Organic integration: the natural process underlying ...

Journal of Communication Management Organic integration: the natural process underlying communication integration Brian G. Smith

Article information:

Downloaded by Purdue University Libraries At 07:31 17 November 2015 (PT)

To cite this document: Brian G. Smith, (2012),"Organic integration: the natural process underlying communication integration", Journal of Communication Management, Vol. 16 Iss 1 pp. 4 - 19 Permanent link to this document: http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/13632541211198012 Downloaded on: 17 November 2015, At: 07:31 (PT) References: this document contains references to 44 other documents. To copy this document: [email protected] The fulltext of this document has been downloaded 1561 times since 2012*

Users who downloaded this article also downloaded: Natalie T.J. Tindall, Derina Holtzhausen, (2012),"Toward an integrated model of communication: the case of South Africa", Journal of Communication Management, Vol. 16 Iss 4 pp. 371-387 http:// dx.doi.org/10.1108/13632541211279003 Lars Thøger Christensen, A. Fuat F#rat, Simon Torp, (2008),"The organisation of integrated communications: toward flexible integration", European Journal of Marketing, Vol. 42 Iss 3/4 pp. 423-452 http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/03090560810853002 Tony Proctor, Philip Kitchen, (2002),"Communication in postmodern integrated marketing", Corporate Communications: An International Journal, Vol. 7 Iss 3 pp. 144-154 http:// dx.doi.org/10.1108/13563280210436754

Access to this document was granted through an Emerald subscription provided by emerald-srm:281668 []

For Authors If you would like to write for this, or any other Emerald publication, then please use our Emerald for Authors service information about how to choose which publication to write for and submission guidelines are available for all. Please visit www.emeraldinsight.com/authors for more information.

About Emerald www.emeraldinsight.com Emerald is a global publisher linking research and practice to the benefit of society. The company manages a portfolio of more than 290 journals and over 2,350 books and book series volumes, as well as providing an extensive range of online products and additional customer resources and services. Emerald is both COUNTER 4 and TRANSFER compliant. The organization is a partner of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) and also works with Portico and the LOCKSS initiative for digital archive preservation. *Related content and download information correct at time of download.

The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available at www.emeraldinsight.com/1363-254X.htm

JCOM 16,1

Organic integration: the natural process underlying communication integration

4


Received 3 November 2009 Revised 21 December 2009 12 April 2010 Accepted 19 April 2010

Brian G. Smith Jack J. Valenti School of Communication, University of Houston, Houston, Texas, USA Abstract Purpose – The purpose of this paper is to progress research on integrated communication management from its current debates on definitions and normative models to research-based understanding of how integration works and is implemented at an organisation with a high level of integration. Also, the paper seeks to provide insights for communication managers on implementing successful integrated communication programs. Design/methodology/approach – This research incorporated a qualitative single case study of an exemplary organisational case of integrated communication, using three data sources: depth interviews, participant observation, and document analysis. Findings – Communication integration operates organically, through cross-functional connections and knowledge sharing and facilitated by an open organisational structure whereby integration occurs naturally. Research limitations/implications – Though other configurations may exist in high-functioning integrated programs, this study provides a new direction for theory development, and fills a need in scholarship to identify the interactions that integration creates. Practical implications – This research provides research-based learning on integrated communication management and implementation, and includes steps to establish a successful integrated program. Originality/value – The paper will be of special interest to strategists, managers, and practitioners for improving communication processes. It also fills a need in the literature to progress understanding from definition debates to the interworking of communication functions. Keywords Communication management, Marketing, Public relations, Brand management, Integrated communication, Integrated marketing communications Paper type Research paper

Journal of Communication Management Vol. 16 No. 1, 2012 pp. 4-19 q Emerald Group Publishing Limited 1363-254X DOI 10.1108/13632541211198012

Introduction Integrated communication, a holistic approach to communication management that has been gaining recognition (Liodice, 2008), is at a critical point in its development. Up until this point, research has emphasized preliminary definitions leading to claims that the field is underdeveloped (Kerr et al., 2008). Furthermore, insights on integrated communication are normative and prescriptive, including models developed over a decade ago by Duncan and Caywood (1996), Caywood (1997), and Gronstedt (1996, 2000), but which remain under-explored in research. There is a need to move scholarship from semantics to execution. This research progresses integrated communication practice and scholarship through a case analysis of a successful integrated program. Communications at Adventure

Communications[1], a major media company, demonstrate that integration is operates naturally through cross-functional collaboration, a process I refer to as organic. Following this introductory section, I lay out the definitions and prescriptions for integrated communication as well as my research method in producing this case study. Finally, I outline organic integration, the philosophy and implementation of integration as a natural, spontaneous process.

Organic integration


5 Literature review What is Integrated Communication? Integrated communication is a management discipline that emphasizes the holistic coordination of multiple communication functions around public needs (Debreceny and Cochrane, 2004, Schultz, 2007). Though a majority of firms use an integrated approach to communication management, and the literature features exemplars of integration’s benefits to an organisation (Batchelor and Formentin, 2008; Hall and Wickham, 2008), only 25 percent of firms rate their programs favourably (Liodice, 2008). There is a need to outline effective integrated communication management principles. The American Association of Advertising Agencies first defined integrated communication as: “A concept of marketing communications planning that recognizes the added value in a program that integrates a variety of strategic disciplines [. . .] to provide [. . .] maximum communication impact” (Kerr et al., 2008, p. 515). Though this definition is still widely used today, scholars have added the concepts of branding (Keller, 1996; Kliatchko, 2005; Madhavaram et al., 2005), synergy (Moriarty, 1996), and information control and audience targeting (Madhavaram et al., 2005; Reid, 2003; Schultz and Kitchen, 1997). Kliatchko (2008) argues that an appropriate definition of integration, based on literature, is: An audience-driven business process of strategically managing stakeholders, content, channels, and results of brand communication programs (p. 140).

