Content uploaded by Daniel Ziegele
Author content
All content in this area was uploaded by Daniel Ziegele on Feb 14, 2023
Content may be subject to copyright.
Communication Insights
Denialism Voice
Interaction
Sustainable
Communications
Digital
Nudging
Virtuality
COMMUNICATIONS
2021
TREND RADAR
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Methodology 04
Denialism 06
Why stakeholders deny obvious truths and facts
Virtual Corporate Communications 12
Finding new ways to communicate and collaborate in virtual contexts
Sustainable Communications 17
Towards an ecological footprint for communication departments
Digital Nudging 22
Leveraging the potential of designing digital environments
Voice Interaction 28
Shifting preferences from text to voice
References 33
Digging deeper 34
Three studies will analyze virtual corporate communications and digital nudging more closely
The Academic Society for Management & Communication 35
Imprint
Authors and citation of this publication (APA style):
Zerfass, A., Stieglitz, S., Clausen, S., Ziegele, D., & Berger,
K. (2021). Communications Trend Radar 2021. Denialism,
Virtual Corporate Communications, Sustainable Communica-
tions, Digital Nudging & Voice Interaction (Communication
Insights, Issue 10). Leipzig, Germany: Academic Society
for Management & Communication. Available online at
www.academic-society.net
Published by Academic Society for Management & Commu-
nications – An initiative of the Günter Thiele Foundation
c/o Leipzig University, Nikolaistrasse 27–29,
04109 Leipzig, Germany
Email: info@akademische-gesellschaft.com
Website: www.academic-society.net
Proofreading by Chris Abbey
Photos and illustrations by Colourbox: VectorMine (p. 6),
#89043 (p. 12), robuart (p. 17); Adobe Stock Fotos:
iracosma (p. 22), Marta Sher (p. 28); Imago-images (p. 31);
Robert Bosch GmbH (C. Ehrhart, p. 11); BP Europe
(S. Hansen, p. 15); Continental AG (F. Gress, p. 16); Pzer
Germany (M. Fensch, p. 26)
Layout and graphics by Zitronengrau Design
All rights reserved. © February 2021
2COMMUNICATIONS TREND RADAR 2021
EDITORIAL
Megatrends such as globalization
and digitalization have accelerated
the process of change for organi-
zations over the past decade. The
impact of the COVID-19 pandemic
in 2020 has turned many funda-
mental beliefs upside down in just a
couple of months. Entire industries,
including aviation, tourism, and the
cultural sector, have been deavas-
tated and are struggling to survive.
It’s essential for communication
leaders to recognize such develop-
ments, understand how they inu-
ence their organizations and their
work, and seize the opportunities
they offer. It’s not without reason
that the communication department is always expected
to have its nger on the pulse.
But let’s be honest. How much time can communica-
tors devote to monitoring the trends evolving around
them? Or to identifying the developments most relevant
to them? Our desire to support communication profes-
sionals in this respect and provide scientically proven
insights into trends was what prompted us to launch
a new annual research project – the Communications
Trend Radar. What’s more, we concentrate on trends in
the elds of business management, technology, and
society, which are harder to grasp for communicators
than developments within the communication sector.
Since January 2020, a team of researchers at the German
universities of Leipzig and Duisburg-Essen has been
observing emerging trends on a scientic basis. We
have scanned hundreds of very recent publications in
science and business, selected the most relevant issues,
and rated them according to their impact on corpo-
rate communications. As a result, we have identied
Stefan Stieglitz Ansgar Zerfass
ve trends that we believe will change communications
profoundly or offer new opportunities for communica-
tors to position themselves as thought leaders.
We would like to thank Sünje Clausen, Florian Brachten,
and Daniel Ziegele for their dedicated research, our
corporate partners who have provided valuable insights
into the trends, and Karen Berger from the Academic
Society for Management & Communication for deve-
loping this publication.
The research team of the Communications Trend Radar 2021 (from left to right):
Ansgar Zerfass, Daniel Ziegele, Sünje Clausen, Florian Brachten, Stefan Stieglitz
3
COMMUNICATIONS TREND RADAR 2021
METHODOLOGY
Management: Trends in strategic management and
organizational design that communication profes-
sionals should be aware of.
Technology: Technological developments that could
either impact corporate communications or be used
by communication professionals.
Research process
1
Sources & screening: First, we selected informa-
tion sources which provide relevant insights into the
professional discourse in the areas of management,
technology, and society. These sources primarily
include recent publications from scientic journals
and conferences in the respective domains, but also
selected newspapers (e.g., The Economist, Die Zeit,
FAZ), magazines (e.g., Harvard Business Review,
Wired), social news sites (e.g., Reddit Science),
blogs and websites (e.g., ReadWrite, The Next Web),
whitepapers, and corporate trend reports. Sources
were included based on their scientic reputation
(impact scores, rankings), or their general reputa-
tion and website trafc (Alexa Internet). All selected
sources were monitored and screened for potential
trends between March and July 2020.
2020 2021
Search for trends in
international professional
and academic discourses
Systematic documentation
in trend proles
Workshop to select most
relevant trends
Publication of the
Communications Trend Radar
Scoring process to
evaluate trends
Discussion with
corporate partners
SCORE
1 3 5
2 4 6
Technology
Digital
Nudging
Virtual Corporate
Communications
ManagementSociety Management
Sustainable
Communications
Denialism
Technology
Voice
Interaction
THE MOST RELEVANT TRENDS FOR CORPORATE COMMUNICATIONS IN 2021
The Communications Trend Radar is an applied
research project focusing on trends that impact
corporate communications. It was initiated by the
Academic Society for Management & Communication
in collaboration with Leipzig University and the
University of Duisburg-Essen. The study was launched
in January 2020 and will be repeated annually. The
overarching goal of the Communications Trend Radar
is to help communication leaders prepare for trends
that look set to inuence their work.
A trend refers to developments which are predicted
to unfold over several years and have a more lasting
impact than short-lived fashions and hypes. Such
trends may originate from practices in disciplines
adjacent to corporate communications or from scien-
tic research maturing into practice. Therefore, the
Communications Trend Radar specically focuses on
current professional and academic discourses in the
areas of management, technology, and society.
Society: Trends emerging in different domains of
public communication, opinion formation, and
values that might change people’s attitudes and
behavior, and affect expectations regarding busi-
nesses, their activities, and their communication.
4COMMUNICATIONS TREND RADAR 2021
2020 2021
Search for trends in
international professional
and academic discourses
Systematic documentation
in trend proles
Workshop to select most
relevant trends
Publication of the
Communications Trend Radar
Scoring process to
evaluate trends
Discussion with
corporate partners
SCORE
1 3 5
2 4 6
Selection process for trends in the Communications Trend Radar 2021
2 Trend proles: Each potential trend was systema-
tically documented in a trend prole consisting of
a brief description and several criteria estimating
the trend’s relevance to corporate communications.
Specically, we assessed the impact of the trend
on the corporate communications function (e.g.,
governance, goals, competencies), processes (e.g.,
platforms, formats, stakeholder interaction), and
management (e.g., content processes, cost struc-
tures). We also considered the extent to which a
trend offers communication leaders an opportunity
to raise their prole within the company. In total,
42 trend proles were compiled during this phase.
3 Scoring: Based on the criteria detailed in the
trend proles, a scoring method was developed
that was used to rate each of the trends. Scoring
was conducted individually by a total of eight
researchers and members of the Academic Society
involved in the Communications Trend Radar
project. Based on the scores and qualitative feed-
back on the trends, ten trends were selected for
further consideration.
4 Selection: These ten trends were rst discussed
among the Communications Trend Radar team
at a workshop in July 2020. Each team member
then voted individually for the top trends in the
areas of management, technology, and society. We
proposed ve trends for 2021 (see graphic on the
left) based on the outcome of this process.
5 Reection: These trends were examined further
and later discussed with approximately 20 commu-
nication leaders during an online workshop in
November 2020.
6 Report: All trends were analyzed and described
in more detail in this publication.
Outlook: The trend selection process will be restarted
in 2021 to identify the most relevant trends for
corporate communications in 2022. Furthermore,
two of the ve trends for this year – virtual corpo-
rate communications and digital nudging – will be
examined in more detail. (see p. 34)
5
COMMUNICATIONS TREND RADAR 2021
Denialism - a well-known phenomenon is
gaining importance
Denialism is a psychological defense mechanism in
which people deny universally valid facts and truths.
Instead, denialists prefer radical and controversial
ideas such as climate change having been invented
by scientists to generate research funding, corona-
virus being an invention by the pharmaceutical
industry, and the COVID-19 vaccine being used to
implant microchips in humans in order to monitor
them. Opinions like these have been scientically
proven to be wrong. But while most people agree that
these statements are false, there are others – denia-
lists – who believe these conspiracy ideas and keep
coming up with new ones.
Denialism isn’t a new phenomenon. Belief in conspi-
racy theories and the rejection of facts have existed
for over 800 years – just think of ritual murder libel
or the witch trials in the Middle Ages. But today,
DENIALISM
Why stakeholders
deny obvious truths
and facts
denialism is more prevalent than ever before. This is
numerically conrmed by the results of a represen-
tative survey conducted in Germany by the Konrad
Adenauer Foundation (Roose, 2020):
8% of the German population deny that climate
change is intensied by human inuence.
19% of the population do not believe that
the Russian intelligence service kills people
abroad, contradicting police investigations into
several murders.
15% of the population believe that a measles
vaccination is more dangerous than the disease
itself, refuting long-term medical ndings.
Indeed, in times of high complexity and uncertainty,
denialism tends to increase. Moreover, denialists
can now spread their ideas faster and more easily
on social media platforms and messaging apps such
as WhatsApp and Telegram. They garner more media
attention by linking their stories to hot topics such as
6COMMUNICATIONS TREND RADAR 2021
the corona pandemic. Online communication is often
complemented by public gatherings and demonstra-
tions such as the Querdenker protests in Germany,
where denialists create a public stage for themselves
and move into the spotlight. To exacerbate polari-
zation, these protest groups promote an anti-every-
thing attitude against politics, corporations, and
other institutions. In fact, it has become clear that
denialists are able to shape the public discourse,
something which threatens the social consensus.
