The applicability of interpersonal relationship dimensions to an organizational context: toward a theory of relational loyalty a qualitative approach.

Ledingham, John A. ; Bruning, Stephen ; Thomlison, T. Dean 等

PUBLIC RELATIONS AS RELATIONSHIP MANAGEMENT

Nowhere should one expect to find relationships more central to the scholarship and practice of a field than in public relations. The term "public relations" itself suggests a focus on "relationships" with "publics," a concentration on the ways in which organizations and their publics "relate" to one another and the end states that result. More than a decade ago, Ferguson urged that the matter of relationships between an organization and its significant publics "should be the central unit of study of the public relations researcher" (in Grunig, 1993, p. 3). In exploring that line of scholarship, Grunig has advanced the notion of public relations as a two-way process of continual and reciprocal exchange (Grunig, 1993). Broom and Dozier have suggested a co-orientation approach to the conduct of relationship audits in seeking to better understand the nature of those relationships and how organizations and their publics might be brought closer around mutual goals (Broom and Dozier, 1990, 9.82).

Moreover, the emergence of the notion that public relations should focus on mutually-beneficial relationships has been accompanied in recent years by an increasing emphasis on practicing public relations as a management function, meaning it should be conducted within the four-step management process of (1) analysis, (2) planning, (3) implementation, and, (4) evaluation (Kotler, 1993, pp. 643-645).

It is not surprising, then, that the authors of a leading public relations text define public relations as "the management function that identifies, establishes and maintains mutually beneficial relationships between an organization and the various publics on whom its success or failure depends" (Cutlip, Center & Broom, 1985, P. 6). However, it is somewhat surprising to find that the literature of public relations does not reveal more in terms of a definition of the matter of relationships, nor the dimensions that comprise relationships. Indeed, with few notable exceptions, that literature contains little for those seeking to explore the study and practice of public relations from the relationship perspective.

THE LACK OF RELATIONSHIP MEASURES

The absence of a focus on relationships is reflected in Broom and Dozier's concern with the difficulty many practitioners have in evaluating program results in terms of the relationship management perspective. As they note: "Conceptually, public relations programs affect the relationships between organizations and their publics, but rarely is program impact on the relationships themselves measured" (Broom and Dozier, p. 82). They report that, to the contrary, traditional "relationship audits" tend to focus on knowledge, predispositions and behavior. Through such audits, researchers seek to identify what publics know about an organization, how those publics feel about the organization, and what these publics do with regard to the organization.

In this way, public relations practitioners seek to identify "gaps" between the position desired by the organization and those held by the publics (Broom and Dozier, p. 36). However, as Broom and Dozier suggest, the results of such audits are essentially one way in nature and serve as the basis for programs designed primarily to move publics closer to the position of the organization. That traditional approach does not contribute to nor reinforce the notion of reciprocal, mutually-beneficial relationships.

In place of the traditional one-way relationship audit, Broom and Dozier have applied Broom's original co-orientation approach (Broom, 1977, pp. 110-119) to develop an audit that is two-way in nature and supports the development of mutually-beneficial relationships. Their approach provides a way to not only identify the issue position of publics, but those of the organization as well. Co-orientation also provides a means for determining levels of agreement between the organization and its publics, as well as the accuracy with which organizations and publics can predict each other's positions (Broom and Dozier, p. 83). Broom and Dozier maintain that co-orientation measures "are consistent with the open systems and two-way symmetrical models of public relations--meaning that changes in knowledge, predispositions and behaviors occur in both the organization and its publics." As they also note, "coorientational measures describe characteristics of system relationships ..." (p. 86). While noting that the criteria of knowledge, predispositions and behavior are the accepted criteria used to measure relationships (p. 82), Broom and Dozier nonetheless point out that "much work remains to refine this approach for measuring program impact" (p. 86).

LOCATING PUBLIC RELATIONS ORGANIZATIONALLY AND EDUCATIONALLY

An additional problem in the practice of public relations is a confusion of communication strategies with relationship goals. Because of that confusion, goals are often based on communication frequency and efficiency rather than on building and maintaining mutually-beneficial relationships. Moreover, public relations is often defined not in terms of relationships, but in terms of communication. The result has been not only confusion as to what public relations is, but as to its proper locus within academe and organizations. For example, some organizations have combined public relations, advertising and marketing to form departments of "integrated marketing communication." In that structure, the value of public relations is thought to be in its contribution to the organization's "market posture." Similarly, the emerging field of "relationship marketing" seeks to exploit what one author terms "the paradigm shift from transactions to relationship" at the point where public relations and marketing intersect (Sheth and Parvatiyar, 1995, p. 397).

In academic institutions, public relations is often a subset of journalism, communication, or marketing. Northwestern University, for example, recently combined its once separate graduate programs in corporate public relations, advertising and direct marketing into a single "integrated marketing communications" sequence (Caywood and Ewing, 1991, p. 237). In short, public relations is a field that continues to seek definition. As part of the process, the once-dominant model of a "journalistic heritage and business orientation" is rapidly eroding. Increasingly, the focus of public relations is on viewing the field in terms of process, rather than practice; an effort to gain insight into what public relations is, rather than continuing to define the discipline in terms of what it does (see Botan, 1993, pp. 108-109).

SHIFT FROM IMAGE TO BEHAVIORAL MODELS

The literature of public relations is increasingly varied, as one would expect with a field that continues to seek its own framework. Grunig's contribution, in this arena, focuses on the need to abandon the one-way sender-receiver perspective--rooted in communication--in favor of a behavioral model which represents public relations as a reciprocal, two-way process which seeks a mutually-beneficial relationship between an organization and its publics. Grunig also contends that the value of public relations will not be fully realized until greater focus is placed on behavioral relationships, rather than "image" as has generally been the case.

