ArticlePDF Available

Driving Employee Engagement: The Expanded Role of Internal Communications


Abstract and Figures

Increasingly, organizations and their public relations professionals are recognizing the importance of strengthening internal communication with employees. Internal communication is important for building a culture of transparency between management and employees, and it can engage employees in the organization’s priorities. This exploratory study uses findings from interviews with public relations executives to explore the growing role that internal communication plays in employee engagement. Executives employ a variety of communication methods, including face-to-face communication, to communicate with employees. The executives’ chosen communication strategies aim to build trust and engagement with employees. In doing so, public relations executives find themselves in an expanded role of fostering employee engagement.
Content may be subject to copyright.
International Journal of
Business Communication
2014, Vol. 51(2) 183 –202
© 2014 by the Association for
Business Communication
Reprints and permissions:
DOI: 10.1177/2329488414525399
Driving Employee
Engagement: The
Expanded Role of Internal
Karen Mishra1, Lois Boynton2, and Aneil Mishra3
Increasingly, organizations and their public relations professionals are recognizing
the importance of strengthening internal communication with employees. Internal
communication is important for building a culture of transparency between
management and employees, and it can engage employees in the organization’s
priorities. This exploratory study uses findings from interviews with public relations
executives to explore the growing role that internal communication plays in employee
engagement. Executives employ a variety of communication methods, including face-
to-face communication, to communicate with employees. The executives’ chosen
communication strategies aim to build trust and engagement with employees. In
doing so, public relations executives find themselves in an expanded role of fostering
employee engagement.
internal communication, employee engagement, public relations, trust
A study by the Great Place To Work Institute found that employees enjoy working in
an environment where they “trust the people they work for, have pride in what they do
and enjoy the people they work with” (Carroll, 2006, p. 1). Such positive work
1Meredith College School of Business, Raleigh, NC, USA
2School of Journalism and Mass Communication, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill,
3North Carolina Central University School of Business, Durham, NC, USA
Corresponding Author:
Karen Mishra, Meredith College School of Business, 3800 Hillsborough Street, Raleigh, NC 27607, USA.
525399JOBXXX10.1177/2329488414525399International Journal of Business CommunicationMishra et al.
by guest on October 19, 2015job.sagepub.comDownloaded from
184 International Journal of Business Communication 51(2)
environments are typically characterized by open communication. Business ethics
scholar Carroll (2006) argued that ethical organizations take care of their employees,
working to build trust through positive communication efforts, as well as demonstrat-
ing respect for employees and acting with integrity in all employee relations. Carroll
further argued that employees trust their managers to the extent that they demonstrate
honesty, transparency, genuine caring, support, and a willingness to listen. More
recently, the Edelman Trust Barometer (2012) also found that businesses that are more
trusted “treat employees well” and openly share information. This honest and trans-
parent internal communication is best received when it comes from a direct manager.
Wright (1995) declared that it was not enough for public relations professionals to be
concerned with external communications, and that they are the best qualified people in
the organization to bridge that external message to employees, treating them as another
important public. Strong internal communication directed by public relations profes-
sionals can build trust and commitment with employees, which can in turn lead to
employee engagement.
This study examines the relationship between internal organizational communica-
tion and employee engagement. Foundationally, communication involves a two-way
exchange of information. Internal communication occurs between managers and
employees. Employee engagement, which internal communication promotes, is “the
degree to which an individual is attentive and absorbed in the performance of their
roles” (Saks, 2006, p. 602). Prior studies have found that managers’ internal commu-
nication with their employees motivates their subordinates to provide superior service
to customers (Lowenstein, 2006). Employees’ knowledge and skills about both their
jobs and the organization provide them with the opportunity to become organizational
advocates with the customers, who in turn can enhance the firm’s reputation (Gronstedt,
2000). Internal communication enhances a number of important bottom line outcomes
for the organization including increased productivity and profitability (Gallup, 2012).
Internal communication boosts productivity by streamlining organizational roles and
duties (Benner & Tushman, 2003). Pounsford (2007) found that communication strat-
egies such as storytelling, informal communication, and coaching led to greater
employee engagement, as well as increased levels of trust in the organization and
increased revenue due to greater customer satisfaction. Furthermore, Chong (2007),
studying Singapore Airlines, found that focusing on face-to-face dialogue between
management and staff helped the airline deliver its brand promise to its customers
through its employees.
The issue of whom in the organization owns internal communication as part of the
overall strategic communication or organizational communication is critical. Academia
has been at the forefront advocating an integration of both internal and external com-
munications so that there would be a more consistent message to all stakeholders,
including employees. While this has been a primary focus for academia, practitioners
have been slower to embrace this in their organizations. That is, internal communica-
tions were seen as the purview of human resources while external communications
was responsible for external communications. In order for all stakeholders to recog-
nize a consistent message from the organization, both internal and external
by guest on October 19, 2015job.sagepub.comDownloaded from
Mishra et al. 185
communication cannot be created in silos—they must be integrated in order to be most
effective. As a result, this study aimed to find out the extent to which public relations
professionals had embraced internal communications as a part of their job
Literature Review
Internal Communication
Internal communication is communication between the organization’s leaders and one
of its key publics: the employees (Dolphin, 2005). It is “social interaction through
messages” (Kalla, 2005, p. 303) and reflects management’s ability to build relation-
ships between internal stakeholders at all levels within an organization (Welch &
Jackson, 2007). Quirke (2008) noted that the role of internal communication is to
“illuminate the connections between different pieces of information” (p. xv), and its
job is “to provide employees with the information they need to do their job” (p. xv).
D’Aprix (2009) posited that “communication is the undoubted lubricant to prevent the
corporate machinery from self-destructing from the friction of change” (p. xxiii).
Thus, in both theory and practice, internal communication is critical to building rela-
tionships with employees.
Historically, employees as a public have been understudied by public relations
scholars and undervalued by public relations professionals in favor of external publics
(Chong, 2007; Wright, 1995). This may have reflected managers’ lack of concern with
their own employees or employees’ declining power in an increasingly competitive
global economy. As Cheney (1999) pointed out, “Amid the rush toward heightened
efficiency and competitiveness is a sense that most organizations don’t care a great
deal about their employees” (p. x). Management’s lack of attention to internal com-
munication with employees may have also been as a result of the emphasis organiza-
tions have traditionally targeted toward external publics about their products and
services through marketing communications such as advertising. Management schol-
ars Thomas, Zolin, and Hartman (2009) indicated, however, that “when employees
perceive that they are getting information from their supervisors and coworkers that is
timely, accurate, and relevant, they are more likely to feel less vulnerable and more
able to rely on their coworkers and supervisors” (p. 302). Several scholars have high-
lighted the positive influence of internal communication on employee engagement
(Chong, 2007; Saks, 2006; Welch & Jackson, 2007). Thus, internal communication
between managers and employees should enhance trust between them and lead to
greater employee engagement with the company.
Focusing on internal communication, therefore, may endow the organization with
several benefits. Kennan and Hazleton (2006) highlighted the need for organizations
to recognize employees as a distinct public worthy of individualized attention through
internal public relations.1 Kitchen and Daly (2002) argued that internal communica-
tion is crucial for both organization success and for its day-to-day existence. This may
be because internal communication can engage employees’ “intellectual and creative
by guest on October 19, 2015job.sagepub.comDownloaded from
186 International Journal of Business Communication 51(2)
assets to produce value” (Quirke, 2008, p. xv). The question remains, however, regard-
ing who should be responsible for ensuring that communication occurs and evaluating
its effectiveness: public relations, human resources, or the first-line supervisor. Argenti
(1996) explained that internal communication is an appropriate role of the corporate
communications function (often referred to as “public relations”) to inform employees
about corporate changes during times of change or crisis. More generally, Cheney
(1999) suggested that values in the workplace can be evaluated by the role communi-
cation plays. Transparent organizations share information widely. Broom, Casey, and
Ritchey (2000) agreed that communication is a critical aspect of how relationships
between the organization and its publics are evaluated, meaning that open communi-
cation indicates a stronger relationship. The study of internal communication is well
documented, and continues to grow as a profession. A recent 2012 University of
Southern California Generally Accepted Practices study (Annenberg School of
Communications, University of Southern California, 2012) found that internal com-
munications positions grew by 11% in just 1 year.
