Content-Type: text/html

                                                                      PR Excellence: An International Perspective
Running head: PR EXCELLENCE: AN INTERNATIONAL PERSPECTIVE





Public Relations Excellence in Alliances and Coalitions: An International Perspective
Mark A. Van Dyke
University of Maryland, College Park
Paper Presented to the Public Relations Division
Association for Education in Journalism and Mass Communication
August, 2001 Convention
Washington, DC


(Word Count: 9,410)






_ Copyright 2001 Mark A. Van Dyke
 Author Note
I thank Dr. Linda Aldoory and Dr. Laura Drake of the Department of Communication, University of Maryland, College Park for their insight, guidance, and assistance.  Their professional knowledge was instrumental in the development of this paper.  Their encouragement and personal interest in student research also provided me with much needed inspiration.
Correspondence concerning this paper should be addressed to Mark A. Van Dyke, who is now at the Department of Communication, 2130 Skinner Building, University of Maryland, College Park, Maryland (USA) 20742-7635.  Telephone calls may be made to (410) 349-0936.  Electronic mail may be sent via Internet to <a href="/cgi-bin/wa?LOGON=A3%3Dind0109B%26L%3DAEJMC%26E%3D8bit%26P%3D9588294%26B%3D--%253D%253D%253D%253D%253D%253D%253D%253D%253D%253D%253D%253D%253D%253D%253D%253D%253D%253D%253D%253D%253D_279740299%253D%253D_%26T%3Dtext%252Fplain%3B%2520charset%3Diso-8859-1" >[log in to unmask]</a>

 Public Relations Excellence in Alliances and Coalitions: An International Perspective
Purpose
A theory of public relations excellence has emerged that views the public relations practitioner as a strategic manager of communications between organizations and their publics (J. Grunig, 1992; Dozier, L. Grunig, & J. Grunig, 1995).  Little has been done, however, to apply this theory to international organizations such as political-military alliances and coalitions. Such study would help describe practical roles of alliance public relations managers, evaluate how public communications are managed within these organizations, and contribute to an international perspective of public relations.
The North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) is one of the most prominent examples of an international, political-military alliance.  Established by the North Atlantic Treaty on April 4, 1949, NATO is "an association of free states united in their determination to preserve their security through mutual guarantees and stable relations with other countries" (North Atlantic Treaty Organization, 1998). Antecedents of NATO can be traced to World War II, when the president of the United States and prime minister of Britain issued the Atlantic Charter, a declaration outlining post-war ideals.  Modern alliances such as NATO are now based on this charter's founding principles, which call for international cooperation, respect for each nation's sovereign rights, and collective defense.
Diplomatic squabbling, financial crises, and more serious military challenges can propel these organizations into deadly international conflicts that often result in enormous political, economic, and human costs.  These conflicts therefore create a need for excellent public relations, which can reduce costs by establishing cooperative relationships between these organizations and their strategic publics.  For example, Chalmer and Pierce (1998) identified changes in the European security environment brought about by the end of the Cold War.  They also cited efforts by NATO to reduce post-Cold War conflicts by establishing cooperative relations with former adversaries:
Dramatic changes since 1989 have required the North Atlantic Treaty Organization [NATO] to rethink its force structure as well as to reconsider how to maintain the peace and security of Europe.  In the strategic vacuum created by the dissolution of the Warsaw Pact, NATO sought to establish cooperative relations with the nations of Central and Eastern Europe. (p. ix)
Beneath alliances are coalitions.  These are usually subordinate structures, often military in nature, which are led by these alliances and formed for the specific purpose of carrying out political mandates.  Like alliances, they are multinational, often comprised of several dozen nations that contribute military forces or other resources to support the coalition.
Although little has been done to apply public relations theory to international political-military alliances and coalitions, these organizations are well suited for the study of public relations.   Their fragile network of member nations and often-politicized missions can complicate the management of internal as well as external relationships.  Alliances and coalitions also rely heavily on cooperation and consensus building to construct the unity of purpose that serves as their major source of influence. This cooperation is especially important in regional and international conflict situations that often involve these organizations.
        The specific role of public relations managers in international alliances and coalitions is also worthy of study.  These practitioners often operate in a complicated communication arena, which they share with political and military leaders, diplomats, negotiators, mediators, news media, and other publics.  The communication activities of these actors involve a wide range of communication strategies, from coercion to collaboration, which often overlap.  Managed properly, integration of these activities can create excellent communication results, including more effective relationships.  Left uncoordinated, however, competing activities and role encroachments can weaken communication efforts, cause confusion, and damage relations.
Well-established social and political science perspectives based on management, decision-making, organization, communication, conflict, negotiation, and mediation theories have often been used to study these organizations and their operations.  However, it would be useful, given the potentially lethal and economic consequences of regional conflicts, to more clearly define and understand the role of public relations in managing relationships between these organizations and their strategic publics.
Thus, the purpose of this exploratory study is to examine how public relations theory might apply to international alliances and coalitions.  Although no hypotheses are proposed, a single research question is considered: Which principles of the excellence theory in public relations described by J. Grunig (1992) apply to the practice of communication management in international alliances and coalitions?
It is expected that answers to this question will add to the body of knowledge supporting the excellence theory, contribute to the development of a global public relations theory, and generate possible applications for the practice of public relations in international alliances and coalitions.
Conceptualization
Excellence in Management of Public Relations and Communication
A strategic management approach to public relations describes communication excellence in terms of managing relationships between organizations and publics. Some of the antecedents to this approach can be found in studies contributing to a general theory of excellence in public relations (J. Grunig, 1992; Dozier et al., 1995).
The first phase of the excellence study consisted of a comprehensive literature review that integrated many theories from communication, public relations, management, organizational psychology and sociology, social and cognitive psychology, feminist studies, political science, decision making, and culture (J. Grunig, 1992).  This phase produced what is believed to be the first general theory of public relations (J. Grunig, 1992, p. 2), which was then empirically tested and revised through a survey of four types of organizations in three different countries (Dozier et al., 1995). J. Grunig (1992) identified seventeen characteristics (p. 28) that define excellence in the practice of organizational public relations.
