Elsevier

Public Relations Review

Volume 39, Issue 5, December 2013, Pages 507-513
Public Relations Review

The public relations contribution to IMC: Deriving opportunities from threats and solidifying public relations’ future

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pubrev.2013.09.012Get rights and content

Highlights

  • IMC may be a marketing-dominant concept, but public relations stand to gain from its emphasis of relationships with all stakeholders.

  • Practitioners can contribute to IMC in three areas: advisory, stakeholders and stakes, and relationships.

  • Public relations are a natural leader of IMC for its focus on stakeholder needs and relationships.

  • This paper recommends the term iComm over the marketing-dominant IMC for its holistic focus on communication rather than marketing.

  • Scholars should examine iComm in the areas of internal relations, employee communication, and education.

Abstract

Integrated Marketing Communication (IMC) has been regarded primarily as a marketing concept. However, as an ever more dominant context for communication management, IMC presents opportunities for public relations scholarship's contributions to the discipline, in spite of IMC's recognized threats. This article, which outlines the state of the fields of IMC and public relations literature, proposes the way public relations roles in relationship cultivation and organizational behavior uniquely contribute to IMC, and, at the same time, establish management roles for public relations. This article also addresses three challenges facing public relations research in integration by providing a better definition of IMC, establishing relationship cultivation as a critical point in the theoretical convergence of public relations and IMC, and providing a framework through which to conceptualize communication structures.

Section snippets

IMC a marketing dominant concept

The basis for the limited discussion of IMC in the public relations domain may be that IMC is a marketing concept. The concept of IMC as we know it today developed in the 1990s when marketing values transitioned from a product focus to a customer relationship focus (Luck and Moffatt, 2009, Mihart, 2012). Marketers in the 1990s began to focus on maximizing profit with customers through loyalty programs, leading to investment in direct response marketing mix elements (i.e. promotion, sales, and

The IMC process

As a process, IMC comprises the integration of marketing content across media channels around stakeholder needs for measurable results. Through IMC, messages are strategically developed to create “linkages in a receiver's mind as a result of messages that connect” (Moriarty, 1996, p. 333). These messages include: (a) planned messages about a product or service, (b) messages that emanate from the performance of a product or service, and (c) unplanned messages from an audience about the company,

The integrated mindset

Up until this point, IMC has been defined as a process. However, integration may be more than a process, but a mindset or orientation. Schultz (2007) said the primary difference between IMC and other marketing paradigms is the emphasis on the stakeholder-first outside-in orientation to marketing. IMC is a product of an organization's culture, as integration develops through the internal interactions between marketers, public relations practitioners, and other communicators. The spirit or

Public relations concerns: IMC and the “marketing takeover”

Because of marketing themes in the concept and process of IMC, public relations scholar concerns about marketing domination and hesitation to validate IMC as a paradigm in public relations research may be natural. For example, concerns that IMC may heighten territorial disputes between marketing and public relations have been well-documented (Hallahan, 2007, Hutton, 2010). However, the argument that IMC is a marketing takeover of the public relations domain may be unfounded, particularly

The case for public relations’ contributions to IMC

Ironically, by ignoring IMC, we as public relations scholars have left the door open for marketing to dominate the conversation—up until this point, public relations has been featured as media relations, promotion, and publicity in IMC research (Kerr et al., 2008, Kitchen et al., 2004Lawler and Tourelle, 2002, Stammerjohan et al., 2005). The unique public relations approach to communication management has been overlooked and unrecognized. This relegation of public relations to promotion in IMC

Solidifying public relations’ future in IMC: where we go from here

Up until this point, we as public relations scholars have left the door open to marketing to define and direct the development of IMC, limiting discussion of public relations to promotional roles. In doing so, we have left unfulfilled fruitful research discussions on stakeholder relationships in an integrated structure. It is time to enter the IMC discussion. We can best contribute to the development of IMC in the areas of IMC advisory, stakeholder needs, and the unique public relations

Conclusion

It is time for public relations scholars to enter the IMC debate, and not as opponents to its existence, but as partners in its development. In detailing the landscape of IMC and public relations, this article has sought to provide context for discussion, and initiate public relations-based scholarship in the field of IMC.

References (58)

  • N.M. de Bussy

    Dialogue as a basis for stakeholder engagement: Defining and measuring the core competencies

  • P. De Pelsmacker et al.

    Marketing communications

    (2001)
  • S. Dickinson-Delaporte et al.

    Building corporate reputation with stakeholders: Exploring the role of message ambiguity for social marketers

    European Journal of Marketing

    (2010)
  • T.R. Duncan

    IMC: Using advertising and promotion to build brands

    (2002)
  • T.R. Duncan et al.

    The concept, process, and evolution of integrated marketing communication

  • T.R. Duncan et al.

    Driving brand value: Using integrated marketing to manage stakeholder relationships

    (1997)
  • R.E. Freeman et al.

    Stakeholder theory: The state of the art

    (2010)
  • A. Gronstedt

    Integrating marketing communication and public relations: A stakeholder relations model

  • S.A. Groom

    The next integration: IMC and the field of communication

    Review of Communication

    (2011)
  • J.E. Grunig

    Furnishing the edifice: Ongoing research on public relations as a strategic management function

    Journal of Public Relations Research

    (2006)
  • J.E. Grunig

    After 50 years: The value and values of public relations

  • L.A. Grunig et al.

    Excellent public relations and effective organizations: A study of communication management in three countries

    (2002)
  • J.E. Grunig et al.

    From organizational effectiveness to relationship indicators: Antecedents of relationships, public relations strategies, and relationship outcomes

  • J.E. Grunig et al.

    The effect of relationships on reputation and reputation on relationships: A cognitive, behavioral study

  • C. Gurau

    Integrated online marketing communication: Implementation and management

    Journal of Communication Management

    (2008)
  • K. Hallahan

    Integrated communication: Implications for public relations beyond excellence

  • R.L. Heath

    Management of corporate communication: From interpersonal contacts to external affairs

    (1994)
  • R.L. Heath

    Management through advocacy: Reflection rather than domination

  • J.A. Hendrix

    Public relations cases

    (2004)
  • Cited by (10)

    • Public relations channel “repertoires”: Exploring patterns of channel use in practice

      2019, Public Relations Review
      Citation Excerpt :

      Some public relations scholars have called for the integration of various types of channels in public relations efforts (e.g., Hallahan, 2001), and related perspectives like integrated marketing communications (IMC) suggest combining messaging from public relations, advertising, and marketing (cf. Smith & Knighton, 2018). B.G. Smith (2012), Smith 2013 urged public relations researchers to reconsider their animosity to IMC and “initiate public relations-based scholarship in the field of IMC” (2013, p.512). We argue the public relations literature is in need of a theory-driven basis for studying patterns of channels used by organizations to communicate with publics.

    • Functional silos, integration & encroachment in internal communication

      2017, Public Relations Review
      Citation Excerpt :

      However, several scholars (Smith, Drumwright, & Gentile, 2010) have questioned how much priority external communication such as marketing executives give to stakeholders beyond customers such as employees, and they referred to this tendency as the “new marketing myopia” (p. 2). Furthermore, Smith (2013b) claimed marketing’s approach to stakeholders tends to be “unidirectional and sales-focused” rather than focused on developing relationships (p. 509). Despite these criticisms, other scholars have described a “marketing orientation” that has evolved and led to the expansion of the “notion of the ‘consumer’ to include families, friends, and sometimes even society” (Cheney & Christensen, 2004, p. 516).

    View all citing articles on Scopus
    View full text