RESEARCH VISION OF MARITA VOS
I’ve always been interested in the interface function of communication
for organisations. This includes monitoring of public perception and sensemaking
by stakeholder groups about societal issues. I believe communication can
play a more important role in facilitating coproductions and problem solving
by an organisation together with other parties in its social environment.
For this purpose research is needed on a strategic level concerning the
dynamics and complexities of the organisational environment.
The research is grounded in structuralism and inspired by authors such
as Weick and Berger. The dynamics of the social environment are underlined
by for instance Bauman and also form the theme of an international congress
hosted by my
university. The research interests described are made concrete in
a number of personal research lines:
• Crisis communication
• Perception of issues and branding
• Trends in the profession. (Click for more
info)
The last topic includes the communication scorecard and integrated communication.
All topics are also part of courses lectured by me: monitoring public
perception; innovation and change; reputation, image and crises; integrated
communication.
CRISIS
COMMUNICATION
Communication is much needed in support of emergency management. In a
crisis people try to make sense of the situation in interaction with others,
and various organisations contribute to crisis management. Communication
can enhance the public understanding of the situation, empower people
to do what they can do themselves for their families and peers, while
also strengthening cooperation among the various authorities involved
in rescue operations and relief activities. Communication is not a luxury
here but a necessity. When people are not included in the efforts they
will be less able to do their part and feel more anxiety, or individuals
may even negatively influence the events, e.g. by not cooperating with
a vaccination or evacuation, sending fake emergency messages or even powder
letters, which may harm other citizens. Crisis communication should be
seen as a coproduction rather than as messaging. Continuous monitoring
and interaction is needed.
This research line mainly concerns governmental and non-profit organisations
involved in disaster management and prevention. Next to disasters caused
by nature or indirectly by men (e.g. climate change), there are also man-made
emergencies for instance caused by terrorism threats.
This topic is investigated in the FP7 project on crisis
communication that I coordinate for my university and in
a project on CBRN crises in which we are a partner. Various doctoral students
investigate risk and crisis communication. By making new proposals in
this line we may become one of the expertise centres in this area of research.
The current project will deliver an open website with a
scorecard consisting of quality indicators for crisis communication helping
authorities to further increase crisis preparedness. Several publications
are on their way, including a theme-issue and a reviewed e-book.
Top
PERCEPTION OF ISSUES AND BRANDING
Companies need to understand public perception of issues related to their
activities. This concerns the perception of e.g. consumers and shareholders.
Nowadays, an organisation functions in multiple issue networks, in which
the organisation is merely one of the players. The networks are dynamic
and communication flows are especially fast online, in the social media.
To better understand this, following a European tradition in the field,
a focus on the public debate is needed, rather than on relations and reputation
as a result of communication. This is developed in two joint articles
on issue arenas.
• Luoma-aho, V. & Vos, M. (2009), Monitoring
the complexities: Nuclear power and public opinion. Public
Relations Review, Volume 35, pp.120-122.
• Luoma-aho, V. & Vos, M. (2010), Towards a more dynamic stakeholder
model: The role of issue arenas for corporate reputation. Corporate
Communication, an International Journal (forthcoming).
Public perception is also discussed in one of my books:
• Vos, M. & H. Schoemaker
(2006), Monitoring public perception of organisations, Amsterdam,
Boom Onderwijs (available via the authors).
Earlier, the debate on the complex issue of genetically modified crops
was studied from the perspective of companies:
• Vos, M. & I. Wassenaar
(2003), 'Image formation about genetically modified food and the communication
by the companies involved', Proceedings of BledCom 2002 in conjunction
with EUPRERA. >>>
pdf
For companies the importance of public perception is especially important
in the case of branding. Innovative branding is discussed
in a new paper that involves a doctoral student. It is currently developed
as a part of the project ‘Added
value of Intangibles for innovation’ initiated by me. This multidisciplinary
project is funded by Tekes in cooperation with four companies. It identifies
performance indicators supporting innovation by companies and delivers
a measurement instrument. To be competitive in the international environment
intangibles should be geared toward business goals. An innovative climate
inside the organisation needs internal communication. This also includes
communication with partners in the value chain, a topic investigated by
one of the doctoral students.
