PART III

Advanced Practices in Public Relations Management

 

 

CHAPTER 10

Issues Management and Sectors of the Public Relations Industry

This chapter discusses the issues management function, with its connection to four sectors of the public relations industry: corporate, agency/firm, government, and nonprofit. Whether the location of the public relations function is in a corporation, an agency or firm, a government, or an NGO, it will always have issues management at its highest level. The issues management process is tasked with strategic forecasting, scenario building, trend monitoring, and problem solving for an organization in an effort to be proactive and to avert crises. To conduct issues management is to engage in the public policy process, or how the organization interacts with governments, regulatory bodies, and various types of stakeholders and publics. Public policies are those which an organization needs to interact with its external environment, as well as internal policies that are visible to (and often critiqued by) publics. Mission, vision, values, and integrative communication are used to create and enact an organization’s specific public policies. All sectors of public relations are also tasked with not only managing issues, but managing interest groups or conducting activism.

The Executive Function of Issues Management

Issues management is the strategic process by which an organization identifies potential problems and trends and works to address issues that could impact it in the future by managing its policy. The issues management process is a long-term, problem-solving function placed at the highest level of the organization to adapt organizational policy and engage in the public affairs process. Issues management allows the top communicator to interact with government and publics, advising the CEO about the values of key publics and priority publics, and how they enhance or detract from the organization’s reputation with those publics. Those who enhance can facilitate or become strategic partners. Those who detract can constrain an organization’s management and, eventually, its autonomy.

Anything can be an issue. As Heath explained, “An issue is a contestable question of fact, value, or policy that affects how stakeholders grant or withhold support and seek changes through public policy.”¹ Involved stakeholders and publics include key executives of the organization, legislators, government regulators, interest groups, community publics, elected officials, and so on. Issues can arise from positive things, but they normally have the potential to damage an organization by harming its profitability.

Because of its linkage to government regulation, the issues management function is often within the same department as public affairs. In most corporations, issues management and public affairs are inextricably linked. Organizations must manage public policy issues that arise as a consequence of doing business, from governmental regulation, from stakeholders who demand accountability, or from activists who petition the government. Organizational policy must continually be revised and updated to reflect the current regulatory environment as well as the demands placed on it by publics. Relevant axioms are:

• Manage your issues or your issues will manage you.
• An ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure.

Why is issues management so important? If an organization is unresponsive to the appeals of publics or stakeholders, they will lobby the government to regulate the organization or seek other public policy changes to be forced onto the organization in the public policy arena.² An organization loses its autonomy, meaning that key decisions are legislated and regulated rather than made strategically by management. Regulation often costs the organization a great deal of money (to show compliance) and resources (such as time or training). Ideally, the organization’s management would know how to strategically allocate its own resources and would
manage issues in a more efficient and effective way than by having ­compliance legislated and standardized across an industry. Maintaining autonomy is a primary goal of issues management.³

Issues management also saves money for the organization by preventing expenditures on crises, fines, or lawsuits. It can create efficiencies by handling problems before they become large-scale issues or crises. Preventing problems is always more effective management than solving large-scale problems or managing crises. Good issues management allows an organization to be proactive in defining problems rather than simply responding to problems defined by others. It scans the environment to monitor for emerging issues that can affect the organization so that there is time to do research and create alternatives for managing the issue (rather than simply reacting to a problem later).

As a proactive function, issues management also seeks to enhance ethics so that it can build long-term, trusting relationships with publics of all kinds from in government to grass roots. Heath notes, “the more that an organization meets key publics’ need for information, the more likely they are to be praised rather than criticized.”⁴ Ethical management that does not seek to exploit publics or other groups allows the issues management function to truly contribute to organizational effectiveness: “Issues communication is best when it fosters mutual understanding that can build trust. This communication must be two-way and collaborative.”⁵

Issues management should be analytical, based on research that enhances an understanding of the view of publics by bringing input into managerial decision making from outside the organization. This research can be used to provide vital information in the strategic planning process. However, issues management cannot resolve all the problems with communication or make all decisions mutually beneficial.⁶ Although some issues are intractable, management can incorporate the values of publics into strategic decisions when possible so that less resistance from those publics is evidenced.

