Bulletin No. 10 | July – August 2002

COMMUNICATIONS

Culture can be a source of miscommunication

A problem in understanding non-verbal communication is that the meaning of many movements and gestures are culturally determined. Verbal and non-verba language differs from one culture to another. These differences can lead to quite serious misunderstanding. Research carried out by Cumpertz et al in 1979 found that the way Asian People speak English in Britain can lead to incorrect judgement of aggressiveness being made about them. People from the Mediterranean generally stand closer, touch more and engage on more eye contact than English people. In some cultures you look down as a mark of respect where a more senior person is questioning you. Just as animals stake out and guard territory, so do humans. Edward T. Hall was one of the pioneers in the study on man’s spatial needs and he described four distinct zones that people unconsciously use as when interact with others: 

Intimate zone (15-46 cm)
We allow people into our intimate zone who are close friends, lovers or children but feel embarrassed or threatened if we are forced to share this zone with people we are not familiar with. Avoiding eye contact and touch. 

Personal zone (46cm 1.2m)
This is a comfortable zone for talking to people at parties and social gatherings

Social zone (1.2m 3.6m)
This is the distance we stand with strangers, clients or service people and with work colleagues we do not know well

Public zone (over 3.6m)
When the boss is talking to the staff, or when we have to address a large group of people

If you want people to feel comfortable in your company, don’y stand to close unless you have an intimate relationship with them 

(Source : Interpersonal Skills, Astrid French)

---

PUBLIC RELATIONS

The Value of Public Relations

If the effectiveness of communication programs is to be measured in economic terms, public relations management must not be viewed as a technical task, but defined in terms of a mission that is socially defensible, organizationally relevant, and quantifiable.

The value of a communications program should be demonstrated by determining its contribution to the effectiveness of an organization, rather than by attempting to make an accounting of how efficient the communication program is. They explore how useful several approaches to organizational effectiveness can be in explaining the economic contribution of communication to an organization. William P. Ehling, a public relations expert who estimated the value of public relations and communications, cites the following eight step process from Mark S. Thompson’s book Benefit-Cost Analysis for Program Evaluation:

Program Efficiency
– Identify the decision-makers and their basic concerns
– Identify alternative programs of action available to the decision-makers
– Identify costs, including both direct and indirect
– Assign monetary values to the program’s effects
– Discount if effects occur at different times

Program Fairness
– Take into account, when appropriate, the distributional equity effects
– Aggregate and interpret the resultant valued effects

One way of measuring the value of effective communication is to measure the cost of poor communication. Good communication builds relationships with strategic publics, thus helping an organization manage its interdependencies with these publics. The leaders of an organization should be aware of the amounts at risk from increased government regulation, litigation or activist activity. An organization can suffer actual losses or lost opportunities when stakeholders exercise ‘countervailing power’, the ability to prevent an organization from implementing its programs. 

In reality, too many leaders are claiming their reputation, too many of them are overshadowed by the fact that their sales increase, their profit is going up. They do not even realize by the time the organization raises to its peak, the employee morale is critical. They view relationships as a matter of dominance or subjugation, they avoid taking responsibility for actions, they divide the world into ‘good guys and bad guys’, they act out of tradition or habit and view relationships as competitive and individualistic. 

• How top management values public relations anyway? 
• How do you strive for excellence in public relations

Find the answers and solutions in Interactive Panel Discussion on the Professionalism in Public Relations with EGA’s distinguished guest speakers: 

Nina Larasati Kairupan, Corporate Communications Director of Texmaco Group
Arief Warsito, Legal and Corporate Communication Affairs, PT Antam Tbk
Gregoria Arum Yudarwati, FISIP Universitas Atma Jaya, Yogyakarta
From the young generation, EGA invites Sint Chyril, student of Communication from the University of Indonesia

Saturday, August 24, from 09.00-12.00 in Flamboyan Room, Lt 6 Jakarta Design CentreIf you are interested in finding more in this professional issue, tips and strategy follow the Workshop from 13.30-16.00 on the same day

---