Category: theory

Book Connects Theory to Strategic Practice for Public Relations Professionals and Students

~ penningink ~ Leave a comment

The result of more than a year of work, my new book “Public Relations Theory in Practice: Strategic Applications for Professionals” will be published June 2, 2025. It is available now for pre-order at Amazon (in both paperback or Kindle versions) or the Business Expert Press publisher’s website.

I had worked as a public relations professional before transitioning into a career as a full-time professor. I learned quickly that theory and practice are not disconnected as some assume, but are realistically connected. In my 25 years as an academic I worked to connect academic concepts with everyday practice both in class and when speaking to professionals.

I grew weary over time of the expression “that sounds good in theory, but here in the REAL world….” The fact is, professionals’ experiences are the subject of research, which in turn develops theory. If practice informs theory, it only makes sense that theory would inform practice.

The key benefit to a robust understanding of theory can be summed up in one word: strategy. Public relations professionals speak often of the need to be strategic, a common part of a PR campaign plan is the articulation of strategy. Well, theory is fuel for strategy.

As I note in the book’s introduction, today’s public relations professionals need to account to management and clients for whether they have caused stakeholders to make meaningful changes in their attitudes and behaviors that match organizational objectives. This requires strategy based on established theory that is well-reasoned and tested, not just informed guesses and clever tactics based on individual perspective.

The book is divided into six parts, beginning with a simple explanation of what theories really are, how they are derived, different types of theories, and why they are practical and not mere abstractions. The following parts explain communication theory generally (interpersonal, small group, and organizational), mass media, persuasion, ethics, and theories specific to public relations practice. Each part ends with a series of summative strategic statements that professionals can apply to daily practice.

In keeping with the theme of connecting academics to professional practice, I am grateful to have received testimonials from a respected academic and professional:

“In Public Relations Theory in Practice, Penning does an excellent job providing an overview of the major theories applicable to public relations in easy-to-understand language I am impressed with the breadth of theories that are addressed. The book would be a valuable resource for an undergraduate theory course or as a resource for graduate students when they are seeking theories for a specific study. It would also be a good resource for practitioners preparing for the accreditation exam (APR).”

Marlene S. Neill, PhD,APR, Fellow PRSA 

Professor & Graduate Program Director

Senior Research Fellow, Arthur W. Page Center

Baylor University Department of Journalism, Public Relations & New Media

Public Relations Theory in Practice bridges the gap between academic theory and real-world application, equipping professionals with the knowledge to move beyond instinct and guesswork. Penning delves into communication, media, and persuasion and ethical theories, demonstrating how they can be strategically applied to every aspect of public relations. From understanding audiences to evaluating results, you’ll learn to craft campaigns with a theoretical foundation, ensuring effectiveness and achieving organizational goals. This book is a valuable source of insight and guidance for communicators at all levels.”

Eliot Mizrachi, VP, Strategy and Content, Arthur W. Page Society

Whether you are a public relations professional, student or professor, I hope you’ll find the book interesting and useful.

The Peripheral Presidential Campaign

~ penningink ~ Leave a comment

As an academic, I tend to look at events and news with a mind on theory. Reading news about the current presidential campaign, it occurred to me that I am witnessing an example of the Elaboration Likelihood Model (ELM) in the campaign of Kamala Harris.

It could be called the peripheral presidential campaign because of how it is executed and how people are responding to it.

Simply, ELM says that people process information through two cognitive routes. The central route is used when people are paying close attention or are highly “involved”. In this state they are seeking information and they want it in quantity and detailed specificity.

It is similar to peripheral vision, in which one sees things off to the side and not by looking directly at it. 

The other route is used when people have low involvement, meaning they don’t see the topic at hand as personally relevant or they are otherwise not motivated to do the focused thinking and information processing. This is called the peripheral route. 

When some describe the Harris campaign as appealing to “low-information voters,” meaning voters who do not seek detailed information, I think of low involvement voters and those who are considering the campaign via a peripheral route. 

While all presidential campaigns to a degree appeal to voters with platitudes and general themes for peripheral consideration, the Harris campaign is unique in this regard for several reasons:

  • She replaced her party’s candidate late in the campaign and did not receive an y primary votes;
  • Since being named the candidate more than two months ago she has not held a press conference;
  • She has done only three interviews, all of them brief and with reporters clearly partial to her and yet she offered little substance.
  • Her campaign website for a long time had only donation appeals and little on policy. The recently added “issues” tab discusses policies but in ways that stress contrast (see below) over substance and details. As many point out, she does not answer why her future goals if elected have not been addressed currently while vice president.

Even CNN—not a conservative network—has reported that many undecided voters actually want more details about policies and positions from a campaign promoting “vibes.” Others have criticized the media at large of journalistic malpractice for enabling this peripheral campaign and not insisting on more and detailed responses. Even more troubling than allowing vagueness is not fact-checking and correcting untruths. But to peripheral voters, even truth may not matter. Oxford dictionaries made the adjective “post-truth” the word of the year in 2016. It defines it as “related to or denoting circumstances in which objective facts are less influential in shaping public opinion than appeals to emotion or personal belief.” That describes peripheral processing perfectly. 

