Revisiting the concept “dialogue” in public relations

Theunissen, Petra; Noordin, Wan Norbani Wan

doi:10.1016/j.pubrev.2011.09.006

Cited by 162 publications

(108 citation statements)

References 22 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…This conflicts with the requirements of deep dialogue that necessitates acceptance of unpredictability and a relinquishing of control over the final outcome (Theunissen and Wan Noordin 2012). The use of communication to maintain organisational autonomy suggest Roper's (2005) categorisation of symmetry as a strategy for hegemony remains valid.…”

Section: An Agonistic Critique Of Two-way Symmetrical Communicationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Public relations theory: An agonistic critique of the turns to dialogue and symmetry

Davidson

2016

Public Relations Inquiry

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This is a conceptual paper that seeks to apply agonistic theories of democracy to critique the embracing of dialogic communication in public relations theory. Several strands of scholarship, despite their vastly different starting points and epistemological assumptions, have converged on advancing dialogic forms of communication as representing the best normative theories for shifting practice toward what might be considered civic, democracy-friendly norms. As a consequence theorising has emphasised compromise and consensus which pressurises practitioners to adopt ostensibly non-partisan styles of communication. In contrast agonistic democratic theory elevates the value of permanent contest, dissensus and performance in vibrant public spaces which expose and test the legitimacy of those who hold power and privilege. However, the disputes in other academic fields between advocates of deliberative and agonistic approaches have up to now been largely absent in the public relations literature. This paper uses agonistic theory, particularly the work of Chantal Mouffe, to critique some of the assumptions that have been used to apply to public relations a) Habermasian deliberation b) two-way symmetrical communication. Finally, the paper discusses the value of the agonistic framework for building new models for understanding the forms of public relations that would support democratic practice.

show abstract

Section: An Agonistic Critique Of Two-way Symmetrical Communicationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Public relations theory: An agonistic critique of the turns to dialogue and symmetry

Davidson

2016

Public Relations Inquiry

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Still, while a seemingly ever-increasing number of people use social media, they do not necessarily see organizations as natural dialogue partners the way they see friends and family. Ultimately, participants have the power to decide how willing they are to be organizations' dialogue partners (Theunissen & Wan Noordin, 2012). Thus, it seems likely that most corporations will experience a mismatch between public demand for and practitioners' enthusiasm for dialogue.…”

Section: Basic Constraints Of Supply and Demandmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Falling on the continuum between dialogic panacea and placebo, corporations' social media may still provide moments and forms of dialogue by embodying a dialogue orientation (Kent & Taylor, 2002;Theunissen & Wan Noordin, 2012) and facilitating dialogic engagement (e.g., Taylor & Kent, 2014). Theunissen and Wan Noordin (2012) argue that "an organization may create an environment where dialogic moments can be nurtured, but the success of these moments will depend on the extent to which organizations embrace its [sic] underlying philosophy and whether they afford appropriate resources to creating such an environment" (Theunissen & Wan Noordin, 2012, p. 11).…”

Section: Conclusion: Beyond Panacea and Placebomentioning

confidence: 99%

Panacea, placebo or prudence: Perspectives and constraints for corporate dialogue

Ihlen

Levenshus

2017

Public Relations Inquiry

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Public relations has long been preoccupied with the notion of dialogue, and the advent of social media ushered in new enthusiasm. Still, despite the technology on offer and the fact that dialogue has become a value that "everyone" embraces, most research concludes that little actual dialogue takes place between corporations and their stakeholders. Scholars have pointed to a host of different factors to explain this, ranging from practitioners' lack of time to their lack of understanding of what dialogue is. This paper discusses perspectives on corporate dialogue with a focus on the constraints identified in the literature, before presenting the main argument that not enough attention has been paid to the macro limits at the systemic level. The paper issues a call to locate dialogue attempts within a system where a limited economic rationality reigns, which, in turn, constrains what individual practitioners can achieve.

show abstract

“…This theoretical provenance highlights the importance of dialogue which, due to the need for stakeholder involvement, is also a vital aspect of the wicked problem solving process in society as well as organizations. PR has a growing body of research on dialogue and its role in organisations and society (Botan, 1997;Kent & Taylor, 2002;Pearson, 1989;Taylor & Kent, 2014;Theunissen & Wan Noordin, 2012). It is suggested this work presents an opportunity for scholars in our field to collaborate with researchers and practitioners in other disciplines to inform debates concerned with "taming" WPs through dialogue.…”

Section: Opportunities For Rapprochementmentioning

confidence: 99%

From humble inquiry to humble intelligence: Confronting wicked problems and augmenting public relations

Willis

2016

Public Relations Review

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

a b s t r a c tThis study seeks to upgrade the concept of humble inquiry into humble intelligence (HI) to address a particular set of seemingly intractable challenges known as wicked problems. It locates the concept of wicked problems in the academic literature to underpin its argument that, because of their ubiquity within organizations and across communities, wicked problems have implications for the practice of PR. It suggests that many of PR's functional challenges within organizations can be characterised as "wicked," while the discipline's strategic interests suggest PR has a wider role to play in helping society address other "wicked" dilemmas. Despite these issues and opportunities the article identifies how PR has yet to recognize, let alone engage systematically with the challenges conceptualized as wicked problems. To confront them, the article sets out Schein's notion of humble inquiry and upgrades it to humble intelligence, loosely defined as a cluster of multiple and interacting capabilities that, in concert, forge a form of collective intelligence amongst a wide range of stakeholders. In this coalition, HI can harness the dispersed knowledge that exists in communities and organizations to go beyond traditional, hierarchical, and, often, isolated forms of expertise. This reorientation engages wicked problems productively by deploying multiple perspectives, extending networks, and building the social capital required for collaboration. The article concludes that as well as gaining traction on seemingly intractable challenges, HI both complements and adds value to dialogic theories of PR.

show abstract

Revisiting the concept “dialogue” in public relations

Cited by 162 publications

References 22 publications

Public relations theory: An agonistic critique of the turns to dialogue and symmetry

Public relations theory: An agonistic critique of the turns to dialogue and symmetry

Panacea, placebo or prudence: Perspectives and constraints for corporate dialogue

From humble inquiry to humble intelligence: Confronting wicked problems and augmenting public relations

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About