Issues management is conducted on a continual, ongoing basis. ­Issues managers monitor, research, listen, advise, and communicate about a number of concurrent issues at any given time. How many issues are managed will depend on the size of the organization and the turbulence of the industry in which it operates, but 12 ongoing issues, organized into a priority order, would be normal. The process of issues management is similar to the RACE process, but it goes into more detail on actions and steps that must be taken. A number of scholars in management and other disciplines have studied the most effective steps for issues management.⁷

A vital phase of issues management is the issues scanning, monitoring, and analysis phase. If an issues manager fails to identify an emerging issue, the hope of creating a proactive plan to manage the issue diminishes. Once an issue emerges into the public policy arena, control over defining the issue is lost and time becomes critical. Monitoring for emerging issues and predicting the future importance of issues is called issues forecasting. Issues forecasting is dynamic because issue elements and interactions with publics are unpredictable. Sometimes issues are brought to light by competitors, industry associations, NGOs, or the news media. An argument could be made that the research and analysis of an issue is the most important phase for determining priorities and how to best handle the new issue. An element of strategy exists within data collection, its analysis, and its interpretation into strategy and policy. Remember, “Data are only as good as the insights of people who analyze them.”⁸ When evaluating the potential impact of issues, organizations may engage in scenario building, by asking “what if” questions to prioritize and plan strategic responses. Although the issues management process is often necessarily fluid, the general steps are presented below in Table 10.1, based on the work of management and public policy scholars and updated for use in public relations here.

Organizational responses within an issues management framework generally take one of four forms:

1. Proactive: actively defines the issue and strategic responses to it.
2. Interactive: seek mutually acceptable outcomes among stakeholders.
3. Inactive: apathetic, ignores the change or simply adapts.
4. Reactive: usually negative, fights, obstructs, may be forced to accommodate.

Clearly, the first two of these strategies are strategic responses by management, proactive and interactive; the next two are not strategic and not optimal because they each decrease the autonomy of management. Regulatory impact, or “constraints imposed by outside groups or interests,”⁹ is costly in terms of both compliance and reputation. The less strategic responses are normally argued against by organizations that seek to maintain their autonomy in order to create more effective management. Good issues management can prevent or solve a large number of problems; however, accidents, natural disasters, and other emergencies still offer numerous concerns to be managed. Astute issues management is vital to the life of an organization.

Sectors of the Public Relations Industry

Public relations is a large discipline that can be subdivided into many types of pursuits. There are four different sectors into which we can categorize the public relations profession, each containing many different specializations:

1. Corporate public relations/corporate communication;
2. Agency public relations;
3. Government/public affairs/lobbying; and
4. Nonprofit/NGO/activist public relations.

An overview of how these areas operate is offered, and conceptually each is linked to both issues management and (perhaps more episodically) activism.

Corporate Communication Sector

Corporate communication is a business-oriented public relations function with an incentive for building relationships on behalf of that enterprise. It also recognizes that governments and nonprofits/NGOs and agencies often play a role in the communication. Communication is a constant with government regulatory agencies, or in public affairs with public policy initiatives and lobbying efforts. Likewise, nonprofits play a large part of corporate communications efforts in building strategic partnerships, relating to the community, corporate social responsibility and philanthropy initiatives, and relationships with activist groups. Of course, a profit motive is a primary and worthy reason to engage in corporate communication. Most of the efforts undertaken in a corporate environment seek to further organizational effectiveness, increasing competitiveness and enhancing profit.

Organizations can vary widely in the resources and number of employees devoted to communication. Reporting relationships and functional responsibilities also differ depending on the nature of the company, such as whether it is consumer oriented, business-to-business, small, global, public, and so on.

In many organizations, the senior leader of the communication team reports directly to the CEO, whereas in others, that individual may report to the head of legal, marketing, or human resources. Regardless of the specific reporting relationship, in virtually all companies, the function is responsible for communicating with the media and usually has the lead role in developing employee communication (i.e., internal relations). Values management or training, instilling, and refining core values inside the organization is often part of the job. Advising the CEO on ethical dilemmas, or acting as the ethical conscience, is normally part of the job for the chief communications officer (CCO).¹⁰ Public relations activities, such as the management of corporate events, press conferences, product launches, large employee gatherings, organizational culture initiatives, and leadership meetings also are managed by the CCO and his or her team.