One prominent example is the 2020 US presidential
election, which showed how ignoring ofcial election
results undermines trust in democracy.
What researchers know about denialism
The scientic concept of denialism can be traced
back to the brothers Mark and Chris Hoofnagle, a
physiologist and a lawyer from the United States.
They dened denialism as
“the use of rhetorical tech-
niques and predictable tactics
to erect barriers to debate
and consideration of any type
of reform regardless of the
facts” (Hoofnagle & Hoofnagle,
2008). Since then, a great deal
of knowledge about denialism
has been amassed, especially
in the elds of psychology and human behavior. Urgent
questions about who denies scientic facts, why the
common consensus is denied, and how denialists build
and maintain their picture of the world can already be
answered thanks to a number of studies.
The above-mentioned survey by the Konrad Adenauer
Foundation shows the sort of people who are particu-
larly likely to deny scientic data and facts, empha-
sizing three characteristics (Roose, 2020):
1 Age: Older people are more likely to believe in
conspiracy ideas and distrust established facts.
Denialism was most prevalent in the survey among
the 65-and-over group.
2 Education: People with lower formal education are
more likely than others to believe in conspiracy ideas.
3 Origin: People with an immigrant background are
more likely than others to believe that the world
is being controlled by secret forces.
Denialists try to create a world view that is coherent
for them. They do so by reducing complexity, adding
untruths, and believing conspiracy ideas. Other reasons
for denialist behavior include self-interest (e.g., nan-
cial incentives or acceptance in social groups), religion,
and self-protection against
mentally disturbing facts and
ideas (Kahn-Harris, 2018).
A distinction must be made
between passive denialists, who believe in conspiracy
theories and reject consensus for themselves, and active
denialists – people who
publicly position themselves
as denialists, who orga-
nize and speak at demons-
trations, who encourage
people to act, and who
fabricate and spread cons-
piracy stories.
Tactics used by denialists
When observing passive and active denialists, ve
different tactics of how denialists develop and sustain
their worldview were identied that often go hand in
hand (Diethelm & McKee, 2009):
Using conspiracy ideas: Instead of arguing
with facts or referring to scientic knowledge,
denialists invent their own narratives. In most
cases, denialists modify the truth and invent a
conspiracy to suppress the actual truth. Numerous
examples refer to the COVID-19 pandemic; for
» When people feel that they have no
control, they try to find strategies to
deal with it – and conspiracy stories can
be one such strategy. The conspiracy
narrative structures the world. «
Pia Lamberty, Social psychologist at Johannes Gutenberg
University, Mainz, Germany
7
COMMUNICATIONS TREND RADAR 2021
Conspiracy ideas
Cherry picking
Misinterpretations
and logical fallacies
Fake experts
Creating impossible
expectations
example, wearing face masks to protect against
the virus is transformed into an instrument of
suppression by the powers that be.
Cherry picking describes a technique whereby
denialists only pick those facts, reports and
views that match their own outlook. Often these
“alternative facts” come from doubtful sources or
fake experts.
Fake experts are people who pretend to be
experts on certain topics without having the
necessary expertise as well as people paid to
back up or lend credibility to the “conspiracy”.
Both mechanisms frequently include the margi-
nalization of real experts. Denialists sometimes
demand impossible pieces of evidence from
genuine specialists in order to undermine them
and strengthen fake experts, a tactic also called
“moving the goalposts.”
Creating impossible expectations: Denialists
often use a tactic of setting very high expectations
for scientists, e.g. demanding proof of the effect-
iveness of face masks against coronavirus. When-
ever scientists successfully respond, denialists
merely set higher and higher expectations until
it’s (almost) impossible for science to reply. This
is when fake experts enter the stage and provide
their “denialist answers”.
Lastly, misinterpretations and logical fallacies
are often part of denialism. Some conspiracy
theorists saw a link between 5G mobile networks
in China and the spread of coronavirus while
ignoring the fact that the disease also spread in
countries without 5G installations.
Even if the denialists’ narrative sounds ridiculous to
the majority and is easily exposed, the combination
of psychological strategies is sometimes powerful
enough to make people believe it. Since this poses
new threats to society, this is an issue that urgently
needs to be addressed.
Five tactics of denialists
Denialists use a variety of tactics to generate, sustain, and spread conspiratorial ideas and beliefs. The ve tactics are often
combined into a complex of denialism.
8COMMUNICATIONS TREND RADAR 2021
The boom in denialism and its relevance to
the corporate sector
Conspiracy ideas are no longer a niche pheno menon,
but are booming and have entered mainstream
society. Denialism has become a confusing and
increasingly complex issue – for society as a whole,
but also for corporations. There are several reasons
why denialism is a key trend to watch for corporate
communications in 2021:
The level of denialism: Both the variety and
the quantity of denialism have mushroomed in
recent years. The denial of facts and evidence
now affects almost all areas of society, politics,
economics, and academia. Examples such as
the 2016 and 2020 US elections as well as the
COVID-19 pandemic have also highlighted the
enormous media coverage of such issues.
Research gap in corporate communications:
Denialism is already being researched in many
areas – not only psychology and human behavior
research, but also journalism and political science.
What is still largely unexplored, however, is its
impact on corporate reputation, stakeholder com -
mu nications, and managing communications in
such situations.
Companies as a target: In addition to politics
and science, denialists are increasingly targeting
companies and industries. In the past, this was
particularly true of pharmaceutical and food
companies. However, an increasing anti-every-
thing attitude ultimately leads to denialism
affecting any economic sector or business.
Unpredictability: Even if we know something
about who denialists are, what they do and
why, denialisms remain unpredictable. Denialists
follow an irrational worldview. As a result, the
phenomenon is difcult to grasp – especially for
top managers in corporations who are mostly
rational thinkers. This is where communication
leaders need to step in by explaining denialism
and its consequences, and giving advice.
Danger from all sides: Denialists aren’t neces-
sarily external to corporations. As the number
of denialists grow, so does the likelihood that
employees might express denialist attitudes in
internal meetings and impact organizational
decisions. Moreover, corporate reputation might
be threatened by employees acting as denialists
in the public sphere. Communication strategies
are needed to deal with this.
Communicators are in the lead and
must take a stand
Denialism will become a very important topic for
communicators in the next few years. It’s crucial for
communication leaders to nd strategies to deal with
denialists. Initial ideas on how to approach them
can be found in the literature. First of all, denialists
should be allowed to have a voice, but they should
not be allowed to take the stage. Furthermore, it’s
vital to grasp denialists’ intentions and tactics.
Pointing out their tactics and exposing methods of
denialism in public are recommended (Diethelm &
McKee, 2009). Dealing with denialists is a balancing
act, which is precisely why seasoned communicators are
required. They must be able to understand denialism,
explain it to others, and manage it in practice:
Dealing with denialists: Handling denialism
correctly isn’t easy. Denialists who take action
against companies are surprisingly diverse and
so there is no one-size-ts-all solution. However,
according to experts, the most promi sing approach
is to beat the opponent at their own game. This
means not immediately jumping on conspiracy
ideas as this will only strengthen them. What
counts are facts and logic. The focus should
therefore be on proven arguments and on unco-
vering authors and sources behind denialism.
9
COMMUNICATIONS TREND RADAR 2021
Denialists can then be exposed with their own
tactics, thus leading them into an argumentative
dead end where they cannot get anywhere with a
conspiracy construct.
Work of persuasion: Changing a denialist’s mind
takes time and resources, and facts are needed to
challenge the denialist’s constructed worldview.
Discussion is required on the denialist’s level without
labeling them mad or a conspiracy theorist. It is
helpful to emphasize that information is incorrect
without talking about conspiracy theories, to offer
fact-based alternatives, and to explain one’s own
view with demonstrative evidence.
Protecting the company: One way of preventing
attacks by denialists is to position a company
appropriately in the public sphere. This can be
done in various ways. For example, a considered
presentation of the CEO gives the company a face
when confronting denialists. The same is true of
positioning the company in public discourses,
for instance by supporting public campaigns
or activists. Similarly, organizing stakeholder
dialogues can be helpful. A wide range of topics
can be discussed ranging from tackling climate
change to technological issues such as articial
intelligence or cybersecurity. Here, authenticity
and credibility by means of facts and evidence
are paramount.
Helping employees: Few people want to be
sucked into the vortex of conspiracy theories, and
even fewer pursue them for recognition or even
nancial benet. Yet it happens all the time. An
additional task for communications could there-
fore be educating and helping employees. This
could take the form of issuing guidelines on how
to recognize and uncover conspiracy theories on
the web. But it also means that public communi-
cation about the company and critical topics
must be closely monitored. A worst-case sce nario
emerges if an employee acting as a representative
of the company attracts attention by spreading
denialist content. Communication leaders can
help to mitigate such risks.
READING RECOMMENDATIONS
Kari Marie Norgaard: Living in Denial – Climate Change, Emotions, and Everyday
Life (2011)
Kari Norgaard, one of the leading researchers on denialism, uses the example of a region
in Norway to analyze why people who know about climate change are often unable to
translate this knowledge into action. Norgaard attributes this to a phenomenon called
“socially organized denial”. Her book illustrates a disconnect between knowledge about
climate science and beliefs held in political, social, and private life.
Katharina Nocun & Pia Lamberty: Fake Facts – Wie Verschwörungstheorien unser
Denken bestimmen (2020)
This popular German-language book was written by a political activist together with a
psychology researcher. The authors discuss both old and new conspiracy theories; they
describe how people from the mainstream become radicalized by conspiracy theories
and reject democracy at large.
