communications

in Our Modern Society,” October 13, 1964.

5. John W. Hill, The Making of a Public Relations Man (New York: David McKay &

Co., 1963), p. 264.

6. Ibid., p. 20.

7. James E. Grunig, Excellence in Public Relations and Communication Manage

ment (Hillsdale, N.J.: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, 1992), pp. 125–126.

24 I CHAPTER 1

8. Foundation for Public Affairs, Corporate Public Affairs: The State of Corporate

Public Affairs Survey Final Report 1999–2000 (Washington, D.C.: Public Af

fairs Council, 1999), p. 3.

9. Douglas G. Pinkham, “Today’s Key Task for Public Affairs,” in Public Affairs

Council 45! Sapphire Anniversary Report (Washington, D.C.: Public Affairs

Council, 1999), p. 6.

10. John F. Mahon, “Shaping Issues/Manufacturing Agents: Corporate Political

Sculpting,” in Corporate Political Agency: The Construction of Competition in

Public Affairs, ed. Barry M. Mitnick (Newbury Park, Calif.: Sage, 1993), p.

196.

11. See James E. Post, et al., Business and Society: Corporate Strategy, Public Policy,

Ethics, 10th edition (New York: McGraw-Hill, 2002).

12. See Rogene A. Buchholz, Business Environment and Public Policy: Implications

for Management, 5th edition (Englewood Cliffs, N.J.: Prentice-Hall, 1995).

13. See George A. Steiner and John F. Steiner, Business, Government, and Society: A

Managerial Perspective (New York: McGraw-Hill, 1997).

14. J. J. Wuerthner, Jr., The Businessman’s Guide to Practical Politics (Chicago:

Regnery, 1959), p. xiii.

15. E. M. Epstein, The Corporation in American Politics (Englewood Cliffs, N.J.:

Prentice-Hall, 1969).

16. John Kenneth Galbraith, The New Industrial State (Boston: Houghton

Mifflin, 1967).

17. Epstein, op. cit., p. 2.

18. Richard L. Daft, Organization Theory and Design, 3rd edition (New York: West

Publishing, 1989), p. 46.

19. John F. Mahon, “Managing the Extended Enterprise: The New Stakeholder

View,” California Management Review, Vol. 45, Fall 2002, p. 10.

20. Richard Eells, Corporate Giving in a Free Society (New York: Harper & Brothers,

1956), p. 6. He says, “Business enterprise has a direct interest in promoting

the strength of private sectors because it is itself a private sector. For this rea-

son, business must maintain the barriers against progressive absorption of

these sectors into state-controlled areas. Corporate philanthropy can and

should aid the weak and private sectors in maintaining their autonomy”

(pp. 103–104).

21. Dan Carney, with Amy Borrus and Jay Greene, “Microsoft’s All-Out Coun

terattack,” BusinessWeek, May 15, 2000, pp. 103–106. Also most of the re

sources listed are from ibid., pp. 103–106. Also Stanley Holmes, “Microsoft

Ad Aims to Boost Image,” Los Angeles Times, April 29, 2000, p. C-2.

22. Mike France, “Commentary: The Unseemly Campaign of Mr. Microsoft,”

Business Week, April 24, 2000, p. 53.

23. A survey conducted by Harris Interactive for the Wall Street Journal, based

on 3,830 computer-using respondents found the following::

• Nearly half said they disagreed with the government’s proposal for break

ing up Microsoft; about 605 said Microsoft should remain one company.

• More than half agreed that Gates is a positive role model.

• Only 29% believed the government is being fair in its treatment of Microsoft.

• 42% agreed that the company is a monopolist.

• Only 23% said it treats its competitors fairly.

Rececca Buckman, “Looking Through Microsoft’s Window,” Wall Street

Journal, May 1, 2000, p. B1.

24. Stuein L. Hwang, “A ‘Predatory’ Monopolist Tries the Old Soft Sell,” Wall

Street Journal, April 21, 2000, p. B1.

AN OVERVIEW OF CORPORATE PUBLIC AFFAIRS I 25

25. Foundation for Public Affairs, op. cit. The previous survey was James E. Post

and Jennifer J. Griffin, 1996 Survey: The State of Corporate Public Affairs

(Washington, D.C.: Foundation for Public Affairs, 1997).

