Int. Journal of Business Science and Applied Management, Volume 17, Issue 2, 2022
Strategic Involvement without Strategic Input: An
Empirical Analysis of the Practice of Public Relations in
Amalia Triantafillidou*
Department of Communication and Digital Media, University of Western Macedonia
Fourka Area, P.O. Box: 30, 52100, Kastoria, Greece
Tel: +30 2467440046 (office)
Email: atriantafylidou@uowm.gr
Prodromos Yannas
Department of Business Administration, University of West Attica
Campus 2, Building D-Office 215, Petrou-Ralli & Thivon 250, 12244, Egaleo, Greece
Tel: +30 210 5381828 (office)
Email: prodyannas@uniwa.gr
The purpose of the study is to empirically examine the practice of public relations in Greece and assess
the extent to which practitioners strategically manage and contribute to the strategic management of
organizations. Moreover, the study aims to reveal differences in the public relations practices across
various industry sectors. Towards this end, an online survey was conducted to examine the views of 75
public relations practitioners from various business sectors in Greece. Findings indicate that most of
the public relations functions examined exhibit a considerable amount of strategic focus as practitioners
participate in the strategic management processes of organizations and have a say in senior
management although their input is far from strategic. Moreover, they support the organizational
strategy by practising two-way asymmetrical models, focusing on positive publicity, and marketing
communications and employing prescriptive communication strategies. Nonetheless, they do not
engage to a great extent in formal and informal research, active listening, and outcome evaluation. Thus,
public relations practitioners in Greece support organizational goals and enterprise strategy by acting as
strategic advisors of the senior management and operational supporters through the implementation of
communication strategies. The low response rate of the survey limits the generalizability of the
findings of our study, which aims to provide preliminary insights about the under researched Greek
practice of public relations. The originality of the study stems from the alternative measurement tools
proposed to evaluate strategic public relations and the emphasis on cross-sectional analysis.
Keywords: public relations, Greece, industry sectors, strategic management, strategic communication,
Amalia Triantafillidou and Prodromos Yannas
The increasing importance of social, political, environmental, and ethical issues for contemporary
businesses has given prominence to the strategic management paradigm in public relations (Steyn,
2009). The strategic management paradigm has been proposed as an alternative approach to the
symbolic-interpretative model which suggests that public relations mainly adopt a top-down one-way
communication strategy approach to convey messages of the decision-makers. On the other hand, the
strategic management paradigm focuses on the empowerment of public relations in the strategic
decision-making process, enabling managers to formulate better informed decisions and balance the
interests between the management and the public (Tam et al., 2022). From this perspective strategic
public relations/communication can be seen as an amalgam of communication processes aiming at
building, presenting, and rebuilding strategy (Van Ruler, 2018).
The origins of strategic public relations can be traced back to the study called Excellence in Public
Relations and Communication Management, which was conducted by Grunig and his colleagues
(Grunig et al., 2002) and sponsored by the IABC foundation of the International Association of
Business Communicators (henceforth the Excellence Study). In their view, strategic public relations are
planned activities that should be evaluated and aligned with organizational goals, with public relations
managers being involved in the strategic management process (Grunig and Grunig, 2000). Several
studies have operationalized the strategic orientation of public relations using the four generic
principles of the Excellence Study, namely: involvement in strategic management, empowerment in the
dominant coalition or direct relationship with top management, use of two-way symmetrical
communication, and enactment of the managerial role (Rhee, 1999; Lim et al., 2005; Valentini and
Sriramesh, 2014; Anani-Bossman, 2021).
Moss et al. (2000) identified the following as key elements of strategic public relations
management: the reporting relationship of the public relations manager to the senior management; the
environmental scanning activities; the advisory role to the senior manager; the development and
implementation of communication strategies; and involvement in the strategy-making process of the
organization. Based on the work of Steyn (2009) on the South African practice of public relations,
Steyn and Niemann (2014) suggested that the strategic public relations orientation is comprised of two
basic dimensions namely, the PR strategist or reflective strategist role, and the strategy formulation
dimension. The PR strategist role is related to (a) the development and execution of a public relations
program that addresses the overarching goals of the organization, (b) the formulation of a mixture of
prescriptive (based on organizational goals) and emergent communication strategies (based on the
changing societal needs), and (c) the counselling offered by public relations managers to other senior
managers. Moreover, the strategy formulation dimension emphasizes the involvement of the public
relations function in the strategic management process of the organization and co-creation of the
enterprise strategy along with other senior managers by providing input from environmental scanning,
thus enhancing the organization’s social responsibility and legitimacy.
