Int. Journal of Business Science and Applied Management, Volume 17, Issue 2, 2022

Strategic Involvement without Strategic Input: An

Empirical Analysis of the Practice of Public Relations in

Greece

Amalia Triantafillidou*

Department of Communication and Digital Media, University of Western Macedonia

Fourka Area, P.O. Box: 30, 52100, Kastoria, Greece

Tel: +30 2467440046 (office)

Email: atriantafylidou@uowm.gr

Prodromos Yannas

Department of Business Administration, University of West Attica

Campus 2, Building D-Office 215, Petrou-Ralli & Thivon 250, 12244, Egaleo, Greece

Tel: +30 210 5381828 (office)

Email: prodyannas@uniwa.gr

Abstract

The purpose of the study is to empirically examine the practice of public relations in Greece and assess

the extent to which practitioners strategically manage and contribute to the strategic management of

organizations. Moreover, the study aims to reveal differences in the public relations practices across

various industry sectors. Towards this end, an online survey was conducted to examine the views of 75

public relations practitioners from various business sectors in Greece. Findings indicate that most of

the public relations functions examined exhibit a considerable amount of strategic focus as practitioners

participate in the strategic management processes of organizations and have a say in senior

management although their input is far from strategic. Moreover, they support the organizational

strategy by practising two-way asymmetrical models, focusing on positive publicity, and marketing

communications and employing prescriptive communication strategies. Nonetheless, they do not

engage to a great extent in formal and informal research, active listening, and outcome evaluation. Thus,

public relations practitioners in Greece support organizational goals and enterprise strategy by acting as

strategic advisors of the senior management and operational supporters through the implementation of

communication strategies. The low response rate of the survey limits the generalizability of the

findings of our study, which aims to provide preliminary insights about the under researched Greek

practice of public relations. The originality of the study stems from the alternative measurement tools

proposed to evaluate strategic public relations and the emphasis on cross-sectional analysis.

Keywords: public relations, Greece, industry sectors, strategic management, strategic communication,

practitioners

Amalia Triantafillidou and Prodromos Yannas

1. INTRODUCTION

The increasing importance of social, political, environmental, and ethical issues for contemporary

businesses has given prominence to the strategic management paradigm in public relations (Steyn,

2009). The strategic management paradigm has been proposed as an alternative approach to the

symbolic-interpretative model which suggests that public relations mainly adopt a top-down one-way

communication strategy approach to convey messages of the decision-makers. On the other hand, the

strategic management paradigm focuses on the empowerment of public relations in the strategic

decision-making process, enabling managers to formulate better informed decisions and balance the

interests between the management and the public (Tam et al., 2022). From this perspective strategic

public relations/communication can be seen as an amalgam of communication processes aiming at

building, presenting, and rebuilding strategy (Van Ruler, 2018).

The origins of strategic public relations can be traced back to the study called Excellence in Public

Relations and Communication Management, which was conducted by Grunig and his colleagues

(Grunig et al., 2002) and sponsored by the IABC foundation of the International Association of

Business Communicators (henceforth the Excellence Study). In their view, strategic public relations are

planned activities that should be evaluated and aligned with organizational goals, with public relations

managers being involved in the strategic management process (Grunig and Grunig, 2000). Several

studies have operationalized the strategic orientation of public relations using the four generic

principles of the Excellence Study, namely: involvement in strategic management, empowerment in the

dominant coalition or direct relationship with top management, use of two-way symmetrical

communication, and enactment of the managerial role (Rhee, 1999; Lim et al., 2005; Valentini and

Sriramesh, 2014; Anani-Bossman, 2021).

Moss et al. (2000) identified the following as key elements of strategic public relations

management: the reporting relationship of the public relations manager to the senior management; the

environmental scanning activities; the advisory role to the senior manager; the development and

implementation of communication strategies; and involvement in the strategy-making process of the

organization. Based on the work of Steyn (2009) on the South African practice of public relations,

Steyn and Niemann (2014) suggested that the strategic public relations orientation is comprised of two

basic dimensions namely, the PR strategist or reflective strategist role, and the strategy formulation

dimension. The PR strategist role is related to (a) the development and execution of a public relations

program that addresses the overarching goals of the organization, (b) the formulation of a mixture of

prescriptive (based on organizational goals) and emergent communication strategies (based on the

changing societal needs), and (c) the counselling offered by public relations managers to other senior

managers. Moreover, the strategy formulation dimension emphasizes the involvement of the public

relations function in the strategic management process of the organization and co-creation of the

enterprise strategy along with other senior managers by providing input from environmental scanning,

thus enhancing the organization’s social responsibility and legitimacy.

In the above conceptualization of strategic public relations management, strategic communication

scholars have added several other elements. Tam et al. (2022) suggested that strategic public relations

managers are those that are frequently invited to top management meetings and strategic planning (Tam

et al., 2022). Bowen (2006) indicated that public relations can contribute to the maximum level in

strategic management when they have enough autonomy as a function and are not supervised by

another function such as marketing. To the strategic role of public relations Verhoeven et al. (2011)

added mainly inbound activities but also outbound activities (but to a lower degree), helping

organizations support their goals. Inbound activities are related to the reflective role of public relations

and include efforts for managing relationships with stakeholders, crisis communication, and the

identification of communication opportunities. Outbound activities are associated with building the

brand and corporate image, reputation, and communicating with customers and employees. Within this

perspective, Zerfass and Volk (2018) regard that communicating with journalists, opinion leaders and

influencers conveys the strategic goals of the organization to various shareholders, thus upgrading the

strategic value of public relations.

Despite their strategic role, public relations/communication departments are still not considered an

essential function in organizations due mainly to the fact that top managers and communication

directors have yet not understood the nature and extent of public relations departments’ involvement in

strategic management (Moss et al, 2000; Zerfass and Volk, 2018). Moreover, the existing theoretical or

empirical conceptualizations of strategic public relations management have emphasized different facets

of the practice, while there is a lack of holistic measurements pertaining to strategic focus that can be

applied by researchers and practitioners alike. Furthermore, existing frameworks do not take into

consideration the strategy building contribution of public relations, ignore the implementation of

emergent strategies, put less emphasis on the operational activities of public relations that help the

Int. Journal of Business Science and Applied Management / Business-and-Management.org

organizations pursue their strategic goals (Zerfass et al., 2018), and do not take into consideration the

impact of industry and environmental conditions on the degree of strategic public relations orientation.

In addition, there is a lack of studies regarding the strategic role of public relations in Southern

European countries (Valentini and Sriramesh, 2014; García, 2015) such as Greece. Although the public

relations industry has reached a stage of maturity (Papatriantafyllou, 2008), indigenous PR research has

lagged considerably behind (Theofilou and Watson, 2014).

Given the above research gaps, the aim of the present study is four-fold. First to develop a holistic

tool, that is an index, for the measurement of the strategic role of public relations through the lenses of

the strategic communication theory and strategic management of public relations. This index will

provide an alternative measurement tool used by public relations practitioners and top managers to

analyze the status of public relations departments and recognize their strategic value. Second, to

measure the strategic role of public relations by taking into consideration the most important facets of

the practice, such as the autonomy of the department, the strategic activities performed, the public

relations model, the empowerment of the function in the strategic processes of the organization,

research, evaluation, and the communication strategy. Third, to test the impact of the industry on the

strategic orientation of public relations and highlight differences in the strategic focus of public

relations departments across business sectors, and fourth to apply the proposed measurement tool to

analyze the strategic practice of public relations in Greece.