26. Foundation for Public Affairs, op. cit., pp. 15–16.

27. Steven Greenhouse, “Accord to Combat Sweatshop Labor Faces Obstacles,”

New York Times, April 13, 1997, p. A1.

28. For further discussion of the concept see Buchholz, op. cit., “The Public Pol

icy Process,” pp. 119–149.

29. Grunig, op. cit., pp. 17, 81.

30. Daft, op. cit., p. 491.

31. Robert L. Dilenschneider, editor, Dartnell’s Public Relations Handbook (Chi

cago: The Dartnell Corporation, 1996), p. 339.

32. See John E. Marston, Modern Public Relations (New York: McGraw-Hill, 1979),

pp. 185–203.

33. Scott M. Cutlip, Allen H. Center and Glen M. Broom, Effective Public Relations,

6th edition (Englewood Cliffs, N.J.: Prentice-Hall, 1985), pp. 199–201.

34. Two excellent books describing campaign strategies and management are

Robert Kendall, Public Relations Campaign Strategies; Planning for Implemen-

tation, 2nd edition (New York: HarperCollins College, 1996); and Robert E.

Simmons, Communication Campaign Management: A Systems Approach (New

York: Longman, 1990).

35. For an overview of issues management, see Rogene A. Buchholz, “Public Is-

sues Management,” in Essentials of Public Policy for Management, 2nd edition

(Englewood Cliffs, N.J.: Prentice-Hall, 1990), pp. 180–215. For a compre-

hensive review see R. L. Heath and Associates, Strategic Issues Management:

How Organizations Influence and Respond to Public Interests and Policies (San

Francisco: Jossey-Bass, 1988).

36. Steven Schnaars and Paschalina Ziamou, “The Essentials of Scenario Writ-

ing,” Business Horizons, Vol. 44, July–August 2001, pp. 25–32.

37. See http://www.gbn.org/public/gbnstory/scenarios.

38. Peter F. Bartha, “Managing Corporate External Issues: An Analytical Frame-

work,” Business Quarterly, Vol. 47, October 1982, pp. 78–90.

39. See John F. Mahon, “Corporate Political Strategy,” Business in the Contempo-

rary World, Vol. 2, Autumn 1989, pp. 50–62.

40. Allen M. Kaufman, Ernest J. Englander, and Alfred A. Marcus, “Selecting an

Organizational Structure for Implementing Issues Management,” in

Mitnick, op. cit., p. 153.

41. Mitnick, op. cit., p. 1.

26 I CHAPTER 1

Interest Group Strategies

Interest groups constitute one of the three major forces in a corpora-

tion’s sociopolitical environment, and they are the starting point for

public affairs communication. In his The Interest Group Society,first

published in 1989, Jeffrey M. Berry states that we are truly an interest

group society and that the role of interest groups in the policymaking

process has expanded. They are an enduring part of American political

life and “today have more resources, represent more constituencies,

and do more lobbying than ever before.”

On the simplest level, says

Barry, “when we speak of an interest group we are referring to an or-

ganization that tries to influence government.”

They serve several

functions: (a) as “a primary link between citizens and their govern-

ment, forming a channel of access through which members voice their

opinions to those who govern them”; (b) as an opportunity for people

to participate in the political process; (c) as a means of educating the

American public about political issues; (d) bringing an issue to light

and agenda building; and (e) program monitoring.

Many issues that later appear in the news media or on legislative

agendas begin their life cycle when interest groups champion them.

Corporations are among these groups, but most often they resist dis

turbing the status quo rather than initiating issues, such as deregula

tion. The opportunity to do so, however, remains an important

corporate public affairs strategy. In this book the term interest group is

restricted to nonbusiness groups unless otherwise indicated. Part II,

therefore, discusses how thought leaders originate issues or how inter

est group leaders respond to social tensions created when the expecta

tions and demands of discontented people are not met. Some social

tensions and resultant issues are traceable to the gap between these pub

lic expectations and corporate performance.

The two prominent issues that gave rise to public affairs—consumer

ism and environmentalism—resulted from public dissatisfactions in the

marketplace and with corporate environmental performance. Ralph

Nader popularized the consumerism movement with his book Unsafe at

Any Speed, and Rachel Carson inaugurated the environmental move

ment with her Silent Spring. Other social movements followed: women’s

rights, gay and lesbian rights, animal rights groups, and a host of oth

ers. Their variety is reflected in Public Interest Profiles, a manual of the

Foundation of Public Affairs, which classifies 250 of the most influential

public interest groups in such areas as civil and human rights, commu

nity improvements, consumer and health, corporate and governmental

accountability, the economic system, energy and environment, and

public policy.

