Using a paired sample of 54 supervisor-public relations practitioner teams, this study examines how the role sent by the supervisor interacts with the role enacted by the most senior practitioner. Four role relationship end states are posited and found. The findings reveal that the most common supervisor-practitioner relationship is one in which the public relations manager role is sent and enacted. In addition, findings indicate that even when supervisors expect practitioners to enact the technician role, the majority of practitioners surveyed enact the manager role. It appears that practitioners are carving out a strategic role for themselves, as opposed to having this role forced upon them.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
Babbie, E. (1989). The practice of social research. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth.
2.
Bell, S. E. , & Bell, E. C. (1976). Public relations: Functional or functionary?Public Relations Review, 2, 47-57.
3.
Berlow, D. K. (1960). The process of communication: An introduction to theory and practice. New York: Holt, Rinehart & Winston.
4.
Biddle, B. J. , & Thomas, E. J. (1966). Role theory: Concepts and research. New York: Wiley.
5.
Broom, G. M. (1980, August). A comparison of roles played by men and women in public relations. Paper presented at the meeting of the Public Relations Division, Association for Education in Journalism, Boston.
6.
Broom, G. M. (1982). A comparison of sex roles in public relations. Public Relations Review, 8, 17-22.
7.
Broom, G. M. , & Dozier, D. M. (1986). Advancement for public relations role models. Public Relations Review, 12, 37-56.
8.
Broom, G. M. , & Dozier, D. M. (1990). Using research in public relations. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
9.
Carmines, E. C. , & Zeller, R. A. (1979). Reliability and validity assessment. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.
10.
Creedon, P. J. (1990, June). Public relations and women's work: Toward a feminist analysis of public relations roles. Paper presented at the meeting of the Public Relations Interest Group, International Communication Association, Dublin, Ireland.
11.
Dahl, R. A. (1957). The concept of power. Behavioral Science, 2, 201-215.
12.
Dozier, D. M. (1983, November). Toward a reconciliation of “role conflict” in public relations research. Paper presented at the meeting of the Western Communication Educators Conference, Fullerton, CA.
13.
Dozier, D. M. (1984). Program evaluation and role of practitioners. Public Relations Review, 10, 13-21.
14.
Dozier, D. M. (1986, August). The environmental scanning function of public relations practitioners and participation in management decision making. Paper presented to the Public Relations Division, Association for Education in Journalism and Mass Communication, Norman, OK.
15.
Dozier, D. M. (1987, May). Gender, environmental scanning, and participation in management decision making. Paper presented at the meeting of the Public Relations Interest Group, International Communication Association, Montreal, Canada.
16.
Dozier, D. M. (1988). Breaking public relations' glass ceiling. Public Relations Review, 14, 6-13.
17.
Ferguson, M. A. (1987, May). Utility of roles research to corporate communications: Power, leadership and decision-making. Paper presented at the meeting of the International Communication Association, Montreal, Canada.
18.
Grunig, J. E. (1990, June). What is excellence in public relations and what are the conditions in and around organizations that make it possible. Paper presented on the Chair's Panel on Excellence in Public Relations and Communication Management, Public Relations Interest Group, International Communication Association, Dublin, Ireland.
19.
Grunig, L. (1987, February). Power in the public relations department as a function of values, professionalism and organizational structure. Paper presented at the meeting of the 16th Annual Communications Conference, Howard University, Washington, DC.
20.
Hickson, D. J. , Hinings, C. R., Lee, C. A., Schneck, R. E., & Pennings, J. M. (1971). A strategic contingencies theory of intraorganizational power. Administrative Science Quarterly, 16, 216-229.
21.
How executives rate accountants, lawyers, PR specialists and others. (1980, December 2). Wall Street Journal, Sec. 2.
22.
Johnson, D. J. , & Acharya, L. (1982, July). Organizational decision making and public relations roles. Paper presented to the Public Relations Division, Association for Education in Journalism, Athens, OH.
23.
Katz, D. , & Kahn, R. L. (1966). The social psychology of organizations. New York: Wiley.
24.
Lauzen, M. (1992). Public relations roles, intraorganizational power and encroachment. Journal of Public Relations Research, 4(2), 61-80.
25.
Lindenmann, W. , & Lapetina, A. (1981). Management's view of the future of public relations. Public Relations Review, 8, 3-13.
26.
Merton, R. K. (1957). Social theory and social structure. Glencoe, IL: Free Press.
27.
Nunnally, J. C. (1967). Psychometric theory. New York: McGraw-Hill.
28.
O'Dwyer, J. (1989). O'Dwyer's directory of corporate communications. New York: Jack O'Dwyer.
29.
Rakow, L. F. (1989, May). From the feminization of public relations to the promise of feminism. Paper presented at the meeting of the Public Relations Interest Group, International Communication Association, San Francisco.
30.
Sullivan, B. S. , Dozier, D. M., & Hellweg, S. A. (1985). Practitioner pursuit of the ideal role. IPRA Review, 9(2), 14-18.
