Elaborating the concept of public relations roles and a test of its utility.

摘要

The types of roles that public relations practitioners play in organizations are deemed an indicator of the status of public relations as a profession (J. E. Grunig, 2000). Notwithstanding its significance, the concept of public relations roles is rudimentary rather than sophisticated. Several limitations are found in previous role research. First, the majority of role studies have adopted the manager-technician dual role typology, which received substantial criticism (e.g., Leichty & Springston, 1996; Moss, Newman, & DeSanto, 2005). Second, scholars often conceptualized public relations roles based on the contents of the activities (i.e., what they do), rather than the purposes of the activities (i.e., what they do for an organization's public relations). Third, public relations roles were conceptualized at the individual level, prohibiting an examination of the relationship of public relations roles with organizational level variables. Finally, previous role measures lack construct validity as most of the studies used exploratory factor analytic techniques.;Given the limitations of previous research, the purposes of the present study were: (1) to elaborate the concepts of public relations roles at the level of public relations unit (e.g., department, division, or team) taking into account the purpose of role activities in light of an organization's public relations; and (2) to test the utility of the elaborated concepts of public relations roles in South Korea. A survey was administered to public relations practitioners employed at 226 companies that are among South Korea's top 1000 companies.;The results from a confirmatory factor analysis of public relations roles suggested seven public relations roles that include: activist, advocate, advisor, expert prescriber, liaison, monitor, and coordinator. Each of the seven roles was related differentially to the criterion variables, such as the influence of the public relations unit on an organization's decision making, environmental uncertainty of organizations, and top management's philosophy, suggesting their own distinct utility in public relations theories. More importantly, the results suggested that, depending on the type of public relations roles enacted, the organization's public relations model would differ. When public relations units had more focus on the advocate role while having less focus on the liaison, coordinator, and advisor roles, companies' public relations practices were more likely to be oriented toward the one-way asymmetric public relations model. Meanwhile, all seven public relations roles were more frequently enacted in organizations that practiced the two-way mixed-motive model.;In sum, the present study showed the utility of this elaborated concept of public relations roles. The findings suggest that using the elaborated concept of public relations roles would have better exploratory and predictive power in explaining phenomena in public relations management than using the vague concept of the manager role. It is expected that this present study provides a ground for sophisticated theorization of public relations roles. Practical implications for public relations educators and practitioners are also suggested by providing information regarding the types of public relations roles and their consequences within organizations.