1. Academic article: Locate, read and summarize an academic article that presents a related theory, case example, etc. Draw connections between the ideas in the article and those you read for class.
As I searched for an academic article to draw connections with this week’s readings, I found Innovation, Communication, and Leadership: New Developments in Strategic Communication by Ansgar Zerfass and Simone Huck. Zerfass and Huck present a theory called Innovation Theory. Throughout the article, Zerfass and Huck present research that states innovation management is crucial to any managerial arm of a company. A company, in order to compete, must be innovative. Innovation is the creation of an idea, which then, must be communicated to the entire company including its leadership. Aside from leaders are “Promoters of Innovation.”
When ideas fast become innovations, there has to be a person in the company who can communicate the innovation so others can understand it. “Promoters of Innovation” possess skills to entice and enthrall the organization through convincing strategic communication. One example mentioned is the innovation of text messaging.
Stakeholders within the organization viewed text messaging as a very simple means for messages to appear on a cell phone. However, stakeholders outside of the company, i.e. teenagers, took a hold on text messaging and used it for far more reasons than expected, i.e. sexting.
Innovative ideas in a company come from a number of employees. The article states that ideas from lower-tier employees enhances an employees self-worth and provides a more favorable working environment. Leadership level members of an organization can use innovation theory as a tool to keep the organization’s employees fresh and creative. These methods of strategic management are similar to our readings because it includes not only changing the culture of the organization, but also adapting to differing ideas and cultures.
The The Strategic Communication Imperative (1) and When Social Issues Become Strategic (2) are similar to Zerfass and Huck’s academic article because they indicate and describe the importance of communication within an organization and making the employee feel empowered. 1 and 2 give good examples of how companies need to understand their potential impact on people, environments, countries, and etc. 2 explains a social contract companies have with stakeholders inside and outside of their organization. 2 goes further to layout grounds for creating long-term goals, because a short-term thinking management could have catastrophic consequences, i.e. Monsanto, ExxonMobil, and Enron. 1 also lists the importance of long-term goals and it actually describes Zerfass and Huck’s Innovation Theory.
Furthermore, 1 states that a company cannot have a “laissez-faire approach.” A company must continue to innovate and communicate within its own employees, as well as stakeholders. The five principles discussed in Strategic Ambiguity, Communication, and Public Diplomacy in an Uncertain World: Principles and Practices also relate back to the academic article by Zerfass and Huck because it states the importance of understanding cultures, communicating strategically, and being cognizant of the fact that outside stakeholders may interpret certain things differently.
Innovation can be described in a plethora of forms. The academic article and the three readings discussed illustrate that innovation should be in every company that strives to be successful. Long-term goals and the willingness to adapt to cultures are both innovative in their own way. Looking out for the best interest of your employee can also be viewed as an innovative tool. Listening to their ideas is a plus, but so is looking out for them financially even when you have to cutback, i.e. FedEx severance packages. The readings about strategic communication were very educational. The company profiles, married with the Zerfass and Huck article, made for a better understanding of communicating practices.
References
Argenti, P., Howell, R., Beck, K. (2005) The Strategic Communication Imperative, MIT
Sloan Management Review, 46(3), 83-89.
Bonini, S. M. J., Mendonca, L., and Oppenheim, J. (2006) When Social Issues Become
Strategic, The McKinsey Quarterly, 2, pp. 19-31.
Goodall, B., Terthewey, A., and McDonald, K. (2006) Strategic Ambiguity,
Communication and Public Diplomacy in an Uncertain World: Principles and
Practices, Consortium for Strategic Communication, 1-14.
Thomas, it is interesting how you tie innovation and strategic communication together. It seems Zerfass & Huck (2007) stress the importance of clearly communicating innovation both inside and outside the organization. Do you think the authors would see the value in strategic ambiguity (Eisenberg, 1984)? If so, do you think strategic ambiguity in this context would be more useful inside or outside the organization? How would this also apply to your text messaging example?
ReplyDeleteThanks for your comment Courtney. I do think Zerfass and Huck would see the value in strategic ambiguity. However, it would have a limited role in their framework. I think they favor more of a clear-cut strategy that eliminates any inkling of confusion.
DeleteYet, steering the focus toward my text messaging example, I'd have to say that that form of innovation was, indeed, ambiguous. They didn't know what the future held for text messaging. They could have purposely left it open-ended byway of strategic ambiguity.
Hi Thomas,
ReplyDeleteI enjoyed your post. The article you found about innovation and communication sounds like interesting read. Given the importance of clearly communicating about new innovations to a variety of audiences, I wonder if an integrated communication approach as described by Argenti, Howell & Beck (2005) would enable a unified message to go out across the board.