What’s theory ever done for us?

One of the many differences between mainstream PR people and their Internal Communications colleagues is an attitude to complexity and theory.  More than once I’ve heard PR’s bemoan the tendency of IC people to over-complicate things.

And not surprisingly, many IC professionals wouldn’t come within a million miles of the PR department because they think it’s populated by knuckle dragging cavemen who can’t understand anything more sophisticated than a conspiratorial phone call to a news desk and bottle of white Burgundy.

If anything this prejudice is reinforced by the annual round of letters to PR Week from seasoned hacks questioning the value of academic study in the field of communication.  It’s almost as if some parts of the profession are proud to be dumb.

However, there are some central tenets to the creed of internal communication which thankfully have a robust basis in classical communication theory. 

For example, where does the idea that line managers are the best way to communicate with staff come from?  Well, employee surveys always give us a clue, but dig out the work of Katz and Lazarsfeld from 1957 and there you have it.  We can be more easily influenced if a message is relayed to us via a trusted source.

And what about the idea that we should develop internal networks of communications ‘champions’?  Rogers’ 1983 theories on diffusion of innovation  (the one where he coined ‘early adopters’ and ‘laggards’) is on hand to explain things.  It seems that only a tiny proportion of people are moved by formal communication to embrace new things – most of us wait to see what the innovators do before we start to experiment.

This has to be important for anyone trying to introduce change at work – and there’s evidence to support it.  It’s great to know that what I do has actually been shown to work and it’s not some form of strange voodoo (although that might make it more fun occasionally).

If you think I’m showing off then I should own up that I’ve been revising for some seminars for the CIPR’s Diploma group in London.  I don’t normally spend that much time reading textbooks.

Yet it has been a refreshing experience to read up on the subject – and it’s provoked some challenging thoughts.  I’ve already spotted a couple of things I can do differently in practice.

And reading around the subject has reminded me why Malcolm Gladwell’s book The Tipping Point is so good. 

Which was also a point made to me by one of the Black Belters last week.

Gladwell has managed to take some of the more obscure elements of communication theory and work them together to try to offer an answer as to why social trends or fashions take off.  Which I think is what we communications practitioners are paid to know about.  After all, who else is meant to influence the opinions and behaviours of employees?

I’ve got a lot out of it all and would certainly recommend a re-read of Gladwell.

And as for other sources?

For a good trot around the subject try “Applying Communication Theory for professional life” by Marianne Dainton and Elaine Zelley.

A more chewy read is Joep Cornelissen’s “Corporate Communication”.

And if Amazon ever deliver “Strategic Organizational Communication: Into the Twenty-First Century” by C.R. Conrad and Marshall Scott Poole I’ll let you know if it’s worth a read…

What’s worked for you?

Liam

Comments

[Mark Darby]

Liam
If I'm feeling a little demotivated about internal communications - what book would you recommend? Should I go for Gladwell's?

Just need a little boost in the arm in believing what we do adds value, and CEOs want it, and its evolving etc etc!

Mark

[Timm]

Great post, and I agree with your assessment of Gladwell's book.

Also, "theory" and "research", while deeply entwined, often get mixed up. I would argue that many pop science / business books on soft topics such as communications present smart - but unvalidated (maybe even unvalidatable) - ideas as theories.

On the other hand, research on soft topics gets a bad reputation because it often proves "obvious" things; but that the contrary finding would have been just as "obvious" shows that in hindsight we're all smarter, and demonstrates just how important solid research is.

[Marc Wright]

Excellent post Liam. People are interested in the theories behind good communication practice.
Here are the top 5 theories requested on www.simply-communicate.com by readers in the last 7 days:

1. Kubler Ross Change Curve
2. Johari's windows
3. Herzberg's X & Y Theory
4. Maslow's Hierarchy of Needs
5. How to look good in a photo

Not sure if No 5 is genuinely from internal comms professionals.

[Liam]

Thanks for the comments and the shameless plug from Marc!

I do recommend Gladwell - I had it for years before I read it. I am in awe of his ability to explain complex theory in an accessible way.

However, I would also suggest Jane Eyre... When I first left college I worked for the London Borough of Hammersmith & Fulham and we got a new Chief Executive whilst I was there. One day my team were asked to meet him and we all trooped up to a conference room and were amazed to be greated by a circle of chairs (very avant garde for the late 1980's!).

Then the Chief Executive just opened a copy of Jane Eyre and read a passage about Jane being told her place in the world - how she had nothing to contribute because of her station in life. He went on to say that it was the duty of every leader to draw out the best in people no matter who the were.