Internal communication has also been shown to improve trust between employees and
managers (Gavin & Mayer, 2005). As Chia (2005) affirmed, “trust and commitment
are byproducts of processes and policies which are designed to make the relationship
satisfactory for both parties, such as open, appropriate, clear and timely communica-
tion” (p. 7). Trust defined as “concern” for each other’s interests can also be built
through open communication (Denison & Mishra, 1995; Mishra & Mishra, 1994).
Additionally, Mishra (1996) found that “the extent to which the trusted person engages
in undistorted communication . . . reinforces the trust (in terms of openness) placed in
him or her” (p. 276). Spreitzer and Mishra (1999) found that clearer communication
improved trust and business unit performance. More generally, Dolphin (2005)
affirmed that “sound relationships can only be developed on the basis of trust and reli-
able information” (p. 185).
The public relations literature considers trust a critical aspect of the organization-
public relationship (Botan & Taylor, 2004). Wilson (1994) found that both employees’
and public perceptions of commitment, trust, and mutual respect are important for
understanding organization-public relationships. For example, Bruning and Ledingham
(2000) found that trust had a significant, positive, impact on customer satisfaction. Ki
and Hon (2007) concluded that “trust is one of the main constructs used to measure a
successful relationship between parties” (p. 422) because it measures the levels of
honesty and reliability. Communication is one critical factor influencing both trust and
relationships, but in some cases “management credibility and trust are under attack
from confused and poorly integrated communications” (Quirke, 2008, p. 15).
Paine (2003), for example, specified that organizations should ask several ques-
tions prior to measuring trust within their organization in order to understand the best
way to communicate, including “Which channels of communication were used and/or
deemed most important to use in disseminating the messages? (e.g., the media . . .
by guest on October 19, 2015job.sagepub.comDownloaded from
Mishra et al. 187
word-of-mouth . . . direct mail . . . special events?)” (p. 11). Of this list, face-to-face
communication is considered the richest form of communication with employees
because it has the greatest potential for resolving ambiguity and uncertainty (Daft,
Lengel, & Trevino, 1987).
Face-to-Face Communication
An organization’s communication practices have an important influence on the degree
to which employees trust their managers and the organization’s top echelon, as well as
their commitment to the organization. Quirke (2008) and D’Aprix (2009) define face-
to-face communication as a combination of information and interaction, noting as well
that it is the most valuable technique for providing credible communication. This is
because face-to-face interaction provides visual and verbal clues that complete our
understanding of the information being shared. Cheney (1999) also observed that face-
to-face communication is considered more reliable than written communication in a
business context because it provides greater information to the other party. Face-to-
face communication, for example, includes verbal cues such as tone of voice and non-
verbal cues such as body language and facial expressions. It is also considered more
reliable if receivers of face-to-face communication perceive a match between the mes-
sage and the nonverbal cues.
Wright (1995) found that effective communication is two-way communication,
where both employees and managers listen to one another. Argenti (1998) also argued
that the most effective internal communication is two-way communication because it
provides an opportunity for informal interaction between employees and managers.
Kalla (2005) also maintained that integrated internal communications involved both
formal and informal communication taking place at all levels in the organization.
Effective face-to-face communication does require a certain level of expertise and
public relations (PR) professionals are trained in both formal and informal communi-
cations. PR professionals communicate using different methods depending on their
level in the organization’s hierarchy. Kelleher (2001) found that PR practitioners
relied more heavily on written communication, whereas PR managers relied more on
face-to-face communication. His findings indicate that lower level PR professionals
spend more of their time providing technical support which allows the manager to
have more time for face-to-face conversations with colleagues and clients.
Employee Engagement
Kahn (1990) defined engagement in the management literature as the ability to harness an
employees’ personal enthusiasm in their work roles. In the internal communications lit-
erature, Quirke (2008) defined engaged employees as “feeling a strong emotional bond to
their employer, recommending it to others and committing time and effort to help the
organization succeed” (p. 102). Hewitt Associates (2009) defined an engaged employee
as “the measure of an employee’s emotional and intellectual commitment to their organi-
zation and its success” (p. 1). Under this definition, employees who are engaged are more
by guest on October 19, 2015job.sagepub.comDownloaded from
188 International Journal of Business Communication 51(2)
likely to contribute to a high-performance organization. In other words, they are more
likely to talk positively about the organization, remain with the organization, and help
their organization perform more effectively every day. In fact, a Gallup Management
study (Robison, 2012) found that engaged employees “are deeply committed to their
employer, leading to key improvements in business outcomes, including reductions in
absenteeism, turnover, shrinkage, safety incidents, and product defects” (p. 1).
Efforts to engage employees are especially critical early in an employee’s tenure.
Caywood (1997) encouraged PR professionals to develop organizational initiatives
that would engage employees. One study found that even as employee engagement
starts high with an employee’s initial entry into the organization, it can drop the first
year and up to 5 years after entry (Trahant, 2009). This means that it is critical for
internal communication professionals to be involved immediately with employee
stakeholders by orienting them to the organization, developing their professional
skills, asking for feedback, and taking time to listen to their concerns.
Previous research has found that several organizational communication practices
enhance employee communication and engagement. Therkelsen and Fiebich (2003)
identified the importance of employee publics to the organization. They found that the
front-line supervisor was a key to employees’ organizational engagement. When employ-
ees perceive greater support from their supervisors, the employees respond, according to
Saks (2006), by becoming more engaged in their job. Saks (2006) also emphasized the
need to communicate with employees clearly and consistently to achieve employee
engagement, suggesting that employees who are more engaged will have a more positive
relationship with their employers. Indeed, Welch and Jackson (2007) identified internal
communication as crucial for achieving employee engagement. They felt that managers
were critical in sharing reliable and open communications with their employees in order
to promote a sense of belonging and commitment as well as helping employees to better
understand the goals of the organization. A Watson Wyatt (2008-2009) study found that
those strategies that engage employees include communication from managers, leader-
ship communication, and a focus on internal communication.
Clearly, prior research has shown that internal communication is a key to numerous
positive outcomes, including employee commitment, and trust between employees
and managers. Cheney (1999) argued that it is important to begin to link internal and
external publics to harness employee enthusiasm for improved customer service
(Gronstedt, 2000). When an employee feels engaged in the organization, it is pre-
sumed that he or she will be more likely to develop positive relationships with other
stakeholders both within and beyond the firm, thus exhibiting engagement. When an
employee develops a relationship with external stakeholders, he or she can become an
ambassador or advocate for the firm (Chong, 2007; Gronstedt, 2000). Evidence of this
concept continues to emerge; indeed, a recent Edelman (2012) study found that con-
versations between customers and technical employees were trusted as a credible
source of information about the organization more than corporate advertising and
information from CEOs. This provides evidence that there is a role for PR profession-
als to coach managers in effective communication with employees in order to become
a trusted source of information.
by guest on October 19, 2015job.sagepub.comDownloaded from
Mishra et al. 189
Research Question
This exploratory study seeks to understand the expanded role that PR professionals
play related to internal communication, focusing specifically on employee engage-
ment. This study used exploratory, semistructured interviews conducted with manag-
ers responsible for PR and/or internal communication at their firms.
The authors conducted interviews either in person or via the telephone. Each conversa-
tion was recorded, transcribed, and analyzed to understand how and what executives
think about communication within their company. The participating executives were
alumni and visitors of the first author’s university, and all worked in the field of inter-
nal communications. The six executives interviewed for this study represented many
different industries, including financial services, utilities, and retailing, and were
recruited using a snowball technique. This was appropriate for this study because
some degree of trust is helpful between the researcher and the interviewee to under-
stand their role in internal communication (Atkinson & Flint, 2001). Not all the execu-
tives were able to meet in person, and some preferred telephone interviews or the
opportunity to answer the interview questions by e-mail. For those who answered the
questions by e-mail, follow-up or clarifying questions were exchanged in some cases,
inviting the executives to elaborate on their responses. The text of the e-mail messages
were combined with the recorded conversations (in person or via phone) and used for
the analysis. The interview questions specifically asked how each participant executes
internal communications at his or her firm.
