在规则、规范和共同理解之间:制度压力如何影响数据驱动通信的实施

IF 3.1 Q1 COMMUNICATION Journal of Communication Management Pub Date : 2023-02-28 DOI:10.1108/jcom-01-2022-0009
E. Economou, Edwina Luck, J. Bartlett
{"title":"在规则、规范和共同理解之间:制度压力如何影响数据驱动通信的实施","authors":"E. Economou, Edwina Luck, J. Bartlett","doi":"10.1108/jcom-01-2022-0009","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"PurposeBig data and analytics make digital communications more effective, but little is known about how institutional pressures shape data-driven communications. These pressures determine and constrain how, what, when and to whom practitioners should communicate. This empirical study explores how institutional forces influence the use of data in guiding digital communications. The paper identifies factors that impact communications and shape practitioner views on particular tools in their day-to-day work.Design/methodology/approachThis study uses a qualitative exploratory approach with in-depth interviews of 15 Australian communication practitioners through the lens of neo-institutional theory. Thematic analysis was applied to identify three main themes.FindingsCommunications professionals disclosed how they were influenced by coercive institutional forces such as ambiguous data privacy regulations, normative forces that shaped ethical concerns, professionalism and various challenges, and mimetic forces that determined shared methods and implementation of digital communications technologies such as analytics. Furthermore, the authors reveal how analytics – tools typically associated with uncertainty and mimetic influences – exert coercive pressures that could lead to misguided decision-making.Research limitations/implicationsThis study’s findings highlight the need for practitioners to learn more about the inner workings of analytics tools and for managers to determine if the perceived benefits of these solutions outweigh any undesirable effects.Practical implicationsThe study contributes to extant research on digitalization in strategic communication by providing new insights into practitioner views and challenges with digital communications technologies.Originality/valueDespite the considerable effects of institutional pressures, this study is the first to explore the impacts of data-driven communications at the level of individual practitioners. The paper advances neo-institutional theory in public relations (PR), strategic communication and corporate communications at the micro level.","PeriodicalId":51660,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Communication Management","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":3.1000,"publicationDate":"2023-02-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Between rules, norms and shared understandings: how institutional pressures shape the implementation of data-driven communications\",\"authors\":\"E. Economou, Edwina Luck, J. Bartlett\",\"doi\":\"10.1108/jcom-01-2022-0009\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"PurposeBig data and analytics make digital communications more effective, but little is known about how institutional pressures shape data-driven communications. These pressures determine and constrain how, what, when and to whom practitioners should communicate. This empirical study explores how institutional forces influence the use of data in guiding digital communications. The paper identifies factors that impact communications and shape practitioner views on particular tools in their day-to-day work.Design/methodology/approachThis study uses a qualitative exploratory approach with in-depth interviews of 15 Australian communication practitioners through the lens of neo-institutional theory. Thematic analysis was applied to identify three main themes.FindingsCommunications professionals disclosed how they were influenced by coercive institutional forces such as ambiguous data privacy regulations, normative forces that shaped ethical concerns, professionalism and various challenges, and mimetic forces that determined shared methods and implementation of digital communications technologies such as analytics. Furthermore, the authors reveal how analytics – tools typically associated with uncertainty and mimetic influences – exert coercive pressures that could lead to misguided decision-making.Research limitations/implicationsThis study’s findings highlight the need for practitioners to learn more about the inner workings of analytics tools and for managers to determine if the perceived benefits of these solutions outweigh any undesirable effects.Practical implicationsThe study contributes to extant research on digitalization in strategic communication by providing new insights into practitioner views and challenges with digital communications technologies.Originality/valueDespite the considerable effects of institutional pressures, this study is the first to explore the impacts of data-driven communications at the level of individual practitioners. The paper advances neo-institutional theory in public relations (PR), strategic communication and corporate communications at the micro level.\",\"PeriodicalId\":51660,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Communication Management\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-02-28\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Communication Management\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1108/jcom-01-2022-0009\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"COMMUNICATION\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Communication Management","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1108/jcom-01-2022-0009","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"COMMUNICATION","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

目的大数据和分析使数字通信更加有效,但人们对制度压力如何影响数据驱动的通信知之甚少。这些压力决定并限制了从业者应该如何、什么、何时以及与谁沟通。这项实证研究探讨了制度力量如何影响数据在指导数字通信中的使用。本文确定了影响沟通的因素,并形成了从业者在日常工作中对特定工具的看法。设计/方法论/方法本研究采用了定性探索方法,通过新制度理论的视角对15名澳大利亚传播从业者进行了深入采访。专题分析用于确定三个主要主题。FindingsCommunications的专业人士透露了他们是如何受到强制性制度力量的影响的,这些力量包括模糊的数据隐私法规、形成道德问题、专业精神和各种挑战的规范力量,以及决定共享方法和实施数字通信技术(如分析)的模仿力量。此外作者揭示了分析——通常与不确定性和模仿影响相关的工具——是如何施加胁迫压力的,这可能会导致错误的决策。研究的局限性/含义这项研究的发现强调了从业者需要更多地了解分析工具的内部运作,以及管理者是否需要确定这些工具的感知利益解决方案大于任何不良影响。实践意义该研究通过对从业者对数字通信技术的看法和挑战提供新的见解,为现有的战略通信数字化研究做出了贡献。独创性/价值尽管制度压力产生了相当大的影响,但本研究首次在个体从业者层面探讨了数据驱动的沟通的影响。本文在微观层面上提出了公共关系、战略传播和企业传播的新制度理论。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Between rules, norms and shared understandings: how institutional pressures shape the implementation of data-driven communications
PurposeBig data and analytics make digital communications more effective, but little is known about how institutional pressures shape data-driven communications. These pressures determine and constrain how, what, when and to whom practitioners should communicate. This empirical study explores how institutional forces influence the use of data in guiding digital communications. The paper identifies factors that impact communications and shape practitioner views on particular tools in their day-to-day work.Design/methodology/approachThis study uses a qualitative exploratory approach with in-depth interviews of 15 Australian communication practitioners through the lens of neo-institutional theory. Thematic analysis was applied to identify three main themes.FindingsCommunications professionals disclosed how they were influenced by coercive institutional forces such as ambiguous data privacy regulations, normative forces that shaped ethical concerns, professionalism and various challenges, and mimetic forces that determined shared methods and implementation of digital communications technologies such as analytics. Furthermore, the authors reveal how analytics – tools typically associated with uncertainty and mimetic influences – exert coercive pressures that could lead to misguided decision-making.Research limitations/implicationsThis study’s findings highlight the need for practitioners to learn more about the inner workings of analytics tools and for managers to determine if the perceived benefits of these solutions outweigh any undesirable effects.Practical implicationsThe study contributes to extant research on digitalization in strategic communication by providing new insights into practitioner views and challenges with digital communications technologies.Originality/valueDespite the considerable effects of institutional pressures, this study is the first to explore the impacts of data-driven communications at the level of individual practitioners. The paper advances neo-institutional theory in public relations (PR), strategic communication and corporate communications at the micro level.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
5.40
自引率
6.50%
发文量
29
期刊最新文献
Subjective well-being perceptions of Portuguese Public Relations practitioners: a gender and stages of life analysis Loneliness, office space arrangement and mental well-being of Gen Z PR professionals. Falling into the trap of an agile office? The influence of leaders’ motivational language on employee well-being through relatedness in remote work environments Subjective well-being of public relations and communication professionals in the context of perceived organisational support Understanding subjective well-being across a multi-generational workforce in public relations: a qualitative study
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1