Broadening the Concept of Expectations in Public Relations

Abstract

Expectations have been connected to many central concepts of public relations research, yet, definitions of what is meant by expectations are lacking. This article aims to broaden the understanding of expectations by taking into account their multi-dimensional nature, suggesting that there are several explanations to expectations depending on what the expectation is based on. We suggest that in organizational context expectations are two-fold assessments of what is considered good or desirable (expectation tone ranging from positive to negative) and the confidence placed in the organization (organization-specific context ranging from high to low confidence). As a result of the conceptual review with theoretical input from areas outside the scope of public relations, the article presents the Expectation Grid, where expectations are acknowledged as continuums of tone and context. Olkkonen & Luoma-aho: Broadening the concept of expectations in public relations

A conceptual foundation for expectations of corporate responsibility

“…When it comes to breaking expectations down as a concept, customer management and customer satisfaction literature offer support as this stream of research presents expectations as a dynamic phenomenon where different factors can affect the final formation of an expectation (see, e.g., Miller, 1977;Summers and Granbois, 1977;Swan et al, 1982;Woodruff et al, 1983;Zeithaml et al, 1993; see also Olkkonen and Luoma-aho, 2015). These factors have been suggested to create different expectation types that have different origins (Summers and Granbois, 1977;Woodruff et al, 1983).…”

“…These factors have been suggested to create different expectation types that have different origins (Summers and Granbois, 1977;Woodruff et al, 1983). The types suggested are abundant (see Olkkonen and Luoma-aho, 2015), some dealing with values, such as "normative" (Summers and Granbois, 1977) or "ideal" expectations (Miller, 1977), while some rest on the information that is available,…”

“…To explore the use of expectations more systematically, this section presents results from a targeted literature search with a focus on journals of corporate communication and public relations. Olkkonen and Luoma-aho, 2015). Responsibility was one of the concepts that expectations was most often connected to, ranking second after reputation and followed by relationship, legitimacy, satisfaction, trust, and identity.…”

“…The two embedded assessments-normative assessment of different outcomes and organization-specific assessment dealing with confidence in a particular organization-are the basis for the Expectation Grid (first introduced by Olkkonen and Luoma-aho, 2015; empirically tested and revised by Olkkonen, 2015a;2015b). Figure 1 below depicts the Expectation Grid and opens up the differences between the positive (optimistic or hopeful), and negative (cynical or pessimistic) expectations.…”

“…First, a targeted literature search in communication journals is presented to map the use of expectations in the current literature of CR communication. As will be discussed in the article, despite the wide circulation and use of expectations in the literature, the conceptual understanding of expectations tends to be narrow and biased in the sense that expectations are understood solely or, at least, predominantly as positive anticipations that organizations can start to fulfill in order to attain important, tangible and intangible assets (Olkkonen and Luoma-aho, 2015;Olkkonen, 2015b). Second, to broaden the existing understanding of expectations and mitigate the positivity bias, four types of expectations are explored; two positive (optimistic and hopeful) and two negative (cynical and pessimistic) that comprise the Expectation Grid (Olkkonen and Luomaaho, 2015;Olkkonen, 2015b).…”