Professional Documents
Culture Documents
www.emeraldinsight.com/1363-254X.htm
Communication
Communication management as a management
second-order management
function
127
Roles and functions of the communication
executive – results from a shadowing study
Howard Nothhaft
Institute for Communications and Media, Science University of Leipzig, Leipzig,
Germany
Abstract
Purpose – The purpose of this paper is to provide young communication managers with a theoretical
framework to better understand what they are doing.
Design/methodology/approach – The paper combines theoretical reflections with empirical
material from an observation study, a “shadowing study” of eight communication managers in
German companies undertaken by the author.
Findings – Communication management is explained as a second-order management function, i.e. a
function which not only coordinates organizational performance by planning, organizing, controlling,
but also institutionalizes certain concerns in the organization. Drawing on the shadowing study, the
paper describes how communication managers “manage the management of others” by acting in
certain roles, e.g. the missionary (not the guru), the agent of common sense (not the enforcer), the
buck’s stop (not the CEO’s darling). Communication management, it is argued, is not predominantly
concerned with power in the organizations, but with influence.
Originality/value – Based on week-long observations of eight experienced communication
executives’ everyday activities, the paper argues against concepts which implicitly or explicitly
debase “soft”, “influence-based” and “people-oriented” approaches and portray “proper”
communication management as “hard”, “power-based” and “system-oriented”.
Keywords Communication management, Management roles, Research, Influence
Paper type Research paper
Figure 1.
Second-order management means influencing the managing of others, but not Communication
subordinate managers – it means influencing the planning, organizing and controlling management
of others. It is important, in this line of thought, not to confuse
second-order-management with a top-management that is out of contact with actual
workers and concerned with managing mid-level managers. The difference lies in the
fact that mid-level managers are subordinate to the top-managers. Second-order
management, however, means influencing the management process of your peers over 133
which you have no or, at best, functional authority. One of the managers expresses the
very same thought in one of the preparatory interviews (translated by the author):
And what differs in communication management is that you always depend on others. You
depend on others to be provided with the right information on time. You depend on being able
to lead and be respected by others in a multi-functional team. You must be able to do that.
That is a core competence you’ll need to bring to the job: an informal way of being in charge,
so to say. Although you are not the one who is formally in charge.
The quote makes clear why the concept of second-order management did not surface in
studies of CEOs such as Mintzberg’s: For CEOs there is no such thing as
second-order-management because they have authority over every member of the
organization. That does not mean that CEOs could not prefer influencing or
questioning or challenging as a management style in contrast to directing,
commanding and ordering. The difference is, however, that normally – at least
within the organization – they have both options at their disposal.
Second-order management does not do much to further our understanding of
communication management. Moreover, as it has been described so far, second-order
management seems dangerously close to organizational politicking (see Mintzberg
et al., 1998, chapter 8, for an overview). So the question is: Why is it an important
concept and how does it differ from politicking? Or, to put the question differently:
What is the function of second-order-management functions?
The author believes that the foremost function of second-order management is to
institutionalize certain concerns in an organization. As such, second-order
management is quite an ordinary thing, and as such communication management is
on a level with the work of the data protection commissioner, the equal opportunity
commissioner or the fire-safety engineer. Institutionalizing a concern in an
organization by making someone responsible for it is a common organizational
strategy, and maybe the only working one in the long run. The difference is, of course,
that communication concerns are inseparably bound up with everyday management
decisions as well as with corporate strategy. A wise, smooth and sensitive
institutionalization of communication concerns is infinitely more important for
organizational success, legitimacy and survival than that of others which are, to put it
harshly, “only” ensuring an organization’s legality.
Institutionalizing a concern is also what differentiates second-order management
from politicking. In a way, second-order management is the exact opposite of
politicking although on the surface level, when observed, it looks very similar. The
difference lies in the fact that politicking is done primarily with a view to serving the
interests of those engaging in it; second-order management is done primarily with a
view to serving the company’s interest by institutionalizing the respective concern.
The author himself is the very first to admit that this is, prima facie, a naı̈ve criterion,
and those adept at playing the game of politicking will always make it look as if it is
JCOM played in the interest of the company. The fact that it is difficult to tell the difference
14,2 does not mean, however, that there is no difference.
Note
1. For communication management as viewed by St Gallen management scholars see
Schmid/Lyczek, 2005.
References
Berger, B. (2005), “Power over, power with, and power to relations: critical reflections of public
relations, the dominant coalition, and activism”, Journal of Public Relations Research,
Vol. 17 No. 1, pp. 5-28.
Carroll, S. and Gillen, D.J. (1987), “Are the classical management functions useful in describing
managerial work?”, Academy of Management Review., Vol. 12 No. 1, pp. 38-51.
Edwards, L. (2006), “Rethinking power in public relations”, Public Relations Review., Vol. 32 No. 3,
pp. 229-31.
Fayol, H. (1966), Administration industrielle et générale – prévoyance organisation –
commandement, coordination – contrôle, Dunod, Paris, (1st ed. 1916).
Fondas, N. and Stewart, R. (1994), “Enactment in managerial jobs: a role analysis”, Journal of
Management Studies, Vol. 31 No. 1, pp. 83-102.