Media relations is often its own department and supported by outsourcing to an agency/firm. Most corporations have at least one ­social media manager to monitor and update digital information. The communication function is also charged with managing investor relations—that is often a smaller department within public relations focused on shareholders and financial analysts. In publicly traded companies, those activities involve the release of quarterly and annual reports on financial results and providing timely information to financial media and analysts.

Most CCOs say that there is no such thing as a typical day in the corporate world. Some of the most important qualities of successful CCOs are flexibility, integrity, patience, analytical ability, team leadership, and the ability to remain calm under pressure. All organizations face potentially damaging issues every day. The CCO must monitor and manage rapidly developing issues on an ongoing basis. Many organizations also operate internationally, meaning that both strategy and messages must be tailored for global diversity. CCO’s also spend a great deal of time managing their teams, analyzing research, and forming relationships throughout the other areas of the organization.

Public Relations Agency/Firm Sector

In addition to in-house corporate departments, most organizations also have a contract with public relations agencies and firms to develop and implement communication programs. They range from full service to specialists who fill a particular client need. Some are units of larger, umbrella organizations, and some are individually owned.

Full Service

The largest agencies and firms offer a full spectrum of services, from traditional media relations and event planning to highly specialized research, training, crisis management, and social media expertise. Large agencies usually have a global reach and offices in numerous cities throughout the world.

Public Affairs, Government Relations, and Lobbying

These agencies and firms focus on developing public affairs positions for or against legislative initiatives. They organize grassroots campaigns, engage in educational efforts especially in connecting with leaders and think tanks, lobbying members of government, train clients to lobby, and often lead coalitions that link like-minded members/organizations.

Strategic Counsel Services

Some focus specifically on what often is referred to as “strategic communication,” including mergers and acquisitions, investor relations, and defending against hostile takeovers. These agencies/firms are brought in as experts when a company decides to make a major move. It is common for both parties in hostile takeover attempts to retain competing strategic agencies or firms.

Digital Public Relations

These agencies and firms are devoted entirely to the digital realm of online public relations and the ever-changing arena of social media. As big data and artificial intelligence (AI) become more common, the importance of analyses in this area grows; it also involves social media monitoring and routine output of messages.

Corporate Identity Services

These utilize extensive research to develop brand platforms for their clients that build on the existing perceptions of companies or their brands. Their expertise includes graphic design, naming, brand engagement programs, and complete identity systems.

Corporate Social Responsibility

Agencies/firms work with clients to determine areas in which they can match their areas of expertise with global human needs, such as hunger, health, the environment, and poverty. They design programs that help address these needs by utilizing the employees, technical expertise, and financial resources of their clients.

Trends in Agencies and Firms

Many organizations find that they can better manage the ebbs and flows of communication activity by hiring an outside company for certain communication activities in lieu of using internal staff. When the demand for communication is high, organizations can increase the amount of agency support they receive; if there is less demand, they can cut back on the support of outside firms.

Most agencies and firms are expected to provide strategic counsel, not just tactical output, so that their teams must employ research that identifies pending issues and opportunities for the client. These aspects normally include competitive threats, labor relationships, legislative and regulatory constraints, and global trends. Their recommendations often challenge the organization to consider the implications of policy changes or major operational decisions.

Careers: Agency/Firm Life versus Corporate Life

The résumés of strategic communicators often include experience in both agencies/firms and corporate positions. The former typically offer entry-level technician roles; corporations normally require some experience with their industry.

The agency/firm world offers the opportunity for varied assignments with multiple clients in a wide range of industries, and numerous opportunities for travel or foreign assignment. However, entry-level positions are highly focused on technician activities: events, publicity, and media pitching. Agencies also may expect long hours for lower pay.

In corporate communication, most employees are focused on a single industry or topic. The communicator may be responsible for numerous public relations subfunctions across the department. Corporate communication positions can provide a more strategic focus and possibilities for advancement into management. Benefits offered in corporations are usually quite good and salaries are higher than in other sectors of public relations.

Government Relations and Public Affairs Sector

Government relations and public affairs are the types of public relations that deal with how an organization interacts with government, with governmental regulators, the legislative, executive, and regulatory arms of government, as well as the taxpayers to whom is owed a special stewardship.¹¹ The government relations and public affairs functions are discussed together in this section; the two functions are often referred to as synonyms, but there are very minor differences.

