Public Relations Strategies for Permeate Milk - Case Study Example

Permeate milk (Dairy Farmers) Name Course Course Instructor Date Public Relation is important as it helps solve marketing issues that are affecting an organization. Public Relation is used to persuade and gain support from the company’s publics and stakeholders. Since the introduction of permeate free milk, the consumers and other stakeholders of the dairy farmers started losing their trust in the dairy farmers products (Kemp, 2012). This paper will discuss the responses of the company to this issue; the company response was guided using the two-way asymmetric theory. The recommended alternative response to this issue used the co-orientation model. The interpersonal bit of the model was explained using the mental model. The mental model explains how an individual’s behavior and thinking can influence how one deals with a crisis (McPhail, 2002, p.15). The paper will discuss the ethics that guided the decision of using the alternative response that was given. The ethical factors that are discussed are how ones decisions are bound by the obligation they have to a particular group or person. Finally, the paper will discuss the ethics theories that guided the alternative response this is utilitarian theory and the teleology theory. When coming up with Public Relations strategies, a company has to consider a few things like, who the target audience are and the ethics of the tactics one will use. The other important consideration that a company should have in mind is the expected end result (Johnston & Zawawi, 2009, p.41). The strategy that the company decides to use should be aligned with the goal and objective of the whole process (Motion & Weaver, 2005, p.44). The main purpose of coming up with a PR strategy is to create awareness to the targeted audience (Heath, 2005, p.11). In case of a crisis, a PR strategy aims at salvaging the situation to a better one. The dairy farmers put these considerations to come up with a response to the consumers’ feedback. The company’s response targeted the consumers of the company’s product. The consumers are targeted because they are among the most important stakeholders in the company (Newson et al, 2010, p.119). The consumers are important since they are the main reason the company functions. Without the consumers, the products will not be of any importance to the company. The response was made to the consumers since the company wants to retain them. Losing the consumers will have adverse negative effects on the company as the consumers are among the most important stakeholders of the dairy farmers (Freudenburg et al, 1993, p.31). This response was made to make the consumers understand the reason why the companies shifted from producing permeate milk to permeate free milk. The company chose to use the two-way asymmetric model. This model uses a scientific persuasion (Oliver, 2010, p.32). With this model, the company disseminates information and receives feedback from the publics (Wilcox et al, 1998, p.49). The company does not have to consider the feedback of the consumers when making the decisions. The feedback can be used to come up with a better persuasive strategy than the original one. This model has an imbalanced influence. The organization gives information to the media and the media in turn the media influences the publics’ perception of the organization and the public give feedback to the organization (Kitchen, 1999, p.102). The main purpose of using the two-way asymmetric model was to persuade the stakeholders to accept the terms of the organization (Preece et al, 1998, p.46). The model is imbalanced as the organization does not take into consideration the feedback when making decisions instead they use it to find persuasive strategies (Heath & Vasquez, 2001, p.62). The company used the radio, newspaper and internet to disseminate the information and get feedback from the consumers. The radio was used so as to reach a larger mass of the stakeholders that were targeted. The newspaper was used to give detailed information on the change from permeate milk to permeate free milk. These channels were used as they had channels that could be used to get feedback (Gamson et al, 1992, p.59). The dairy farmers used this method to respond to the stakeholders’ feedback. They gave all the necessary information explaining their choice to shift from permeates milk to permeate free milk. Part 2 An alternative response that this paper would recommend to the company will require more communication between the company and its stakeholders. The co- orientation model will help in coming up with an alternative tactic for the organization to use. The interpersonal part of the co-orientation model will be defined using mental model. This is because once personal behavior will influence how the organization will identify and solve the problem at hand (Brewer & Kramer, 1986, p.72). The co-orientation model will help the farmers in