In the above conceptualization of strategic public relations management, strategic communication
scholars have added several other elements. Tam et al. (2022) suggested that strategic public relations
managers are those that are frequently invited to top management meetings and strategic planning (Tam
et al., 2022). Bowen (2006) indicated that public relations can contribute to the maximum level in
strategic management when they have enough autonomy as a function and are not supervised by
another function such as marketing. To the strategic role of public relations Verhoeven et al. (2011)
added mainly inbound activities but also outbound activities (but to a lower degree), helping
organizations support their goals. Inbound activities are related to the reflective role of public relations
and include efforts for managing relationships with stakeholders, crisis communication, and the
identification of communication opportunities. Outbound activities are associated with building the
brand and corporate image, reputation, and communicating with customers and employees. Within this
perspective, Zerfass and Volk (2018) regard that communicating with journalists, opinion leaders and
influencers conveys the strategic goals of the organization to various shareholders, thus upgrading the
strategic value of public relations.
Despite their strategic role, public relations/communication departments are still not considered an
essential function in organizations due mainly to the fact that top managers and communication
directors have yet not understood the nature and extent of public relations departments’ involvement in
strategic management (Moss et al, 2000; Zerfass and Volk, 2018). Moreover, the existing theoretical or
empirical conceptualizations of strategic public relations management have emphasized different facets
of the practice, while there is a lack of holistic measurements pertaining to strategic focus that can be
applied by researchers and practitioners alike. Furthermore, existing frameworks do not take into
consideration the strategy building contribution of public relations, ignore the implementation of
emergent strategies, put less emphasis on the operational activities of public relations that help the
Int. Journal of Business Science and Applied Management / Business-and-Management.org
organizations pursue their strategic goals (Zerfass et al., 2018), and do not take into consideration the
impact of industry and environmental conditions on the degree of strategic public relations orientation.
In addition, there is a lack of studies regarding the strategic role of public relations in Southern
European countries (Valentini and Sriramesh, 2014; García, 2015) such as Greece. Although the public
relations industry has reached a stage of maturity (Papatriantafyllou, 2008), indigenous PR research has
lagged considerably behind (Theofilou and Watson, 2014).
Given the above research gaps, the aim of the present study is four-fold. First to develop a holistic
tool, that is an index, for the measurement of the strategic role of public relations through the lenses of
the strategic communication theory and strategic management of public relations. This index will
provide an alternative measurement tool used by public relations practitioners and top managers to
analyze the status of public relations departments and recognize their strategic value. Second, to
measure the strategic role of public relations by taking into consideration the most important facets of
the practice, such as the autonomy of the department, the strategic activities performed, the public
relations model, the empowerment of the function in the strategic processes of the organization,
research, evaluation, and the communication strategy. Third, to test the impact of the industry on the
strategic orientation of public relations and highlight differences in the strategic focus of public
relations departments across business sectors, and fourth to apply the proposed measurement tool to
analyze the strategic practice of public relations in Greece.
2.1. Strategic public relations/communication
To understand the practice of public relations in Greece we will draw upon the literature on
strategic communication and strategic public relations management. As Tam et al. (2022) note,
empowerment of public relations and communication in the strategic management of organizations can
enhance the strategic orientation and legitimacy performance of organizations. In the present study the
multi-faceted role of strategic public relations can be organized around four dimensions: (a) position
and purpose of public relations, (b) public relations models, (c) influence on and relationship with
senior management, and (d) planning.
2.1.1. Strategic activities and purpose
Strategic public relations should not only focus on supporting marketing communications
campaigns or communicating information about the organization to the public but also needs to
emphasize building organizational reputation, managing issues associated with social responsibility
(Gregory, 2020) and contributing to the society through philanthropic initiatives (Singh et al., 2021).