The interview data were coded using cluster analysis (Foss, 2004). First, the inter-
views were analyzed for key terms based on frequency or intensity. Second, the inter-
views were mapped for other terms clustered around the key terms, such as those
found near a key term or those that may connect to a key term. Finally, the analysis
examined patterns of association or links to identify which clusters are most interest-
ing, most frequent, or of greatest importance. To visualize the clusters, a mindmap
(Northcutt & McCoy, 2004) of the analysis was developed. The mindmap procedure,
a tool in the interactive qualitative analysis process, has been used by scholars in the
fields of health, philanthropy, political science, and exercise science. The results of the
mindmap are described later.
Interview Findings
All the executives were responsible for internal communications and/or PR as a sig-
nificant aspect of their job. The executives interviewed included
1. Mary Beth, vice president of corporate communications, financial services
2. Keith, vice president of corporate communications, energy firm
by guest on October 19, 2015job.sagepub.comDownloaded from
190 International Journal of Business Communication 51(2)
3. Karen, director of internal communications, a software firm
4. Sharon, manager of employee communications, a utility firm
5. Katherine, corporate board secretary (and family member) with communica-
tions responsibility of a medium-sized, family-owned construction materials
6. Gwen, district manager of an international retail firm, with responsibility for
internal communications.
Five of the executives are female, while one is male. Four of the executives have
specific responsibility for corporate or employee communications and two hold other
roles that lead them to have significant influence on communications within their
firms. This profile of women (83%) versus men is similar to a study of the PR field that
found that 85% of women hold PR positions (Sebastian, 2011).
Themes that emerged from the cluster analysis of the executive interviews were the
goals of engaging employees, managing reputation, building trust through dialogue
with key audiences, owning all channels of communication, and face-to-face commu-
nication. The following sections present the key findings surrounding each theme.
Employee Engagement
All of the executives mentioned employee engagement as an important goal of internal
communication. When asked to define their job or their primary role, three of the
executives, Mary Beth, Keith, and Sharon mentioned “employee engagement” as one
of their top priorities. This fits with Wright’s (1995) findings indicating that PR profes-
sionals understand the priority of employee communication. The executives explained
that employee engagement was a relatively new way for their firms to envision the
communications role, and that their CEOs communicate this perspective down to
them. This, too, is in keeping with the literature as Wright (1995) found that CEOs
were a catalyst for promoting employee communication. All participants believe that
employees must feel they are contributing to the company’s goals in order to be
“engaged.” According to Keith, engagement can be a process of ensuring employees
understand the company mission and “how they fit into it.” Similarly, Sharon said she
believes it is essential for employees “to be aware of and have access to information”
in order to become engaged employees.
Keith also mentioned that when he started his job, he spent the first year reorganiz-
ing the entire corporate communications department and toyed with the idea of mak-
ing his title “director of employee engagement.” He said, that for his firm,
The bigger, sort of the higher-level, picture of the employee communications role is to
increase the engagement of employees into what the company is trying to do. Helping the
employees understand what the company’s goals and objectives are, how they fit into it,
helping them buy into the strategy . . . the research shows the more employees understand
by guest on October 19, 2015job.sagepub.comDownloaded from
Mishra et al. 191
and feel like they’re contributing or in line with the company strategy, the more productive
they are and the higher the morale and lower turnover.
Some of the executives also recognize that employee engagement presents chal-
lenges. Keith believes that the goal of employee engagement is an exceptionally impor-
tant part of his job and his department’s responsibility, yet he noted having a difficulty
finding qualified people to fill new positions for his department. He believes that this
challenge relates to the job’s shift toward focusing on employee relations and away
from media relations, which has traditionally existed at large companies. He noted,
Media is sexy and visible, but employee relations have impact. There are all kinds of
varied defendable numbers to show that an engaged workforce is a happier workforce
and a more productive workforce. So, it’s worth the investment. To that end, we end up
getting into all those kinds of things [such as] employee meetings, web casts—you know
working with senior managers on presentations—they’re giving road show presentations
to employees [and] creating feedback mechanisms for employees and constantly
evaluating our tools to see how we can communicate with employees. [This puts into]
context the things that the company’s doing.
Managing Reputation
The second priority many of the executives expressed was protecting and managing
their company’s reputation. Mary Beth, the vice president of corporate communica-
tions from the financial services firm, said, “I feel [as if] corporate communications is
helping [the] corporation manage its reputation with all of its stakeholders.” Mary
Beth believes that her firm’s reputation, both internally and externally, is driven by
behavior and not corporate communication slogans. She expressed it this way:
The management decisions that you make about how you’re going to treat customers and
employees will determine what your reputation is no matter what we tell the news media.
No matter what statement we make, it’s really about your behavior. We always want our
statements to be honest and accurate, so it starts with your behavior and the decisions you
make to determine what we can then say about them.
Keith agreed that managing the firm’s reputation was a priority in his position and
that it impacted employees and other stakeholders. He said,
I think reputation is one of our most important roles. Managing and protecting the
reputation of the company. Positioning the company in the marketplace with customers,
with key stakeholders, with employees, and to some extent with investors and
shareholders, although that kind of bleeds over into investor relations. What is our story
and how do we promote that story and also reputation protection? How do you protect a
company when bad things happen that threaten the image or reputation of the company?
In contrast, Gwen, measures her company’s reputation based on how well a store is
doing financially and how close they are to their customers. She believes that the
by guest on October 19, 2015job.sagepub.comDownloaded from
192 International Journal of Business Communication 51(2)
stores that do best are those with “authentic” employees who are able to be their same
selves at work as they are with friends or colleagues. She noted, “It’s not authentic if
it’s not the voice you use all the time.” She believes that “respect and dignity” in the
way employees communicate with each other cultivates this authenticity. She feels as
if this authenticity is also evident to customers, which keeps them coming back.
In summary, the second theme that emerged from the executive interviews was a
focus on managing and protecting the firm’s reputation.
Building Trust Through Dialogue With Key Audiences
The third theme identified when analyzing the executive interviews is their goal of
building trust by promoting dialogue with key audiences, including employees and
external stakeholders. Along with promoting employee engagement and managing the
company’s reputation, these executives believed that their role included building trust
through two-way communication with their key audiences or stakeholders. For exam-
ple, Sharon described her job as promoting “dialogue from the company’s leadership
with various audiences—media, key leaders, employees. We place a huge emphasis on
relationships with our elected officials and regulators. To maintain those relationships,
we have to be perceived well by our customers.” The participants also relayed how
dialogue with key audiences influenced employee relations. Sharon described the
importance of internal relations, indicating that employee communication was critical
to rebuilding trust in her firm after a recent merger. She explained,
That cynicism is also due to the fact that Florida was acquired in the merger. They feel the
previous management team was not straight with them, and so there’s a lot of lingering
distrust. In the Carolinas, most employees are happy to work for this company. The
company pays well, particularly compared with others in some of the rural communities
where our facilities are located. So, you start off with most folks feeling pretty positive.
Karen also described her department’s goal as “letting [employees] know the com-
pany.” She wants her efforts to help employees become more knowledgeable about the
company and their place in it.
Keith also agreed that his job is to “facilitate communication.” He said,
You’re trying to accomplish something to make people feel part of a team and understand
what the company’s doing. It’s pretty important, and I think more and more CEOs and
companies are recognizing the value of that.
In summary, these executives identified one of their roles as opening a dialogue with
key audiences, including employees and external stakeholders. One of the goals of this
communication outreach is to build trust.