The study provided strong support for the strategic manager role and a two-way symmetrical model of communication as major components in the excellence theory.  For example, J. Grunig (1992) found that "choice of the symmetrical model of communication is the key choice made by effective organizations" (p. 24). The two-way symmetrical communication approach, led by a senior public relations manager working in concert with the organization's dominant coalition, or senior leadership, was deemed to be the most excellent.  Research also found this approach to be the most ethical (J. Grunig, 1992, p. 320), the most likely to produce effective relationships (p. 26), and the most likely to build collaborative structures that can help prevent costly conflicts between organizations and their publics (pp. 312-320), thereby contributing both social and monetary value to an organization's bottom line economic performance (Ehling, 1992).
 This research has helped develop a normative and positive theory of public relations (J. Grunig & L. Grunig, 1992).  This allows, theoretically, an application of relative importance to characteristics of public relations excellence; and, in practice, indicates where to look for excellence in public relations and how to measure it (Dozier et al., 1995).  However, there are limitations to this approach.  Organizational and public relations theories rely largely on Western models of public relations, and may not extend to other nations or coalitions who hold a different worldview of public relations (J. Grunig, 1992; Dozier et al., 1995; Vercic & J. Grunig, 2000).
J. Grunig (1992) also pointed out that "authoritarian dominant" (p. 320) coalitions often do not use two-way symmetrical communication because they view the yielding of information to their publics as a threat to organizational power.  Dozier et al. (1995) observed that the two-way symmetrical approach is not a panacea.  They described a "mixed motive" (pp. 47-48) approach that may explain how many organizations and their publics vary their communication strategies, oscillating between use of asymmetrical and symmetrical approaches, depending on situations and desired outcomes:
Advance practices combine two-way communication with negotiation and persuasion.  Short-term asymmetrical tactics can be used to stake out more advantageous positions within the larger context of mutually beneficial relationships.  Ethical communicators always subordinate asymmetrical methods to broad principles of symmetrical purpose. (p. 104).
Public Relations as Relationship Management
Scholars have been exploring a relationship paradigm for nearly two decades (Ferguson, 1984, in Ledingham & Bruning, 2000, p.xiii; J. Grunig, 1992; Dozier et al., 1995).  This approach takes the study of public relations beyond individual units of organization and publics, and interpersonal activities such as communication.  It focuses, instead, on the management of strategic relationships between organizations and publics as a public relations responsibility.  This is a useful approach when trying to distinguish between various roles and responsibilities in organizations.
Relationship management has also been defined in terms of specific value to organizations.  L. Grunig, J. Grunig, and Ehling (1992) found that public relations contributes to an organization's effectiveness by building long-term relationships with strategic publics.
 Moreover, this view is consistent with an organizational perspective, in which organizations are viewed as being linked, and even interdependent, with their strategic publics.  In this regard, organizations must manage changing relationships with these publics, internal and external, in order to achieve their strategic goals (Daft, 2000).  Spicer (1997) described the responsibility of the organizational public relations practitioner as "linking the organization with its larger environment" (p. 152).  To emphasize the importance of managing relationships and communication, as opposed to managing information, Spicer noted, "We do not form relationships with information or data or issues. We form relationships (through the communication process) with stakeholders, with people" (p. 153).
Management of communication and relationships can influence more than an organization's public image.  Quality of communication and relationships can also influence economic performance.  Van Riel (1995) observed, "new forms of communication" (p. 2) have emerged that are designed to deal with financial management and investor relations.  Van Riel (1995) considered these specialized communication activities to be outside the realm of public relations, but L. Grunig et al. (1992) placed responsibility for relationships affected by these communication activities within the domain of the public relations manager.  They suggested that public relations "has monetary value" (p. 86) when it opens up new markets, eases constraints, reduces expensive litigation and government regulation, and makes an organization more efficient.
The relationship management concept can be extended further when viewed from perspectives related to theories of interpersonal and organizational communication, social psychology and other disciplines.  According to Ledingham and Bruning (2000), "The cumulative effect of this scholarship has been to establish the concept of relationship management as a useful and fruitful perspective for public relations study and education" (p. xiv).
Public Relations as Communication Management
Applying these theories to organizations such as NATO allows these organizations to be viewed as the product of "strategic alliances" in which management is viewed as a communication activity (Pien, 1994, p. 133).  Communication is widely accepted as an essential part of public relations excellence and relationship management (J. Grunig & Hunt, 1984; J. Grunig & Repper, 1992; Dozier et al., 1995; Spicer, 1997).  Cutlip, Center, and Broom (1987) went so far as to describe communication as the "nub of public relations" (p. 175).
As described in excellence theory, two-way symmetrical communication also promotes effective relationships.  Once these relationships are formed, communication is then needed to maintain long-lasting, mutually beneficial relationships. The role of communication is particularly important in cultivating and maintaining these relationships prior to, during, and after crises and conflicts (Coombs, 2000).
Communication is also an essential element within internal dimensions of organizations, such as between leadership and employees. Cutlip, Center, & Broom (1987) stated:
As part of the larger public relations function, the goals of employee communication are to identify, establish, and maintain mutually beneficial relationships between the organization and the employees on whom its success or failure depends.  (p. 315)
This concept has become one of the key characteristics of public relations excellence under the general theory of public relations; and it may help identify, explain, and evaluate communication performance within complex internal organizational networks.  For instance, organizations that demonstrated symmetrical internal communication and a participative organizational culture tended to produce more excellent results (J. Grunig, 1992; Dozier et al., 1995).
Public Relations as Conflict Management
The study of public relations and communication management in international alliances and coalitions also requires an understanding of conflict theory, since these organizations are often engaged in deterring and resolving regional and international disputes.  This perspective can also help explain how public relations and communication might be managed in conflict situations, and how relationships might be affected.
