Search in book...
Toggle Font Controls
Create new playlist

Name your new playlist

Playlist description (optional)
Sign In

Email address

Password

Forgot Password?

or

Continue with Facebook

Continue with Google
Sign Up

Full Name

Email address

Confirm Email Address

Password

or

Continue with Facebook

Continue with Google

7
Coordination and Control, Standardization and Localization

Keywords

global efficiency; multicultural; polycentric; standardization; localization; coordination control

Central Themes

Strategies such as coordination, control, standardization, and localization are frequently refined by multinational organizations (MNOs) to carry out their public relations functions and practices around the globe.
The techniques and efforts used to integrate and evaluate global operations follow three principles: efficiency, learning, and flexibility or responsiveness.
Standardization improves organizational efficiency by integrating public relations operations across various world locations into a more cohesive and collaborative state.
Localization improves the effectiveness of public relations, or the ability of a program or campaign to achieve a desired effect.
Environmental factors play a role in an organization's decision to localize.

Introduction

The advent of globalization has made it imperative to comprehend strategic and tactical public relations choices from a global perspective. Global and multicultural public relations can be best understood as the strategies employed by organizations in any environment in order to engage in effective two‐way communication with stakeholders in an effort to build enduring symbiotic relationships. These environments are no longer isolated from one another, meaning the influence an organization has on its stakeholders at home (where it is headquartered) impacts its influence on publics elsewhere, and vice versa. The impact may occur through communications campaigns, crisis situations, or political or socioeconomic upheavals. Equally important is the transnational environment, where groups' and institutions' activities can have a simultaneous impact in several world locations and, perhaps, globally. As a consequence, organizations planning, executing, and evaluating global programs should understand this multigeographic and virtual dynamic. This chapter will focus on the mechanics of public relations management from a global perspective. Moreover, it will look at how multinational organizations (MNOs) are planning, implementing, and managing their global strategic communications efforts. Strategies such as coordination, control, standardization, and localization are frequently refined by MNOs in carrying out their public relations functions and practices around the globe. In sum, the chapter will delve into the coordination and control mechanisms required to manage the global public relations function while aiming to strike a balance between standardization and localization.

Coordination and Control

Lenovo, the world's second‐largest personal computer manufacturer (Shah 2012), has principal operations in China, Singapore, and the United States; seven research centers in China and one each in Japan and the United States; sales headquarters in China, France, Singapore, and the United States; and four manufacturing centers in China and one each in India, Mexico, and the United States (Lenovo 2015). This complex structure is typical of corporations operating globally, and requires coordination and control of functional areas, including public affairs or public relations, among other related communications functions.

Coordination has been defined as “the linking or integrating of activities into a unified system,” and control systems as “the measurement of performance so companies can respond appropriately to changing conditions” (Daniels et al. 2013, p. 646). Examples of coordination mechanisms are all the components of the global supply chain, as well as supplier relations, logistics, and the administration between the headquarters and subsidiaries of all communications programs and activities. Examples of control systems include structure and performance assessments. Multinational corporations (MNCs) use coordination and control mechanisms “to synchronize, integrate, and evaluate value activities” (Daniels et al. 2013, p. 574). In particular, the coordination and control of global public relations or public affairs have been conceptualized and documented through cultural and transnational crisis perspectives (e.g. de Mooij 2010; Molleda and Laskin 2010).

The techniques and efforts used to integrate and evaluate global operations follow three principles: efficiency, learning, and flexibility or responsiveness (Bartlett and Ghoshal 2002). These principles, in a global public relations context, take on different connotations. Global efficiency is the coordination and control, with various degrees of centralization or decentralization, of the management of programs, campaigns, plans, and daily activities or tactics. Worldwide learning is the documentation, sharing, analysis, and perhaps awarding or rewarding of the best domestic and multinational practices. Finally, multinational flexibility or national responsiveness is the need to adapt or conform to country‐specific legal or social regulations, as well as stakeholders' and consumers' expectations and needs. Two out of the three principles, efficiency and flexibility or responsiveness, imply a continuum between two extremes: standardization and localization. This will be addressed next.

Standardization and Localization

The main assumption of coordination by standardization is operational consistency, which entails the application of “rules and precise procedures” that help an MNO “leverage its core competency as well as minimize inefficiencies” (Daniels et al. 2013, p. 574). In global public relations, standardization means the consistency of programs and strategies across dispersed world markets of the MNO. Coordination by standardization entails “universal rules and procedures that apply to units worldwide” (Daniels et al. 2013, p. 574). This also includes policies, rules, and procedures for global strategic communications and its various areas of specialization. On the other hand, localization is about understanding and accepting unique local challenges.