10 COMMUNICATIONS TREND RADAR 2021
make a difference with carefully selected clarifying contri-
butions to complex debates – as Bosch does in the case of
the future of mobility or the usage of articial intelligence
with studies, polls and opinion articles – and physical as
well as virtual dialogues, in which top management exposes
itself to fundamentally divergent views. To move corporate
communications from the Holocene to the Anthropocene
world, we have to nd new shared ways of thinking, acting,
and working with stakeholders.
How do you predict this trend will develop?
Denialism – like fake news and lter bubbles – is a human
reaction to the signicantly increased complexity of the post-
modern age, fostered by the new communication channels
and platforms of the digital age. The human brain has an
insatiable desire for coherence in order to achieve a state of
minimum energy consumption. Faced with a lack of coherence,
we humans grow afraid and strive to eliminate the incoherence
around us. In times of tremendous change in the economy,
politics, and society simultaneously, it’s very tempting to
ignore reality that generates fear, or at least to adapt it
to one’s own hopes and wishes. This trend will intensify,
not fade. In the short term, we can expect to see far more
heated debates about companies and their activities,
making businesses and their CEOs even more careful in their
public positioning. In the medium and long term, we can
expect corporate communications to nd better ways to deal
with denialism. A willingness to take and hold strong posi-
tions in line with the company purpose and to communicate
them against the headwind of the zeitgeist will be required
while keeping in close touch with those stake holders who
are critical but also constructive.
What does the denialism trend mean for companies
like Bosch?
We are moving from a Holocene, in which humans were
part of a more or less constant natural environment, to an
Anthropocene, in which humans are increasingly inuen-
cing nature and the biosphere while also creating comple-
tely new worlds of language and symbolism through digital
technologies. Denialism is a signicant side-effect of this
paradigm shift as it changes the fundamental logic of
how public opinion is created and thus has fundamental
effects on corporate communications. This is especially so
for companies with a business model based on scientic
research and technological expertise such as Robert Bosch
GmbH. It’s no longer sufcient to base communications
strategies on convincing facts and objective data from the
natural or social surroundings. Whether stakeholders accept
company positions or not depends in times of denialism on
a credible company purpose and also on the willingness to
engage in respectful dialogue.
What is important from your point of view when
dealing with denialists? How does Bosch’s corporate
communications prepare for this?
Denialism means both challenges and opportunities for
corporate communications. It’s now more difcult than ever
to agree with stakeholders about fundamental questions
such as how to deal with challenges like climate change,
how to fully harvest the potential of new technologies such
as AI, or how to strike a balance between the economic,
ecological and societal dimensions of entrepreneurial
responsibility. At the same time, there is an opportunity to
» We can expect Corporate
Com munications to nd better
ways to deal with denialism. «
Christof E. Ehrhart, Executive Vice President
Corporate Communications & Governmental
Affairs, Bosch
11
COMMUNICATIONS TREND RADAR 2021
The many faces of virtualization
“Let’s do it virtually!” has been a common phrase and
a widespread way of doing things in businesses around
the world since the rst half of 2020. The pandemic
has accelerated the digitization of workplaces so rapidly
that video calls, virtual conferences and digital get-to-
gethers are already considered the “new normal”.
In many countries, communication within and between
organizations shifted to the virtual realm post lockdown.
According to a research report by the German Federal
Ministry of Labor and Social Affairs (Bonin et al., 2020),
the proportion of employees in Germany working exclu-
sively or regularly from home has increased from around a
fth to 36 percent. Interactions with internal and external
stakeholders are affected, too, as are established formats
such as face-to face team meetings as well as events for
business partners and customers. Virtual alternatives
have been created for trade shows, conventions, and
VIRTUAL CORPORATE COMMUNICATIONS
Finding new ways to communicate
and collaborate in virtual contexts
conferences. However, it has become difcult for
businesses to cultivate relationships that need privacy
and trust to ourish, including with interest groups,
activists, politicians, and researchers. Stakeholder
dialogues and similar settings are useful in this respect
– but transferring such formats into the digital world
is much harder than digitizing professional workows.
As a result, virtual management has become a central
challenge for both communications and other depart-
ments. It includes virtual collaboration in internal teams
as well as with agencies, freelancers, and service providers.
Moreover, virtual leadership becomes a key issue when
executives operate from home (Hill & Bartol, 2018). This
is closely intertwined with corporate culture and employee
engagement (Howard-Grenville, 2020). Both are necessary
to foster collaboration and leadership with digital means,
and they are being modied by virtual practices. After
all, something which had been established for years and
usually worked smoothly is suddenly no longer possible.
12 COMMUNICATIONS TREND RADAR 2021
Communication leaders and their staff, however, face an
additional challenge: the execution of virtual commu-
nications between the company and its external and
internal stakeholders, i.e. offering virtual formats for
stakeholder communications (Chodor & Cyranski, 2021).
They must design multiple dimensions successfully: v ir tua l
workows, management and leadership processes for
corporate communications, and virtual communication
and relationship management with various stakeholders.
What virtualization means for corporate
communications
Virtual meetings, virtual events, even virtual Christmas
parties: virtuality has become a buzzword in the business
world. But what does virtualization actually mean? And
what does it imply for corporate communications?
Virtualization generally means that something resembles
a real object in its essence or effect, but without exis-
ting in its physical form (Woolgar, 2002). Unlike the
real world, the virtual world is a simulated, computer-
based environment. This logic can be applied to
leadership, collaboration, and communication formats
as well. Using the example of a traditional public rela-
tions format, this means that a virtual press conference
must full the purpose of a live press conference. In
other words, it should still be a media event where an
organization talks to a limited number of registered
journalists and answers their questions. The difference
is that there is no physical presence and so certain
aspects such as informal conversations before and after
the conference are omitted.
Virtualization as such is complex because routines are
altered, logics are different, and typical advantages of
established formats no longer apply. These changes need
to be compensated for by other features of virtualiza-
tion. This is also evident in corporate communications.
Many formats for stakeholder communications are now
offered online. Communication leaders report that
things such as virtual events with tens of thousands
of guests, team meetings via video conferencing, and
new podcasts for employees have been developed very
quickly during the pandemic. Bearing in mind, that in
most cases the staff relied on trial and error and had
little time for preparation, they have been surprisingly
successful. Obviously, many solutions cannot fully
compensate for the advantages of face-to-face formats,
as can be seen from the desire to return to them, at
least for some purposes. Nevertheless, virtualization
has found its way into corporate communications and is
expected to persist in a hybrid world consisting of both
virtual and real elements.
Virtuality will remain an integral part of
corporate communications
The end of the pandemic is unlikely to also mean the
end of virtual corporate communications. Accordingly,
virtual corporate communications will be a key trend in
2021. We believe that, rather than a short-term hype,
it’s an important development that will continue to
impact many aspects of communication processes and
management. What’s more, communication departments
stand to benet from virtualizing their work in many ways:
Ubiquity: Virtual corporate communications is a
reality and can’t be avoided at the moment. Dealing
with virtual formats will remain a key challenge
when managing corporate communications in the
near future. Those who ignore it and fail to develop
suitable solutions are at risk of losing touch with
their stakeholders and competitors.
Lack of orientation: At the same time, due to the
novelty of the phenomenon, there is a lack of scien-
tic descriptions and best practices providing orien-
tation. The majority of communicators have started
producing podcasts and organizing virtual live
events and online meetings. However, these are
seldom established, proven practices, and have
instead been improvised within a very short time.
The systematic consideration of success factors for
virtual formats could help communicators to iden-
tify sustainable, successful approaches.
13
COMMUNICATIONS TREND RADAR 2021
Advantages of virtual formats: After initial
implementation, communication departments need
to push virtual solutions forward to fully exploit
their potential. Advantages include:
Signicantly larger audiences
Overcoming boundaries as virtual formats can
involve stakeholders around the world
Saving time due to less travel and fewer physical
meetings, freeing up time for other tasks
A positive impact on the environment if
virtual solutions have a smaller carbon foot-
print than live events, which often include
travel, facilities, and catering
Changing habits and playgrounds: We know from
technical sociology that establishing new prac-
tices alters the habits of users and their expec-
tations, yet also relationships and power balances
between those involved. Virtualization will thus
change the playground against which companies
interact with their stakeholders. Understanding
these developments will be essential for the
survival and sustained success of any organization.
This is where corporate communications becomes
strategic (Zerfass et al., 2018), and communication
leaders can leverage business value, setting them-
selves apart by a merely operational adjustment of
communication practices.
Communication leaders must respond to
different needs
Even if virtuality may sound like a technology topic,
the issues involved go far beyond the selection and
provision of a suitable infrastructure. Communication
departments must provide solutions for virtual colla-
boration and communication with many different
people along internal workstreams and with a variety
of stakeholders. In doing so, both the company goals
and the needs of stakeholders and recipients must be
taken into account. The requirements of employees
in terms of motivation and engaging with a company
are quite different from those of a journalist reques-
ting a specic piece of information. Requirements for
informal but virtual one-to-one meetings in the eld of
public affairs might be entirely different from those
for
multi-stakeholder dialogue. Practitioners must create
specic solutions if virtual corporate communication
is to be successful in the long term.
At the same time, expectations towards communica-
tion departments will grow. Virtual and real formats
will continue to exist in parallel in the future, so events
need to be offered both virtually and in the real world,
meaning even more resources will be needed than
before. Finding the right mix with limited resources to
satisfy the different needs of numerous stakeholders
will be crucial.
What lies ahead for corporate communications?
In many areas, virtual communications already run very
smoothly. For some formats, there is an urgent need to
catch up; for other aspects the next step must be taken
now, or the right balance must be found. There are at
least three challenges ahead:
Stakeholder dialogues: Organizing platforms for
personal, condential, and topic-centered communi-
cations with key stakeholders in a protected
environment is an established practice within
corporate communications. Many companies use
stakeholder dialogues to build relationships with
activists, opinion leaders, and representatives
of different groups in politics and society. Such
formats help to understand interests and to
pre-clarify options for action. They are especially
important when the legitimacy of a company
or industry is challenged. However, transfer-
ring stakeholder dialogues to the digital world
is much more complicated than substituting
communication processes with stakeholders that
build on common routines and long-term rela-
tionships (e.g., with employees, customers, and
journalists). The critical nature of stakeholder
dialogues for corporate success in diverse and
fragmented societies suggests that viable solu-
tions are needed.
