By Professor Paul A. Argenti
Hanover, New hampshire
May 17-19, 2006

Introduction

The Arthur W. Page Society, in conjunction with the Tuck School of Business at Dartmouth, hosted the inaugural Arthur W. Page Society/Tuck School of Business Academic Symposium, a meeting that for the first time brought together academics, communications practitioners and journalists to discuss: the state of the profession, the challenges it faces and new areas of research that continue to push it forward. The two-day symposium, hosted over May 17-19, 2006, in Hanover, NH, by Page member and trustee Professor Paul A. Argenti, also drew Page VPs Peter Debreceny of Allstate and Tom Martin of ITT, as well as trustees James O'Rourke of the University of Notre Dame and Don Wright of the University of South Alabama, and prompted discussions in the following areas*:

• The credibility of the communications industry
• The need for succession to foster and preserve communications' viability and longevity
• Corporate communication's place in higher education
• The role of new technology, measurement and ethics in the profession
• The connotations surrounding the terms "public relations" and "communications"

The symposium aimed to provide a forum to engage in high-level conversations among peers in the communications industry. In his opening address to attendees, Argenti outlined the seven Page principals and defined the meeting's raison d'etre within them. He further established the symposium's purpose as necessary because:

• One like it has never occurred before
• The discipline and the Corporate Communication function itself is under attack
• Gatherings such as this can make a difference

Executive Summary

Tell the truth.
It is a lesson learned early in life, and its importance does not dwindle with age or wisdom, as neither prevents lies nor enables truth; thus, it is aptly - and not surprisingly - the founding principal of the Arthur W. Page Society and the opening line of its brief but declarative credo, which implores PR professionals and corporate communicators to execute their business with the utmost integrity. And yet the crowning organization of the communications industry presides over a community of professionals who have long been stigmatized by some of the most loathsome monikers: spin doctors, flacks, hacks and liars.

Many inside - and outside - the communications industry will agree that, despite its tainted history, the field has undergone an evolution in recent years that any Darwinist communicator would celebrate: the weak, inept and distrustful have largely (though not entirely) been weeded out of the proverbial gene pool, leaving the strong to prosper. Plus, corporations of Procter & Gamble's size and stamina have at long last tipped their hats to their PR function, publicly acknowledging the direct link between PR and sales through the use of sophisticated new measurement tools. But, in spite of the growing mindshare and the ever-accumulating number of seats at the table inhabited by communicators, one question still remains:

What must happen to elevate - or, better yet, establish - the credibility of the communications function once and for all?

The question manifested itself in various ways throughout the symposium:

• As an impetus for changing the way communications is incorporated into higher education curricula
• As an argument for ethical decision-making, because it is a mode of entrée into the dominant coalition
• As a defense against debilitating crises, exemplified by Merck's recall of Vioxx
• As a reason to explore new technology, because constituents have an increasing amount of trust in non-traditional communications vehicles

The following offers a synopsis of the AWPS/Tuck Academic Symposium.

Day 1:
The History and Development of Public Relations Education

The symposium began quite appropriately with the history and development of public relations education, presented by Don Stacks, professor and director of the University of Miami School of Communications Program in Advertising and Public Relations, and Don Wright, professor of communication at the University of South
Alabama's College of Arts and Sciences. Given the conspicuous absence of public relations programs from many institutions - and the awkward blending of the field of study into other disciplines in others - it is surprising to learn that PR made its entrée into academy in 1928, when Edward Bernays taught a course on it at New York University.

The years that have elapsed since would suggest that the number and quality of such programs have increased exponentially, but that is only partially true; in fact, the number of noteworthy programs at major universities could be counted on both hands. Thus, Wright and Stack's presentation raised a series of questions:

• Why is there such a disconnect between practice and education?
• Why isn't education preparing PR students to be leaders in the industry?
• How can PR become a discipline of integrity without continuity and succession?

The former question expressively acknowledges what is perhaps the crux of the challenge in current PR and communications education - that is, according to Wright and Stacks, only a small number of senior-level PR executives and managers studied PR at a university, and that much of PR education is esoteric and out of touch with the bottom-line realities of the modern business world.