Kliatchko’s inclusion of stakeholders, content, channels, and results provides a framework against which to explore the process of integrated communication. Integrating stakeholders Stakeholders are the foundation for integration, because they are already integrating content as they “self-select and identify themselves as being interested in a brand” (Duncan, 1993, p. 18). Recent research has expanded target audiences beyond the traditional customer-orientation to include all stakeholders (Gregory, 2007; Kerr et al., 2008). Gronstedt (2000, 1996) has argued for a comprehensive stakeholder orientation because an employee may also be a consumer; and a consumer, an opinion leader. In this way, integrated communication seeks to fulfil the needs of a merging stakeholder base (Kitchen et al., 2004; Schultz, 2007). Integrating content Integrating messages, logos, and other material for synergy has been a priority of integrated communication research since 2000 (Kliatchko, 2008). The focus on tactical elements in integrated communication research may be natural, as scholars seek to identify how “marketing and communication activities interact with each other in the marketplace [and] come together to impact [. . .] the host of other stakeholders that are

JCOM 16,1


6

involved in today’s marketplace success” (Schultz, 2005, p. 7). Synergy, which stems from “linkages created in a receiver’s mind as a result of messages that connect [leading to] impact beyond the power of any one message on its own” (Moriarty, 1996, p. 333), involves every department “speaking the brand language” in their interactions with stakeholders (Kitchen et al., 2007, p. 154), and leads to brand equity and competitive advantage (Aaker, 2008; Campbell, 2002; Debreceny and Cochrane, 2004; Schultz and Kitchen, 2001). Research by Kerr et al. (2008) confirms the holistic effect of coordinating all messages, rather than only marketing messages (p. 516). Integrating channels Channel integration includes consideration of all access points between a company and its stakeholders, and the strategic selection of multiple media platforms for desired effect (Kliatchko, 2008; Stammerjohan et al., 2005). Kitchen et al. (2007) conceptualize integration as a quick-response mechanism to the “diversified media sector [. . .] widely varying consumers’ needs and tastes, and clients’ desires to develop a cost-efficient and effective marketing strategy” (p. 33). They also found that agency executives value integration because individual marketing pieces are no longer effective to communicate with publics. Integrating results Scholars assert that organisational effectiveness and measurement are key components of integration (Kliatchko, 2008) and that integration is designed for enhanced evaluation (Zahay et al., 2004). Liodice (2008) argues that measurement should comprise common processes, objectives, and strategies across functions. Kerr et al. (2008), argue that integrated measurement requires the evaluation of long-term results, such as relationships. Overall, much of the literature considers integration as a marketing concept, analyzing marketing messages and tools (Kliatchko, 2008). The current study approaches integration consistent with challenges posed by Duncan and Caywood (1996), Hallahan (2007), and Gronstedt (2000): to consider all organisational communications. How does integration work? Most of the literature features prescriptions and normative models for how integrated communication should work. Gronstedt (2000, 1996) has developed a model for understanding integration based on the idea that public relations’ and marketing communications’ tools and publics overlap. In his stakeholder relations model, Gronstedt (1996) considers a company’s functions as sending, receiving, and interactive tools. Communication functions, such as promotion, publicity, and even research, are considered tools that are employed based on stakeholder needs. Caywood (1997) and Duncan and Caywood (1996) identified stages through which integration develops at an organization. Lower levels of integration begin with awareness of a change in business landscape (stage one), as development progresses through image and message coordination (stage two) and increasing functional integration (stage three) and dissolution of functional boundaries (stage four). Advanced levels of integration “expand the range of audiences from customers to all stakeholders” (Caywood, 1997, preface, p. xx) and include evaluation of all customer touch-points (stage five), integration based on all stakeholder needs (stage six), and, finally, the convergence

of all communication functions around building relationships with the full range of stakeholders (stage seven) (Caywood, 1997; Duncan and Caywood, 1996).


Scope of this study In this study, I explore integrated communication as a holistic process that encompasses all communication functions, including marketing, advertising, and public relations. This is in line with recent challenges posed by scholars (Hallahan, 2007). Current conceptualizations lack insight on department structures and functional roles beyond opinion-based assertions and scholars have called for studies that transcend definition debates and identify the processes of integration (Hallahan, 2007; Schultz, 2005; Schultz and Patti, 2009). The current study explores integration against models by Caywood (1997) and Duncan and Caywood (1996). Research questions The following research questions have been developed to fill the need in the literature to explore how integrated communication is implemented. The purpose of RQ1 is to provide a principal understanding of integration because employee understanding precedes and influences implementation. RQ2 addresses implementation. RQ1. How is the integration of communication defined and understood at an organisation with a high level of integrated communication? RQ2. How is integration implemented at an organisation with a high level of integrated communication? Using Kliatchko’s (2008) review of the literature, I explored integration based on: content, stakeholders, channels, and results. I evaluated integrated communication against Duncan and Caywood’s (1996) stages of integration. Definitions and understandings are separated from implementation in the research questions because integrated concepts held by employees can differ from implementation. Method Qualitative research is the science of the observed (Denzin and Lincoln, 2003), and has been chosen for this project because of its appropriateness in clarifying theory and achieving depth of understanding. The qualitative method employed in this research was a single-case analysis of an exemplary instance of integrated communication, featuring multiple data collection sources: interviews, participant observation and document analysis. The primary unit of analysis was organisational processes. Most research has explored employee opinions about integrated communication (Kitchen et al., 2007; Kitchen and Li, 2005). This study answers Schultz’s (2005) call for research that explores “how integrated communication works, how it impacts the various parties, and how it can be developed and maintained” (p. 7). Case study method Case studies, an empirical method of inquiry commonly used to examine organisational phenomena, are designed for exploring contextual conditions and include consideration of multiple sources of evidence (Yin, 2003). Yin (2003) has argued that case studies are useful for evaluation of theory and that for exemplary representations of an occurrence, the single-case study, employed here, is most appropriate.