coming up with a communication strategy that will improve the relationship and the image of the company to its stakeholders. The co-orientation model offers a structure for categorizing the relationships that exist between factions in a communications process. The concept of mental models is the heart of this model that recognizes for any communication process to be effective these models ought to be properly oriented (Coombs & Holladay, 1996, p.55). The linkage theory (on stakeholders) provides a vital input to the model that provides a way for revealing the important participants in a particular communication process. The stakeholders provide their different opinions and views with respect to the issue at hand (Huber et al, 1987, p.61). The concept of a mental model helps distinguish the fundamental difference between stakeholders. A mental model is basically a personal theory of how things should work (Rawlins, 2006, p.14). The mental model is made up of a perception of the most vital factors and the different relationships that merge these factors together to come up with a way of interpreting the issue at hand. The mental model affects how we interpret our situations and also provides guidance for our behavior (Chaffee, 1991, p.11). Mental model also adversely affects how one gathers and processes information, evaluates and solves pending problems. Mental models can be shared in organizations and special interest groups. Due to the limitation imposed on the cognitive capacity in humans, the mental models are curtailed representations (Holtz, 1999, p.18). Instead of relying on facts, one has to frequently rely on assumptions to guide ones behavior; this in turn leads to misunderstandings and miscommunications. The ability to communicate with others who share similar mental models and understanding of an issue is easier than communicating with someone who does not share a common perceptional structure. With an understanding of the mental model, it will be easier for one to understand how co-orientation model works. The co-orientation model tries to lay its emphasis on the role cognition in the process of communication. The co-orientation model has its focal points on two or more elementary features of communication rather than the message sent between a sender and a receiver. The underlying features constituted in the co-orientation model are problem finding and problem understanding. Problem finding includes the identification of a specific issue that exists then accepting the situation as worth spending resources on and finally defining the objectives and actions to achieve after problem solving (Burger, 1984, p.32). Problem solving on the other hand is considered an important part of the communications process. It is regarded to be a necessary condition required for effective communication. Under the realms of organizational communications, problem understanding refers to the procedure of surveying the impact of a concern on the internal and external organizational stakeholders (Du, 2000). Problem understanding is an outstandingly multifaceted cognitive action that is influenced easily by automatic and involuntarily triggered responses initiated by the activated mental model on the individual communicators’ part or the organizations’ part. The co-orientation model identifies three critical types of relationships that tend to define and influence the interactions between a stakeholder and an organization. Mess management is an essential problem that is addressed by the co-orientation model. Under the co-orientation model there are four different distinct states namely a state of true consensus, a state of false consensus, a state of false conflict and a state of dissensus (Biddle & Thomas, 1996, p.11). A true consensus comes into existence when both parties know they share an agreement on their opinion over an issue. On the other hand a state of false consensus exists when the organization considers that the stakeholder concurs with them on a particular issue (Dunwoody & Peters, 1993, p.38). Correspondingly this state exists if both parties have a mistaken belief that they concur on an issue when strictly speaking they do not. A state of false conflict exists when the groups believe they differ on a policy when in fact they agree. The final state is the state of dissensus which transpires when the parties exhibit contradictory opinions and they are aware of it. The heart of the co-orientation model is the mental concept whose importance is constituted in the distinction in beliefs and values thus resulting into different interpretation of proceedings and conclusions. When a need arises for the parties to communicate but no attempt is made to find out and talk about the hypothesis each one applies the state of affairs turn out to be more complex (Moloney, 2006, p.51). Under the co-orientation model three types of relationships are recognized in order to have the ability to sort out the problems and have a significant