2. LITERATURE REVIEW

2.1. Strategic public relations/communication

To understand the practice of public relations in Greece we will draw upon the literature on

strategic communication and strategic public relations management. As Tam et al. (2022) note,

empowerment of public relations and communication in the strategic management of organizations can

enhance the strategic orientation and legitimacy performance of organizations. In the present study the

multi-faceted role of strategic public relations can be organized around four dimensions: (a) position

and purpose of public relations, (b) public relations models, (c) influence on and relationship with

senior management, and (d) planning.

2.1.1. Strategic activities and purpose

Strategic public relations should not only focus on supporting marketing communications

campaigns or communicating information about the organization to the public but also needs to

emphasize building organizational reputation, managing issues associated with social responsibility

(Gregory, 2020) and contributing to the society through philanthropic initiatives (Singh et al., 2021).

Thus, strategic public relations cultivates mutually beneficial relationships between organizations and

various strategic stakeholders, tries to avoid and eliminate the risks associated with the corporate

reputation and addresses societal issues that affect the public (Steyn, 2007). Emphasis on social

responsibility is related to the social exchange perspective (Memon and Ghani, 2020) and the reflective

dimension of European public relations, which aims among other things to analyze social trends and

adapt the organization’s strategy and value to meet these trends (Verčič et al., 2001).

Gregory (2020) also points out that in order to understand how public relations is practised one

should examine where the function of public relations is situated within an organizational structure.

Public relations will have a strategic role as an institutionalized management function located in

organizational structure that integrates and coordinates all communication functions and not be a

subordinated function to departments such as marketing or human resources (Grunig and Grunig, 1998).

Prior literature has shown that public relations in organizations is mainly a tactical function, treated as

part of the marketing department or regarded as a publicity service (Moss et al., 1996). From a

European perspective, public relations is nowadays positioned as an independent management function

within organizations under the titles “corporate communication”, “strategic communication”, or

“communication management”, in an attempt to avoid the highly criticized term 'public relations'

(Zerfass et al., 2011).

2.1.2. Public Relations Models

Strategic communication and public relations is more than the one-way communication model and

puts emphasis on two-way models (Van Ruler, 2018). According to Grunig et al. (1995) one-way

communication models such as the press agentry and public information aim at disseminating neutral

information to the public or at producing positive publicity while eliminating negative information. On

the other hand, the two-way asymmetrical model utilizes research to understand public attitudes to

influence the public in an effective way. The two-way symmetrical model focuses on research in order

Amalia Triantafillidou and Prodromos Yannas

to adapt the organizational behaviour to the public's needs and desires. Tam et al. (2022) note that the

strategic management paradigm of public relations suggests that one-way models need to co-exist with

two-way communication models that enable dialogue between the public and the organization and

foster the development of mutually beneficial relationships. Thus, it is expected that public relations

departments which are excellent and strategically managed try to inform while also listening and

responding to stakeholders (Verčič and Zerfass, 2016).

2.1.3. Influence on and relationship with senior management

Strategic communication is related to the communication efforts of an organization to fulfil its

mission (Hallahan et al., 2007, p. 3). Thus, public relations aims at conveying the corporate strategy to

important stakeholders for organizational survival (Zerfass and Volk, 2018) and communicating a set

of predefined strategic decisions (Moss and Warnaby, 1998). In this perspective, public relations align

the communication strategy with the corporate strategy and formulate communication goals to achieve

the organizational goals (Steyn and Niemann, 2014). Hence, public relations is partly strategic and in

line with the communication of strategy through the implementation of communication programs

(Zerfass et al., 2018).

Another important facet of strategic public relations lies in its contribution to organizational

strategy formulation (Van Ruler, 2020). As Verčič and Zerfass (2016) note, the contribution to strategic

management could be indirect through the advisory influence of communication managers as well as

direct by exerting executive influence. More specifically, public relations executives exercise advisory

influence when they make recommendations to senior management and act as internal consultants,

while they engage in executive influence, a more direct form, when they participate in senior

management meetings during the strategic planning process, when they shape strategic decisions at the

organizational level (Rebel and Berger, 2006) about the development of new policies, strategies,

procedures, and programs, and when they engage in discussions about major problems and issues

(Broom and Dozier, 1986). Thus, the empowerment of public relations in the strategic management of

organization can be related to (a) counselling activities through which the head of public relations helps

senior managers make more informed decisions by informing them about the reactions of the public,

communication problems and opportunities (Gregory, 2020), (b) operational activities that focus on

communicating the organizational strategy to strategic members of the public, and (c) strategic

activities, by participating in the strategic decision making processes and meetings at the organizational

level. These three types of public relations empowerment in strategic management represent a

continuum ranging from supportive, operational, to decisional and strategic (Zerfass et al., 2018).

Moreover, a strategic approach to public relations is reflected in the relationship between the head

of public relations function and the senior management. Public relations managers need to

communicate with senior management (Cardwell et al., 2017) and offer them input as boundary

spanners of the external environment either through access to the dominant coalition or maintaining a

direct relationship with the CEO or Chairperson of the organization (Tam et al., 2022). In contrast, a

tactical approach to public relations is assumed to exist when the head of public relations reports to the

marketing manager.

2.1.4. Research and Evaluation

In its basic form, strategic communication is related to the strategic communication management

(Zerfass et al., 2018). Thus, public relations/communication needs to be a carefully planned activity.

According to Steyn (2007), at the functional level, strategic public relations managers formulate and

execute public relations plans and programs. Based on the Excellence Study, public relations

departments can contribute to strategic management when they perform formal research (e.g., news

clipping) as well as informal research with key stakeholders (e.g., informal interviews) and

environmental scanning techniques (Grunig and Grunig, 2020). Moreover, effective evaluation is an

integral part of a strategic approach in public relations. Macnamara and Gregory (2018) point out that a

strategic orientation in public relations is reflected in the extent to which practitioners emphasize

organizational listening to the public by assessing the outcomes and the impact of organizational

decisions on strategic members of the public (e.g., awareness, attitudes, behaviour) besides the output

evaluation of the public relations efforts. They further note that this strategic evaluation could be

conducted through quantitative (surveys) as well as qualitative techniques (e.g., focus groups,

interviews).

2.1.5. Communication Strategy

Communication strategy formulation and implementation is also an integral part of the strategic

management process of public relations. Practitioners that formulate their strategy based solely on

Int. Journal of Business Science and Applied Management / Business-and-Management.org

intuition and subjective knowledge without formal research and evaluation are not performing strategic

public relations/communication. Researchers have also pointed out that the alignment of the

communication strategy with the organizational goals as well as stakeholders’ interests is a central

element of strategic communication management (Volk and Zerfass, 2018). In general, practitioners

may choose to develop either a “prescriptive” communication strategy through ad hoc planning aligned

with organizational goals, thus contributing to the effectiveness of organizational strategy or a more

“emergent” strategy that promotes the interests of the organization and stakeholders as well (Steyn,

2007) by incorporating research of publics, environmental scanning of social issues, active listening,

and the participation of stakeholders in the formulation process (Toledano, 2018).

