Management. Empirical Evidences from some Case Studies. Alfonso

12th

International Conference on Corporate and Marketing Communications, London, Middlesex University Business School, 16-17 April, 2007.

179

The Governance-Structure-System Model: a Framework for Corporate Communication

Management. Empirical Evidences from some Case Studies. ∗∗∗∗

Alfonso Siano, Full Professor of Corporate Communication Management

Agostino Vollero, PhD in Marketing and Communication

Mario Siglioccolo, PhD candidate in Marketing and Communication

University of Salerno, Italy

ABSTRACT The aim of the present study is the proposal of a new model, which enables the

understanding of the working mechanisms of corporate communication activities of complex organizations. The use of the model allows the analysis, the planning and the control of corporate communication activities. The model defines a set of drivers on which the organization can operate to improve its communication activities. Starting from the individualization of the critical elements of corporate communication, the model allows identifying the factors of inadequacy and their structural (static) or systemic (dynamic) nature. In relation to the nature of the noticed factors of inadequacy, the decision maker for communication can select, from time to time, the proper drivers, in order to solve the specific inadequacy, to provide effectiveness and efficiency to corporate communication activities and to improve, above all, corporate image and reputation. Some examples of case studies are commented on the end of the study, in order to test the usefulness of the proposed model. KEY WORDS: innovative approach, framework, corporate communication management, identity. 1. Introduction: the key concepts about corporate communication

The terminological expression corporate communication is increasingly in use to point out the processes of corporate communication, not only in the academic world (the researchers’ point of view) but also in the business community (perspective of the practitioners) (INVERNIZZI, 2005: 9). Such expression refers to all communicational activities that an organization develops to reach its objectives (JACKSON, 1987). A more modern and complete definition of corporate communication is based on the integration and the orchestration of the internal and external communication, for the development of relationships with the main stakeholders (van RIEL, 1995). Therefore, such expression refers to the conjunction between the relational and communicational activities of an organization (INVERNIZZI, 2005: 9).

For its features and potentialities, the corporate communication refers especially to

complex organizations. In entrepreneurial field, the organizations are considered complex when they have a multi-product (or multi-business) and, often, a multi-brand portfolio

∗ Although the views expressed in the paper belong to all of the authors, the paragraphs 1, 2, 3 and 6 are

attributed to Alfonso Siano ([email protected]), paragraph 4 to Agostino Vollero ([email protected]), paragraph 5 to Mario Siglioccolo ([email protected]). For further information: http://www.scienzecom.unisa.it/Siano/index.htm.

12th


180

(BRONDONI, 2002). Such organizations are expression of an elevated variety of the factors (DI BERNARDO and RULLANI, 1990; SIANO, 1997; GOLINELLI, 2000) and of communicative process, since they present a double level of communication: corporate and product communication. The corporate brand is set at a first level; in the multi-brand organizations, such brand is often used to assure the consumers about the quality of the products. In such situations, the brands of the various product lines (product brands) are placed at a second level, as endorsed brand (OLINS, 1983)1.

The objective of our study consists in the definition of a model of corporate communication management that allows:

- the analysis and understanding of the mechanisms of the communication activities

implemented by complex organizations; - the planning and control (measurement and evaluation of the results) of the integrated

activities of corporate communication; - the regulation of results, particularly for corporate image and reputation. The construction and use of the model implies, preliminarily, the knowledge of some

specific concepts. Before analysing in detail the proposed model, we will consider the key concepts of corporate communication: corporate personality, identity, image and reputation (fig. 1). The interpretations of these concepts presented in literature are conflicting, and this makes difficult to reach shared definitions about corporate reputation, image and identity (CARUANA, 1997; ALESSANDRI, 2001; GOTSI and WILSON, 2001; MELEWAR and JENKINS, 2002; WARTICK, 2002).

Corporate personality represents what the organization currently is (i.e. real identity)

(FILL, 1999: 563). It represents the totality of the organizational features: the behavioural and intellectual aspects (BERNSTEIN, 1984; ABRATT and SHEE, 1989) which refer to the elements of the corporate culture, related to organizational know-how (the distinctive competences) and to organizational performances. Corporate personality is expressed by the modalities according to which the organization manages its business and develops its own activities. Corporate personality can be considered the result of the interpretation of the personality of the organization, achieved through a process of self-evaluation (FILL, 1999). With regard to organizational studies literature, we can include the notion of corporate personality in the conceptualization of organizational identity2.

The understanding of the distinctive characteristics of the organization allows the

definition of the corporate identity, thanks to the transposition of the corporate personality, through self-analysis (MARKWICK and FILL, 1997), in visual elements that represent the corporate visual identity3 (OLINS, 1990). In fact, the corporate personality has, in its nature, a strong immaterial component, that has to be made explicit through the visual elements, in

1 Barilla and Parmalat are examples of Italian groups with a multi-brand portfolio. In the first case, Barilla is

the corporate brand and the product brands are: Mulino Bianco, Pavesi, Voiello and Wasa. In the second case, Parmalat is the corporate brand and the product brands are: Santal, Kyr, Mr. Day, Crisbì, Chef, Pomì, Malù, Pronto Forno and Jeunesse. Nestlè and Danone represent examples of international multi-brand groups of the food sector.

2 "In other words, organizational identity is seen as a self-definition or cognitive self-representation adopted by organizational members [...]" (CORNELISSEN, HASLAM and BALMER, 2007: S6).

3 In fact, "[...] research into corporate identity (in the marketing and communications literatures) has traditionally placed an emphasis on external, symbolic factors [...]" (CORNELISSEN, HASLAM and BALMER, 2007: S4).

12th


181

order to be communicated to the outside and to become perceivable from the stakeholders (SIANO, 2001).

The corporate identity expresses the core, distinctive and durable features of an organization (ALBERT and WHETTEN, 1985; van RIEL, 1997), since it represents a translation of the corporate personality in visual elements. For these reasons, the desired corporate identity implies positioning the entire organization (van RIEL and BALMER, 1997). A strong corporate identity can raise employees’ motivation and inspire confidence among the organisation’s external stakeholders (KITCHEN, 1997: 113).

Corporate visual identity elements are used to create messages communicated through the channels. The coherent and selected representations of visual elements of an organization concern its symbols, its brand, its claim, its organizational colours4 (chromatic codes) (LAMBERT, 1989; GIOIA, SCHULTZ and CORLEY, 2000). The symbolism and the other visual elements of the corporate identity, usable from the organization to represent itself, provide with visibility and recognisability (BALMER and GRAY, 2000; DOWLING, 1993); they allow the stakeholders to identify and to distinguish an organization from the other firms (BERNSTEIN, 1984; BIRKIGT and STADLER, 1986; ABRATT and SHEE, 1989; FILL, 1999).

4 Further elements which compose the corporate visual identity are: the headed paper, the wrappings and the

packings, the design (architectural characterization of the buildings), the means of transport, the organizational dress (BIRKIGT and STADLER, 1986).

12th


182

The corporate identity is the totality of the communication modalities through which an organization communicates and makes itself visible and perceivable to the inside and outside stakeholders. Also the behaviour of the organization and of its members, perceived from customers, suppliers, shareholders, etc., has to be included in the corporate identity5 (van RIEL, 1995; ALESSANDRI, 2001). In fact, the behaviour of the organization (daily expressed, above all, by front-office members) represents one of the four ways through which

5 Considering the behaviour as an expression of the unplanned communication, it is useful to remind the

known principle “one cannot not communicate”, for which also the behaviour of an organization and of its members represents communication for others (WATZLAWICK, BEAVIN and JACKSON, 1967).

Fig. 1 - The key concepts about corporate communication

corporate image and reputation

ORGANIZATION

behaviour of the firm and of its members, not perceivable from the stakeholders (back-office)

distinctive competences and organizational performance

corporate culture

product brand

visual identity (symbolism)

corporate brand

corporate identity

behaviour of the firm and of its members,

perceivable from the stakeholders (front-office)

EFFECT ON THE STAKEHOLDERS

planned communication

planned and unplanned communication

planned and unplanned communication

corporate personality

s t a k e h o l d e rs

p e r c e p t i o n

12th


183

corporate identity is communicated to stakeholders; communication emerging from behaviours is partially unplanned6 (GRÖNROOS, 2000a).

Besides, the corporate identity can be communicated through the characteristics and the

benefits of the products and services, through the production plants and the distribution channels and also through the verbal contents and the visual components of the messages communicated through planned communication activities7 (BIRKIGT and STADLER, 1986; OLINS, 1990; van RIEL, 1995).

An organization can create its corporate identity after the interpretation of its corporate personality. The corporate identity is then communicated to stakeholders through visual signals and messages. The stakeholders can create an image of the organization after receiving these signals/messages.

Corporate image represents how an organization is perceived by its stakeholders (WEI,

2002). Corporate image is not what an organization presumes to be, but it is composed of the existing opinions (the feelings and the convictions) in the mind of the stakeholders (ABRATT and SHEE, 1989: 68; BERNSTEIN, 1984; ALESSANDRI, 2001). Unlike many authors, which use in a similar way the expressions corporate identity and corporate image, in our opinion it is essential to distinguish the meanings of these two expressions. This position allows affirming that the corporate identity is a presentation of the organization conceived at strategic level, with the purpose to develop a positive corporate image and corporate reputation (SCHULTZ, HATCH and LARSEN, 2000; ALESSANDRI, 2001).