In that context, Grunig suggests that public relations is the "management of behavioral relationships" rather than that of "symbolic relationships." He sees this particularly important in terms of the value of public relations to a sponsoring organization noting: "for public relations to be valued by the organizations it serves, practitioners must be able to demonstrate that their efforts contribute to the goals of these organizations by building long-term behavioral relationships with strategic publics" (Grunig, 1993, p. 136).

Other scholars have taken more of a traditional critical approach to public relations. Wilson, for example, urges the use of public relations as a vehicle for the development of "relational responsibility" (Wilson, 1994, p. 340), while Heath argues for a focus on social responsibility, within the practice of public relations (Heath, 1992).

PUBLIC RELATIONS ACCOUNTABILITY

While scholars have the luxury of deliberating the nature of public relations, practitioners must deal on a daily basis with the immediate problem of justifying their existence and that of their programs. A question of long-standing concern to corporate America is that of the value of public relations to an organization's revenues. That issue was part of a comprehensive research effort to identify excellence in public relations and determine the contribution of that excellence to an organization's economic well being (Excellence in Public Relations and Communication Management, Grunig, et al, 1996).

Part of the drive for accountability in the practice of public relations rests with the need for evaluative research. A great deal of progress has been made in recent years in that regard. Evaluative research is now part of the curriculum of most accredited U.S. public relations programs (Heath, 1991, p. 185-194) and is increasingly part of the public relations planning process (Broom and Dozier, p. 73). Nonetheless, those seeking to determine the value of public relations to an organization may find the literature less helpful than they may have hoped.

OBSERVATIONS AND ISSUES

Within the background of the research and theory building of Gruning, Broom and Dozier, as well as the issues of the field, we offer the following observations:

(1) If public relations is a management function, then the proper focus of public relations scholars and practitioners ought to be with relationship goals, and not solely with communication strategies and tactics.

(2) If the core of that management function is relationships, then we agree with Ferguson that the proper focus of public relations research is with relationships.

(3) If public relations is indeed "relationship management," it is incumbent upon public relations scholars to set a pattern for practitioners in the following manner:

(a) to identify and verify the dimensions of organizational-public relationships;

(b) to apply these dimensions in differing contexts to determine their wider applicability;

(c) to work toward a general model of organizational-public relationships that explains and predicts behavioral relationships between organizations and their significant publics.

These observations raise a number of questions for research purposes, including the following:

1. Having accepted the concept that relationships are at the core of public relations, what constitutes the dimensions of these relationships. In other words, what--in addition to knowledge, predispositions and behavior--contributes to the initiation, nurturing and maintenance of successful organizational-public relations?

2. In that same sense, how might the various types of organizational-public relationships be categorized and described? In short, how is "relationship" defined in the context of organizational-public relationships?

3. How might these relationship dimensions and end-states differ depending on context?

4. If relationships are an end state, what are they the result of?

5. Do the public relations efforts of companies operating in a non-competitive environment foster relationships which can be tied to loyalty in a newly-competitive marketplace?

6. What are the elements of the relationships most powerful in the decision to remain loyal or to opt for a new provider?

7. What are the implications of the findings for organizations involved in the practice of public relations?

8. What might be suggested to help both scholars and practitioners involved in the study and practice of managing organizational-public relationships in terms of guidelines for categorizing, characterizing, evaluating and improving organizational-public relationships?

SETTING FOR THE STUDY

One setting in which to approach the study of organizational-public relationships is that in which public members have an opportunity to make choices between an historic provider and a competitor new to the field. Our rationale is that the historic provider has had an opportunity to establish a relationship without competing forces at work. The test of the success of that relationship is the degree to which that traditional relationship is effective in engendering loyalty in the face of competition which may offer additional rewards to the public as part of a competitive strategy. Without competition, companies with exclusive operating authority have had free rein to build relationships with their significant publics absent concern for competing "voices" (see Ledingham, 1984, pp. 28-30). In that environment many company executives and governmental regulators argued that a lack of choice for consumers made public relations activities needless and even extravagant. Practitioners often responded that even without competition, maintaining good "public relations" had immediate and long-term benefits, such as reducing the number of complaints and facilitating relations between subscribers and company employees.

For our purposes, the historic absence of competition provides a test of the power of relationships and the influence of relationship dimensions. It stands to reason that if the effects of relationships are to be seen, they should be found in the degree of loyalty subscribers hold for their historic provider in traditionally non-competitive markets that are beginning to experience competition. Our study utilizes this newly-competitive environment as a setting in which to explore the impact of relationship dimensions on the decisions of individuals who are being given choices not previously available. The setting for this study is the increasingly competitive field of telecommunications. Such a setting affords an opportunity to examine public relations in terms of a process for maintaining organizational-public relationships and may provide a framework for determining the economic contribution of public relations for a sponsoring organization.

The timing of events is fortuitous. The field of telephony is experiencing competition at various levels from familiar and newly-emerging organizations. At one time, telephone service was the province of carriers operating under exclusive franchises granted by governmental regulatory bodies. Today, long distance telephone service has become fiercely competitive with companies experiencing constant churn as subscribers opt for first one and then another long distance carrier. Moreover, changes in regulations are now opening residential service to these same competitive pressures. Those changes also will allow traditional telcos to venture outside their traditional service territories with "bundles" of new services--cable television and others--to attract new subscribers.

This environment offers the opportunity to test the value of relationship dimensions on the decision of telephone subscribers to either remain loyal to their traditional provider, or to opt for service with a new competitor. In that sense, the research is part of an effort to develop a theory of relational loyalty that will both explain the nature of that relationship and predict future outcomes based on the strength of those relationships. The matter of competition in this setting in pivotal. Competition elevates the level of cognitive involvement from one of perception to that of choice, from image to behavior, in keeping with Grunig's call for a focus on behavioral relationships rather than symbolic ones (Grunig, 1993, p. 132). It also may suggest worth for public relations as a "value added" in situations in which services or products are seen by members of the public as commodities.

