Dynamic Change Agent with Skills in Public Relations - Assignment Example

2c Dynamic Change Agent with Skills in Public Relations Public relations is important in any organization whether dealing with the public inside or outside the organization. Employees within the organization must understand their environment and how it is affected by change. A dynamic leader understands they may not be able to make changes to the environment of an organization, but they can change some things within the company. Public relations is crucial to the running of a company. Employees may be the first contact that customers and competitors have with them so the employees must have strong public relations skills. They must be able to interact with other employees as well as with customers. Leadership and Public Relations In any organization, the leadership must have a style that is conducive to the public and to the organization. The first commitment is to the organization so customers must feel a loyalty to the organization so they will continue interaction with them. In this researchers organization, the concept of servant leadership has been an effective way to lead. The concept of servant leadership was founded by Dr. Robert Greenleaf in 1970. He suggests that "servant leadership is a practical philosophy which supports people who choose to serve first, and then lead as a way of expanding service to individuals and institutions…Servant leadership encourages collaboration, trust, foresight, listening, and the ethical use of power and empowerment" (Greenleaf Center for Servant Leadership, 2008). Many researchers have established that all of the traits mentioned here are important to leadership, so their importance cannot be denied. When adding the servant element to the process, the leader understand that there is a duty to "serve" people within an organization and in the community. McCuddy and Cavin (2008) suggest that a strong servant leader also has a Fundamental Moral Orientation (FMO) that includes three orientations: selfishness, selflessness, and self-fullness. Selfishness is the pursuit of an individuals self interest and "seeking to maximize ones utility" (p. 107) and it happens in different degrees. Selflessness is the opposite of selfishness because it involves sharing oneself and skills for the common good. Self-fullness is the concept that sits between selfishness and selflessness because it uses the other two concepts simultaneously. McCuddy and Cavin suggest that a leaders FMO is a precursor to their practice of service leadership, and that some leaders may not be as effective in service leadership unless they have the appropriate FMO. McCuddy and Cavin also found that one of the concepts of servant leadership called stewardship and healing aligned with an individuals ethics. Specifically, stewardship was seen as a commitment to serving others and the community which would in turn is essential to "influencing and interacting with followers" (McCuddy and Cavbin, 2008, 0. 16). In other words, servant leadership encompasses the community inside and outside an organization and it often comes from a leaders moral code. Servant leadership has been used as a way to build relationships between customers and salespeople. Jaramillo, Grisaffe, Chonko and Roberts (2009) studied the impact of servant leadership on sales force performance. The researchers created a study because of the need for organizations to become more customer focused. They wanted to see whether adopting a service leadership model would assist salespeople in promoting a more service oriented attitude with customers. Because servant leadership is a style that "emphasizes genuine care and concern for others" (Jaramillo, Grisaffe, Chonko and Roberts, 2009, p. 267) it provides a way for customers to feel cared about, which means they stay longer with the sales company. In other words, when customers feel taken care of by a company, they tend to spend more and develop a loyalty to the company. Servant leadership has been researched in many other studies and it has been applied to many situations. This researcher believes that service leadership is a very important aspect of working with employees because it prevents leaders from becoming domineering in their interaction with employees; it also encourages leaders to grow employees instead of dominating them. Another important aspect of understanding public relations is in the perception of the community. Whether an organization is working with patients and their families or with the community outside the organization, the leaders must present a persona of interest and caring. When they do, customer satisfaction stays high and leaders are able to identify the changes necessary to effectively manage public opinion. The Need for Collaboration Collaboration is necessary in working within healthcare because in order to be effective, the entire community must become involved. Any healthcare facility, whether it is a hospital, nursing home, or community clinic, must include the community in its planning and operations. Collaborating with others will present some challenges but none that cannot be worked out through coordination. One of the first places that healthcare begins to create a collaborative community effort is through their board of directors. The board should have people from the community who are not only business leaders, but constituents and others who are interested in healthcare. A board will be responsible for fundraising and public relations to a point, as well as for helping to promote the vision and objectives of the organization. Public Relations Defined There are many ways to define public relations. The most obvious definition is that it is the relationships that an organization builds with its public. Grunig and Hunt (1984) defined public relations as "the management of communication between an organization and its public" (as cited in River Plate, p. 1). This definition suits public relations because the reasons that an organization does well or poorly is often dependent upon the community that interacts with them. This means that the community is very important to the enhancement of an organization because they provide the assistance that the organization will need to survive. One of the ways that an organization is able to work with the public is by building collaborative relationships. The way that this happens can be different for each organization and each must understand their publics that are most