Organic integration

7

JCOM 16,1


8

Sampling My sample was purposive and theory-driven (Miles and Huberman, 1994), as I contacted local organisations, and selected an organisation based on location, availability, willingness to participate, and organisational fit with advanced levels of integrated communication (Duncan and Caywood, 1996). Following a formal e-mail requesting participation – and offering a research-based analysis of the organisation’s communications as incentive – I conducted informal interviews with executives to determine preliminary fit with the Duncan and Caywood model. Once the organisation was selected, I sampled individuals, documents, and participant observation experiences based on theoretical sampling, recruiting participants who could discuss as many categorical concepts as possible (Glaser and Strauss, 1967). I also asked interviewees for referrals for other interviewees in the organisation. In my recruiting, I sought to reach a point of saturation with data sources. Data collection I gathered data from three sources: interviews, participant observation, and document analysis. Table I outlines my data sources. Interviewing is a direct form of inquiry that involves the creation of meaning through conversation (Fontana and Frey, 2003; Kvale, 1995). I conducted nine 45-75 minute informant interviews (Lindlof, 1995), in-person and over-the-phone, with professionals in both marketing and public relations capacities with experience in the organisation’s integration efforts (six interviewees were decision-makers in communication management, and three were practitioners). Interviews were purposive and conversational (Rubin and Rubin, 2005), and were based on an interview guide I pretested with three professional contacts. Interviews, which featured discussion on communication roles and implementation, were recorded and transcribed, with permission. During interviews, I noted reflections, themes, and patterns. Participant observation, which is based on the notion that enacting roles provides understanding (Lindlof, 1995; Sanday, 1979), was used to confirm interview findings. In this study, I conducted six hours of participant observation, in which I helped coordinate and analyze a company event. My experiences included interactions with the event coordinator and evaluation of the event. I also produced an analysis for the event that was delivered to company executives. Finally, I collected and analyzed organisational documents to “corroborate and augment evidence from other sources” (Yin, 2003, p. 87). Documents, which were obtained from interviewees and from personal online research, included both internal Interviews Observation Documents: web sites

Table I.

Documents: Strategy Documents: Presentations Documents: Other

9 6 hours Network sites (6) Blog/fan sites (20) Twitter site Intranet portal Communication Toolbox Document Company Investor Presentation Corporate Newsletter


and external materials, newsletters and brochures, presentations, web sites, intranet sites, and strategy sheets. I also investigated third-party blogs and web sites. Data analysis and interpretation For analysis and interpretation, I used a combination of Miles and Huberman’s (1994) structured analysis and a grounded theory approach (Glaser and Strauss, 1967) to identify all possible themes. In my first reading of the data, I used the literature-based coding list, summarizing data, noting patterns, and adding themes missing from the literature to the preliminary list of codes. I then reviewed the data a second time, assigning representative codes. On my third review of the data, I compiled all codes into primary conceptual categories designed to answer each research question, writing vignettes under each, summarizing insights, and noting patterns. In my interpretation efforts, I sought to write “the story” of integration through a reflexive process of evaluation, writing memos and noting reflections. Even while away from the data, I worked through connections in my head, and often found myself writing notes to myself in some of the oddest locations and times – in planes, while driving (I would wait for a stop light), and even in the middle of the night (ideas often woke me at night). I learned the real meaning of Miles and Hubermans’ (1994) claim that “we need to keep a box score along the way” (p. 86). Case organisation: adventure communications Adventure Communications[2] is a top-rated broadcast media company based in the USA that broadcasts nature and educational programming through over 100 worldwide television and digital networks. Adventure demonstrates high levels of integration through a combination of a centralized brand umbrella, under which Adventure’s networks operate, and an open structure operations that allows each network to operate as its own unit. Each of the communication functions – which are divided into advertising (marketing, sales, etc.), and communication (public relations, viewer relations, internal communciations, etc.) “contribute to the success of the corporate mission” through the full cooperation of public relations, marketing, and selling (Duncan and Caywood, 1996, p. 23). Additionally, communication professionals are brought “in direct contact with the full range of management functions and businesses” (p. 32) for the strategic relationship management of the company’s stakeholders. Findings RQ1. How is the integration of communication defined and understood at an organisation with a high level of integrated communication? Individually held concepts of integration are central to understanding the execution of integrated communication at Adventure Communications. Primary among considerations of integration are interdependence, strategic communication, and message unity. Interdependence. Integration involves recognition of “being part of the same team,” and that other functions are integral to completing a project or conducting a campaign. As a network publicity director explained, “We all work very closely because what I’m doing is affected completely by what the other team is doing”. To this end practitioners recognize interdependence among communication and marketing functions. “You need to balance each other. So, if marketing is going hardcore one way, we might play a little more straight and narrow knowing that we’ll balance each other out”.