Government relations is the branch of public relations that helps an organization communicate with the government—through its representatives at all levels. This role is an “organizational-to-government” responsibility (normally corporate) or government to constituent role.

Public affairs is the type of public relations that helps an organization interact with the government, legislators, interest groups, and the media. It seeks to participate in policy creation and includes numerous and varied groups of people.

These two functions often overlap when questions of public policy are at stake: “public policy issues are those with the potential of maturing into governmental legislation or regulation (international, federal, state, or local).”¹²

Public affairs is the external side of the function that deals more broadly with public policy issues of concern among constituents, activists, or groups who lobby the government on behalf of a certain perspective. They are often issues of public concern that involve grassroots initiatives, meaning that everyday citizens organize and create a movement in favor of a certain issue or perspective. Public affairs specialists seek to resolve conflict or negotiate with these groups to create an ethical solution to problems. An organization must also use public affairs to communicate about policy and procedures with investors, regulators, employees, communities, suppliers, distributors, and customers.¹³

Public affairs specialists act as lobbyists on behalf of their organizations, and they interact with publics who are interested in lobbying the government for legislation regarding particular issues. Public affairs specialists might focus on a particular area of public policy, such as international trade agreements or exchange rates, security and terrorism, equitable wages and working conditions, the regulatory process, safely disposing of production by-products, and so on.

Issues management and public affairs are normally housed within the same department, team, or CCO. Issues management and public affairs seek to facilitate interaction between organizations and governments. However, issues management is the larger function because it deals with governmental and regulatory publics, plus many other types of publics.¹⁴ Governmental relations is more narrowly focused on legislative, regulatory, and lobbying issues.

Lobbying constitutes a large part of government relations and public affairs. Communicators undertake an educational role in the lobbying process: research, analyses, and policy formulation; they communicate to legislative publics or interest groups. Lobbyists educate elected ­officials on an organization’s point of view, contribution to society, regulatory environment, and business practices. The legislative process is one in which organizations can be proactive and integrative in their participation, and help to inform legislation with real-world data and implications. ­Lobbyists are hired to advance a perspective for or against legislation—and there are also lobbyists on the other side of that issue. Many issues in the public policy arena are hotly contested, as discussed in the case concluding this chapter.

Nonprofit, NGO, and Activist Public Relations Sector

Nonprofit or not-for-profit groups (a “501(c)3” in the U.S. tax code) are those that exist in order to educate, fund research, advocate, or lobby on behalf of a public cause or initiative. Nonprofit groups are those with an educational mission existing on behalf of a public interest, to promote an idea or cause, or to raise funds for research on an issue. Nonprofit public relations often relies on member relations: it seeks to maintain and develop relationships with supportive stakeholders who can distribute the organization’s message, and often pay a membership fee to assist in providing an operational budget. Fund-raising or development is a vital part of nonprofits, tasked with raising funds from large donors, writing grants for governmental support, and conducting fund-raising with smaller, private donors. Most industry associations or trade groups also fall into this sector of public relations. Almost every industry imaginable has an association representing their collective interest.

Nongovernmental organizations, or NGOs, are “soft-power” groups who do not hold the political appointees of governmental agencies but often contain former politicians as well as political staffers, social activists, and active netizens. They exist in order to carry out initiatives, such as humanitarian tasks, that governments are not willing to handle. NGOs often form around social issues or causes to act in concert with government but they are not controlled by it (although their sovereignty is questioned in some nations). The top executives of NGOs are often noteworthy former government officials. NGOs often move at the ground level to establish goodwill as a part of establishing credibility.¹⁵ An example is Human Rights Watch.

Activist groups are special interest groups that arise around an organization in order to establish some type of change around their particular issue of concern. Activist groups normally arise from a “grassroots movement,” meaning that it comes from everyday citizens rather than those who work in government. That fact makes it different from an NGO; activist groups can be less official or formal in structure, compared to nonprofits or NGOs. Examples would be The Cloud Foundation, as contrasted with People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals (PETA).

Activist groups can differ in their purposes and reasons for existing, and in the amount of action-taking behavior that they undertake. For example, some activist groups are termed “obstructionist” because they obstruct a resolution to the problem in order to gain media notoriety for their issue and new membership. An example is Greenpeace.¹⁶ Groups who advocate at any cost, sometimes including violence, are sometimes called advocacy groups, but in layman’s terms there is often no distinction between an activist and an advocate. Other activist groups may use more integrative strategies to resolve problems by having changes integrated into organizational policy.