The decision over standardization versus localization definitely goes beyond product, pricing, and distribution to include the choice of communication strategy adopted by an MNO (Schmid and Kotulla 2011). Pudelko and Harzing (2008) suggest considering both internal and external factors in choosing between them. Molleda et al. (2012) reviewed the literature on standardization and localization from a multidisciplinary perspective to conceptualize and empirically test the extent of localization practiced by MNOs. They conducted a content analysis of the online newsrooms of US‐based MNO subsidiaries in China, India, and the United Kingdom, and found a high extent of localization in the form of localized newsrooms on organizational websites, with news releases being the most common localized information subsidy on the corporate portals. The extent of localization was also found to be dependent on the industry type and the level of impact the corporation had on its stakeholders.

A similar study by Halliburton and Ziegfeld (2009) analyzed how major European multinationals communicate using their organizational websites and create corporate identities. The study found evidence that organizations adopt a “glocal” approach, which varies according to the industry type. The discussion on standardization versus localization is significant for the tourism industry due to its uniqueness. Gotham (2005) analyzed how tourism, a truly global industry, integrates with local actions to develop different forms of the industry. Tourism is seen as a process that symbolizes the differences and commonalities between standardization and localization (Gotham 2005).

The Standardization–Localization Paradox

Studies on the management of the public relations function in MNOs underscore the need for a balanced approach to standardization and localization (Newburry and Yakova 2006; Molleda and Laskin 2010). Balance is required because the adoption of one approach to the exclusion of the other can have unintended consequences for MNOs. In an attempt to explain the delicate balance necessary between standardization and localization, Wakefield (2009, p. 10) proposed that MNOs should “think global and local and act global and local” (italics in original).

On the one hand, standardization improves organizational efficiency by integrating public relations operations in various world locations into a cohesive, collaborative unit through formal control and informal coordination. From this ethnocentric perspective, public relations techniques and efforts are the same in home and host countries. Standardization enables MNOs to accomplish organizational goals and objectives through consistent communications at a reduced cost across geographical borders. It also allows MNOs to effectively manage transnational crises. However, a standardized approach to public relations programs can be less effective because it does not consider the social, cultural, and political differences between home and host countries.

On the other hand, localization improves public relations' effectiveness, or the ability of a program or campaign to achieve a desired effect. This polycentric perspective assumes that public relations is practiced differently wherever an MNO has operations (Grunig 2006). Localization allows subsidiaries to adapt corporate messages to address the self‐interests, expectations, and cultural sensitivities of local stakeholders (Molleda and Laskin 2010). A localized approach can also prevent issues from developing into crises through environmental scanning conducted at the local level (Molleda and Laskin 2010). However, the increase in autonomy of the public relations departments of a subsidiary caused by localization can also lead to inconsistent communications about the organization (Botan 1992; Wakefield 2011).

The Localization Decision

While much of the research on global public relations has described the factors that influence the standardization–localization decision, little research has been conducted to understand the decision‐making process used by professionals in global agencies in deciding whether and how to localize strategies and tactics. Verčič et al. (1996) and Wakefield (1997) conducted the first systematic study of the standardization–localization paradox. This research resulted in the generic/specific theory of global public relations, which proposes a set of eight universal principles derived from the Excellence Theory and five factors that influence the implementation of public relations in different host countries. These five factors are: (i) the level of development of the host country; (ii) its political, legal, and cultural environments; (iii) the language difference between home and host countries; (iv) the degree of activism in the country; and (v) the characteristics of the mass media (Verčič et al. 1996; Wakefield 1997). As suggested by this model, the generic principles are inextricably linked to the application of country‐specific public relations programs (Wakefield 2011). Therefore, macro‐level organizational variables, such as the complexity of the organization, corporate culture, shared expectations about public relations, and public relations participation in organizational decision‐making, should all influence decisions about whether and how to localize (e.g. Dozier and Broom 1995).

Other internal organizational factors play a role in the implementation of local public relations programming. Lim (2010) reports that the autonomy of a subsidiary plays a key role in localization. Subsidiaries in host countries need enough autonomy from corporate headquarters in the home country to tailor public relations efforts to local conditions. After Molleda and Laskin (2010) reviewed the existing literature on the coordination and control of international business and public relations, they proposed that larger or strategically important subsidiaries have more influence and greater autonomy to implement localized strategies. Similarly, they argued that greater localization is likely in host countries when headquarters has a high level of confidence in its subsidiaries. They also posited that different types of public relations activities require different levels of standardization. For example, they observed that investor relations are highly standardized, while community relations are highly localized. Molleda et al. (2012) tested this assertion by comparing the extent of localization of the online newsrooms of MNOs in high‐, medium‐, and low‐contact industries. They observed that high‐impact industries (e.g. mining, chemicals, electricity, oil, and gas) had more localized newsrooms than medium‐ or low‐impact ones.