14 COMMUNICATIONS TREND RADAR 2021
Employee involvement: As for employee communi-
cation, many virtual formats have been intro-
duced to keep employees informed and motivated
in the short term. But looking ahead in the long
term, the question arises how a strong corporate
culture and identication with the employer can
be promoted among employees who don’t work
in the ofce every day, or who work exclusively
from home. How can motivation and commitment
be strengthened through virtual communication?
This needs to be explored, and insights will show
what practices of internal communications need
to be adapted or recongured.
Finding the right balance: As well as generating
new, virtual communication formats and events,
the pandemic has already led to a noticeable
oversupply of some offerings. There are free webinars
for nearly everything: many register, fewer attend,
and it remains unclear how many participants really
pay close attention to them on their screen. This
has consequences. A fatigue of digital formats is
emerging. The desire is growing to return to face-
to-face formats where possible. Communication
leaders report that both employees and journalists
are becoming more impatient. “Zoom fatigue”
– exhaustion resulting from the monotony of
lockdown routines and permanent videoconferen-
cing – is on the rise (Nadler, 2020). Practitioners
should therefore consider which of their offerings
are crucial in terms of presence, which are best
staged digitally, and which can be dispensed with
altogether – to protect both their own resources
and those of their audience.
» Virtual town halls are a great technical solution
to communicate with employees internationally and
across our different locations. The chat-box in par-
ticular is used a lot and significantly increases the
quantity of questions over a face-to-face employee
event, which is partly due to the possibility of com-
menting anonymously. However, I believe the quality
of communication suffers, as no real dialogue can
take place and questions are dealt with one after the
other. The reaction of participants to the answers
remains hidden. Interjections or applause that make
a debate lively are not possible. The only indication
of the mood among the staff is the language used
in the chat. Here, the tone is often harsher than it
would be in a real event. «
Stefanie Hansen, Head of Communications Austria, Germany,
Switzerland, BP Europa
15
COMMUNICATIONS TREND RADAR 2021
READING RECOMMENDATIONS
Mark Grimshaw (Ed.): The Oxford Handbook of Virtuality (2014)
The articles in this handbook outline the broad diversity of concepts and applications of
virtuality. The contributors discuss differences between virtuality, reality, and actuality
using examples such as ethics, emotions, economic potentials, and relationships. Mark
Grisham is a professor in the Department of Communication and Psychology at Aalborg
University in Denmark.
Sherry Turkle: Life on the Screen – Identity in the Age of the Internet (1997)
Sherry Turkle’s “Life on the Screen” is a classic read of internet research from a psycho-
logical standpoint. Published before the turn of the century, this study on the psycho-
logy of online life is more topical than ever in times of virtual team meetings, online
events, and permanently working from home. Turkle moves the discussion away from
formats or tools to the human being.
» Today, leaders aren’t those who are managers, but
those who have followers. This is because employees
in an organization are choosing their leaders rather
than vice versa. They are looking for influential
characters regardless of their hierarchical position
or location. For this reason, virtual communication
with employees via social media is gaining in impor-
tance. This has multiple advantages: greater reach;
a broader, stronger impact; direct, non-hierarchical,
interactive exchange; and relatively lower costs
per person. When it comes to responsiveness, our
experience shows that comments from Germany are
a notch more critical than those from participants of
other cultures. «
Dr. Felix Gress, Senior Vice President Group Communications and
Public Affairs, Continental
16 COMMUNICATIONS TREND RADAR 2021
Sustainability – a key driver for business
performance
Few topics have been debated as emotionally as
climate change over the past few years. Millions of
Fridays for Future activists have marched through the
streets calling for more environmental protection. The
United Nations calls it the world’s greatest challenge.
Opponents, however, speak of “climate hysteria” – the
2019 misnomer. Even if the debate has been pushed
back by the COVID-19 pandemic, the issue of environ-
mental sustainability is more present than ever.
The high importance of sustainability for companies
in all industries is indisputable. This is true for each
aspect of sustainability: environmental, social, and
economic issues. In particular, ecological sustainabi-
lity – in the sense of the long-term, gentle use of
natural resources – is expected to be an integral part
of corporate strategies. Be it CO2 reduction, renewable
energies, supply chains, or making the value chain
more sustainable, those companies without answers
at hand run the risk of losing public legitimacy.
At the same time, sustainability management can
help to build intangible assets. The Global Climate
SUSTAINABLE
COMMUNICATIONS
Towards an ecological footprint
for communication departments
and Sustainability Trends Report by Weber Shandwick
(Meszaros, 2019) states that sustainability isn’t only
an obligation to prevent risks such as loss of accep-
tance, but also actively offers opportunities such as
building reputation or increasing brand value.
Stakeholders expect sustainability
The growing relevance of sustainability is driven by
various stakeholders simultaneously:
Investors are getting more serious about sustain-
ability. Robert E. Eccles, considered the world’s
foremost expert on integrated reporting and an
authority on how companies and investors can
create sustainable strategies, concludes in one
of his studies that environmental, social, and
corporate governance (ESG) “is now a priority for
these leaders and that corporations will soon be
held accountable by shareholders for their ESG
performance” (Eccles & Klimenko, 2019, p. 108).
Sustainability is also a pressing issue for customers
and clients. Customers are developing a sensitivity
for sustainability and are willing to punish miscon-
duct. This has been demonstrated by recent boycott
17
COMMUNICATIONS TREND RADAR 2021
calls and social media train wrecks. According to a
survey by the market research company Quantilope
(2020), more than 80% of the population in
Germany, China, the US, and the UK believe that
environmental protection is one of the most
important issues of our time. What’s interesting
for the private sector is that almost two thirds
of the customers surveyed also plan to be more
sustainable themselves. They intend to buy and
consume products and services while paying close
attention to their carbon footprint.
Employees and applicants are also calling for
more sustainability, especially talents and young
professionals. More and more young people want
to take the aspect of sustainability into account
when choosing a career. Even though a company’s
location and individual salaries are still regarded
as important by millennials, a lack of sustaina-
bility can lead to inner tensions and dissatisfac-
tion among employees (Gallup, 2019).
NGOs and activists are forcing governments and
companies to develop concrete sustainability
strategies. Their actions focus enormous public
attention on matters like climate change, renew-
able energy, sustainability goals, etc. There is
a particular threat as many NGOs and activists
are challenging economic and social policies of
corporations and criticizing economic growth
(O’Brien et al., 2018).
Expectations regarding sustainability are also
rising among politics and governments. The
global community has signed up to the United
Nations Sustainable Development Goals. Since
these targets apply to everyone and everyone’s
contribution is needed, companies are also being
held more accountable.
What is practiced today: Sustainability
communications
It’s no surprise that sustainability isn’t only part of
corporate strategies, but also a topic for communi-
cation departments. Climate protection, sustainable
sourcing and production, and similar content has
already been dealt with by corporate communica-
tions for a few years. Sustainability communications
is an established practice in most corporations. It
refers to sustainability as a core topic for communi-
cation campaigns, branding, stakeholder dialogues,
and corporate reporting. The institutionalization of
sustainability communications has been intensied
recently, partly due to political regulations and stan-
dards like the IIRC’s framework for integrated repor-
ting (Köhler & Hoffmann, 2018).
What is needed in the future: Sustainable
communications
Companies and other organizations measure and
document their ecological impact in order to meet
stakeholder demands and differentiate themselves
from competitors. Measuring sustainability is nowadays
broken down from a global corporate level to the
departments and functions with specic indica-
tors (Pandey et al., 2011; Vereecken et al., 2010).
Concrete targets (e.g., CO2 reduction in supply
chains, climate-neutral production), measurement
» Sustainability has moved beyond compliance with laws and regulations and
improving bottom-line performance to be a core driver of reputation and brand
value, attract and retain top talent, and respond to consumer preferences. «
Jim Meszaros, Executive Vice President, Weber Shandwick
18 COMMUNICATIONS TREND RADAR 2021
Sustainability as
a content topic
Sustainability as
a strategy topic
SUSTAINABILITY
COMMUNICATION
SUSTAINABLE
COMMUNICATIONS
Established practice New trend
Sustainability communication vs. sustainable communications
A distinction can be drawn between sustainability communications, i.e., sustainability as a topic and content for corpo-
rate communications, and sustainable communications, meaning the sustainability of processes, platforms, media, and
products of corporate communications.
methods (e.g., carbon footprints), and more and more
labels and certicates (e.g., Blue Angel, ISO 14064)
have been established for core functions such as
purchasing, production, and distribution. This develop-
ment is driven by management consultancies, who have
identied this as a business eld. McKinsey’s and Bain’s
footprint models and standards are prominent examples
– they establish new approaches and provide consulting
at the same time.
The ecological impact of the communication depart-
ment’s activities usually remains unclear, even though
there are several reasons why corporate communications
should be as sustainable as possible:
Request for metrics: The debate on sustainability
tends to make everything measurable and control-
lable. This explains why numerous new certicates,
seals, and standards have been developed and
introduced in recent years. But the sustainability
of corporate communications activities, which are
expanding from year to year in today’s mediated
world, has rarely been questioned so far. This is
curious as events, trade shows, print magazines,
yet also websites and social media platforms
consume lots of energy and produce waste and
air pollution as well. Due to the universality of
the trend towards metrics, it can be assumed that
communication departments will soon have to
answer questions about their own sustainability.
Agenda-setting by communication agencies:
Practices in consultancies are sometimes seen
as indicators of future developments in large
organi
zations. Some pioneers in the communi-
cations industry are already certifying and posi-
tioning themselves as climate-friendly (e.g.,
Edelman). This puts the issue on the agenda of
the public relations and marketing communi-
cations profession. It is only a matter of time
before stakeholders as well as internal CSR depart-
ments or even top management will start to ask
communication leaders about their stra tegies
and achievements in this eld.
