What is PR?

You’d think we’d have this question answered once and for all by now, but this very thing was discussed recently at a Houston PRSA board meeting. And, it prompted some interesting e-mail exchanges afterwards.

One point made referenced Roper’s Theory of Concentric Circles, a mass communication theory. It holds that communication emerges from a small group to increasingly larger groups of influencers and finally to the politically inert, the largest group. The e-mailer used the theory to support a view that public relations focuses on mass communication not all communications.

He said that “if public relations is the art and science of managing communications between an organization and its key publics, then by definition, that communication has to reach those constituencies, some of which number in the millions.

“Conversely, if PR just deals with communication of any kind, which was the counter argument, (at the board meeting) then a memo from the boss is PR. A sales pitch from a door-to-door salesman is PR. A Valentine’s Day card is PR. This e-mail is PR. It’s all PR.”

Unable to resist a professorial opportunity, I chimed in as follows:

(Our colleague) is absolutely right in his application of Roper’s mass communication theory to
public relations. But the concept that public relations deals with “communication” is also correct because everything an organization does AND doesn’t do communicates something about it to publics, singular or mass, whether targeted or not, and affects the organization/public relationship. (Credit Jim Haynes with that phrasing.)

Based on that premise, yes, a memo from the boss communicates something about
him and the organization he represents to the memo recipient (and applying Roper’s theory, to those the recipient shares information and/or opinions with). A Valentine’s card can do the same thing, (which is one reason Talbot’s sends me birthday greetings). And, yes, the door-to-door sales pitch does as well. That’s why we want public relations to work hand-in-hand with the other communication functions in advertising and marketing to help create and maintain the desired organizational reputation.

Most professors teach the Cutlip, Center and Broom definition of public relations, or some variation of it. “Public relations is the management function of (identifying = my addition) establishing and maintaining mutually beneficial relationships between an organization and the publics on which its success and failure depend.”

“Publics” has many definitions as well as many synonyms (audience, constituency, stakeholder, consumer, customer, etc.), but I have never seen it defined numerically.

“Mutually beneficial” implies that we are applying two-way, symmetrical communication, which, in reality, hasn’t been the case very often in the past — but our “new” publics and our “new” media are changing that (a good thing, in my opinion).

As our ability to communicate instantly with vast numbers of people continues to increase, I think it becomes more critical to position public relations as “communication central” for all internal and external communication action/inaction. We’re still muddling about trying to define and apply “integrated communication” to the combined functions of PR, advertising and
marketing, and we may never come to consensus about that. But I think we’re on very solid ground to stake our claim on “relationships” and the communication that affects those relationships whether with one or with multitudes.

And, you’ll note, of course, that we refer to “communication” not “communications.” It’s taken me a while to realize why — communications are the myriad of tools we use deliberately or by accident that deliver messages. Communication is a process. We have to think of it as much more than just the behavioral, verbal and visual elements. It’s the basis for forming, changing and reinforcing opinions, attitudes and beliefs that cause behavior. We hope it is strategic and planned and that the results of its application are measured.

Some of you may not be familiar with the concept that public relations has five functions (it’s in Bob Heath and Tim Coombs’ textbook, Today’s Public Relations): research, strategic planning, publicity, promotion and collaborative decision-making. I think that’s pretty useful in defining “what” we do.

I’m not the most learned person nor the most experienced in our distinguished group, so I’m sure there’s a lot more that can be contributed to this discussion. So, how about sharing your take on these questions:

How do we define public relations? How do we define the value of our function to a bottom-line, shareholder responsive chief executive? Does the “shrinking world” and new technology change our function, and, if so, is that a good thing or a bad thing? And so on.