2.2. Industry and Public Relations

The industry/sector of an organization can shape the practice of public relations in a given country

according to its own distinct characteristics (Gregory, 2020). For example, Moss et al. (1996),

investigating the UK retail and consumer goods sector, found that public relations mainly has a product

publicity function with a strong marketing orientation. Moreover, public relations is usually practised

through one-way and two-way asymmetrical models. Valentini (2012), examining organizations in the

Italian public sector, found that public relations had an operational rather than a strategic function and

that mixed public relations models were practised. In Ghana, financial services companies emphasized

interpersonal relationships and public relations practitioners exhibited low involvement in strategic

management of their organization as they had a reporting relationship with the CEO but were not

members of the dominant coalition (Anani-Bossman and Mudzanani, 2020). In addition, they were less

likely to be advisors of the senior management. In the European Communication Monitor survey in

2019 excellent public relations departments that were likely to perform strategic public relations

originated mainly from joint-stock companies as well as non-profit organizations, while governmental

organizations exhibited the lowest scores on excellence (European Communication Monitor, 2019).

Thus, it is herein assumed that there will be cross-sectional differences with respect to the practice of

public relations in Greece.

2.3. Greek-related Literature on Public Relations

Scientific research is still in its infancy and there is a lack of studies regarding the current practice

of public relations by Greek companies (Yannas, 2004). The scant research on public relations in

Greece has focused on the history and current state of the profession (Theofilou and Watson, 2014;

Yannas, 2004), the use of the internet by public relations professionals (Kitchen and Panopoulos, 2010;

Triantafillidou and Yannas, 2014), the role of public relations managers in consumer product

companies (Panigyrakis, 2015), as well as gender-related differences of public relations practitioners

(Panigyrakis and Veloutsou, 1998; Panigyrakis and Poulis, 2009), and female public relations

professionals (Triantafillidou and Yannas, 2021).

In 1991, Anastasia Lyra conducted research regarding the practice of public relations in Greece

(Grunig et al., 1995). Results suggested that public relations practitioners were regarded as

communication technicians who mainly used the press agentry and public information models. They

did not conduct research and practised marketing public relations. In addition, the personal influence

and cultural interpreter models were more likely to be practised by public relations practitioners of

Greek organizations. Specifically, practitioners relied on their personal relationships with key contacts

such as journalists and politicians. An interesting finding of this study was that only a small percentage

of public relations practitioners were regarded as strategic managers who practised two-way

symmetrical public relations. These findings were also noted by Panigyrakis and Veloutsou (1998),

who found that public relations practitioners working for the consumer goods industries performed

mostly technical tasks like writing, editing, organizing special events, working with the media and

speaking, whereas more managerial activities like programming or researching were less frequently

practised. More recently, Triantafillidou and Yannas (2021) have reported that female public relations

managers in Greece are often underestimated by senior management in their organizations due to the

low importance they attach to the public relations function.

Before examining the way public relations in Greece is currently practised, special attention

should be paid to the broader environment in which it operates. Although the effect of the American

model of public relations is evident in the case of Greece (Theofilou and Watson, 2014) its

implementation is questionable. According to García (2014) the prevalence of small and medium-sized

companies and the high power-distance culture of Greece, which supports centralized and authoritarian

styles of organizational structure, leave no room for the practice of the two-way symmetrical model,

which requires both the public and the organization to change their behaviour in order to develop win-

win relationships. The dominance of clientelism is also another characteristic of the Greek environment

Amalia Triantafillidou and Prodromos Yannas

that has had a profound impact on the practice of excellent public relations, as practitioners tend to

focus on the cultivation of personal relationships with politicians and the media for the provision of

favours and positive media coverage (García, 2015). Hence, it is expected that public relations

departments of companies operating in Greece are not ideal candidates for strategic public relations.

3. METHODOLOGY

To address the study’s objectives and develop a measurement tool for the strategic role in public

relations an online survey was conducted through a self-administered questionnaire to public

relations/communication practitioners of organizations in Greece.

To assess the measurement model for the strategic role of public relations an index was formulated

based on an extensive literature review which consisted of eight constructs, namely: strategic activities,

autonomy, model of public relations, level of empowerment, reporting relationship with CEO, research,

evaluation, and communication strategy (Table 1). The questions about autonomy, model of public

relations, level of empowerment, reporting relationship with CEO, and communication strategy were

developed after a careful review of previous conceptualizations of strategic public relations

management (e.g., Valentini and Sriramesh, 2014; Moss et al., 2000; Steyn, 2009; Tam et al., 2022;

Verhoeven et al., 2011; Zerfass and Volk, 2018; Zerfass et al., 2015). The items that comprised the

construct strategic activities were adapted from Hutton et al. (2001), Kim and Reber (2008), Zerfass

and Sherzada (2014), Tong and Chang (2020). The constructs of strategic research and strategic

evaluation were adapted from Anani-Bossman and Tella (2017), Zerfass et al. (2017), Xavier et al.

(2005), Gregory and Macnamara (2019).

Table 1. Variables of the Study

Construct

Measurement and Example items

Analysis

Autonomy of the department

The name of the department includes terms related to

(1) Other functions

(2) Marketing

(3)

Public Relations, Communication, Corporate

Communications etc

Descriptive statistics

(frequencies), chi-

square test with

industry sector

Strategic Activities

(15 items – 5-point scales)

• Building and maintaining a positive image

•

Supporting marketing and product promotion

campaigns

• Cultivating relationships with the public, such

as investors, the community, employees, NGOs,

political organizations

• Communicating during crisis

•

Positioning the stance of the organization on

public matters

•

Implementing and communicating social

responsibility activities

•

Building relationships with media

representatives

Descriptive statistics

ean scores and

standard deviations),

exploratory factor

analysis, reliability

analysis, creation of

composite scales,

analysis of variance

with industry sectors

for each derived

factor

Model of public relations

(1:one-way, 2: two-way

asymmetrical, 3: two-way

symmetrical)

(one best answer question)

Indicate the answer that best described their practice

from the following list:

(1) Communication in my organization is one-way

and the organization aims mainly at informing

the public. Communication activities are

organized in such a way as to support

organizational objectives.

(2)

Communication in my organization aims at

informing the public and responding to their

questions and complaints. Communication

activities are organized in such a way as to

support organizatio

nal objectives taking into

consideration the needs of the public, and

(3)

Communication in my organization aims at

informing the public, responding to their

questions and complaints, while seeking the

public’s input, which is incorporated in

communication dec

isions and activities. The

end-goal is to co-create communication with

Descriptive statistics

(frequencies), chi-

square test with

industry sector

Int. Journal of Business Science and Applied Management / Business-and-Management.org

the public.

Level of empowerment

(1: advisory, 2: operational, 3:

strategic)

(one best answer question)

Indicate which of the following three answers

describes your role in the organization:

(1)

I advise senior managers about the public's

reactions to organizational decisions,

communication problems and opportunities,

and other broad communication issues,

(2) I am responsible for the communication of the

corporate strategy and the development and

implementation of public relations and

communication programs,

(3) I contribute to the strategic decision-making

process of the organization as an active

member, propose strategies and participate in

meetings of the dominant coalition.

Descriptive statistics

(frequencies), chi-

square test with

industry sector

Reporting relationship with

senior manager

(one best answer question)

(responses 3 and 4 indicate a

more strategic focus)

Indicate which of the four answers describes your

relationship with the top management:

(1) I report to the marketing manager

(2)

I have an indirect relationship with senior

management. I mainly advise the

CEO/chairperson/senior managers about public

relations/communication issues.

(3) I have a direct reporting relationship with the

CEO or chairperson of the organization.

(4) The CEO invites me to the senior management

meetings.