influential in their progress. Models/Theories of Public Relations There are many public relations theories and models that are important to the study of public relations. Some of the most important are the communication theories because they define how people communicate with one another and with the public. Communication is the cornerstone of collaboration. Attribution Theory One of the first communication theories for public relations was the attribution theory. Begun by Heider in 1958, it was a theory that provided insight into human behavior. Heider suggested that it is human nature or commonsense for people to try to understand why people behave in the way they do. In order to do this, people will assign certain attributes that they understand (University of Twente, 2010). There are generally two attributions an individual can assign: 1) internal attribution which suggests that the individuals attitude, personality or other internal attribute makes them act in a certain way or 2) an external attribution meaning that the environment or situation the individual is in creates the reason for their behavior (University of Twente, 2010). These attributes are fueled by emotions and motivations. Some attributes are self-serving when people blame others for their behavior because they fear recrimination. Leaders must understand attribution theory and how it works with groups so they can develop strong relationships and teach groups how to develop positive attributes for each other. Situational Theory J. Grunig developed the symmetrical theory of public relations that identified how people communicate with one another and when it would be most effective in to communicate with others (Smith, 2008). Grunig saw that there were different "publics" that could be classified as passive versus active (Perry, 2008). The concept of publics was coined by John Dewey (as cited in Smith, 2008) as " a group of people who face a similar situation, recognize the consequences and seek to deal with the situation" (p. 1). Different organizations have different publics and they are measured by observing how the members in the publics are perceiving a specific situation. According to Grunig, publics can be analyzed in many ways. As an example, the issues can be analyzed in terms of the wants, interests, and needs of the individuals, or their level of awareness or involvement can be measured. The public can be analyzed in terms of the organization by understanding the perceptions and the expectations of the organization. The publics can also be analyzed by understanding the communication within the public which includes the opinion of the leaders, their habits for using the media and their information patterns (Smith, 2008). Types of Publics Grunig saw four basic publics: 1. Customers who received what the organization does either directly or indirectly. This can be links to past and present customers, as well as potential customers. 2. Producers who create the organizations output and will include employees, volunteers, management, retirees, families and so forth. 3. Enablers who generate support for the organization and help establish the climate which can include community organizations, community leaders, professional experts and consultants. 4. Limiters who limit the work of the organization and include competitors, opponents and activists (Smith, 2008). The understanding of Grunigs theory is important because it gives a deeper understanding of the organization. By understanding each of the publics a leader is able to design strategies to help their organization build collaborative efforts both internally and externally. The Rational Persuasion Theory The Rational Persuasion Theory provides insight into how people interact with one another. McGaan (2010) defines persuasion as "a process by which people use messages to influence others" (p. 1). In other words, people can use information and/or communication to change the minds of people and get them to act on an issue or project. Persuasion has several components when working with people. People make decisions about what is right or wrong and these decisions become their beliefs. People put value on what they label as right or wrong (good or bad). These values motivate their desires and needs for what they do. Peoples attitudes or what they like or dislike is also a part of persuasion theory and this can create behavior which translates to intended action (McGann, 2010). The persuasion model suggests that people move, think, and behave, in ways that are "based on reasons and are relatively predictable" (McGann, 2010, p. 1). In general, the rational persuasion model suggests that the person wanting to persuade others must first analyze their audience to determine the way the audience sees the world. By doing this, they can determine the beliefs and values the audience holds dear and persuade them to think differently about a topic or change their belief in some way. Persuasion is important for leaders to understand because it is often part of collaborative efforts. Since everyone has a different way of believing, the leader must be able to bring like minded individuals together while also helping those with different ideas to understand both sides of any situation. The communication theories have given me ideas at times about what is needed in my dealings with my employees, volunteers and other organizations. The theories make leaders better communicators and help them understand people on many different levels. Importance of Community Coalitions The healthcare industry has always existed as a collaborative process because without the help for other agencies and community support, the task for healthcare would be more difficult. Zakocs and Edwards (2006) call the community collaboration by various names, including "inter-organizational, cooperative and synergistic working alliances" (p. 351). Whatever we choose to call them, they must be effective in order to serve the community well. Central to these collaborations is the ability of leaders to bring people together in a space that creates positive communication for growth of the organization. Also, it is important that the members of each public are open to collaborating effectively with one another. Leaders must also have an understanding of not only how to bring groups together, but also an understanding of what makes a strong coalition. Coalition Building Factors Important for Organizations Zakocs and Edwards (2006) studied several groups to