The image of the organization is elaborated not only from customers but also from

suppliers and from other stakeholders (HATCH and SCHULTZ, 1997). An organization does not have a single image but a variety of images, since the perceptions of individuals are different and influenced by subjective factors. Moreover, the organization communicates with different stakeholders (BACCARANI and GOLINELLI, 1992). Therefore, corporate image can be considered as the resultant of the average of individuals’ perceptions. These stakeholders constitute the public of an organization and corporate image represents the

6 Unplanned communication refers to what “[…] employees say, how they say it, how they behave, how

[…] physical resources look like […]” (GRÖNROOS, 2000a: 264). The physical resources include products, packaging, corporate means of transport, etc. Unplanned communication can be considered as contingent, spontaneous, not perfectly and totally planned. According to GRÖNROOS (2000b), there are two types of communication messages: planned (e. g. mass communication, brochures, direct response, etc.) and unplanned (word of mouth referrals, gossip, internet chat groups, etc.). Also the results achieved by the organization can express, from time to time, planned or unplanned communication, because of the distinctive competences developed by the firm. The economic-financial results achieved by the firm (turnover, market share, profits, dividends, return on equity, etc.), for example, are expressed by numbers and are described through verbal language. The organization can plan its communication about these results to interested stakeholders (investors and employees), through suitable channels of communication (annual reports, newsletters, etc.). On the other hand, products' performances (with regard to their quality and reliability) represent unplanned communication at the time that customers utilise them, since every customer has a direct experience of the products manufactured by the firm.

7 Together with symbolism and behaviours, communication is one of the components of the corporate identity mix, through which the organization manifests itself (self-presentation) (BIRKIGT and STADLER, 1986; van RIEL, 1995). For example, when an organization sends a press release to a newspaper editorial staff, the organization tries to spread, through the verbal language, the brand name and information about itself, in order to develop public relations activities with its stakeholders. The expression “brand name” is used to point out the part of a brand that can be written (including letters or words). The brand name is the part of the brand which can be spelled and spoken (KOTLER, 1991). The brand name must not be confused with the graphic symbol, which represent the other element of the brand and can not be spoken.

12th


184

expression of their diffused judgment. Corporate image can also be influenced by an elevated number of other organizations or groups (DOWLING, 1993).

After specifying this, we now try to analyse the concept of reputation. The reputation of a

firm and of its products depends on the degree of respect and credibility that stakeholders have about an organization (FOMBRUN, 1996; FOMBRUN and van RIEL, 1997; WEISS, ANDERSON and MACINNIS, 1999; MAHON and WARTICK, 2003). Corporate reputation is the result of a shared judgment socially expressed by the stakeholders which is based on the actions of the firm and its previous results and on its ability to satisfy the expectations and create value for the stakeholders (customers, shareholders, employees, suppliers, etc.) (BENNETT and KOTTASZ, 2000; FOMBRUN and van RIEL, 2003). The actors of the institutional environment of affiliation (communities and local administrations) have to be considered among the stakeholders. Reputation is based, therefore, on fiduciary elements8, considered as the cognitive antecedents of the brand equity (AAKER, 1991).

Unlike corporate image, which can be limited only to one episode of perception9 and

refers to the way the stakeholders perceive the organization in a certain instant, corporate reputation represents the result of a series of perceptions along the time, and can be considered the result of a long period of time, which allows the stakeholders to know in depth the organization and to evaluate its degree of respect (FILLIS, 2003).

In fact, when, in an exact instant, an individual comes into contact with the organization (and/or with its products), he achieves an image of the organization through his own perception. Such situation is not enough to let the individual mature a judgment on the reputation of the organization, because of the limited time, that does not allow a serious assessment about the level of respect and credibility of the organization. It is only possible for the individual to achieve a “contingent” judgment of trust (in case of positive perception) or

8 Trust can be considered as a substitute of the information (VICARI, 1991: 77-78; BACCARANI, 1991;

BUSACCA, 1994). In lack of trust, in fact, the decision maker needs the complete range of useful information for the choice among different alternatives, with all the difficulties and the burdens that such condition involves. In other words, the effort (necessary to make a decision) becomes smaller through the trust. The stakeholders develop a certain degree of trust towards the organization and, then, they look for confirmations in their cognitive and behavioural patterns (GOOD, 1989: 41-62). Cognitive and behavioural inertia has recourse to strategies experimented in the past, in order to look for confirmations rather than to bring into question the pre-existing relationships. Therefore, trust keeps alive with precise expectations, that is, with confirmations to the cognitive pattern, built by each individual (VICARI, 1992). In this way, trust represents what a person, or an organization, expects from another person, or from another organization, in relation to the satisfaction of his/its own expectations (BACCARANI, 1995: XIII). Further trust is created any time that the cognitive pattern is confirmed from the lived experience; on the contrary, the trust is damaged.

9 The greatest weakness of the orientation to image is represented by the fact that it can also assume a

negative meaning of “mere appearance”, as a consequence of temporary marketing and communication actions.

In this case, the image derives from an attempt to create an artificial and fake identity of the firm, mainly based

on the emotional factors of the communication. In these situations, such factors serve to disguise the true features

of the organization to the outside (MARKWICK e FILL, 1997). This tactical and speculative intent is helpful

only in the short term, with negative repercussions on corporate reputation in the long period (PREECE,

FLEISHER e TOCCACELLI, 1995). The orientation to image excessively underlines outward and superficial

appearances; it points out the way in which the firm wants to appear, beyond its real features that help to

distinguish itself from its competitors. On the contrary, the transparency aims to present an organization for what

it really is (INVERNIZZI, 1996).

12th


185

of mistrust (in case of negative perception) about an organization that, as such, has a temporary validity.

For a suitable judgment about reputation is needed a long time, during which the

individual can have more contacts with the organization and accumulate more signs about corporate identity, manifested during the history of the organization. The reputation has, therefore, a historical nature, deriving from a subjective and collective evaluation on the reliability of an organization that is based, in the first place, on corporate performances (FOMBRUN and van RIEL, 1997). The reputation is more stable and durable in comparison to the image, since it derives on the signs expressed by an organization during its history.

The history of an organization favours the development of a good reputation when it

reflects a stable image, consequential to the coherence of the leading choices operated from the organization and from its commitment during the time (MARKWICK and FILL, 1997; SIANO, 2001). The organizational commitment represents the profuse, durable and binding perseverance that allows the organization to persist along a strategic run (GHEMAWAT, 1993: 3-20).

The sequence of actions implemented from the organization represents corporate history.

If the organization has a history of maintained promises and coherent choices during the time, the public are suited to think to a serious and continuous commitment from the organization, consequent to structural and well consolidate factors. From this point of view the reputation represents the respect of the ability and the wish of the firm to repeat its performances in a similar way over the time (HERBIG and MILEWICZ, 1995)10.

The commitment has fundamental relationship implications; it is manifest in the cases in

which the relationship with the stakeholder is considered so remarkable to justify the maximum effort to maintain it (MORGAN and HUNT, 1994)11. This involves the desire to build a stable relationship with the counterpart, the availability to also bear some sacrifices in the brief period to consolidate the relationship, trusting on the stability of the relationship in the long period.

In the case of the reputation, the stakeholders mature a "consolidated" judgment of trust (in case of positive perception) or of mistrust (in case of negative perception) towards the organization that has durable validity. Consolidated trust favours the loyalty and the cooperation of the stakeholders towards the organization.

Reputation is, therefore, rooted in consistent aspects, deep and consolidated, with

particular reference to the behaviours of the organization and of its members (HERBIG and MILEWICZ, 1995). The corporate reputation and the reputation of the CEO are closely intertwined (KITCHEN and LAURENCE, 2003). Unlike image, which can be relatively altered in brief times, the judgement about reputation is so consolidated that it can not easily be modifiable despite some events can negatively condition the evaluation of the degree of

10 The predictability of the organizational behaviour represents one of the fundamental elements from which

derives the trust. This element is connected to the perception of organizational competences in doing its own activities in effective and reliable way and also to the perception of organizational motivations to produce the results attended by its stakeholders. The “strong” trust implies the elevated ability to reach results and the positive motivation of the counterpart to do the best in the relationship (ANDALEEB, 1992; GANESAN, 1994; MAYER, DAVIS and SCHOORMAN, 1995).

11 "[…] commitment is defined as an enduring desire to maintain a valued relationship" (MORGAN and HUNT 1994).

12th


186

reputation from the stakeholders (MARKWICK and FILL, 1997). In fact, empirical studies show that even when confronted with negative information, observers do not suddenly change their assessments about corporate reputation (WARTICK, 1992). The greater the stability of the judgment of respect and credibility about an organization, the smaller will be the negative impact on reputation, consequential to possible accidents, among which the defectiveness of product or the sabotages. The organizations with a strong reputation are more able to face and overcome crisis that would destroy weaker organizations (FOMBRUN and van RIEL, 2003).

Despite so many differences between image and reputation, a common feature must be

underlined: they are out of firm’s control because they exist in the mind of the stakeholders as a result of their perception (GRAY and BALMER, 1998; FOMBRUN and SHANLEY, 1990). An organization can manage only indirectly image and reputation through the regulation of its behaviours, which are evaluated by its stakeholders.

