This study sought to compare how socio-cultural backgrounds, and individual cultural notions of trust and reputation, may have played into the teaching practices of two academics - one from Australia and one from Indonesia.

1. Acollaborativeautoethnographycomparinghowissues
management/crisiscommunicationwastaughtatan
AustralianandanIndonesianuniversity.
Teaching trustandreputation

2. Introduction
This study reports on a teaching exchange that took
place in late 2018 between myself (Dr Deborah Wise,
University of Newcastle, Australia) and Dr Pia
Wulandari (University of Brawijaya, Indonesia).
Using a collaborative auto-ethnographic
methodology, the paper draws on vignettes of our
personal experiences teaching into the other’s public
relations courses.
The study sought to compare how our socio-cultural
backgrounds, and our individual cultural notions of
trust and reputation, may have played into our
teaching practices in these context.

3. Deb: I am writing about my experiences teaching into
undergraduate public relations courses at the University of
Brawijaya (UB) in Malang, Indonesia for two weeks in
2018. In my home country of Australia, I am a lecturer in
communication at the University of Newcastle. I also have
experience working as a senior public relations
practitioner, particularly in the not-for-profit sector.
Pia: I am writing about my experiences teaching into
undergraduate public relations courses at the University of
Newcastle for two weeks in 2018. In my home country of
Indonesia, I am a Senior Lecturer in Communication at the
University of Brawijaya, Malang. I have had teaching
experience at the University of Newcastle in 2010-2014. In
Indonesia, I am a highly sought after public relations
consultant, and I have delivered public relations campaigns
for the government and global companies.

4. Image source: http://www.vectorworldmap.com/vectormaps/vector-world-map-v2.2.jpg

5. Image source: https://encrypted-
tbn2.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcREg_ZnbE5srVsBsqlxulY4LYTdI2jy9YncWjr2GKJ3H_whlL0Jfa
Zd5Pc

6. “Thecomplexitiesofsocietalfactorssuchas
culture,politicalsystemsandmediasystems
makeAsiaachallengingplacetoconduct
strategicPR”
(Sriramesh,2003,p.54).

7. Trust is multi-dimensional - the Edelman Trust
Barometer demonstrates that trust is (partly)
culturally constructed (Rawlins, 2007).
Edelman 2018 report:
 Australia is only four percentage points above
Russia- the world’s least trusting country.
 Indonesia continues to go against global trends with
trust in its institutions rising for the second year in a
row.
 Indonesia has the second highest level of trust in the
world after China

8. 2019Edelman
TrustBarometer
 Online Survey in 27 Markets
33,000+ respondents total
 All fieldwork was conducted
between October 19 and November
16, 2018
2019 Edelman Trust Barometer

9. Levelsof
trust/distrust
Image: 2019 Edelman Trust Barometer

10. 15out of 26
marketsare
distrusters
Image: 2019 Edelman Trust Barometer

17. Study
sample
 We each delivered two guest lectures at the other’s
university, and we each co-taught in two of the other’s
classes where students presented case studies on
issues/crisis management.
 Based on these experiences we then documented our
thoughts as personal vignettes

18. Methodology
 Collaborative autoethnography (CAE) comprises a research
team of two or more researchers, who “pool their lived
experiences on selected socio-cultural phenomena and
collaboratively analyse and interpret them for commonalities
and differences” (Hernandez, Chang, Ngunjiri, 2017, p. 251).
 This multivocality offers promise in terms of: engendering
power-sharing in the research process, relational
authenticity, and has potential “as a critical method for
fostering global collaboration that disrupts hegemonic
theorizing” Hernandez et al, 2017, pp. 252-253).
 CAE adopts various methods of collaboration (Hernadez et
al, 2017). We collaborated at different stages and worked
individually at others. We also adopted a sequential model
where I wrote the first vignette and then passed it to Pia who
added her story.