Organic integration

9

JCOM 16,1


10

Adventure demonstrates a focus on collective approach, as one respondent said, “We all work towards the greater good here and we all want to be a successful company”. Company presentations also showed this collective approach, lumping networks and communications and marketing teams into the holistic success of the organisation. Strategic communication. Integrated communication is also considered a strategic endeavour, because, as one publicity agent explained, it involves the coordination of communication activities for an intended benefit for the organisation. “Strategic” is defined by respondents as “supporting the corporate brand” and “putting a consistent face forward”. A network publicity director explained that everything “has to be strategic in terms of all the communications teams working together so that we’re promoting our brands separately but also strategically together at the same time”. Message unity. Consistent messaging may be the common denominator in consideration of integration at Adventure Communications. During interviews, participants commonly referred to integration as coordinating messages between web sites and communication material. One respondent said that being “completely integrated” involves putting out a press release and making sure employees get the same message. One network manager said success comes when “the communications message, the marketing message and the sales message are all in harmony and are not conflicting, that’s how you know you’ve succeeded”. RQ2. How is integration implemented at an organisation with a high level of integrated communication? Integrated communication at Adventure is based on the intersection of management priorities and an organisational culture that values transparency and teamwork. Integration is implemented both externally and internally. External integration. Adventure Communications’ integration efforts seek consistency in messaging, media channels, and across stakeholder groups. Efforts toward internetwork consistency are also evident. Messaging. Adventure communicators use a concept referred to as “message sharing”, in which, according to a publicity manager, communicators “share the same assets to enable as consistent and joint a message as we can”. Message sharing involves using a unified message across media and promotional materials, ensuring that different messages are not at odds with each other. Message sharing also requires employees to be on the same page. “We train ourselves and make sure that we’re on message when we talk to people”, said one network general manager. Communicators ensure all employees are “on message” by working in tandem with human resources to create and distribute messaging to employees through a variety of sources. The company’s internal employee web site is evidence of this – it features messaging around the company’s themes of adventure and discovery and has a designated section where employees can learn about teams successfully representing these company themes. This message sharing was also evident in a recent company event I helped evaluate, and attendee YouTube videos highlighted the adventures the company provided for attendees. Managers also encourage message sharing informally. One network general manager said, “If I notice that in the course of meetings and day-to-day work, people are missing one another and are not speaking the same message, then I’ll encourage them to get together and do that”.


Message sharing allows room for differences in semantics or word choice, as a corporate vice president explained: “It’s not that the lines have to be the same [. . .] it’s the essence that has to be the same”. This “essence” is managed through a company editorial filter. “An Adventure show has to be immersive, engaging and informative at the same time”, said one network manager. “That brand filter is a way of helping us remember how to frame our projection of ourselves so that when I’m talking to a reporter, I’ll have a lexicon of words that I can pull from”. Through message sharing, taglines and semantics may differ, but themes are consistent. Company network web sites demonstrated this editorial filter. Though each site had a different tagline and set of keywords, content reflected the themes of adventure and education. One site represented adventurous everyday families, another site featured survival stories of individuals. Media. Adventure Communications synchronizes media outlets for a comprehensive reach of target publics by balancing earned and paid-for media, as well as print and online channels. Integrating across media channels entails earning as much media coverage as possible to reach targeted stakeholder groups and often involves close coordination between marketing and communications on scheduling media releases and launches. Adventure communicators often work with magazines that the ad sales department is also targeting to “double down” and “own” a particular media outlet. This was evident in my experiences working with the company on a promotional event, as my main task was to assess the company’s “ownership” of online media. Several respondents reported putting more emphasis on social media, like blogs, Twitter, Facebook, and YouTube, because of their viewers’ social media attention. In fact, many reported that digital and online media are changing the way they integrate channels because “some people want to do everything online”. Respondents discussed the difficulty coordinating across online media because of the lack of message control in online forums and messaging environments, and, as stated previously, my purpose in working with the company on their upcoming event was to provide insight on online coverage, which coverage previously was under-evaluated. Stakeholder integration. “I think what drives integration is what the audience wants,” said a brand director. “A lot of bloggers, for example, don’t want a press release, they want a message that’s customized to them [. . .] but maybe there’s another message that’s more important for certain audiences”. Stakeholder integration involves having “the same audience in mind, and the same brand promise in mind”, when targeting stakeholders, and may involve “coming at the same pitch from five different angles”. In this way, the underlying message may be the same, but way the message is presented differs according to audience. For example, one network general manager divides target audiences into four groups – viewers, trade reporters, consumer reporters, and advertisers – considering a different message for each group. “You are speaking to different audiences but you want them to be in harmony”, he said. For many, stakeholder integration is facilitated by online technology, as practitioners try to capitalize on direct to consumer media channels. “People are out there listening to us, and it’s good to get it directly from the network, not necessarily from a reporter”, one communication director said. This emphasis on connecting with bloggers is evident on their web sites, where networks offer blogging viewers the opportunity to share their own stories and images that relate to network shows. The company also sought to integrate bloggers into their audience through their

