Institutionalizing Strategic Communication in Europe – An Ideal Home or a Mad House? Evidence from a Survey in 37 Countries

Abstract

Is strategic communication becoming an established discipline of practice across Europe? Is it in turn becoming institutionalized? And do we mean establishing a renowned practice at the heart of organizational operation? This article aims to address these questions while paying attention to the negative implications some of the terminology has in the English language. Institution is also the label given to prisons, hospitals and other physical structures that are used in society to organize and control groups of people. The article finds evidence that communication managers are not frustrated "inmates" but rather liberated and respected practitioners who are establishing themselves as permanent and necessary fixtures within the organizational infrastructure. As a consequence these practitioners and departments are becoming entwined parts of the organization and therefore institutionalized. Evidence is presented from data collected from 37 European countries from a sample of over 1,500 communication managers.

The present state of integrated communication in Russia

“…However, few studies have been conducted on the specifics of integrated communication as a social institution and culturally-specific social phenomenon (Smith, 2013). Tench, Verhoeven, and Zerfass (2009) noted that the term institution is rather vague and describes large public and private enterprises; additionally, this term may have a negative connotation. Tench et al, 2009 proposed multiple views of this term, including the accepted organizational structure, collective behavior patterns that are historically derived from separate practices, and the image of the organization within the societal structure and public sphere.…”

“…Tench, Verhoeven, and Zerfass (2009) noted that the term institution is rather vague and describes large public and private enterprises; additionally, this term may have a negative connotation. Tench et al, 2009 proposed multiple views of this term, including the accepted organizational structure, collective behavior patterns that are historically derived from separate practices, and the image of the organization within the societal structure and public sphere. Evstsafyev (2013) regarded integrated communication as both a societal function and institution since it simultaneously is a societal product and its driver.…”

“…Evstsafyev (2013) regarded integrated communication as both a societal function and institution since it simultaneously is a societal product and its driver. This article defines institutionalization as a process of transformation of certain professional practices into the social institution, establishing trends in the field and shared meaning of professional practices (Grunig, 1999;Tench et al, 2009). Thus, this article supports Evstsafyev's (2013) claim that integrated communications appear in the form of a system of social institutions and now are in the process of transformation into the social institution themselves.…”

Social media: the Wild West of CSR communications

“…The paper reports on research data from the European Communication Monitor 2010, 2011 and 2012 (http://www.communicationmonitor.eu/) and draws on work already published in this area (Tench, Verhoeven and Zerfass, 2009;andZerfass et al, 2010, 2011) to illustrate the unruly unregulated Web 2.0 social media communication landscape in Europe. A range of literature is drawn on to provide the theoretical context for an exploration of issues that surround social media.…”

Organizing and Disorganizing Strategic Communication: Discursive Institutional Change Dynamics in Two Communication Departments

“…Tench et al (2009) argue that strategic communication is institutionalized both as a collective pattern of behavior and as an institutionalized thought structure. Moreno et al (2010) suggest that the institutionalization of strategic communication varies along the lines of personal characteristics, experience, hierarchal position, age and gender.…”