Organization-Public Relationships - how to measure and use
•Download as PPTX, PDF•
1 like•505 views
This presentation discusses measuring and improving an organization's relationship with its key publics. It summarizes research conducted by the University at Buffalo (UB) on its advocacy program called "UB Believers". The research found that levels of satisfaction and commitment with UB predicted whether members had advocated for the university's goals. To strengthen relationships, the presentation recommends focusing communications on mutual benefits and sharing information rather than just asking for support, as well as enhancing the sense that the organization cares about the public's welfare.
Recommended
More Related Content
Similar to Organization-Public Relationships - how to measure and use
Similar to Organization-Public Relationships - how to measure and use (20)
More from Joe Brennan, Ph.D.
More from Joe Brennan, Ph.D. (6)
Organization-Public Relationships - how to measure and use
- 1. “Want to Know What People Really Think About Your University?” John DellaContrada Joseph Brennan University at Buffalo: The State University of New York AMA Symposium, Nov. 2009
- 2. Excellent PR builds relationships
- 3. Today’s presentation • Organization-Public Relationship (OPR) • How to measure OPR • Our advocacy program: UB Believers • What we learned, and how we used it • How you might use this • Comments and questions
- 4. The value of OPR • Understanding OPR helps you create mutually beneficial relationships • Healthy relationships enable an organization to achieve its goals • By building relationships PR contributes directly to organizational goals
- 5. Organization-Public Relationship Developed by Grunig and Hon in 1999 Six dimensions: 1. Control mutuality 2. Trust 3. Satisfaction 4. Commitment 5. Exchange relationship 6. Communal relationship
- 6. Measuring OPR is Easy… • Why measure it? • 3 advantages of stronger relationships • How to measure it? • 13 questions (Ki and Hon, 2007) • Five point scale • strongly disagree through strongly agree
- 7. Questions on “Control Mutuality” 1. The university believes the opinions of people like me are legitimate. 2. The university really listens to what people like me have to say.
- 8. Questions on “Trust” 1. The university can be relied on to keep its promises. 2. I believe the university takes my opinion into account when making decisions.
- 9. Questions on “Satisfaction” 1. I am happy with the university. 2. Generally speaking, I am pleased with the relationship the university has established with people like me.
- 10. Questions on “Commitment” 1. The university wants to maintain a relationship with me. 2. There is a long-lasting bond between the university and people like me.
- 11. Questions on “Exchange Relationship” 1. Whenever the university gives or offers something to people like me, it generally expects something in return. 2. Even though people like me have had a relationship with the university for a long time it still expects something in return whenever it offers a favor. 3. The university will compromise with people like me when it knows it will gain something.
- 12. Questions on “Communal Relationship” 1. The university is very concerned about the welfare of people like me. 2. The university helps people like me without expecting anything in return.
- 13. Our own questions 1. I support the goals of the university. 2. I have asked other people to support the goals of the university. 3. In the future I would ask other people to support the goals of the university. 4. I am a... (student, faculty, staff, alum, parent, member of community, other)
- 14. What we REALLY wanted to know How do members of our advocacy program view the university? How are support and OPR related? Can we predict support, based on what we know about how the person views his or her relationship to the organization?
- 15. • Communications describing the mutual benefits of university's growth (web, email) • Encourage their support and advocacy (to elected officials) • 5,000 community members, alumni, faculty, staff, students, parents (at the time of the research – now close to 10,000) • Goal: Obtain NYS support for university’s growth plan
- 16. Who answered the survey? 1,095 responses (23% of all Believers) Alumni 44.7% Staff 27.4% Students 18.3% Community (non-UB) 10.4% Faculty 10.0% Parents 8.1% Other 7.3% Note, respondents were allowed to choose more than one category.
- 17. What we learned “I have asked other people to support the goals of the university.” 33.4% Yes No 66.6%
- 18. Have you asked others to support the goals of the university? 33.4% Yes OPR and support No 66.6% Two dimensions related most closely to support: • Satisfaction • Commitment 87% of those who asked others to support agreed or strongly agreed that • “the university wants to maintain a relationship with me” (commitment) • they were “happy with the university” (satisfaction).
- 19. Have you asked others to support the goals of the university? 33.4% No Yes 66.6% OPR and non-support 80% of those who did not act to support the university did not agree that “the university helps people like me without expecting anything in return.” 74% did not agree that “the university is very concerned about the welfare of people like me.”
- 20. Key Takeaways • Nurturing a sense of “communal relationship” is vital • Organizations should focus on building “satisfaction” and “commitment”
- 21. Communal Relationship Strategies “People want to be served, not sold; involved, not told.” - Patrick Jackson
- 22. “Five Strategies for the New Century” 1. Building relationships face-to-face. 2. Making internal publics top priority. 3. Under-the-radar approach to media. 4. Accountable, focused, measurable programs. 5. Research – far beyond statistical surveys. “Involving stakeholders and offering them service, info or events is key.” Source: Pat Jackson, pr reporter 39:28, 7/15/96
- 23. Satisfaction and Commitment Trust Commitment Pleasure Satisfaction
- 24. Satisfaction and Commitment Strategies • Find ways for publics to take pleasure in the organization; create positive experiences. • Focus on activities that build trust in your organization, e.g. sharing of tasks.