Descriptive statistics

(frequencies), chi-

square test with

industry sector

Strategic Research

(6 items, 5-point scales)

(1) Internet analysis

(2)

Identification of trends through secondary

sources

(3) Content analysis of media coverage

(4) Interviews with key stakeholders

(5) Focus groups

(6) Surveys with questionnaires

Descriptive statistics

(mean scores and

sta

ndard deviations),

analysis of variance

with industry sectors,

reliability analysis,

creation of composite

scale

Strategic Evaluation

(6 items, 5-point scales)

(1) Web analysis and social media analytics

(2)

Output evaluation in terms of activities

performed

(3) Out

come evaluation in terms of changes in

perceptions, attitudes, and behaviours

(4) Qualitative and quantitative techniques

Descriptive statistics

(mean scores and

standard deviations),

reliability analysis,

creation of composite

scale, analysis of

variance with industry

sectors

Communication Strategy

(1: indicates lack of strategic

focus, 2: indicates the use of a

prescriptive strategy, and 3 &

4 indicate the usage of

emergent strategies)

Indicate whether the communication strategy is

formulated based on:

(1) ideas of the public relations executives,

(2) corporate goals,

(3) corporate goals and research, and

(4) active listening to the public and exchange of

information with the public.

Descriptive statistics

(frequencies), chi-

square test with

industry sector

Participants were also asked to answer questions about their gender, age, years of experience in

public relations, the sector of their organization, the title of their department, the title of their position,

the number of the organization’s employees, and the number of employees that worked in their

department.

A purposive sampling approach was used after developing a list of organizational emails. The list

of emails was developed by utilizing other lists such as the 200 most profitable organizations in Greece

for 2021, organizations and brands that received various business awards, organizations that were listed

in the Athens Exchange Group, organizations that were advertised in ad books. The questionnaire was

e-mailed during April 2022 to 840 Greek organizations with a notice to be completed by the head of the

public relations/communication department. In total, 75 emails were returned, and the response rate

was 8.9%, thus the representativeness of the population is not guaranteed. Similar response rates have

been observed in other studies that target public relations practitioners (e.g., Porter and Sallot, 2005;

Porter et al., 2009).

Amalia Triantafillidou and Prodromos Yannas

4. RESULTS

Table 2 shows the characteristics of the sample. Based on the findings, the majority of respondents

are female (78.7%) aged between 36 and 55 years old (73.4%). Most of the practitioners are working

for the retail and consumer goods industry and companies that sell products such as cars, motorcycles,

cosmetics, clothing, etc (28%; 21). Several practitioners are working in the services sector, which

comprises companies that offer consulting services, asset management, research and financial services

(14.7%, 11), the energy, technology and industrial manufacturing sector (13.3%, 10), the entertainment,

publications and sports sector (13.3%, 10), and in the food-beverage-hospitality sector (12%, 9). To a

lesser extent organizations from the public sector (9.3%, 7) and the logistics and transportation sector

(9.3%, 7) are represented in the sample. It should be noted that the organizations of the sample were

either Greek companies or multinational companies with a Greek branch.

Table 1. Characteristics of the Sample

Gender

Percentage

Industry

Percentage

Male

21.3%

Energy-technology-industrial manufacturing

13.3%

Female

78.7%

Food-Beverage and Hospitality

12.0%

Public sector

9.3%

Age

Entertainment, publications, and sports sector

13.3%

18 to 35

12.0%

Retail and consumer goods

28.8%

36 to 45

34.7%

Services

14.7%

46 to 55

38.7%

Logistics and Transportation

9.3%

More than 56

14.7%

Years of Experience

Size

Less than 5 years

9.3%

Less than 49 employees (small)

23.0%

6 to 10 years

22.7%

50 to 249 employees (medium)

24.3%

More than 11 years

68.0%

More than 250 employees (large)

52.7%

Department size

1 to 2 employees

52.1%

3 to 10 employees

42.5%

More than 11

employees

5.5%

Most of the practitioners are regarded as senior practitioners given that they had been working in

the field of public relations and communication for more than 11 years (68%). The majority of them are

working in large organizations (more than 250 employees) (52.7%) and for small public

relations/communication departments (1 to 2 employees) (52.1%).

4.1. Department Names

Table 3 shows the names of the respondents’ departments. In general, the term “marketing” was

found in the names of 26 departments, followed by the terms public relations (19 times),

communications (15 times), and corporate communications (9 times). We mainly observed three types

of departments: (a) departments that follow a marketing public relations orientation (40.5%), (b)

departments that follow a corporate public relations orientation (51.4%), and (c) departments that

integrate public relations in other departments such as the “human resources department” or the

“operations departments” (8.1%). Marketing-oriented departments are those that integrate the functions

of marketing and public relations. Most of these departments are named “marketing” (17.3%) and

“marketing and communications” (8%). Other names found were “marketing and public relations or

public relations and marketing” (4%), COM “marketing communications”, “communications and

marketing”, “corporate communications and marketing services”, “marketing communication, and

digital strategy”, “promotion and communications”, “brand and communication”, “consumer product

division”, and “commercial department”. The majority of these departments originate from the retail

and consumer goods industries and public relations acts as a supporting function of marketing

On the other hand, departments with a corporate public relations focus use names such as “public

relations” (10.7%) and “communications” (9.3%). It seems that the Greek public relations industry has

not been aligned with the European trend to abandon the term public relations and turn to the use of

Int. Journal of Business Science and Applied Management / Business-and-Management.org

other terms such as “corporate communications”. Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) influenced

the names of the departments with a corporate public relations focus. Six departments make use of the

terms “sustainability”, “CSR”, and “responsibility” along with the terms “corporate communications”

and “public relations”. Other names found to a lesser extent, were “corporate affairs” (2.7%),

“communications and public relations” (2.7%), “corporate communication” (1.3%), “communications

and public affairs” (1.3%), and “corporate communications and government relations” (1.3%).

Emphasis on media relations was also observed in five departments as they used the terms “press

office” and “media relations” in their names (5.3%). Interestingly, five departments with a corporate

public relations focus incorporate in their names the term “publications” (e.g., public relations and

publications) (5.3%). Three departments had a clear focus on external relations as they were named

“external relations” or “international and public relations" (4%). Departments with a corporate public

relations focus are popular among public organizations, and companies in the food-beverage-hospitality,

entertainment-publications-sports sectors.

Table 3. Names of Departments

Marketing Public Relations

Corporate Public Relations

Other

Marketing (13)

Communications (7)

Human Resources

(1)

Marketing and Communications (6)

Communications and Public Relations (1)

Management (5)

Marketing and Public Relations (1)

Communications and Public Affairs (1)

Operations (1)

Marketing Communications (1)

Corporate Communications (1)

Marketing, Communication and

Digital Strategy (1)

Corporate Communications & Sustainability

(1)

Communications and Marketing (1)

Corporate Communications and CSR (3)

Corporate Communication Marketing

Services (1)

Corporate Communications, CSR and Media

Relations (2)

Public Relations and Marketing (2)

Corporate communications and government

relations (1)

Promotion and Communications (1)

Public Relations (8)

Brand and Communications (1)

Public Relations and Press Office (1)

Consumer Product Division (1)

Public Relations and Publications (3)

Commercial (1)

Publications, Events, and Public Relations (1)

Corporate Affairs (2)

Press offices (1)

Press office, Public Relations and CSR(1)

External Relations (1)

International and Public Relations (2)

Table 1 shows that the Cronbach's Alpha score of LCOC 0.701 indicated that the LCOC variable

was reliable. Hair et al. (2014) stated that the limit for Cronbach's Alpha was 0.6. The bivariate

correlation analysis in Table 1 also suggests that the correlation between each LCOC indicator and the

total LCOC scores had a significant effect. Hence, each LCOC question indicator was valid.