2. Governance-Structure-System: a model of corporate communication management

The use of the model allows the analysis, the planning and the control of corporate

communication activities. The model of corporate communication management is based on the principles of the systemic-vital approach, which proposes a clear distinction among static (structural) elements and dynamic (systemic) elements (SIANO, 2004) and considers the firm as a system in which the role of decision-making and the operations are distinguishable. Such approach individualizes a set of supra-systems in the environment of reference that interact with the organization and a set of sub-systems, which compose the firm (GOLINELLI, 2000 and 2002).

The model is based on the following factors and on the relationships between them (fig. 2):

- the governance group, which is composed of the members who carry out the decision-making process and the planning and the control of the results of corporate communication activities. Governance group can be considered a systemic factor, since the members who compose it interact in order to perform their actions of decision and control; - the organizational operations, or rather the processes (organizational routines) that allow the daily functions of the firm. The organizational operations represent dynamic phenomena. As such, they represent systemic factors that usually produce unplanned communication, that is perceived by the external stakeholders, above all through the interaction with the front-office members; - the internal structure of communication, composed of structural elements of communication which are internal to the organization, selected through decisions of equipment assumed by the governance group; - the supra-system of communication. Within this system it is possible to individualize and map the structural elements of communication external to the organization, which are placed in the external structure of communication; - other supra-systems, in which the various stakeholders act. The stakeholders can be considered as the receivers of corporate communication; - the system of communication, represented by the totality of corporate communication flows, through which the messages are communicated to the stakeholders.

12th


187

Considered the factors that compose the model, we will use the expression “governance-structure-system” to denominate the proposed model, which we will point out with the acronym “GSS” for brevity.

In the following paragraphs we will analyse, in detail, such factors and we will underline the relationships (of different nature) that intervene between them.

The governance group

The governance group is the decision-maker about corporate communication activities.

The governance group is made up of a plurality of individuals - the CEO, the General Manager (Chief Operating Officer), the managers of the specific operations (responsible of the sub-systems of production, marketing, research & development, logistics, etc.) and the consultants -; they assume choices regarding corporate communication.

12th


188

Fig. 2 - The GSS model of corporate communication management

ORGANIZATIONAL OPERATIONS

(SUB-SYSTEMS)

GOVERNANCE GROUP

of the organization

( u )

SUPRA-SYSTEM OF COMMUNICATION

( u )

( se )


corporate identity

OTHER SUPRA-SYSTEMS

- consumers - investors - suppliers - competitors

- etc.

corporate culture

external stakeholders

( se ) = decisions of structural equipment; ( u ) = decisions of utilize of the structural elements of communication; ( c ) = coherence between visual identity and corporate culture;

= planned and/or unplanned communication flows;

= communication flows internal to governance group, internal to/among sub-systems.

Legend:

internal STRUCTURE of communication

corporate identity

brand

( c )

external STRUCTURE of communication

internal stakeholders

(members of the organization)




SYSTEM of communication

12th


189

In fact, the contributions of a plurality of individuals are inevitable in order to achieve good communication results. The CEO indubitably acts as chief communicator (KITCHEN and LAURENCE, 2003); instead, he does not have the plurality of the necessary competences to assume proper decisions about communication activities. The managers have a deep knowledge about the organizational operations and the sub-systems; therefore, they have the capability to link strategic plan to operational plan. Lastly, the consultants of communication have the technical-specialist competences and the information about the communication sector; they also can manage the relationships with the stakeholders within the supra-system of communication.

More in detail, the communication choices imply the contemporary possession of

cognitive requirements (CONFETTO, 2004: 139): - the deep knowledge about the elements of the organizational operations or about specific

sub-systems (for example, marketing sub-system, finance sub-system, etc.), which can be enhanced through communication activities;

- the capability to link the strategic choice about competitive positioning with the decisions about operational communication, in order to translate the positioning in concrete initiatives of communication;

- the technical-specialist and professional competences about the mix thematic area-modality-generic channels (media) - specific channels (vehicles) of communication, the message definition (copy and visual), the tools of monitoring of the implemented communication activities, etc.12;

- the lasting relationships with critical components within the supra-system of communication (journalists, media, etc.);

- the availability of ad hoc information (e.g. audience of the specific channels), essential to direct the decisions about communication investments.

The components of the governance group interact to individualize and appraise the

options and to assume the strategic and operational decisions, which typically regard: the composition of corporate structural factors of communication, the determination of a communication budget, the selection of a communication-mix, etc.

To decide the best for the organization, the governance group appraises the results of corporate communication activities through the measurement of these activities, above all for what concerns the corporate image and the corporate reputation (DOWNS, 1988; FOMBRUN, GARDBERG and SEVER, 2000; ADRIAN and DOWNS, 2004). The measurement and the evaluation of the communication results allow the governance group to receive precious informative feed-backs for the individualization of the possible corrective actions, in order to eliminate inadequacies and distortions and improve corporate image and

12 The thematic areas are, for instance, the marketing (or commercial) communication area, the economic-

financial communication area (investor relations), the corporate communication area, the lobbying communication area; each of the areas is characterized by a specific subject of the communication and is directed to specific stakeholders. The modalities represent different kinds of communicative approach towards the receivers (one-to-many; one-to-one; many-to-many) with the purpose to achieve the potential effects, linked to each communication area. Among the modalities analyzed in literature, we usually find advertising (and e-advertising), sales promotion, public relations (publicity), sponsorships, etc. Lastly, the channels refer to the media, selected by the firm, through which the message is communicated to the stakeholders. In the channels selection, the decision maker chooses the "generic" channel (e.g. newspapers, magazines, TV) and, then, the "specific" channel (or vehicle) of communication ("New York Times", "The Economist", "CNN"), considering, above all, the cost per contact of the communication channels.

12th


190

reputation. This can be achieved by acting on a set of drivers, as we describe in the final part of this article.

The strategic decisions of the governance group that can have an impact on corporate communication concern, typically, the following fundamental aspects:

- the choice about the target of customers; - the choice about the positioning (corporate and product), which define the competitive

strategy; - the objectives of visibility and brand awareness; - the selection of the thematic areas of communication (corporate, marketing, economic-

financial, internal, etc.) that have to be activated to satisfy the needs of communication of the firm13.

The strategic decisions of communication are pointed out in the strategic plan, in which

are also defined other fundamental elements, as corporate mission and vision. The operational decisions of communication of the governance group are formalized in

the communication plan and concern, fundamentally, the choices: - about the actions of branding (in order to develop visibility and awareness); - about the communication-mix - combination of communication modalities and channels,

for any selected communication area (SIANO, 2002). The possible addition of new corporate channels involves a change in the equipment of the internal structure of communication;

- about the content (copy and visual) of the messages to communicate to the stakeholders14.

Thanks to plan decisions, the governance group creates a planned communication, which

involves the use of some predetermined non-personal channels (traditional mass media, internet, mail, etc.) and messages (radio-television spot, advertising messages on press, newsletter, etc.). The contents of these messages are repeatable on the selected channels without any limit.

The messages and the communication-mix are defined by the consultant of communication that, subsequently, presents them to governance group components for the approval. During the evaluations that direct the decisions of the governance group about the messages and the communication-mix, a fundamental aspect is the verification about the compatibility of the choices of channels (and the relative investments linked to their use) in comparison to the established budget to carry out the communicational activities of the organization.

It has to be specified that the behaviour of governance group members, perceivable from

the external stakeholders, represents unplanned communication. This circumstance happens,

13 Each of the communication areas is characterized by specific contents, based on specific communication

elements (mission, corporate culture and competences, products, economic-financial performances, guiding beliefs, etc.), selected according to the stakeholders to contact (consumers, investors, organizational members, etc.), in order to achieve specific effects (brand awareness, benevolence, trust, loyalty, collaboration, financial support, etc.) (SIANO and CONFETTO 2003; CONFETTO 2004).

14 The construction of the spoken messages to communicate to the stakeholders is the result of the copy strategy, which is based on the key words that derive from the selected positioning. According to a terminology used by communication practitioners, the copy strategy derives from the concept. The typical application of the copy strategy is in the messages on the newspapers and magazines, with the creative construction of the claim (or payoff), the head-line and the body-copy.

12th


191

for example, when a journalist interviews corporate CEO15; the contents of this interview are then diffused through the press, the radio or the television. Consequently, such behaviour expresses a component of the corporate identity. The behaviour of organizational members, engaged in the organizational operations, expresses the remaining component of the corporate identity.

Alike the other members of the organization, the behaviour of some exponents of the

governance group derives from corporate culture - we refer there, typically, to CEO and to managers -. For this reason, the behaviour of these members is an expression of corporate personality.

Organizational operations

The various operations (productive, logistic, marketing, research & development activities, etc.) represent the corporate processes through which the strategic formulation, defined by the governance group, is implemented.

According to systemic perspective, the operations assume importance for communication

activities. Within the operations are, in fact, developed the behaviour of the organization and its members, which represent flows of unplanned communication, perceived by the external stakeholders. For this motive the operations belong to the system of communication.

The operations activate additional communicative flows and, somehow, they belong to the

system of communication of the firm. When internal communication is activated, the members of the organization constitute the stakeholders that receive the communication (SCHULTZ and KITCHEN, 2004)16.

The operations represent the fundamental component of the corporate personality, since

they express the distinctive (firm-specific) features of the organization: the corporate culture and the distinctive competences, the location of the productive plants and the organizational performances.

The corporate culture represents the most meaningful factor of the corporate personality.