This study was applied throughout the Midwest, three-state division of a major, telecommunications company. The company made available public relations representatives and opened its public relations files. Moreover, it provided randomly generated lists of business and residential subscribers, from which we drew subjects. The organization prefers to remain anonymous and we are grateful for its support and cooperation.

METHOD

The process we used in gathering information and analyzing it to serve as the basis for observations and conclusions included the following:

1. A review of literature from the field of public relations and other, related fields.

2. In-depth interviews and discussion with members of the public relations department of the sponsoring organizations, including community relations and community development personnel, media relations personnel and strategic planners.

3. Individual interviews with business and community leaders across three Midwestern states.

4. Focus groups with business and community leaders and separate groups with residential subscribers.

5. A telephone survey of some 800+ respondents across the three-state area.

RESEARCH DESIGN

The research design consisted of a five-step process, as follows:

Step 1: Meetings with public relations representatives of the organization to gain a knowledge of their public relations activities in service communities.

A review of relevant literature from the field of public relations.

A review of relevant literature from the disciplines of interpersonal communication, sociology, psychology and marketing.

Step 2: The use of qualitative research methods to explore the critical elements of relationships and gain insight into their value.

Executive interviews with individual business and community leaders.

Focus group discussions with small groups of business and community leaders and also with groups of residential subscribers.

Step 3: Development of preliminary hypotheses based on the literature review and the qualitative research findings.

Step 4: Testing of those hypotheses through survey research methods and statistical analysis. Determination of the relative impact of those attributes on organizational-public relationships within a defined context.

Step 5: Conclusions as to the implications of these findings for the study and practice of public relations. Implications of the impact of these findings as regards an organization's revenue stream. Development of a relationship model based on qualitative and quantitative research findings.

The research reported herein is based on completion of the first three steps in the process. It builds on the work of Grunig, Ferguson, Broom and Dozier, and others who view public relations as a management function "that identifies, establishes and maintains mutually beneficial relationships between an organization and the various publics on whom its success or failure depends" (Cutlip, Center & Broom, 1985). It is part of a research project to explore the nature of relationships in order to identify relationship attributes or dimensions that can be used to describe, predict and improve organizational-public relationships. It does so anticipating that other relationship attributes will emerge along the way that will help public relations scholars and practitioners alike analyze, plan, implement and evaluate initiatives concerning the organizational-public relationship.

The findings reported here are based on the review of the literature and the qualitative portion of the research with members of the organization and those publics that are significant to that organization's success.

REVIEW OF RELATIONSHIP LITERATURE

A review of the scholarly literature of the field of public relations revealed broad-stroke paradigms (Grunig, Heath, Wilson), with implications for developing relationship models as noted in the discussions presented above. And, Broom and Dozier's discussion of relationship audits--with their attention to knowledge, predispositions and behavior--help emphasize the need to view public relations as a two-way process. However, there is little past the dictionary definition of relationships as "a specified state of affairs existing among people" for those seeking to explore the nature of relationships or the dimensions which comprise relationships between an organization and its publics.

Due to the lack of relationship research in the public relations literature, the literature of other, related fields were explored to identify specific attributes of relationships. One field which was particularly productive, in that sense, is that of interpersonal relationships.

COMPONENTS OF SATISFYING RELATIONSHIPS

The field of interpersonal relationships is rich for those seeking insight into the nature and composition of relationships. Indeed, the matter of components of satisfying relationships is the subject of a recent seminal work by Wood. In her extensive review of more than 700 articles and books, Wood isolated four "essential dimensions" of successful interpersonal relationships: (1) investment, (2), commitment, (3) trust, and (4) a comfort with relational dialectics (Wood, 1995).

Investment refers to the time, energy, feelings, efforts and other resources given to build the relationship. According to Wood, the perception of equality of investments directly influences levels of satisfaction (Fletcher, et. al., 1987; Hecht, et. al., 1994).

Commitment involves the decision to continue a relationship. It adds the element of responsibility by suggesting that successful relationships involve facing relational difficulties together. In practice, it means problems are used as opportunities to mutually solve strengthen a relationship rather than excuses for terminating the relationship.

Trust essentially refers to a feeling that those in the relationship can rely on each other. Dependability, forthrightness and trustworthiness are key components. Participants feel the other can be trusted to do that which is in the best interest of maintaining the relationship and each expects the other to protect the welfare of that relationship (Brehm, 1992).

Comfort with relational dialectics refers to the numerous forces which can pull a relationship in opposite directions. In individuals, one force may be the natural desire to be connected to others, while there is an opposing "pull" to maintain a degree of autonomy (Wood, 1996). In an organizational context, there may be opposing "pulls" in which an individual may expect an organization to act in his or her best interest, but at the same time may resist the need of that organization for certain types of private information.

Disclosure, the pull between being open and being closed, may be considered the most important relational dialectic in an organizational context, according to Wood. Investing is also an important dimension in the "humanistic" interpersonal context. This model contends that relationships flourish when both parties in a relationship feel the other is "investing" of their time and themselves, is willing to make a "commitment" to the relationship, can be "trusted" to act in a manner that supports the relationship and is "open" and "willing to disclose information."

SOCIAL EXCHANGE THEORY

Social exchange theory--sometimes referred to as "economic balance"--is more narrow in focus. It maintains that two of Wood's four dimensions--investment and commitment--are the keys to a successful relationship. The social exchange perspective contends that social relationships involve the "exchange" of resources such as status, information, goods, services, money, security and love " (Knapp, 1984, p. 44)

Much like a marketing model, the giving and receiving of physical and psychological resources can be viewed as "costs" and "rewards." However, in this case, the "costs" are defined as physical and mental effort, while "rewards" include matters such as pleasure, satisfaction and gratification of a need (Kelley and Thibaut, 1959, pp. 12-13). This perspective contends that each partner in a relationship has a standard or expectation of the other. When the partner meets or exceeds that standard, or "comparison level," satisfaction with the relationship occurs. When the standard or expectation is not met, dissatisfaction is the condition. Littlejohn notes that studies by Taylor and Altman suggest that partners "not only assess the rewards and costs of the relationship at a given moment, but also use the information they have gathered to predict rewards and costs in the future" (Littlejohn, p. 264).

