Journals / Selçuk İletişim / 2018 / Cilt: 11 - Sayı: 2

PUBLIC ‘RELATIONS’; AMPIRICAL EVIDENCE ON ORGANIZATION RELATIONSHIP CULTIVATION STRATEGIES AND RELATIONSHIP OUTCOMES

HALKLA ‘İLİŞKİLER’; ÖRGÜTLERİN İLİŞKİ YETİŞTİRME STRATEJİLERİ VE İLİŞKİ ÇIKTILARI ÜZERİNE AMPİRİK BULGULAR

Pages
139–158
Publication Date
2022-10-19
DOI
—
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

In addition, there are important differences between the predictions of organizations on relations outputs and the perceptions of the publics.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:This study aims to solve the structure of relations between organizations and organizations by taking relationship management theory in background.
📊
Key Findings & Data:Towards this end, the study, which seeks empirical evidence on relationship-building strategies and outputs, presents the relations with the public in a way that focuses on the outputs of the strategies and relations that will relate to the organization and the publics rather than an understanding that only breaks the theoretical ties away from the theoretical ties.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:In addition, there are important differences between the predictions of organizations on relations outputs and the perceptions of the publics.
🔬Design:Research Article
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:Domain Parameters

Abstract

This study aims to solve the structure of relations between organizations and organizations by taking relationship management theory in background. Towards this end, the study, which seeks empirical evidence on relationship-building strategies and outputs, presents the relations with the public in a way that focuses on the outputs of the strategies and relations that will relate to the organization and the publics rather than an understanding that only breaks the theoretical ties away from the theoretical ties. In the research, the perception of both the organizations and the public in the construction process of the relationship was evaluated by field research. It has reached the conclusion that the relations of the organizations are directly affecting the relations outputs. In addition, there are important differences between the predictions of organizations on relations outputs and the perceptions of the publics.

Özet

Bu çalışma ilişki yönetimi teorisini ardalanına alarak, örgütlerle kamuların ilişkilerininyapısını çözümlemeyi amaçlamaktadır. Bu amaç doğrultusunda ilişki yetiştirme stratejilerive çıktılarına ilişkin ampirik bulgular arayan bu çalışma halkla “ilişkiler”i, kuramsalbağları koparılmış, sadece uygulamaları yöneten bir anlayışla değil, örgüt ve kamulararasındaki ilişkileri yetiştirecek stratejilere ve ilişkilerin çıktılarına odaklanan bir yönlesunmaktadır. Araştırmada, ilişki inşası sürecinde hem örgütlerin hem de kamularınalgıları, alan araştırması ile değerlendirmiştir. Örgütlerin ilişki yetiştirme stratejilerinin,ilişki çıktılarını doğrudan etkilediği sonucuna ulaşmıştır. Ayrıca, örgütlerin ilişkiçıktılarına ilişkin öngörüleri ile kamuların algılamaları arasında önemli farklarbulunmaktadır.

🔖

Cite This Article

TUNCER, A. İ. (2022). PUBLIC ‘RELATIONS’; AMPIRICAL EVIDENCE ON ORGANIZATION RELATIONSHIP CULTIVATION STRATEGIES AND RELATIONSHIP OUTCOMES. Selçuk İletişim, Cilt: 11 - Sayı: 2, 139–158. https://ajindex.com/articles/591514

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (10)

  1. Amin M, Isa Z and Fontaine R (2013) Islamic Banks: Contrasting The Drivers of Customer Satisfaction on Image, Trust, And Loyalty of Muslim and Non-Muslim Ustomers In Malaysia, International Journal of Bank Marketing, 31(2), 79-97.
  2. Berko R M, Rosenfeld L and Samovar L A (1997) Connecting, 2nd ed., Harcourt Brace College Publisher,
  3. New York, NY. Broom G M, Casey S and Ritchey J (1997) Toward A Concept and Theory of Organization-Public Relationships, Journal of Public Relations Research, 9(2), 83- 98. Dick A S and Basu K (1994) Customer Loyalty: Toward An Integrated Conceptual Framework, Journal of Academy of Marketing Science, 22(2), 45-6.
  4. Erjavec S H, Dmitrović T and Bržan P P (2016) Drivers of Customer Satisfaction And Loyality In Service Industries, Journal Of Business Economics and Management, 17 (5), 810-823.
  5. Ferguson M A (1984) Building Theory in Public Relations: Inter-Organizational Relationships. Paper Presented To The Public Relations Division, At The Annual Conference Of The Association For Education In Journalism And Mass Communication, Gainesville, FL, August Garbarino E and Mark S J (1999)
  6. The Different Roles of Satisfaction, Trust, and Commitment in Customer Relationships, Journal of Marketing, 63(2), 70-87.
  7. Grunig J E and Hung C J (2002) The Effect of Relationships on Reputation and Reputation on Relationships: A Cognitive, Behavioural Study. Paper Presented To The Public Relations Society Of America Educator's Academy, Miami, Florida. Grunig J E (1993) Image and Substance: From Symbolic to Behavioral Relationships. Public Relations Review, 91(2), 121-139.
  8. Grunig J E and Huang Y H (2000) From Organizational Effectiveness to Relationship Indicators: Antecedents of Relationships, Public Relations Strategies, and Relationship Outcomes. In J. A. Grunig L A, Grunig J E and Dozier D M (2002) Excellent Public Relations and Effective Organizations: A Study of Communication Management in Three Countries. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. Guiniven J (2005) "Podcast as a PR Tool: What Do You Need To Know?" Public Relations Tactics, 12(9), 6. Holtzhausen D R (2000) Postmodern Values in Public Relations, Journal of Public Relations Research, 12(1), 93-114.
  9. Holtzhausen D R and Voto R (2002) Resistance From the Margins: The Postmodern Public Relations Practitioner as Organizational Activist, Journal of Public Relations Research, 14(1), 57-84.
  10. Hon L C and Grunig J E (1999) Guidelines for Measuring Relationships in Public Relations. Gainesville, FL: Th