The corporate culture is constituted by the values, principles, beliefs (which express the organizational identity17), lived and shared by the organizational members and by the diffused convictions that give a meaning to what the organizational members do; the elements of the corporate culture provide to organizational members the rules (the guiding beliefs18). These rules regulate the behaviour of the members and their relationships with the external stakeholders (DEAL and KENNEDY, 1982: 24; DAVIS, 1984: 1-3; CODA, 1988: 45-49; SCHEIN, 1999: 26-30). Since corporate culture is the source of the behaviours and of the operational processes (routines), it influences in a decisive way the development of the distinctive competences, which express the firm-specific know-how (SELZNICK, 1957;

15 It must be specified that, even if its scheduling is planned, an interview is unplanned in its contents,

emerging from face-to-face discussion. 16 "[...] the organization of the future [...]" must focus their communication efforts "[...] not just externally,

but internally as well." (SCHULTZ and KITCHEN, 2004). 17 In fact, "[...] organizational identity can be seen as an interpretative system, or as a set of shared

cognitions, or as shared language and behaviours." (CORNELISSEN, HASLAM and BALMER, 2007: S6). 18 The guiding beliefs (declared values), that express the strategic culture defined by the governance group,

become daily beliefs and create daily culture (rites and rituals, etc.) - which represent the diffused culture within the organization, based on tacit shared premises - when they are actually experienced in the daily behaviours of the organizational members (DEAL and KENNEDY, 1982; DAVIS, 1984: 1-3; SCHEIN, 1999: 26-30).

12th


192

SIANO, 2001: 97-158; GOLINELLI, 2002: 75-142). The competences of the stakeholders, which develop strategic alliances with the firm, also have to be considered as distinctive competences of the organization. The not occasional processes of collaboration and outsourcing allow the organization to also count on other people's knowledge to co-produce new knowledge and to enrich and regenerate its own stock of resources.

The country-specific factors have to be considered important, with regard to the location

of the production plants and, above all, for what concerns the peculiarity of knowledge (e.g. the local competences of human resources). Such aspect is particularly evident and meaningful in the industrial districts.

The organizational performances correspond to the various results (economic-financial,

competitive, social, etc.) achieved by the organization to satisfy a range of stakeholders (supra-systems and sub-systems):

- the ethical behaviour (social responsibility), appreciated by public opinion; - the meritocracy and the fringe benefits, praised by organizational members; - the quality and the reliability of the products, the satisfaction of the needs, the trust,

which represent fundamental elements for the consumers; - the share of market, the sales proceeds and the profits, the return on equity, required by

the shareholders; - the capital adequacy and the firm solvency, which creditors (banks and bondholders) pay

particular attention to; - etc.

The corporate culture and the distinctive competences derive from the unrepeatable

history of a firm19 and are determined by the path-dependency20. Since it derives from specific factors of context, the corporate culture and the distinctive competences are barely imitable from competitors.

The internal structure of communication

The structural elements of communication inside the organization (the visual identity and the corporate channels) represent the starting point for the corporate communication activities, since they can be considered as components of the “tool-box” for the various possible communication activities. The organization requires these components to implement its communication activities. For this reason, the governance group of an organization constitutes

19 The historical events are “…unrepeatable, since they are tied to their concrete context, to the endless

determinations that make them part of a unique historical phenomenology, not repeatable in any other place and in any other moment”. (DI BERNARDO and RULLANI, 1990: 348). Such conception finds a fundamental point of reference in the contribution of SARACENO (1978).

20 The natural tendency to the inertia of the organizations is justified by the path dependency (the dependence of the path followed by the firm), especially in technological field, tied up to strategic choices made in the past. The path dependency makes possible the accumulation of resources and productive factors, inside a well defined specific trajectory of technological change, using inertial strengths (DOSI, 1982; TEECE, PISANO and SHUEN, 1997). Such trajectory is destined to evolve in incremental way (cumulative) as a result of the determinism, in comparison to the initial conditions, to create a natural trajectory. (NELSON and WINTER, 1982: 258). Some authors observe: “Where a firm can go is a function of its current position and the paths ahead. Its current position is often shaped by the path it has travelled. […] Bygones are bygones. […] The notion of path dependencies recognizes that “history matters”. […] Thus a firm’s previous investments and its repertoire of routines (its “history”) constrain its future behaviour. This follows because learning tends to be local” (TEECE, PISANO and SHUEN, 1997: 522-523). In this perspective, corporate history determines the future evolution of the same entrepreneurial organization (DIERICKX and COOL 1989; RUMELT, 1984: 558).

12th


193

a set of structural elements of communication internal to the organization, characterized by specific features. In a specific time t, the inside structure of communication is the resultant of decisions of structural equipment assumed by the governance group.

The internal structure of communication does not have to be confused with the operations,

even if both can be considered as corporate factors. The inside structure of communication represents the set of corporate elements usable by an organization for its communicative activities, while the operations are the processes implemented by the organization and, as such, they have systemic (dynamic) nature.

The elements of visual identity (or symbolism) used by the organization represent the

“house style” and they are encoded in the visual identity manual, which is the corporate identity basic tool. The symbolic elements have the function to make identifiable and recognizable the organization and its products to the stakeholders (BIRKIGT and STADLER, 1986; FILL, 1999; BERNSTEIN, 1984; ABRATT and SHEE, 1989). The fundamental element of the visual identity is the brand (distinguished in corporate brand and product brand).

At a structural level, the governance group not only equips the organization with visual

codes of representation, but also with corporate channels, to communicate to the inside (house magazine, intranet, multimedia stands, etc.) and to the outside (letterhead, brochure, annual report, web site, front-office, etc.) of the organization. For its nature, the front-office members represent a corporate mean of communication with peculiar features; they can communicate both verbally and not verbally (gestural expressiveness, proxemics, paralinguistic).

After the constitution of a set of elements that compose the structure of communication,

the governance group can use them to formulate the communication plan of the organization. In the messages, the governance group uses the brand to communicate to stakeholders the symbol of recognizability of the organization; the internal channels are used to complete the set of corporate communication channels, which are added to those outside, available in the supra-system of communication.

The supra-system of communication

The structural elements of communication external to the organization are present in the supra-system of communication. From this supra-system, the firm can buy spaces of communication on extra-corporate channels, services from suppliers of the sector, the image of particular opinion leader, in order to answer to its own needs of communication.

More in detail, the supra-system of communication is composed of the following structural elements (COLLESEI and RAVÀ, 2004):

- the non-corporate channels of communication (traditional mass media, mail, internet,

telephone, etc.); - the opinion leaders (journalists, columnists, testimonials, experts, etc.); - the suppliers of communication services: providers, infomediaries, press agencies and

consultants (advertising agencies, which are composed of accounts, creatives, copywriters, art directors, etc.). In particular, it is necessary a strong integration between marketing managers and advertising agencies, in order to develop profitable relationships that assure an effective communication (EAGLE and KITCHEN, 2000).

12th


194

We consider such elements in the external structure of communication, as expression of the structural equipment of the supra-system of communication.

Other supra-systems

Besides the supra-system of communication, other supra-systems are considered as factors of our model of corporate communication management. We refer to the supra-systems in which act the various stakeholders that receive the corporate communication: the supra-system of the consumption (customers), the financial supra-system (shareholders, bondholders, and banks), the supra-system of the supply (suppliers) and the distribution (distributors), the supra-system of the public administrations (national and local government), etc. The system of communication

The last factor of the model (the system of communication) represents the totality of the flows (planned or unplanned, according to the cases, underlined in the figure 2) that make possible the process of corporate communication and the interaction with a multiplicity of individuals.

The fundamental flows of communication are: - among the members of the governance group; - among the members of the organization engaged in the operations; - among the members of the governance group and the members engaged in the

operations; - among the members of the governance group and the stakeholders of the supra-system of

communication (e.g. to find key resources for the corporate communication: opinion leaders, services suppliers that offer exclusive performances, etc.);

- among the members involved in the operations and the stakeholders of the supra-system of communication (to manage the maintenance of corporate intranet, assigned to a net service supplier);

- among the governance group and the external stakeholders (thanks to product advertising, expression of the planned corporate communication);

- between the front-office and the external stakeholders; - among the services suppliers of the supra-system of communication (call centre used by

the firm in outsourcing) and the external stakeholders. Through the process of communication, the firm conveys the textual, symbolic and factual

elements of the organization, communicating to its internal and external stakeholders. The system of communication has a dynamic nature and can be differentiated from the structure of communication, which has, instead, a static nature. The structure of communication is constituted of a set of elements that can be noticed and catalogued in any instant; these elements can also be object of planning. The relationship between these two factors consists in the fact that the system of communication derives from the implementation of the structural elements of communication, both inside and outside the organization.

The textual and symbolic elements are communicated through a planned communication, effected through the choices of the governance group. The factual elements, expressed by the behaviour of the governance group and of the organizational members, represent unplanned communication, characterized, instead by a varying degree of spontaneity. The stakeholders receive such type of communication through various types of contact with the organization:

12th


195

- through the front-office (sales and post-sales personnel), with the call centre representatives, etc. (direct contact);

- through the products, experienced at the act of their use (direct experience in the use of the products);

- through the word of mouth and the actions of the competitors, which can describe the behaviour of the organization (indirect contact).

The perception of the contents of the planned messages, together with the direct experience

of the products, the perception of the behaviour of the executives of the organization and the information concerning the organization communicated by other sources external to the firm, allow to the stakeholders to create an image of the organization (corporate image) and of its products (product brand image). In a long time, these factors allow stakeholders to have an idea about the level of reputation of the firm (corporate reputation and brand reputation).