Environmental factors also play a role in an MNO's decision to localize. Lim (2010) identified five environmental factors that should be addressed to achieve local public relations effectiveness: (i) policies and regulations; (ii) culture and language; (iii) local activism; (iv) local hostility and skepticism; and (v) relationships with local media. These categories broadly describe the findings of a number of empirical studies. Similarly, other research has demonstrated that cultural understanding can predict the communications strategies and techniques that are suited to a particular cultural environment (Holtzhausen et al. 2003; Sriramesh and Verčič 2009). Furthermore, Curtin and Gaither (2007) used the circuit‐of‐culture model to demonstrate how culture, power, and identity affect the practice of public relations in MNCs.

A few scholars have explored the localization decision‐making process in more detail. Zaharna (2001) used an intercultural approach to describe three levels of external, country‐specific factors that affect localization: country profile, cultural profile, and communication profile. The country profile consists of the “the structural components of a country or national entity that influence international public relations” (p. 137). These country‐level components include political, economic, legal, and social structures, as well as mass media and the country's infrastructure. The cultural profile considers cultural differences and indicates the public relations adaptations that may be effective in a particular country. These cultural‐level considerations include high and low contexts, monochronic and polychromic, doing and being, future and past tense, and linear and nonlinear.

García (2010) drew from his experience in global public relations to suggest a three‐phase process for teaching students about developing global programs or campaigns. The first phase is the preliminary period, which consists in conducting thorough research on the client organization, its standing in the industry, its capabilities to implement a campaign, and how culture will influence all of these factors. The second phase is the preparation period, which is marked by decisions about whether to hire a local agency or to work with subsidiary resources. Finally, the third phase is execution, where the major questions revolve around the relationship between headquarters and the subsidiary.

Localization Strategies and Tactics

Almost no scholarly research documents how localization occurs on a tactical level. Zaharna's (2001) three‐level typology comes closest to providing guidance about localizing specific strategies and tactics. Localization of public relations tactics may include adaption of verbal, nonverbal, and visual communications, rhetorical style, and the overall communications matrix. However, research from the international advertising literature can provide some ideas of the ways that global professionals can localize strategies and tactics. A number of content analyses show that the localized advertising strategies of MNOs include the customization of themes, slogans, headlines, subheads, body copy, models, characters, spokespeople, names, layout, background visuals, color, music, commercial length, and advertisement size (e.g. Harris and Attour 2000; Melewar et al. 2000).

Case Study “Costa Rica: No Artificial Ingredients” – A Global Campaign Created by the Country's Tourism Board

The Costa Rican government's participation in tourism development began in 1930 with the creation and promotion of the first privately owned luxury hotel, Gran Hotel Costa Rica (Visit Costa Rica n.d.). Foreign tourists entered the country via the Port of Limón (on the Atlantic coast), then commuted to San José (the capital city) by train. In 1931, the first regulation of tourism activity was decreed, by means of Law 91, on June 16, when the National Tourism Board was created. This board operated until 1955, when Law 1917 replaced it with the Instituto Costarricense de Turismo (ICT). The ICT is a governmental organization that promotes and regulates the tourism industry in Costa Rica. It is responsible for promoting tourism attractions and destinations nationally and internationally, for establishing tourism norms, regulations, and incentives, and for certifying Costa Rica's hotels, travel agencies, rental cars, and other tourism service providers under its Certification of Sustainable Tourism program. The ICT coordinates and controls all of Costa Rica's global promotional efforts via internal human and material resources, as well as the outsourcing of specialized public relations agencies with a global reach.

In 1997, the ICT launched the global campaign, No Artificial Ingredients, to promote the natural environment. Costa Rica is 31 600 square miles in area, representing 5% of the earth's biodiversity (Smithsonian Journeys 2010). A quarter of the landmass is protected by law, through national parks or wildlife refuges. In 2009, a research firm evaluated Costa Rica's branding effort and concluded that it was very strong and well positioned. Burson‐Marsteller's Latin American hub in Miami has been the country's global public relations agency in North America since 2007.