19
COMMUNICATIONS TREND RADAR 2021
What such an ecological footprint for corporate
communications will look like isn’t yet clear. What is
clear, however, is that it must reect the complexity
of communication processes, platforms, media, and
products. The environmental footprint of corporate
communications is inuenced by various factors –
many of which cannot even be controlled by the
department itself (e.g., the energy consumption
of ofce infrastructure). As with other footprint
calculations (e.g., Global Footprint Network), these
would then have to be broken down per unit, for
instance to the communication department or to
specic communication activities like a townhall
meeting for employees or a site visit for interna-
tional journalists traveling to attend the opening of
a new factory.
Furthermore, there are often contradictions between
stakeholder expectations and requirements for envi-
ronmentally friendly communication. For example,
emissions could be saved through virtual events or
by not using print products, but this in turn could
disappoint key stakeholders preferring to meet in
person or use traditional media. Communication
leaders should prepare themselves and their teams
for questions of this kind.
Getting started today
Even if concepts for dening and measuring communi-
cation footprints have yet to be developed, there are
already some steps that communication departments
Positive effects on sustainability communi-
cations: In addition, acting sustainably in
communication departments can have numerous
positive effects on communicating about sustain-
ability. Firstly, the integration of sustainability
into their own workow allows communication
departments to contribute to related corporate
goals. Secondly, dealing with sustainability in
their everyday work increases the awareness and
expertise of communication practitioners. This
helps them to communicate better and more
authentically about “green” topics and related
issues; they can gain credibility in a difcult
stakeholder environment. The bottom line is that
those who act sustainably themselves are better
equipped to communicate and advise about
corporate sustainability.
The way towards a communication footprint
Acknowledging sustainability for communication acti-
vities of all kind is just the beginning. John Edelman,
Managing Director at Edelman, says the sustainability
standard dened by their gobal communications rm
is used “to guide our sustainability efforts moving
forward and, in the future, we seek to achieve certi-
cation. I invite other communications rms to do the
same”. What is true for agencies might be relevant
to communication departments as well. The path
will head into the direction of specic certication
procedures and seals – towards dening a communi-
cation footprint.
» A standard clarifies the path to sustainability. It also allows a professional
service firm to differentiate itself from competitors as one that is committed to
social and environmental sustainability. «
John Edelman, Managing Director Global Engagement & Corporate Responsibility, Edelman
20 COMMUNICATIONS TREND RADAR 2021
can take today. This helps to make their activities –
from running websites, staging events, and producing
publications to occupying ofce space and traveling
– more sustainable:
Put your own sustainability to the test: As a
rst step, document all the platforms, media, and
products that you use. What sort of events do
you organize? What reports and brochures do you
publish? In what form do meetings take place,
and how much travel is involved? This can reveal
potential for improvement. In a second step, by
understanding that sustainability plays a part
in every decision, it makes sense to include the
aspect of sustainability in future decisions and
planning templates for projects.
Develop arguments: Developing a line of argu-
ments on the sustainability of corporate communi-
cations can be an investment in credibility and
risk prevention. It can be assumed that internal
and external stakeholders such as the manage-
ment board or journalists will at some point want
answers and proof. This needs to be prepared in
advance, as many situations will be tricky – for
example, if sustainability requirements and user
expectations have to be weighed up against each
other. In such a case, communicators might need
to prepare arguments why the staff magazine can
be discontinued, but a customer magazine sent
by surface mail to all consumers still makes sense
(e.g., because it garners more attention among
recipients and provides a good opportunity to
verify the address database).
Reduce where possible: What processes and
activities of a communication department have
the most negative impact on the climate, and
which of them are most likely to become sustain-
able? This question can be applied to events such
as press conferences, trade fairs and internal
events, as well as to communication products like
annual reports, image brochures, and employee
magazines. These days, much of stakeholder
communications – websites, social media chan-
nels and intranets – is digital. The same is true
for internal workows and management processes,
which are often supported by content manage-
ment systems, or software for digital assets,
collaboration, and video conferencing. All these
technologies consume energy. Communication
leaders should think early on about sustainability
in these dimensions. The good news is that best
practices raise awareness internally and exter-
nally, and some might even be used to highlight
the corporation’s overall green commitment in
sustainability communications.
READING RECOMMENDATIONS
Mike Berners-Lee: How Bad are Bananas? The Carbon Footprint of Everything (2020)
The author, a professor of sustainability at Lancaster University and founder of a
company specializing in supply chain carbon metrics, deals with the concept of the
carbon footprint in a sound but entertaining way. Using the latest data, the footprint of
everything is calculated – including a Zoom call and storing computer data in the cloud.
In this way, Berners-Lee provides an initial indication on where CO2 emissions play a
role in corporate communication activities.
21
COMMUNICATIONS TREND RADAR 2021
Roots of nudging
The concept of nudging stems from the eld of behavioral
economics. It was introduced by University of Chicago
economist Richard H. Thaler and Harvard Law School
professor Cass R. Sunstein (Thaler & Sunstein, 2008).
Nudging describes the design of choice environments
to predictably inuence people’s decision-making.
Importantly, nudging has a strong ethical component;
people should only be nudged towards personally
(and socially) benecial decisions. Moreover, their full
freedom of choice must always be preserved.
Nudging assumes that humans aren’t simply rational
beings (homo oeconomicus) who always take decisions
based on weighting the pros and cons in any given
situation. Instead, decision-making is inuenced by
characteristics and limitations of human cognition.
For example, biases, heuristics (rules of thumb), and
contextual factors, such as cognitive load or fatigue,
can lead to decision-making which is suboptimal
or inconsistent with one’s beliefs. The key idea of
nudging is to take these characteristics and limita-
tions of human cognition into account and design
a choice environment that helps individuals to take
personally (and socially) benecial decisions.
Nudging in a digital environment
The researchers Weinmann et al. (2016) adapted the
concept of nudging to digital environments and coined
DIGITAL
NUDGING
Leveraging the
potential of
designing digital
environments
the term digital nudging. Examples of digital environ-
ments include a corporate website, a brand channel on
social media, an email program, an enterprise social
network, an online shop, and a smartphone app. Within
digital environments, nudges consist of design elements
of the user interface such as the arrangement and
display of choice options, the selection and phrasing of
information, or the selection of default settings.
When applying digital nudging, user interface design
elements are selected to address certain characteris-
tics or limitations of human cognition to inuence
decision-making in a predictable way. For example, as
humans have a psychological status quo bias (a prefe-
rence for maintaining the status quo), selecting an
option as a default can nudge people towards choosing
this option. Furthermore, individuals tend to prefer
the middle option in choice situations because they
use the other options as a frame of reference (anchor
effect). Thus, by adding a higher and a lower valued
option, individuals can be nudged towards selecting the
middle option. In the past, digital nudging and similar
approaches were primarily applied to e-commerce
applications. However, it offers great potential for
optimizing any digital choice environment.
» There is no such thing
as ‘neutral’ design.«
Richard H. Thaler, University of Chicago and
Nobel laureate in economic sciences
22 COMMUNICATIONS TREND RADAR 2021
HOMO OECONOMICUS PSYCHOLOGICAL MECHANISMS
Rational decisions Decisions inuenced by
heuristics, context, mood, etc.
In economics, humans were long described as economic people (homo oeconomicus) who carefully weighed up different
alternatives and made rational decisions to maximize their benet (left). In practice, however, humans often take subop-
timal, irrational decisions. This is explained by the impact of psychological mechanisms on decision-making, such as heuris-
tics (right). Nudging addresses these psychological mechanisms through the careful design of choice environments to help
individuals make decisions for their own benet.
Status quo of digital nudging in research
As digital nudging was only introduced relatively
recently, research into it is still nascent. There is,
however, extensive literature from psychology and
behavioral economics on psychological mechanisms
in decision-making to inform the design of nudges
(e.g., Mirsch et al., 2017). Furthermore, there are
theoretical models which describe the process of
implementing digital nudging in practice (e.g., the
digital nudging process model by Meske & Potthoff,
2017), and research studies proposing digital nudges
to improve decision-making in various areas.
Several studies have explored whether and how
digital nudging can be applied to different domains.
For example, nudges have been proposed to support
users in protecting personal information on social
networking sites by raising awareness of privacy.
In an online learning context, digital nudges were
suggested to prevent drop-out from online courses
by using them to promote a growth mindset, goal
setting, and offer personalized assistance. Another
example is the use of social norm nudges to encou-
rage the adoption of new communication technolo-
gies in the workplace. Thus, while there are several
proposed applications and designs of digital nudges,
empirical studies evaluating their effect on deci-
sion-making in practice remain scarce.
Small but mighty: Why communications
departments should explore digital nudging
There are several reasons why digital nudging will be
a highly interesting concept for corporate communi-
cations in the near future:
Virtual work: Due to the digitalization of communi-
cations in general and the ongoing COVID-19
pandemic in particular, more work processes have
shifted into the virtual sphere. This entails the
higher personal responsibility of employees to
How do humans make decisions?
23
COMMUNICATIONS TREND RADAR 2021
structure their workload and implies more freedom
of choice. Accordingly, empowering employees is
becoming increasingly important. New communica-
tive approaches to facilitate decision-making are
needed. Digital nudging is such an approach which
can support communication professionals in leading
the way towards effective virtual decision-making
by employees throughout the organization while
respecting personal autonomy.
Low costs – high impact: Economic challenges
increase the need to optimize business processes
and create low-cost innovations. Digital nudging
is a versatile communication technique with
high potential impact which can be imple-
mented inexpensively. It provides an oppor-
tunity for communication leaders to raise their
prole within the company as experts on opti-
mizing digital environments by means of clever
communication and design.
Prize-winning concept: The underlying concept
of nudging isn’t just a passing fad or hype but is
based on extensive, inuential research on human
decision-making in psychology and economics.
