How to make PR-communication engaging again: a study of PR-strategies that change the power dynamic between public and organizations on social media to allow engaging storytelling

(1)

How to make PR-communication engaging again:

A study of PR-strategies that change the power dynamic between public and organizations on social media to allow engaging storytelling

By Yaschar Hasan

Student ID 12161721 Master’s Thesis

Graduate School of Communication

Master’s programme Communication Science

Course Corporate Communication

Supervisor Dr. James Slevin 26/08/2019

(2)

1

Abstract

Even though digital media provide a platform that allows the public to gain more power in their communication with organizations and PR-communication to become more engaging, the opposite happened. Organizations prefer to advertise rather than engage the public, while the public tends to boycott or silence organizations.

Because of this the relationship between organizations and the public has worsened. PR-strategies fail to resonate with the public. The PR-sector failed in its main task to cultivate the relationship between organizations and the public and may be in danger of being driven out by other sectors.

To solve that problem, the PR-communication has become engaging again. As such this thesis is going to research if the public gaining power causes a lack of engagement in PR-communication and which power dynamic between public and organizations allow strategies that use co-creative storytelling.

For that purpose, interviews are hold with PR-practitioners, communication science students and people representing the public. The interviewees are asked if and why they believe the public gaining power on social media caused a lack of engaging PR-communication and which power dynamic between public and

organizations allows co-creative storytelling. Lastly, they are asked which social media strategies (Real-time marketing, the creation of brand communities or Transmedia Narrative Transportation) use co-creative storytelling that leads to engaging PR-communication.

The results of the research are that the public gaining more power is not a major cause for the lack of engaging PR-communication. Instead causes lie in reasons mostly unrelated to any power dynamics. While the public having more power is seen as enabling co-creative storytelling, other unrelated methods are also identified. Storytelling through the creation of brand communities was as a result seen as the strategy most likely leading to more co-creative and engaging PR-communication.

It can be concluded that PR-practitioners should focus on social media strategies that resonate positively with the public by reducing for example the distrust the public has in organizations or by telling stories that interest the public. That way more engaging PR-communication can be conducted.

Key words: Engagement, power dynamic shifts, co-creative storytelling, real-time marketing, brand communities, transmedia narrative transportation

(3)

2

Introduction

When it came about in the early 20th century, the PR-sector utilized persuasion and

manipulation to influence the audience. Practitioners were less actual PR-experts and more in-house journalists. It would be more apt to call this kind of communication between

organization and public advertorial propaganda. The focus was more on selling something to the audience instead of trying to engage them and build a proper relationship. Since then, the PR-sector has evolved into a field that requires its own professional experts and not just substitutes (Grunig & Grunig, 1992).

Beyond that, the field of public relations has switched from the analogue world to the wide plains of the internet. Especially the widespread of social media has created new opportunities for PR-practitioners to allow instantaneous dialogue between organizations and public where both parties can talk and listen. This has made more engaging PR-communication possible and given the public more power in their relationship with organizations. Engaging

communication in this case is defined as communication “that occurs by virtue of interactive, co-creative customer experiences with a focal agent/object” (Hollebeck, Glynn & Brodie, 2014, p2). In other words, communication that allows the public to create meaning to stories alongside organizations.

It is believed that social media help with the development of relationships and the possibilities for engaging communication, they offer, fit naturally into the PR-sector. Most literature agrees, the benefits of social media have largely been positive for the PR-sector (Wolf and Archer, 2018, p.4) and many organizations have integrated social media into their PR-policies (Lovejoy & Saxton 2012, p.2).

Despite this, it seems that social media have also caused a regression of the engagement between public and organizations. While the public has indeed gained power, it uses said

(4)

3

power to silence organizations, to subvert their messages and attempts at engagement (Fournier & Avery 2015, p.2).

The power dynamic has shifted and according to Wolf and Archer (2018, p.5) “companies would reject interactivity if it was likely to decrease their power or control over relationships with customers”. Instead of focusing on its main task, the development of a relationship between an organization and their public, PR has put its efforts into using social media as a platform for selling and advertising (p.2). and regressed from its “role as organization–public relationship builders and counsellors, to marketers, advertisers, and strategic communicators” (p.5).

Despite the potential social media offer for more engaging communication that only helps to fulfil the main goal of PR – the building of a meaningful relationship between organizations and public – the opposite happened. Both parties have become less engaging in their

communication. The PR-sector is unable to reach the public with their communication (p.12) and failed in its main function. It is thus at a cross-road. Either the PR-sector sector is able to become more engaging or it becomes obsolete and gets phased out by other sectors (p.13). Research questions

As a result, this thesis is going to research how PR-communication can become engaging again and the three research questions of this thesis will be:

1. Why does the public gaining more power on social media lead to a lack of engagement in PR-communication, both from the side of the organizations and the public?

2. Does a shift in the power dynamics between public and organizations on social media in turn lead to strategies that reverse the lack of engagement in PR-communication?

3. Which social media strategies change the power dynamics in communication for PR-practitioners to employ consumer-engaging storytelling?

(5)

4

To answer these questions, one first needs to examine if the public gaining more power because of social media has led to a) organizations adopting more advertorial means of communicating to keep their power and b) the public stopping to engage organizations as an abuse of power or if there are other reasons for the lack of engagement. Then one needs to determine whether the public, the organization or neither having more power allows

storytelling, whose meaning is co-created. So that the lack of engagement can be reversed and if there are other methods to achieve this task. And lastly one needs to determine which PR-strategy are the most ideal for the task.