Thus, strategic public relations cultivates mutually beneficial relationships between organizations and
various strategic stakeholders, tries to avoid and eliminate the risks associated with the corporate
reputation and addresses societal issues that affect the public (Steyn, 2007). Emphasis on social
responsibility is related to the social exchange perspective (Memon and Ghani, 2020) and the reflective
dimension of European public relations, which aims among other things to analyze social trends and
adapt the organization’s strategy and value to meet these trends (Verčič et al., 2001).
Gregory (2020) also points out that in order to understand how public relations is practised one
should examine where the function of public relations is situated within an organizational structure.
Public relations will have a strategic role as an institutionalized management function located in
organizational structure that integrates and coordinates all communication functions and not be a
subordinated function to departments such as marketing or human resources (Grunig and Grunig, 1998).
Prior literature has shown that public relations in organizations is mainly a tactical function, treated as
part of the marketing department or regarded as a publicity service (Moss et al., 1996). From a
European perspective, public relations is nowadays positioned as an independent management function
within organizations under the titles “corporate communication”, “strategic communication”, or
“communication management”, in an attempt to avoid the highly criticized term 'public relations'
(Zerfass et al., 2011).
2.1.2. Public Relations Models
Strategic communication and public relations is more than the one-way communication model and
puts emphasis on two-way models (Van Ruler, 2018). According to Grunig et al. (1995) one-way
communication models such as the press agentry and public information aim at disseminating neutral
information to the public or at producing positive publicity while eliminating negative information. On
the other hand, the two-way asymmetrical model utilizes research to understand public attitudes to
influence the public in an effective way. The two-way symmetrical model focuses on research in order
Amalia Triantafillidou and Prodromos Yannas
to adapt the organizational behaviour to the public's needs and desires. Tam et al. (2022) note that the
strategic management paradigm of public relations suggests that one-way models need to co-exist with
two-way communication models that enable dialogue between the public and the organization and
foster the development of mutually beneficial relationships. Thus, it is expected that public relations
departments which are excellent and strategically managed try to inform while also listening and
responding to stakeholders (Verčič and Zerfass, 2016).
2.1.3. Influence on and relationship with senior management
Strategic communication is related to the communication efforts of an organization to fulfil its
mission (Hallahan et al., 2007, p. 3). Thus, public relations aims at conveying the corporate strategy to
important stakeholders for organizational survival (Zerfass and Volk, 2018) and communicating a set
of predefined strategic decisions (Moss and Warnaby, 1998). In this perspective, public relations align
the communication strategy with the corporate strategy and formulate communication goals to achieve
the organizational goals (Steyn and Niemann, 2014). Hence, public relations is partly strategic and in
line with the communication of strategy through the implementation of communication programs
(Zerfass et al., 2018).
Another important facet of strategic public relations lies in its contribution to organizational
strategy formulation (Van Ruler, 2020). As Verčič and Zerfass (2016) note, the contribution to strategic
management could be indirect through the advisory influence of communication managers as well as
direct by exerting executive influence. More specifically, public relations executives exercise advisory
influence when they make recommendations to senior management and act as internal consultants,
while they engage in executive influence, a more direct form, when they participate in senior
management meetings during the strategic planning process, when they shape strategic decisions at the
organizational level (Rebel and Berger, 2006) about the development of new policies, strategies,
procedures, and programs, and when they engage in discussions about major problems and issues
(Broom and Dozier, 1986). Thus, the empowerment of public relations in the strategic management of
organization can be related to (a) counselling activities through which the head of public relations helps
senior managers make more informed decisions by informing them about the reactions of the public,
communication problems and opportunities (Gregory, 2020), (b) operational activities that focus on
communicating the organizational strategy to strategic members of the public, and (c) strategic
activities, by participating in the strategic decision making processes and meetings at the organizational
level. These three types of public relations empowerment in strategic management represent a
continuum ranging from supportive, operational, to decisional and strategic (Zerfass et al., 2018).