These movements—and the not-to-be-forgotten civil rights move

ment—were preceded by the labor movement, which is represented by

hundreds of labor unions, most of which fall under the umbrella of the

American Federation of Labor and Congress of Industrial Organizations

(AFL-CIO). Although union membership has fallen sharply over the last

decade, the AFL-CIO’s president, John Sweeney, has mobilized union-

organizing drives to win more members and launched lobbying and

electoral campaigns to advance legislative interests.

He has also sup-

ported new strategies, notably the “corporate campaign,” which adds to

the traditional union tactics of strikes, pickets, and boycotts.

Interest groups play a vital role in society. “The labor movement

and community organizing are indispensable to a democracy,” says

Mike Miller, editor of Social Policy. “They are ‘civil society,’ ‘mediating

institutions,’ or ‘intermediate structure’ that stand between the indi-

vidual and government and corporations.… They defend communi-

ties and individuals against corporate or government excess.” They

also serve as incubators for new ideas about how we should live to

gether in society.

Viewed collectively, interest groups, along with the

news media, serve as society’s watchdogs; they initiate issues of con

cern to a variety of constituents; and they apply pressure on corpora

tions, as well as government, to consider the needs of society in their

decision making.

Each decade the number of interest groups grows, as reflected in the

number of entries in the Encyclopedia of Associations. (See Box II.1 for

categories of such interest groups.) In the mid-1950s, it listed just under

5,000 associations. By 1990, the number was 22,000, and, although

growth slowed, the number reached 23,000 in 1997. Estimates of the

number of nongovernmental organizations (NGOs), from the smallest

neighborhood association to huge international relief agencies such as

CARE, suggest that the United States alone has about 2 million NGOs.

Growth in recent decades has been enormous, as 70% of them are less

than 30 years old. Growth in membership of environmental groups has

been especially vigorous: The Sierra Club now has 572,000 members,

up from 181,000 in 1980; and the Worldwide Fund for Nature has

28 I PART II

around 5 million members, up from 570,000 in 1980.

The Natural Re

sources Defense Council now has 550,000 members.

THE THIRD SECTOR

Among interest groups of greatest concern to corporations is the

large category of social action groups—the myriad activist groups

that represent individuals with grievances or espoused causes. They

are part of what Theodore Levitt called the “third sector,” whose tra

ditional role has been to care for the casualties of society that are ne

glected by government and business sectors. Even these traditional

nonprofit organizations that primarily provide client services in

creasingly engage in advocacy activities to promote their mission.

The social action groups described by Levitt are best known for ac

tively, and sometimes very aggressively, advocating and pursuing

social reforms. In addition to persuasion and pull, they believe in

publicity and push. “Its tools are loud, insistent, assertive, impatient,

INTEREST GROUP STRATEGIES I 29

Box II.1 Categories of Public Interest Groups (With Examples)

Business/economic: The Business Roundtable, Citizens for a Sound

Economy, U.S. Chamber of Commerce

Civil/constitutional rights: American Civil Liberties Union, Amnesty In

ternational USA

Community/grassroots: Mothers Against Drunk Driving, Nuclear Free

America, People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals

Consumer/health: American Medical Association, Consumer Federa

tion of America, National Consumers League

Corporate accountability/responsibility: Center for Business Ethics,

Committee for Economic Development, INFACT

Environmental: Friends of the Earth, Greenpeace, National Wildlife

Federation, Sierra Club

International affairs: Foreign Policy Association, Union of Concerned

Scientists

Media: Accuracy in Media, Action for Children’s Television

Political/governmental process: Center for Responsive Politics, Com-

mon Cause, The Conservative Caucus.

Public interest law: Center for Law in the Public Interest

Religious: Anti-Defamation League of B’nai B’rith, Interfaith Center on

Corporate Responsibility

Think tanks: The Heritage Foundation, Investor Responsibility Re-

search Center, The Urban Institute, Worldwatch Institute

and sometimes violent.”

In the 1980s and 1990s, these third-sector

activists preferred to take direct action against corporations rather

than wait for government to act.