Therefore, I propose three strategies that, going by the literature, allow storytelling whose meaning is co-created by public and organizations alike.

1. Real-time Marketing: the utilization of synchronous storytelling by timing PR-campaigns to events and current interests of the public (Willemsen, Mazerant, Kamphuis, & Van der Veen, 2018).

2. Brand Communities: the creation of online communities that are centered around the loyalty of the consumer to a specific brand (Zaglia, 2013).

3. Transmedia Narrative Transportation: the use of storytelling across various media platforms made up of multiple smaller narratives (Coombs & Holladay, 2013).

Based on which power dynamic is the most ideal for co-creative storytelling, one can determine, whether the use of real-time marketing, the creation of brand communities or the TNT-approach leads to a more consumer engaging PR-communication. Each individual strategy will account for one of three possible power dynamic plays.

Practical and theoretical relevance

Insights into consumer-engaging communication are still rare in the literature (Hollebeck, Glynn & Brodie, 2014, p.3), as are those into the power dynamics between organizations and the public (Wolf & Archer, 2018, p.5). This thesis provides relevance from a theoretical

(6)

5

standpoint by elaborating on the correlation between the power dynamics of public and organizations and engaging PR-communication. As well as, which power dynamics allow or prevent consumer-engaging communication. Meanwhile, PR-practitioners can learn what strategies create engagement between public and organizations. As consumer-engaging communication furthers the main purpose of PR – the development and maintain of a

meaningful relationship between public and consumers – the results of thesis are relevant for the practical field.

(7)

6

Theoretical background

Lack of engagement in PR-communication

As this thesis is trying to propose strategies that allow engaging storytelling, “Engaging communication” is the main sensitizing concept of this thesis. In order to find out how PR-communication can become engaging again, it first is necessary to identify what the cause for the lack of engagement in the communication between public and organizations is. This leads to “Lack of engaging PR-communication” as a sensitizing concept. According to the literature, such as Wolf and Archer (2018) or Fournier and Avery (2015), social media allow the public to gain more power. In the past PR-communication used to advertise more than develop a relationship with the public. The public could only listen to the messages of organization, but thanks to social media can now talk back, subvert or resist a message. It is the “consumers who are now empowered to share their brand stories easily and widely through social networks have gained a more important voice that brand managers can no longer afford to ignore” (Gensler, Völckner, Liu-Thompkins & Wiertz, 2013, p.1). The public “can exercise increasing pressure on marketers to cater to their specific needs” (Kohli, Suri & Kapoor, 2015, p.9).

But while the literature agrees that social media allow the public to gain more power, it disagrees on the consequences and how the acquirement of more power leads to a decrease in engaging PR-communication. Wolf and Archer (2018, p.2-5) believe that the public gaining more power results in organizations adopting more advertorial strategies that are deliberately not engaging, in order to maintain the power, they still have and not lose it further. Wolf and Archer thus see the cause for the lack of engagement within the organizations. Meanwhile Fournier and Avery take the opposite stand. For them it is the public who causes the lack of engagement. Instead of creating a paradigm where both public and organization talk and listen to the other, the situation has reversed. Organizations no longer set the agenda and are

(8)

7

dependent on the public’s approval if they are to be invited into the communication (Fournier & Avery 2015, p.14). Only the public talks while organizations have no choice but to be silent. Therefore “Powershifts in the communication between public and organizations” is another sensitizing concept of this thesis. Based on the literature, I formulate the following two thought markers TM1a and TM1b. They will help to guide this thesis from the sensitizing concept “Engaging PR-communication” to “Powershifts in the communication between public and organizations”.

TM1a: The public gaining more power has led to a lack of engaging PR-communication because organizations are trying to keep their power when communicating with the public.

TM1b: The public gaining more power has led to a lack of engaging PR-communication because the public is abusing its power when communicating with organizations.

Through these two thought markers I will able to connect the two-sensitizing concepts and see how the public gaining power causes a lack of engaging communication. Tough Gensler et. al note that organizations can gain through social media “more power to shape the consumer's thought processes and action” (2018, p.9). So, there is the is the possibility that organizations have gained more power instead of the public, so I formulate the following thought marker TM1c.

TM1c: Organizations gaining more power is the cause for a lack of engaging PR-communication.

And lastly, as Bonsón and Ratkai (2013) note that to be non-engagement in the

communication between public and organizations saves resources (p. 11), it is possible that there are reasons for the lack of engaging PR-communication unrelated to the public or the organizations gaining power. Thus, I formulate the thought marker TM1d to account for that possibility.

(9)

8

TM1d: Other reasons unrelated to power dynamic shifts are the cause for a lack of engaging PR-communication

Powershifts in the communication between public and organizations

As can be seen, if one goes by the literature, there are conflicting causes for the lack of engaging PR-communication. But there seems to be an overall agreement that a shift in the power dynamics between organizations and public is the catalysator. Kohli, Suri and Kapoor (2015, p.12) conclude that the new power dynamics on social media can easily destroy or strengthen an organization’s brand alike. What determines the difference is whether an organization can adapt to the new environment and adopt new strategies. Organizations have to utilize new strategies to allow for engaging PR-communication. To construct these

strategies, there are three options. Organization can set the agenda and make the public listen to them, thus remaining the more powerful entity; they can hand over the reins to the public and listen to their demands, thus making the public the more powerful one; or they give up enough power to the public to allow a play where both are equally powerful (Gensler et al., 2013, p.12).