try and identify factors that coalitions should have in order to be seen as effective. Some of the factors they found to be important included active membership participation, diverse membership, group cohesion, leadership style, open and frequent communication, task and/or goal orientation, member benefits, and effective administration. Clearly, these factors must be present in any group in order for it to be effective. Chaskin, Brown, VenKatesh and Videl (2001) add to this discussion by adding the characteristics of "a sense of community, commitment, ability to solve problems and access to resources" (p. 12) as factors that help a collaborative effort work together effectively. Chaskin et al. also state that community collaboration is a coming together of several levels of what they call "social agency." They suggest there are three levels to social agency that include: the individual level, the organizational level and the network level. The individual level involves the skills and knowledge that individuals from the immediate community bring to the coalition along with the resources they bring. This could include those powerful individuals in the communities who have the ability to bring groups together (e.g. church pastors, council people, vocal residents). The organizational level includes community groups that operate in the community that can bring together large systems and who operate responsively in the community (e.g. banks, large institutions, schools, businesses). The network level brings together the organizations, individuals, formal and informal groups. This includes people who know each other as well as acquaintances and other links to the network. These levels are similar to Grunigs publics and are important to the development of collaborations if people are to work well together. Challenges to Community Collaboration Community collaboration is not without its challenges and working in any community will bring these challenges out. In my community, there have been challenges as we moved into collaboration. In looking at the models, several come to mind as those that can present an understanding of the publics that I work within. Grunigs model is the first one to come to mind because he puts a name and a face to the publics. The publics I work with include social service organizations that work with the elderly, people with disabilities and those that work with some aspects of mental illness. In Grunigs model, some of these would be enables and others would be limiters. Insurance companies would be some of the limiters, especially when they limit what the insured can receive. As an example, Medicaid and Medicare are two of the insurers that we have difficulty with because there is certain equipment, drugs or treatment that would be best for clients that they do not have access to because Medicaid or Medicare will not cover it. This means that those who work with patients often have to become creative in how they write an order to help patients receive the care they need. Families and patients are some of the customers that we have and they can also be producers or limiters depending on how they fit into the community. Families can be very helpful in working with family members in the nursing home but they can also cause more problems. Dealing with families can be very easy or difficult, but they are a part of the community. Private and public foundations can be helpful to us in terms of funding and helping us in specific programs. They fall into the customer category in some ways, but in other ways they are the producers. Grunigs model helps to put a better understanding of our community in place. We also know that the attribution and persuasion models are important because they help us design our programs for employees as well as for our patients. As a leader, I know that I must communicate the needs of the organization to all the players in and outside the organization in order for them to understand what needs to be done. We use persuasion all the time because we are always dealing with helping people see our facilities as the best fit for their loved one. We also use persuasion with employees when we begin new policies. We work to make sure that all people we work with attach positive attributes to each other and to the groups we work with in order to insure stronger programs. Green and Haines (2008) present another model stating that there are different capitals that are important to community development. Two of the capitals that we are always using are human capital and financial capital. We have many skilled employees who may leave the organization for a different job if they do not feel compensated. Many organizations train their employees but at this level, but once trained some of them leave. The managers who are able to keep their employers are able to answer some of the questions that Greene and Haines posit and these questions help managers inform Human Resources about their needs. One of the issues that healthcare and other industries face, especially in the difficult economic times we live in today, is how to bring in money to keep their facilities solvent which adds to their financial capital. Not only do they need to understand insurance companies, funding sources and financial resources, they will also need to know resources within the community that provide financial resources. Green and Haines create in their model a way for organization to work together financially. I believe that in the future we will need to develop alliances with other institutions to work together for financial opportunities. We already do this for grants because funders tend to want collaboration for projects rather than single organizations going for large sums of money. Rubin (2009) points out that human beings are naturally collaborative and those individuals and organizations that work together are enhancing this concept. Although Rubins model was developed for communities and schools, there are many ideas that I can take into my organization that help find the challenges and help us move through them. What I found interesting was that some teachers find collaboration a natural idea which happens automatically for them. Rubin made a good point in that an individual does collaboration well when they "understand collaborative leadership as a meaningful and personally practical way to get certain things done" (p. 40). I see the truth in this as I bring my managers together. Without an understanding of the concept