communications which are to be used as the basis for common action. The mental mode to a large extent influences the depiction of the other party. Due to the fact that open exchange of information is hardly ever possible the interests and knowledge with regard to the issue at hand are more than often assumed (Glasgow University Media Group, 1980). For example, the competitors to the dairy farmers, (the scientist), misunderstood the dairy farmers shift from permeate milk to permeate free milk and labeled it a scam. This was a misconception as the scientists made the wrong assumptions about the Dairy Farmers. The perception assumed may not always the real representation of the stakeholders’ opinion. This perception is the reality of the organizations perception of what the stakeholders’ opinion or interest. When the organization’s perception is closely correlated with the stakeholders, then they can develop a solid communications strategy. An organization should be careful when making these assumptions as the wrong assumption might reinforce the stakeholders’ bad image of the organization (Chase, 1977, p.66). Since the dairy farmers have already identified the problem at hand, their main aim would be to understand and come up with the perceptions of the stakeholders that would help them come up with a communication strategy. The farmers should make sure that they have a mutual point of agreement with the consumer. When a perceived agreement has been established, the dairy farmers will then formulate a communication strategy that aims at convincing and persuading the consumers to agree to the change to permeate free milk from permeate milk. At this point, the farmers should use factual information to persuade the consumers and also take into consideration the feedback they receive in their decision making. The best way to gather information on the consumers’ opinion on the change is through the feedback they have. This way the assumption that will be made will be more accurate. The farmers have to be extremely careful when coming up with these assumptions so as to ensure that they will not reinforce the stakeholders’ perception on the company’s negative image (Carney, 2006, p.15). If the company uses this response, it would improve its relationship with the targeted audience. This is because both the company and the stakeholders would be at a mutual understanding as the company explained why they changed from producing permeate milk to permeate free milk. When the company is at the same level with the stakeholders, this improves and retains the relationship that was previously tarnished due to bad publicity. Using this alternative response would make the stakeholders feel valued as their opinions were considered during the decision process. The recommendation made had to be made within the ethical framework of Public Relations. The first thing that one has to consider when coming up with an ethical strategy is the duty one has. The obligation behind the decision relies on the duty to the society, ones duty to the client and ones duty to the employer and to oneself. These obligations will determine the ethical bit of one’s decision. Most times, the decision one makes has moral implications as they have to make choices between competing moral loyalties and values (Diggs-Brown, 2012, p.37). For example, when a company produces products that are suspected to be fatal to the consumer, is the one obliged to tell the public the truth and oversee the company’s well being, here one is bound by the duty to society. Therefore ones ethics can be adversely influenced by the greater bounding duty or obligation which may vary according to the problem (Chase, 1984, p.59). There are ethics that can guide one in making decisions that are ethical. That is deontology theory, teleology and utilitarian theory. This paper will focus on the utilitarian and teleology theories. Deontology theory focuses on the action and not the consequences of the action. The theory states that one must adhere to their obligation to an individual, organization or society as upholding ones duties is deemed to be the ethically correct thing to do. Therefore, deontologists believe that one’s morality should be based on a matter of duty and an individual has a moral obligation to act in accordance with duty that binds them (Agich, 2003, p.51). The morality and obligation of a deontologist are generally determined by God, therefore, to a deontologist, being moral is obeying God (Werkmeister, 1961, p.33). In deontology, a bad act is bad no matter what the consequences are. For example, in a situation where a murder is looking for his next victim and asks a deontologist for directions to where they are hiding, the deontologist is obliged to tell him/her the truth as it is the moral thing to do. In this situation, lying to the murder would cause a greater good as lives will be saved. But in accordance to this theory lying is wrong no matter the circumstance (Smith, 