4.2. Strategic Activities

A fifteen-item scale was used to measure the practice of public relations in Greece in regard to its

strategic activities for organizations. Then, an exploratory factor analysis was performed through the

principal component method and the varimax rotation in order to identify possible clusters of related

variables. Looking at the rotated component matrix we had to drop the item “promoting the

organization through social media” as it loaded high in two factors. Thus, we re-ran the factor analysis

with fourteen items. All variables had communalities above 0.4 and the factor loadings were above

0.55. Three factors emerged from the analysis capturing 64.8% of the total variance. The first factor

was named “positive publicity” (25.07% of variance) and reflected a focus towards the creation of a

positive image and downplaying negative publicity. This factor also emphasized relationships with

media as well as other groups such as the community, government, employees etc. The second factor

was named “social responsibility” (21.64% of variance) and reflected the efforts of public relations to

implement social responsibility initiatives, to take a public stance, and create public awareness on

social issues. The third factor was named “marketing support” (18.12% of variance) and was associated

with public relations activities that mainly support marketing and product or services promotion

campaigns. All three factors showed high internal reliability as the Cronbach’s alpha values of all

factors were well above the 0.70 threshold (Table 4). Then, the three factors were converted to three

Amalia Triantafillidou and Prodromos Yannas

composite variables based on the average item scores of the variables that comprised each factor. To

compose the measurement tool of the strategic role of public relations these three composite factors

produced the total score of the strategic activities index.

Table 4. Results of Factor Analysis of Public Relations Practice

Positive publicity

Mean (SD) (a=0.883)

Social responsibility

(a=0.847)

Marketing

support

(a=0.78)

Building and preserving positive image for the

organization

4.69(0.68)

Building and preserving corporate reputation

4.68 (0.64)

Communicating during crisis

4.57 (0.72)

Building relationships with media

representatives

4.55 (0.72)

Building relationships with stakeholders such as

community, government, employees, NGOs.

4.36 (0.76)

Eliminating negative publicity

4.15 (0.86)

Promoting organizational values

4.35 (0.88)

Implementing and communicating social

responsibility activities

4.32 (0.88)

Communicating initiatives with NGOs and

philanthropic organizations

3.85 (1.07)

Positioning the stance of the organization on

public matters

3.79 (0.89)

Creating public awareness on social issues (e.g.,

racism, sexual harassment, etc.)

3.57 (1.15)

Promoting the organization’s positive image

4.48 (0.66)

Identifying communication opportunities

4.27 (0.84)

Promoting products, services and supporting the

launch of new products/services

4.16 (1.00)

Supporting marketing and promotional

campaigns

4.15 (0.82)

Mean scores of composite factors

4.49 (0.58)

3.97 (0.77)

4.26 (0.65)

A one-way anova was performed to test whether organizations from different industry sectors

showed similarities or differences in their mean scores for each factor. The results of the analyses of

variance showed that the industry sectors do not differ significantly (p>0.05) in their mean scores of the

positive publicity factor (F=1.537, sig=0.180). However, significant (p<0.05) differences were

observed in the mean scores of the social responsibility factor across the various industry sectors

(F=2.853, sig=0.015). In addition, the industry sectors differed significantly (p<0.05) in their mean

scores on the marketing support factor (F=3.23, sig=0.08). In general, the energy-technology-industrial

manufacturing sector and the services sector exhibited the highest scores in the positive publicity factor,

while the logistic-transportation and the retail and consumer goods sectors scored highly on the

marketing support factor. Regarding the social responsibility factor, the sectors of logistic-

transportation and energy-technology-industrial manufacturing showed the highest scores. On the other

hand, organizations from the public sector had the lowest scores on all the three factors, while the food-

beverage-hospitality sector exhibited the lowest scores on the positive publicity factor.

Int. Journal of Business Science and Applied Management / Business-and-Management.org

Figure 1. Public Relations Practice across Industry Sectors

4.3. Model of Public Relations

To understand the model of public relations that is practised by public relations practitioners of the

sample, respondents were asked to indicate which of the three models - one-way information model,

two-way asymmetrical, and two-way symmetrical - is practised more often. The results suggest that

most organizations favour the two-way asymmetrical model (49.3%) followed by the two-way

symmetrical one (30.7%). The one-way model was the least preferred model by public relations

professionals (20%).

Figure 2 shows the models utilized by each sector. Most of the industry sectors mainly utilize the

two-way asymmetrical model with the exception of the energy-technology-industrial manufacturing

sector, which makes use of the two-way symmetrical model. However, results of the chi-square test

indicate that no significant differences exist between organizations of different sectors with respect to

the public relations model that is used by practitioners (χ

=10.79, sig=0.547).

Figure 2. Public Relations Model by Industry Sector (Percentages Are Per Industry)

4.4. Empowerment and relationship with senior management

Results indicate that 13.3% of the respondents report to the marketing manager, implying that

public relations is not empowered by top management. In addition, 14.7% of practitioners report that

they act only as consultants and offer their communication advice to the CEO or members of the top

Amalia Triantafillidou and Prodromos Yannas

management in meetings. On the other hand, 45.3% or practitioners indicated that they have a direct

reporting relationship with the CEO, an indication of empowerment in the dominant coalition.

Interestingly, 26.7% act as strategic public relations managers as they report directly to the CEO and

act as communication consultants in the top management. Chi-squares tests indicated that there are no

significant differences in the role of public relations head enacted across the industry sectors. However,

it can be argued that non-strategic roles (e.g., reporting to the marketing manager) were found in

organizations from the retail and consumer goods and entertainment-publication-sports sectors. Public

relations managers of the public sector serve mainly as communication consultants. On the other hand,

more strategic roles (direct reporting to the CEO and communication consultant) were found in the

energy-technology-industrial manufacturing and logistic-transportation sectors.

We identified three main types of public relations influence and involvement in the strategic

management of organizations: (a) advising, (b) operational - implementing communication programs to

support organizational strategy, and (c) strategic-participating in strategic decision making at the

organizational level by proposing strategies and being part of the dominant coalition. Findings indicate

that public relations heads reported that they are involved in the strategic decision-making process of

the organization and thus have a strategic role (58.7%). An important number of respondents are

regarded as operational supporters and communicators of the organizational strategy as they mainly

execute communication programs to achieve the organizational goals (32%). To a lesser extent, public

relations practitioners act as advisors regarding the main communication problems and the public's

reactions to the organizational strategies (9.3%). Based on a chi-square test, no significant differences

(p<0.05) were found between the industry sectors in regard to the involvement of public relations in the

strategic management process (χ

=18.62, sig=0.098). However, it can be argued that practitioners in the

entertainment-publications-sports sector mainly function as advisors, while the retail and consumer

goods sector and the food and beverage sectors mainly implement communication programs.

Participating in the strategic decision-making process was mainly observed in organizations from the

retail and consumer goods and the energy-technology-industrial manufacturing sectors.