This leads to the following three thought markers TM2a, TM2b and TM2c that allow to create a connection between the sensitizing concept of “Powershifts in the communication between public and organizations” and the sensitizing concept of “Co-creation of meaning for

storytelling through PR-strategies”, which will be elaborated further below These thought markers will help to find out which power dynamic between organizations and public allows for co-creative storytelling.

TM2a: Organizations having more power in their communication with the public allows the use of PR-strategies, whose stories are co-created by public and organizations.

(10)

9

TM2b: The public having more power in their communication with organizations allows the use of PR-strategies, whose stories are co-created by public and organizations.

TM2c: Public and organizations having equal power in their communication allows the use of PR-strategies, whose stories are co-created by public and organizations.

But Kohli, Suri and Kapoor (2015) also propose that finding out what interests the consumers, so that organizations can understand them better and get into actual conversations with the audience (p.11), is a way to be more engaging. This method focuses less on changing the power dynamics and more that organizations should try to change their advertisement led models. It also begs the question, what other methods could allow co-creative storytelling. Therefore, I propose one more thought marker TM2d to account for methods that allow co-creative storytelling, unrelated to power dynamic shifts.

TM2d: Methods unrelated to power dynamic shifts allow the use of PR-strategies, whose stories are co-created by public and organizations.

Co-creation of meaning for storytelling through PR-strategies

With different power dynamic paradigms being advocated that allow PR-communication to be more engaging, it stands to reason that likewise there are different PR-strategies that can be utilized by PR-practitioners to achieve said goal. As already mentioned, three of these potential strategies are “Real-time Marketing”, “Creation of brand communities”, “The transmedia narrative transportation-approach”.

Real-time marketing

Real-time marketing is the practice of timing PR-campaigns to trending topics. (Willemsen et al., 2018, p.1). Thanks to digital media news travel faster than ever before. People can

(11)

10

brands. It allows to adapt PR-communication to current events, thus enhancing the quality and content of storytelling by making it more relevant.

Social media […] has sparked a renewed interest in [real-time marketing] from practitioners. Real-time marketing messages are, by definition, focused on public and timely moments. As such, real-time marketing capitalizes on the properties of social media – that is their

networked infrastructures and real-time nature – and their affordance to users. (Willemsen et al., 2018, p.4)

PR-communication is increasingly tied to recent events, as those are in the interest of the consumers. As a result, organizations make the stories they tell more engaging for the

consumer. As Willemsen et al. further state in their paper, the underlying rationale for the use of real-time marketing is that “by linking their messages to public and real-time moments, [organizations] are becoming part of ongoing discussions, thereby hoping to engage

consumers while promoting their brand at the same time”. As their research also shows, the use of real-time marketing, that is trying to combine storytelling with user engagement, fruits favorable results and enhances the effectiveness of the communication.

The experiments Willemsen et al. conducted, show that the public on social media shares real-time marketing campaigns more often than campaigns that do not utilize this strategy. Real-time marketing gives the organizations more power. As strategies that are trying to gain “cultural resonance by being where the action is on social media, and fitting in seamlessly with what is happening there […] [strive] to tip the power scales back” (Fournier & Avery 2015, p.3).

This leads to the following thought marker that allows me to create a bridge between the sensitizing concepts “Co-creation of meaning for storytelling through PR-strategies” and “Engaging PR-communication”:

(12)

11

TM3a: The use of real-time marketing gives organizations power over the public and result in PR-communication that is more engaging.

Creation of brand communities

Gensler et al. (2018, p.6) say brand communities support and enhance the creation as well as the spread of stories concerning an organization’s brand. The consumers – the public – can share these stories – created by them or by the organizations – among themselves and create meaning to these stories through a collective consumption and negotiation of said meanings. As a result, the public actively engages organizations. In return, organizations can also engage the public better, as brand communities allow them to better answer to the needs, demands or problems of the customer base (Zaglia, 2013, p.7).

Since the stories that can be generated within brand communities “include provoking

incidents, experiences, outcomes/evaluations, and summaries of to-person and person-to-brand relationships” (Gensler et al. 2018, p.3), it only adds to their power. The creation of brand communities is thus a strategy that results in the public gaining power over

organizations. According to Gensler et al. (2018, p.6), creating brand communities allows PR-communication to become more engaging, as “consumers contribute more and better content […] if they are […] socially recognized” by the organization. This leads to the following thought marker, which like before will help me to find out whether the strategy of creating brand communities will allow engaging PR-communication:

TM3b: The creation of brand communities gives the public power over the organizations and result in PR-communication that is more engaging.

The Transmedia narrative transportation-approach

Going by Coombs and Holladay (2018, p.7), transmedia narrative transportation (TNT)-storytelling is an approach that “integrates transmedia (TNT)-storytelling with narrative

(13)

12

the mission and values of an organization – be told. But it is not just the organizations that tell the story. The publics of an organization contribute likewise with their stories, creating a greater narrative that is spun of smaller stories, co-created together between organizations and public. Coombs and Holladay believe that this approach “naturally draws upon multiple channels, including digital platforms, to tell stories that are engaging for stakeholders and prompts the co-creation of meaning through public relations initiatives” (p13).