The impact of this research is illustrated by the
fact that Richard H. Thaler’s work founded the
new research domain of behavioral economics,
winning him the Nobel prize for economic science
in 2017. Thus, digital nudging has a solid scien-
tic foundation and a rich knowledge base that
can inform development and implementation in
corporate communications.
Room for exploration: Although digital nudging
itself is a relatively new concept, the body of
knowledge is advancing quickly. Its implementa-
tion requires translating theory into practice in
order to explore promising applications, effective
nudge design, and evaluation approaches. The
corporate communications profession has not yet
discovered the potential of digital nudging. As
digital nudges can be implemented and evaluated
relatively easily, communication professionals can
interactively explore the eld for their purposes.
The role of communicators: The successful imple -
mentation of digital nudging requires a productive
collaboration between different functions and
departments within a company, and dialogue with
stakeholders. Communication practitioners need to:
1
Identify areas of suboptimal decision-making,
for example together with HR, sales & marketing,
and IT departments.
2 Understand the interests and characteristics of
the stakeholders concerned.
3 Moderate a discussion about ethical concerns,
for instance with the staff council.
4 Potentially collaborate with the IT department
to implement and evaluate nudges in digital
environments.
Communication professionals are well equipped
to bridge the gaps between these different groups
and communicate the potential benets and risks
of digital nudging. While marketing professionals
might have previous experience with the concept in
e-commerce and its implementation on commercial
websites, the potential of digital nudging is much
more far-reaching. Communication professionals can
become the primary point of contact for digital nudging
in a corporate environment.
Scenarios for digital nudging in corporate
communications
Possible applications differ depending on, for
example, the available digital choice environments,
the inuence of communication leaders and profes-
sionals on these digital choice environments, and the
stakeholders or recipients to be nudged. However,
in principle, digital nudging can be applied to any
digital choice environment and to any area. In the
pharmaceutical industry, Pzer uses digital nudging to
support individuals in health prevention.
24 COMMUNICATIONS TREND RADAR 2021
IMPLEMENTATION PROCESS OF DIGITAL NUDGING
Analysis
Identify target groups (e.g., employees, business
partners, or customers).
Determine target behavior taking into considera-
tion the interests and freedom of choice of reci -
pients (e.g., a quick response to an event invita-
Based on the digital nudging process model by Meske and Potthoff (2017).
Analysis Design Evaluation
Target group?
Target behavior?
Psychological mechanisms?
Digital environment
Selection of nudges
Impact on behavior?
Preserved freedom of choice?
Preferences of users?
tion, employees choosing free training activities,
the selection of more secure passwords).
Identify potential reasons for suboptimal behavior
(i.e., psychological mechanisms, context factors).
Design
The accumulated information serves as a basis for the second phase in which digital nudges are developed:
Develop and implement user interface design
elements in the digital choice environment which
address the reasons for suboptimal behavior (e.g.,
different wording, presentation of information,
default selection in an online form).
Evaluation
Assess the effect of digital nudges on target
behavior. For example, different designs with and
without nudge elements are presented to users,
and their choices in response to the designs are
compared (A/B testing).
Evaluate digital nudges with respect to ethical
aspects such as ensuring the freedom of choice,
leaving the incentives associated with each
choice option unchanged, and respecting the
preferences of users.
Select a suitable digital decision environment
(e.g., corporate website, enterprise social network)
and analyze its current design; the possibility to
customize the design determines how nudges can
be implemented.
25
COMMUNICATIONS TREND RADAR 2021
» The idea of nudging in prevention can help raise
awareness for individual health risks and encourage
people to act. In a representative survey, we discovered
that most Germans would like to use more preventive
services, but either they lack guidance or access is
simply too complicated.
This is why we also include elements of nudging in our
digital vaccination campaigns, for example by educating
patients with a weakened immune system that they are
at increased risk of infectious diseases.
In the future, the electronic patient file could be a
platform that also utilizes digital nudging with nation-
wide impact. For example, an electronic vaccination
card could give automatic and individualized recalls to
remind users of booster vaccinations. «
Martin Fensch, Managing Director and Head Health & Value,
Pfizer Germany
Sample applications for digital nudging in communi-
cations could include:
Well-being: During and after the pandemic,
many employees will be working from home and
nding it harder and harder to separate work from
their private life, as well as having less social
interaction with their team. Nudges in internal
communications can potentially help employees
to improve their well-being by prompting them
to schedule downtime in their diaries, reminding
co-workers to respect each other’s evenings and
weekends, encouraging employees to maintain
social contact with their colleagues, or simply to
get up from their desk occasionally.
Learning: Continued learning is important for
employees and the company alike, especially as
some jobs might disappear or change radically
due to the digital transformation and arti-
cial intelligence. However, in day-to-day work,
immediate tasks are often prioritized over profes-
sional development. The tendency of people to
choose a smaller but quicker reward over a larger
reward later (i.e., hyperbolic discounting) could
be addressed with digital nudges. For example,
participation in training activities could be
encouraged by emphasizing the long-term bene-
ts of improving skills, knowledge etc. in the
choice environment.
Accepting new technology: Employees are often
faced with new technology in the workplace.
Despite its potential benet for corporate value
chains and personal well-being, employees some-
times hesitate to use it or do so ineffectively.
26 COMMUNICATIONS TREND RADAR 2021
Similar challenges affect other stakeholders like
consumers or journalists when new modes of inter-
action are introduced. Nudges could be used to
encourage users to adopt new technology within
internal and external innovation communications.
Interaction and company culture: New em ploy ees
starting work remotely in distributed teams
may nd it hard to bond with co-workers and to
learn, adopt, and t into the company culture.
Social norm nudges could help new employees
to be familiarized with corporate norms and
values. Nudges could also be used to encourage
interaction and engagement of new employees,
for example by encouraging them to take part
in virtual events or sign up for internal news-
letters and social platforms. Similar nudges could
also be used to encourage external stakeholders
to interact and communicate more intensively
with the company.
Cybersecurity: Cybersecurity is a big challenge for
any company in 2021. Research shows that threats
are often caused by employees (deliberately
or unwittingly) disregarding information security
policies (Cram et al., 2020). Employees and mana -
gers tend to falsely assess cybersecurity risks based
on their personal past experiences. Here, nudges
could raise awareness of the prevalence of cyber-
security attacks and the importance of compliant
behavior. Specically, users could be nudged to
choose more secure passwords, to be more atten-
tive to potential phishing and spearphishing
emails, to share potential security threats with
co-workers, and to take better managerial deci-
sions to prepare for cyberattacks.
READING RECOMMENDATIONS
Daniel Kahneman: Thinking, Fast and Slow (2011)
This best-selling book by Nobel laureate Daniel Kahneman explains the functioning of the
human mind based on psychological research. He describes two modes of thinking: system 1,
which operates automatically, quickly, and with little effort; and system 2, which performs
strenuous mental activities, both slow and deliberate. He explains when and how these
systems inuence our thinking and provides an overview of psychological mechanisms.
Understanding these mechanisms forms the basis for addressing them with nudging.
Richard H. Thaler & Cass R. Sunstein: Nudge – Improving Decisions about Health,
Wealth, and Happiness (2008)
This best-selling book by economist Richard H. Thaler and legal scholar Cass Sunstein
introduces the concept of nudging. The authors discuss the concept of homo oecono-
micus, why people sometimes take irrational decisions, and how nudging can help them
to make better decisions.
27
COMMUNICATIONS TREND RADAR 2021
Characteristics of voice interaction
Voice interaction describes the trend towards more
interaction between humans and technology using the
voice and natural language. Instead of typing, clicking,
or swiping on digital devices, the method of input is the
voice. Digital systems process these verbal commands,
perform an action, and reply to the user by voice and
sometimes a graphical user interface (e.g., Siri). Such
systems are also called voice user interfaces (VUIs).
The best-known types of VUIs are personal digital
assistants such as Siri, Google Assistant, and Alexa,
which are integrated into smartphones, laptops, or
smart speakers. All digital assistants share similar basic
features such as answering simple questions, playing
music, and creating calendar appointments. Additionally,
both Google and Amazon allow skills or actions to be
installed on their smart speakers which resemble smart-
phone apps but have been designed for VUI. Often
designed by third parties, they extend the capabilities
of personal digital assistants.
Furthermore, voice interaction can also be integrated
into Internet of Things (IoT) devices, including cars,
smart home appliances, and TVs. In IoT applian
ces, voice
VOICE
INTERACTION
Shifting preferences
from text to voice
interaction
is often implemented by means of applica-
tions provided by one of the major technology companies.
For example, Amazon’s Alexa can be integrated into
Samsung’s smart TVs, allowing the user to control the TV
remotely by voice. There are also product-specic voice
assistants, such as MBUX by Mercedes-Benz, which
allows drivers to operate the GPS navigation system and
other instruments, and Casey by Bosch.
Voice interaction can also refer to VUIs designed for
specic tasks rather than being a personal assistant. A
popular example is voice bots for call centers which can
take calls from customers, manage standardized interac-
tions, and allocate callers to human employees.
Another example is voice search, which allows users to
search the web through voice commands. Many Android
smartphone users are used to saying “Ok, Google” to
their smartphone to activate Google search and then
verbally stating their search query. Moreover, voice
search isn’t limited to search engines, but can also be
implemented directly on a corporate or brand website
to search its content.
In a nutshell, voice interaction is an umbrella term
for different forms of VUIs and the general trend
28 COMMUNICATIONS TREND RADAR 2021
towards more voice-based interactions between
humans and technology.
Prevalence and technological basis of voice
interaction
Prevalence: A few years ago, Google
(2016) already indicated that 20%
of global searches were done by
voice. A representative survey by the
market research company Splendid
Research(2019) revealed the following
insights about voice interaction:
60% of Germans had already used voice inter-
actions with digital devices, up from 37% in a
similar Splendid Research survey in 2017.