Top
TRENDS
IN THE PROFESSION
Accountability may be one of the most important ethical requirements.
CSR or sustainability should go together with being accountable for ones’
actions. Similarly, also the communication department should be accountable
for choices made. In cooperation with others I developed various methods
supporting accountability in a way that the quality of communication can
be improved. Inspired by the Balanced Scorecard of Kaplan and Norton a
communication scorecard was developed. A doctoral student investigates
the balanced scorecard as a means to help discuss company policies.
• Vos, M. & H. Schoemaker
(2004), Accountability of communication management; a balanced scorecard
for communication quality, Den Haag, Boom Lemma (available via the
authors). (in Dutch: Accountability
van communicatiebeleid)
• Vos, M. & Schoemaker, H. (2004), 'Accountability of communication
policy', Proceedings of BledCom 2003 in conjunction with EUPRERA. >>>
pdf
Earlier, I started to develop a communication scorecard for municipal
communication (Dutch publication available which will be renewed soon).
• Vos, M. (2009),
Communication
quality and added value: a measurement instrument for municipalities,
Journal of Communication Management, Volume 13 – Issue
4, pp.362-377.
• Vos, M. (2003), 'Communication quality measurement of councils',
Proceedings of BledCom 2002 in conjunction with EUPRERA. >>>
pdf
For the management of communication by an organisation integrated
communication is an important approach adding to current practices. The
concept first referred to coherence within the level of multi-media projects,
then synthesis on the level of communication domains (integrating concern,
internal and marketing communication) and finally embedding communication
within the organisational policies. In a paper I explained that integrated
communication should not emphasize internal coherence without acknowledging
that external orientation is just as important and that both elements
should be balanced.
Integration is not by definition a top-down process, rather the opposite,
as bottom-up ways to develop coherence are probably more effective.
• Vos, M. &
H. Schoemaker (2008), Integrated
Communication; concern, internal and marketing communication,
Den Haag, Boom Lemma, 3rd edition. (also in Dutch ‘Geintegreerde
Communicatie’)
• Vos, M. (2009), ‘Synergy and social orientation as quality
dimensions for the future communication policy’. In Rogojinaru,
A. & Wolstenholme, S., Current trends in international public
relations; papers presented at the Euprera Congress 2009, Tritonic,
Bucharest, pp. 83-94. >>>
pdf
The way in which the planning of communication
is accomplished changes when
communication management is implemented in a more strategic manner. This
is explained in the following book.
• Vos, M., J. Otte &
P. Linders (2003), Setting
up a Strategic Communication Plan, Den Haag, Boom Lemma. (also
in Dutch ‘Communicatie
en planning’)
Online communication and especially social media
have changed the landscape in which organisations function. A doctoral
student investigates online communication by NGOs.
Another doctoral student investigates computer facilitated internal communication
and its importance for internal communication by multiple-location organisations.
• Meriläinen, N.
& Vos, M. (2010), Can online communication strengthen the relationship
of EU with young citizens in Finland? In Valentini, C. & Nesti, G.
(ed.), Public
Communication in the European Union: History, Perspectives and Challenges.
Cambridge Scholars Publishing.
Earlier, a research report of a study on trends in governmental
communication was published (Dutch publication). Also, the
perceived distance between governmental organisations and publics was
discussed in a paper.
• Vos, M. & Westerhoudt,
E. (2008), 'Trends in government communication in The Netherlands'. Journal
of Communication Management, Volume 12 - Issue 1, pp. 18-29.
• Vos, M. (2007). 'The public image of a government', International
Social Capital and Networks of Trust (ISOCA) October 2007, Jyväskylä.
>>>
pdf
• Vos, M. (2006), 'Setting the research agenda for governmental
communication', Journal
of Communication Management, Volume 10 - Issue 3, pp.250-258.
Top
E-mail: vos.schoemaker@gmail.com