How much cost over rewards a person will accept and remain in a relationship depends on that individual's "comparison level for alternatives." That is, if there are other equally attractive or more attractive choices available, then there will be less tolerance for anything below that person's standard for satisfaction. In essence, having other viable choices available will reduce an individual's acceptance of anything less than his or her expectation for satisfaction. Of course, level of commitment to that relationship and how much one has invested in the relationship affects how much attention one will pay to the other available choices. Having numerous options also tends to increase the comparison level for satisfaction.

Therefore, if several options are available (such as numerous telephone providers), unless our expectation is met or exceeded we will not be satisfied and we will select from the other viable alternatives (such as a different telephone carrier). If one can (1) determine the other choices available and thus establish a fairly accurate idea of the "comparison level for alternatives" and (2) determine the comparison level or level of satisfaction for a given partner, it is possible to predict when an individual will terminate or maintain a particular relationship.

According to proponents of "economic balance" theory, individuals view interpersonal relationships as "transactional" in much the same way that they consider a marketplace exchange transactional. They expect to get something when they give something. When what they give seems out of balance with their internal ledger, the relationship is unsatisfactory.

With regard to social exchange theory, the research reported in this paper seeks to (1) determine if the dimensions of interpersonal relationships apply to organizational-public relationships, (2) if it is possible to use these relational dimensions to identify the comparison level

or level of satisfaction for individual consumers in their relationship with a specific organization, and thereby predict the amount of rewards necessary to main a given relationship and (3) if it is possible to determine the specific levels of rewards offered by alternative choices (competitors) necessary to overcome the commitment a consumer has with their current organizational relationship.

As Emerson has noted, in "Toward a Theory of Value in Social Exchange:"

In the fields of sociology, anthropology, and social psychology, social exchange theory is developing in a way that is radically different from the traditional study of exchange in economics. The major difference is this: At its core, neoclassical economic theory views the actor (a person or a fire) as dealing not with other actors but with a market. In economic theory, decisions are made by actors not in response to, or in anticipation of, the decision of another party but in response to environmental parameters such as market price ... By contrast, in the various forms of social exchange theory, the longitudinal exchange relation between two specific actors is the central concept around which theory is organized. Although some have taken this dyadic focus to be a limitation (e.g., Simpson, 1972), this concept is also a point of departure for other theoretical developments, notably networks, some of which have market properties. Thus, while social and economic theories of exchange might be seen as growing toward each other, they remain radically different in their conceptual core. Social exchange theory studies person-environmental relations (in Cook, pp. 11-12).

From the marketing literature, we were able to identify attributes in the "buyer-seller" relationship that have met the test of empirical verification. Those attributes include price, quality, reliability (Heskett, Sasser, Hart, 1990, pp. 73- 86), commitment, trust, cooperation, mutual goals, interdependence/power imbalance, performance satisfaction, comparison level of the alternatives, adaptation, non-retrievable investment, shared technology, and social bonds (Wilson, D. T., 1995, pp. 337 - 341). and, from the field of social psychology, we drew the attributes of commitment, intimacy and passion (Trotter, 1986, p. 46).

FINDINGS

Discussion with public relations personnel elicited a listing of activities included in their on-going efforts. In this organization, as in many others of its type, public relations is practiced under the banner of "community relations" and includes "economic development" as well as the other activities listed below:

* Liaison with local media.

* Support of a number of local philanthropic activities, including the United Way and the programs of similar organizations.

* Service on the boards or on committees of philanthropic organizations.

* Involvement for local educational institutions, often through donations of equipment and other materials and through on-site volunteer activities to assist students in increasing computer skills.

* Participation in the sponsorship of some civic activities, such as parades and youth sports.

* A speakers' bureau.

* Work with community leaders on matters relating to the economic growth of the community.

These personnel felt, generally, that they enjoyed a good relationship with members of the community. They cited on-going support for education in the community, contributions to local philanthropic organizations, volunteer work carried out by members of the organization and service on the boards of numerous local businesses and organizations. While they often expressed hope that their activities would engender loyalty in the face of competition, they were not overly optimistic. A typical comment was: "I think that if another telco comes in here and offers the same service at a lower price, we're going to see people signing up with them in droves."

Interviewees were randomly selected from a list of local leaders provided by the local telephone company's public relations personnel and asked to participate in an in-depth, in-person interview. These included key decision makers from various types of industries as well as those representing not-for-profit organizations.

The individual interviews were usually held on-site at the offices of the interviewee, although in some instances the discussion occurred over lunch or dinner. The interviews lasted an average of ninety minutes, although some ran as long as two hours. The interviews were audio-taped for later review. A discussion guide was developed which served as a framework for the interview. In those interviews, we probed for the following:

* A subjective evaluation of activities and effectiveness of the public relations practices undertaken by representatives of "the local telephone company."

* The degree to which these leaders felt the community is aware of the telephone company's support of local activities, involvement in economic development and other similar activities.

* Their estimate of the levels of interest generated by these activities.

* An estimation as to the degree to which the telephone company was identified with those activities.

* The degree to which they felt the activities were valued by community members.

* The various dimensions of relationships which they feel are most important in the relationship between the telephone company and various business leaders, community leaders and residential subscribers.

* The degree to which the telephone company is perceived as "local."

* Their evaluation of the importance of "local presence" to business, not-for-profit leaders and residential subscribers.