While many would say that Harris outperformed Trump in their single debate, the reality is that her debate points were also largely peripheral. Partisans cheered both debaters but the undecided voters who tuned in wanted more.

Vibes could also be called what scholars label peripheral cues, which are what people consider when they are not thinking critically or processing information in the central route. There are seven identified peripheral cues that can be persuasive to people short of detailed information and substantive argument:

  • authority—people are persuaded because of someone’s position or title;
  • commitment—people are persuaded by their perception of a communicator’s commitment to a cause;
  • contrast—people are persuaded when someone sets up uneven points of comparison, i.,e. It’s either this or that or at least it’s not that;
  • liking—people are persuaded by a stressed affinity of a person toward them;
  • reciprocity—people are persuaded by a quid pro quo promise, i.e. if you do this I’ll do that
  • scarcity—people are persuaded by a fear of missing out, a false sense of urgency;
  • social proof—people are persuaded by the perception that others like themselves think or do something.

Again, any politician uses some or all of these peripheral cues when seeking votes. But those messages are usually part of broader appeals that do included specifics. For example, Trump has done more than 50 interviews since Harris became his opponent, and in these and other campaign events he talks about specific policies and results of his past term and details of his plan for another. Harris, meanwhile, as the CNN article and others attest, has offered only messaging that has peripheral impact.

As examples, she refers to her commitment to causes without policy specifics, and when questioned about how her commitment has changed (ion things from fracking to the border), she insists in vague terms that her values are the same. She certainly contrasts herself to her opponent, Donald Trump, albeit not always truthfully, in the hopes of earning votes not on who she is but who she is not. And she strongly stresses liking, with words such as “joy” being an emotive theme devoid of rational clarity.

One thing the theory does say about the peripheral route—it can persuade but only in the short-term. Less than two months from election day, that may be enough and actually the plan of the Harris campaign. After that, anything from rising fuel prices to an unanticipated policy to the breakout of war could make things relevant enough for peripheral voters to start processing things centrally. But at that point no amount of specific information can lead to them adapting their behavior—election day will be over.

PR at the intersection of corporate and environmental communications

~ penningink ~ Leave a comment

Consumers Energy is the public utility that provides electricity to my home. But rather than merely monitor my kilowatt hours and send me a bill, Consumers goes above and beyond in its communication.

They have shown this in two power outages in as many months in my small neighborhood in west Michigan. They have prompt text alerts and an up-to-date app confirming they know about the outage, showing the extent of the outage with numbers and maps, updating when crews are on site and have determined the cause, and giving an estimate of time for power restoration, and confirming when power is restored. It gives new meaning to consumer “empowerment.”

Consumers is also a unique organization. It is in a sense a corporation, but it is one that is regulated, in the case of Michigan by the Public Service Commission. So Consumers does what could be seen as typical corporate communication, another name for public relations, to maintain communications with all of its stakeholders. This can often seem weighted toward customer relations and sales.

But a recent communication I received from them included an example of the intersection between traditional communication and environmental communication. Environmental communication is broadly defined as formal communication that has the environment as a primary subject. There is even an academic journal named Environmental Communication. 

What Consumers sent me was a link to an entire section on their website about electronic vehicles (EVs). This makes intuitive sense, since anyone like myself who buys an EV is going to be wondering about how to charge the vehicle, whether at home or out on the road. Installing EV chargesr at homes is one of the products and services Consumers offers. The Consumers web page explains this at length. 

It would make sense they do this in business terms. It is a new market opportunity, a product extension, a B-B integration and more. But that is all corporate communication. Consumers gets into environmental communication as well with a tab called “myths and FAQs” that addresses the hesitance a typical consumer may have about buying and charging an EV. They first have to answer questions about the environmental need for EVs, the environmental benefit of EVs, and address concerns about negative environmental impact of EVs, before they can start serving consumers individually and society at large—via power grid supply—when the purchase of EVs hits critical mass.

As an academic, this brings to mind a bunch of theories that are so practical here. Consumers is applying concepts from these theories, whether they do so consciously or not:

  • Diffusion of Innovation—which means communication needs to address a series of cognitive and experiential stages the public goes through collectively and individually before adopting new ideas. Consumers is addressing the “relative advantage” and “compatibility” stages of this theory directly;
  • Attribution Theory—in which people consider not just what a company says but why they think they are saying it when deciding whether to attend to or believe a message. Consumers goes beyond simply offering product or service information to sell something to show they are considering the total social benefit to the environment;
  • Cognitive Dissonance—in which people avoid ‘cognitive pain’ by simply discounting information or claims that contradict their predisposition or current beliefs; Consumers is clearly addressing current beliefs and concerns of people and trying to move them to a new mindset without discounting their current onel.

I think Consumers did a good job overall. But there are still realities that people experience that negate the arguments Consumers makes. This is especially true in Michigan. 

For example, one argument could be that an EV may not be a household’s only vehicle. If I want to go from where I live in western Michigan up to Mackinac City, I would not be confident I have the range and can find a charging station in northern Michigan. Encouraging one EV on a household of more than one car would be a transition and easier to persuade than a complete change to all EV vehicles. 