Organic integration

11

JCOM 16,1


12

promotional event I helped evaluate, encouraging influential bloggers to post video, tweets, and blog reports on the event. Integrating networks. One of the principle areas for integration at Adventure is ensuring that networks are in sync with the corporate brand and in sync with each other. This is done through a coordinated set of priorities – network priorities are on promoting programming and corporate priorities are on promoting each network. This puts the bulk of integration efforts on the network level to represent Adventure Communications appropriately, and networks keep headquarters “in the loop” on activities through weekly integrated meetings. Network general managers also supervise network integration efforts, serving as “the ultimate style guide”, as one general manager said, ensuring that networks are aligned with the corporate brand. Web sites and material present a consistent brand image. On the network level, marketing and communication maintain fluid levels of integration, based on a recognition that “we’re both stronger for doing that”, as one respondent said. For example, in a DVD launch of a network series, communication supported marketing and sales by creating promotional activities and setting up talk show interviews. The two functions begin projects separately, and then come together prior to a campaign to synchronize efforts. “I’ll watch the show and I’ll put together my own messages”, one publicity manager said. “But at some point, I’m going to sit down with marketing and marketing will have done the same thing [. . .] and I might decide at that point that I really like some of their things”. Another respondent explained: We approach every show together. So, as marketing is building their media bios and we [communication] are pitching, we’ll look and figure out where we have crossover, or if marketing is buying media that will help us. For example, does marketing not need to buy a certain publication because we have a feature coming out, so they can put money somewhere else?

Networks also use “share messaging” to “tag along with a bigger corporate story” or work in unison with other networks. Through share messaging, communication teams “work together to promote [network] brands separately, but also strategically together at the same time”, as one respondent explained. Network web sites confirm this strategic connection, as network web sites are sub-domains of the broader corporate site – that is, each network is an “.adventure.com” site – and each site maintains the same framework as the corporate site. Internal integration. Communication strategy starts at network levels, where managers set up teams to brainstorm and develop strategy, and then report to the network vice-president who approves the strategy. Strategy creation ultimately relies on the communication team, as vice presidents tend to trust the team’s direction and may only offer minor changes. This puts the onus on network and corporate teams, which demonstrate high levels of cross-functional collaboration and interaction. Cross-functional collaboration. Teamwork and cross-functional collaboration are endemic to the Adventure culture, a trait commonly lauded in interviews. The company hosts a weekly coordination meeting, referred to as “the main meeting of the week” in which network communicators and corporate communicators meet to discuss initiatives, programs, and activities going on for the week. During meetings “priorities are set with everyone’s feedback” as participants decide on processes to put in place. Communication and marketing initiatives also emphasize cross-functional knowledge sharing and teamwork. For one, executives give employees experience in several different roles. One network executive said she likes to “push people in


the direction they haven’t been before [. . .] and keep things fresh”. She explained: “We might switch it up and put a whole new group on [a network show]. It’s a chance to just breakout into something new”. This gives employees valued experience to work cohesively with across units and functions. One network executive said, “Anyone that works on my team is exposed to all of the things that relate to [the network]. There isn’t anyone on my team that just does program publicity, or that just writes. We do all of it”. Adventure professionals also gain cross-functional experience by serving as inter-department liaisons, splitting time between marketing and communication teams to “be that much more collaborative and in sync, and know what’s going on”, as one publicity manager said. Employees rely on each other for their expertise and the assets they bring to a team. One network GM said, “The guy in the communications department is aware of the ingredients of a marketing campaign and the marketing department is aware of the ingredients of a communications campaign. We are all sharing the same assets”. This sharing of assets appeared critical in planning and evaluation of the company event I participated in: though the communication department was in charge, advertising played an equal role in the event’s management. Executives also facilitate cross-functional coordination. One network communicator commented, “I think communication really works well because the leadership has made us feel very connected to one another in a tuned way.” One executive explained his role in cross-functional collaboration in this way: I always encourage people to communicate with one another. It’s my job to say, “Go see how [one person] does this or see what [another person] in marketing says about what you’re thinking, and get some input, because it’s valuable”.

Culture of collaboration. At Adventure Communications, collaboration appears to be a natural occurrence or “something that people do on their own”, as one communicator explained. A network vice president said, “If something works well, it works organically – something that naturally occurs when you’re working on something”. This natural integration may be attributed to a company culture “based on communication among every department, every team. Not just department but outside of communication [. . .] and all over the place” and which “doesn’t have a great level of tolerance for people who are obstructionist”. Adventure’s culture emphasizes transparency and teamwork, “so that nobody feels walled off from information” said one respondent. Corporate headquarters routinely brings everyone together for big events and to celebrate network successes. A brand director added that collaboration “has something to do with the corporate culture [. . .] when there’s a priority, there’s definitely a do-whatever-we-can-do-to-makesure-it-happens attitude”. This undercurrent of team spirit was evident in my experience helping one network assess an upcoming promotional event – even as an outsider, I was invited to contribute to the brainstorming process. One executive explained, “It’s not that often that something just happens and it’s one person that has worked on it, there have been lots of hands in it, lots of cooks in the kitchen and if it’s a win from this person over here, it’s really a win for all of us”. Employees at Adventure also maintain ongoing relationships as several respondents pointed to the tendency to reach out to each other to “keep in mind what team mates are doing” so they can “percolate ideas together” and can avoid

Organic integration

13

JCOM 16,1


14

“stepping on each other’s toes”. One professional called it “a collaborative partnership”. A communication director illustrated it in this way: “It’s one of those things where you could just walk down the hall and say, ‘ Hey! What do you think about this?’ We are all on one team”. Intra-company competition. Though collaborative, the company is not immune to competition. In particular, some interviewees revealed undercurrents of animosity between networks, which are separate and responsible for meeting viewership goals, but are also tasked with being aligned together. It is apparent that priorities skew toward larger networks, which at least one respondent noticed: “Larger networks have the bigger priorities, so if [a larger network] is coming out with this huge promotable, we’re all supposed to back down for the greater good of the company”. This competition is also evident in the company’s press database, which houses media contacts, dates of interaction, and feedback for the entire company. Though this database is designed to keep everyone on the same page, one respondent revealed: I think in theory it’s great, and we all love each other and we all work under one umbrella [. . .] but we’re charged with bringing viewers to our network, so there’s a little competition there. So, there’s a lot of media contacts that don’t make it onto the database, sometimes because of competitiveness and sometimes because we just don’t get to it.