According to ICT's statistics, Costa Rica's main market is North America (more than 50%). US tourists come from Florida, Texas, New York, Indiana, and California. Canadian tourists mainly come from Toronto, Vancouver, and cities in Quebec. Europe is another important market (close to 20%). The majority of European visitors come from France, Germany, the Netherlands, Italy, Spain, Switzerland, and the United Kingdom. European tourism in Costa Rica is year‐round but peaks in the summer (European winter). Since the end of 2012, the ICT has worked with the Central America Tourism Agency (CATA), a promotion agency in Spain. The economic crisis beginning in 2008–09 forced the ICT to increase its visibility and promotion in the European market, especially in areas such as France, Germany, Spain, and the United Kingdom, as well as Belgium, Russia, Sweden, and Switzerland. In 2008, 2 million tourists visited Costa Rica, generating US$2 billion. In 2009, the number of tourists declined by 9% (ICT 2010), but by the end of 2011, they had increased again by more than 10% (Costa Rica Information n.d.). Overall, tourism represents 7.4% of Costa Rica's GDP and 19% of its total exports.

The ICT's main strategy has been to educate and attract all demographics (e.g. families, students, ecotourists, adventure seekers, etc.) that may find Costa Rica interesting. The ICT sponsors and carries out formal and informal research to understand the media use of identified tourists, which helps it develop, execute, and measure effective campaigns. It has successfully developed and implemented social media and interactive online campaigns in its communications efforts to attract potential foreign tourists.

Global Communications Function

The ICT's vision is “to be the leading institution for the country's tourism activity” (Visit Costa Rica n.d.). Its mission is stated in a National Development Plan, quoted on the ICT website: “Promote a wholesome tourism development, with the purpose of improving Costa Ricans' quality of life, by maintaining a balance between the economic and social boundaries, environmental protection, culture, and facilities” (Visit Costa Rica n.d.). ICT's main functions are:

Strengthening of the processes of formulation and implementation of planning for tourism development, attraction and assessment of investors, development of quality and competitiveness systems, development of marketing in an integral way, tourist attention, generation of information for decision‐making, reinforcement of processes for improving administration (comptrollership services, income, administrative analysis, among others).

(Visit Costa Rica n.d., par. 2)

In particular, the Director of Marketing is in charge of global communications efforts through the departments of Research and Evaluation and Promotion (ICT 2008). The ICT Director of Marketing coordinates its campaigns with the network of embassies and consulates of Costa Rica worldwide, as well as with advertising and public relations firms and travel agency operators. The ICT's institutional policies state: “All of the international and national promotion will be done according to specific plans that have been designed keeping in mind the private sector's and related communities' proposals, responding to a vision and the country's tourism goals at large” (ICT n.d., para. 9).

Public Relations Agencies

Burson‐Marsteller handled the ICT's public relations for North America from 2007 to 2013. Other markets are handled either through CATA or in‐house. It selected Cheryl Andrews Marketing Communications as its public relations agency of record in August 2013. The ICT is also interested in developing domestic tourism among Costa Ricans, especially during the low season. The ICT targets domestic tourists and encourages travel through local public relations and advertising campaigns. The goal is to use the extensive tourist infrastructure to spread knowledge among citizens about the importance of the tourist industry and the preservation of the natural environment. The ICT's domestic agency is Comunicación Corporativa Ketchum, an affiliated agency of the Omnicom Group with roots in Costa Rica. The ICT works closely with its various outsourcing agencies, both local and global, to develop specialized campaigns and drive efforts to attract domestic and international tourists.

Coordination and Control

The planning of the No Artificial Ingredients campaign was carried out by the ICT's director of marketing and McCann Erickson Worldwide, a marketing communications agency of the Interpublic Group of Companies. Approval for the global strategic communications plan and its objectives, strategies, and tactics was granted by the ICT's board of directors. Execution of the campaign was the responsibility of both McCann Erickson and the ICT's marketing and public relations teams. The main evaluation efforts focused on the assessment of the country brand.

A highly standardized approach was adopted for the campaign, with the ICT (client) exercising control and McCann Erickson (marketing communications agency) coordinating things. A moderate level of centralization was adopted for the content of communications materials, with the language and currency being localized, while the rest of the content was standardized.

No Artificial Ingredients has been one of the hallmark campaigns of the ICT, and its tourism branding efforts, including advertising, sales promotion, marketing, and public relations, are still being used to promote Costa Rica globally today. These efforts have been effective according to the studies the ICT has commissioned. The Foreign Agents Registration Act (FARA) reports the money spent on media relations campaigns carried out by Burson‐Marsteller for the Costa Rican Tourism Board since 2009. A total of US $2 966 082 has been spent on monitoring and analyzing news coverage, writing news releases, distributing to key media, organizing events for consumers and agents with travel industry partners, fulfilling media inquiries, and organizing media familiarization trips to Costa Rica (Foreign Agents Registration Act 2011). In the second semi‐annual report to Congress, Costa Rica is shown to have paid US$245 930 to Burson‐Marsteller for media relations services, where:

The registrant monitored and analyzed news coverage of the foreign principal in the North American media market; wrote press releases in English and distributed some to media; organized events with travel industry partners for consumers and the travel industry; fulfilled media inquiries; provided background information on Costa Rican tourist attractions and services; and organized media familiarization trips to Costa Rica.