One third of respondents said they used voice inter-
action regularly (daily or several times a week).
Voice interaction was most frequently used to
search the internet for information (54%).
The overall trend suggests a steady increase in
voice searches, especially on mobile devices.
Voice searches via mobile devices are perceived
to be more convenient and quicker, and are espe-
cially used for searches with a local reference.
Regarding smart speakers, another representative
survey by the market research company YouGov found
that 24% of Germans own at least one smart speaker
(mostly Amazon products) at home, half of this share
using them daily. Smart speakers were mainly used
for activating streaming services, smart-home opera-
tion, asking questions, and everyday organization via
related Alexa skills and Google actions (Beyto, 2020).
Technology: The technological basis for voice inter-
action is natural language processing (NLP). NLP
includes both rule-based and data-driven methods
from linguistics and articial intelligence to translate
natural language into commands a digital system
can “understand.” Both approaches have advantages
and disadvantages. Rule-based approaches are more
reliable (i.e., less nonsensical answers or glitches),
but are also very labor-intensive as the rules have
to be manually implemented. Therefore, they are
best suited to specic tasks with
a small range of possible interac-
tions and can’t be scaled up to
general language understanding.
Data-driven approaches, on the
other hand, are more scalable, but
require very large amounts of data
to achieve satisfactory conversa-
tional quality. This kind of data and the resources to
process it are not widely available. While data-driven
approaches have not yet achieved natural language
u
nderstanding, there are impressive examples like
the GPT-3 model by OpenAI, a US-based research and
deployment company working on articial intelligence.
The model is based on language data from the entire
internet and once wrote an article for the newspaper the
Guardian. Given the increase in computing power and
data, language models are expected to improve further.
Voice interaction is driven by new communi-
cation preferences and maturing technology
Voice interaction is a key trend to watch in 2021 for
two reasons:
Shifting preferences: A shift from written com -
muni cation to voice interaction can be observed
which will fundamentally change how corporate
communications should be designed and evaluated.
Communication professionals need to learn how
audio content can be made available, how it will
be perceived by stakeholders, and how information
can be presented by voice.
Growing maturity: Voice interaction has been a
trending topic for a few years. However, the quality
of voice interactions has often been disappointing,
“Speech is the
fundamental means of
human communication.”
Clifford Nass & Scott Brave, Stanford
University
29
COMMUNICATIONS TREND RADAR 2021
impairing the initial euphoria and limiting possible
use cases. Nevertheless, there are several reasons
why we expect voice interaction to reach a critical
level of maturity within the near future:
• The increasing dissemination of voice inter-
action devices isn’t only a sign of user
demand, but also a source of valuable voice
interaction data. In combination with the
increasing computational power and sophis-
tication of NLP methods, this voice inter-
action data will be instrumental for improving
human language models.
• Voice interaction isn’t an isolated trend, but
related to other developments such as mixed
reality, smart devices, and biometric authen-
tication. Hence, various global players and
industries are interested in and working on
improving the quality of voice interaction.
• Besides technological factors, legal require-
ments in the European Union point towards
more voice interaction as well. Under
the European Accessibility Act, by 2025
companies will have to ensure that their
devices and services are accessible to indi-
viduals with disabilities, such as impaired
vision and hearing.
Three reasons why voice interaction is
relevant to corporate communications
1 Threat and opportunity for corporate visibility
The increase in voice-based searches, for example
through Siri or Alexa, might affect the visibility
of any company’s public communication on search
engines. Voice assistants often only return a single
result to requests. Therefore, the “race to the top” in
search engine ranking, such as appearing in Google’s
Featured Snippet, is likely to increase.
Furthermore, initial research suggests that typed
search queries differ from spoken search queries in
several respects. For example, spoken queries tend to
be longer, richer, and are phrased as complete ques-
tions more often than typed queries (Guy, 2016).
Accordingly, different search engine optimization
(SEO) strategies might be required for spoken queries
to increase the chances of corporate communications
messages and platforms ranking high in the search
results. Various marketing blogs and reports propose
optimization strategies for voice search such as using
an easy-to-understand writing style, including specic
local information where possible, using structured
data to briey indicate website content to Google,
and ensuring the website loads as quickly as possible.
2 New requirements and opportunities for
content management
To meet the demand for voice interaction and to
increase the accessibility of digital content for all
users, communication professionals should develop
more audio content for existing platforms such as
corporate websites. Purely visual and textual content
can be complemented by integrating voice search on
the website, or by developing more voice assets, such
as podcasts. In Germany, the proportion of people
listening to podcasts has grown steadily, climbing to
33% in 2020, compared to 26% in 2019 (Krösmann
& Klöß, 2020).
Additionally, communication professionals could
develop new communication formats for smart speakers.
oth Google and Amazon allow third parties to develop
services for their smart speakers. For example, the
German railway operator Deutsche Bahn offers a
service for Amazon Alexa and Google assistants that
enables customers to plan journeys by voice. And IT
researchers Zhang et al. (2020) have developed a
search engine for sounds that allows users to search
for content that’s difcult to express in words. An
30 COMMUNICATIONS TREND RADAR 2021
Clubhouse - the rst voice based
social network
The Clubhouse app is a new type of social network which
is entirely based on audio content and voice. In different
“rooms”, users can have conversations with strangers,
colleagues, and friends or listen in on the conversations
of others. It was developed by the US company Alpha
Exploration Co. and a beta version was released in spring
2020. In order to join the app, one needs an iOS device
and an invitation from someone who is already part of
it (status as of January 2021). Clubhouse is planned to
become available for everyone in the future.
innovation like this might be a starting point for
developing playful voice interactions or new strategies
for companies’ acoustic branding.
All in all, although exploring voice interactions will
require communication professionals to acquire new
knowledge, they can benet by proling themselves
as pacesetters within the organization. Voice interac-
tions allows corporate communications to reach out to
stakeholders in a new way, and to position the company
as an innovative brand.
3 Advanced personalized communication
Voice interaction is predicted to create new oppor-
tunities for more personalized corporate commu-
nications. This may sound futuristic and perhaps
ethically debatable, but a voice can reveal much
about a user, including their gender, age, personality,
health, physical characteristics, and mood (Kröger et
al., 2020). This could be relevant to more targeted
customer segmentation and communication. Inves-
ting in voice interaction is therefore also an invest-
ment in a source of data with enormous potential.
Additionally, by considering information such as
the user’s past queries, location, shopping history,
calendar, and characteristics of their environment
(e.g., location, noise), voice user interfaces are
predicted to discover more about the context in
which communication happens (Telner, 2021). Based
on this information, the verbal delivery of content to
users might then be automatically adapted.
Risks of voice interaction
Competition: Competing with Amazon and Google in
the technology sector is tough. And it’s even tougher
in the eld of voice interaction, with both tech giants
dominating the smart speaker market. As well as giving
them access to even more personal data, there are also
fears that they will use voice interaction devices to
lock out other competitors. This could be done by, say,
restricting interoperability between their smart spea-
kers and other smart devices (smart fridges, TVs etc.),
or by using voice interaction devices to attract users
predominantly to their own services.
This risk has been recognized by the European
Commission, which started an antitrust competition
inquiry into the sector of Internet of Things (IoT) for
31
COMMUNICATIONS TREND RADAR 2021
READING RECOMMENDATIONS
Clifford I. Nass & Scott Brave: Wired for speech: How Voice Activates and Advances
the Human-Computer Relationship (2005)
This classic book by Stanford researchers Clifford Nass and Scott Brave explores the
effects of human and digital speech on humans. The authors present theories and expe-
riments showing that humans respond to voice technologies in the same way as they
respond to real people, behaving as if in a social situation. This raises important ques-
tions for the application and design of voice interaction.
Cathy Pearl: Designing Voice User Interfaces (2016)
Cathy Pearl from Google provides the reader with an introduction to the key concepts
of voice interaction. The book also includes practical guidance on how to develop and
evaluate different types of VUIs.
consumer-related products and services in the European
Union in July 2020. The inquiry is focusing on connected
devices (e.g., smart homes, wearables) which can be
controlled through voice assistants or mobile devices. A
preliminary report is expected in spring 2021, the nal
report following in summer 2022.
Security: Smart speakers are frequently the subject
of privacy and security concerns. For example, smart
speakers might respond to a variety of keywords
which are similar to their designated wake word,
causing them to listen in on private conversations.
As the recordings are sent to the cloud for proces-
sing and are occasionally transcribed by humans,
there is a risk of sensitive information being exposed.
Isolated incidents have been reported in the media
illustrating potential vulnerabilities, such as a smart
speaker sending emails containing intimate conversa-
tions, and another one ordering products based on TV
commentary. Moreover, smart speaker recordings have
been used to investigate crimes. Some people are
worried that smart speakers (and other smart devices)
could be abused to spy on their owners, as it appears
to be already happening in China (Hvistendahl, 2020).
With many employees working from home during and
after the Covid-19 pandemic, they may well make
business calls in the vicinity of a smart speaker or
device. In a recent survey, 23% of smart speaker
owners said their smart speaker was positioned in
their ofce at home (Beyto, 2020). This must be seen
as a potential security risk.
32 COMMUNICATIONS TREND RADAR 2021
REFERENCES
Beyto (2020). Beyto Smart Speaker Survey 2020 | Germany.
https://www.beyto.com/en/smart-speaker-study-2020/
Bonin, H., Eichhorst, W., Kaczynska, J., Kümmerling, A., Rinne, U., Scholten,
A., & Steffes, S. (2020). Verbreitung und Auswirkungen von mobiler Arbeit und
Homeofce. Forschungsbericht 549. Bundesministerium für Arbeit und Soziales.
Chodor, B., & Cyranski, G. (2021). Transitioning to virtual and hybrid events: how
to create, adapt, and market an engaging online experience. John Wiley & Sons.
Cram, W. A., Proudfoot, J. G., & D’Arcy, J. (2020). Maximizing employee compli-
ance with cybersecurity policies. MIS Quarterly Executive, 19(3), 5.