Many practitioners view public relations as persuasive, asymmetric communication used to control their environment.  In contrast, public relations can also be viewed as a symmetrical approach to conflict management (J. Grunig, 1992, p. 310).  The symmetrical model is closely aligned with the social-psychological perspective that views communication as an essential element in resolving conflict. Deutsch (1973) defined conflict as existing "whenever incompatible activities occur" (p. 10). Communication activity plays a critical role in explaining Deutsch's (1973) social-psychological perspective of conflict, in which:
1.      Participants interact socially, based on perceptions and cognitions of others.
2.      Participants are influenced by internal expectations of the other's actions.
3.      Social interaction is initiated by motives, generates new motives, and alters old motives.
4.      Interaction takes place in a social environment.
5.      Each participant is part of a complex unit comprised of many interacting subsystems, and can act in a unified way. (pp. 7-8)
Thus, communication and conflict are interdependent, and the establishment of lines of communication becomes necessary to resolve conflict effectively (Roloff, 1987). Given that communication can serve as a cause of conflict, a symptom of conflict, and a means to resolve conflict (Roloff, 1987), this interdependence "produces relationships and the need for public relations" (J. Grunig & L. Grunig, 1992).  Practitioners can then, ideally, manage these interdependent relations in a way that will deter conflict, end conflict, or prevent conflict from escalating. While much of the research in conflict theory focuses on the intrapersonal and interpersonal levels, the interaction of communication and conflict can also be operationalized at the organizational level and within mass publics (Roloff, 1987).
This conflict management approach leads naturally to other relationship management perspectives such as dispute resolution, negotiation, mediation, and conflict management (J. Grunig & L. Grunig, 1992). From this perspective, certain forms of communication (e.g. conversation) can be viewed as "an emergent, improvised, and negotiated activity" (Newell & Stutman, 1989, p. 139), as well as a cooperative activity that can be identified and measured by approaches described in the general theory of public relations (J. Grunig, 1992).
Other scholars have approached conflict management from a systems, social exchange, or power perspective (e.g. Drake, 1993; Huston, 1983).  These approaches may help explain the applications of power, influence, or even dominance that Jentleson (2000) conceptualizes in coercive prevention, a form of preventative diplomacy.  This is important to the study of alliances and coalitions, as the concept relates to implied use of military power.  However, communication used in this regard implies a high concern for the sending organization and low concern for the receiver (Pruitt & Carnevale, 1993).  These communication activities could be symptomatic of poor relationships, or could damage long-term relationships.
J. Grunig and Huang (2000) noted that many studies of interorganizational relationships are dominated by two theories.  Resource dependency theory explains how relationships form in response to an organization's need for resources; and exchange theory describes how relationships form around transactions of resources.  These theories are useful in explaining conflicts such as regional disputes that arise over limited resources, but they do not address conflicts imposed by an activist or hostile adversary (J. Grunig & Huang, 2000, p. 35).
 As stated previously, normative theory (J. Grunig, 1992) suggests that collaborative, two-way symmetrical forms of communication are most effective in resolving conflicts and establishing lasting, effective relationships.  J. Grunig and Huang (2000) built on this earlier notion by identifying two broad categories of negotiation strategies:
These negotiation strategies can be defined broadly as integrative strategies, which are symmetrical in nature, and distributive strategies, which are asymmetrical.  In general, we propose that integrative, symmetrical strategies will be more effective in developing organization-public relationships than will distributive, asymmetrical strategies. (p. 38)
 This is supported by conflict theory that has found integrative, argumentative, and collaborative strategies to be positively associated with communication competence (Canary & Spitzberg, 1989) and more likely to produce stable relationships (Canary, Cunningham, & Cody, 1998; Infante, Chandler, & Rudd, 1989; Sillars, 1980).  However, in practice, even the excellent organizations employ both distributive (asymmetrical) and cooperative (symmetrical) communication tactics (J. Grunig, 1992), depending upon the situation.  As mentioned earlier, Dozier et al. (1995), in observing this phenomenon, proposed a situational or "mixed motive" model of communication.  This may help explain how organizations operate along a communication continuum, using a combination of two-way asymmetrical and symmetrical communication strategies to deal with a variety of situations (p. 48).  It may also explain how strategies such as coercive prevention might be used in concert with more collaborative approaches to relationship management.
Public Information as Power
        From a conflict perspective, international alliances and coalitions often resort to verbal (diplomatic) or physical (military) power to influence or dominate adversaries, especially in deadly conflicts.  Use of distributive strategies such as military force, or even the use of threats to coerce (Jentleson, 2000), can have harmful effects on relationships.  This requires further study, in order to better understand the implications for public relations and communication managers in conflict settings.
Influence can be defined as effects on relationships caused by events in interpersonal or interorganizational relations; power as the ability to achieve desired ends through intentional use of influence; and dominance as use of asymmetrical influence over a broad range of activities (Huston, 1983, p. 169). Within this context, information can be used as an element of power on a national and international scale to deter and resolve conflicts (Clinton, 1998; Combelles-Siegel, 1998; Kirby, 2000; National Defense University, 1996; Offley, 1999; Stephens, 1999; Van Dyke, 1998).
Legitimate, rational, competent, and symmetrical uses of public communication and information as a means to influence behavior have many justifiable antecedents in theories of communication, conflict resolution, and power. But many political and military leaders, even scholars (Combelles-Siegel, 1998), have begun to describe information as a "non-lethal weapon" (p. 146) that can be used to dominate adversaries in conflict. Asymmetrical and potentially unethical uses of public information, whether perceived or real, could undermine the credibility of public information and competency of communicators.  It is, therefore, even more important to accurately define credible roles of the public relations practitioner and public information activities in these conflict situations.
In summary, international alliances and coalitions are large, complex, multinational organizations that require strategic management of their public communication programs and excellence in public relations.  These communication programs are used to establish and maintain the relationships that are required to sustain and empower these organizations.  Furthermore, strategic public communication programs are required to deter and resolve conflicts that often arise within and around alliances and coalitions, thereby threatening their existence. Thus, this paper concludes that public relations theory and related communication and conflict theories will provide a useful framework for studying public relations practitioners and communication management in international alliances and coalitions.
Methodology
        Semi-structured, qualitative interviews were conducted with 6 public relations practitioners to gather data about communication, relationship, and conflict management behavior in international alliances and coalitions.  This method was selected as the best means to achieve rich, comprehensive, preliminary data from a variety of participants.  Interview design helped to produce answers that described and allowed interpretation of public relations practitioner roles, worldview of public relations, communication strategies, and effects of various communication strategies on organizational outcomes.  Interpretation of data helped illustrate how communication, conflict, and public relations theories applied to public relations roles and practices in international alliances and coalitions.