(FARA 2012, p. 40)

Familiarization Tours: Teaming Up With Foreign Media Professionals

At the invitation of the ICT, the first author of this textbook participated in a familiarization tour through Costa Rica in the summer of 2010. This was an opportunity to conduct participant observations. Guided by the “no artificiality” theme, the author's itinerary included an eco‐lodge, a grand tourism hotel with national and global sustainability certifications, hot springs, zip lining, marine life and wildlife watching, volcanic sights, national parks, pristine beaches, and an indigenous territory. The familiarization tour also included talks on sustainable development and indigenous cultural preservation, given by managers of the lodge and hotel where the author stayed.

Familiarization tours are controlled by the ICT and coordinated by the public relations agency. Foreign journalists and media professionals can request guided tours, or they may be invited strategically by the ICT, targeting various media outlets in specific markets with the potential to reach prospective tourists. Once the list of invitees is finalized, sent out, and confirmed, the marketing team assesses the needs and expectations of the professional guests through emails and telephone conversations. The logistics are planned in detail, and the marketing team sends out regulatory paperwork (including visa documents or formal invitations), itineraries, logistics, timelines, a welcome guide, and information regarding the assigned trained guides and drivers. The ICT is always very careful in explaining and setting expectations for media guests regarding the rules and conditions of travel expenses and sponsorships. Upon arrival, media guests are assigned to their respective guides and drivers, who are responsible for ensuring a successful stay. Each media guest's requests for language translators and assistance in overcoming other cultural barriers and time orientations are specially arranged.

English is an international language that facilitates work with media representatives from various world markets, and it is the preferred language for the ICT familiarization tours, unless otherwise requested by a media guest. The guides and drivers have experienced a variety of behaviors and attitudes from visiting media professionals, and find it easier to interact with and relate to some more than others. Rapport and empathy between guides and guests inform interpersonal relations on the tours, and may affect guests' impressions of their visit. The ICT marketing and promotion team is aware of how preparation, coordination, and personal treatment of visiting media professionals may influence the perceptions they have or develop regarding not only the professionalism and qualities of ICT personnel, but also, more importantly, Costa Rican tourism itself.

The author's guide and driver explained some sensitive issues that should be treated carefully during familiarization tours, such as the exchange of gifts, the safety and comfort of guests, and hotel and tour operators' expertise on environmental and sustainability issues. Close coordination and constant communication between ICT administrative headquarters and the guides and drivers guarantees a smooth running of the tours. Any change or delay in the agenda is immediately reported and adjustments made. Almost all aspects of the familiarization tours are guided by written policies – especially those which refer to guides and drivers' allowed behaviors and interactions with guests. Administrators, guides, and drivers issue standard final reports with evaluations and recommendations. These reports are intended to support stated objectives and register best practices.

By the end of the tour, the slogan “No Artificial Ingredients” had acquired a different meaning for the author. It had become a tangible subject with multiple reinforcements. The campaign's claims and promises were fulfilled greatly in the context of the tour. Media familiarization tours are one example of how the ICT strengthens its global strategic campaign. They support the solid foundations of tourism in Costa Rica by emphasizing the country's long‐term programs to preserve and enhance its natural, human, and cultural environments. This is a universal theme that should resonate with today's international tourists, and will continue to do so for generations of tourists to come.

Conclusion

The complexity of global public relations is increased by the existence of a multiplicity of home, host, and transnational stakeholders and consumer groups. These groups are exposed constantly to claims, promises, and calls to action from a variety of organizations with domestic and foreign roots. Organizations operating in multiple markets face the challenge of being consistent with their core messages and yet relevant to local needs and expectations. Coordination, control, and standardization are essential to the success of multinational campaigns. Regarding the standardization–localization continuum, the approach taken by an MNO is not as important as the core foundation and distinctiveness of its offerings and rewards. Here, the authors have presented an international case in which standardization was the strategic preference over localization in certain management functions. Costa Rica is a unique case in that it offers a tourist destination with appealing characteristics for domestic and international tourists in search of natural and safe environments.