Moreover, we explained the newly-competitive situation and asked each of the individuals the following:

* Their probable reaction if they were to be contacted by a competing company offering telephone service .

* Their reaction if the service were discounted (initially 10%, then more as the discussion continued).

* The factors most important in making that decision at each price level.

In this manner, executive interviews were conducted with some eighteen local leaders across a three-state area. The results of these interviews were reviewed and were part of the basis for development of the discussion guide to be used in focus groups with business leaders and representatives of not-for-profit organizations. From those interviews, we concluded that price is an overriding consideration to those in the business community and that many had changed long distance carriers because of price. although they said they were reluctant to do so, preferring to remain with "a local company." However, there was also a strong expectation among both businesspeople and other community leaders that organizations such as utility companies have a responsibility to the community that outstrips mere providing of service. Paramount among those expectations were the following:

(1) The organization is expected to be open and truthful in sharing its plans for future development, employment and other activities with the community;

(2) The organization is expected to be involved in activities that benefit the community, in general, such as philanthropic organizations;

(3) The organization should exhibit a continuing commitment to the community both in terms of financial support and volunteers; and,

(4) The organization is expected to invest in the community's future through support of education and youth activities.

These leaders also commented that the sponsoring organization had not been aggressive in seeking to raise the level of community awareness of the activities it had historically sponsored. These individuals were particularly critical that the utility had a practice of partnering with other organizations in sponsoring events and activities, but "seemed to get lost" in terms of gaining awareness of its involvement. As one interviewee noted: "I guess they didn't need publicity when they didn't have competition. Now, they don't seem to know how to get to the front of the stage. Everyone else gets the credit, except them." Other interviewees suggested that telco activities were probably well known to business and community leaders, but doubted that there was any significant carryover to members of the general public.

Because of these activities, many business and community leaders seemed predisposed to remain as subscribers to the traditional telco in the face of competition, "as long as the playing field is level." Few expected it to remain level for long. Most expected price to become a major consideration in the event that competition ensued. On the other hand, quality of service and reliability were not seen as issues. The general feeling was that the quality of today's service will not vary significantly from one carrier to another, and that reliability is not a problem in the telephone industry. With regard to other, competitive issues, these leaders were unimpressed with the notion of companies outside the telephone arena providing telephone service. A typical comment was to the effect that: "Companies ought to do what they do best; not try to do what some other company does." Other, marketplace related concerns included the need to provide State-of-the-Art technology, an insistence that the organization be more knowledgeable concerning its clients' business needs, and a desire from business leaders for the organization to be more proactive in bringing new ideas to its customers.

Lists were then generated through random selection of businesses of varying sizes and not-for-profit organizations within the tri-state area in which the research was conducted. A screener was used to identify the "key decision-maker" as regards telephony equipment for the organization. Potential participants to the focus groups were drawn from the lists using a strategy of random selection and recruited to centrally located facilities for a two-hour noontime meeting. Overall, the focus groups were conducted in accordance with practices standard in the field (see Templeton, Jane Farley, 1987).

Group size was intentionally kept small, with the number of participants ranging from five to seven persons. At the noon-time meeting, efforts were made to make the participants comfortable with sandwiches, coffee and soft drinks made available. A discussion guide was again prepared covering most of the same areas as included in the executive interviews. A representative of the local telephone company--who was unknown to the participants--was on hand in an adjoining, unseen area to provide the focus group moderator with answers to questions of a technical nature.

In those focus groups, we first explored their reaction to competition in long distance service, including asking whether they had changed carriers, if so how many times, and the factors that affected that decision. We then explained the changes occurring in regulations regarding local telephone service, emphasizing that competition would now be permitted, and asking their initial reaction to those regulatory changes. We probed to determine if participants were already being solicited for their local telephone service and then led them through a series of topic areas designed to determine the following:

(1) Their levels of satisfaction with current service.

(2) Predispositions toward a new telephony provider.

(3) The impact of a 10% discount on their inclination to remain with their current provider or sign up with a competitor.

(4) Rating of numerous telecommunications companies in terms of technology.

(5) Their perceptions of price, quality, products, and a range of relationship dimensions (trust, involvement, etc.) concerning the local provider.

(6) The factors most important to them in the decision regarding staying with the historic provider or agreeing to service from a competitor.

If participants didn't mention specific attributes gleaned from the literature and earlier interviews, those attributes were introduced and discussed. As matters of apparent importance were raised by the participants, they were probed for insight and depth of feeling. Issues surrounding alternate delivery systems such as cable television providing telephone services and cable television-type services being offered by a telephone company--as well as and the importance of computer linkages (Internet access, etc.)--were also explored.

In essence, these leaders did not differ substantially in their group discussions from the comments we had heard in individual interviews. They were concerned about price of service, but, for most, the major portion of their telephone costs are associated with long distance, not local charges and they are aware of that. Quality and reliability, in general, were not a concern, since the telco had up-graded its service in recent years and most were satisfied. These participants also looked to the organization to be involved in the community through various activities and service on boards and committees, to make a commitment of continuing support for activities which further the welfare of the community, to invest time and finances for community affairs and to be open with the community as to future plans. They were particularly concerned that the organization continue its support of educational activities and philanthropic organizations. Typical comments included the following:

"I'm a businessman, and I'm always going to be concerned with cost. But, I also want to support local companies that support the community and I'll stay with that as long as I can."

"I've been in other areas and the service quality there is no better than it is here. I'd have to say, overall, that I'm satisfied with the service. I'd like to get it cheaper if I can, but that's not a big consideration to me."

"They've been very reliable here in the last few years; not like it used to be. Dependability is not an issue."

The concept of competition was strongly endorsed. However, in contemplating the actuality of competition, most of these leaders professed they would stay with their "local" provider, citing the need to support local businesses and the traditional involvement of the telco in the welfare of the community.