Owning All Channels of Communication
The fourth theme that emerged from the interviews is that these executives feel that
they have an array of communication channels accessible to disseminate messages to
by guest on October 19, 2015job.sagepub.comDownloaded from
Mishra et al. 193
employees. All of the executives said they are responsible for all channels of commu-
nication with employees, including company intranets, company e-newsletters, social
media such as forums and company blogs, and traditional employee communication
such as employee meetings and print materials. Keith described his firm’s approach:
For employee communications, we own all the channels to communicate to the
employees. For all of our electronic communications, we have a daily electronic
newsletter. We have several other regular communications vehicles that go out to
employees from human resources, IT and things like that. That’s one big chunk of the
work–it’s managing that process of delivering the information.
One of the tasks these executives described in their interviews was determining
which communication vehicles to use, when, and for what purposes. Mary Beth finds
that her internal clients, whom she counsels on internal communication, prefer to com-
municate with their direct reports by issuing written memos either in hardcopy or by
e-mail. She believes, however, that occasions arise (such as performance feedback)
that call for a more intimate approach, such as face-to-face communication. She tries
to help her clients determine the most appropriate approach for each situation.
Keith believes that rather than guessing how employees want to receive communi-
cation, he asks them to express their preferred information channel for receiving infor-
mation on important issues. In his experience, employees want to receive any
information about their company benefits in writing, so that they can take that infor-
mation home to read and digest the details. He explained,
What you have to do is you really have to find out from employees how they like to be
communicated to. There’s been plenty of research on things that are effective, but what
you find is there are certain kinds of information that people like to get a certain way. For
example, for HR information, benefits, and things like that, most employees like to get a
printed document. If it’s to review their health plan and their benefits, we still find that
employees like to have something to look at in front of them. But, if it’s just like quick
company information, announcements, and things like that, they like e-mail or electronic
Katherine acknowledges that the intention of the communication is just as impor-
tant as what form is chosen. She explained,
In our task-focused, operations-driven business consistent management announcements
made in weekly meetings along with the proper follow up from management have been
successful. Additionally, small groups or one-on-one meetings have proven to be
successful. Even a quick email from a manager when the week’s production goals have
been met can go a long way. When employees feel like they’re important and their
contributions matter they feel like a part of the company’s overall success. Most of the
time people simply want to feel like they’re valued. Whether it’s a quick lunch with a
supervisor or a well thought out incentive program that has the employee’s best interest
at heart, good employees will sense when management cares about them. It’s up to
management to come up with creative ways of communicating with their employees.
by guest on October 19, 2015job.sagepub.comDownloaded from
194 International Journal of Business Communication 51(2)
Several of the executives mentioned that it was also important to match the medium
with the message. Sharon noted that her firm has found that the mode of communica-
tion depends on the circumstance for the communication. She noted,
We’ve seen in our research a strong and growing preference for electronic communication.
For us that means the daily e-mail and the intranet. However, this format works best to
inform. Major change management initiatives—where employees actually have to take
action or face radical changes to their work—are better done through some sort of face-
to-face interaction. I think there is also a role for print, particularly if you need to educate
employees around a particular set of issues.
In summary, these executives find that they have a range of communication vehi-
cles from which to choose when communicating with employees. They also believe,
however, that it is best to ask employees how they want to receive specific types of
information. The next theme is the executives’ belief that despite this breadth of com-
munication vehicles, face-to-face communication still plays an important role in the
way they communicate with employees.
Face-to-Face Communication
Despite the variety of media available to the executives interviewed, they all believe
in the benefit of maintaining regular face-to-face communication. Karen summarized
the general feeling of all the executives: “There is nothing better than face-to-face
communication.” Mary Beth discovered that when her firm conducted its own in-
house employee communication study, the response “face-to-face communication
with my boss” was the most satisfactory way employees in her firm said they wanted
to receive information. She explained,
We [can] say based on what we know from social science and based on what we know
from our own surveys of employees, that the most effective communication is one-on-
one with [the] manager. Then, I would say beyond that would be in a meeting—a face-to-
face meeting with your manager [with] five to ten people there or a hundred people there.
A face-to-face meeting would be the most effective way because people get the body
language, and they can make a decision as to whether or not they think it’s credible. They
can ask questions if they don’t understand something.
Gwen believes that face-to-face communication is critical for store-level employ-
ees and their bosses. She said, “Our whole goal is respect and dignity in how we com-
municate, and it translates to the partners as well as to the customers.”
Keith underscored the benefit to employees of regularly receiving face-to-face
Face to face communication is the most effective in terms of getting people to understand.
There are certain things you want the CEO and senior managers to [communicate], but if
you really want people to buy and believe [a message], they need to hear things and have
it echoed from their day-to-day supervisors or one level up.
by guest on October 19, 2015job.sagepub.comDownloaded from
Mishra et al. 195
In summarizing the executives’ responses about face-to-face communication, the
data show that this type of communication serves a dual purpose. First, it keeps
employees informed, and second, it helps them feel secure about their place in the
company because they are getting information directly from their boss.
Executive Interview Summary
The interviews revealed that the executives’ primary goals are to promote dialogue to
build trust with key audiences, manage the reputation of the company’s brand and
image, and promote employee engagement. The executives identified a full-range of
communication vehicles they used to implement these goals with employees, yet
believed that face-to-face communication between an employee and his or her man-
ager was the preferred and most effective channel. These executives found that face-
to-face communication reduced turnover and promoted a sense of community among
employees. Finally, they saw their work as overlapping yet distinct from the marketing
department, which they consider more tactical than strategic.
As noted, Figure 1 illustrates the mindmap created from the cluster analysis of the
executive interviews. The data in the figure were drawn from the interviews and relate
that information back to the internal communications literature. The executives
Managing Reputation Employee Engagement
Building Trust
Dialogue with
Key Audiences
Own all channels
Of communication
Figure 1. Mindmap of executives’ perceptions of their role in promoting internal communication.
by guest on October 19, 2015job.sagepub.comDownloaded from
196 International Journal of Business Communication 51(2)
frequently mentioned that the focal point of their activities is engaging in or promoting
dialogue among key audiences in order to build trust. This concept, therefore, occupies
the center of the diagram. The purpose of the executives’ dialogue includes both man-
aging the firm’s reputation and employee engagement. The diagram’s horizontal
arrows reflect these concepts. In addition, the mindmap illustrates that these commu-
nication executives have a range of communication vehicles from which to choose
(both on-line and off-line) when communicating with employees. They believe, how-
ever, that face-to-face communication occupies a distinct and important place in talk-
ing with employees. The diagram’s vertical arrows reflect this concept. The executive
interviews corresponded most closely with the relationship management and PR lit-
eratures, including aspects of building relationships. The mindmap, however, uses the
words the executives used to describe their relationship management practices.
Discussion and Contributions
One key contribution of this study is highlighting the importance that PR executives
place on face-to-face communication in their communications with employees. As
fostering employee engagement is seen as an increasingly important aspect of their
jobs, PR professionals rely on transparent communication with employees (Dolphin,
2005). Another contribution of this study is identifying the need for PR executives to
serve as internal coaches in their own organizations to train front-line managers to
listen and provide feedback. The PR executives we interviewed shared how they must
coach their internal clients and managers on relating effectively with employees. They
also stated that their clients and managers would rather send out a memo than walk
over and talk to an employee. This could be because a memo is faster and less “messy”
than getting involved in a potentially long conversation. Managers might also shy
away from face-to-face communication because they might not be well equipped to
handle such personal interactions. Recognizing this propensity, Wright (1995) sug-
gested that PR professionals work with supervisors to help them communicate more
closely with their employees to help manage this deficiency. PR professionals in this
study indicated that they already provide a coaching role to managers so it follows that
they could teach listening and feedback skills to them to help them feel more comfort-
able in this role.
This study also contributes to our understanding of the importance PR executives
place on their role in maintaining and improving their firm’s reputation. Research has
shown that organizations that invest in employees are viewed more favorably by exter-
nal audiences as being better employers (Gill, 2010). The interviewed executives
understand the importance of their work in influencing their company’s reputation.