Moreover, a strategic approach to public relations is reflected in the relationship between the head
of public relations function and the senior management. Public relations managers need to
communicate with senior management (Cardwell et al., 2017) and offer them input as boundary
spanners of the external environment either through access to the dominant coalition or maintaining a
direct relationship with the CEO or Chairperson of the organization (Tam et al., 2022). In contrast, a
tactical approach to public relations is assumed to exist when the head of public relations reports to the
marketing manager.
2.1.4. Research and Evaluation
In its basic form, strategic communication is related to the strategic communication management
(Zerfass et al., 2018). Thus, public relations/communication needs to be a carefully planned activity.
According to Steyn (2007), at the functional level, strategic public relations managers formulate and
execute public relations plans and programs. Based on the Excellence Study, public relations
departments can contribute to strategic management when they perform formal research (e.g., news
clipping) as well as informal research with key stakeholders (e.g., informal interviews) and
environmental scanning techniques (Grunig and Grunig, 2020). Moreover, effective evaluation is an
integral part of a strategic approach in public relations. Macnamara and Gregory (2018) point out that a
strategic orientation in public relations is reflected in the extent to which practitioners emphasize
organizational listening to the public by assessing the outcomes and the impact of organizational
decisions on strategic members of the public (e.g., awareness, attitudes, behaviour) besides the output
evaluation of the public relations efforts. They further note that this strategic evaluation could be
conducted through quantitative (surveys) as well as qualitative techniques (e.g., focus groups,
2.1.5. Communication Strategy
Communication strategy formulation and implementation is also an integral part of the strategic
management process of public relations. Practitioners that formulate their strategy based solely on
Int. Journal of Business Science and Applied Management / Business-and-Management.org
intuition and subjective knowledge without formal research and evaluation are not performing strategic
public relations/communication. Researchers have also pointed out that the alignment of the
communication strategy with the organizational goals as well as stakeholders’ interests is a central
element of strategic communication management (Volk and Zerfass, 2018). In general, practitioners
may choose to develop either a “prescriptive” communication strategy through ad hoc planning aligned
with organizational goals, thus contributing to the effectiveness of organizational strategy or a more
“emergent” strategy that promotes the interests of the organization and stakeholders as well (Steyn,
2007) by incorporating research of publics, environmental scanning of social issues, active listening,
and the participation of stakeholders in the formulation process (Toledano, 2018).
2.2. Industry and Public Relations
The industry/sector of an organization can shape the practice of public relations in a given country
according to its own distinct characteristics (Gregory, 2020). For example, Moss et al. (1996),
investigating the UK retail and consumer goods sector, found that public relations mainly has a product
publicity function with a strong marketing orientation. Moreover, public relations is usually practised
through one-way and two-way asymmetrical models. Valentini (2012), examining organizations in the
Italian public sector, found that public relations had an operational rather than a strategic function and
that mixed public relations models were practised. In Ghana, financial services companies emphasized
interpersonal relationships and public relations practitioners exhibited low involvement in strategic
management of their organization as they had a reporting relationship with the CEO but were not
members of the dominant coalition (Anani-Bossman and Mudzanani, 2020). In addition, they were less
likely to be advisors of the senior management. In the European Communication Monitor survey in
2019 excellent public relations departments that were likely to perform strategic public relations
originated mainly from joint-stock companies as well as non-profit organizations, while governmental
organizations exhibited the lowest scores on excellence (European Communication Monitor, 2019).
Thus, it is herein assumed that there will be cross-sectional differences with respect to the practice of
public relations in Greece.
2.3. Greek-related Literature on Public Relations
Scientific research is still in its infancy and there is a lack of studies regarding the current practice
of public relations by Greek companies (Yannas, 2004). The scant research on public relations in
Greece has focused on the history and current state of the profession (Theofilou and Watson, 2014;
Yannas, 2004), the use of the internet by public relations professionals (Kitchen and Panopoulos, 2010;
Triantafillidou and Yannas, 2014), the role of public relations managers in consumer product
companies (Panigyrakis, 2015), as well as gender-related differences of public relations practitioners
(Panigyrakis and Veloutsou, 1998; Panigyrakis and Poulis, 2009), and female public relations
professionals (Triantafillidou and Yannas, 2021).