This case study was a unique way of applying the fundamentals of strategic communications in a tourism setting. However, in terms of research, studying other economic sectors will help determine the use of specific coordination and control mechanisms, and the extent of standardization or localization of global strategic communications strategies and tactics. Further research is important in order to understand how organizations, operating in a diverse but interconnected world, can accomplish their goals and objectives through the adaptation of coordination control and standardization and localization efforts.

Case Study Public Relations and the Communications Coordination Strategies in Telefónica Central America – Localization Tactics in Nicaragua

Telefónica is one of the world leaders in integrated operators in the telecommunications sector, providing communications, information, and entertainment solutions with presence in Europe and Latin America. Its corporate headquarters is located in Madrid, Spain. Telefónica operates in 24 countries, with a total customer base amounting to 315.7 million. It has one of the most international profiles in the sector, with more than 77% of its business outside its home market, and a reference point in the Spanish‐ and Portuguese‐speaking market.

In Latin America, Telefónica serviced more than 212.4 million customers as of the end of March 2013, making it the leading operator in Argentina, Brazil, Chile, and Peru. It also has substantial operations in Colombia, Costa Rica, Ecuador, El Salvador, Guatemala, Mexico, Nicaragua, Panama, Puerto Rico, Uruguay, and Venezuela. In Europe, on top of the Spanish operations, the corporation has operating companies in the Czech Republic, Germany, Ireland, Slovakia, and the United Kingdom, providing services to more than 102.7 million customers. In this case study, we will explore how public relations and communications coordination and strategies work in this Spanish multinational, with emphasis on the Central American region, and in particular on Nicaragua.

Multilevel Structure

Telefónica's communications strategy is divided into three major corporate levels. First, we have the corporate, a global structure under the Director of Communications and Corporate Reputation, which structures global communications strategies in regions where Telefónica operates. This level is subdivided into Europe and Latin America, and is based in Spain. Second, we have the regional (in this case, the Central American region), which aligns the strategy in a particular region and promotes joint projects to exploit synergies of scale. There is a Regional Assistant Director of Public Relations and Institutional Communications located in Panama. Finally, we have the country (in this case, Nicaragua), which manages the internal and external communications strategies of the corporation. It has a manager and is under the corporate regional level. Each country monitors its own business and communications results, and reports to its region.

The Sub‐direction of Institutional Relations Central America is in charge of two main areas: the Department of Communication and Institutional Relations and the Department of Corporate Social Responsibility, which operate separately by country. In Nicaragua, the head of the Department of Communication and Institutional Relations is responsible for maintaining corporate relationships with different publics of interest in order to facilitate the work of other areas, paving the way for partnerships to facilitate the smooth running of the business. The manager looks after the reputation of the company. This department runs the company's internal and external communications, maintains relationships with the media, is in charge of messages the company transmits to the community (everything that goes out to the community has to be checked by the department first), and ensures the reputation and sustainability of the corporation.

Control and Monitoring at the National (Host) Level

In Telefónica Nicaragua, the Department of Communication and Institutional Relations plans strategic communication and operates a management tool for the control and monitoring of communications, contributing to the corporation's objectives.

At the regional and corporate levels, the department proposes annual and weekly goals. Annual goals are directed to the Executive Committee, consisting of the managers of each area of the corporation, the communications team, and the regional level. Annual goals led by the managers begin with an evaluation of the actions of the previous year, identifying key actions to provide continuity. An example of an annual goal is “stakeholder engagement.” As a way of fulfilling this goal, team members set strategies, such as engaging in dialogs with interest groups the department wants to attract or coordinating the participation of external stakeholders in internal corporation dialogs. Another strategy is to reinforce relationships with public entities and interest groups. To fulfill the annual goals, team members set weekly goals every Monday, directed toward members of the participating areas and the regional level; the team members then meet to coordinate the goals and take action. Each member of the communications team shares their tasks for the week, and all tasks are documented in a spreadsheet. The team members meet again the next week and evaluate their success. The annual goal of stakeholder engagement is supported by the weekly strategies and tactics set every Monday. Examples of weekly goals based on the “stakeholder engagement” goal are workshops, Skype conferences, presentations, and social events with stakeholders.

Goals, strategies, and tactics all have desired outcomes. The members of the department prepare a report each week, and these reports are compiled at an annual evaluation. With each weekly report, the department analyzes quantitatively the presence of Telefónica and other multinational operators in print and broadcast news media based on the main topics of interest; the annual report aims to analyze and then present the results of the contribution of communications management in the development of the business.

Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR)

The Sub‐direction of Institutional Relations in the region is also in charge of corporate social responsibility (CSR), leading the social function of the corporation and working closely with the community. Telefónica Foundation, in conjunction with local operators, implemented a social responsibility initiative in 13 countries across Latin America, aimed at tackling child labor – the Proniño program. According to the International Labour Organization (ILO), there are currently 211 million children and adolescents aged between 5 and 17 working in the world, almost three‐quarters of whom do so in one of the worst forms of child labor. With Proniño, Telefónica Foundation aims to contribute significantly to the eradication of child labor in Latin America through the education of children and adolescents. The Proniño program is aligned with the regional goals of ILO, which seek to eradicate all child labor by 2020.

In Nicaragua, Telefónica works hand in hand with the Ministry of Education. It accomplishes Proniño's mission through reinforcement activities (sports, arts, and crafts) and by giving lectures on how harmful child labor is in the educational sector. Teachers are trained in teaching techniques and computer software in order to support quality education and provide for children to remain in school. Similarly, corporate volunteering is another program where employees invest time and financial resources to support activities like Proniño, environmental activities, and programs for people with disabilities. Various kinds of activity are organized, such as reforestation, supporting the Teletón and Proniño, and school visits to share morning recreation with the children. The Department of Communication, Institutional Relations, and CSR reports to the country director or general manager and works with an annual plan containing goals, objectives, budget, and guidelines.

Corporate Identity and Reputation

Telefónica Nicaragua is one of the leading organizations in terms of sales and customer loyalty in the region. One aspect that should be emphasized in the communications process is that public relations and communications strategies are used not only as a business strategy, but also as a way to create corporate identity and a shared positive philosophy for customers, shareholders, and employees.

Acknowledgments

This case was made possible thanks to the contribution of the Communication and Image Specialist of Telefónica Nicaragua. All data provided in this case study is dated as of March 2013.

Discussion Questions

1 What factors do you think contribute most to deciding which functions of a global public relations campaign will be standardized or localized?
2 What is the interplay between standardization, localization, coordination, and control? How does each concept affect the others?
3 How does an outsourcing public relations agency aid in helping an MNC localize its global campaign?
4 In what situations should an MNC choose to standardize a global campaign, and when should it be localized to different host countries?

Class Activity

Netflix, an online movie and television streaming service, is currently operating in the United States, Latin America, and Europe. It is hoping to expand to more areas in the future. Students should think about which aspects of Netflix's global operations should be standardized and which should be localized. They should also look into how Netflix coordinates and controls its global operations.