Responding to Activism

Activist groups exert power on organizations in many forms of pressure, using public relations strategies and tactics, such as lobbying, boycotts, or phone calls to legislators. Activist groups are usually filled with younger, educated, and motivated ideologues with a strong devotion to their cause. These groups are often quite effective in their efforts to integrate their values into organizational policy.

Organizations might attempt to “ignore” activist pressure, but that approach simply is not effective because it prolongs or exacerbates the activist group’s efforts. Then activist groups may ask for congressional hearings, Senate committee investigations, the organization to be broken up, fined, or regulated. Activists can both influence legislators and change public opinion.

The most effective way to approach activist groups is to engage them in symmetrical dialogue to discover their issues of concern, values, wants, and priorities. Collaborative efforts to resolve conflict normally lessen the damage; refusing to deal with activist groups often results in the filing of lawsuits and injunctions. The efficacy of activist groups, even small ones, is well documented. The Excellence Study contends that “regardless of the length of the dispute, the intensity of the conflict or the media coverage involved... all activist groups studied had disrupted the target” organization.¹⁷ Activists may experience less success against the behemoth of government because of its intractable structure, diffused accountability, and bureaucratic nature of the institutions involved. In such instances, activist groups may band together to form an activist coalition to collectively petition the government for redress.

Integrative Strategy: Holding face-to-face meetings with activists, brainstorming sessions, or joint “summits” tends to work well in building understanding. The activist group needs to understand the organization’s business model and regulatory constraints. This strategy can result in novel adaptations of ideas that provide a win-win solution to issues. Valuing the concerns of activists sometimes offers enough respect for them to then target less-collaborative organizations. Using ethics, conflict resolution, negotiation, and symmetrical dialogue creates an integrative environment. An integrative approach allows relationships to be built and lessens the damage that activists can cause to the reputation of organization.

Case Study

Wild Horse Public Policy: A Modern-Day Shootout at the O.K. Corral

Public affairs issues often center on a conflict of ethical values or rights
between organizations and publics, and sometimes organizations, publics, and one or more branches of government. Government public ­affairs specialists and activist group public relations specialists often clash in these instances, and history is usually the judge of which side acted with ethical rectitude.

An example would be the grassroots movement in the United States to protect wild horses from “permanent removal” by the government. Wild horse “roundups,” run by the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) in the U. S. Department of the Interior, are morally objectionable to numerous activist groups for horses, burros, and animals. BLM’s helicopter roundups often result in wild horses being sent to slaughter, or the captured horses languishing, dying of exposure and other problems brought on by confinement, or being killed due to injuries sustained in the miles of chase over rocky terrain by helicopters. Taxpayers may also object to the costs: the 48,000 wild horses in pens cost each person $5 per day to maintain in terms of personnel and facilities; round-up contractors net $850 per horse (dead or alive) and, in many instances, contractors have earned millions of dollars annually paid by the government.¹⁸ Accountability and stewardship at BLM have been lacking. Investigations of the BLM holding facilities have revealed the most cruel and inhumane of conditions in which the equines are kept. Animal protection and animal rights organizations have protested or filed lawsuits on behalf of the horses.

An annual ban on horse slaughter for meat, backed by the 200-member, bipartisan Animal Protection Caucus, was signed into law by President Trump in 2018. However, the BLM made an “end-run” around that legislation by allowing selling the horses 24-at-a-time to wholesalers, who then sell the horses for slaughter. A horrific death awaits countless of these noble creatures who are considered a national treasure by many, as well as a symbol of liberty and the rugged individualism that inspired westward expansion.

Defenders of horse slaughter for human consumption, including the meatpacking industry and its lobbyists, as well as the U.S. Department of the Interior and BLM, argue that it provides an inexpensive way to dispose of unwanted animals. The ranking member of the U.S. House Committee on Agriculture, Collin Peterson (D-MN) said, “These unwanted horses are often sick, unfit, or problem animals.” Yet, the BLM’s own data show that the horses are healthy enough to offer for paid adoption, or sale, for BLM revenue generation.