Gregory, A. (2008), “The competencies of senior practitioners in the UK: an initial study”, Public
Relations Review., Vol. 34 No. 3, pp. 215-23.
Grunig, J. (2006), “Furnishing the edifice. Ongoing research on public relations as a strategic
management function”, Journal of Public Relations Research, Vol. 18 No. 2, pp. 151-76.
Hales, C. (1986), “What do managers do? A critical review of the evidence”, Journal of
Management Studies, Vol. 23 No. 1, pp. 88-115.
Hales, C. (1999), “Why do managers do what they do?”, British Journal of Management, Vol. 10
No. 4, pp. 335-50.
Hales, C. (2001), “Does it matter what managers do?”, Business Strategy Review, Vol. 12 No. 2, Communication
pp. 50-8.
management
Heath, R. (2006), “Onward into more fog: thoughts on public relations’ research directions”,
Journal of Public Relations Research, Vol. 18 No. 2, pp. 93-114.
Hon, L. and Grunig, J. (1999), Guidelines for Measuring Relationships in Public Relations,
The Institute for Public Relations, Commission on PR Measurement and Evaluation,
Gainesville, FL. 139
Katz, D. and Kahn, R. (1978), The Social Psychology of Organizations, 2nd ed., Wiley, New York,
NY.
Malik, F. (2003), Systemisches Management, Evolution, Selbstorganisation, Haupt, Bern.
Malik, F. (2006), Führen. Leisten. Leben. Wirksames Management für eine neue Zeit, Campus,
Frankfurt am Main.
Mintzberg, H. (1970), “Managerial work. Analysis from observation”, Management Science,
Vol. 18 No. 2, pp. B97-B110.
Mintzberg, H. (1973), The Nature of Managerial Work, Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ.
Mintzberg, H. (1990), “The manager’s job: folklore and fact”, Harvard Business Review,
March/April, pp. 163-75.
Mintzberg, H. (1994), “Rounding out the manager’s job”, Sloan Management Review, No. 3,
pp. 11-26.
Mintzberg, H., Ahlstrand, B. and Lampel, J. (1998), Strategy Safari: The Complete Guide through
the Wilds of Strategic Management, Prentice-Hall, London.
Moss, D. and Green, R. (2001), “Re-examining the manager’s role in public relations: what
management and public relations research teaches us”, Journal of Communication
Management, Vol. 6 No. 2, pp. 118-32.
Moss, D., Newman, A. and DeSanto, B. (2004), “Defining and re-defining the core elements of
management in public relations/corporate communication context: what do
communication managers do?”, paper presented at the 11th International Public
Relations Research Symposium. Lake Bled, Slovenia, July 1-4, 2004.
Moss, D., Newman, A. and DeSanto, B. (2005), “What do communications managers do? Defining
and refining the core elements of management in a public relations/communication
context”, Journalism and Mass Communication Quarterly, Vol. 82, pp. 873-90.
Moss, D., Warnaby, G. and Newman, A. (2000), “Public relations practitioner role enactment at
the senior management level within UK companies”, Journal of Public Relations Research,
Vol. 12 No. 4, pp. 227-308.
Nothhaft, H. and Wehmeier, S. (2007), “Coping with complexity. Sociocybernetics as a framework
for communication management”, Inernational Journal of Strategic Communication, Vol. 1
No. 3, pp. 151-68.
Reber, B. and Berger, B. (2006), “Finding influence: examining the role of influence in public
relations practice”, Journal of Communication Management, Vol. 10 No. 3, pp. 235-49.
Schirmer, F. (1992), Arbeitsverhalten von Managern, Gabler, Wiesbaden.
Schmid, B.F. and Lyczek, B. (2005), “Die Rolle der Kommunikation in der Wertschöpfung der
Unternehmung”, in Schmid, B.F. and Lyczek, B. (Eds), Unternehmenskommnunikation.
Kommunikationsmanagement aus Sicht der Unternehmensführung, Gabler, Wiesbaden.
Steinmann, H. and Schreyögg, G. (2002), Management. Grundlagen der Unternehmensführung.
Konzepte – Funktionen – Fallstudien 5, überarbeitete Auflage, Gabler, Wiesbaden.
JCOM Toth, E., Serini, S.A., Wright, D.K. and Emig, A.G. (1998), “Trends in public relations roles
1990-1995”, Public Relations Review, Vol. 24 No. 2, pp. 145-63.
14,2 von Hayek, F. (1975), “Die Anmaßung von Wissen”, Ordo, Vol. 26, pp. 12-21.
Willke, H. (1999), Systemtheorie II: Interventionstheorie, 3rd ed., Lucius & Lucius, Stuttgart.
Zerfaß, A. (2007), “Unternehmenskommunikation und Kommunikationsmanagement: Grundlagen”,
in Piwinger, M. and Zerfaß, A. (Eds), Handbuch Unternehmenskommunikation, Gabler,
140 Wiesbaden, pp. S21-S70.
Corresponding author
Howard Nothhaft can be contacted at: nothhaft@uni-leipzig.de