4.5. Strategic Research and Evaluation

Research and evaluation activities received moderate scores, suggesting that practitioners are not

utilizing research methods to a high extent to derive their objectives and evaluate their strategies (Table

5). More specifically, respondents indicated that they conduct mainly internet research (M=3.47)

followed by analysis of the media coverage (M=3.36), and research on secondary sources for the

identification of social trends (M=3.13). In regard to the evaluation methods, again, web and social

media analysis was the most preferred method (M=3.71) followed by output evaluation in terms of

public relations activities executed (M=3.08). Outcome evaluation and other more sophisticated

research techniques were utilized to a lesser extent.

Analyses of variance indicated that organizations across sectors differ only with respect to the

usage of research methods such as interviews with representatives (F=2.617, sig=0.024), focus groups

(F=2.298, sig=0.044), and the evaluation technique of web and social media analysis (F=2.353,

sig=0.040). Specifically, the logistic-transportation sectors utilized the research technique of interviews

to a higher extent, while the energy-technology-industrial manufacturing sector scored higher on the

usage of focus groups. The entertainment-publications-sports is utilizing more the evaluation method of

web and social media analysis.

Table 5. Research and Evaluation Activities

Pre-Campaign research practices

Mean Scores

(SD)

Post-campaign evaluation

practices

Mean Scores

(SD)

Internet research

3.47 (1.08)

Web and social media

analytics

3.71 (112)

Content analysis of media coverage

3.36 (1.14)

Output evaluation (e.g.,

activities performed)

3.08 (1.19)

Identification of trends through

secondary sources and studies

3.13 (1.08)

Outcome evaluation in terms

changes in perceptions,

attitudes, behaviours of the

public

2.95 (1.18)

Interviews with key representatives

from their public

2.45 (0.99)

Qualitative or quantitative

research

2.88 (1.13)

Surveys through questionnaires

2.43 (1.13)

Focus groups

2.37 (1.06)

Int. Journal of Business Science and Applied Management / Business-and-Management.org

It should be noted that for the development of the measurement tool for the strategic role of public

relations, two composite scales (with averaged items) were developed, one for the research index

(Cronbach’s alpha: 0.746) and one for the evaluation index (Cronbach’s alpha: 0.813).

4.6. Communication Strategy

Further, the study addressed the way the communication strategy is formulated by practitioners in

order to shed more light on the strategic role of public relations and the prevalence of prescriptive

versus emergent strategies. The findings suggest that only 9.3% of respondents are shaping their

communication strategies without a strategic focus and based on subjective knowledge and ideas from

executives. On the other hand, 41.3% of practitioners design their strategy based on organizational

goals and objectives indicating an operational focus that aims at prescriptive strategy communication.

20% of respondents formulate their communication strategy by considering organizational goals along

with results from research activities. Almost one third (29.3%) of respondents are designing emerging

strategies through active listening and exchange of ideas with relevant publics. Chi-square tests indicate

that there are no differences across sectors in the way that practitioners design their communication

strategies (χ2=12.48, sig=0.821). However, it can be noted that although practitioners of most sectors

are designing their strategy based on corporate goals, the sector of entertainment-publication-sports

mainly utilizes input from ideas of public relations executives while active listening is employed by

practitioners of sectors such as logistics-transportation and services.

4.7. Overall Measurement Tool for the Strategic Role of Public Relations

To develop the overall index for the strategic role of public relations, the eight constructs [i.e.,

autonomy, strategic activities (mean scores), public relations model, empowerment in strategic

management, reporting relationship with CEO, research (mean score), evaluation (mean score), and

communication strategy] were summed. The scores of the overall index for each organization had a

range between 7 and 31.

The average score of the overall index for the organizations of the sample was 21.74 (SD=3.36).

The top two organizations with the highest score in the strategic role of public relations originated from

the sectors of energy-technology-industrial manufacturing (M=29.42) and logistic-transportation

(27.97). These two public relations functions are medium-sized autonomous departments and originate

from large companies which mainly perform strategic activities related to publicity and social

responsibility and to a lesser extent support marketing activities. They also employ the two-way

symmetrical model, are empowered in strategic management processes, have a direct reporting

relationship with the CEO and are invited to top management meetings, and implement emergent

strategies. Interestingly, these departments did not exhibit higher scores in terms of research and

evaluation compared to the other departments of the sample.

Concerning the different sectors, the results of analysis of variance suggest that the different

industries do differ significantly (p<0.05) in their overall strategic scores (F=1.640, sig=0.150).

However, as Figure 3 shows, the energy-technology-industrial manufacturing sector (M=23.93,

SD=2.57) and the logistics and transportation sector (M=23.09, SD=3.58) performed better in terms of

their strategic orientation in public relations.

Figure 3. Overall Index of The Strategic Role of Public Relations Across Industries

Amalia Triantafillidou and Prodromos Yannas

5. DISCUSSION AND IMPLICATIONS

The present study has tried to shed light on the nature and extent of strategic public relations

practice in Greece as well as develop a holistic overall measurement tool for the assessment of the

strategic role of the public relations function. The impact of the industry on the strategic focus of public

relations was also examined.

Findings suggest that almost half of the public relations departments are autonomous functions.

On the positive side, the assessment of the overall strategic focus of the public relations functions of the

sample revealed that practitioners exhibited a considerable amount of strategic orientation driven by

satisfactory levels of empowerment in the strategic management of organizations and involvement in

decision-making. Although public relations practitioners seem to have “a seat at the table” their input in

the organizational strategy formulation is far from strategic given that it is not driven by formal and

informal research and outcome evaluation methods since they place emphasis on tactical web analysis

and social media metrics to assess their performance without really engaging in active listening and

assessment of the true outcome of public relations.

Concerning the strategic activities of the Greek public relations function, results suggest that they

focus on inbound (positive publicity) and outbound activities (marketing support) (Verhoeven et al.,

2011). Social responsibility activities which capture the most strategic and reflective role of public

relations were embraced to a minor degree. The public relations practitioners of the sample utilize

mainly two-way asymmetrical communication models and employ prescriptive communication

strategies to support organizational goals. However, a closer look at the results suggests that

practitioners' strategic way of supporting organizational goals takes two forms: (a) strategic advising

and counselling of top managers as practitioners have access to the decision-making process but exhibit

a low level process without though engaging in boundary spanning or being reflective of their

observations, and (b) operationally supporting organizational strategy (Verčič and Zerfass, 2016) by

employing two-way asymmetrical communication and prescriptive strategies. The above findings could

be attributed to several reasons. Practitioners might be lacking the knowledge or might have limited

resources to design and conduct research and thus evaluate the outcome of their strategies. Failing to do

so holds them back from becoming strategic facilitators and enhancing the status of their

communication unit. This finding confirms the arguments of Macnamara and Zerfass (2017) that the

“lack of rigorous measurement and evaluation of PR is paradoxical given that the field of practice is

growing rapidly and allegedly becoming increasingly professionalized” (p. 322).

The present study enriches our limited knowledge about the practice of public relations in Greece

by also contributing to the literature about strategic communication and strategic management of public

relations. The present study has several theoretical implications. First, the strategic focus of public

relations/communication was assessed using alternative measures compared to existing studies such as

the Excellence Study (Grunig et al., 2002) that do not effectively capture the practice of public relations

in non-American contexts. The proposed framework developed an overall measurement tool for the

strategic focus of public relations by assessing: the strategic activities of public relations; the autonomy

of the function, the model of public relations; the empowerment in strategic decision making, the

reporting relationship with the CEO, the research and evaluation activities; and the communication

strategy.