The bonds among the elements of the model

In our model of corporate communication management, the greatest number of bonds regards the governance group, which, as can also be seen by the figure 2, is set in connection with the other factors.

A first bond exists with the inside structure of communication and is constituted by the

decisions of structural equipment regarding the elements of communication of corporate derivation, assumed by the governance group (indicated in the figure with the letter “d”).

The governance group, from time to time, according to its needs of communication, can

select and use the visual elements and the suitable channels to define corporate communication plan. Communication plan, as said earlier, is previously predisposed by the governance group within the structure of communication. To reach these objectives, the governance group selects and uses, according to its requirements, the structural elements of communication external to the organization (this operation also is pointed out with the letter “u”), present in the supra-system of communication. With these elements, the governance group has a double bond.

Some bonds exist, obviously, also among the governance group and the operations

developed within the organization, since these two contexts strongly interact for the good operating of the firm. In the firms of big dimensions the interaction happens, typically, on the basis of a two-way flow of planned communication, regulated by determined procedures, which concern the use of specific channels and shared format of message. The governance group transfers to the employees assigned to organizational operations the information to implement the guiding beliefs and the corporate strategy, in order to reach the strategic objectives and the realization of the mission of the organization. The employees assigned to the operations offer to the governance group precious informative feedbacks for the correct assumption of strategic decisions.

A bond also exists among the governance group and the various stakeholders that belong

to different supra-systems and receive the messages. This bond is based upon flows of planned communication (e. g. deriving from an advertising campaign) and unplanned communication (as said earlier, on the occasion of an interview granted by the CEO to a journalist).

The stakeholders are also in communication with the employees assigned to the operations. The external stakeholders perceive the behaviour of the organization as unplanned

12th


196

communication every time that they have a direct (through the use of the products and the interaction with the front-office) and indirect (through news on the media and the word of mouth) contact with the firm, as observed in precedence. Through the front office, the governance group can have informative flows of return (feed-backs) about the results achieved by the implemented communication activities.

A bond can finally be individualized also between the organizational operations and the

internal structure of communication. The organizational operations exercise on such structure an action of influence, in terms of bonds and opportunities, through corporate culture values. The system of values expressed by the corporate culture is destined to influence the symbolic elements contained in the inside structure communication and, above all, the corporate brand. Such elements, to be faithfully evocative, must reflect distinctive aspects of the real identity of the organization. Corporate identity finds in the corporate culture the most meaningful and qualifying elements. The more numerous the distinctive cultural factors, the greater the opportunities for the effective creation of a brand, which allows the transparency, the recognizability and the differentiation of the firm in comparison to the brands of the competitors21. 3. The drivers for corporate reputation management

The suitable perception of the brand by the stakeholders and, therefore, the creation of a favourable corporate image and corporate reputation represent the final objectives of the corporate communication.

The recovery of a negative image and reputation (or the positive consolidation of image

and reputation) implies an action of control through the measurement and the evaluation of the results of communication activities. Such evaluation can consent the individualization of the appropriate corrective actions, which allow a process of regulation of the corporate communication, destined to improve corporate image and reputation. The process follows three stages:

- a survey of the critical elements that produce inadequacies and problems to corporate

communication; - a selection of the factor of the GSS model in which any elements of inadequacy is

noticeable; - an individualization of the drivers on which the governance group can act to introduce

the corrective actions for the improvement of corporate image and the development of corporate reputation. According to the problem noticed in the stage of control of the results, the drivers allow interventions of adjustment. The selected drivers can offer the adequate solution to the problem, since they have an impact, direct or indirect, on the interested factors of corporate communication, and they can improve its results.

21 The firm could compensate for this lack adopting an orientation to image, that nevertheless introduces the

risk to create mere appearance. On the other hand, the orientation to transparency reflects the reality of the facts, according to the principles of business ethics and corporate social responsibility (EPSTEIN, 1987; CARROLL, 1991).

12th


197

ORGANIZATIONAL OPERATIONS

(SUB-SYSTEMS)

GOVERNANCE GROUP

of the organization

( u )

SUPRA-SYSTEM OF COMMUNICATION

( u )

( se )


corporate identity

OTHER SUPRA-SYSTEMS

- consumers - investors - suppliers - competitors

- etc.

corporate culture


( se ) = decisions of structural equipment; ( u ) = decisions of utilize of the structural elements of communication; ( c ) = coherence between visual identity and corporate culture;

= planned and/or unplanned communication flows;

= communication flows internal to governance group, internal to/among sub-systems.

Legend:

internal STRUCTURE of communication

corporate identity

brand

( c )

internal stakeholders

(members of the organization)

F.1

F.2

F.3

D.1 - formulation of strategic plan

D.2 - formulation of communication plan

D.3 - behaviour D.4 - measurement

and evaluation of corporate communication results

D.5 - corporate culture

D.6 - distinctive competences

D.7 - visual identity (symbolism)

D.8 - corporate channels




F.4

SYSTEM of communication

D.9 - internal flows of communication

D.10 - implementation of communication plan

external STRUCTURE of communication

Fig. 3 - The drivers usable for the regulation of corporate communication results

12th


198

Generally, in order to regulate the results of the corporate communication it is possible to act, for each factor (F) of the GSS model, on the following drivers (figure 3):

- drivers for the solution of problems of inadequacy consequent to the decisions and/or the behaviour of the governance group factor (F.1):

- D.1 - formulation of strategic plan (mission, vision, strategic objectives, positioning); - D.2 - formulation of communication plan (communication-mix and messages); - D.3 - behaviour of governance group members; - D.4 - measurement and evaluation of corporate communication results;

- drivers for the solution of problems of inadequacy consequent to the features of the organizational operations (F.2):

- D.5 - corporate culture; - D.6 - distinctive competences of the organization;

- drivers for the solution of problems of inadequacy consequent to the equipment of the internal structure of communication (F.3):

- D.7 - visual identity (symbolism); - D.8 - corporate channels of communication, internal to the organization;

- driver for the solution of problems of inadequacy consequent to the operating of the communication system (F.4):

- D.9 - inside flows of communication: - vertical (among the governance group and the sub-systems); - horizontal (among the members assigned to organizational

operations); - D.10 - implementation of the communication plan.

It has to be specified that the 10 individualized drivers refer only to the factors of the

model, which are endogenous to a firm. The governance group can manage these factors, although they have a varying degree of change. Governance group can not directly manage the supra-system of communication and the other supra-systems, since they are exogenous factors.

It must also be explained that the factors of the model, which manifest a determined

critical state, do not necessarily represent the source of the inadequacy of the communication, and a solution could be given acting on other drivers. In some cases the source must be found in previous actions implemented by the governance group. For instance, the possible inadequacy of the actual visual identity of the firm (which is manifest in the structure of communication) is attributable to the decisions of structural equipment decided in the past by the governance group. In such cases, the corrective actions that the model suggests are based upon the assumption that drivers act on the basis of the bonds existing among the factors of the model.

12th


199

A last specification concerns the combined use of the drivers. In order to correct the critical states, it could be essential to act on more drivers. To individualize more drivers at the same time, it is useful the analysis and the understanding of the bonds among the factors of the model, and therefore of the various cause-effect relationships on which corporate communication is based.

4. Case studies of Italian organizations

In order to check the value of the proposed model and its capability to control and regulate the results of corporate communication activities, we have individualized some case studies of organizations that show situations of inadequacy in corporate communication process.

A first set of cases, analysed in this paragraph, considers five Italian organizations (tab. 1); a second set of other five cases, examined in the following paragraph, refers to non-Italian organizations. Each of the proposed case studies considers: the critical elements of the corporate communication; the relative factors of the model GSS in which the inadequacy is manifested; the drivers of the model to activate for the corrective actions. In some cases, the corrective actions are designed to recover image and reputation; in other cases, they aim to make more effective the corporate communication process, without a meaningful impact on image and reputation.

12th


200

Tab. 1 - Case studies of Italian organizations

Organizations

Critical elements

of corporate

communication

Factors of the GSS

model that represent

sources of

inadequacy

Drivers of the model

for the corrective

actions

Ciaoweb (web portal)

Wrong selection of target and of communication channels.

F.1 - governance group

D.1 – formulation of strategic plan




D.3 - behaviour

Numero Italia (phone services)

Non-transparent communication; inadequate formulation of the visual identity elements.

F.3 - structure of communication

D.7 - visual identity


D.1 - formulation of strategic plan


Koèsis (jewels)

Wrong redefinition of target; inadequacy of the brand elements.





Chiampesan (jewels)

Inadequate formulation of the message; wrong choice of communication channels; scarce effectiveness of communication plan implementation.

F.4 - system of communication

D.10 - implementation of

communication plan

F.2 - organizational operations

D.5 - corporate culture



Indesit (household appliances)

Inadequate behaviour of organizational members; inadequacy of the equipment of corporate communication channels. F.4 - system of

communication

D.9 - internal communication flows

In the first case, communication inadequacies are attributable to the decisions of the

governance group.