Conclusion The purpose of this study was to provide research-based insights on integrated communication where opinion-based and normative theories have dominated the literature. As a representative case example of high levels of integration, Adventure Communications confirms and helps clarify what integrated communication is and entails, and it also provides direction for the development of theory. Results from this study show that integration is a holistic process that involves participation of all communication functions for the benefit of stakeholder relationships. In fact, Communications at Adventure revolve around stakeholder needs (viewer, blogger, employee, etc.), confirming scholar claims of the stakeholder as the differentiating factor (Gronstedt, 2000; Kerr et al., 2008; Schultz, 2007). Perhaps contrary to current conceptualizations, integrated communication is more than a “business process of strategically managing [. . .] content, channels” and other elements (Kliatchko, 2008, p. 140). A majority of the literature discusses integration as a planned process of coordinating images and messages for the synergy created by one look, one sound (Kliatchko, 2008; Moriarty, 1996; Schultz and Patti, 2009). At Adventure, consistency in content is only a baseline consideration. Rather, communicators approach integration as an audience-driven philosophy that provides context for behaviour – a way of doing business, rather than a set of rules and procedures. Integration at Adventure reflects Duncan and Caywood’s (1996) declaration that, “the greatest degree of integration emerges from cooperative efforts [. . .] as each step of integration is mastered and accepted, the elements begin to work together” (pp. 23, 29). Therefore, though formal elements like consistency in content (i.e. logo, taglines, etc.) may serve as principle needs for integration, implementation at the highest levels of integration occurs based on informal and natural collaboration. Integration, then, should be considered an organic even spontaneous process – a process I refer to as organic integration.


Organic integration: a new direction in theory and practice Integration as a natural, spontaneous process is fertilized by an open structure of interaction and cross-functional collaboration, and operates through internal relationships. Though management directives may serve to initiate the process, integration works organically, through self-initiative, from the bottom of the organisation up, and from the inside of the organisation out. Critical factors include: Access. Employees need access and face-time in order to collaborate. This may be common sense, but it is one element of integrated communication that is not recognized enough in management or academic literature. For Adventure Communications, getting employees together to spur integration was a priority. Access requires that communicators have informal interaction outside of meetings. This process was often spontaneous at Adventure, though management also encouraged it. Organisational support. Successful integration depends on an open and fluid company structure. Adventure communicators described the company culture as flexible, open, and one that welcomes change. The company facilitates cross-functional collaboration, evident in interviews and participant observation. Adventure also provides an autonomous structure, in which networks and functions work independently toward communication success. Knowledge sharing. A fluid knowledge-sharing process facilitates integrated communication, and enables communicators to collaborate. Adventure Communications ensures knowledge sharing through employee brown-bag luncheons with senior executives, weekly meetings, and even global events featuring interactive sessions with network talent and celebrities. Additionally, employees have access to daily information-updates through the online employee portal. Adventure’s inter-departmental liaisons Another way organisations may facilitate knowledge sharing is through the use of inter-department liaisons, who attend meetings outside of their department to coordinate communications and stay informed. Inter-department liaisons facilitate critical connections between communication functions to ensure consistency. By keeping both marketing and communication teams informed on the other’s activities, they create synergy and become the primary personnel to ensure integration. Self-initiative. A hallmark of organic integration may be the propensity for an individual to interact with others and seek out opportunities to integrate communication efforts. Integration begins with the individual, through individual relationships and interactions, regardless of the level of management directives surrounding integration. Brand essence. Integration operates more on matching the essence of the company brand rather than copying messages and matching words. Though a company may have a brand lexicon, representing a company’s brand themes is more important than semantic similarities. Marketing and communication functions require different messages in different formats but the message theme should be the same. Internal relationships. Fluid internal relationships enable integration to work organically. Communication is a relationship-driven function, and should be considered as such internally, through employee relationships, as much as it is externally, through relationship marketing and management efforts. Future research should investigate integration as a relationship concept, in addition to its status as a management process.

Organic integration

15


JCOM 16,1

Innovation. Innovation may be a contributing factor to organic integration. In order to enable integration to operate naturally, management and employees should be open to change and engage in new ways to solve communication problems and approach communication campaigns. This was evident in one executive’s efforts to mix and match team members through different projects at Adventure.