Second, the present study adds to the scant literature regarding the extent to which public relations

are managed in a strategic way and contribute in a strategic manner to organizations in the Greek

context. While the data collected do not allow us to generalize regarding the public relations practice in

Greece, some initial findings were observed. Greek practitioners are not isolated experts on

communication in organizations but enact strategic roles such as advisors of the top management for

strategy formulation issues and operational supporters of the enterprise strategy by implementing

mainly prescriptive communication strategies.

Third, the study sheds light on differences that might exist across the different sectors in a given

country in regard to the strategic focus of public relations. Until now, most studies have focused on

analyzing public relations in one industry/sector (e.g., Moss et al., 1996; Valentini, 2021; Anani-

Bossman and Mudzanani, 2020). Findings indicate that there are no major significant differences

across sectors, and that there might be a homogeneity in the practice of public relations across

organizations of various industries. However, it was found that several sectors showed a more strategic

focus compared to others. For example, of all the industry sectors the energy-technology-industrial

manufacturing sector along with the logistics-transportation one exhibited the highest scores in most

strategic aspects. This finding corroborates the arguments of Moss et al. (2000), who suggested that

public relations departments working for organizations in highly competitive industries or in politically

influenced environments show a strong strategic focus to achieve competitive advantage and have an

Int. Journal of Business Science and Applied Management / Business-and-Management.org

impact on the political decisions. On the other hand, managers from the public sector are practising

public relations mainly in a non-strategic manner.

Several practical implications could be derived from the present study. The overall measurement

model of the strategic role of public relations can be used a tool for public relations managers to assess

their strategic orientation and demonstrate their value to top managers. It is herein proposed that public

relations practitioners need to provide strategic input to the organizational decision-making process by

gathering intelligence, conducting environmental scanning, formal and informal research, emphasizing

organizational listening and evaluating their efforts on an outcome basis. Only if practitioners offer

advice and input that is research-driven can they create value for the organization. In addition,

practitioners need to implement two-way symmetrical models of communication to a greater degree

and intensify the employment of emergent communication strategies that consider the needs and

desires of stakeholders and adapt the communication policy to them. Public relations practitioners in

Greece need to increase the reflective and societal focus of their practice by implementing social

responsibility campaigns and working closely with various societal groups. A strategic turn in the

public relations of the public sector in Greece is imperative even though bureaucratic obstacles stand in

the way.

6. LIMITATIONS AND FUTURE RESEARCH SUGGESTIONS

The main limitations of the present study stem from the low response rate and the lack of

generalizability of the results to all organizations in Greece. According to Baruch and Brooks (2018),

the low response rate could be attributed to factors that researchers cannot control or the inability of the

survey to reach the target audiences since the majority of the emails were sent to generic email

addresses of organizations. As Anani-Bossman and Mudzanani (2020) argue, the purpose of the study

was not to generalize results but to “explore meaning and gain insight into an issue rarely studied” in

Greece (p. 546) and to create a diversified sample that includes organizations of various sectors.

Future research could replicate the method of the present study to assess the practice of public

relations in other countries of Southern Europe with similar cultural characteristics to Greece. The

study could be expanded to include the views of executives that work in public relations agencies

regarding the strategic orientation of their practices. The impact of variables such as environmental

uncertainty, role ambiguity and role conflict on the strategic focus of public relations could also yield

additional fruitful insights.

REFERENCES

Anani-Bossman, A. A. (2021). An exploration of strategic public relations management in Ghana.

Public Relations Inquiry, 10(1), 73-96.

Anani-Bossman, A. A., & Tella, F. (2017). The use of research by public relations practitioners: A

study of selected organisations in Ghana. Communicare: Journal for Communication Sciences in

Southern Africa, 36(2), 55-74.

Anani-Bossman, A., & Mudzanani, T. E. (2020). Towards a framework for public relations practice in

the financial services sector of Ghana. Corporate Communications: An International Journal,

25(3): 533-550.

Baruch, Y., & Holtom, B. C. (2008). Survey response rate levels and trends in organizational research.

Human relations, 61(8), 1139-1160.

Bowen, S. A. (2006). Autonomy in communication: Inclusion in strategic management and ethical

decision‐making, a comparative case analysis. Journal of Communication Management, 10(4):

330-352.

Broom, G. M., & Dozier, D. M. (1986). Advancement for public relations role models. Public

Relations Review, 12(1), 37-56.

Cardwell, L. A., Williams, S., & Pyle, A. (2017). Corporate public relations dynamics: Internal vs.

external stakeholders and the role of the practitioner. Public Relations Review, 43(1), 152-162.

European Communication Monitor (2019), http://www.communicationmonitor.eu/wp-

content/uploads/dlm_uploads/ECM19-European-Communication-Monitor-2019.pdf

Amalia Triantafillidou and Prodromos Yannas

García, C. (2014). Clientelism and guanxi: Southern European and Chinese public relations in

comparative perspective. Public Relations Review, 40(5), 798-806.

García, C. (2015). PR, clientelism and economics: a comparison of southern Europe and Latin

America. Journal of Communication Management, 19(2), 133-149.

Gregory, A. (2020). Planning and managing public relations campaigns: A strategic approach. Kogan

Page Publishers.

Gregory, A., & Macnamara, J. (2019). An evaluation u-turn: From narrow organisational objectives to

broad accountability. Public Relations Review, 45(5), 1-12.

Grunig, J. E., & Grunig, L. A. (2000). Public relations in strategic management and strategic

management of public relations: Theory and evidence from the IABC Excellence project.

Journalism Studies, 1(2), 303-321.

Grunig, J. E., Grunig, L. A., Sriramesh, K., Huang, Y. H., & Lyra, A. (1995). Models of public

relations in an international setting. Journal of Public Relations Research, 7(3), 163-186.

Grunig, J., & Grunig, L. (1998), The relationship between public relations and marketing in excellence

organizations: Evidence from the IABC study, Journal of Marketing Communications, 4, 141-162.

Grunig, L. A., Grunig, J. E., & Dozier, D. M. (2002). Excellent public relations and effective

organizations: A study of communication management in three countries. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence

Erlbaum Associates, Inc.

Hallahan, K., Holtzhausen, D., Van Ruler, B., Verčič, D., & Sriramesh, K. (2007). Defining strategic

communication. International Journal of Strategic Communication, 1(1), 3-35.

Hutton, J. G., Goodman, M. B., Alexander, J. B., & Genest, C. M. (2001). Reputation management: the

new face of corporate public relations?. Public Relations Review, 27(3), 247-261.

Kim, S. Y., & Reber, B. H. (2008). Public relations’ place in corporate social responsibility:

Practitioners define their role. Public Relations Review, 34(4), 337-342.

Kitchen, P. J., & Panopoulos, A. (2010). Online public relations: The adoption process and innovation

challenge, a Greek example. Public Relations Review, 36(3), 222-229.

Lim, S., Goh, J., & Sriramesh, K. (2005). Applicability of the generic principles of excellent public

relations in a different cultural context: The case study of Singapore. Journal of Public Relations

Research, 17(4), 315-340.

Macnamara, J., & Gregory, A. (2018). Expanding evaluation to progress strategic communication:

Beyond message tracking to open listening. International Journal of Strategic Communication,

12(4), 469-486.

Macnamara, J., & Zerfass, A. (2017). Evaluation stasis continues in PR and corporate communication:

Asia-Pacific insights into causes. Communication Research and Practice, 3(4), 319-334.