- 25. How we used our findings What we did differently • Changes in messaging • More “info-sharing” • Less “do this for us” • Greater emphasis on mutual benefits • UB to community • Community to UB • More regular, frequent communications • Not just when we needed something
- 26. Limitations Limitations of our research methods • Social bias in responses (stated support vs. actual support?) • Timing – survey came right after announcement of big budget cuts • Respondents “self-selected” into the sample (those who chose to participate might be different from those who did not) • We didn’t measure the organization’s perceptions Lessons learned • Better preparation of organizational leaders • Institutional Review Board • Better application of findings for planning, decision making
- 27. Next steps for us 1. Change creative for UB Believers 2. Enhance “communal” messaging 3. Two-way communication - Facebook 4. Broaden the focus beyond advocating to Albany 5. More attention to the most supportive, most loyal 6. Cross tabulations (demographics of support, non- support groups)
- 28. How could you use OPR? Groups you might study • Students • Parents • Faculty • Alumni • Neighbors Example: • non-profit healthcare org – donors
- 29. Questions? Comments? Organization Public
Editor's Notes
- A study of the public relations practices of hundreds of organizations found that those which focused on two-way communication and relationship building were the most successful in helping the org achieve its goals.This led to conclusion building relationships should be the main purpose of public relations, and relationship building is the standard for excellence in public relations. Therefore, the value of public relations can be determined by measuring the quality of relationships with publics.
- Definition of Organization-Public Relationship:the exchange that occur b/t organization and its key publics, in which the actions of either can impact the economic, social, cultural or political well being of the otherHow do you measure an organization’s relationship with its publics? .
- The goal of OPRis to build and manage relationships using a variety of outreach strategies and tactics
- Public relation researchers have identified these six elements of a relationship. By assessing the strength of each of these elements, an organization can measure the overall strength of its relationship with priority publics. 1. Control mutuality: The degree to which parties agree on who has the rightful power to influence one another. Although some imbalance is natural, stable relationships require that organizations and stakeholders each have some control over the other. Shared power 2. Trust: Defined as one party’s level of confidence and willingness to open oneself to the other party. There are three dimensions to trust: integrity -- the belief that an organization is fair and just; dependability -- the belief that an organization will do what it says it will do; and confidence -- the belief that an organization has the ability to do what it says it will do. 3. Satisfaction: The extent to which each party feels favorably toward the other because positive expectations about the relationship are reinforced. A satisfying relationship is one in which the benefits outweigh the costs. 4. Commitment: The extent to which each party believes and feels that therelationship is worth spending energy to maintain and promote. 5. Exchange relationship: In an exchange relationship, one party gives benefits to the other only because the other has provided benefits in the past or is expected to do so in the future. 6. Communal relationship: In a communal relationship, both parties provide benefits to the other because they are concerned for the welfare of the other -- even when they get nothing in return. For most public relations activities, developing communal relationships is much more important to achieve than would be developing exchange relationship.
- Why: strong relationships will produce supportive attitudes and behaviorWhy: strong relationships will enhance organizational performance (better fundraising, recruitment of students/alumni, more employee productivity, etc)Why: Strong relationships will reduce misinformation, uncertainty and redundancy 13 questions assess the health of the organization’s relationship with priority publics and pinpoints problem areas
- Do our publics feel there is shared power in decisions that affect them and the organization? Do they have some control over decisions that affect them?
- Do publics believe that the organization will do what it says it will do, and has the ability to do so?
- Does the organization engage in behaviors and actions that positively affect stakeholders?
- Do publics feel that have a stake in the relationship?
- Is there a give and take between an organization and publics in which both parties get something?This is more a focus of marketing than public relations.
- Will the organization do something for the community even though it expects nothing in return?
- Looking for the link between attitude, behavior and strength of relationships
- “Would ask” is essentially the same breakdown: 2/3 would, 1/3 would not
- In a communal relationship, both parties provide benefits to the other because they are concerned for the welfare of the other -- even when they get nothing in return.
- In a communal relationship, both parties provide benefits to the other because they are concerned for the welfare of the other -- even when they get nothing in return. Jackson saw people moving towards a greater need for community in response to three factors:Constant, often wrenching change.Demand for a voice in decisions that affect us.Unbelievable over-communication.
- Pat Jackson: “PR’s #1 job is seeing that decisions become two-dimensional: costs, yes, but also impact on relationships.”
- The two questions for satisfaction:I am happy with the university.Generally speaking, I am pleased with the relationship the university has established with people like me.
- 3. Satisfaction: The extent to which each party feels favorably toward the other because positive expectations about the relationship are reinforced. A satisfying relationship is one in which the benefits outweigh the costs.Commitment: The extent to which each party believes and feels that the
- Non-profit example: In a 2008 study, major gift donors were more likely to have stronger feelings of trust, satisfaction, commitment, and control mutuality with the organizationthan annual gift donors did. This study found that donors who gave multiple times to an organization evaluated the relationship stronger than one-time donors.