Sit among the group of academics present at Tuck and such a statement would be almost irrefutable; their intellect is unparalleled but, even they would agree, the context in which they teach often does not translate to real world practice. Perhaps it is a matter of location, as many programs are entangled with other disciplines (journalism, for example) and thus diluted. But it was unanimously agreed upon that, for the benefit of the students, professors and practitioners alike, communications studies - at least at the graduate level - should have a place among business school curricula.

As for the latter question in Stack's and Wright's presentation, it raised the issue of credibility in a new light, eliciting the biggest response from presenters and attendees and pto larger implications for the communications profession as a whole. After all, what happens when the Argentis and Formans and O'Rourkes of the world depart from their hallowed inner sanctums of learning? The leaders in the field certainly won't operasuch for eternity, thus requiring a new group to step into their place. The problem, though, is that the excellence of the select few degree programs is connected more to an individual than to the university - a challenge that rivals the succession planning in corporate world.

While the questions posed were not for the faint of mind, attendees did offer potential solutions to grow credibility in the communications function from the ground up:

• Imbed PR/communications programs in top schools where the pool of students is inherently stronger

• Require more formal networking procedures between top PR programs and practitioners

Communications Professionals as Ethical Consciences

Credibility may begin with proper practical training, but it also hinges on moral development and ethics - two additional facets of the increasingly complex communications education format. Shannon Bowen, assistant professor specializing in public relations at the University of Maryland's Department of Communications, addressed the subject in her presentation titled "Moral Development, Strategy, and Counsel."

Bowen's research indicates that:
1.) moral development and ethics training are closely interrelated,
2.) there is a dearth of ethics training among communications and public relations professionals, and
3.) those who have had some ethics training are likely to engage in more sophisticated ethical analyses and higher levels of moral reasoning than those who have had none.

While none of these findings may be surprising to those inside the industry, they do reiterate the unintended theme of the symposium: credibility at all levels of the communications function, and how to attain it. Bowen's research found that ethical decision making is a mode of entrée into the dominant coalition for professional communicators because they are in the position to best know the values and potential reactions of publics to organizational policy. In a survey conducted by Bowen, demonstrating credibility and good judgment were mentioned by all respondents who were members of their dominant coalition as being essential to gaining access and eventual membership. Ethics training and moral development, then, must be integrated into communications education to build the foundation for credibility to exist across all levels of the organization.
Shannon Bowen

Case Study in Crisis Management: Merck's Recall of Vioxx
Given the nature of the symposium and its audience, the relationship between education and practice - and credibility's place within each - was central to much of the discussion, but communications execution was also considered in depth. James O'Rourke, professor and director, The Eugene D. Fanning Center, University of Notre Dame, highlighted one of the most talked about crisis communications situations of the past half decade: Merck's recall of Vioxx.

The news that Vioxx may increase the risk for heart attack and stroke in users was released as early as 2000, when the FDA issued a "black box" warning on all Vioxx labels. Therein lies the root of the credibility debate: How could an allegedly credible company that claims to act in the best interest of its consumers not begin crisis management then, when the initial whisperings of an impending crisis began? Merck didn't pull the drug until 2004, an action that was quickly followed by a criminal investigation into its handling of the recall.

Corporate mishandlings like this underscore the industry's adulterous relationship with credibility. But, is it possible for corporations (and, in turn, corporate communications functions) to act in an ethical, credible way? Bowen hinted at the question (as have others at academic conferences past), but no one seems particularly close to an answer. Thus, as suggested by presenters and attendees, perhaps the best plan of attack is to revert back to the first stages of communications practice: training and education. Only then will the communications function have the credibility to warn senior management about organizational/reputation risk.

New Technologies in Corporate Communications
As often as communications executives grapple with issues of crises and credibility, there is no subject less front of mind in the current business landscape than that of new media and technology. Peter Debreceny, VP, Corporate Relations, Allstate, tended to the growing trend with statistics that could either make the corporate communicator cringe or celebrate, depending. According to the Makovsky + Company 2006 State of Corporate Blogging Survey, 81% of surveyed senior executives have some or thorough understanding of blogs; thus, blogs' role in corporate communications is increasingly up for debate through the following questions:

• How can corporate communicators/PR professionals reconcile the loss of power that comes with the blogosphere?
• How should they use blogs in business communications?
• How credible is blog content?