Community activities were recognized and appreciated. The participants echoed the sentiments expressed in individual interviews that the telco often "left a lot of credit on the table" in partnering with other organizations. Community involvement was defined most often as support for education and youth activities.

Businesses leaders particularly want the organization to exhibit a better understanding of their clients' needs and to be proactive in bringing solutions to their clients. There is a great deal of dissatisfaction, potentially damaging to the relationship, based on the perception that the organization is always reactive, never proactive.

Residential subscribers were recruited to two-hour focus groups using the random-selection strategy. The sample frame consisted of a list of computer-generated telephone numbers with weighted prefixes and suffixes. A screening device limited participants to the individual in the home having the greatest influence on selection of telecommunications equipment and/or providers.

Residential focus groups were conducted in the early and mid-evening, from 6:00 -8:00 p.m. and from approximately 8:00-10:00 p.m. Sandwiches and drinks were furnished to those participants in the early groups, with lighter refreshments available for later groups.

The discussion guide utilized as a framework for the discussion essentially covered the same topic areas as that used in the leaders' focus groups. Ten focus groups of six to 12 residential subscribers were conducted in this manner across the three-state territory. A sampling of typical comments includes the following:

"They used to have a lot of outages and service interruptions, but lately I think they've been doing a good job."

"The service is always there when I need it. That's good service to me."

"The cable t.v. service goes out a lot, but the telephone service is good."

"I don't even question it (dial tone) now. It's always there."

"The quality is good. And, when there's a problem they fix it immediately."

"If quality means I can hear the voice on the other end of the 'phone, then the quality is excellent."

"I've had the same telephone company for years. I'd have to say the quality is fine."

"The telephone utility is basically the same wherever I've been. It's not an issue."

"We've sort of watched them grow up and we've grown up with them. They didn't used to be very good, but that's all changed now."

"I used to go into their office and they were always real nice. I never had a problem with them."

"They cut my line once, but they were right out to fix it, so I can't complain."

"They used to have an office here in town, but they closed it. I didn't like that."

"I guess they get involved in some local activities, but I can't think of one specifically."

"Just give me a better price for 'phone service. It's too expensive."

"The price is the thing, and it's that way with everything. I guess I'd be happier if it were less money."

"I think the younger people need for things to cost less. It's okay for me, but it's tough on them."

"I think they need competition--everyone does. It makes you do a better job."

"I think competition would lower the prices they charge."

"I'd like to see competition for the other utilities, too."

These participants were harder pressed to identify activities in the community with which the organization was associated. Even when participants seemed to recall an associated activity, they often seemed unsure. They frequently mentioned other organizations, and in some instances, these were organizations with which the telco had partnered. Nonetheless, they were clear in what they expect from an organization, The concept of "localness" was paramount. And in defining a "local" company, the dimensions of community involvement, support, investment and commitment were raised with particular importance associated with education, youth activities and the telco as a clearing house for and provider of technological expertise. They also expressed a strong desire that the telco bring State-of-the-Art technology to the educational system. This was particularly a concern to young participants. And, they said the telco ought to provide such technology to its subscribers as well, or risk the loss of subscribers to competing organizations. Specifically, they looked to various services such as access to the Internet, and a range of digital services.

In response to being asked if they would sign up for service with another provider, only a few said they would. Most indicated they had no reason to change. A typical comment was: "There's no reason to change if it's not cheaper." However, when asked if they would change if the new provider's charges were 10% less, most said they would, or at the least would seriously consider it. Some typical comments were:

"I'd change for sure. If it costs less, that's what I want."

"The older folks and kids need to save money. I know they'd change."

"It doesn't seem like much, but it adds up."

Most were skeptical with the idea of a cable television company providing telephone service. A typical comment was: "Every time it rains, the cable goes out. They (cable company) need to figure out how to run their own business before they try taking on anything else." However, many were receptive to cable services being provided by a telephone company: "I think it's a good idea. We'd know it was going to be there all the time, not just in good weather."

When subscribers were asked to define a "good relationship" with the local telephone company, they focused on (1) providing State-of-the-Art technology, (2) being able to trust the telco to do what it says, and (3) the need to be open with the community and to let community residents know when the telco was making personnel changes or closing facilities, and to seek input from subscribers. Typical comments were:

"I think they ought to be able to provide for us anything that's available anywhere else."

"They need to let us know when they're going to do these things (lay-offs and office closings). They affect this community and we have a right to know."

"I trust them. I know people who work for them and I don't have any reason not to trust them. They've always done what they said they'd do."

The value of community involvement, support and investment was brought clearly into focus in the first group. In that gathering, participants were asked if they would be inclined to sign up for service with a new telephone provider. Most said they would not. They were then asked if they would sign up if that new provider offered the level of service they currently have, but at a cost of 10% less. Initially, most members of the group said they would sign up for service. They expressed feelings that competition is good, and that they--as telephone "consumers"--were entitled to the best price available. However, as the discussion ensued, one of the participants mentioned that the telco had historically been a supporter of community activities and events. As soon as that concept was introduced, the tone of the discussion changed to one of support for the traditional service provider.

That matter of community involvement also was mentioned played out in every focus group with virtually the same effect. There was no need for the moderator to raise the issue or introduce it. Sooner or later, in every group, it was raised by a participant and as soon as it was, the sentiment of the entire group changed from a focus on the price of service to the individual to appreciation for the value of the telco to the community. Even the relatively few who continued to say they would sign up with the new competitor expressed varying degrees of reluctance at doing so. Many of the participants said they might "have to think about it," but most cited the traditional involvement of the organization in the community as an overriding reason to remain loyal in the face of service from a new provider, even at a discounted price.