Cattle ranchers use public lands so that their private cattle can graze at practically no cost; they argue that the wild horses cause overgrazing. However, the BLM’s own research has found that not to be the case: There are about 2 million cattle grazing on public lands compared to an estimated 82,000 wild horses.¹⁹ Research also found that wild horses are healthy; natural predation, water scarcity, and extreme weather all act to limit herd size. For the wild horses who are adopted, enthusiasts train them to be loyal sport and pleasure mounts.

Further complicating matters is the fact that miners and the BLM earn a large profit from the uranium mines on these lands, as well as gold and other mining interests. It is unclear how the wild horses limit mining, yet the BLM argues for their permanent removal near mining operations, and near uranium mines in particular. If mines are in a Herd Management Area (where horses were found when the 1971 Wild Horse and Burro Act was passed by Congress) mining companies want the horses removed to use the water on the land for mining opportunities.

The Cloud Foundation was founded by Emmy-award winning documentarian Ginger Kathrens with the mission: “We protect and preserve America’s wild horses and burros.”²⁰ She started the group because she wanted to fight for a policy that:

Allows wild horses to be managed on the range—not in dirt corrals where they are vulnerable. They live in family units that are critical to the survival of the wild horses. Their family is a unique and complex social arrangement but shattered when roundups occur.

The Cloud Foundation, made up of 13 volunteer board members and 2 staff members, uses social media to inform a half-million-followers of an active public about the plight of the wild herds.

Kathrens is the one of two Humane Advocates approved by Congress to participate in the Wild Horse and Burro Advisory Board (of nine members) in the U.S. Department of the Interior. The Cloud Foundation also has an educational mission, participates in numerous public events, protests, and investigations, as well as documents the lives of horses and burros in the wild and in round ups. It is supported by donations, including those for its legal fund. They have numerous lawsuits and injunctions against the BLM. The government’s power often means roundups and sales to slaughterhouses go forward despite the best efforts of animal welfare groups. Because of that power differential, activist groups often form coalitions. In this case, 150 animal-related groups united into a coalition for the horses against what they see as government exploitation and profiteering by ranchers, regulators, miners, and politicians. The activist coalition petitions the government for responsible stewardship in its designated Herd Management Areas, humane treatment, and an end to the sale of horses for slaughter.

At the core of this debate is an ethical divergence over the value of equine life and the role of horses in American society, iconography, and history. Issues management plays a tremendous role in a debate such as this one, in which priorities, values, and relevant facts are still being defined. For example, are horses indigenous? Many scientists say so, but the BLM resists this classification because then the animals could be classified as a protected species. If they are imported, even with bloodlines ranging back to the Conquistadors, they are defined as expendable. Definitions and facts of an issue matter (refer to Table 10.1, step 3).

At risk is the future of not only the horses who live free in American herds, but also the survival of the American wild horse: activists argue the need for genetic diversity of a large enough gene pool for survival of the horses. Yet, billions of dollars are at stake in the ranching, meatpacking, transport, and mining industries, as well as for the BLM, the U.S. Department of the Interior, the campaigns of elected officials at all levels, and the resources invested in education, lawsuits, injunctions, and legislation by animal rights activists. As history shows with the civil rights movement and others, defining social issues of justice, values, and rights can be a slow and tumultuous, even violent, process. In a modern-day shootout at the O.K. Corral, activists and government public affairs specialists will launch competing issues management and public policy initiatives. They each vie to define the issue in the minds of voting publics and legislators. Only time will tell who is still standing when the dust settles, and how the issue of the American wild horse is ultimately defined and resolved.

Chapter Summary

Issues management was defined and discussed as the highest level executive problem solving and prevention function of public relations. The six steps of effective issues management, heavily based on research and analysis, including an ethical analysis, were explained. Issues management is inextricably linked to the public affairs process because of its role in policy creation across sectors of the public relations industry. Primary sectors of the public relations industry are corporate communication; agencies; government relations; and nonprofit, NGO’s, and activist groups. All sectors use issues management and public policy, and issues managers are normal professionals with the most experience and responsibility in their respective areas. Activists public relations hold the ability to impact the public policy of corporations but have less influence when petitioning the government. Activist coalitions are often formed when that is the case. Research shows that an organization should best respond to pressure from activist groups with symmetrical dialogue, ethics, respect, and integrative strategy.