In 1991, Anastasia Lyra conducted research regarding the practice of public relations in Greece
(Grunig et al., 1995). Results suggested that public relations practitioners were regarded as
communication technicians who mainly used the press agentry and public information models. They
did not conduct research and practised marketing public relations. In addition, the personal influence
and cultural interpreter models were more likely to be practised by public relations practitioners of
Greek organizations. Specifically, practitioners relied on their personal relationships with key contacts
such as journalists and politicians. An interesting finding of this study was that only a small percentage
of public relations practitioners were regarded as strategic managers who practised two-way
symmetrical public relations. These findings were also noted by Panigyrakis and Veloutsou (1998),
who found that public relations practitioners working for the consumer goods industries performed
mostly technical tasks like writing, editing, organizing special events, working with the media and
speaking, whereas more managerial activities like programming or researching were less frequently
practised. More recently, Triantafillidou and Yannas (2021) have reported that female public relations
managers in Greece are often underestimated by senior management in their organizations due to the
low importance they attach to the public relations function.
Before examining the way public relations in Greece is currently practised, special attention
should be paid to the broader environment in which it operates. Although the effect of the American
model of public relations is evident in the case of Greece (Theofilou and Watson, 2014) its
implementation is questionable. According to García (2014) the prevalence of small and medium-sized
companies and the high power-distance culture of Greece, which supports centralized and authoritarian
styles of organizational structure, leave no room for the practice of the two-way symmetrical model,
which requires both the public and the organization to change their behaviour in order to develop win-
win relationships. The dominance of clientelism is also another characteristic of the Greek environment
Amalia Triantafillidou and Prodromos Yannas
that has had a profound impact on the practice of excellent public relations, as practitioners tend to
focus on the cultivation of personal relationships with politicians and the media for the provision of
favours and positive media coverage (García, 2015). Hence, it is expected that public relations
departments of companies operating in Greece are not ideal candidates for strategic public relations.
To address the study’s objectives and develop a measurement tool for the strategic role in public
relations an online survey was conducted through a self-administered questionnaire to public
relations/communication practitioners of organizations in Greece.
To assess the measurement model for the strategic role of public relations an index was formulated
based on an extensive literature review which consisted of eight constructs, namely: strategic activities,
autonomy, model of public relations, level of empowerment, reporting relationship with CEO, research,
evaluation, and communication strategy (Table 1). The questions about autonomy, model of public
relations, level of empowerment, reporting relationship with CEO, and communication strategy were
developed after a careful review of previous conceptualizations of strategic public relations
management (e.g., Valentini and Sriramesh, 2014; Moss et al., 2000; Steyn, 2009; Tam et al., 2022;
Verhoeven et al., 2011; Zerfass and Volk, 2018; Zerfass et al., 2015). The items that comprised the
construct strategic activities were adapted from Hutton et al. (2001), Kim and Reber (2008), Zerfass
and Sherzada (2014), Tong and Chang (2020). The constructs of strategic research and strategic
evaluation were adapted from Anani-Bossman and Tella (2017), Zerfass et al. (2017), Xavier et al.
(2005), Gregory and Macnamara (2019).
Table 1. Variables of the Study
Measurement and Example items
Autonomy of the department
The name of the department includes terms related to
(1) Other functions
(2) Marketing
Public Relations, Communication, Corporate
Communications etc
Descriptive statistics
(frequencies), chi-
square test with
industry sector
Strategic Activities
(15 items – 5-point scales)
Building and maintaining a positive image
Supporting marketing and product promotion
Cultivating relationships with the public, such
as investors, the community, employees, NGOs,
political organizations
Communicating during crisis
Positioning the stance of the organization on
public matters
Implementing and communicating social
responsibility activities
Building relationships with media
Descriptive statistics
ean scores and
standard deviations),
exploratory factor
analysis, reliability
analysis, creation of
composite scales,
analysis of variance
with industry sectors
for each derived
Model of public relations
(1:one-way, 2: two-way
asymmetrical, 3: two-way
(one best answer question)
Indicate the answer that best described their practice
from the following list:
(1) Communication in my organization is one-way
and the organization aims mainly at informing
the public. Communication activities are
organized in such a way as to support
organizational objectives.