16

Practical applications: sowing organic integration Two critical applications for communication management are inherent in leading the organic process of integration. First, management of integration should centre on knowledge sharing and team building for ongoing interaction between communication functions. Roles should be assigned based on skills and expertise, and inter-department brainstorming should be a common fixture. Second, managers should be cautious in mandating integrated efforts or setting up extensive boundaries. Formal content and framework elements can be governed (i.e. logos, taglines, etc.), but practitioners should collaborate based on program goal and self-initiative. Limitations Confounding variables may have influenced the results of this research, including the type of organisation I studied. It is possible that integration may be a focus in media companies, and other company types (i.e. small businesses) and industries integration may operate differently. Though research should explore the breadth of integration, company type, in this study, may not be a valid limitation because the purpose of qualitative research is to describe a phenomenon’s occurrence, not prove that it is consistent across all contexts. Within this framework, the results here represent a possibility in professional practice and provide a theoretical perspective to be tested across organisational settings. Future research: unlocking the cultural and systemic dimensions of integration Schultz and Patti (2009) argue that integration is “culturally based and culturally biased” (p. 82) and call for a cultural assessment of integration. Though it was not my intention to explore culture, the results point to the need to consider the influence of cultural context on integration. Cultural influences here include the company’s western management orientation and its own organisational culture, which values self-initiative, creativity, and community. Holtzhausen et al. (2003) questioned whether communication models “developed in some countries can be applied to others” (p. 306), and, in this vein, I propose that future research should explore national and organisational cultural variables. This study also shows that integration may be a systems construct – the interaction between an organisation’s subsystems (i.e. functions, teams, and groups) influences the performance of the entire system (Grunig, 1992). Examining integration from a systems approach implies studying the social structure within which organisational actors operate, including actor interdependence, needs fulfilment, and external influences. Such perspectives, coupled with this study’s findings, provide a basis for Schultz’s (2005) call to “focus on indentifying the interactions that integration creates” (p. 7). Overall, this study has demonstrated that integrated communication is an organic phenomenon based on cross-functional collaboration that may occur naturally. More than a tactical concept, integration is built through relationship cultivation. Scholarship and practice can flourish from this relational perspective.

Notes 1. Names of the organisation and its members have been changed for confidentiality.

Organic integration


2. The organisation’s name has been changed to maintain confidentiality.

References Aaker, D. (2008), Strategic Marketing Management, John Wiley & Sons, Hoboken, NJ. Batchelor, B. and Formentin, M. (2008), “Re-branding the NHL: building the league through the ‘My NHL’ integrated marketing campaign”, Public Relations Review, Vol. 34 No. 2, pp. 156-60. Campbell, M.C. (2002), “Building brand equity”, International Journal of Medical Marketing, Vol. 2 No. 3, pp. 208-18. Caywood, C. (1997), Handbook of Strategic Public Relations & Integrated Communication, McGraw Hill, New York, NY. Debreceny, P. and Cochrane, L. (2004), “Two disciplines on same road”, Advertising Age, 8 November, p. 28. Denzin, N.K. and Lincoln, Y.S. (2003), “Introduction: The discipline and practice of qualitative research”, in Denzin, N.K. and Lincoln, Y.S. (Eds), Collecting and Interpreting Qualitative Materials, 2nd ed., Sage, Thousand Oaks, CA. Duncan, T.R. (1993), “To fathom integrated marketing, dive!”, Advertising Age, Vol. 54 No. 43, p. 18. Duncan, T.R. and Caywood, C. (1996), “The concept, process, and evolution of integrated marketing communication”, in Thorson, E. and Moore, J. (Eds), Integrated Communication: Synergy of Persuasive Voices, Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Mahwah, NJ, pp. 13-34. Fontana, A. and Frey, J.H. (2003), “Recontextualizing observation: ethnography, pedagogy, and the prospects for a progressive political agenda”, in Denzin, N.K. and Lincoln, Y.S. (Eds), Collecting and Interpreting Qualitative Materials, 2nd ed., Sage, Thousand Oaks, CA. Glaser, B.G. and Strauss, A.L. (1967), The Discovery of Grounded Theory: Strategies of Qualitative Research, Aldine de Gruyter, New York, NY. Gregory, A. (2007), “Involving stakeholders in developing corporate brands: the communication dimension”, Journal of Marketing Management, Vol. 23 Nos 1/2, p. 59. Gronstedt, A. (1996), “Integrating marketing communication and public relations: a stakeholder relations model”, in Thorson, E. and Moore, J. (Eds), Integrated Communication: Synergy of Persuasive Voices, Lawrence Erlbaum, Mahwah, NJ, pp. 287-304. Gronstedt, A. (2000), The Consumer Century: Lessons from World Class Companies in Integrated Marketing and Communications, Routledge, New York, NY. Grunig, J.E. (1992), Excellence in Public Relations and Communication Management, Routledge, New York, NY. Hall, L. and Wickham, M. (2008), “Organising IMC roles and functions in the business-to-business network environment”, Journal of Marketing Communications, Vol. 14 No. 3, pp. 193-206. Hallahan, K. (2007), “Integrated communication: implications for public relations beyond excellence”, in Toth, E.L. (Ed.), The Future of Excellence in Public Relations and Communication Management, Lawrence Erlbaum, Mahwah, NJ, pp. 299-336.