Diethelm, P., & McKee, M. (2009). Denialism: what is it and how should scien-
tists respond? European Journal of Public Health, 19(1), 2–4.
Eccles, R. G., & Klimenko, S. (2019). The investor revolution. Harvard Business
Review, 97(3), 106-116.
European Commission. (2020). Identifying conspiracy theories. Available at
https://ec.europa.eu/info/live-work-travel-eu/coronavirus-response/ghting-disin-
formation/identifying-conspiracy-theories_en
Gallup. (2019). How millenials want to work and live.
https://www.gallup.com/workplace/238073/millennials-work-live.aspx
Godemann, J. (2011). Sustainability communication: interdisciplinary perspec-
tives and theoretical foundation. Springer.
Guy, I. (2016). Searching by talking: analysis of voice queries on mobile web
search. In Proceedings of the 39th International ACM SIGIR Conference on
Research and Development in Information Retrieval (SIGIR ’16) (pp. 35–44).
Association for Computing Machinery.
Hill, N. S., & Bartol, K. M. (2018). Five ways to improve communication in
virtual teams. MIT Sloan Management Review, 60(1), 1–5.
Hoofnagle, M., & Hoofnagle, C. (2007). Denialism. Science blogs.
https://scienceblogs.com/author/denialism
Howard-Grenville, J. (2020). How to sustain your organization’s culture when
everyone is remote. MIT Sloan Management Review, 62(1).
https://doi.org/10.17863/CAM.60133
Hvistendahl, M. (2020, May 18 ). How a Chinese AI giant made chatting – and
surveillance – easy. WIRED.
https://www.wired.com/story/iytek-china-ai-giant-voice-chatting-surveillance/
Kahn-Harris, K. (2018). Denialism: what drives people to reject the truth. The Guardian.
https://www.theguardian.com/news/2018/aug/03/denialism-what-drives-people-
to-reject-the-truth
Köhler, K., & Hofmann, C. P. (2018). Integrated reporting: bridging investor
relations and strategic management. In A. Laskin (Ed.), Handbook of nancial
communication and investor relations (pp. 209–220). Wiley-Blackwell.
Kröger, J. L., Lutz O. H.-M., Raschke, P. (2020). Privacy implications of voice
and speech analysis – Information disclosure by inference. In M. Friedewald, M.
Önen, E. Lievens, S. Krenn, & S. Fricker (Eds.), Privacy and identity management.
Data for better living: AI and privacy. Privacy and identity (pp. 243-258). Springer.
Malhotra, A., Majchrzak, A., & Rosen, B. (2007). Leading virtual teams. Academy
of Management Perspectives, 21(1), 60–70.
Meske, C., & Potthoff, T. (2017). The DINU-model – a process model for the
design of nudges. In Proceedings of the 25th European Conference on Information
Systems (ECIS) (pp. 2587-2597).
Meszaros, J. (2019). 10 global climate and sustainability trends in 2019. How a
changing environment will impact governments and businesses.
https://medium.com/issues-decoded/10-global-climate-and-sustainability-trends-
in-2019-b579ff8f177f
Mirsch, T., Lehrer, C., & Jung, R. (2017). Digital nudging: altering user
behavior in digital environments. In Proceedings der 13. Internationalen Tagung
Wirtschaftsinformatik (WI 2017) (pp. 634-648).
Nadler, R. (2020). Understanding “Zoom fatigue”: theorizing spatial dynamics as third
skins in computer-mediated communication. Computers and Composition, 58, 102613.
Pandey, D., Agrawal, M., & Pandey, J. S. (2011). Carbon footprint: current methods
of estimation. Environmental Monitoring and Assessment, 178(1–4), 135–160.
Quantilope. (2020). Wie unterscheiden sich die Konsumenten aus den USA,
Deutschland, Großbritannien und China in ihren Ansichten über Nachhaltigkeit?
https://www.quantilope.com/de/blog/insight-studies-multi-country-nachhaltigkeit
Reilly, A. H., & Hynan, K. A. (2014). Corporate communication, sustainability, and
social media: it’s not easy (really) being green. Business Horizons, 57(6), 747–758.
Roose, J. (2020). Verschwörung in der Krise. Repräsentative Umfragen zum Glauben
an Verschwörungstheorien vor und in der Corona-Krise. Konrad-Adenauer-Stiftung.
https://www.kas.de/de/einzeltitel/-/content/verschwoerung-in-der-krise
Splendid Research (2019).
Digitale Sprachassistenten. Eine repräsentative Umfrage
unter 1.006 Deutschen zum Thema digtale Sprachassistenten und Smartspeaker.
https://www.splendid-research.com/de/studie-digitale-sprachassistenten.html
Krösmann, C., Klöß, S. (2020, August 5). Podcast-Boom hält an. Bitkom.
https://www.bitkom.org/Presse/Presseinformation/Podcast-Boom-haelt-an
Telner, J. (2021). Future trends in voice user interfaces. In T. Ahram (Ed).,,
Advances in Intelligent Systems and Computing (pp. 181-186). Springer Interna-
tional Publishing.
Thaler, R. H., & Sunstein, C. R. (2008). Nudge: improving decisions about health,
wealth, and happiness. Yale University Press.
Vereecken, W., van Heddeghem, W., Colle, D., Pickavet, M., & Demeester, P.
(2010). Overall ICT footprint and green communication technologies. In 4th Inter-
national Symposium on Communications, Control and Signal Processing (ISCCSP)
(pp. 1–6).
Weinmann, M., Schneider, C., & vom Brocke, J. (2016). Digital nudging. Business
& Information Systems Engineering, 58(6), 433–436.
Woolgar, S. (2002). Five rules of virtuality. In S. Woolgar (Ed.), Virtual society?
Technology, cyberbole, reality (pp. 1–22). Oxford University Press.
Zerfass, A., Ver
č
i
č
, D., Nothhaft, H., & Werder, K. P. (2018). Strategic commu-
nication: dening the eld and its contribution to research and practice. Interna-
tional Journal of Strategic Communication, 12(4), 487-505.
Zhang, Y., Hu, J., Zhang, Y., Pardo, B., & Duan, Z. (2020). Vroom! A search
engine for sounds by vocal imitation queries. In Proceedings of the 2020 Confer-
ence on Human Information Interaction and Retrieval (CHIIR ’20) (pp. 23–32).
Association for Computing Machinery.
33
COMMUNICATIONS TREND RADAR 2021
DIGGING DEEPER
THREE STUDIES WILL ANALYZE VIRTUAL CORPORATE COMMUNICATIONS AND DIGITAL
NUDGING MORE CLOSELY
To nd out more about how the identied trends
will affect corporate communications, three research
projects will be conducted throughout 2021. The
ndings are set to be published by the end of 2021.
Employee relations and employee engage-
ment in times of virtual collaboration
University of Vienna – Professor Sabine Einwiller
The goal of employee communication is to build up and
sustain a trusting relationship between an organization
and its employees. It seeks to stimulate employee enga-
gement and build a strong corporate culture. These goals
become harder to achieve when leaders and employees
mainly work from home – something that has become
the “new normal” due to the COVID-19 pandemic. The
aims of the research project are to nd out …
How virtual collaboration affects team spirit and
employee engagement
How employees are experiencing the new working
mode and what their expectations are
What employees think of virtual internal com -
munication activities
Virtualizing stakeholder dialogues
Leipzig University – Professor Ansgar Zerfass
Stakeholder dialogues have proven to be a good
way for companies to exchange views with relevant
stakeholders on critical issues. But what happens
when face-to-face meetings can’t take place? With
regards to key economic challenges such as climate
change and sustainability, engaging in stakeholder
dialogue is more important than ever.
What dimensions and prerequisites need to be
considered when virtualizing stakeholder dialogues,
especially in connection with sustainability?
What processes work best? What other success
factors are relevant?
What are the limitations for virtual stakeholder
dialogues?
Digital nudging
University of Duisburg-Essen – Professor Stefan Stieglitz
Our decisions and actions are always affected by
psychological mechanisms and the context in which
they are made. Seemingly irrelevant details such as
a preselected default option in online forms can
inuence human decisions far more than expected.
The concept of nudging uses these psychological
mechanisms to subtly steer human actions into a
certain direction for their own benet without limi-
ting their personal freedom of choice. This idea can
also be transferred to the digital world and raise the
following questions:
How are digital interfaces designed in organizations?
To what scenarios can digital nudging be applied
– especially in corporate communiations?
What ethical, organizational, and technical factors
inuence the use of digital nudging?
34 COMMUNICATIONS TREND RADAR 2021
The Academic Society for Management & Communication
is a joint initiative of leading companies and univer-
sities. Through collaborative research and knowledge
sharing, it aims to actively shape the future of corporate
communications. The initiative was founded in 2010,
and is currently supported by six professors, four univer-
sities, and approximately 40 corporate partners.
The Academic Society initiates practical, forward-
looking research projects. These extensive, multi-
disciplinary studies are designed to support the ongoing
professionalization of corporate communications. In the
past years, more than 20 research projects have been
carried out in areas such as agility, automated commu-
nication, value creation, digitalization, and diversity.
The key ndings have been published in the series
Communication Insights. All issues feature interviews,
case studies and reading recommendations, and can
be downloaded by visiting bit.ly/ComInsights.
The Academic Society is part of the Günter Thiele
Foundation for Communication & Management, an
independent non-prot entity that is dedicated to
advancing science and knowledge transfer in the eld
of corporate communications.
For more information, go to academic-society.net.
ACADEMIC SOCIETY FOR MANAGEMENT &
COMMUNICATION
Our research and corporate partners
35
COMMUNICATIONS TREND RADAR 2021
Academic Society
for Management & Communication
c/o Leipzig University
Nikolaistrasse 27-29
04109 Leipzig, Germany
Telephone: 49 (0)341 973 5052
Email: info@akademische-gesellschaft.com
www.academic-society.net
© February 2021