The bank executive, Mary Beth, mentioned that she closely watches the American
Customer Satisfaction Index ratings for her bank ( Furthermore, she
knows that the actions she takes on behalf of internal communications directly affect
these customer satisfaction rankings. All the executives know that the work they do
communicating with all stakeholders through both traditional and social media chan-
nels impacts firm reputation.
by guest on October 19, 2015job.sagepub.comDownloaded from
Mishra et al. 197
An additional contribution of this study is understanding how PR professionals
view the toolbox of communication channels they have at their disposal and how they
perceive the strengths and weaknesses of each method in communicating with their
internal publics. Because PR professionals have a variety of communications channels
available to them (including on-line and off-line communications), they need to ask
employees how they prefer to receive information. While studies have suggested that
face-to-face communication is more credible (D’Aprix, 2009; Quirke, 2008), there
may be times and circumstances where employees prefer to receive certain types of
information via the intranet or company newsletters. Executives recognize that many
communication vehicles are available to them to send messages to employees, and
they do not always see face-to-face communication as the fastest, easiest, or most
effective method. In one sense, however, executives recognize that certain other meth-
ods are preferable for specific types of information. Employee benefits, for example,
are best communicated using hardcopies because employees want something on paper
to take home with them.
An important contribution of this study is recognizing the role of trust in trans-
parent communication and employee engagement. The Edelman Trust Barometer
(2012) exhorts companies to “practice radical transparency” which by definition
includes talking to employees first. In addition, Edelman found that trusting behav-
iors include communicating frequently and honestly and has a transparent and
open business. If the company shares information widely, employees feel a sense
of belonging and a shared mission with their employer. This develops a bond
of trust between the organization and the employee, which leads to employee
Finally, this study contributes to our knowledge of the expanded role of employee
engagement for PR and internal communications executives from their perspectives.
As it turns out, this expanded role is critical confirmed by a Gallup Management
Journal study that found that the stronger the engagement, the more likely the
employee will act in the interests of the employer (Nink & Welte, 2011). As Keith
noted, he is having a hard time finding qualified employees to hire for his employee
engagement staff. This represents a challenge for PR university programs to include
employee engagement curriculum so that graduates are prepared for this new and
expanded role as they enter their internships and professional careers.
Limitations and Future Directions
This study has some limitations. Although they represented a variety of firms, this
exploratory study interviewed only six executives. These executives are still represen-
tative of the PR field as their responsibilities encompass both the tactical and manage-
rial aspects that Kelleher (2001) uncovered in his research. One other limitation is that
this study is not a longitudinal study, but examined these executives at one point in
time. Future research should follow PR professionals over time to understand how
internal communications affect employee engagement in different ways at different
points in time to understand how it affects organizational outcomes.
by guest on October 19, 2015job.sagepub.comDownloaded from
198 International Journal of Business Communication 51(2)
Grunig (1993) suggested that various publics can perceive a difference between
symbolic and behavioral communication and noted that one-way communication is
inherently symbolic in that it says something, but does not require follow-up. Two-
way or behavioral communication, on the other hand, suggests that the provider is
willing to engage in dialogue and actually make changes as a result of that dialogue. If
the executives are only planning communication and not implementing it, they will
not be able to measure how effective their communication was. Future research should
examine the effectiveness of including either employees or their front-line managers
in planning and executing communication efforts.
Future research should consider studying a larger group of both employees and
executives from a single firm to determine if that firm’s employee engagement activi-
ties are building trust and creating an open atmosphere for both employees and their
managers to communicate well with one another. By hearing from both employees and
executive at one firm, researchers could follow the executives’ intentions and then fol-
low up with employees to discover the result.
Executives see face-to-face communication as one method among many to promote
dialogue with their key audiences. They disclosed, however, that their managers are
not always equipped to deal with their direct reports face-to-face. Future research
should evaluate managers’ level of expertise and confidence in conducting face-to-
face communication, including their ability to listen and deliver constructive feed-
back. In addition, future research should examine if managers have had training in
interpersonal communication, which would aid in delivering internal communications
effectively. Another line of future research could examine a firm’s efforts to build trust
after an organization works with managers to improve their communication skills.
Such a study could evaluate the level of trust in the organization prior to the manager
skills training and examine how that level of trust changes in the organization after
managers received skills training. A future study should also measure specific dimen-
sions of trust, rather than evaluating a general feeling of trust and how this leads to
employee engagement.
In the present study, the term employee engagement emerged from the interviews
with executives as a critical component of their job responsibilities. The executives
in this study described their responsibilities as building trust through a dialogue with
key audiences, which included both an internal component of employee engagement
and an external component of managing their firm’s reputation. These executives
were aware that their employees are an important public and considered them equal
in value to investors or external customers. In fact, three of the firms had depart-
ments specifically designed to manage relationships with employees. Future research
should focus specifically on employee engagement as a role an internal communica-
tions executive plays and how such efforts build trust between employees and the
organization. In addition, future research should look more closely at the goals of
employee engagement as opposed to engagement for its own purpose. Finally, future
research should examine the role resulting employee engagement has on relation-
ships with other stakeholders, including customers, and the levels of trust engage-
ment achieves.
by guest on October 19, 2015job.sagepub.comDownloaded from
Mishra et al. 199
Efforts to build trust with employees through internal communication can provide
benefits for both employees and the firm. Employees feel more engaged, build trust
with their supervisor and the firm, and are therefore more empowered to build rela-
tionships with customers on the firm’s behalf. More effective internal communication
can enhance this engagement.
Internal communications professionals can enhance their role by equipping front-
line managers with more effective face-to-face communication skills in order to carry
out the organization’s communication plans. If PR executives are relying on front-
line managers to be their messengers, then the messengers need better training in
interpersonal communication to build trust with employees on behalf of the entire
Furthermore, Larkin and Larkin (2005) advocated for managers to understand
which channels of communication are best suited for the message. Executives like
having a variety of channels available to them, but they must conduct a communica-
tions audit (D’Aprix, 2009) to determine how employees prefer to receive certain
types of communication. Employees will be more likely to respond and engage when
they receive information in a form and channel that they prefer. As social media
becomes an increasingly important component of the PR professional’s role, it will be
critical to learn how to harness the two-way communication aspect of social media to
listen, monitor and participate in conversations, monitor social networks, and use ana-
lytics to measure success (Marketwire, 2012).
D’Aprix (2009) concluded that organizational leadership has lost credibility
because it has not been truthful with employees about a variety of issues that impact
the company and its customers. One essential way for leaders and organizations to
regain their credibility is to be open and truthful with information that employees and
other stakeholders value and listen to concerns. Once a dialogue has taken seed, effec-
tive internal communication can begin to grow. The 2012 Edelman Trust Barometer
identifies transparent communication as a key attribute for a trusted company. As trust
in CEOs decline while trust in company employees rise (Edelman Trust Barometer,
2012), PR professionals will help drive employee engagement by supporting CEOs in
providing transparent communication. This effort will benefit the company, the
employees, and the general public.
The authors wish to thank the editor and the following reviewers for their helpful comments on
previous drafts of this article: Dr. Peter Smudde at Illinois State University and Dr. Thomas
Hove at Michigan State University. The authors would also like to thank Ms. Leslie Wilhelm for
her expert editing assistance.
Declaration of Conflicting Interests
The author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship,
and/or publication of this article.
by guest on October 19, 2015job.sagepub.comDownloaded from
200 International Journal of Business Communication 51(2)
The author(s) received no financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of
this article.
1. Researchers William Kennan and Vincent Hazleton credit public relations scholar Carl
Botan with prompting them to label the term internal public relations (V. Hazleton, per-
sonal communication, 2007).
Annenberg School of Communications, University of Southern California. (2012). Generally
Accepted Practices VII Executive Summary. Los Angeles, CA: Author. Retrieved from
Argenti, P. (1996). Corporate communication as a discipline. Management Communication
Quarterly, 10, 73-97.
Argenti, P. (1998). Strategic employee communications. Human Resource Management, 37,
Atkinson, R., & Flint, J. (2001). Accessing hidden and hard-to-reach populations: Snowball
research strategies. Social Research Update, 33. Retrieved from
Benner, M. J., & Tushman, M. L. (2003). Exploitation, exploration, and process management:
The productivity dilemma revisited. Academy of Management Review, 28, 238-256.