12th


201

Ciaoweb, the horizontal portal of Ifil-Fiat group, was created for a public of internet beginners, which are people unskilled in digital technology, that experienced internet “surfing” for the first time in that period (December 1999). According to governance group, Ciaoweb should have been a very easy-to-use portal ("Useful to Everybody, Easy as Anybody"), in comparison to many competitors (Virgilio, Libero, Kataweb, Jumpy, Tiscali, etc.). The main objective was to produce additional benefits to the various activities of the group, present in different sectors, from the car industry (Fiat, Lance, Alfa Romeo), to the retailing (Rinascente, SMA, Auchan), to the tourist industry (Alpitour, Franco Rosso, etc.). Therefore, the main idea was to create an user-friendly portal (brick-and-mortar), usable by families. Nevertheless, in phase of launch it was clear that, among the channels of communication selected, only the points of sale incentives were suitable to the selected target; all the other used channels were mainly aimed to different stakeholders (press, hotels and airports advertising to professionals; TV, radio and internet advertising to young people, often skilled in new technologies). Probably the wrong decisions about the strategic plan (e. g. the individualized segment was not substantial, the governance group did not seem to have a clear corporate positioning and, therefore, which could not be created ex-novo with the portal, that is an operational tool). In a few months (late 2001), this situation brought to the transfer of the portal (at that time in a situation of heavy loss) to Hachette Rusconi group.

In order to solve the underlined inadequacies, our model suggests acting on the drivers

that concern a revision of the choices of strategic and communication plan, considering the difficulty to reach the target with the selected communication-mix.

Even in Numero Italia case, the governance group is involved, also if different

communication imperfections are detected.

In 2005, a negative word-of-mouth via e-mail had negative repercussions on Numero Italia advertising campaign, created for the launch of the new information service on telephone subscribers (denominated “892 892”). The e-mail openly discredited the firm, which was guilty not to have specified immediately the costs incurred by customers. Besides the heavy economic burden, the advertising message of the service, broadcasted on the main Italian television stations, had the "hidden" intention to present “892 892” as substitute for the service “12”, offered by Telecom Italia (until then, a service in monopoly regime). The TV spot, in fact, called to mind such competitor, using the same chromatic codes (red colour) for the overalls of the two testimonials.

In this case, the assumption of a behaviour based upon unethical values and a scarce

transparency of communication, did not allow the firm to face adequately the negative word-of-mouth, arisen after the launch of the service. Therefore, it seems clear that the positioning chosen by the governance group could not be sustainable over time, since it was thought to imitate the market leader. To solve the inadequacies, the model suggests redefining communication plan and visual identity elements.

Similar inadequacies can be found in Koésis case.

12th


202

Koésis entered the Italian jewellery market in 1999. The first advertising campaign, proposed by the governance group, aimed to reach a segment of consumers on the rise at that time, the “new senior” (i.e. people aged between 50 and 70 years that prefer “classical” jewels and a good manufacture, rather than to follow the fashion). In 2001, the firm decided to change both the concept of its message and the previously selected target. The name Koésis was changed in Koésia; also the brand was modified and associated with the ethereal features of a young model who, as the new headline recited, “cannot live without” the ring she wears. With such decisions about corporate communication, Koésia lost its distinctive features, achieved thanks to the previous advertising efforts, and selected the same target chosen by other Italian firms, made up of women with an age between 20 and 50 years old.

The corrective drivers, pointed out by the model, involve the redefinition of strategic plan, communication plan and visual identity. In this case, after an accurate individualization of the target, it is necessary to act on the elements of the communication structure, which are the only ones capable of recovering the distinctiveness and the awareness (of the firm and of its products), previously wasted with contradictory strategic choices. The new visual identity has to be, then, communicated in a new plan.

Also the following selected case concerns the jewellery sector.

In 1997, Chiampesan chose a communication campaign centred on the pay off "women love themselves" (in Italian such expression can also mean "women love each other"), investing about 10% of its sales revenue. After the first successful TV advertising campaigns, thanks to a progressive increase of brand awareness, in 2001 the governance group decided to create a website. During the launch of the website, the firm decided to choose as testimonials seven women, who had different age and life styles, but shared the same taste for beauty. The website "www.ledonnesiamano.it" was proposed as a meeting point for women; afterward, the website was appreciated above all for the fact that the name of such web pages allowed two different interpretations.

In this case, it is possible to underline a plurality of inadequacies in communication activities. The formulation of a message that was not adaptable to various media (TV and internet) was caused by the decision of the governance group about the copy strategy. Moreover, it was necessary a particular attention to the communication of the messages, to avoid undesirable effects on image and reputation. In such case, the model suggests corrective interventions on the communication plan and on the modalities of plan implementation.

In 1990, the Indesit Company was among the first Italian firms to invest in a Customer Relationship Management program, with the activation of a call centre. Organizational members and customers did not consider this call centre necessary. The new corporate communication channel was a premature choice for Indesit, which did not succeed in establishing a closer relationship with its stakeholders. Its customers, in fact, were more satisfied when they could take advantage of pre and post sale services provided by specialized technicians and by sales employees. Moreover, CRM tactics were in conflict with the existing distribution network and made employees’ work difficult because of the several interruptions. This situation created many inconveniences to customers. In other words, the introduction of an unsuitable communication channel determined behaviour of organizational members that the stakeholders perceived in a negative way.

12th


203

Following the indications provided by the model, the drivers on which is necessary to act

for problem solving, are various: the corporate culture, in order to create the conditions to accept a substantial organizational change (the introduction of a call centre); the internal communication flows (between governance group and organizational members), to guarantee a suitable informative exchange and to underline the possible risks following a change of organizational members behaviour; the corporate channels, to verify the adequacy of the internal structure of communication. 5. Case studies of non-Italian organizations

In this paragraph, we analyse five cases of non-Italian organizations that show communication inadequacies. According to the noticed inadequacy, it is possible to operate corrective interventions through the individualization of the fit drivers (tab. 2).

Tab. 2 - Case studies of non-Italian organizations

Organizations

Critical elements

of corporate communication

Factors of the GSS

model that represent

sources of inadequacy

Drivers of the model

for the corrective

actions

F.1 - governance group D.2 - formulation of communication plan

Ikea (furnishings)

Wrong choice of communication target and also of the corporate communication channels.



Gatorade (energetic drinks)

Regionality of the product due to wrong choice of the communication channels. Message created only for a part of the selected consumers.



F.1 - governance group D.1 - formulation of strategic plan

D.4 - measurement and evaluation of corporate communication results

Boo.com (clothing e-tailer)

Wrong choice of the communication target. Inability to satisfy customers' expectations (assortment, usability of the web site, etc.). Wrong measuring and assessment of the achieved results.

F.4 - system of communication

D.10 - implementation of communication plan

F.1 - governance group D.2 - formulation of communication plan


D.5 - corporate culture D.6 - distinctive

competences

British Airways (air transport)

Inadequate interaction among front office and customers. New visual identity, totally different from the previous one.




D.5 - corporate culture D.6 - distinctive

competences

Citycorp (banking services)

Inadequate interaction among front-office and customers.



12th


204

The first case concerns the addition of a new communication channel used by the organization.

In the spring 2000, the Italian division of Ikea, a firm leader in the distribution of furnishings, chose to distribute "Room", a quarterly magazine (which was similar to a house magazine and to a magazine of design) in addition to communication channels used in the past (advertising hoardings and product-catalogues distributed for free). After few numbers the magazine was cut off, probably because it was too expansive for the firm. Moreover, the magazine was not appreciated by stakeholders, which did not have the proper motivations to buy a magazine directly connected to the organization. Subsequently, Ikea developed different house magazines, distributed to its organizational members and its customers.

According to the model prescriptions, in such case it is necessary to act on the selection of

the corporate channels and on the formulation of the communication plan, in order to increase the efficiency and the effectiveness of corporate communication.

In the following case the focus is set on the communication channels.

In 1983, the Quacker Oats made the acquisition of the Gatorade Company, which produced energetic drinks. The brand Gatorade had some weaknesses that the Quacker Oats tried to eliminate. Particularly, the regionality of the product was evident (over the 70% of the sales was made in the South of the United States) and the low number of consumers (the majority of its consumers were male athletes, aged between 15 and 49 years old). The regionality was caused by the wrong choice of the communication channels selected to communicate the product to consumers. Thanks to an effective selection of channels - but also thanks to an expansion of the distribution channels - the percentage of the sales in South States of USA was reduced, but sales increased in other areas of the country. Moreover, thanks to a new claim (“Gatorade is a help for the thirst, for the deep thirst of the body”), the organization succeeded to reach more consumers (as women and youngest boys). With these corrective actions, the sales grew around 20%, from 1983 to 1986.

The effected interventions follow the indications of our model that, in such case, suggests

redefining the communication plan. Other interventions (not tightly concerning the corporate communication process) involved changes in the marketing plan, to redefine the distribution of the products.

The Boo.com case is about an initiative of e-commerce in the clothing sector. With an initial investment of 120 million dollars, the governance group idea was the creation of the first global website for sporting and city-life fashion ("the first online global sports and urban fashion store"). Because of numerous technical problems, the launch of the website was postponed of several months (from May to December 1999) and, in a short time, the organization failed (May 2000), despite the corrective actions effected. Besides general problems (scarce experience of the managers, costs out of control, assortment different to consumers expectations, logistic costs underestimated), various inadequacies were also in the choices of communication.

Probably, communication inadequacies followed mistakes of the governance group (e. g.

inaccurate market evaluation). Our model prescribes to correct the strategic plan, the implementation of communication plan and the tools used to measure and evaluate communication results.

12th


205

The British Airways case shows different inadequacies.