Communication in my organization aims at
informing the public and responding to their
questions and complaints. Communication
activities are organized in such a way as to
support organizatio
nal objectives taking into
consideration the needs of the public, and
Communication in my organization aims at
informing the public, responding to their
questions and complaints, while seeking the
public’s input, which is incorporated in
communication dec
isions and activities. The
end-goal is to co-create communication with
Descriptive statistics
(frequencies), chi-
square test with
industry sector
Int. Journal of Business Science and Applied Management / Business-and-Management.org
the public.
Level of empowerment
(1: advisory, 2: operational, 3:
(one best answer question)
Indicate which of the following three answers
describes your role in the organization:
I advise senior managers about the public's
reactions to organizational decisions,
communication problems and opportunities,
and other broad communication issues,
(2) I am responsible for the communication of the
corporate strategy and the development and
implementation of public relations and
communication programs,
(3) I contribute to the strategic decision-making
process of the organization as an active
member, propose strategies and participate in
meetings of the dominant coalition.
Descriptive statistics
(frequencies), chi-
square test with
industry sector
Reporting relationship with
senior manager
(one best answer question)
(responses 3 and 4 indicate a
more strategic focus)
Indicate which of the four answers describes your
relationship with the top management:
(1) I report to the marketing manager
I have an indirect relationship with senior
management. I mainly advise the
CEO/chairperson/senior managers about public
relations/communication issues.
(3) I have a direct reporting relationship with the
CEO or chairperson of the organization.
(4) The CEO invites me to the senior management
Descriptive statistics
(frequencies), chi-
square test with
industry sector
Strategic Research
(6 items, 5-point scales)
(1) Internet analysis
Identification of trends through secondary
(3) Content analysis of media coverage
(4) Interviews with key stakeholders
(5) Focus groups
(6) Surveys with questionnaires
Descriptive statistics
(mean scores and
ndard deviations),
analysis of variance
with industry sectors,
reliability analysis,
creation of composite
Strategic Evaluation
(6 items, 5-point scales)
(1) Web analysis and social media analytics
Output evaluation in terms of activities
(3) Out
come evaluation in terms of changes in
perceptions, attitudes, and behaviours
(4) Qualitative and quantitative techniques
Descriptive statistics
(mean scores and
standard deviations),
reliability analysis,
creation of composite
scale, analysis of
variance with industry
Communication Strategy
(1: indicates lack of strategic
focus, 2: indicates the use of a
prescriptive strategy, and 3 &
4 indicate the usage of
emergent strategies)
Indicate whether the communication strategy is
formulated based on:
(1) ideas of the public relations executives,
(2) corporate goals,
(3) corporate goals and research, and
(4) active listening to the public and exchange of
information with the public.
Descriptive statistics
(frequencies), chi-
square test with
industry sector
Participants were also asked to answer questions about their gender, age, years of experience in
public relations, the sector of their organization, the title of their department, the title of their position,
the number of the organization’s employees, and the number of employees that worked in their
A purposive sampling approach was used after developing a list of organizational emails. The list
of emails was developed by utilizing other lists such as the 200 most profitable organizations in Greece
for 2021, organizations and brands that received various business awards, organizations that were listed
in the Athens Exchange Group, organizations that were advertised in ad books. The questionnaire was
e-mailed during April 2022 to 840 Greek organizations with a notice to be completed by the head of the
public relations/communication department. In total, 75 emails were returned, and the response rate
was 8.9%, thus the representativeness of the population is not guaranteed. Similar response rates have
been observed in other studies that target public relations practitioners (e.g., Porter and Sallot, 2005;
Porter et al., 2009).