Botan, C. H., & Taylor, M. (2004). Public relations: State of the field. Journal of Communication,
54, 645-661.
Broom, G. M., Casey, S., & Ritchey, J. (2000). Concept and theory of organization-public
relationships. In J. A. Ledingham & S. D. Bruning (Eds.), Public relations as relationship
management: A relational approach to the study and practice of public relations (pp. 3-22).
Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Bruning, S. D., & Ledingham, J. A. (2000). A longitudinal study of organization-public rela-
tionship dimensions: Defining the role of communication in the practice of relationships
management. In J. A. Ledingham & S. D. Bruning (Eds.), Public relations as relationship
management: A relational approach to the study and practice of public relations (pp. 55-
69). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Carroll, A. B. (2006, July 29). Trust is the key when rating great workplaces. Retrieved from
Caywood, C. (1997). The handbook of strategic public relations and integrated communica-
tions. New York, NY: McGraw-Hill.
Cheney, G. (1999). Values at work. Ithaca, NY: ILR Press.
Chia, J. (2005). Measuring the immeasurable? Retrieved from
Chong, M. (2007). The role of internal communication and training in infusing corporate val-
ues and delivering brand promise: Singapore Airlines’ experience. Corporate Reputation
Review, 10, 201-212.
D’Aprix, R. (2009). The credible company. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Daft, R. L., Lengel, R. H., & Trevino, L. K. (1987). Message equivocality, media selection, and
manager performance: Implications for information systems. MIS Quarterly, 11, 355-366.
Denison, D. R., & Mishra, A. K. (1995). Toward a theory of organizational culture and effec-
tiveness, Organization Science, 6, 204-223.
by guest on October 19, 2015job.sagepub.comDownloaded from
Mishra et al. 201
Dolphin, R. R. (2005). Internal communications: Today’s strategic imperative. Journal of
Marketing Communications, 11, 171-190.
Edelman Trust Barometer. (2012). 2012 Edelman Trust Barometer: Executive summary.
Retrieved from
Foss, S. K. (2004). Rhetorical criticism: Exploration and practice (3rd ed.). Long Grove, IL:
Waveland Press.
Gallup. (2012). Employee engagement. Retrieved from
Gavin, M. B., & Mayer, R. C. (2005). Trust in management and performance: Who minds the
shop while the employees watch the boss? Academy of Management Journal, 48, 874-888.
Gill, R. (2010). Employer of choice: Using computers to enhance employee engagement in
Australia. Global Business and Organizational Excellence, March/April, 44-63.
Gronstedt, A. (2000). The customer century: Lessons from world-class companies in integrated
marketing communication. New York, NY: Routledge.
Grunig, J. E. (1993). Image and substance: From symbolic to behavioral relationships. Public
Relations Review, 19, 121-139.
Hewitt Associates. (2009). Engagement and culture: Engaging talent in turbulent times.
Retrieved from
Kahn, W. A. (1990). Psychological conditions of personal engagement and disengagement at
work. Academy of Management Journal, 33, 692-724.
Kalla, H. K. (2005). Integrated internal communications: A multidisciplinary perspective.
Corporate Communications, 10, 302-314.
Kelleher, T. (2001). Public relations roles and media choice. Journal of Public Relations
Research, 13, 303-320.
Kennan, W. R., & Hazleton, V. (2006). Internal public relations, social capital, and the role of
effective organizational communication. In C. Botan & V. Hazelton (Eds.), Public rela-
tions theory II (pp. 311-338). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Ki, E. J., & Hon, L. C. (2007). Testing the linkages among the organization-public relationship
and attitude and behavioral intentions. Journal of Public Relations Research, 19, 1-23.
Kitchen, P. J., & Daly, F. (2002). Internal communication during change management.
Corporate Communications: An International Journal, 7, 46-53.
Larkin, T. J., & Larkin, S. (2005). Change the communication channel: Web, paper, or face-to-
face. Communication World, November-December, 16-18.
Lowenstein, M. (2006, February 14). The trust equation: Build employee relationship credibil-
ity, rapport and integrity to leverage customer advocacy. CRMGuru. Retrieved from http://
Marketwire. (2012). Social media intelligence: A new PR skill. Retrieved from http://istrategy-
Mishra, A. K. (1996). Organizational responses to crisis: The centrality of trust. In R. Kramer &
T. Tyler (Eds.), Trust in organizations (pp. 261-287). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Mishra, A. K., & Mishra, K. E. (1994). The role of mutual trust in effective downsizing strate-
gies. Human Resource Management, 33, 261-279.
Nink, M., & Welte, K. (2011, December 6). Involving employees in change. Gallup Management
Journal. Retrieved from
Northcutt, N., & McCoy, D. (2004). Interactive qualitative analysis: A systems methods for
qualitative research. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
by guest on October 19, 2015job.sagepub.comDownloaded from
202 International Journal of Business Communication 51(2)
Paine, K. D. (2003). Guidelines for measuring trust in organizations. Retrieved from http://
Pounsford, M. (2007). Using storytelling, conversation and coaching to engage. Strategic
Communication Management, 11(3), 32-35.
Robison, J. (2012, January 5). Boosting engagement at Stryker. Gallup Management Journal.
Retrieved from
Quirke, B. (2008). Making the connections: Using internal communication to turn strategy into
action. Burlington, VT: Gower.
Saks, A. M. (2006). Antecedents and consequences of employee engagement. Journal of
Managerial Psychology, 21, 600-619.
Sebastian, M. (2011, March 3). In PR world, men still earn more than women. Retrieved from
Spreitzer, G. M., & Mishra, A. K. (1999). Giving up control without losing control: Trust and
its substitutes’ effects on managers’ involving employees in decision making. Group &
Organization Management, 24, 155-187.
Therkelsen, D. J., & Fiebich, C. L. (2003). The supervisor: The linchpin of employee relations.
Journal of Communication Management, 8, 120-129.
Thomas, G. F., Zolin, R., & Hartman, J. L. (2009). The central role of communication in devel-
oping trust and its effect on employee involvement. Journal of Business Communication,
46, 287-310.
Trahant, B. (2009). Driving better performance through continuous employee engagement.
Public Manager, 38(1), 54-59.
Watson Wyatt White Paper. (2008-2009). Driving business results through continuous engage-
ment. Retrieved from
Welch, M., & Jackson, P. R. (2007). Rethinking internal communication: A stakeholder
approach. Corporate Communications, 12, 177.
Wilson, L. J. (1994). The return of Gemeinschaft: A theory of public relations and corporate
community relations as relationship building. In A. F. Alkhafaji (Ed.), Business research
yearbook: Global business perspectives 1 (pp. 135-141). Lanham, MD: University Press
of America.
Wright, D. K. (1995). The role of corporate public relations executives in the future of employee
communications. Public Relations Review, 21, 181-198.
Author Biographies
Karen Mishra is an assistant professor of business at Meredith College in Raleigh, North
Lois Boynton is an associate professor of public relations, Public Relations Sequence Head, and
master’s program advisor in the School of Journalism and Mass Communication at the
University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill. She teaches ethics and public relations classes, is a
fellow in the University’s Parr Center for Ethics, and was named to the University’s Academy
of Distinguished Teaching Scholars.
Aneil Mishra is Associate Dean for Academic Affairs in the School of Business at North
Carolina Central University in Durham, North Carolina.
by guest on October 19, 2015job.sagepub.comDownloaded from
... Penelitian terdahulu telah menyelidiki faktor-faktor penentu kinerja karyawan, pergantian karyawan, dan niat berpindah kerja yang muncul dari penelitian retensi dalam sumber daya manusia dan studi komunikasi internal dalam hubungannya dengan masyarakat. Prekursor penting untuk mempertahankan karyawan adalah komunikasi dua arah yang efektif (Laddha et al, 2012;Mishra et al, 2014). Karyawan melihat organisasi yang transparan sebagai organisasi yang kredibel dan akuntabel, sehingga dapat memberdayakan karyawan untuk bersedia bekerja lebih baik (misalnya, hubungan yang lebih baik dengan pemangku kepentingan eksternal) dan lebih berkomitmen pada organisasi tersebut (Mishra et al, 2014). ...