19. Deb’svignette
For my class on issue and crisis management I based the lesson on my own research (i.e. Wise and James,
2012) into how a Human Papilloma Virus (HPV) vaccination program, targeted at year seven female high
school students living in New South Wales (NSW) Australia, was communicated in a brochure published by the
NSW Department of Health…students seemed to be of the opinion that the Australian government providing
free vaccination was a very good thing and so they found it difficult to understand why I would be questioning
the program in terms of how it was communicated.
…none of the groups I saw presenting seemed to be critical of the organisation’s communication strategies…on
one occasion I questioned one of the groups about whether or not the communication strategies they had
analysed had actually been as successful as they had reported, but I was quickly reassured that the public
relations campaign had indeed been highly effective. …it seemed that the Indonesian students were,
collectively at least, more trustful than Australian students. By this I mean they were trustful of the
Indonesian government to make laws that would protect them, and that institutions were likewise to be
trusted. When I reflect on my own teaching practices teaching students in Australia I tend to be critical of
many examples of practice …

20. Pia’s vignette
In my opinion, most of the presentations were not linked to important theories such as the theory of SCCT, Apologia, and
Image Repairation. For example, when the group was presenting about the crisis of the loss of flight MH13, the group
showed data on the causes of the crisis and the communication strategies. they did not explain what kind of response
strategies were carried out by Malaysia Airlines. How the impacts caused by the crisis in the overall Malaysian Airlines
business, especially in terms of international flight ticket sales as well as customer trust and corporate image, were analyzed
neither. They also did not explain the cultural context and the ethical issues that arose specifically when the company was
treating the families of the victims.
I completely have no idea whether Australian students trust on Australian government, institution and public
relations practitioners or not... when I was delivering a guest lecture for third year students...I presented a topic
Negative Engagement – Dark Side of Indonesian Social Media Buzzer. I discussed a phenomenon of media buzzer
used for negative engagement in Indonesia. The students enjoy the class and no questions! Again, I asked myself,
what was happening? Did Australian students see my presentation as a story instead of an academic lecture? Why
they didn't want to express their thoughts from the Australian point of views? Were they hesitant or did they not
trust on Australian (or even Indonesian) government or institution?

21. Findings
Pia:
 ‘No idea’ if Australian students trust institutions or not
 Australian students didn’t ask questions – was this because they trusted what I
told them? Were they hesitant or did they not trust Australian (or even
Indonesian) government or institutions?
 Australian students did not explain the cultural context and the ethical issues...
Deb:
 Indonesian students asked questions about why I would be critical of public
relations campaigns – seemed to trust that the government/institutions would
act ethically
 Indonesian students presented case studies of ‘best practice’ issues and crisis
management in which they applied PR theory to support (and not critique) these
practices

22. Results and
conclusions:
Teaching trust
and reputation
 Pia: Deb’s students would benefit from
developing a better understanding of how
culture impacts on trust and reputation in
cultures other than Australia when examining
case studies of professional practice.
 Deb: Pia’s students would benefit from
developing a better understanding of how to
critically evaluate if trust and reputation is a
given when examining case studies of
professional practice.
 Deb and Pia: Students in both countries would
benefit from further teaching exchanges so that
different worldviews can be discussed and
shared.

23. Results and
conclusions:
Teaching trust
and reputation
 The challenge for public relations educators is
“to engage a diverse, multicultural,
transnational student cohort and to foster
critical inquiry and evaluative skills” (Fitch &
Suma, 2006, p.106).
 Teaching exchanges and jointly working on a
collaborative autoethnography provided us both
with added insights into our own
ideology/worldviews as well as our teaching
practices.
 Cultural constructs of trust can also have a
bearing on how students understand public
relations curricula and examples of practice.

24. Practical &social implications
 The findings suggest that research into public relations
curriculum needs to acknowledge, as a starting point, the pre-
existing cultural worldviews of students and teachers.
 Such an approach would go some way to addressing the
ethnocentrism inherent in much of the public relations literature
and curricula, while also improving learning outcomes for
students.
 This is an initial pilot study and the findings will be used to
inform a larger joint Australia-Indonesia education research
project involving both of the authors.
 E.g. future research will apply Wu, Taylor and Chen’s (2001) five
dimensions of culture for public relations, to analyse student’s
cultural understanding before and after undertaking work-
integrated-learning in Indonesia and Australia.

25. Thankyou
Terimakasih
deborah.wise@newcastle.edu.au
mpiawulandari@gmail.com