The TNT-approach draws similarities to the suggestion of improv theater Gensler et al. (2018, p.12) make. There the organization can control the boundaries within which the story is set and to an extent manipulate the story, but the outcome lies within the public. They control where the story will be taken. As such, both sides can exert power over the communication. The TNT-approach is a strategy that results in organizations and the public having equal power. This leads to the following thought marker to help me see if this strategy utilizes co-creative storytelling that leads to engaging PR-communication:

TM3c: The use of storytelling that takes the TNT-approach gives public and organizations equal power and results in PR-communication that is more engaging.

Conceptual map

As Figure 1 shows, the thought markers TM1a, TM1b, TM1c and TM1d connect the concept of “Lack of engaging PR-communication” with “Powershifts in the communication between public and organizations”, by exploring whether or not the lack of engaging

PR-communication are caused by the changed power dynamics between public and organizations. Through the thought markers TM2a, TM2b, TM2c, TM2d the sensitizing concept of

“Powershifts in the communication between public and organizations” leads to strategies that create meaning in storytelling. Whether it is organizations staying in power, the public keeping their power, both parties having equal power, or methods unrelated to all three, it leads to the formulation of PR-strategies that allow the co-creation of meaning for storytelling.

(14)

13

Each of the three strategies is built upon one of the power dynamics between public and organization and allows storytelling that is engaging.

Through the thought markers TM3a, TM3b and TM3c, the sensitizing concept of “Co-creation of meaning for storytelling through strategies” leads to “Engaging PR-communication”.

(15)

14

Methods

For this research, qualitative research is conducted and semi-structured interviews with representatives of the parties that are involved in the PR-communication, will be hold. I have decided to use interviews, as this form of data gathering is the one best suited to gain enough information on the views of the participants (Braun & Clarke, 2013). As it is possible that there are answers and opinions, I had not considered yet in my research, interviews give me the opportunity to further probe and ask for elaboration. (Braun & Clarke, 2013). Interviews are thus the most adaptable and flexible form of data gathering that allows to accommodate for unexpected information, which, given the nature of my research is a possibility.

Recruiting and sampling

For this study I decided that a purposive sampling method will be the most ideal method for gathering participants, since only specific members of the population – the parties involved in PR-communication – can deliver the necessary answers for my research (Tongco, 2007). The participants will be categorized in three groups. The PR-sector is made up of the actions of multiple parties. I believe these three groups will create a microcosm of the PR-sector that is feasible within the scope of this thesis.

The first group (C) will be made up of PR-practitioners. They possess knowledge and experience in how PR-communication has changed because of social media and thus what could cause the lack of engagement from their side. They also would possess knowledge about which strategies could successfully lead to a more engaging PR-communication. The requirement for this group was that they were active in the field of PR within the last five years and at least for one year. That way I could ensure that the knowledge of the participants regarding social media and how the PR-sector changed because of its widespread, is up-to-date.

(16)

15

The second group (B) includes students studying communication science, which allows them to a certain degree bridge the gap between audience and PR-experts. For this group I chose students who are or were recently studying the course “Corporate Communications” at the University of Amsterdam. As I am also a student of this course, I could thus be certain that their knowledge was sufficient enough to allow an outside perspective. As the field of

Communication Science requires students to observe the PR-sector, they are less involved and have a more unbiased view – compared to the other groups.

The third group (A) is made of those, who possess no educational knowledge in the field of PR-communication, representing the audience. Just having the opinions and perspective from one side would give an incomplete and biased view of the actual PR-sector. The third group can provide a perspective on which PR-strategies are enabling an engaging relationship with organizations. Members of this group were recruited via Facebook, as this ensured that they were active on social media. The only other requirement was that no one in this group worked or studied in a field related to communications. I excluded following organizations or being engaged in communication with organizations as a criterion because I believe that a lack of engagement also provides a unique perspective for my research.

Other parties like representatives of organizations or social influencers are excluded, because gathering interviewees representing their views was not possible within the timeframe the data gathering is conducted. As Figure 2 shows, this resulted in a total of eight interviews.

(17)

16

(18)

17 Figure 2: List of interviewees and their corresponding codes and quotes

(19)

18

Data gathering

Individual interviews will be held, because PR-experts are less likely to disclose their methods and strategies, if they are in a room with potential rivals and as they are busy people, getting them all to meet at the same time, would be difficult. As such, while face-to-face interviews were preferred, if it was not possible to schedule one, the interview would be hold online, via WhatsApp. In case an interview is hold face-to-face, the location would be of the choosing of the participant, so that the possibility of discomfort could be reduced to a minimum.

Otherwise there could be the risk that the discomfort could cloud their opinions and make the results of the research less credible. (Braun & Clarke, 2013).

To ensure the accuracy of their statements, the participants are informed about the general purpose of the interviews, that their identities remain anonymous, that their answers will be audio-recorded and quoted for this paper and that they can retract any given statement at any time and can leave the interview whenever they want.

Furthermore, by member-checking and telling them my interpretation of their statements, I ensure that I do not misinterpret their words, further ensuring the accuracy of their

information (Creswell & Miller, 2000).