... Prekursor penting untuk mempertahankan karyawan adalah komunikasi dua arah yang efektif (Laddha et al, 2012;Mishra et al, 2014). Karyawan melihat organisasi yang transparan sebagai organisasi yang kredibel dan akuntabel, sehingga dapat memberdayakan karyawan untuk bersedia bekerja lebih baik (misalnya, hubungan yang lebih baik dengan pemangku kepentingan eksternal) dan lebih berkomitmen pada organisasi tersebut (Mishra et al, 2014). ...
... Beberapa penelitian memberikan bukti adanya pengaruh positif dari strategi komunikasi yang berbeda (seperti komunikasi transparan, komunikasi simetris, komunikasi melalui saluran yang berbeda) dalam meningkatkan job engagement (Jiang & Men, 2017;Jiang & Shen, 2020;Men, 2014;Men & Stacks, 2014). Beberapa peneliti lain juga mulai mengkonfirmasi secara empiris adanya pengaruh positif pada keterlibatan karyawan melalui komunikasi internal (Kang & Sung, 2017;Mishra et al, 2014;Tkalac Verčič & Vokic, 2017;Walden et al, 2017). ...
Full-text available
This study aims to analyze the effect of transparent communication and communicated appreciation on job engagement mediated by affective organizational commitment to the employees of RSGM-P FKG Usakti. This study uses a quantitative method that uses primary data sourced from questionnaires distributed via google forms to employees at RSGM-P FKG Usakti. The research sample was selected using the entire population of 210 employees, consisting of medical and non-medical personnel at RSGM-P FKG Usakti. Analysis of the data used for the hypothesis is Covariance-Based Structural Equation Modeling (CB-SEM), the software used is AMOS, and to test the hypothesis of the mediating variable using the Sobel Test. The results of this study indicate that there are several hypotheses that have a positive effect, including; transparent communication on job engagement; communicated appreciation on job engagement; transparent communication on affective organizational commitment; and communicated appreciation on affective organizational commitment. In addition, the results of this study also found information that there was no positive influence between affective organizational commitment on job engagement; transparent communication on job engagement through affective organizational commitment; and communicated appreciation on job engagement through affective organizational commitment. This research is expected to be a reference for further research on respondents in other health fields or outside the health sector, as well as further research on other factors outside of this research that may influence or mediate job engagement
... En la estructura organizacional, el 67 % de las empresas tiene la comunicación interna en el área de recursos humanos; por lo que se puede concluir que aún no se logra en las empresas GPTW de Chile la propuesta académica de que esté en el área de comunicación (Almansa-Martínez, 2005;Mishra et al., 2014). ...
... Almansa-Martínez (2005) considera que aunque el trabajo con el departamento de recursos humanos enriquece, la comunicación interna debe gestionarse desde el departamento de comunicación estratégica de las empresas. SegúnMishra et al. (2014), la propuesta académica es que gestionar la comunicación interna en el mismo departamento que se gestiona la comunicación externa, permite un mensaje coherente; pero considera que los profesionales de la comunicación en las empresas no han adoptado totalmente esta propuesta como lo confirma el presente estudio.Entre los encuestados, solo un 14 % tiene el área de comunicación interna en el departamento de comunicación externa y relaciones de prensa, y el menor porcentaje es el grupo que lo tiene en el área de marketing con un 5 % (figura 1).Con relación al tamaño del departamento, los resultados indican que más de la mitad de las empresas cuentan con dos a cuatro personas dedicadas a la comunicación interna, y una cuarta parte de las empresas cuenta con más de cinco personas en esa área (figura 2). ...
Full-text available
Los cambios en los modos de trabajar en las organizaciones impulsados por la pandemia por la COVID-19 y las restricciones de movimiento, generaron adaptaciones en las formas de comunicar a los diferentes públicos con los que se relacionan las instituciones, en particular en el modo de interactuar con los públicos internos. Esta investigación tiene como objetivo observar el impacto en el estado, funcionamiento y ajustes en la comunicación interna en pandemia. Para esto se observaron organizaciones en Chile pertenecientes al ranking Great Place to Work® 2020 (GPTW 2020). El análisis se hizo cinco meses después de iniciada la crisis sanitaria. Esta investigación de tipo exploratorio utilizó un cuestionario autoadministrado que fue aplicado a través de mailing y teléfonos a las instituciones presentes en el ranking Great Place to Work®. Entre los principales resultados se puede destacar que la comunicación interna es un actor relevante de desarrollo en las organizaciones, sobre todo en tiempos de crisis. Esto se confirma porque el 88 % de las empresas cuenta con un área exclusiva para la comunicación interna, las que producto de la pandemia debieron cambiar su foco desde capacitación, beneficios y reconocimientos al personal en 2019, a contención de crisis externa, seguridad y prevención de accidentes laborales en 2020. Tras el análisis, es posible vislumbrar cambios institucionales, reorganización interna y temas emergentes como work-life balance, trabajo en equipo, COVID y cuidado de los trabajadores.
... The simultaneous employment and expression of a person's 'preferred self' in task behaviors that enhance connections to work and people, personal presence, and active, full performance is what "work engagement" means (Schaufeli et al., 2006). Numerous studies have pointed out that EYE has three dimensions: vigor, dedication, and absorption (Christian, 2011;Mishra et al., 2014;Schaufeli et al., 2006). According to these authors, vigor indicates power, mental resilience, spending constant effort, and determination on the job. ...
... Since EE has become one of the critical issues in the workplace today. With complex and strict regulations in place, EE remains a major obstacle to organizations in the future [6], [7]. This aspect will challenge management because EE is an important criterion in maintaining continuous effort, sustainability, and organizational profitability [8]- [12]. ...
Full-text available
span lang="EN-US">The study examined the mediating effect of employee engagement between blue ocean leadership and team performance among lecturers. A cross-sectional study design was used, and quantitative data were collected using a structured survey from 2,580 lecturers from the population across the 22 vocational colleges in Malaysia's north zone. Structural Equation Modeling (SEM) was used for data analysis. The results revealed a considerable positive relationship between blue ocean leadership and employee engagement, as well as between employee engagement and team performance. Employee engagement, as demonstrated through the use of bootstrapping analysis, acts as a mediator between blue ocean leadership and team performance. The finding supported the Blue Ocean Leadership theory and Social Exchange theory in this study. Future research is be recommended to conduct in other states as well as private institutions to get a comprehensive understanding.</span
... Some of the participants noted that the lines between internal and external communication are blurry. This finding is not surprising as scholars have repeatedly observed that in today's increasingly digitized and connected world, anything internal can quickly become external (Mishra et al., 2014;Men, 2021). In addition to the blurriness between internal and external communication, organizations and internal communicators struggle with defining where they should sit within an organization. ...
Full-text available
The amount of internal communication research has flourished during the past decade, and scholars have examined the role of internal communication in affecting employee and organizational outcomes. Despite the increasing literature, knowledge, and research of internal communication in Latin America is largely missing. Given this reality, this study explored the status of internal communication in Latin America through the lens of 20 experienced internal communication professionals from nine Latin American countries. Taking a multi-iteration consensus-building approach, this Delphi study enabled the expert panel to individually elaborate and collectively evaluate shared observations regarding the definition, characteristics, importance, and current reality of the field. Specifically, this study examined how practitioners define and understand internal communication, the skills and knowledge needed to perform internal communication, the value of internal communication, and the state of internal communication practice in Latin America. The findings of the current study enriched and diversified the extant body of knowledge that is U.S. and European-centered.
... This is because consistent communication can increase employee trust and can influence their behavior; making employees' expectations more realistic, thereby enhancing their sense of safety. Research has shown that underutilized communication and transparency strategies, as well as the use of evasion and cohesiveness approaches, affect employee trust and engagement (Mazzei and Ravazzani, 2014;Mishra et al., 2014). Therefore, internal communication and transparency are required to facilitate strategy transformation in medium-sized businesses. ...