The latter question yields interesting results: 76% of respondents believe blogging as a communications medium for corporations is somewhat, moderately, or greatly credible; 53% believe corporate blogging as a sales or lead generation tool for corporations is somewhat or moderately credible. Thus, corporate communicators and PR professionals have yet another challenge to reconcile in their maturation process: to blog, or not to blog? And, if one blogs (and one should given the surprising amount of trust placed in the medium), how does one do it with integrity and purpose? Clearly, new technology offers more questions than answers.

Measurement, Research and Corporate Identity
Clarke Caywood, associate professor of integrated marketing communications at Northwestern University, turned the discussion to another holy grail within the communications industry: research and measurement. Why, he proposed, don't PR professionals conduct more research? It's an apt interrogation coming from an academic, but it also points to the fact that PR pros are often too tactical and operate under the assumption that research the cost of research is too high - but, as Caywood and case studies suggest, surely the benefits outweigh the costs.

Preceding Caywood's presentation was Frank Ovaitt, president and CEO of the Institute for Public Relations, who inquired about what the role such an organization should play in the industry today. The IPR offers industry research and thought leadership across a range of communications-relate subjects - from measurement and management to diversity and marketing - but such a tool can be leveraged more to the benefit of its ultimate constituent: the communicator himself. Argenti suggested (and others agreed) that the Institute would serve its audience best if it consolidated industry research across all platforms and operated as the ultimate go-to for surveys, studies, white papers, reports and statistics. The conversation spoke indirectly to the research Caywood implored professionals to conduct as well, and it led in to Sue Alessandri's, assistant professor, advertising and public relations, at Syracuse University, presentation.

Alessandri focused on her area of expertise - corporate identity - and described the process corporations and organizations undergo during branding and identity makeovers. Again, research is absolutely essential (and often overlooked), as evidenced by the difficulty Syracuse University experienced when it tried to rebrand its logo and subsequently faced opposition from Michigan State University, which claimed to have already registered the block letter "s" in a number of colors.

All three presentations addressed some facet of research, imploring professionals to:
1.) actually conduct it,
2.) consider how to use research institutes more effectively and
3.) understand how it can affect stakeholders and corporate identity issues.

Day 2:
Corporate Communication's Roll in High Education
The second and final day of the symposium precipitated the most fitting culmination of such an academic event: a contentious debate surrounding the most basic question: Who are we? James Rubin, assistant professor of business administration and areas coordinator of management communication at the University of Virginia's Darden School of Business, kick-started the conversation with his presentation, "A Field By Any Other Name?"

So there it is, the white elephant in the room: Do we practice public relations or corporate communications? And, more important, does it really matter? It does if the field can't gain traction with audiences that constantly question its credibility and misunderstand its purpose. So, then, what is the answer?

In short, judging from the evolution of the discussion, there really isn't one. The term "PR" is all-encompassing of what we do, as some attendees argued, but it is also an anachronism in many circles. Likewise, utter the word "communication" in the business world and behold the looks of confusion, dismay, even loathing. PR is often mistaken for marketing communications; corporate communications is regularly fragmented into various functions across the organization.

So, then, in the same conversation that Craig Carroll (assistant professor, public relations, at the USC's Annenberg School of Journalism) discussed Corporate Reputation Management education at the graduate level; Janis Forman (director, management communication at the Anderson School of Management) discussed using academic partnerships to enfranchise corporate communications; and Trudi Baldwin (director, MS program in Strategic Communications at Columbia University and Jane Praeger (faculty of MS program at Columbia) discussed developing strategic communications education programs for business professionals, the entire room of thinkers pondered who they really are and how, if at all, they can move their industry towards credibility if they can't define themselves at the most basic level.

Conclusion
Perhaps, then, PR (or Corporate Communication, depending on your preference) is an industry currently in its adolescence, moody and inconsistent but not without moments of astonishing poise and brilliance. There are the blemishes - the questions raised more often than they're answered, the name calling that has dwindled but not yet disappeared, the self-consciousness, the occasional identity crisis as it finds itself torn between two cliques. But, as with all things destined for purpose, for success, for seats at the table and glowing bottom-line results, communications will continue to grow into itself with the grace and resolve only fitting of the leaders that propel it forward today.

Members of the Page Society in attendance agreed that the meeting generated value for the profession and should continue in the future.