During the privatisation process, the British Airways (the principal airline company of the United Kingdom) met serious problems to succeed in modifying the organizational members’ behaviours. In fact, BA was known as "bloody awful"; the organization had an extremely negative reputation, caused by its organizational members and its customer service (HATCH and SCHULTZ, 2003). At the end of the eighties, the company was considered bureaucratic, incompetent, and indifferent to the needs of the customers. In a short time, British Airways modified radically its own corporate image, despite of several resistances of inside and outside stakeholders. A training program for organizational members was launched to modify their behaviour; this program, with time, improved the staff competences. Moreover, the airline company symbolism was modified, acting on visual elements as the logo and the airplanes design, in order to communicate the innovative aspects of the re-positioning to stakeholders. The British Airways did not succeed in communicating adequately the change to important customer segments (the most conservative part of the English society), which considered the new visual identity an offence to the values and the pride of the British tradition.

In such case, our model suggests corrective actions to improve the corporate culture, the

distinctive competences, the visual identity and the communication plan. Particularly, it would have been useful to plan more adequately the contents of the message and to redefine the communication-mix, in order to satisfy the needs of an important part of the customers, to sustain the change and to reassure on the preservation of the national identity of the firm.

The last case proposed concerns Citycorp.

Citycorp is an American firm of banking services. The results emerged from a research showed that Citycorp customers perceived the front office of the firm as extremely bureaucratised and slow. The firm decided to obviate such problem giving the possibility to the customers of the bank to set up their own operations through the Automatic Teller Machine (ATM). In such way, the company succeeded in eliminating the queues, communicating an image of greater dynamism to the stakeholders.

The solution individualized by Citycorp refers to a specific factor of our model: the

structure of communication. In such case, it is necessary the revision of the corporate channels, with the addition of new technologies, in order to offer a new service to the customers and to improve the corporate image. Moreover, the model suggests interventions on the corporate culture and on the distinctive competences, to modify the behaviour and to improve the performances of the front office, to satisfy customers that prefer to make banking operations by using the traditional counters.

To complete the analysis of the examined case studies, we have noticed that some recurrent features are found in different situations of crisis communication22. In fact, the involved drivers are referable only to some factors of the model: the governance group and the organizational operations, even if there is a variation of the critical elements (sabotage, defects of production, lack of transparency in the communication). The governance group and the organizational operations are the only two factors of the model that can make decisions and express behaviours destined to influence in a significant way corporate image and reputation.

22 We refer to Mercedes, Nike, Coca-Cola, Exxon, Tylenol (Johnson & Johnson), Enron, Intel, Tetrapak,

Moulinex, Perrier, Levi’s, Parmalat, Motta-Alemagna (Nestlè) and Airport Malpensa of Milan (SEA) cases.

12th


206

6. Conclusions

The “Governance-Structure-System” model can constitute a valid support for both the researchers and the practitioners of corporate communication. Describing working mechanism of corporate communication, the model offers an overall view of the fundamental factors and the main bonds of cause-and-effect that, in a systemic approach, intervene and set the corporate communication processes. This point of view allows having an orientation about corporate communication issues, making possible the immediate detection of the nature - static (structural) or dynamic (systemic) - of the factors of the model which come into play and assume considerable importance to plan and control communication activities. Knowing the nature of the considered factors means to be able to decide consciously and effectively about corporate communication issues.

The mapping of the drivers, to use in relation to each factor of inadequacy in order to

operate corrective actions, completes the utility functions of the model. The individualized drivers reflect the nature of the factors, which they refer to. A set of drivers must be considered by governance group (decision-maker for corporate communication), which selects, from time to time, the more suitable drivers for the improvement of the effectiveness and the efficiency of corporate communication process.

The model offers the further advantage to point out the practicability and the necessary

times of improving actions for reputation: the structural drivers involve less complex and more directly achievable actions (e.g. change of the logo or the addition of a corporate channel of communication); the systemic drivers act, instead, on variables characterized by high social complexity and uncertainty of results and times (changes of the corporate culture or development of new distinctive competences). As such, the systemic drivers are suitable to manage corporate reputation, which represents a complex phenomenon, both for the plurality of the factors which can determine it and for the length of the time necessary to its development.

The empirical evidences, represented by some case studies, seem to confirm the

explanatory ability of the model, not only in phase of analysis but also in phase of evaluation and selection of the options to improve the results of corporate communication.

Nevertheless, we are aware that the model requires to be broadly tested at empirical level,

in order to be considered a reliable tool for the decision-maker, that is engaged in very complex analyses and evaluations, since it has to consider a wide range of factors concerning corporate communication and its relative performances. References

AAKER, D.A. (1991) Managing Brand Equity. Capitalizing on the Value of a Brand Name, New York: The Free Press. ABRATT, R. and SHEE, P.S.B. (1989) ‘A New Approach to the Corporate Image Management Process’, Journal of Marketing Management, 5 (1), 63-76. ADRIAN, A.D. and DOWNS, C.W. (2004) Assessing Organizational Communication:

Strategic Communication Audits, New York: Guildford Press.

12th


207

ALBERT, S. and WHETTEN, D.A. (1985) Organizational Identity, in CUMMINGS, L. L and STAW, B. M. (eds.), Research in Organizational Behaviour, Greenwich CT: JAI Press, 263-295. ALESSANDRI, S.W. (2001) ‘Modelling Corporate Identity: a Concept Explication and Theoretical Explanation’, Corporate Communications: an International Journal, 6 (4), 173-182. ANDALEEB, S.S. (1992) ‘The Trust Concept: Research Issues for Channel Distribution’, Research in Marketing, 11, 1-34. BACCARANI, C. (1991) ‘Qualità e Governo dell’Impresa’, Sinergie, Quaderno, 7, 37-56. BACCARANI, C. (1995) ‘Riflessioni sulla Fiducia’, in UGOLINI, M. La Natura dei

Rapporti tra Imprese nel Settore delle Calze per Donna, Padova: Cedam. BACCARANI, C. and GOLINELLI, G.M. (1992) ‘L’Impresa Inesistente: Relazioni tra Immagine e Strategia’, Sinergie, 29, 137-147. BALMER, J.M.T., and GRAY, E.R. (2000) 'Corporate Identity and Corporate Communications: Creating a Competitive Advantage', Industrial and Commercial Training, 32(7), 256-262. BENNETT, R. and KOTTASZ, R. (2000) ‘Practitioner Perceptions of Corporate Reputation: an Empirical Investigation”, Corporate Communications: An International Journal, 5(4), 224-234. BERNSTEIN, D. (1984) Company Image and Reality: a Critique of Corporate

Communications, London: Rinehart & Winston. BIRKIGT, K. and STADLER, M. M. (1986) Corporate Identity, Grundlagen, Funktionen und

Beispielen, Verlag: Moderne Industrie: Landsberg and Lech. BRONDONI, S.M. (2002) Patrimonio di Marca e Politica di Comunicazione, Torino: Giappichelli. BUSACCA, B. (1994) Le Risorse di Fiducia dell’Impresa. Soddisfazione del Cliente,

Creazione di Valore, Strategie di Accrescimento, Torino: Utet. CARROLL, A.B. (1991) ‘The Pyramide of Corporate Social Responsibility: Toward the Moral Management of Organizational Stakeholders’, Business Horizons, 34(4), 39-48. CARUANA, A. (1997) ‘Corporate Reputation: Concept and Measurement’, Journal of

Product & Brand Management, 6(2), 109-118. CODA, V. (1988) L’Orientamento Strategico dell’Impresa, Torino: Utet. COLLESEI, U. and RAVÀ, V. (eds.) (2004) La Comunicazione d’Azienda, Torino: Isedi. CONFETTO, M.G. (2004) Un Modello di Comunicazione d’Impresa ASV-based, Torino: Giappichelli. CORNELISSEN J.P., HASLAM S. A. and BALMER, J.M.T. (2007) 'Social Identity, Organizational Identity and Corporate Identity: Towards an Integrated Understanding of Processes, Patternings and Products', British Journal of Management, 18, S1–S16. DAVIS, S.M. (1984) Managing Corporate Culture, Cambridge, MA: Ballinger Publishing Company. DEAL, T.E. and KENNEDY, A.A. (1982) Corporate Cultures. The Rites and Rituals of

Corporate Life, Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley. DI BERNARDO, B. and RULLANI, E. (1990) Il Management e le Macchine. Teoria

Evolutiva dell’Impresa, Bologna: Il Mulino. DIERICKX, I. and COOL, K. (1989) ‘Asset Stock Accumulation and Sustainability of Competitive Advantage’, Management Science, 35(12), 1504-1511. DOSI, G. (1982) ‘Technological Paradigms and Technological Trajectories: a Suggested Interpretation of the Determinants and Directions of Technical Change’, Research Policy, 11, 147-162.