Full-text available
This objective of this study was to examine the effects of communication, training and development, and transformational leadership on employee engagement during COVID-19 in Malaysia. Four hundred individuals were recruited, and data were analyzed using partial least square structural equation modeling (PLS-SEM). Communication, training and development, and transformational leadership were found to positively affect employee engagement. In the midst of the COVID-19 outbreak, this study investigated the aforementioned factors as part of the reciprocal process between the employee and the employer and their effects on employee engagement, thereby making original theoretical contributions. This study also provides vital insights for businesses to consider when designing effective employee engagement plans for future well-being in the workplace.
... Employees are indispensable communication agents and assets for organizations whose external reputation and relationships are built from within (Kim & Rhee, 2011). Public relations scholars have noted that the line between "internal" and "external" is blurred in the increasingly connected, digitized, and transparent world and that what employees say publicly about the organization can form the basis of external stakeholders' perception of the organization (; Mishra et al., 2014;Lee & Yue, 2020). Consequently, the field of internal public relations has grown rapidly in the last decade (Verčič et al., 2012;Shen & Jiang, 2021) as observed through diverse topics on different internal communication strategies and employee responses (Lee & Yue, 2020). ...
Full-text available
To fill the research gap and expand the body of knowledge on leadership communication and internal communication, the current study investigates the effect of leader motivating language on psychological safety, job meaningfulness, and psychological availability, and employee advocacy in the United States and India. Through a web survey of 441 participants from the U.S and 354 participants from India, the study confirmed that leader motivating language is positively related with psychological safety, job meaningfulness, psychological availability, and employee advocacy in the United States and India. The study also looked at the relationship that psychological safety, work meaningfulness, and psychological availability have with employee advocacy, a concept that has been described as an indicator of public relations effectiveness and the ultimate test of a relationship between an organization and its employees.
Conference Paper
Full-text available
Human rights and freedoms are subject to improvement, supervision, and more and more complete protection both internationally and domestically. However, the fact that there is a growing range of guaranteed human rights and freedoms and that their protection is increasingly diverse and effective does not mean that they are not subject to certain conditions and restrictions. One can talk about three types of such limitations that are allowed by international law: 1) embedded restrictions, 2) restrictions due to extraordinary circumstances and 3) optional restrictions. The paper deals with the first one, which usually is paid less attention to. They are inseparable from the specific human right itself, more precisely from the way in which it is defined or understood. Since, as an integral part of the right itself, they are inextricably linked to it, the characteristic of these restrictions is that they are permanent, always present, meaning that in principle they do not depend on the existence of extraordinary circumstances, nor on the special decision of the state. The author points out the differences between embedded and other permitted restrictions on human rights and freedoms and gives an overview of various ways embedded restrictions can be introduced. He concludes that embedded restrictions are not only reasonable, but in principle necessary and even inevitable, because everything else would lead to chaos and, ultimately, trampling on those same human rights. On the other hand, no human rights restrictions, not even the inherent ones, should ever turn into their opposite, into the abuse of human rights restrictions.
Employee engagement (EE) is a common research topic in human resources and psychology, though such studies are relatively rare in accounting, despite its integral role in modern business. This study aims to redefine the employee engagement drivers (EED) from an accounting perspective. This research uses the method of systematic literature review (SLR) of EE articles from the Web of Science, Scopus, and Google Scholar databases published in the period 1990-2020. The results reveal a strong correlation between the current definition of EED in psychology and the major accounting areas of internal control, corporate governance, and financial performance. The findings suggest that healthy financial performance, solid internal controls, and good corporate governance will increase the EE level because these accounting perspectives represent EED. These findings improve the understanding of accounting principles and their implementation in actual business contexts. Further empirical research could investigate the connections among the variables in this SLR.
Full-text available
Full-text available
Researchers for decades have believed that trust increases performance, but empirical evidence of this has been sparse. This study investigates the relationship between an employee’s trust in the plant manager and in the top management team with the employee’s in-role performance and organizational citizenship behaviors (OCB). Results support a fully mediated model in which trust in both management referents was positively related to focus of attention, which, in turn, was positively related to performance. The results raise questions about appropriate levels of analysis for outcome variables. Trust is mandatory for optimization of a system.... Without trust, each component will protect its own immediate interests to its own long-term detriment, and to the detriment of the entire system.- W. Edwards Deming (1994) Over three decades ago, Argyris (1964) proposed that trust in management is important for organizational performance. Recognition of the importance of trust in organizational relationships has grown rapidly in recent years, evidenced by a large number of publications on the topic addressing both academic and practitioner audiences (e.g., Annison & Wilford, 1998; Fukuyama, 1995; Mishra, 1996; Shaw, 1997). In spite of this interest, difficulties in defining and operationalizing trust have hampered the empirical study of its relationship with performance.
Full-text available
Purpose – Employee engagement has become a hot topic in recent years among consulting firms and in the popular business press. However, employee engagement has rarely been studied in the academic literature and relatively little is known about its antecedents and consequences. The purpose of this study was to test a model of the antecedents and consequences of job and organization engagements based on social exchange theory. Design/methodology/approach – A survey was completed by 102 employees working in a variety of jobs and organizations. The average age was 34 and 60 percent were female. Participants had been in their current job for an average of four years, in their organization an average of five years, and had on average 12 years of work experience. The survey included measures of job and organization engagement as well as the antecedents and consequences of engagement. Findings – Results indicate that there is a meaningful difference between job and organization engagements and that perceived organizational support predicts both job and organization engagement; job characteristics predicts job engagement; and procedural justice predicts organization engagement. In addition, job and organization engagement mediated the relationships between the antecedents and job satisfaction, organizational commitment, intentions to quit, and organizational citizenship behavior. Originality/value – This is the first study to make a distinction between job and organization engagement and to measure a variety of antecedents and consequences of job and organization engagement. As a result, this study addresses concerns about that lack of academic research on employee engagement and speculation that it might just be the latest management fad.
A field study of middle- and upper-level managers was undertaken to explain managers' selection of communication media. The findings indicate that media vary in their capacity to convey information cues. Managers prefer rich media for ambiguous communications and less rich media for unequivocal communications. The data suggest that high performing managers are more sensitive to the relationship between message ambiguity and media richness than low performing managers. Implications for managers' use of information systems and electronic media are discussed.
This study began with the premise that people can use varying degrees of their selves. physically. cognitively. and emotionally. in work role performances. which has implications for both their work and experi­ ences. Two qualitative. theory-generating studies of summer camp counselors and members of an architecture firm were conducted to explore the conditions at work in which people personally engage. or express and employ their personal selves. and disengage. or withdraw and defend their personal selves. This article describes and illustrates three psychological conditions-meaningfulness. safety. and availabil­ ity-and their individual and contextual sources. These psychological conditions are linked to existing theoretical concepts. and directions for future research are described. People occupy roles at work; they are the occupants of the houses that roles provide. These events are relatively well understood; researchers have focused on "role sending" and "receiving" (Katz & Kahn. 1978). role sets (Merton. 1957). role taking and socialization (Van Maanen. 1976), and on how people and their roles shape each other (Graen. 1976). Researchers have given less attention to how people occupy roles to varying degrees-to how fully they are psychologically present during particular moments of role performances. People can use varying degrees of their selves. physically, cognitively, and emotionally. in the roles they perform. even as they main­ tain the integrity of the boundaries between who they are and the roles they occupy. Presumably, the more people draw on their selves to perform their roles within those boundaries. the more stirring are their performances and the more content they are with the fit of the costumes they don. The research reported here was designed to generate a theoretical frame­ work within which to understand these "self-in-role" processes and to sug­ gest directions for future research. My specific concern was the moments in which people bring themselves into or remove themselves from particular task behaviors, My guiding assumption was that people are constantly bring­ ing in and leaving out various depths of their selves during the course of The guidance and support of David Berg, Richard Hackman, and Seymour Sarason in the research described here are gratefully acknowledged. I also greatly appreciated the personal engagements of this journal's two anonymous reviewers in their roles, as well as the comments on an earlier draft of Tim Hall, Kathy Kram, and Vicky Parker.