Methodological remarks towards a systematic comparative analysis of communication in the Euro Med area.

1. Dr. Holger Sievert
PR and media around the ‘mare mediterraneum’
Methodological remarks towards a systematic comparative analysis
of communication in the Euro Med area
Catania/Sicily, November 14th, 2009

2. Introduction
• The systematic understanding of International Corporate
Communications is not very well developed
• The Library of Congress registered the first edition of ‘Who's Who’ in public relations in 1959, and
the first ‘Handbook on International Public Relations’ was published in 1967.
• But only in the last ten years has there been a small boom in scholarly research on this topic.
Two major collections by Hugh M. Culbertson and Ni Chen (1996) and Krishnamurthy Sriramesh
and Dejan Vercic (2003, 09) garnered the most international attention. A series of titles with a regional
focus, for example on Europe, also appeared, and, not least, a series of theoretical studies.
• There is no comprehensive interlinking of PR knowledge with
relevant expertise derived from other disciplines
• What is common to all of these essays mentioned above is that they primarily or even exclusively
link to and develop the discourse within the field of PR. Whatever economics, law, cultural studies,
political science, sociology, social psychology, linguistics and even communications theory beyond
the range of PR have to say about the topic scarcely enters into the picture, if at all.
• The result is that terminological distinctions already in use in other fields for some time have been
reinvented. In particular, international comparative sub-disciplines within the fields mentioned above
could contribute a great deal to an understanding of International Corporate Communication.
• A pragmatic, but differentiated heuristic working model is required
and can be used for an inter-Euro-Med comparative analysis
Source: Sievert 2007, 2008 and 2009

3. Heuristic grid
Source: Own compilation, adapted from Weischenberg 1992

4. Standard context (1)
Source: Sievert 2007 following Hallin and Mancini 2004

5. Standard context (2)
Source: Sievert 2007 following Hallin and Mancini 2004

6. Standard context (3)
Source: Hallin and Mancini 2004: 67-68; revised by Sievert 2007

7. Structure Context (1)
Source: Berglöf 1997, Williams and Conley 2005, Mallin 2006; revised by Sievert 2007

8. Structure Context (2)
“The United States, despite some
small changes at the legal margins,
continues to adhere to a legal
regime focused almost entirely on “Corporate governance in continental
short-term shareholder wealth Europe traditionally differs from that in
maximization. Until very recently the the United States in two important ways:
UK has followed a similar path […]. first, most European companies have
Recently, however, a distinctly controlling shareholders, while most
British approach has emerged […]. American corporations are widely held;
The UK’s goal appears to be to second, the regulations on self-dealing
maintain its corporations’ financial have traditionally been stricter in the
accountability […] while United States. In the last 15 years,
simultaneously using market forces France, Germany, and Italy have
to push companies in the direction enacted significant corporate law
of greater social responsibility […]”. reforms […]
Source: Williams and Conley 2005: 550; Enriques/Volpin 2007: 199

9. Structure Context (3)
Source: Enriques/Volpin 2007: 199

10. Function context (1)
Source: Sievert 2007 following Hofstede 1980 and 2001

11. Function context (2)
Source: Sievert 2007 following Hampden-Turner and Tompenaars 2000

12. Function context (3)
Source: Hofstede 1980 following Henry 2001

13. Role context (1)
Source: Weaver 1998; revised by Sievert 2007

14. Role context (2)
Source: Weaver 1998; revised by Sievert 2007

15. Role context (3)
Source: Weaver 1998; Sievert 1998; revised by Sievert 2007

16. Compilation in a “compass” (1)
Source: Sievert 2007, 2008 and 2009

17. Compilation in a “compass” (2)
Source: Sievert 2007, 2008 and 2009

18. Conclusion (1)
• The discussion above illuminates the complexity of the context
within which international corporate communications occur.
• It illustrates how important is it for a globally-engaged corporate
communicator to be knowledgeable about the levels of target
countries, target institutions, target contents and target actors.
• How
many and which particular compass axes should be selected for an individual strategic
communications goal depends upon the situation
• When the cultural expressions of the individual contexts for all axes are compared to the map, the
biggest cultural differences between the system in which a communications project originates and
those of the target system become apparent
• This background knowledge seems quite useful for professionals directing cross-national and
cross-cultural corporate communications.
• However, this is by no means a “complete” solution to the problem
of theorizing International Corporate Communication. But it might
be an interesting first step on a long journey.
Source: Sievert 2007, 2008 and 2009

19. Conclusion (2)
Why don’t you join us
• …for the further theoretical
development of the heuristic
framework presented?
• …for the collection of data in
different Mediterrean countries
to “fill” the framework?
• …for the discussion of a
possible special Mediterrean
approach for the PR subject?

20. komm.passion consulting
Dr. Holger Sievert, Director
Media Tower
Holzstr. 2
40221 Duesseldorf-Media Habour
Germany
Phone: +49 (0) 211 - 600 46 280
Fax: +49 (0) 211 - 600 46 200
Private: +49 (0) 211 – 4 05 67 76
holger.sievert@komm-passion.de
www.komm-passion-consulting.de
http://ssrn.com/author=562809