I went home and read the book almost overnight and it's stayed with me as a injunction that you have to help other people make a difference. If you're feeling jaded...

And Timm - I'm thinking of writing a management book - I reckon I could make up half the stuff that gets passed off as fact. Just google the bloke who wrote 'Men are from Mars...' and you'll see what I mean!

With regard to Elizabeth Kubler Ross - I saw Russell Grossman present it recently as part of a case study and he made the point that many people miss that there is an extra dip right at the beginning. I've seen the change curve used in dozens of presentations - maybe it's time we all read the original source?

Liam

[Heather Yaxley]

Liam,

Rather a sweeping generalisation about PR practitioners and attitudes to theory. I'm sure there are as many people who are willing to understand the why and how of their roles in PR as in IC.

Also, a lot of your theoretical models are classics, but rather dated. They tend to be modernist, simplified models. I'd recommend anyone to check out some of the post-modernist and critical perspectives on communications. There is some really intersting contemporary thinking that challenges the way we do things.

I've just ordered Jacquie L'Etang's new book which promises her original perspective on PR practice.

I thank you for introducing me to Gladwell's Tipping Point - and I also found Sutherland's Irrationality fascinating in terms of how people make decisions, often illogically.

One final "must read" for anyone in modern PR has to be Orwell's 1984. Dare I say it, especially those who seek to control the internal communications world?

[Liam]

I like the point about 1984 – whilst few governments hope to achieve mind control these days it still remains a aspiration in many workplaces.

OK my point was exaggerated for impact, but I do stand by the suggestion that attitudes to theory in some sections of the PR craft are dismissive. Although I have seen many students on the CIPR diploma (on which you teach) really get excited exploring theoretical perspectives, they are still a relatively small proportion of the profession. I don't think this is the case in IC - perhaps because it's a younger calling still finding its feet?

And if the letters page of PR Week is even mildly representative, I suspect the average PR grandee would be rather puzzled at why colleges promote what would be seen as over complex intellectualism. It does sometime feel like the local chamber of trade complaining about the numeracy skills of school-leavers.

Regarding the models I mentioned I like the fact that their simplicity makes them immediately useful to practitioners. And I guess the attraction is they are not avant garde - in fact things like "Early adopter" are part of day to day speak now.

Regarding the more recent academic writing was there a particular writing that you think people would find accessible/useful?

Liam

[Sue]

The joy of Gladwell is that his books are so readable and accessible. I find reading a lot of traditional books on theory like dutifully eating my way through a pack of dry crackers.

When I first joined one organisation I made talked about my views on communication using the stimulus-response model, Katz and Lazarsfeld and uses and gratifications theory to illustrate the thinking behind it. One of my team had just completed a communications qualification and said it was the first time she had actually heard someone explain how the theory applied in practice instead of just trotting out the models. I hope more of the translation into 'how this stuff works in the real world' goes on in the world of academia nowadays.

When I was working on a change research report earlier this year, Christine Daymon at Bournemouth University made the same point about the most quoted models being a bit dated as Heather makes above. She referred me to an article by Jeffrey D Ford and Laurie W Ford called 'The role of conversations in producing intentional change in organisations' published in the Academy of Management Review, July 1995. It's a bit heavy-going but interesting reading.

I've been a bit lax on the reading front lately, so have just placed an Amazon order for John Smythe's new book, The CEO: Chief Engagement Officer; The World Cafe, Shaping our futures through conversations that matter; Made to Stick by Chip Heath; and On Leadership - practical Wisdom from the People who Know, by Alan Leighton.

I noticed the last one at Stockholm Airport on Friday night (and nearly bought it but decided I was off duty by that point so went for chick lit instead!). Not a sausage of theory to be found, but written by a CEO who gets & wants communication, in conversation with lots of other CEOs with similar mindsets - I'm sure it will have some choice quotes/stories and be a boost on those 'do any of these guys actually get it??' days.

[Kevin Ruck]

I have just read Wikinomics, How Mass Collaboration Changes Everything, by Don Tapscott and Anthony D.Williams.

This is either a challenging or inspiring read (depending on your view) for anyone interested in the way new internal communication networks are emerging.

It has a really interesting chapter on the wiki workplace that should make every IC practitioner think about the way employees are collaborating more in some organisations.

Kevin

[Liam]

Thanks Kevin

I have a vague idea that Timm was raving about this book a while ago as well...

Liam