Memon, K. R., Ghani, B., & Khalid, S. (2020). The relationship between corporate social responsibility

and employee engagement-A social exchange perspective. International Journal of Business

Science & Applied Management, 15(1), 1-16.

Moss, D., & Warnaby, G. (1998). Communications strategy? Strategy communication? Integrating

different perspectives. Journal of Marketing Communications, 4(3), 131-140.

Moss, D., Warnaby, G., & Newman, A. J. (2000). Public relations practitioner role enactment at the

senior management level within UK companies. Journal of Public Relations Research, 12(4), 277-

307.

Moss, D., Warnaby, G., & Thame, L. (1996). Tactical publicity or strategic relationship management?

An exploratory investigation of the role of public relations in the UK retail sector. European

Journal of Marketing, 30(12), 69-84.

Panigyrakis, G. G. (2015). The role of Public Relations Managers in Consumer PRODUCTS

Companies in Great Britain, Ireland, France and Greece: A Comparison Study of Demographic

Individual Characteristics and Job-Related Attitudes. In Proceedings of the 1994 Academy of

Marketing Science (AMS) Annual Conference (pp. 167-173). Springer, Cham.

Panigyrakis, G. G., & Poulis, A. G. (2009). Men and women as public relation managers in Greece and

Turkey: a comparison study of background variables, job-related factors and activities. EuroMed

Journal of Business, 4(3), 287-303.

Panigyrakis, G. G., & Veloutsou, C. A. (1998). Sex-related differences of public relations managers in

consumer goods companies in Greece and Italy. Women in Management Review, 13(2), 72-82.

Int. Journal of Business Science and Applied Management / Business-and-Management.org

Papatriantafyllou, G. (2008), Προγράμματα δημοσίων σχέσεων: Στρατηγική και εκτέλεση [Public

relations programs: Strategy and execution], Stamoulis Publishers, Athens, Greece.

Porter, L. V., & Sallot, L. M. (2005). Web power: a survey of practitioners’ World Wide Web use and

their perceptions of its effects on their decision-making power. Public Relations Review, 31(1),

111-119.

Porter, L., Sweetser, K., & Chung, D. (2009). The blogosphere and public relations: Investigating

practitioners' roles and blog use. Journal of Communication Management, 13(3): 250-267.

Reber, B. H., & Berger, B. K. (2006). Finding influence: examining the role of influence in public

relations practice. Journal of Communication Management, 10(3): 235-249.

Rhee, Y. (2002). Global public relations: A cross-cultural study of the excellence theory in South

Korea. Journal of Public Relations Research, 14(3), 159-184.

Singh, K. S. D., Abbasi, M. A., Abbasi, G. A., Amran, A., & Ahmed, E. R. (2021). Contemporary CSR

Model: Conceptualization, scale development, and validation to measure consumer

perceptions. International Journal of Business Science and Applied Management, 16(3), 63-85.

Steyn, B. (2007). Contribution of public relations to organizational strategy formulation. In E. L. Toth

(Ed.), The future of excellence in public relations and communication management. Challenges

for the next generation (pp. 137-72). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.

Steyn, B. (2009). The strategic role of public relations is strategic reflection: A South African research

stream. American Behavioral Scientist, 53(4), 516-532.

Steyn, B., & Niemann, L. (2014). Strategic role of public relations in enterprise strategy, governance

and sustainability—A normative framework. Public Relations Review, 40(2), 171-183.

Tam, L., Kim, J. N., Grunig, J. E., Hall, J. A., & Swerling, J. (2022). In search of communication

excellence: Public relations’ value, empowerment, and structure in strategic management. Journal

of Marketing Communications, 28(2), 183-206.

Theofilou, A., & Watson, T. (2014). The history of public relations in Greece from 1950 to 1980:

Professionalization of the “art”. Public Relations Review, 40(4), 700-706.

Toledano, M. (2018). Dialogue, strategic communication, and ethical public relations: Lessons from

Martin Buber’s political activism. Public Relations Review, 44(1), 131-141.

Tong, S. C., & Chan, F. F. Y. (2020). Exploring market-oriented relations in the digital era: A study of

public relations and marketing practitioners in Hong Kong. Journal of Communication

Management, 24(1): 65-82.

Triantafillidou, A., & Yannas, P. (2014). How public relations agencies in Greece respond to digital

trends. Public Relations Review, 40(5), 815-817.

Triantafillidou, A., & Yannas, P. (2021). Women in Public Relations in Greece. EUPRERA Report 3

(2)., in - Topić, M. (ed), EUPRERA report series. Leeds/Brussels: Creative Media and

Communications Research Ltd. & EUPRERA. ISSN 2633-2353.

Valentini, C. (2013). Public relations in the public sector. The role of strategic communication in the

Italian public administration. Sinergie Italian Journal of Management, 31(Sep-Dec), 93-113.

Valentini, C., & Sriramesh, K. (2014). To be, or not to be: Paradoxes in strategic public relations in

Italy. Public Relations Review, 40(1), 3-13.

Van Ruler, B. (2018). Communication theory: An underrated pillar on which strategic communication

rests. International Journal of Strategic Communication, 12(4), 367-381.

Van Ruler, B. (2020). An underrated pillar on which strategic communication rests. In Nothhaft, H.,

Werder, K. P., Verčič, D., & Zerfass, A. (Eds.)., Future Directions of Strategic Communication,

Routledge, New York.

Verčič, D., & Zerfass, A. (2016). A comparative excellence framework for communication

management. Journal of Communication Management, 20(4), 270-288.

Verčič, D., Van Ruler, B., Bütschi, G., & Flodin, B. (2001). On the definition of public relations: A

European view. Public Relations Review, 27(4), 373-387.

Verhoeven, P., Zerfass, A., & Tench, R. (2011). Strategic orientation of communication professionals

in Europe. International Journal of Strategic Communication, 5(2), 95-117.

Volk, S. C., & Zerfass, A. (2018). Alignment: Explicating a key concept in strategic communication.

International Journal of Strategic Communication, 12(4), 433-451.

Amalia Triantafillidou and Prodromos Yannas

Xavier, R., Johnston, K., Patel, A., Watson, T., & Simmons, P. (2005). Using evaluation techniques

and performance claims to demonstrate public relations impact: An Australian perspective. Public

Relations Review, 31(3), 417-424.

Yannas, P. (2004), Greece, In B. Van Ruler, D. Verčič (Eds.), Public relations and communication

management in Europe, Mouton de Gruyter, Berlin, pp. 169-184.

Zerfass, A., & Sherzada, M. (2015). Corporate communications from the CEO’s perspective: How top

executives conceptualize and value strategic communication. Corporate Communications: An

International Journal, 20(3): 291-301.

Zerfass, A., & Volk, S. C. (2018). How communication departments contribute to corporate success:

The communications contributions framework. Journal of Communication Management, 22(4):

397-415.

Zerfass, A., Verčič, D., & Volk, S. C. (2017). Communication evaluation and measurement: Skills,

practices and utilization in European organizations. Corporate communications: An International

Journal. 22(1): 2-18.

Zerfass, A., Verčič, D., Nothhaft, H., & Werder, K. P. (2018). Strategic communication: Defining the

field and its contribution to research and practice. International Journal of Strategic

Communication, 12(4), 487-505.

Zerfass, A., Verhoeven, P., Tench, R., Moreno, A., & Verčič, D. (2011). European Communication

Monitor 2011. Empirical insights into strategic communication in Europe. Results of an empirical

survey in 43 countries. Brussels, Belgium: EACD, EUPRERA.