SUMMARY

The executive interviews and focus groups provided an opportunity to discuss a range of concerns and responses, including the importance of the relationship attributes found in the literature as well as new variables which impact decision-making in this type of environment. Of all the dimensions that were discussed, subscribers initially placed the most value on quality, price, reliability, their personal experience with the telco, and "community involvement." Participants did not expect that levels of service and quality would change with a new provider. However, corporate citizenship was seen as a differentiating variable. Participants thought community involvement--most often described as support for education, and sponsorship of youth activities, with other philanthropic activities also mentioned--could vary greatly depending on the particular provider of telecommunications services. Economic development, on the other hand, did not seem to be an important part of the expectations these subscribers hold for their local telco.

For the most part, younger participants expressed an interest in information concerning technology to a far greater degree than did older members. Many of the younger participants said they would welcome a newsletter devoted to telecommunications and would read bill inserts concerned with technology. Younger members also said they would attend a "technology fair," and expressed interest in computer linkages, particularly with regard to accessing the Internet.

Recall of advertising by various telephone companies was impressive with participants able to recall the particulars of various campaigns. In that regard, the "dime lady" and Candice Bergan, often referred to as "Murphy Brown," were the most-often items. Moreover, these participants were generally able to correctly identify the advertising sponsor of these messages. However, recall of specific stories concerning the local telephone company was comparatively and consistently low across the executive interviews and focus groups. Participants tended to exhibit more top-of-mind association between an organization and an event when there was a "natural linkage"--such as a car race with an auto manufacturer--and also when there is a single sponsor for an activity or event.

As noted, the initial reaction toward a new provider at a reduced cost was positive, adding credence to the "economic balance" model. However, that impression changed in most executive interviews and in virtually every focus group when the matter of community involvement was raised. The matter of involvement took several forms, , including physical location within the community, the fact the telco employs local people, and that the company contributes to the welfare of the community through taxes and the to be support of local activities and institutions.

In one focus group, a bank officer who had recently moved into the community was enthusiastic in support for a new provider until someone mentioned that the local telco employed local people and contributed to the community. His response:

"I hadn't thought of that. But now that it has been mentioned, I've changed my mind. There's no way I'd sign up with a new telephone company no matter what they were offering."

OBSERVATIONS

The purpose of this research was to explore the application of non-organizational relational dimensions in an organizational context. While this report covers only the first step in a multi-step research process, nonetheless, some observations may be offered at this point, including the following:

* Some of the dimensions in question appear to carry over to an organizational setting, while others do not. Those of passion and intimacy, for example, were not considered relevant by these participants when discussing a local organization. The interpersonal relationship dimensions of openness, trust, commitment, involvement and investment appear to transfer to an organizational-public setting.

* In a newly-competitive environment, decision-making will be impacted initially by cost, but that consideration can be off-set by raising the awareness of various and specific community activities.

* Relationships that are mutually-beneficial have higher value than one-way relationships.

* There is the "expectation" that local businesses will be part of and support the community if they expect loyalty.

* The specific community activities most valued are associated with--in rank order--education, youth activities, and philanthropic activities, with economic development of less importance.

* Technology is an important factor in a choice decision in a newly-competitive technological field.

* Younger subscribers tend to exhibit less loyalty to a local organization than older ones.

* Business subscribers look to providers to exhibit a willingness to invest time to learn about the client's business.

* Business subscribers expect openness in terms of where the telco is going and what it plans to do as a condition of the relationship. And, businesses expect the telco to operate from the perspective of mutual benefits, not simply for the benefit of the telco.

* The building of relationships is a powerful force for loyalty in a newly-competitive environment.

* Knowledge of the influence of key relationship dimensions variables can help practitioners to play a vital role in protecting their organization's interest by bringing to the mind of their publics matters which otherwise might not occur.

* In linking an organization with support for local activities, participants indicated more top-of-mind association when there is a "natural linkage" to an organization and the activity that is being supported.

* Activities and institutions are differentially valued. Those with numerous sponsors do not generate the same level of name association as do those with single sponsors. Thus, the matter of multi-sponsorship can influence the degree or strength of relationships between a sponsoring organization and its customers.

PRELIMINARY CONCLUSIONS

Our paper began with concern over a number of issues including (1) the need for a clearer understanding of the nature of organizational-public relationships, (2) the dimensions of such relationships, (3) the confusion between what public relations is and what it does, and (4) accountability of public relations to organizational goals. While we have not attempted to treat the serious issue of relationship definition, we have been able to see apparent linkage between interpersonal relationship dimensions and organizational-public relationships. This exploration of the nature of organizational-public relationships should serve to draw clearer distinctions between the discipline of public relations and those of advertising, marketing communication and similar fields. And, the value of public relations to an organization, even at this preliminary point, seems to rest with the following:

1. Public relations initiatives, particularly those involving community relations, can serve to of develop, maintain and enhance a loyal relationship between an organization and its significant publics;

2. Public relations activities can help achieve organizational goals by fostering loyalty in the organizational-public relationship through involvement, investment and commitment to the community served by that organization.

3. The types of involvement most valued by community members are those which contribute to the welfare of the community. Hence, public relations programs can build relationships by involvement in activities, event and programs which benefit the community.

This reinforces that which many practitioners have intuited over the years; effective public relations programs can do well by doing good.

4. A focus on relationships distinguishes public relations from advertising, marketing communication and similar activities.

NEXT STEPS

The next step in our research involves construction of a survey instrument that reflects the results of the research to this point. After the questionnaire is pre-tested, it will be administered to a random sample of residential and business subscribers, utilizing "truth statements" and Likert-type scaling to gather responses for analyzing. Statistical procedures will then be employed to determine which variables are deemed most important by respondents and also which ones--or set of variables--best predict a loyal relationship.

At this point, much work remains to be done. Nonetheless, we are prepared to tentatively offer the following as a Theory of Organizational-Public Relationship Loyalty: If an organization is seen as involved in and committed to the interests of a community, the aware members of that community will be positively predisposed toward loyalty to that organization (in the face of competition).