Selecting the Participants
        Telephone and in-person interviews, each lasting from 30 to 60 minutes, were conducted, in English, with a sample of 6 current and former public relations practitioners.  These practitioners were located in U.S. metropolitan areas of Washington, DC, and Norfolk, VA; and in Naples, Italy.  All participants had experience serving as public relations officials in international alliances or coalitions.  These participants were mid-career to senior-level U.S. military or NATO civilian public relations practitioners.  Purposive sampling was used to identify participants with NATO public relations experience who were most likely to provide the depth of information needed to answer the questions under study.
Participants were also drawn from different international locations and organizations in order to help ensure variety in public relations worldviews.  These organizations included the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) alliance, NATO-led coalitions such as the peace implementation force (IFOR) and stabilization force (SFOR) in Bosnia-Herzegovina, and the international force deployed to Kosovo (KFOR).  The public relations managers were middle-aged, held senior positions within the headquarters of their respective organizations, and had several years of experience in public relations.  They also held professional status, and they possessed or were working toward advanced educational degrees in a communications field.  The sample, which was comprised of 5 males and 1 female from two different countries, provided diversity in gender and nationality of senior public relations managers in these organizations.
My experience in NATO and my professional knowledge of allied operations also contributed to selection of participants.  I served as chief of public information for NATO's regional headquarters in southern Europe from 1995 to 1998.  I also served as chief of public information for the NATO-led peace implementation mission in Bosnia-Herzegovina from 1995 to 1996.  Thus, participants in this study were professional acquaintances of mine.  My NATO experience allowed me greater access to NATO participants and contributed to a broader understanding of data that was obtained.  I explain possible implications of my relationship with participants in the conclusion section of this paper.
Conducting the Interviews
A general interview protocol was used to conduct interviews.  The protocol consisted of 13 sets of open-ended questions.  This approach allowed flexibility in adapting wording and sequence of questions during each interview, depending upon situation and context (Patton, 1990, p. 280).  Given that these interviews were conducted with different participants, in different geographic locations, through different communication media (e.g. face-to-face interviews and long-distance telephone calls), this protocol offered several advantages (Patton, 1990):
1.      Allowed best use of limited time.
2.      Provided a systematic and comprehensive approach to collecting data without strictly limiting issues to be discussed.
3.      Kept interviews focused but allowed individual expression of thoughts and experiences.
4.      Allowed exploration of other topics that emerged.  (p. 283)
Participants were provided with background on the study through a pre-interview briefing and post-interview debriefing.  All interviews were tape-recorded.  Participants provided their informed consent on tape and in writing prior to each interview.
Analyzing the Data
Interviews were recorded and key passages were transcribed to allow for categorization of data according to characteristics of public relations excellence theory.  Data were first categorized according to four levels of analysis used by J. Grunig (1992) in the studies of public relations excellence: program, department, organization, and results (p. 28).  Data were then further analyzed to determine how specific characteristics of excellence theory described by J. Grunig (1992, p. 28) might apply to the practices described by participants.  These characteristics include:
ù       Strategic management of public relations programs.
ù       A single, integrated public relations department, separate from marketing, led by a senior public relations manager who reports directly to and has influence with senior leadership.
ù       Professional knowledge and training in management and symmetrical models of communication.
ù       Equal opportunity for men and women in public relations.
ù       An organizational worldview that reflects the two-way symmetrical model of communication.
ù       An organic structure and participative organizational culture that relies upon symmetrical internal communication systems.
ù       A turbulent, complex environment with pressure from outside groups that creates a need for public relations.
ù       Public relations results that meet communication objectives; reduce costs associated with regulation, litigation, and other external pressures; and promote high job satisfaction among employees.
Data obtained from participants were also reviewed to identify themes or trends that might suggest ideas for further study of public relations in these organizations.  Finally, responses that were closely associated with questions under study were included in the report of findings to illustrate key points.
Findings
How Principles of the Excellence Theory Applied to Alliances and Coalitions
As expected, public relations practitioners in these international alliances and coalition organizations exhibited many characteristics of excellence within the overall public relations program, within the public relations department, within the organization, and as evidenced by public relations efforts that contributed directly to the organization's communication objectives.  There were, however, exceptions that will be explained.


Program Level
        Managed strategically.  Participants generally described organizations in which the public relations program was managed strategically, in direct support of the strategic goals of the organization.  For instance, one U.S. military officer who served in a coalition public relations management position in Bosnia-Herzegovina described the strategic goals assigned to her by her commanding general:
The objectives were _ number one, to establish and maintain media interest in activities [of the organization] _ number two, to be able to _ use [public relations] to compel compliance from the former warring factions, and then, finally, to address the morale issues of the soldiers.
        In response to questions about her public relations role, she added, "My job was definitely as a manager."  However, she also acknowledged that many of the public relations staff under her immediate supervision carried out little more than technical, media relations functions.
        Another practitioner described duties that required strategic management of personnel and resources, as well as communication programs:
What [the senior PR person does] first and foremost, I think, is to provide direction to this small staff, and also to ensure that we have an adequate flow of current information within the headquarters organization so that the very limited resources that we have are applied as correctly as possible, to make our communication as effective as it can be, given the limited number of people that we have assigned.
Two practitioners deviated from the strategic management model.  They were less experienced in public relations than other participants and they were assigned positions subordinate to the senior public relations manager in their organization. As a result, their primary functions involved technical public information and internal relations duties.
Department Level
Participants generally exhibited most of the characteristics associated with excellent public relations departments.  These characteristics are related to organizational structure, types of communication used, relationships with senior officials, professional development, and an equal opportunity climate.
        Single or integrated public relations department; and separate from marketing. All participants worked in a single or integrated public relations department, separate from marketing and other public communication functions of the organization.  The description provided by a public relations practitioner on the staff of NATO's Supreme Allied Command, Atlantic (SACLANT) in Norfolk, VA was typical of the responses from other participants: "Within the SACLANT headquarters it [the public relations office] is a single, stand-alone office."