The interview will be divided into three sections: “Lack of engaging PR-communication”, “Powershifts in the communication between public and organizations” and “Co-creation of meaning for storytelling through PR-strategies”. Each section focuses on one of the underlying sensitizing concepts of this thesis, as a topic.

There are two version of the interview guide, one for PR-practitioners and one for non-practitioners. The difference in the two version lies therein, that the practitioner’s version focuses more on what organizations can do to make the communication with the public more engaging, while the non-practitioners version focuses more on what would make the public

(20)

19

want to engage organizations more. The reason for the divide is that practitioners possess more practical knowledge about PR-communication and strategies, while non-practitioners lack this knowledge and instead know whether a specific strategy would make them want to engage organizations more.

Lack of engaging PR-communication

The goal of the first section is to find out how the public gaining power on social media caused a lack of engagement in PR-communication. Whether it is organizations trying to keep their power or the public abusing the power they gained and which power dynamic between public and organizations causes a lack of engagement. Lastly, I will find out if there are causes for the lack of engagement unrelated to power dynamics. Through this I will see whether TM1a, TM1b, TM1c and TM1d apply, and connect the lack of engagement to the powershifts in the communication between public and organizations

Powershifts in the communication between public and organizations

The second section will determine how the lack of engagement can be reversed. But also, how and which power dynamic allows for an engaging relationship: organizations being more powerful than the public, the public becoming more powerful or if both should have equal power. As well as if there are methods that allow co-creative storytelling that are unrelated to the power dynamics. With the data gathered from the answers one can see whether TM2a, TM2b, TM2c or TM2d applies and thus which power shift will lead to a PR-strategy that uses co-creative storytelling.

In the third section it will be discussed what strategies allow co-creative storytelling, so that PR-communication becomes more engaging. And whether the participants believe if real-time marketing, the creation or brand communities or the TNT-approach result in more engaging

(21)

20

PR-communication. In case the interviewees are unfamiliar with any of the strategies, a brief explanation and a practical example will be given. Answers for this section evaluate if TM2a, TM3b or TM2c were observed and thus which strategy changes the power dynamics to allow for a more engaging PR-communication.

Data analysis

Given the nature of this research and its goal of exploring possible strategies to conduct more engaging communication, the grounded theory approach was used to guide the data analysis. As the gathered data from this interview forms the basis of the formed theory, using the sensitizing concepts and thought markers of this research (Bowen, 2006), the grounded theory approach will help with the concentration and analyzation of said data (Strauss, 1987). To visualize the used concepts and thought markers of my research, a concept indicator model (CIM) was created.

All interviews were transcribed in Word and then coded and analyzed in ATLAS.ti. At first the coding was done through open coding. Each questions and answer would be put under a quotation. These quotations would be then divided along the thought markers and everything the interviewees said would receive a quote. For example, answers to the question “How would organizations or the public having more power cause a lack of engaging PR-communication” would be separated depending on whether the participant talked about organization having more power or the public having more power. If the participant stated that the public gaining more power leads to it boycotting the messages of the organization, then the answer would be one quote and coded as “Boycott of messages”, “The public gaining more power” and as the overall sensitizing concept and topic of the segment and question was “Lack of engaging PR-communication”, the answer would also be coded with “Lack of engaging PR-communication”.

(22)

21

made. First, the codes that had the same or similar meaning or content were merged into one group. For example, “the public boycotting messages” and “the public silencing

organizations” would be grouped in “Abuse of power”.

The remaining codes would be put within one of three families that correspond to the three underlying sensitizing concepts and topics of the interviews (“Lack of engaging

PR-communication”, “Powershifts in the communication between public and organizations”, “Co-creation of meaning for storytelling through PR-strategies”). One the next level would be a concept that corresponds to the questions asked, with the indicators on the third level indicating the answer of the interviewee.

To give an example with Figure 3: One the first level is “Lack of engaging

PR-communication”, on the second level is “public gaining power” and on the third level is “organizations trying to keep their power”. This means when I asked if/why there is a relation between the lack of engagement in PR-communication and the public gaining power, the interviewee answered that it is because organizations are then trying to keep their power.

(23)

22

Results

For this section, the coded answers of the interviewees are written in italics and marked, like

this. A complete list of the used codes and their corresponding interviewee can be seen in

Figure 2.

Lack of engaging PR-communication

Figure 3: CIM " Lack of engaging PR-communication"

The public getting more power

As seen in Figure 3, even though all participants agree that social media indeed provide a platform through which the public was able to get more power when communicating with organizations, only few see this as a cause for the lack of engagement in PR-communication. Some participants even take the opposite stand. By giving the masses a platform to talk back and give feedback to the messages and stories of the organizations and providing the means to easily communicate together, the power of organizations has decreased. As a result, according to some participants PR-communication has become more engaging. “There is more

engagement now than there has ever been. Because now we have more and more social media and social media users and different platforms. Everybody has social media, everybody can consume and engage” (B2, B2.1).

(24)

23

Despite this, some interviewees agree that there is potential for abuse of power that causes a lack of engagement, if the public gains more power. Using the advantage of numbers, the audience can easily boycott or silence communication attempts from the side of the

organizations and the attitude and actions of the public can easily be influenced by opinion leaders for example. “They can even boycott and damage the reputation and finally the sales of the company (C2, C2.1). Another problem that this could create is that organizations as a result only engage the public if they become too loud. As C1 puts it: “A company only likes to solve a problem when there's a lot of reactions by a lot of people. And they don't do it on a daily business” (C1.1).