12th


208

DOWLING, G.R. (1993), ‘Developing Your Company Image into a Corporate Asset’, Long

Range Planning, 26(2), 101-109. DOWNS, C.W. (1988) Communication Audits, New York: Harper Collins. EAGLE, L.C. and KITCHEN, P.J. (2000). 'IMC, Brand Communications and Corporate Cultures: Client / Advertising Agency Co-ordination and Cohesion', European Journal of

Marketing, 34 (5-6), 667-704. EPSTEIN, E.M. (1987), ‘The Corporate Social Policy Process: Beyond Business Ethics, Corporate Social Responsibility, and Corporate Social Responsiveness’, California

Management Review, 29 (3), 99-114. FILL, C. (1999) Marketing Communications. Frameworks, Theories and Applications, 2nd, Hemel Hempstead: Prentice Hall. FILLIS, I. (2003) ‘Image, Reputation and Identity Issues in the Arts and Crafts Organisation’, Corporate Reputation Review, 6 (3), 239-251. FOMBRUN, C. (1996) Reputation: Realizing Value from the Corporate Image, Boston, MA: Harvard Business School Press. FOMBRUN, C. and SHANLEY, M. (1990) ‘What's in a Name? Reputation-building and Corporate Strategy’, Academy of Management Journal, 33, 233-258. FOMBRUN, C. and RIEL van, C. B. M. (1997) ‘The Reputational Landscape’, Corporate

Reputation Review, 1(1/2), 5-13. FOMBRUN, C., GARDBERG, N. and SEVER, J. (2000) ‘The Reputation Quotient: a Multi-stakeholder Measure of Corporate Reputation’, The Journal of Brand Management, 7 (4), 241-255. FOMBRUN, C. and RIEL van, C.B.M. (2003) Fame & Fortune. How Successful Companies

Build Winning Reputations, Upper Suddle River: Prentice Hall Financial Times. GANESAN, S. (1994) ‘Determinants of Long-term Orientation in Buyer-Seller Relationship’, Journal of Marketing, 58, 1-19. GHEMAWAT, P. (1993) Commitment. La Dinamica della Strategia, Milano: Il Sole 24Ore Libri. GIOIA, D.A., SCHULTZ, M. and CORLEY K.G. (2000) ‘Organizational Identity, Image, and Adaptive Instability’, Academy of Management Review, 25(1), 63-81. GOLINELLI, G.M. (2000) L’approccio Sistemico al Governo dell’Impresa. L’Impresa

Sistema Vitale, vol. I, Padova: Cedam. GOLINELLI, G.M. (2002) L’approccio Sistemico al Governo dell’Impresa. Valorizzazione

delle Capacità, Rapporti Intersistemici e Rischio nell’Azione di Governo, vol. III, Padova: Cedam. GOOD, D. (1989), ‘Individui, Relazioni Interpersonali e Fiducia’, in D. GAMBETTA (a cura di), Le Strategie della Fiducia. Indagini sulla Razionalità della Cooperazione, Torino: Einaudi, 41-62. GOTSI, M. and WILSON, A.M. (2001) ‘Corporate Reputation: Seeking a Definition’, Corporate Communications: An International Journal, 6(1), 24-30. GRAY, E.R. and BALMER, J.M.T. (1998) ‘Managing Corporate Image and Corporate Reputation’, Long Range Planning, 31(5), 695-702. GRÖNROOS, C. (2000a) Service Management and Marketing: a Customer Relationship

Management Approach, 2nd

ed., New York: Wiley. GRÖNROOS, C. (2000b), ‘Creating a Relationship Dialogue: Communication, Interaction, Value’, Marketing Review, 1(1), 5-14. HATCH, M.J. and SCHULTZ, M. (1997) ‘Relations between Organizational Culture, Identity and Image’, European Journal of Marketing, 31 (5), 356-365.

12th


209

HATCH, M.J. and SCHULTZ, M. (2003) ‘Bringing the Corporation into Corporate Branding’, European Journal of Marketing, 37(7/8) , 1048-1052. HERBIG, P. and MILEWICZ, J. (1995) ‘To Be or not to Be...Credible That Is: a Model of Credibility among Competing Firms’, Marketing Intelligence & Planning, 13(6), 24-33. INVERNIZZI, E. (1996) La Comunicazione Organizzativa nel Governo dell’Impresa, Milano: Giuffrè. INVERNIZZI, E. (2005) Manuale di Relazioni Pubbliche. Le Tecniche e i Servizi di Base, Milano: McGraw-Hill. JACKSON, P. (1987) Corporate Communication for Managers, London: Pitman. KITCHEN, P. J (1997) (ed.) Public Relation. Principles and Practice, London: Thomson Learning. KITCHEN, P.J. and LAURENCE, A. (2003) 'Corporate Reputation: an Eight Country Analysis', Corporate Reputation Review, 6(2), 103-117. KOTLER, P. (1991) Marketing Management. Analysis, Planning Implementation and

Control, Englewood Cliffs: Prentice-Hall. LAMBERT, A. (1989) ‘Corporate Identity and Facilities Management’, Facilities, 7(12), 7-12. MAHON, J.F. and WARTICK, S.L. (2003) ‘Dealing with Stakeholders: How Reputation, Credibility and Framing Influence the Game’, Corporate Reputation Review, 6(1), 19-35. MARKWICK, N. and FILL, C. (1997) ‘Towards a Framework for Managing Corporate Identity’, European Journal of Marketing, 31(5/6), 396-409. MAYER, R.C., DAVIS, J.H. and SCHOORMAN, F.D. (1995) “An Integration Model of Organizational Trust”, Academy of Management Review, 20(3), 709-734. MELEWAR, T.C. and JENKINS, E. (2002) ‘Defining the Corporate Identity Construct’, Corporate Reputation Review, 5(1), 76-90. MORGAN, R.M. and HUNT, S.D. (1994) ‘The Commitment-Trust Theory of Relationship Marketing’, Journal of marketing, 58(3), 20-38. NELSON, R. R. and WINTER, S. G. (1982) An Evolutionary Theory of Economic Change, Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. OLINS, W. (1983) The Wolff Olins Guide to Corporate Identity, London: The Design Council/The Design Management Institute. OLINS, W. (1990) Corporate Identity: Making Business Strategy Visible through Design, London: Thames & Hudson. PREECE, S., FLEISHER, C. and TOCCACELLI, J. (1995) ‘Building a Reputation along the Value Chain at Levi Strauss’, Long Range Planning, 28(6), 88-98. RIEL, C.B.M. van (1995) Principles of Corporate Communication, Harlow: Prentice Hall. RIEL, C.B.M. van (1997) 'Research in Corporate Communication. An Overview of Emerging Field', Management Communication Quarterly, 11(2), 288-309. RIEL, C.B.M. van and BALMER, J.M.T., (1997) 'Corporate Identity: the Concept, its Measurement and Management', European Journal of Marketing, 31(5/6), 340-355. RUMELT, R.P. (1984) ‘Towards a Strategic Theory of the Firm’, in LAMB, R., (ed.) Competitive Strategic Management, Englewood Cliffs: Prentice-Hall. SARACENO, P. (1978) Economia e Direzione dell’Impresa Industriale, Milano: Isedi. SCHEIN, E.H. (1999) The Corporate Culture Survival Guide, San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. SCHULTZ, D.E. and KITCHEN, P.J. (2004) 'Managing the Changes in Corporate Branding and Communications: Closing and Re-Opening the Corporate Umbrella', Corporate

Reputation Review, 6 (4), 347-367. SCHULTZ, M., HATCH, M.J., and LARSEN, M. (2000) The Expressive Organisation:

Linking Identity, Reputation and the Corporate Brand, Oxford: Oxford University Press.

12th


210

SELZNICK, P. (1957) Leadership in Administration: A Sociological Interpretation, New York: Harper & Row. SIANO, A. (1997) ‘L’Alibi della Complessità nelle Analisi Strategiche: Giustificazione alla Rinuncia alla Comprensione del Fenomeno o Sfida per gli Studiosi?’, Esperienze d'Impresa, 1, 113-125. SIANO, A. (2001) Competenze e Comunicazione del Sistema d’Impresa. Il Vantaggio

Competitivo tra Ambiguità e Trasparenza, Milano: Giuffrè. SIANO, A. (a cura di), (2002) Il Piano di Comunicazione Aziendale. Elementi Costitutivi e

Criteri di Formulazione, Salerno: CUSL. SIANO, A. (2004) ‘Struttura e Sistema di Comunicazione d’Impresa’, Esperienze d'Impresa, 2, 171-183. SIANO, A. and CONFETTO, M.G. (2003), ‘Fonti-Aree-Forme-Mezzi-Veicoli: un Modello per la Scelta del Communication-Mix nell’Impresa Sistema Vitale’, Esperienze d’Impresa, 2, 33-88. TEECE, D.J., PISANO, G. and SHUEN, A. (1997) ‘Dynamic Capabilities and Strategic Management’, Strategic Management Journal, 18(7), 509-533. VICARI, S. (1991) L’impresa Vivente, Milano: EtasLibri. VICARI, S. (1992) ‘Risorse Aziendali e Funzionamento d’Impresa’, Finanza Marketing e

Produzione, 3, 127-151. WARTICK, S.L. (1992) ‘The Relationship between Intense Media Exposure and Change in Corporate Reputation’, Business & Society, 31, 33-49. WARTICK, S.L. (2002) ‘Measuring Corporate Reputation: Definition and Data’, Business &

Society, 41(4), 371-392. WATZLAWICK P., BEAVIN J.H. and JACKSON D.D., (1967) ‘Pragmatics of Human Communication. A Study of Interactional Patterns, Pathologies, and Paradoxes’, New York: Norton & Co. WEI, Y.K. (2002) ‘Corporate Image as Collective Ethos: a Poststructuralist Approach’, Corporate Communications: An International Journal, 7(4), 269-276. WEISS, A.M., ANDERSON, E. and MACINNIS, D.J. (1999) ‘Reputation Management as a Motivation for Sales Structure Decisions’, Journal of Marketing, 63(4), 74-89.

Management. Empirical Evidences from some Case Studies. Alfonso

Documents

Transcript of Management. Empirical Evidences from some Case Studies. Alfonso