        Senior public relations person in managerial role; and direct reporting relationship to senior management.   Each practitioner served in a managerial role, performing management activities described in excellence theory.  These duties included advising and counseling leadership, managing resources, taking responsibility for decisions, and leading subordinate staff members (Dozier et al., 1995).  The following response from one U.S. military officer was typical of participants' duties that went beyond communication management:
A portion of my responsibility and my day does deal with resources and attempting to more adequately, more properly, resource this office ... and a portion of my day is true leadership functions _ ensuring the personal and professional development and well being of the personnel assigned to the office.
All organizations represented in the participant sample had senior public relations practitioners working in a management role.  With two exceptions, all worked directly for the military commander or chief executive of the organization.  The exceptions worked in a position immediately subordinate to the senior public relations manager in the organization - their direct supervisor.
        Some senior public relations practitioners explained, however, that their organization's formal hierarchy was structured in such a way that they reported administratively to a chief of staff or a deputy to the chief executive.  In practice, however, they had an "open door" policy with the chief executive, and it was understood throughout the organization that they enjoyed a close, direct reporting relationship.  The public relations manager in Norfolk, VA explained his office's relationship with senior leaders in the Strategic Allied Command, Atlantic organization:
My chain of command, by the wiring diagram, runs through the chief of staff and the four-star deputy supreme allied commander who is a Royal Navy admiral, to the four-star supreme allied commander.  As a practical matter, [the senior public relations official works] directly for the supreme allied commander, the Army four-star, and [the senior public relations official works] to ensure that the chief of staff and the deputy are kept informed.
Another participant described her relationship with her commanding general and other senior officers in Bosnia-Herzegovina:
The signal that [the commanding general] had sent me was that he was going to be a very involved commander. _ He gave his public affairs officers complete access.  He let me be an advisor, a manager of all the public affairs activity, to include all the command information _ [he] brought me in to everything _ I was never excluded from anything.
Yet another participant, with more than 17 years of civilian experience in the public relations office of a senior NATO headquarters in Naples, Italy, described the relationships between his immediate supervisors (senior U.S. military public affairs officers) and their military commanders as close, but dynamic.  Of interest is the situational nature of these relationships, which seem to vary according to personalities, management styles, and "chemistry" of the individuals who rotated through those positions every two to three years.  As described by this participant:
He had direct access to the commander, with requirements for coordination with intermediate staff, depending let me say on the personalities of the intermediate staff.  We went from full access, to good access, to very good access _ it's not constant _ it depends on personalities: personalities of the commanders and the chief public information officers.
Potential for excellence in public relations. Potential for excellent public relations in these organizations was defined by J. Grunig (1992) as knowledge of symmetrical communication and managerial roles, academic training in public relations, and professionalism in the public relations field. This potential was generally reflected in the responses of several participants.
All participants reflected knowledge of managerial roles, supported by the fact all of the participants were either active duty or retired military officers, with extensive training in leadership and management.  All had either advanced educational degrees in a communication or public relations field, formal training at institutions such as the U.S. Defense Information School, or professional status gained through specialization in the public relations field.
Knowledge of symmetrical communication among participants displayed the weakest potential for excellence in public relations.  While most responses reflected knowledge and proficiency in public information and two-way asymmetrical approaches to communication, few participants expressed formal knowledge or expertise in two-way symmetrical communication models, in a theoretical sense.
Professionalism below the senior or deputy public relations managers was also weak.  Only U.S., Canadian, and a small number of European countries maintain a corps of trained, military public relations professionals needed to fill alliance and coalition posts.  One participant, a retired U.S. military officer, observed:
This was a huge handicap, to be moving into, really, uncharted waters; to be having to deal with an increasing tempo of media interest in what we were doing; and increasing expectations among our leadership as to what we could do; when we really didn't have the personnel with the qualifications to carry on a sound program.
Equal opportunity.  Despite the limited sample, there was evidence from data collected that alliances and coalitions exhibit some measure of equal opportunity for men and women in public relations.  One of the 6 participants, a female U.S. military officer, served in a senior public relations position with NATO-led peace implementation forces in Bosnia-Herzegovina.  The multinational nature of these organizations also ensured high levels of diversity.
Two-way symmetrical model.  Just as participants reflected weak, formal knowledge of symmetrical communication, few indicated they used the types of two-way symmetrical communications described in excellence theory.  Two of the most senior participants described roles that involved some aspects of the two-way symmetrical approach to communications.  But the majority described practices that were more indicative of two-way asymmetrical or public information models of communication.
One participant, a U.S. military officer, served at a NATO coalition subordinate headquarters in Zagreb, Croatia and at the main headquarters in Sarajevo, Bosnia-Herzegovina.  He described how public relations management roles varied according to different levels of organization:
It seemed to me _ at the levels I was involved in, in Zagreb, it was predominantly a press information model.  There was some management, but it was mostly technician related, in that we set up press conferences. ... We also did lots of press releases, interviews, hosted media, those types of things that tend to be technician oriented. _ There wasn't as much focus on management, I think for a number of reasons. One, it was a one deep operation. _ When I was in Sarajevo _ I think it was more managerial.
The Strategic Allied Command, Atlantic official described NATO communication activities that were suggestive of two-way symmetric communication with strategic publics.  Upon further questioning, however, it appeared that the purpose of gathering information from these publics was designed more to improve the targeting of public information provided by the organization than to address the true needs of their publics:  "Well, you have to address their needs in order to communicate successfully with them.  If you're providing information to a group that they in turn don't see any use for you'll be highly unsuccessful in adequately communicating with them."  If this interpretation is accurate, then this communication approach falls short of the two-way symmetric communication model described in theory.  This would be consistent with J. Grunig's (1992) observation that "authoritarian dominant" (p. 320) coalitions inhibit use of two-way symmetrical communication.
Furthermore, the response of a U.S. officer with experience in Bosnia-Herzegovina, reported earlier in this paper, described coercive communications that were designed "to compel compliance from the former warring factions."  These distributive forms of communication are less likely to achieve excellence in public relations, in theory, than more collaborative, two-way symmetrical communication (J. Grunig, 1992).  However, the hostile, post-war environment surrounding this particular coalition may have influenced the selection of this particular communication strategy.