REFERENCES

Botan, Carl (Summer, 1993), "Introduction to the Paradigm Struggle in Public Relations." Public Relations Review.

Brehm, S. (1992). Intimate Relations. (2nd ed.) New York: McGraw-Hill.

Broom, Glen M. (1977). "Coorientation Measurement of Public Issues." Public Relations Review.

Broom, Glen M. & Dozier, David M. (1990), Using Research in Public Relations: Applications to Program Management, Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall, Inc.

Broom, Glen M. & Dozier, David M. (Spring, 1986). "Advancement for Public Relations Role Models." Public Relations Review.

Caywood, Clarke & Ewing, Raymond (Fall, 1991), "Integrated Marketing Communications: A New Master's Degree Concept." Public Relations Review.

Cook, Karen S. (editor). (1987). Social Exchange Theory. Newbury Park, CA: SAGE Publications.

Cutlip, Scott M., Center, Allen H. & Broom, Glen M., (1994), Effective Public Relations, Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall, Inc.

Dozier, David M., Hellwig, Susan and Ledingham, John A., 1983, "Implications of Interactive Cable Systems: Reduced Consumer Contact." Communication Yearbook 7, Beverly Hills, CA: Sage Publications.

Ferguson, M.A. (1984). Building theory in Public Relations: Interorganizational Relationships. Paper presented to the Association for Education in Journalism and Mass Communication, Gainesville, FL.

Fletcher, G. J, Fincham, F. D., Cramer, L. and Heron, N. (1987). "The Role of Attributions in the Development of Dating Relationships." Journal of Personality and Social Responsibility, 51, 875-884.

Goldman, Jordan (1984). Public Relations in the Marketing Mix, Chicago, IL: Crain Books. Grunig, James E. (Summer, 1993), "Image and Substance: From symbolic to Behavioral Relationships." Public Relations Review.

Heath, Robert L. (1992). "The Wrangle of the Marketplace: A Rhetorical Perspective on Public Relations." in E.L. Toth and R. L. Heath (Eds.), Rhetorical and Critical Approaches to Public Relations, Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.

Heath, Robert L. (Summer, 1991). "Public Relations Research and Education: Agendas For The 1990s." Public Relations Review.

Hecht, M.L., Marston, P.J., & Larkey, L.K. (1994). "Love Ways and Relationship Quality in Heterosexual Relationships." Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 11, 25-44.

Heskett, James L., Sasser, W. Earl, Jr., Hart, Christopher, W .L. (1990). Service Breakthroughs: Changing the Rules of the Game." New York: The Free Press.

Homans, G. C. (1961). Social Behavior: Its Elementary Forms. New York: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich.

Kelly, Harold H. (1979). Personal Relationships: Their Structures and Processes. Hillsdale, New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

Knapp, Mark L. (1984). Interpersonal Communication and Interpersonal Relationships. Boston, MA: Allyn and Bacon.

Kotler, Philip (1993). Marketing Management: Analysis, Planning, Implementation and Control, Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall, Inc.

Ledingham, John A., Dozier, David M. (1982) "What Cable Television subscribers think about two-way Television Services." Paper presented at the regional symposium of the Association for Education in Journalism and Mass Communication, Atlanta, GA.

Ledingham, John A. (1984). "Are Consumers Ready for the Information Age." Journal of Advertising Research, Vol. 24, No. 4.

Ledingham, John A., (1984). "Interviewing and Role Playing to Prepare for the Press." Public Relations Quarterly, Fall, pp. 28-30.

Littlejohn, Stephen W. (1995). Theories of Human Communication. (5th ed.) Belmont, CA: Wadsworth Publishers.

Nakra, Prema (Spring, 1991). "The Changing Role of Public Relations in Marketing Communication," Public Relations Quarterly.

Petrison, Lisa A. & Wang, Paul (Fall, 1993). "From Relationships to Relationship Marketing: Applying Database Technology to Public Relations." Public Relations Review.

Seitel, Fraser, P., (1995), The Practice of Public Relations, Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.

Sheth, Jagdish N., and Parvatiyar, Atul (1995). "The Evolution of Relationship Marketing," International Business Review, Vol. 4, No. 4, pp. 397-418.

Small, William J. (Spring, 1991), "Exxon Valdez: How to spend Billions and Still Get a Black Eye." Public Relations Review.

Templeton, Jane Farley, (1987). Focus Groups: A Guide for Marketing & Advertising Professionals, Chicago: Probus Publishing Company.

Thibaut, J. W., and Kelly, H. H. (1959). The Social Psychology of Groups. New York: John Wiley & Sons.

Trotter, Robert J. (1986), Psychology Today, September, 1986.

Wilcox, Dennis L, Ault, Philip H. & Agee, Warren K., (1992) Public Relations Strategies and Tactics, Harper Collins Publishers.

Wilson, Laurie J. (Winter, 1994), "Excellent Companies and Coalition-Building among the Fortune 500: A Value and Relationship-Based Theory." Public Relations Review.

Wilson, David T. (1995), "An Integrated Model of Buyer-Seller Relationships." Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, Vol. 23, No. 4, pp. 335-345.

Wirthlin Group, The (March, 1994). "Corporations as Citizens: The Public Opinion, Corporate Community Relations, The Center for Corporate community Relations at Boston College, Vol. 8, No. 7.

Wood,, Julia T. (1995), Relational Communication, Belmont, CA: Wadsworth Publishers.

Wood, Julia T. (1996). Everyday Encounters. Belmont, CA: Wadworth Publishers.

Emerson, Richard M.,(1987), "Toward a Theory of Value in Social Exchange." ed: Karen S. Cook, Social Exchange Theory, Newbury Park, CA: Sage Publications, pp. 11 - 46.

John A. Ledingham, Capital University

Stephen Bruning, Capital University

T. Dean Thomlison, University of Evansville

Cheryl Lesko, Capital University