NGOs

The term NGO is widely used in the international sphere, where these or

ganizations deal with governments and speak out on many high-profile

issues. Among the top five issues are environment, conservation and

ecology, labor conditions and human rights, trade policies, and wages

and working conditions. They are recognized by the United Nations

(U.N.) at certain important international meetings and the U.N. uses

them for such purposes as dispensing aid. Since “The Battle of Seattle,”

which targeted the World Trade Organization, NGOs have gained more

media coverage. Some, such as Amnesty International and Greenpeace,

have become “superbrands.”

NGOs are highly effective because they: (a) play the offensive all the

time, (b) know how to simplify complex issues, (c) form unusual coali-

tions (e.g., with labor unions and youth groups), (d) have a clear

agenda, (e) move at Internet speed, and (f) know how to feed on the me-

dia. They hit where it works: a company’s customers, legislators and

regulators, the media, and, now becoming more important, financial

markets and institutions (e.g., the World Bank and the International

Monetary Fund).

The entire nonprofit sector of society accounts for a formidable part

of the economy. It represented 5.9% of all organizations in the United

States in 1998 and had a 6.7% share of national income. The Independ-

ent Sector reports that it employs 10.9 million workers and that 74% of

adult volunteers worked in nonprofit sector organizations. As the de-

mand for their services increased, the number of charitable organiza

tions increased at an annual rate of 5.1% between 1987 and 1997—

more than double the growth rate of the business sector.

Advantages Possessed by Noncorporate Groups

It takes a professional staff and an adequate budget to apply the sophis

ticated media relations strategies and techniques that are available to

every group in society. Besides corporations, some large nonprofits,

such as the Sierra Club, can also afford professional media relations

staffs. Although less wealthy activist groups often resign themselves to

their relative weakness in media relations and thus shun the mass me

dia, many are beginning to change their attitude. Instead of relying only

on the strength of their own communication channels with members,

they realize the importance of enlisting the support of public opinion

and of “democratizing” the media. This is the view of Charlotte Ryan in

Prime Time Activism: “Our society is heavily media-dependent and if we

30 I PART II

ignore mainstream media, we abandon audiences with little or no access

to alternative and opposition media.”

Media Power. More important, activist groups have some advan

tages over business. One is they are able to attract media attention when

they confront visible corporations. Such events become newsworthy

because conflict and crises play into the media’s definition of news.

Newsworthiness is further enhanced because social action groups can

use a wider repertoire of tactics than business. They can engage in color

ful and action-filled demonstrations, rallies, and events—chaining

themselves to trees, lying in front of bulldozers, and occupying a build

ing. It is mostly the tactics of activists, not the underlying issues, how

ever, that tend to gain prominent media attention. Even when issues are

mentioned, they are usually not analyzed in depth. In a labor dispute,

strike actions, not the reasons underlying the strike, dominate the news.

Social injustice and grievances are covered lightly because the main-

stream news media are basically conservative.

People Power. Noncorporate interest groups have the great advan-

tage of people power relative to corporations, even though the latter

have relationships with many stakeholder groups, such as employees

and stockholders. The pluralistic feature of American democracy is that

it includes tens of thousands of public interest and other social groups.

Even Carl Boggs, a critic of corporate America who believes “the corpo-

rate stranglehold over social and political life shows no signs of weaken-

ing,” acknowledges that “civil society in the United States does remain

surprisingly fluid and resilient—witness the capacity of thousands of

local organizations and movements to sustain a grassroots presence

that, while now scattered and largely impotent, could provide the basis

of a more unified oppositional politics.”

Social groups’ focus of power is the local level, where community

groups can mobilize people power to counteract corporate money

power, says Pennsylvania State University sociologist Ed Walsh, author

of Don’t Burn It Here: Grassroots Challengers to Trash Incinerators.

states, “Ordinary people increasingly confront large bureaucracies over

which they feel they have little or no control. Our evidence shows, how

ever, that corporate power is more fragile than many citizens imag

ine.”

He urges people to organize and to draw support from outside by

mobilizing politically; for example, by going door to door to place issues

on a referendum or to elect certain legislators.

People will do this only,

however, when an issue becomes important enough to engage their

interest and involvement.

It is this strong identification by citizens with the causes and visions

of specific public interest groups that gives them an advantage over cor

porate relationships with their stakeholders. These groups have the

great ideological advantage that their members are motivated by broad

INTEREST GROUP STRATEGIES I 31