Corporate Communication Essay

Literature review
Communication

In general, communication can be defining as connecting people or places or two-way process of reaching mutual understanding, in which participants not only exchange (encode-decode) information, news, ideas and feelings but also to create and share meaning. In business, communication is the key of management because an organization cannot operate without communication between levels, departments, employees and their stakeholders.

Corporate communication

Corporate communication definition provided by van Riel and Formbrun (2007) by many communication scholars which is the set of activities involved in manging and coordinating all internal and external communication aimed at creating favourable starting points

In their article, Balmer and Gray conclude that corporate communication should not merely be viewed as a functional activity but a strategic activity in addition. These three modes of corporate communication are subsequently elaborated by Balmer (2001a, p. 253) and Balmer and Greyser (2003, p. 125). The three dimensions of total corporate communications are as follows:
• primary communications – the communications effects of products, services, management, staff and corporate behaviour;
• secondary communications – the communication effects of controlled forms of communications (similar to integrated communications); and
• tertiary communications – the communications effects of communication given by third parties such as competitor and media commentary, the media and that from interest groups.
Finally, the corporate communications total corporate communications approach by taking account of primary, secondary and tertiary communication with provides a tripartite bridge between an organisation’s identity and corporate image and reputation. In short, it represents the link between corporate identity and corporate

Sandman (1993) reconciles these two concerns by proposing that risk is a combination of hazard (what is the true danger, what the experts are concerned about) and outrage (what the public is concerned about). If hazard is high but outrage low, the public should be warned of danger; if hazard is low but outrage high, the organization should acknowledge and address the outrage, not ignore it as unfounded (Sandman, 1993).
• Communicate with honesty, candour, and openness: Sellnow and Vidoloff (2009) bluntly assert that “there is no substitute for the truth in risk and crisis communication” (p. 41). The adage that “truth will out” applies in crisis situations, and being less than honest with publics and the media will inevitably backfire on the organization. Furthermore, not sharing information with the public, “responding with such answers as ‘no comment’ or avoiding any interaction with the public or press reveals a cavalier attitude and implies guilt” (Sellnow and Vidoloff, 2009, p.