Organizational Level
Responses from participants provided a rich mix of data on worldview, power in the dominant coalition, and organizational culture, structure, and environment.  Data reflected a close association with characteristics of excellence theory that relate to worldview, power in the dominant coalition, organizational structure, and turbulence of the environment.  However, there were weaker associations with the organizational cultures and internal communication approaches required for excellence.
Worldview of public relations as two-way symmetrical.  Public relations practitioners from the United States described a worldview that reflected various models, from two-way symmetrical to public information.  Of interest, one participant, an Italian citizen, described a NATO coalition that simultaneously held a variety of worldviews.  The multinational nature of membership in the coalition (36 nations), and political pressures of a NATO alliance that operates on the principle of consensus, apparently permitted various worldviews to operate together.  For instance, the senior political and military headquarters organizations of the NATO alliance seemed to reflect either a two-way symmetrical or asymmetrical approach to public relations - perhaps influenced by the Western leaders who held the chief executive positions, and the largely political nature of the organizational units at the headquarters level.
In contrast, worldviews within some subordinate military commands in the field suggested a public information or, further down the organization's hierarchical chain, even a press agent approach to communication.  Again, selection of communication models seemed to be associated with the nationality of the organizational unit's military leaders (including many from former Soviet bloc countries, the Middle East, and Asia), and the more military nature of the field units.  Out of interest in maintaining unity of the alliance or coalition, however, it seems NATO has elected to allow these various worldviews to co-exist as long as they conform to the alliance's basic political guidelines.  One participant with extensive NATO experience noted:
There have been cases where there has been no harmony.  The approach has not been the same throughout coalition activities, even vertically, at various levels of command.  So, strangely, we have had somehow different, slightly different approaches, in planning for public information_.  But also horizontally, you still have different national approaches _ in environments which are dominated, quote-unquote, in a sense that they are in a national framework _ you see the approach taken by that nation influencing the overall approach taken by the organization at that level.
        Public relations director has power in or with the dominant coalition.  In terms of public relations membership within the dominant coalition, all participants indicated they had some measure of participation or power in influencing decisions of the senior leadership. This participant's response was indicative of a high level of participation and influence in the dominant coalition:
I felt like I always had a voice, as though it was respected.  We did not always agree.  But I think I had enough successes early on that I earned his trust and [another general's trust]_. I think I had a lot of credibility.  And I really have to go back to the support I had from [a colonel] and [commanding general] to make me a hundred percent a part of the team.  It made doing my job that much easier.
Organic rather than mechanical organizational structure.  Descriptions of the participants' organizations also implied that they were of a mixed mechanical/organic structure, defined in theory as "large in scale, high in complexity" (L. Grunig, 1992, p. 471).  As such, J. Grunig (1992) maintained that public relations practitioners in these organizations "enjoy the greatest autonomy, support, and value by top management" (p. 471).  This was supported by responses by several participants, including a U.S. military officer:
Well, I'd say that we have a very high degree of shared understanding for the importance of [public relations] and the prioritization of our activities within the military headquarters, here.  Going to the next level, above, which is the political level _ he is exceedingly _ adaptable, and accessible, and supportive leader _ he recognizes the importance of  _ communicating with important audiences, publics, and individuals.
        Turbulent, complex environment.  The environment described by all participants easily fit J. Grunig's (1992) description of a "turbulent, complex environment with activists groups" (p. 28).  Without exception, all practitioners described organizations that operated in a highly charged political-military environment.  Their parent organizations were prone to many pressures from internal political issues and external threats that including military force, terrorism, and activism.  One participant, who led NATO public relations activities in southern Europe during the alliance's first combat operations, described the environment this way:
The environment was changing rapidly as I arrived _. Where NATO had only just in the previous months committed a force of ships to operate an embargo to observe ships going into the Adriatic _ to be able to report to the United Nations when ships were violating the embargo of trade and weapons going to the former Yugoslavia.  The [command] prior to that time had really been almost a country club.
Participative rather than authoritarian organizational culture.  Participants described organizations that were highly political and military in structure.  As such, these organizations were found to be largely authoritarian in culture, with vertical, hierarchical lines of responsibility and communication.  One military officer described a culture that appeared structured, and even constrained, by the travel schedule of the chief executive of the organization:
Well, the leader _ has a very _ busy schedule that includes a very large amount of travel - primarily travel to Europe, but also travel to Washington and other locations.  Given that he's probably out of the building 60 percent of the time, it makes his in-the-office time very structured _ by necessity, he has to have a very structured schedule in order to meet the pressing _ the most pressing _ needs of his office.
This structured organizational culture, while efficient, seemed less likely to produce desired communication results than the participative culture described in excellence theory.
        Symmetrical system of internal communication.  Due to a weakness in the questionnaire design, respondents were afforded little opportunity to describe specific traits of internal communication systems.  Therefore, this characteristic, which can be a useful indicator of public relations excellence, was not observed to a significant extent.
Effects of Excellent Public Relations
Data from responses related to effects of public relations programs yielded inconclusive information on effects of excellent public relations within alliances and coalitions.
        Programs meet communication objectives.  Most participants indicated their public relations programs generally met communication objectives and contributed to the overall goals of the organization.  One participant responded, "Well, I know that they [public relations programs] absolutely influence the organization because events are structured and generally considered for scheduling and execution in a way that allows is to properly report on them either through news media being there or through our generation of public release materials."  However, few participants provided any substantive comment to explain how their programs influenced the accomplishment of overall organizational goals.
        Job satisfaction among employees.  In terms of job satisfaction among employees, only two participants provided substantive comment.  One military participant, based in the United States, described NATO headquarters, in general, as "a very happy place."  With regard to morale in the public relations department, he reported:
I'd say for the vast majority of individuals it's exceedingly high.  The work _ that we do here is recognized and appreciated.  And we do get very real-term, real-time feedback and input from both leaders and peers within the organization, here.  People are genuinely appreciative of the work that's done here, especially when they consider the very limited resources _ that we have.