of collaboration that the entire team can get behind, there can be difficulty with team members and/or organizations. Again, this attitude seems to go back to the Constructionist viewpoint because in our organization, we focus on improving all the time. The need to assess how our programs are doing and how they are effective, takes a collaborative effort. Those who actively collaborate inside and outside the organization seem to develop new ideas. As a Constructionist, I make sure that my manager are always looking for ways to improve their employees customer service and that they receive the training and materials they need to make what they have to do directly tied to their objectives. This to me creates stronger leaders and helps them to evolve as the organization evolves. Reflections on My Use of Public Relations Walumbwa, Hartnell and Oke (2010) suggest that service leadership defines citizenship behavior in an organization. I thought this idea was unique in that it describes an organization that has a culture in which citizenship is important. They suggest that this is behavior that is not always rewarded by an organization and it goes beyond the employees specific role (Walumbwa, Hartnell and Oke, 2010). I want our employees to be able to use their knowledge of servant leadership to help them become more effective leaders. The most important aspect of public relations in my opinion, is helping employees stay motivated to treat each other well, and then to treat clients and customers well. I entreat them to do this through using the servant leadership model. I like this model because it has several characteristics that are developed. These characteristics are: 1. The ability to listen receptively to what others have to say. 2. Highly developed powers of persuasion, in contrast to authority. 3. Commitment to building community in the workplace. 4. Commitment to the value and growth of employees. These characteristics are ones that I believe I have and that I attempt to pass on to my employees. As Ive stated before in other papers, I believe that the concept stems from the biblical teachings of Jesus. Jesus taught his disciples to put others first and he modeled this leadership to his disciples as he moved through the world during his time. Jesus washed the feet of his disciples at the Last Supper as a way to give to others. This to me is an important idea to carry on because of how it began. Servant leadership is also a way that I teach my staff to build relationships. To do this, I use an open door policy for everyone to share their thoughts with me. In addition, we use family, patient, and employee satisfaction surveys to try to glean information from are of them to better drive our delivery of care. On a more personal point, I attempt to use servant leadership in my daily life by using it as often as possible at work. The Greenleaf book that I have mentioned is the book that I use and refer back to as I continue to lead my employees. Because I believe in teaching adults holistically, I attempt to help adults learn by sing concepts they are familiar with and then expanding on that knowledge. This approach is reminiscent of David Kolb and Kurt Lewins cycle of learning in which the learner has a concrete experience that becomes the basis for a second step of observation and reflection on the experience and their individual response. Building relationships is very important in healthcare because the industry is based on people. When a patient enters a healthcare facility, the family is upset and unsure of what is happening. Whether they are in an emergency room or a doctors office, having someone who is caring and who puts their heeds first will help them calm down and answer questions easier. My emphasis with my staff the idea of service first and necessary data collection as a secondary process. I believe that the program at Andrews University has prepared me for service leadership and the more I have moved through the program, the more I have embraced the concept the better I feel I have worked with my employees. References Bounds, G. (1998). Servant leadership: A model that can pay great dividends. Retrieved July 22, 2010 from http://dallas.bizjournals.com/dallas/stories/1998/ 08/31/smallb4.html Chaskin, R.J., Brown, P., Venkatesh, S. and Vidal, A. (2001). Building community capacity. NY: A de Gruyter. Green, G.P. and Haines, A. (2008). Asset building & community development LA: Sage Publications. Jaramillo, F., Grisaffe, D.B., Chonko, L.B. and Roberts, J.A. (2009). Examining the impact of servant leadership on sales force performance. Journal of Personal Selling & Sales Management, 29, (3), 257-275. Retrieved July 17, 2010 from Business Source Premier database. (AN: 2959936) McGaan, L. (2010). Introduction to persuasion. Monmouth College. Retrieved November 10, 2010 from http://department.monm.edu/cata/saved_files/ Handouts/PERS.FSC.html Oberman, W.D. (2008). A conceptual look at the swtrategic resource dynamics of public affairs. Journal of Public Affairs (14723891), 8 (4), 249-260. Retrieved July 22, 2010 from Academic Search Premier database. (AN: 35387148) Perry, L. (2008). Community theories in public relations. Retrieved November 10, 2010 from http://Linda.perry.net/nm2219/theories8.htm River Plate. Public relations definition. Retrieved November 10, 2010 from http://www.riverplateinc.com/publicrelationsdefinition.html Rubin, H. (2002). Collaboration leadership: Developing effective partnerships in communities and schools. CA: Corwin Press. Smith, R.D. (2008). Teacher notes: Situation theory. Buffalo State University. Retrieved November 10, 2010 from http://faculty.buffalostate.edu/smithrd/PR/publics.htm The Robert Greenleaf Center. (2008). What is servant leadership? Retrieved July 22, 2010 from http://www.greanleaf.org University of Twente. (2010). Attribution theory: Explaining human behavior Retrieved November 10 from http://www.utwente.nl/cw/theorieenoverzicht/ Theory%20clusters/Public%20Relations,%20Advertising,%20Marketing%20and %20Consumer%20Behavior/attribution_theory.doc/ Walumba, F.O., Harnell, C.A., and Oke, A. (2010). Servant leadership, procedural justice climate, service climate, employee attitudes, and organizational citizenship behavior: A cross-level investigation. Journal of Applied Psychology, 95 (3), 517- 529. doi: 10.1037/a0018867 Zacocs, R.C. and Edwards, E.M. (2006). What explains community coalition effectiveness? A review of the literature. Doi; 10.1016/j.amepre.2005.12.004 Read More