2002, p.62). The utilitarian theory measures the morals standards of an action through the final outcome. Utilitarian theory uses an emotion aspect as a means of measuring the morals behind an action (Oakley & Cocking, 2001, p.72). This theory is also referred to as the consequentialist morality. The utilitarian formula states “the greatest happiness is the greatest number” (Parson, 2004, p.90). This translates to if the outcome of an actions gives more happiness, then that is the right thing to do. This theory requires one to make a speculation of the outcome of that particular action. If the outcome causes more joy to the recipient then that is the best alternative to use. The end justifies the means, provided the outcome of an action bears positive results, how it was achieved is not important. In a situation where a bank decides to distribute money among and they have the alternative of either distributing the money equally to all people and the other alternative of distributing the money according to how the people want, they would have to weigh the alternatives. Distributing the money equally is the right and fair thing to do but considering that there are people who don’t like having a lot of money that they feel they do not need, then the right thing to do is to distribute the money according to the wants of the people as this would cause greater happiness compared to the first option (Grunig, 2006). The other theory that applies to this situation is the teleology theory. This theory is similar to the utilitarian theory to some extent. The similarity comes in as in both theories; the outcome of an action is what measures what is right or wrong. Using the teleology theory, morals are measured according to ones belief and values (Laffort & Martimort, 2002, p.69). If an action seems to be right in ones opinion, and not in another person’s opinion, and the consequences of the action are good then the action is qualified to be ethical. Teleology theory draws a line between the Bible and the human beings’ decision (Adams, 1999, p.44). In the Bible, there is a situation where God asked Abraham to kill his son and Abraham was determined and ready to kill his son until God intervened. One of the Ten Commandments in the bible state that one shall not kill but Abraham went ahead to do so. To him obeying God was the right thing to do despite the Ten Commandments. Therefore an actions morality should be measured according to ones standards and not the standards and expectation of others. With this theory, ones action should only be measured by their own standards and not of those around them. In this situation, the alternative response for the dairy farmers considered two ethical theories, that is utilitarian and teleology theory. The utilitarian theory was applied on the fact that the perceived end result should cause happiness and satisfaction among the consumers of the product. This was done by stretching the truth about the benefits of using permeate free milk. Since the milk is more natural than permeate milk, then it is better for consumption as it has more nutrients than permeate milk (Shepherd, 2012, p.52). The teleology theory came in handy when choosing the alternative response to use to solve this issue. The right thing to do was to persuade the consumers to agree with the company’s decision using all means as possible. The feedback the company got was used to come up with a communication strategy that would somehow consider the consumers. For the organization, this would be the right thing to do as some of the stakeholders’’ opinions were considered though not as the consumers thought it would be used. Public relations help to improve the image of a company. The strategies and tactics that a company decides to use to salvage a crisis should be done within an ethical framework with the ethics of Public Relations (Grunig, 2005, p.152). The tactic that the dairy farmers used was effective although it did not fully convince the stakeholders as there feedback was not considered when making the decisions. With the alternative response, the stakeholders’ feedback was considered in making some decisions and also coming up with strategies to persuade them in areas that the company could not afford to compromise. The alternative response was made within ethical frameworks using the teleology and utilitarian theories. These theories gave guidance as they are flexible and gave consideration to both the stakeholders’ opinions and the organizations as compared to the deontology theory that was rigid. References Adams, R. M. (1999). Finite and infinite goods: A framework for ethics. New York: Oxford Univ. Press. Agich, G. J. (2003). Dependence and autonomy in old age: An ethical framework for long term care. New York: Cambridge University Press. Biddle, B. J., & Thomas, E. J. (1996). Role theory; concepts and research. New York: Wiley. Brewer, M. B., & Kramer, R. M. (1986). Choice behavior in social dilemmas: Effects of