| Public relations (PR) concerns the image that an organization would like to project in the eyesof its stakeholders. Modern business, characterized by globalization, requires organizations tounderstand the intercultural and international aspects of pubic relations while operating in aglobal market.Drawing upon three of Hofstede's (1980, 1991) dimensions of culture----individualism versuscollectivism, power distance and Confucian dynamism----and Trompenaars' Universalismversus Particularism dimension, this study contrasts the organizational crisis PR practicesbetween Chinese and the United States companies. Using a qualitative approach, the studyreveals significant cultural differences that affected crisis PR practices by companiesoperating in different cultural contexts. Findings are based upon analysis of 112 respondentsfrom American local companies, Chinese domestic companies and the US multinationalsrespectively. The study demonstrates major differences in the use of apology, informationdisclosure, and litigation concerns. Some discrepancies from cultural assumptions are alsoindicated by questionnaire analysis. When conducting crisis PR in another culture, the USmultinationals are making adaptive effort to fit into Chinese culture. The culturalcharacteristics embodied by these US multinationals operating in China are not as evident asthey are back in the United States. The US multinationals are incorporating Chinese culturesinto their endeavors in China.The findings suggest that cultural sensitivity is a key to developing a successful crisis PR planin different cultures. Theoretically, this study makes evident the values of crisis PR in termsof relationship management and conflict resolution. On a pragmatic level, the results of thisstudy may serve to benefit PR practitioners interested in generating favorable relationshipsand resolving conflict with their publics of a different culture, and conducting successfulinternational business in China.
|
PDF Full Text Request