Likewise, some participants agree that organizations as a result are deliberately using non-engaging communication in order to keep their power from the public. Engaging the public means giving up some of their power and there is always a risk of the public using said power to silence them. Organizations are afraid of that possibility and so instead of engaging the audience they “want to keep control of their message by advertising” (B1, B1.1).

Organizations gaining more power

Despite this, more interviewees saw a potential for lack of engaging PR-communication if organizations could gain more power. Like with the public gaining more power, it could easily lead to an abuse of power. It can easily result in giving organizations a blanc check. Then they don’t have to care anymore about the audience and can set their agendas through without consideration for them. If organizations become “more powerful they can do basically whatever they want to do” (A2.1), as A2 puts it. There would be no need for engagement, since as said, the power they have allows them to set their agenda however they want. But it also would result in organizations not being able to engage, as they would never learn how to conduct consumer-engaging communication. “If the organizations have more power but they

(25)

24

still have no clue and are not careful, then will still not try. But now we can’t say anything, so they will never get better” (B3, B3.1).

Other reasons

But in the end, a shift in the power dynamics was not seen as the major cause of a lack of engagement in PR-communication. Going by the gathered information, the are other reasons unrelated to the power dynamics. For one, engaging the public creates risks for the

organizations, as engagement attempts could backfire and thus cost money. Trying to engage is furthermore more expansive and requires more complex strategies and communication. So, opting for more advertorial styles of communication is a result of saving resources from the organizations. And in general, only a small percentage of the users on social media bother to

read content and give feedback, which further causes a lack of engagement.

If you're a writing and selling organic content, it become of course, more and more difficult to reach the audience. I don't know the exact number, but I think the percentages for certain companies are like, only a few percent of their audiences see the organic content. So that's a bit of a problem. So, I kind of understand that the companies are trying to, to use paid advertising more in order to reach that audience (C1, C1.2).

But beyond that, several interviewees believe that many stories are not interesting for the

public. They either don’t cater to their interests, needs or demographics and have little

informational value and relevance for them. As C2 says “Organizations don’t fit them. And often when they try to communicate with the audience, their messages are often not in the interests of the audience” (C2.2). And lastly, there is often a dissatisfaction of the public with

organizations. The public has little trust in them, especially if there is a crisis going on or

(26)

25

public or that the individual voice of a consumer has much weight, so consumers will not bother to engage.

As a corporation like international or like a multinational corporation. If they would send a message or they would try to be engaging, I think some people would already look at the communication or at the attempt as it's a big corporation anyway, so they're, they're just after the money. It's like a bit of like a distrust (B1, B1.2).

Power dynamic shifts between public and organizations

Figure 4: CIM " Power dynamic shifts between public and organizations "

Consequently, as Figure 4 shows, when asked which power dynamic between organization and public would allow for engaging PR-communication, none of the interviewees believe that that the answer would be organizations having more power.

The public having more power

The interviewees agree that the public having more power forces engagement. Organizations cannot afford to ignore the audience, who will otherwise use their power to boycott or silence them. So, there is little choice but to actively engage the public. “When consumers come together with their shared experience in creation groups, it gives them a certain power as a consumer, and this forces producers to also engage with them” (A1, A1.1). Some participants believe that only then do both have equal power – organizations and public. “I think

(27)

26

organizations should give up some of their power. Otherwise they would just dictate […]. They already are still more powerful, so that both sides can share” (C2, C2.3).

Methods that allow co-creative storytelling unrelated to power dynamic shifts

Beyond a change in power dynamics, one way to increase engagement is that the public can

band together, not just so that a single voice can have more impact, but also so that the

individual members of the consumers can support each other. A method that can be taken a step further through the use of brand ambassadors to mediate and represent the interests of the grander public to the organizations. C1 gives an example for how that would work. “One of the most engaging communities is one around the handicap people. They help each other, give each other tips and that's works really well. And we approach them to create stories around their experience” (C1.3).

Related to that is the idea that every organization should monitor social media better and have their own department for that task. That way not only will organization be able to know

their audience better they can more easily be up-date with new events and respond to their

audience better, which also increases engagement.

Every successful company is really monitoring what is happening on the Internet and on social media. So, if you drew that in a proper way, you can react fast. You know what the audience is looking for, you know what you maybe need to adapt in your client's processes, your customer journey, so it offers a lot of opportunities and advantages. […] So as a bigger company you have to have a news room, a social media monitoring room, you need a web care team (C1, C1.4).

And lastly, as many participants think that non-interesting storytelling causes a lack of engagement in PR-communication, organizations telling stories that interest the public, is seen as a method to reverse this. As C1 puts it: “If you are talking about engagement you

(28)

27

should really communicate what people want to know and what to read and not only what you want to let them know” (C1.5).