social identity, group size and decision framing. Newbury Park, CA: Sage. Burger, E. J., Jr. (1984). Health risks: The challenge of informing the public. Washington, DC: The Media Institute. Carney, J. K. (2006). Public health in action: practicing in the real world. Sudbury, Mass.: Jones and Bartlett Publishers. Chaffee, S. H. (1991). Communication concepts 1: Explication. Newbury Park, CA: Sage. Chase, W. H. (1977). Public issue management: The new science. Boston, Mass: Wadsworth Cengage Learning. Chase, W. H. (1984). Issue management: Origins of the future. Stamford, CT: Issue Action Publications. Coombs, W. T. (1995). Choosing the right words: The development of guidelines for the selection of the“appropriate” crisis response strategies. Boston,Mass: Wadsworth Cengage Learning. Coombs, W. T., & Holladay, S. J. (1996). Communication and attributions in a crisis: An experimental study in crisis communication. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Diggs-Brown, B. (2012). Strategic public relations: An audience-focused approach. Boston, Mass: Wadsworth Cengage Learning. Du, P. D. F. (2000). Introduction to public relations and advertising. Lansdowne: Juta. Dunwoody, S., & Peters, H. P. (1993). The mass media and risk perception. In B. Ruck (Ed.), Risk is a construct. Perceptions of risk perception. Munich: Knesebeck. Freudenburg, W. R., Coleman, C., Gonzales, J., & Helgeland, C. (1993). Media coverage of hazard events. Analyzing the assumptions. Risk Analysis. Thousand Oaks. CA: Sage. Gamson, W. A., Croteau, D., Hoynes, W., & Sasson, T. (1992). Media images and the social construction of reality. Annual Review of Sociology, Glasgow University Media Group. (1980). More bad news. London: Routledge & Kegan Paul. Grunig, J. E. (2005). Situational Theory of Publics: Encyclopedia of Public Relations. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Grunig, J. (2006). Furnishing the Edifice: Ongoing Research on Public Relations as a Strategic Management Function. Journal of public relations research, 18(2), 151–176. Heath, R. L. (2005). Encyclopedia of public relations. Thousand Oaks. CA: Sage. Heath, R. L., & Vasquez, G. (2001). Handbook of public relations. Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications. Holtz, S. (1999). Public relations on the Net winning strategies to inform and influence the investment community, the government, the public and more. New York: AMACOM. Huber, V. L., Neale, M. A., & Northcroft, G. B. (1987). Decision bias and personnel selection strategies. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes. Johnston, J., & Zawawi, C. (2009). Public relations: Theory and practice. Crows Nest, N.S.W: Allen & Unwin. Kemp, M. (2012). South Australian farmers launch milk war against discounting supermarkets. News Limited. Retrieved from http://www.news.com.au/money/cost-ofliving/south- australian-farmers-launch-milk-war-against-discounting-supermarkets/storyfnagkbpv- 1226444485092. Kitchen, P. J. (1999). Public relations: Principles and practice. London: International Thomson Business Press Laffort, J., & Martimort, D. (2002). The theory of incentives: the principle agent model. Princeton: Princeton University Press. McPhail, T. L. (2002). Global communication: theories, stakeholders, and trends. Boston: Allyn and Bacon. Moloney, K. (2006). Rethinking public relations: PR propaganda and democracy. (2nded.). London: Routledge. Motion, J., & Weaver, C. K. (2005). A discourse perspective for critical public relations research: Life sciences network and the battle for truth. Thousand Oaks. CA: Sage. Newson, D., Turk, J. V., Kruckeberg, D. (2010). This is PR: the realities of public relations. (10th ed). Boston, Ma: Wadsworth. Oakley, J, & Cocking, D. (2001). Virtue ethics and professional roles. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Oliver, S., & Chartered Institute of Public Relations. (2010). Public relations strategy. London: Kogan Page/CIPR. Parson, P. (2004). Ethics in public relations: guide to the best practice. London: Kogan Page. Preece, C. N., Moodley, K., & Smith, A. M. (1998). Corporate communications in public relations strategies for successful business and projects. London: Blackwell Science. Rawlins, B. (2006). Prioritizing Stakeholders for Public Relations. Institute for Public Relations. Shepherd, T. (2012). ICB: Are the permeate-free claims just out to milk you?. The Punch. Retrieved from http://www.thepunch.com.au/articles/icb-are-the-permeate-freeclaims- just-out-to-milk you/. Smith, R. D. (2002). Strategic planning for public relations. Mahwah: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. Strategic Public Relations Management Planning and Managing Effective Communications Program (2nd ed). (2006). Taylor & Francis: Routledge. Werkmeister, W. H. (1961). Theories of ethics. Lincoln, Neb: Johnsen Pub. Co. Wilcox, D. L., Ault, P. H. & Agee, W. K. (1998). Public relations: strategies and tactics. (5th ed). New York: Longman. Read More