Another NATO public relations official, based in Europe, described how the tempo of operations and degree to which public relations employees are allowed to contribute to the overall mission could affect morale within the public relations department:
When people are engaged and they feel they are contributing to the overall effort, and they are in the picture, they work hard, they are right on the mark, they anticipate problems and they are very active.  When, instead, people perceive that they are put behind, they are not in the picture, the organization is not counting that much on them, unfortunately, that further reduces the contribution they can give.  Morale goes down particularly if _ somebody perceives that maybe the organization is not doing it the best way or it's not learning enough from past experience, then it's difficult to keep the good spirit _ you see that things could be done better _ so you do it, but without the enthusiasm which would maybe guarantee better results.
Reduces cost of regulation, pressure, and litigation.  Participants also provided few details about how their programs reduced the cost of regulation, litigation, and other outside pressures on their organization.  However, there is ample evidence in literature outside this study that indicate NATO's public relations programs can reduce cost by helping to resolve conflict (Combelles-Siegel, 1998).
        Questionnaire design may have contributed to the lack of data in the latter categories.  Questions designed to elicit responses in these areas of public relations effects were placed at the end of the questionnaires, and may have been glossed over as the interviews arrived at their conclusion.  Questions may have also lacked sufficient specificity to generate the type of data required for thorough study.
Conclusions
Findings suggested that public relations practitioners play an important role in international alliances and coalitions, especially in settings that involved conflict resolution. Furthermore, public relations roles and practices in these organizations were closely associated with most characteristics of the excellence theory.  Public relations programs in these organizations, as the excellence theory described, were managed strategically.  From a departmental perspective, public relations programs were organized as a single and separate function, managed by a senior public relations practitioner who reports directly to the dominant coalition, and representative of potential for excellence, equal opportunity, and diversity among its work force.  From an organizational perspective, public relations demonstrated power within the dominant coalition, operated in a turbulent environment, and was part of a mixed mechanical/organic structure.  Finally, morale among public relations employees appeared high; especially in situations where the public relations department met communication objectives and helped the organization meet its strategic goals.
However, a few organizational characteristics were not consistent with excellence in public relations programs.  These characteristics might prevent alliances and coalitions from achieving the highest levels of excellence public relations, but even these exceptions can be explained by the excellence theory.
First, most NATO organizations were found to use public information and two-way asymmetric models as their primary means to communicate with strategic publics.  These approaches have been deemed less effective, in theory, than two-way symmetrical approaches in achieving excellence.  However, evidence was found to support the theoretical notion that structure and authoritarian nature of these political-military organizations interfered with selection of two-way symmetrical communication approaches.  This supports previous research that has found "an authoritarian dominant coalition sees the [two-way symmetrical] approach as a threat to its power" (J. Grunig, 1992, p. 320).  Also, data implied that NATO at times adopted more of a mixed-motive or situational model of communication, especially in conflict situations.  This model has been described in literature as more representative of how alliances and coalitions might alternate between strategic choices in communication strategies
(Dozier et al., 1995).
Second, a two-way symmetrical worldview of public relations was not reported consistently.  However, multiple public relations worldviews, including two-way symmetrical, appeared to be operating together, effectively, throughout various levels and units of the NATO organization.  Although not supported in theory, NATO seems to have effectively adapted a mixed-worldview approach to their highly specialized operations. This may represent a difference between normative theory described by J. Grunig (1992) and positive theories being tested and developed by case studies (J. Grunig, 1992; Dozier et al., 1995).  Furthermore, this may suggest applications for a global perspective.
Limitations
This study was limited primarily by the small sample size.  However, this sample size was selected based on a reasonable assumption that it was the minimum number needed to provide adequate coverage of the phenomena being studied (Patton, 1990, p. 186).  The size was also considered sufficient for the collection of baseline data that was intended for this exploratory study.  The sample size could be increased and additional interviews conducted for the purpose of further study.
Validity of these data was also subject to participants' interpretation of questions and to the interviewer's interpretation of responses. The semi-structured interview design was, by its qualitative nature, subjective.  Therefore, results are not generalizable.  However, the purpose of this study was to collect deep, natural data from NATO insiders.  Data from this study lead to a richer understanding of public relations and communication management in alliances and coalitions and will support future research.  This was the best approach for an exploratory study designed to study dynamic communication phenomena in a single organization.
Finally, my own biases, as a retired U.S. Navy public affairs officer and former NATO chief of public information, could have influenced findings and conclusions. However, professional knowledge gained from these experiences assisted with participant observation and data analysis.  Furthermore, the scientific design of the protocol and strict adherence to theoretical principles and literature in the analysis of data should limit the effect of these biases.
The limited scope of this study, therefore, prevented sweeping conclusions about roles and activities of public relations managers in international political-military alliances.  Nor could any general assumptions be made about how principles of the excellence theory might apply to public relations practices within a broad range of alliances and coalitions.
Suggestions for Future Study
Despite the limitations of this study, data collected for this paper suggested that there is a rich environment for future study of public relations in political-military alliances and coalitions.  Their complicated structure, responsibilities in regional conflict, and international setting offer great potential for qualitative and quantitative research in public relations excellence, communication and relationship management, and roles of public relations practitioners in international conflicts.
Data that revealed use of coercive strategies, or even a dual concern approach to communicating in conflict situations (J. Grunig & Huang, 2000; Pruitt & Carnevale, 1993), raises interesting implications for public relations practitioners.  Public relations excellence models, including those related to conflict management, rely on symmetrical communication (J. Grunig, 1992).  In both conflict and public relations theory, integrative, argumentative, collaborative, and symmetrical communication approaches are most effective in negotiation strategies (Canary & Spitzberg, 1989; J. Grunig & Huang, 2000).  Yet, from a political perspective, the coercive, distributive approaches advocated and taken by diplomats, political leaders (Jentleson, 2000), and now even public relations managers within NATO are seen as useful and effective means to resolve conflict in certain situations.  Further study is required to understand better how alliances select communication strategies, and how these c
hoices involve public relations programs.  For instance, how do coercive diplomatic messages (e.g. threatening communications) affect relationships, as well as the credibility and perceived competence of public relations managers, in and around these organizations?  Moreover, what long-term, ethical implications does the integration of coercive communications and collaborative communications have for the public relations profession, in general?
There is also a need to understand more clearly the concept of worldview in multinational organizations, and how a mixed-worldview approach might influence the quality of public relations programs in international alliances and coalitions.