Figure 5: CIM " Co-creation of meaning for storytelling through PR-strategies "

Real-time marketing

Out of the three strategies, real time marketing is seen as the least engaging. The necessity to time campaign to events and topics that are recent and talked about by the public allows

organizations to tell stories that interest the public, “because the topic is in the interest of the public and allows for more participation as a result is so more engaging” (B2, B2.2). But most participant believe that organizations are only using the interests of the public to appear engaging and that they are not really believing the story themselves. It is fake engagement. In the opinion of B2 “consumers could see the organizations are only riding the trend to get the consumers interest and only pretending to be interested, that they are not genuine” (B2.3). The creation of brand communities

Going by the words of the interviewees, the use of brand communities creates a concentration of fans and consumers, by allowing the public to band together. It creates a cesspool of loyalty, where followers of an organizations or a brand can exchange information and talk to each other. Due to high amount of membership numbers in the community, it gives the voices of the public a higher reach and visibility, that organizations must communicate with, or

(29)

28

otherwise the public will use the power they get through the communities to boycott the organizations. In other words, it forces engagement. The high concentration of fans makes it also easier to employ and pick brand ambassadors to represent the communities and

communicate on their behalf with the organizations. Because of all these factors, the creation of brand communities is seen as the strategy that is the most suited to create engaging

PR-communication, between organizations and the public. “I think making brand communities is

the best strategy for creating engagement” (A3, A3.1).

Consumers, they became a community based on their shared experience with consumption. And this creates a kind of consumption power. It gives the consumer some kind of power as a community and this obviously creates more options for them to engage between themselves and the company itself […] like the consumers from the community can talk on behalf of the community with the companies (A1, A1.2).

If you're successful in creating a brand community, then people would feel something with the brand, right? They would feel connected or have this feeling of identity by being a part of a brand. If you're successful in creating that, I think everything you're communicating is way more likely to reach the audience (B1, B1.3).

The TNT-approach

Like real-time marketing, the TNT-approach allows organizations to tell stories that interest

the public. As B1 says “I think that's a quite a good strategy actually. Because if you create

multiple stories, all centring around the central narrative, I think it's more likely that one of these narratives in one of these stories would connect to you” (B1.4).

But its abstract nature, makes a control of the communication and stories difficult, so it is hard to discern what the results of this strategy would be and if they are indeed engaging. Some interviews suggest that the TNT-approach should be combined with the strategy to

(30)

29

create brand communities to mitigate that problem, so that the stories can spread in a more

concentrated and controllable environment. “If you were to combine like the TNT approach with the brand community, I think it's better in order to keep control over your main narrative” (B1, B1.5).

(31)

30

Discussion

The aim of this thesis was to propose social media strategies that change the power dynamics between public and organizations to allow co-creative and engaging storytelling. For that, this thesis was going to research why the public gaining power leads to a lack of engagement in PR-communication, what power dynamics allow co-creative storytelling the situation and which strategies can thus lead to engaging PR-communication.

Going by the data, the answer to the first question turns out to be, that the public gaining more power through social can indeed lead to an abuse of power and a silencing of organizations, and organizations are using advertorial communication in an attempt to keep power. Still, organizations becoming more powerful, is seen as a more likely cause for a lack of

engagement in PR. As a change in the power dynamics is not seen as a major cause, attempts to answer what further causes for the lack of engagement could exist, were made. It seems that the public refuses to engage because of a lack of trust and satisfaction regarding

organizations. For organizations meanwhile it is a more resource-saving (money and effort) and risk-free method of communicating.

As such, the answer to the second question is that the public gaining more power would allow for co-creative storytelling. When asked what allows co-creative storytelling, several answers would be solutions to what is perceived as the actual causes for the lack of engagement in PR-communication. Methods that allow organizations to better understand the public and tell stories that it in their interests, as well those that allow the public to communicate among each other and band together.

Likewise, the answers to the third question, which strategies will lead to engaging PR-communication, are based on these methods. A change in the power dynamics is not

(32)

31

perceived as a reason for why real-time marketing, the creation of brand communities or the TNT-approach are allowing engaging PR-communication. Instead, it was whether or not these strategies enable the aforementioned qualities. For instance, that real-time marketing and the TNT-approach allow storytelling that interests the public. The creation of brand communities is the strategy out of the three, that enables most of the methods that lead to co-creative storytelling. As a result, of the three, storytelling through brand communities is the strategy deemed the most likely to allow engaging PR-communication.

Limitations and future discussions

PR-communication involves organizations using a PR-department/agency and/or social influencers to communicate with other entities, like the public, the media or stakeholders, which is observed by theoretical experts. Within the limits of this thesis it was not possible to gather interviews with all involved parties, like social influencers for example. As such, any further research should gather a suitable large sample size from all possible parties.

Beyond this, that the public gained power was not seen as a cause for a lack of engagement in PR-communication. Other causes were identified, such as that organizations tell stories that are no interesting for the public. Thus, future research should give these aspects more focus. What the causes for these problems are and how exactly for example organizations can tell stories that engage the public. Lastly, future research should also focus and examine on other strategies that allow engaging PR-communication. This thesis chose precisely three strategies to examine, based on the potential power dynamics that would allow more engaging PR-communication. So, more strategies should be examined independently of what power dynamics between organizations and public they allow.

(33)

32

The widespread of social media, and the public gaining more power is not seen as the catalysator for the lack of engaging PR-communication. Both phenomena have aspects to them that can potentially enable a communication between organizations and public that is lacking in engagement. But the major causes for the lack of engagement seem to be

independent of either phenomena and may have existed even before. The public has to trust organizations more and organizations have to understand their audience better and find ways to better carter to them. Furthermore, the practice of using advertisement instead of

engagement to save resources has to be reduced. Future social media strategies that try to create engaging PR-communication should focus more on these aspects and how to solve them. Social media provide a platform that allows for more engaging PR-communication, for organizations and public to improve their communication. But PR-practitioners have to make full use of these opportunities.