17

JCOM 16,1


18

Holtzhausen, D.R., Petersen, B.K. and Tindall, N.T.J. (2003), “Exploding the myth of the symmetrical/asymmetrical dichotomy: public relations in the new South Africa”, Journal of Public Relations Research, Vol. 15 No. 4, pp. 305-41. Keller, K.L. (1996), “Brand equity and integrated communication”, in Thorson, E. and Moore, J. (Eds), Integrated Communication: Synergy of Persuasive Voices, Lawrence Erlbaum, Mahwah, NJ, pp. 103-32. Kerr, G., Schultz, D., Patti, C. and Kim, I. (2008), “An inside-out approach to integrated marketing communication: an international analysis”, International Journal of Advertising, Vol. 27 No. 4, pp. 511-48. Kitchen, P.J. and Li, T. (2005), “Perceptions of integrated marketing communications: a Chinese ad and public relations agency perspective”, International Journal of Advertising, Vol. 24 No. 1, pp. 51-78. Kitchen, P.J., Brignell, J., Li, T. and Spickett, G. (2004), “The emergence of IMC: a theoretical perspective”, Journal of Advertising Research, Vol. 44 No. 3, pp. 19-30. Kitchen, P.J., Spickett-Jones, J.G. and Grimes, T. (2007), “Inhibition of brand integration amid changing agency structures”, Journal of Marketing Communications, Vol. 13 No. 2, pp. 149-68. Kliatchko, J. (2005), “Towards a new definition of integrated marketing communications (IMC)”, International Journal of Advertising, Vol. 24 No. 1, pp. 7-34. Kliatchko, J. (2008), “Revisiting the IMC construct: a revised definition and four pillars”, International Journal of Advertising, Vol. 27 No. 1, pp. 133-60. Kvale, S. (1995), “The social construction of validity”, Qualitative Inquiry, Vol. 1 No. 1, pp. 19-40. Lindlof, T.R. (1995), Qualitative Communication Research Methods, Sage, Thousand Oaks, CA. Liodice, B. (2008), “Essentials for integrated marketing”, Advertising Age, Vol. 72 No. 23. Madhavaram, S., Badrinarayanan, V. and McDonald, R.E. (2005), “Integrated marketing communication (IMC) and brand identity as critical components of brand equity strategy”, Journal of Advertising, Vol. 34 No. 4, pp. 69-80. Miles, M.B. and Huberman, A.M. (1994), Qualitative Data Analysis, 2nd ed., Sage, Thousand Oaks, CA. Moriarty, S.E. (1996), “The circle of synergy: theoretical perspectives and an evolving IMC research agenda”, in Thorson, E. and Moore, J. (Eds), Integrated Communication: Synergy of Persuasive Voices, Lawrence Erlbaum, Mahwah, NJ, pp. 333-53. Reid, M. (2003), “IMC-performance relationship: further insight and evidence from the Australian marketplace”, International Journal of Advertising, Vol. 22 No. 2, pp. 227-48. Rubin, H.J. and Rubin, I.S. (2005), Qualitative Interviewing: The Art of Hearing Data, 2nd ed., Sage, Thousand Oaks, CA. Sanday, P.R. (1979), “The ethnographic paradigms”, Administrative Science Quarterly, Vol. 24 No. 4, pp. 527-38. Schultz, D. (2007), “NorthWestern University’s Don Schultz, the ‘father of integrated marketing communications’”, available at: www.medill-imc.podomatic.com (accessed 15 September 2009). Schultz, D.E. (2005), “IMC research must focus more on outcomes”, Journal of Advertising, Vol. 34 No. 4, pp. 6-7. Schultz, D.E. and Kitchen, P.J. (1997), “Integrated marketing communications in US advertising agencies: an exploratory study”, Journal of Advertising Research, Vol. 37 No. 5, pp. 7-18.


Schultz, D.E. and Kitchen, P.J. (2001), “The role of integrated communication in the interactive age”, in Kitchen, P.J. and Schultz, D.E. (Eds), Raising the Corporate Umbrella: Corporate Communications in the Twenty-first Century, Palgrave/St Martin’s Press, New York, NY, pp. 82-114. Schultz, D.E. and Patti, C.H. (2009), “The evolution of IMC: IMC in a customer-driven marketplace”, Journal of Marketing Communications, Vol. 15 Nos 2/3, pp. 75-84. Stammerjohan, C., Wood, C.W., Chang, Y. and Thorson, E. (2005), “An empirical investigation of the interaction between publicity and advertising, and previous brand attitudes and knowledge”, Journal of Advertising, Vol. 34 No. 4, pp. 55-67. Yin, R.K. (2003), Case Study Research: Design and Methods, 3rd ed., Sage, Thousand Oaks, CA. Zahay, D., Peltier, J., Schultz, D.E. and Griffin, A. (2004), “The role of transactional versus relational data in IMC programs: bringing customer data together”, Journal of Advertising Research, Vol. 44 No. 1, pp. 3-18. Further reading Corbin, J. and Strauss, A. (2008), Basics of Qualitative Research: Grounded Theory Procedures and Techniques, 3rd ed., Sage, Thousand Oaks, CA. Grunig, J.E., Grunig, L.A. and Dozier, D.M. (2006), “The excellence theory”, in Botan, C.H. and Hazleton, V. (Eds), Public Relations Theory II, Lawrence Erlbaum, Mahwah, NJ, pp. 21-62. Kim, I., Han, D. and Schultz, D.E. (2004), “Understanding the diffusion of integrated communications”, Journal of Advertising Research, Vol. 44 No. 1, pp. 31-5. About the author Brian G. Smith, PhD, is an Assistant Professor in Integrated Communication at the Jack J. Valenti School of Communication at the University of Houston. He currently teaches courses in Public Relations, Marketing, Advertising, and Digital and Social Media, and conducts research in integrated communication management. He earned his doctorate in Communication and Public Relations at the University of Maryland and, prior to that, led a professional career in marketing, communications, and publication management. Brian G. Smith can be contacted at: [email protected]

To purchase reprints of this article please e-mail: [email protected] Or visit our web site for further details: www.emeraldinsight.com/reprints

Organic integration

19

This article has been cited by:


1. Brian G. Smith. 2013. The public relations contribution to IMC: Deriving opportunities from threats and solidifying public relations’ future. Public Relations Review 39, 507-513. [CrossRef]