I also have read legitimate reports about power reduction in colder climates, as well as batteries exploding. There are concerns about raw materials coming from third-world countries where workers are exploited, and that these raw materials can not be safely disposed of. Here is where the Elaboration Likelihood Model applies—Consumers can’t just make claims to the contrary, it needs to offer some detailed, factual, respectable studies to back up the claims. When people are “highly involved” according to ELM, they are paying significant attention and need more than a reliable source, they need the facts. This is especially true because EVs are really a subset of the much larger climate change social issue.

Most importantly, if we are charged more in the summer for air conditioning in peak hours, what will our rates and even capacity be when everyone is in an EV and charging at night? Consumers makes assurances, but people have heard and experienced differently about the electric grid capacity. 

Maybe some of these additional arguments and facts will come. But for now overall Consumers Energy offers a good example of how corporate and environmental communication co-exist.

New crisis communication book offers theoretical foundation

~ penningink ~ Leave a comment

There are a lot of books on the market about crisis communication. As a public relations professor, I read a lot of them and I must say I am often disappointed.

Many crisis communication books dwell on handling the news media and don’t have a deeper perspective. Others are written by seasoned professionals and full of interesting anecdotes and even wise takeaways, but they lack a broader application beyond lessons learned from one professional’s context.

So I was happy to read “Breaking Bad News: 12 Essential Crisis Communication Tools” by Jeff Hahn, published in 2020.

The book has some examples of major crises faced by well-known brands and small enterprises. Such cases is fundamental. But what I love about the book is the solid roots in academically derived and tested models and theories.

Hahn starts the book by talking about the value of models (he could clarify how a model is distinct from a theory). He then discusses reputation and forming a rapid response team before getting into a sequence of chapters that outline crisis response on a timeline, from the first 15 minutes to what should be done in the 90-120 minutes after a crisis breaks. He ends with a chapter on restoring and earning reputation.

When I teach crisis communication, as with many other subjects, I like to blend theory and practice. So I certainly cover case studies. But I also want students to discuss them through the lens of and by applying relevant theories. Hahn covers a good number of them, including some of my favorites that I review in class. A partial list:

  • Festinger’s Cognitive Dissonance Model
  • Coomb’s Crisis Type Matrix
  • Benoit’s Image Repair Typology
  • Roger’s Diffusion of Innovation Model

Some people disregard theory as too abstract and impractical to be of use, particularly in a time of real crisis. But I always tell my students theory = strategy. This book is another example of that. PR professionals who read this book now and institute some of the wisdom into their own specific crisis communication plans will be well served, and better prepared. Ultimately, their reputations will not only survive but grow (there are some theories about that too).

How to decide if your company should take a ‘stand’–some theoretical guidance

~ penningink ~ Leave a comment

A hot topic among PR professionals is whether or not to counsel their CEOs and others in management if the company should take a stand on current social issues. The trend has been moving in that direction, but some are hesitant to polarize their stakeholder groups or fall into mission drift.

A recent article in the Journal of Public Relations Research (subscription required) offers some guidance and proposes a research-based theoretical model. (Disclosure: I am on the editorial review board for this journal but did not review or participate in this article in any way).

Authors Cheng Hong and Cong Li of California State University Sacramento and University of Miami, respectively, developed a model after conducting a survey of 555 random participants about their intention to support or boycott a company based on their association with a social issue. The academic term for what they studied is Corporate Social Advocacy (CSA). They define this as

“a public relations initiative in which a company and/or its CEO expresses an opinion/stance on a sociopolitical issue that is unrelated to its business considerations.”

The key for me in this definition is “unrelated to its business considerations.” It would be obvious if a food company like Kellogg takes a stand on nutrition, or Starbucks takes a stand on supporting local coffee farmers, or Dick;’s stops selling guns. But when the social position goes beyond product or service category, that’s when things can get confusing and be cause for alarm.

There will always be some consumers who buy a product or service regardless of the sociopolitical stance a company takes on these unrelated issues. I heard several CCOs say this recently on a podcast. Meanwhile, however, there is increasing evidence that many consumers make purchase decisions in whole or in part based on the company’s posture on everything from gun control to climate change.

To try to cut through this clutter of considerations, Hong and Li developed a model. They admit the model may be limited and need further testing because they focused on one issue–same-sex marriage. But it is a good step toward developing a more robust theory.

The model includes several variables:

  • consumer-company congruence–when people and the organization share similar fundamental characteristics and values;
  • company-cause fit–when an organization takes a stand on something that is reflected in its corporate values and actions;
  • consumer-cause fit–if the consumer finds a cause relevant or important to themselves personally.

The study found that all three variables if at a high level would make a boycott less likely and increase purchase intention and corporate reputation.

The application, therefore, involves key considerations of relevance and authenticity. Taking a stand on a social issue– even if unrelated to product, service or other business considerations–will be a good move among consumers and other stakeholders who are of similar values, if the issue is relevant to the consumer, and if the company is acting authentically and not just issuing statements.