Page 130 - Corporate Communication

Cornelissen-04.qxd 10/9/2004 9:04 AM Page 119

Communications Strategy 119

This, of course, is at least in part aspirational and also prescriptive as the strategic
role of communications has not yet everywhere, in each and every organization
around the globe, come to full gestation. In fact, in some organizations White and
Dozier remarks referred to earlier still ring true in the sense that communications
practitioners may be found to operate only on the periphery of the dominant coali-
tion, functioning largely as communications technicians and with a limited influence
on the decision-making process. In such cases, as well as for other organizations that
aim to actively pursue stakeholder management strategies, research suggests that a
number of closely related challenges exist and need to be met for the corporate
communications function to indeed deliver upon its strategic potential. Some of
these challenges may not be entirely new, but they are nonetheless central to securing
the strategic involvement of communications.

Challenge 1: Having communications professionals who can think and act strategically.
One of the basic problems of why the strategic potential of corporate communica-
tions often remains unmet in organizations is the lack of communications practi-
tioners who can enact a strategic role and contribute to strategy making at the
corporate and/or business units levels. In many organizations, communications prac-
titioners tend to be cast in the role of communications technicians rather than
managers or strategists, and are not included in the dominant coalition responsible
for the formulation of organization-wide strategies.This happens when practitioners
fail to enact a strategic role, because of a lack of expertise or experience, or because
senior management simply does not provide the support and room for doing so.The
following framework based on research of role types of communications practition-
ers illustrates this distinction between ‘technicians’ and ‘managers’ or ‘strategists’ and
offers, in this respect, a useful way of considering how and where practitioners may
contribute to both the formulation and implementation of strategy.
29
As indicated in Table 4.1, Broom and Smith, the originators of role research
among communications practitioners, suggest four types of roles which practitioners
may fulfil within organizations: ‘communications technician’, ‘expert prescriber’,
‘communications facilitator’ and ‘problem-solving process facilitator’. Research has
indicated that the more strategic roles of ‘communications facilitators’ and ‘problem-
solving process facilitator’ are to a greater degree enacted when senior management
values and appreciates the input of communications practitioners, and when the
communications practitioner him/herself is capable – in terms of having the
required business knowledge and intelligence – of enacting it. 30
This distinction between role types is thus important because it will largely deter-
mine the extent to which practitioners are likely to participate in the strategic
decision-making process within organizations, and thus contribute directly to the
formulation of corporate strategies.As said,whether practitioners enact a strategic role
within the organization depends on a number of factors, including the environment
and the political context within the organization (as further discussed in Chapter 6),
but perhaps most importantly, it depends on the knowledge that the practitioner has
of strategy making and of the role of corporate communications therein.
A basic distinction can be made at this point between ‘strategic’and ‘craft’approaches
31
to communications. A strategic approach allies with the strategic practitioner roles
outlined above and suggests that practitioners understand how communications not