(34)

33

Literature

Bonsón, E., & Ratkai, M. (2013). A set of metrics to assess stakeholder engagement and social legitimacy on a corporate Facebook page. Online Information Review, 37(5), 787-803. Bowen, G. A. (2006). Grounded theory and sensitizing concepts. International journal of qualitative methods, 5(3), 12-23.

Braun, V. & Clarke, V. (2013). Successful qualitative research: A practical guide for beginners. London: SAGE Publications Ltd.

Coombs, W. T., & Holladay, S. J. (2018). Innovation in public relations theory and practice: A transmedia narrative transportation (TNT) approach. Journal of Communication

Management, 22(4), 382-396.

Creswell, J. W., & Miller, D. L. (2000). Determining validity in qualitative inquiry. Theory into practice, 39(3), 124-130.

Fournier, S., & Avery, J. (2011). The uninvited brand. Business horizons, 54(3), 193-207. Gensler, S., Völckner, F., Liu-Thompkins, Y., & Wiertz, C. (2013). Managing brands in the social media environment. Journal of interactive marketing, 27(4), 242-256.

Grunig, J. E., & Grunig, L. A. (1992). Models of Public Relations and Communication. Excellence in Public Relations and Communication Management, 285-325.

Hollebeek, L. D., Glynn, M. S., & Brodie, R. J. (2014). Consumer brand engagement in social media: Conceptualization, scale development and validation. Journal of interactive marketing, 28(2), 149-165.

Kohli, C., Suri, R., & Kapoor, A. (2015). Will social media kill branding?. Business Horizons, 58(1), 35-44.

(35)

34

Lovejoy, K., & Saxton, G. D. (2012). Information, community, and action: How nonprofit organizations use social media. Journal of computer-mediated communication, 17(3), 337-353. Strauss, A.L. (1987). Qualitative analysis for social scientists. Cambridge: Cambridge

University Press.

Tongco, M. D. C. (2007). Purposive sampling as a tool for informant selection. Ethnobotany Research and applications, 5, 147-158.

Willemsen, L. M., Mazerant, K., Kamphuis, A. L., & van der Veen, G. (2018). Let’s Get Real (Time)! The potential of real-time marketing to catalyze the sharing of brand messages. International Journal of Advertising, 37(5), 828-848.

Wolf, K., & Archer, C. (2018). Public relations at the crossroads: The need to reclaim core public relations competencies in digital communication. Journal of Communication

Management, 22(4), 494-509.

Zaglia, M. E. (2013). Brand communities embedded in social networks. Journal of business research, 66(2), 216-223.

(36)

35

Appendix

INTERVIEW GUIDE – practitioners

Introduction

 Goal: Finding strategies that allow for more engaging communication between organization and the public

 Recording: This interview will be recorded for research purposes

 Informed consent: Hand them the informed consent letter

 Background check: Why don’t we start by you telling me something about yourself (education, occupation, work history)?

Topic 1: Lack of engaging PR-communication

Goal:

 To find out whether organizations trying to keep their power or the public abusing the power they gained is the cause for the lack of engaging PR-communication and why

 To find out whether organizations or the public having more power cause a lack of engaging PR-communication and why

 To find out what other causes for a lack of engaging PR-communication could

Initial question: Social media have given the public more

power when communicating with organizations and allow PR-communication to become more engaging. Yet, organizations have adopted more advertorial

communication, while the public refuse to engage. Do you agree with this statement?

 Why do you think have organizations adopted more advertorial communication?

 What do you think are the reasons the public refuses to engage organizations and instead opts to silence, ignore or boycott them?

 How would organizations or the public having more power cause a lack of engaging PR-communication?

 What other reasons do you believe could have caused the lack of engagement either from the organizations or the public?

(37)

36 Topic 2: Powershifts in the communication between

public and organizations Goal:

 To find out which power dynamic between organizations and the public results in the co-creation of meaning for stories and what the reasons for that are

 To find out what other methods independent of power dynamics between public and organizations result in the co-creation of meaning for stories and what the reasons for that are

Initial question: What do you think would allow both

sides create meaning for stories and make PR-communication more engaging? Organizations having more power, the public having more power or both having equal power?

 Why do you think would that allow a more engaging communication?

 What other methods do you think allow the co-creation of meaning for stories, so that the communication between public and organizations more engaging?

 Why do you think would these methods

allow the co-creation of meaning for stories, so that the communication between public and organizations more engaging?

Topic 3: Co-creation of meaning for storytelling

through PR-strategies Goal:

 To find out which of these three strategies is the most likely to succeed in enabling the co-creation of meaning to a story, so that the communication between organization and public becomes more engaging and what the reasons for that are

Initial question: Do you think that the following social

media strategies allow for engaging PR-communication and why?

 What do you think makes Real-time marketing a strategy that allows or not allows engaging PR-communication and why?

 What do you think makes the Creation of brand communities a strategy that allows or not allows engaging PR-communication and why?

 What do you think makes the TNT-approach

a strategy that allows or not allows engaging PR-communication and why?

 Which of these three strategies is in your opinions the one that would allow for the most engaging communication and why?

Rounding up the interview

 Is there anything else you would like to mention?

(38)

37

INTERVIEW GUIDE – non-practitioners