Vol 19, No 2 (2000)

The body of knowledge in the field of corporate communication indicates a strategic
role for the corporate communication manager. However, there are but a few references
to corporate communication 'strategy' in a strategic organisationa( context. Few
practitioners seem to understand the meaning of strategy, although it is a known,
uncomplicated concept to those familiar with management theory. The key problem
seems to lie in the application of strategy for corporate communication (public relations)
issues.
It is therefore the aim of this article to explain the meaning of strategy in a corporate
communication context. Based on the strategic management Literature, corporate
communication strategy is conceptualised as a functional strategy, providing focus
and direction to the corporate communication function. It is differentiated from
implementation strategy as it is known in the communication plan - the latter being
the approach to communication activities. Corporate communication strategy is
proposed as providing the missing link between the corporate strategy and the corporate
communication function.

Although the philosophy of ethical and socially responsible communication management'
practices has a long history and has been described in great detail, the notion of the
communication manager as an ethical/moral ombudsperson is relatively new.
With increasing numbers of communication managers now forming part of the dominant
coalition/strategic decision-making team in many organisations, the real influence
that these individuals have over the values that organisations accept should be critically
assessed.
The new role of the communication manager is conceptualised as constituting two
spheres of responsibility. Internally the communication manager should be facilitating
the establishment and acceptance of ethically/morally acceptable organisational values.
These values will then figure in external organisational behaviour, while the
communication manager will act as the eyes and ears of the society in which he/she
operates.

The advent of the Communication Age sets the challenge for public relations to lead
corporations and other organisations on several levels, including the integration of
relationships with various stakeholders, management functions, corporate and
organisational structures as well as the integration with society. The successful
integration at these levels will depend on the range of leadership that corporate
communication professionals demonstrate from a macro level of interaction with society
to a more micro level of individual stakeholders. As a result, public relations professionals
must understand the major issues and trends confronting business and society, and be
able to effectively communicate their longterm implications to management. Key issues
t h a t w i l l remain of concern include many challenges that are a function of technology
and changing times. The future of public relations practice depends on how well the
profession adapts to changes in the new media environment and to shifts in economic,
social and business paradigms.
This article explores the reasons why public relations practice has grown increasingly
complex and discusses the challenges, threats and opportunities facing the profession
in the new millennium.

kspite 14 joint years of working for two large Parastatal corporations and the largest
Financial Services institution on the African continent, and of late three years as an
independent communication consultant, I still have no clear-cut answer to the question
of what the future holds for conventional communication. Note that I am steering
clear of the word communications.
Communications would in my view be referring to those information-technology-trained
experts driving luxury cars at an age when they had barely qualified for a legal driver's
licence, or to the richest person in the world who has, by starting a dot.com business,
surpassed in stock wealth the software wunderkid of the eighties. They are indeed also
part and parcel of communication. The only thing is that they seem to be successful
on a large scale where people electing to qualify and practise in the field of conventional
communication appear to have much less to be happy about.
This statement would probably further demoralise current students of communication,
academia, starter-up practitioners, those who are in fact making it and let us not
forget communication advisers. The question is are we making it professionally or are
we practising an unnecessary art and science? Let us, explore this issue by looking
objectively at some pertinent communication industry (not IT) mind teasers, turning
them into statements and then arguing the realities surrounding them.