References

Bartlett, C. and Ghoshal, S. (2002). Managing Across Borders: The Transnational Solution, 2e. Boston, MA: Harvard Business School Press.
Botan, C. (1992). International public relations: Critique and reformulation. Public Relations Review, 18 (2): 149–159.
Costa Rica Information. (n.d.). “International tourist arrivals by month and nationality.” Retrieved January 10, 2019 from http://costarica‐information.com/about‐costa‐rica/economy/economic‐sectors‐industries/tourism/tourism‐statistics.
Curtin, P.A. and Gaither, T.K. (2007). International Public Relations: Negotiating Culture, Identity, and Power. London: Sage.
Daniels, J.D., Radebaugh, L.H., and Sullivan, D.P. (2013). International Business Environments and Operations, 4e. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.
de Mooij, M. (2010). Global Marketing and Advertising: Understanding Cultural Paradoxes, 3e. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Dozier, D.M. and Broom, G.M. (1995). Evolution of the manager role in public relations practice. Journal of Public Relations Research 7: 3–26.
FARA. (2012). “Report of the Attorney General to the Congress of the United States on the administration of the Foreign Agents Registration Act of 1938, as amended, for the six months ending December 31, 2012.” Retrieved January 10, 2019 from http://www.fara.gov/reports/SAR_DEC_2012.pdf.
García, C. (2010). Integrating management practices in international public relations courses: A proposal of contents. Public Relations Review 36 (3): 272–277.
Gotham, K.V. (2005). Tourism from above and below: globalization, localization and New Orleans's Mardi Gras. International Journal of Urban and Regional Research 29 (2): 309–326.
Grunig, J. (2006). “After 50 years: The value and values of public relations.” 45th Annual Distinguished Lecture. The Institute for Public Relations, 9 Nov. 2006, New York, The Yale Club.
Halliburton, C. and Ziegfeld, A. (2009). How do major European companies communicate their corporate identity across countries? An empirical investigation of corporate Internet communications. Journal of Marketing Management 25 (9): 909–925.
Harris, G. and Attour, S. (2000). Content analysis of advertising 1970‐1997: A review and assessment of methodologies. In: The Handbook of International Marketing Communications (ed. S.O. Monye), 237–250. Chichester: Wiley.
Holtzhausen, D.R., Petersen, B.K., and Tindall, N.T.J. (2003). Exploding the myth of the symmetrical/asymmetrical dichotomy: Public relations models in the new South Africa. Journal of Public Relations Research 15: 305–341.
ICT. (n.d.) “About us.” Retrieved January 10, 2019 from https://www.ict.go.cr/en/ict/about‐us.html#pol%C3%ADticas‐institucionales.
ICT. (2008). “Organization chart.” Retrieved January 10, 2019 from https://www.ict.go.cr/en/ict/organization‐chart/file.html.
ICT. (2010). “Plan nacional de turismo sostenible de Costa Rica 2010–2016: Resumen ejecutivo.” Retrieved January 10, 2019 from https://www.slideshare.net/RivieraMayaSostenibl/plan‐nacional‐de‐turismo‐sostenible‐costa‐rica‐20102016.
Lenovo. (2015). “Locations.” Retrieved January 10, 2019 from https://www.lenovo.com/us/en/lenovo/locations/.
Lim, S.L. (2010). Global integration or local responsiveness? Multinational corporation’s public relations strategies and cases. In G.J. Golan, T.J. Johnson, and W. Wanta (eds.), International media communication in a global age. NewYork: Routledge, pp. 299–318.
Melewar, T.C., Turnbull, S., and Balabanis, G. (2000). International advertising strategies of multinational enterprises in the Middle East. International Journal of Advertising 19: 529–547.
Molleda, J.C. and Laskin, A. (2010). Coordination and control of global public relations to manage cross‐national conflict shifts: a multidisciplinary perspective for research and practice. In: International Media Communication in a Global Age (ed. G.J. Golan, T.J. Johnson, and W. Wanta), 319–344. New York: Routledge.
Molleda, J.C., Kochhar, S., and Wilson, C. (2012). “Theorizing the global–local paradox: Comparative research on information subsidies' localization by US‐based multinational corporations.” Paper Presented at the Association for Education in Journalism and Mass Communication's 100th Annual Convention, Division of Public Relations, Chicago, USA.
Newburry, W. and Yakova, N. (2006). Standardization preferences: A function of national culture, work interdependence and local embeddedness. Journal of International Business Studies 37: 44–60.
Pudelko, M. and Harzing, A.W. (2008). The golden triangle for MNCs: standardization towards headquarters practices, standardization towards global best practices and localization. Organizational Dynamics 37 (4): 394–404.
Schmid, S. and Kotulla, T. (2011). 50 years of research on international standardization and adaptation: from a systematic literature analysis to a theoretical framework. International Business Review 20: 491–507.
Shah, A. (2012). “Lenovo gains over Dell as world's second‐largest PC maker”. PCWorld. Retrieved January 10, 2019 from http://www.pcworld.com/article/253622/lenovo_gains_over_dell_as_worlds_secondlargest_pc_maker.html.
Smithsonian Journeys. (2010). “Costa Rica's natural heritage.” Retrieved January 10, 2019 from https://www.smithsonianjourneys.org/blog/costa‐ricas‐natural‐heritage‐1‐180951287/.
Sriramesh, K. and Verčič, D. (eds.). (2009). The Global Public Relations Handbook: Theory, Research, and Practice. (2nd ed.). NewYork: Routledge.
Verčič, D., Grunig, L.A., and Grunig, J.E. (1996). Global and specific principles of public relations: Evidence from Slovenia. In: International Public Relations: A Comparative Analysis (ed. H.M. Cuthbertson and N. Chen), 31–66. New York: Routledge.
Visit Costa Rica. (n.d.). “Essential Costa Rica.” Retrieved January 10, 2019 from http://www.visitcostarica.com.
Wakefield, R.I. (1997). “International public relations: A theoretical approach to excellence based on a worldwide Delphi study.” Dissertation.
Wakefield, R.I. (2009). Public relations contingencies in a globalized world where even ‘glocalization’ is not sufficient. Public Relations Journal 3 (4).
Wakefield, R.I. (2011). World‐class public relations one decade later: Does the model still apply? Public Relations Journal 5 (3): 1–26.
Zaharna, R.S. (2001). ’In‐awareness’ approach to international public relations. Public Relations Review 27 (2): 135–148.

..................Content has been hidden....................

You can't read the all page of ebook, please click here login for view all page.

Table of Contents for 7 Coordination and Control, Standardization and Localization

Create new playlist

Sign In

Sign Up

Keywords

Central Themes

Introduction

Coordination and Control

Standardization and Localization

The Standardization–Localization Paradox

The Localization Decision

Localization Strategies and Tactics

Discussion Questions

Class Activity

References

Table of Contents for
7 Coordination and Control, Standardization and Localization