Evaluation stasis continues in PR and corporate communication: Asia Pacific insights into causes

Macnamara, JR; Zerfass, A

Evaluation stasis continues in PR and corporate communication: Asia Pacific insights into causes

Macnamara, JR

Zerfass, A

Permalink

Publisher:: Routledge
Publication Type:: Journal Article
Citation:: Communication Research and Practice, 2017, 3 (4), pp. 319 - 334
Issue Date:: 2017-09-05

Open Access

Copyright Clearance Process

Recently Added
In Progress
Open Access

This item is open access.

Adobe PDF

Download Accepted Manuscript VersionAdobe PDF (277.8 kB)

View on publisher's site

View statistics

Full metadata record

Field	Value	Language
dc.contributor.author	Macnamara, JR https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1387-3882	en_US
dc.contributor.author	Zerfass, A	en_US
dc.date.available	2020-05-25T19:17:14Z
dc.date.issued	2017-09-05	en_US
dc.identifier.citation	Communication Research and Practice, 2017, 3 (4), pp. 319 - 334	en_US
dc.identifier.issn	2204-1451	en_US
dc.identifier.uri	http://hdl.handle.net/10453/83376
dc.description.abstract	The first comprehensive study of public relations (PR) and corporate communication practices across Asia-Pacific countries has found that, despite being an area of rapid growth, evaluation remains limited, is often not based on reliable research methods, and is focussed on outputs rather than the outcomes of communication. This reflects a worldwide stasis in evaluation of PR that has been identified as problematic by a number of authors. The Asia-Pacific Communication Monitor, a survey-based study conducted by a collaboration of 16 universities across 23 Asia-Pacific countries in 2015, also explored practitioners’ skills, and found a significant lag that could account for this stasis. This article reports key findings of this study that contribute insights to address the lack of measurement and evaluation in the growing field of PR that remains a major concern in the academy and industry.	en_US
dc.publisher	Routledge	en_US
dc.relation.ispartof	Communication Research and Practice	en_US
dc.relation.isbasedon	10.1080/22041451.2017.1275258	en_US
dc.rights	This is an Author's Accepted Manuscript of an article published in Communication Research and Practice, 2017, 3 (4), pp. 319 - 334. Copyright Routledge, available online at: https://dx.doi.org/10.1080/22041451.2017.1275258.	en_US
dc.title	Evaluation stasis continues in PR and corporate communication: Asia Pacific insights into causes	en_US
dc.type	Journal Article
utslib.citation.volume	4	en_US
utslib.citation.volume	3	en_US
utslib.for	2001 Communication and Media Studies	en_US
utslib.for	1902 Film, Television and Digital Media	en_US
utslib.for	1903 Journalism and Professional Writing	en_US
pubs.embargo.period	Not known	en_US
pubs.organisational-group	/University of Technology Sydney
pubs.organisational-group	/University of Technology Sydney/Faculty of Science
pubs.organisational-group	/University of Technology Sydney/Strength - CPCE - Centre for Creative Practices and the Cultural Economy
utslib.copyright.status	open_access
pubs.consider-herdc	true	en_US
pubs.issue	4	en_US
pubs.publication-status	Published	en_US
pubs.volume	3	en_US

Abstract:

The first comprehensive study of public relations (PR) and corporate communication practices across Asia-Pacific countries has found that, despite being an area of rapid growth, evaluation remains limited, is often not based on reliable research methods, and is focussed on outputs rather than the outcomes of communication. This reflects a worldwide stasis in evaluation of PR that has been identified as problematic by a number of authors. The Asia-Pacific Communication Monitor, a survey-based study conducted by a collaboration of 16 universities across 23 Asia-Pacific countries in 2015, also explored practitioners’ skills, and found a significant lag that could account for this stasis. This article reports key findings of this study that contribute insights to address the lack of measurement and evaluation in the growing field of PR that remains a major concern in the academy and industry.

Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item:

http://hdl.handle.net/10453/83376