Finally, further study of alliances and coalitions, to include how concepts of mixed-motive communication and mixed-worldviews apply, will contribute to a better understanding of how principles of public relations excellence apply to international organizations, thus extending public relations theory beyond a Western view and contributing to a global theory of public relations.
 References
Canary, D. J., Cunningham, E. M., & Cody, M. J. (1988). Goal types, gender, and locus of control in managing interpersonal conflict. Communication Research, 15, 426-446.
Canary, D. J., & Spitzberg, B. H. (1989). A model of the perceived competence of conflict strategies. Human Communication Research, 15, 630-649.
Chalmer, L. R., & Pierce, J. W. (Eds.). (1998). NATO 1997: Year of change. Washington, DC: National University Press.
Clinton, W. J. (1998). A national security strategy for a new century. Washington, DC: The White House.
Combelles-Siegel, P. (1998). Target Bosnia: Integrating information activities in peace operations. Washington, DC: National Defense University Press.
Coombs, W. T. (2000). Crisis management: Advantages of a relational perspective. In J. A. Ledingham and S. D. Bruning (Eds.), Public relations as relationship management (pp. 73-93). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Cutlip, S. M., Center, A. H., & Broom, G. M. (Eds.).  (1985). Effective public relations (6th ed.).  Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
Daft, R. L. (2000). Essentials of organization theory and design (2nd ed.). Cincinnati, OH: South-Western College Publishing.
Deutsch, M. (1973). The resolution of conflict: Constructive and destructive processes. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
Dozier, D. M., Grunig, L.A., & Grunig, J. E. (1995). Manager's guide to excellence in public relations and communication management.  Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Drake, L. E. (1993). Models of mediator competence and their impact on negotiation. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the Central States Communication Association, Lexington, KY.
Ehling, W. P. (1992). Estimating the value of public relations and communication to an organization. In J. E. Grunig (Ed.), Excellence in public relations and communication management (pp. 617-638). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Ferguson, M. A. (1984, August). Building theory in public relations: Interorganizational relationships. Paper presented to the Association for Education in Journalism and Mass Communication, Gainesville, FL.
Grunig, J. E. (Ed.). (1992).  Excellence in public relations and communication management. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Grunig, J. E. (in press). Constructing public relations theory and practice.  In B. Dervin, & S. Chafee (Eds.), Festschrift to honor Richard F. Carter.
Grunig, J. E., & Grunig, L. A. (1992). Models of public relations and communications. In J. E. Grunig (Ed.), Excellence in public relations and communication management (pp. 285-325). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Grunig, J. E., & Huang, Y. (2000). From organizational effectiveness to relationship indicators: Antecedents of relationships, public relations strategies, and relationship outcomes. In J. A. Ledingham & S. D. Bruning (Eds.), Public relations as relationship management (pp. 23-53). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Grunig, J. E., & Hunt, T. (1984). Managing public relations. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston.
Grunig, J. E., & Repper, F. C. (1992). Strategic management, publics, and issues. In J. E. Grunig (Ed.), Excellence in public relations and communication management (pp. 117-157). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Grunig, L. A. (1992).  How public relations/communication departments should adapt to the structure and environment of an organization _ and what they actually do. In J. E. Grunig (Ed.), Excellence in public relations and communication management (pp. 467-481). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Grunig, L. A., Grunig, J. E., & Ehling, W. P. (1992). What is an effective organization? In J. E. Grunig (Ed.), Excellence in public relations and communication management (pp. 65-90). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Huston, T. L. (1983). Power. In H. H. Kelley et al. (Eds.), Close relationships (pp. 169-219). New York: W. H. Freeman.
Infante, D. A., Chandler, T.A., & Rudd, J. E. (1989). Test of argumentative skill deficiency model of interspousal violence. Communication Monographs, 56, 163-177.
Jentleson, B. W. (2000).  Coercive prevention: Normative, political, and policy dilemmas (Peaceworks No. 35). Washington, DC: U.S. Institute of Peace.
Kirby, J. F. (2000). Helping shape today's battlefield: Public affairs as an operational function. Unpublished manuscript, Naval War College, Newport, RI.
Ledingham, J. A., & Bruning, S. D. (Eds.). (2000). Public relations as relationship management. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
National Defense University, (1996). Public diplomacy. In Strategic assessment 1996: Elements of U.S. power [On-line]. Available: http://www.ndu.edu/inss/sa96/ sa96cont.html.
Newell, S. E., & Stutman, R. K. (1989). Negotiating confrontation: The problematic nature of initiation and response. Research on Language and Social Interaction, 23, 139-162.
North Atlantic Treaty Organization, (1998).  NATO handbook: 50th Anniversary edition. Brussels, Belgium: NATO Office of Information and Press.
Offley, E. (1999). The military-media relationship in the digital age. In E. L. Bateman, III (Ed.), Digital war: A view from the front lines (pp. 257-291). Novato, CA: Presidio Press.
Patton, M. Q. (1990).  Qualitative evaluation and research methods. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
Pien, M. J. (1994). The use of coalitions in the practice of strategic public relations. Unpublished master's thesis, University of Maryland, College Park.
Pruitt, D. G., & Carnevale, P. J. (1993). Negotiation in social conflict. Pacific Grove, CA: Brooks/Cole.
Roloff, M. E. (1987). Communication and conflict. In C. R. Berger & S. H. Chafee (Eds.), Handbook of communication science (pp. 484-534). Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
Sillars, A. L. (1980). Attributions and communication in roommate conflicts. Communication Monographs, 47, 180-200.
Spicer, C. (1997). Organizational public relations: A political perspective. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Stephens, C. L. (1999). The revolution in media affairs: Reinventing U.S. strategic communications in the era of Slobodan Milosevic. Unpublished manuscript, National Defense University, Washington, DC.
Vercic, D., & Grunig, J. (2000).  The origins of public relations theory in economics and strategic management.  In D. Moss, D. Vercic, & G. Warnaby (Eds.), Perspectives on public relations research (pp. 9-58). London: Routledge.
Van Dyke, M. A. (1997, May). NATO military public information operations: IFOR lessons learned. Paper presented to Ministry of Defense, Bucharest, Romania.
van Riel, C. B. M. (1995). Principles of corporate communication. New York: Prentice-Hall.