Amalia Triantafillidou and Prodromos Yannas
Table 2 shows the characteristics of the sample. Based on the findings, the majority of respondents
are female (78.7%) aged between 36 and 55 years old (73.4%). Most of the practitioners are working
for the retail and consumer goods industry and companies that sell products such as cars, motorcycles,
cosmetics, clothing, etc (28%; 21). Several practitioners are working in the services sector, which
comprises companies that offer consulting services, asset management, research and financial services
(14.7%, 11), the energy, technology and industrial manufacturing sector (13.3%, 10), the entertainment,
publications and sports sector (13.3%, 10), and in the food-beverage-hospitality sector (12%, 9). To a
lesser extent organizations from the public sector (9.3%, 7) and the logistics and transportation sector
(9.3%, 7) are represented in the sample. It should be noted that the organizations of the sample were
either Greek companies or multinational companies with a Greek branch.
Table 1. Characteristics of the Sample
Energy-technology-industrial manufacturing
Food-Beverage and Hospitality
Public sector
Entertainment, publications, and sports sector
18 to 35
Retail and consumer goods
36 to 45
46 to 55
Logistics and Transportation
More than 56
Years of Experience
Less than 5 years
Less than 49 employees (small)
6 to 10 years
50 to 249 employees (medium)
More than 11 years
More than 250 employees (large)
Department size
1 to 2 employees
3 to 10 employees
More than 11
Most of the practitioners are regarded as senior practitioners given that they had been working in
the field of public relations and communication for more than 11 years (68%). The majority of them are
working in large organizations (more than 250 employees) (52.7%) and for small public
relations/communication departments (1 to 2 employees) (52.1%).
4.1. Department Names
Table 3 shows the names of the respondents’ departments. In general, the term “marketing” was
found in the names of 26 departments, followed by the terms public relations (19 times),
communications (15 times), and corporate communications (9 times). We mainly observed three types
of departments: (a) departments that follow a marketing public relations orientation (40.5%), (b)
departments that follow a corporate public relations orientation (51.4%), and (c) departments that
integrate public relations in other departments such as the “human resources department” or the
“operations departments” (8.1%). Marketing-oriented departments are those that integrate the functions
of marketing and public relations. Most of these departments are named “marketing” (17.3%) and
“marketing and communications” (8%). Other names found were “marketing and public relations or
public relations and marketing” (4%), COM “marketing communications”, “communications and
marketing”, “corporate communications and marketing services”, “marketing communication, and
digital strategy”, “promotion and communications”, “brand and communication”, “consumer product
division”, and “commercial department”. The majority of these departments originate from the retail
and consumer goods industries and public relations acts as a supporting function of marketing
On the other hand, departments with a corporate public relations focus use names such as “public
relations” (10.7%) and “communications” (9.3%). It seems that the Greek public relations industry has
not been aligned with the European trend to abandon the term public relations and turn to the use of
Int. Journal of Business Science and Applied Management / Business-and-Management.org
other terms such as “corporate communications”. Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) influenced
the names of the departments with a corporate public relations focus. Six departments make use of the
terms “sustainability”, “CSR”, and “responsibility” along with the terms “corporate communications”
and “public relations”. Other names found to a lesser extent, were “corporate affairs” (2.7%),
“communications and public relations” (2.7%), “corporate communication” (1.3%), “communications
and public affairs” (1.3%), and “corporate communications and government relations” (1.3%).
Emphasis on media relations was also observed in five departments as they used the terms “press
office” and “media relations” in their names (5.3%). Interestingly, five departments with a corporate
public relations focus incorporate in their names the term “publications” (e.g., public relations and
publications) (5.3%). Three departments had a clear focus on external relations as they were named
“external relations” or “international and public relations" (4%). Departments with a corporate public
relations focus are popular among public organizations, and companies in the food-beverage-hospitality,
entertainment-publications-sports sectors.
Table 3. Names of Departments
Marketing Public Relations
Corporate Public Relations
Marketing (13)
Communications (7)
Marketing and Communications (6)
Communications and Public Relations (1)
Marketing and Public Relations (1)
Communications and Public Affairs (1)
Marketing Communications (1)
Corporate Communications (1)
Marketing, Communication and
Digital Strategy (1)
Corporate Communications & Sustainability
Communications and Marketing (1)
Corporate Communications and CSR (3)
Corporate Communication Marketing
Services (1)
Corporate Communications, CSR and Media
Relations (2)
Public Relations and Marketing (2)
Corporate communications and government
relations (1)
Promotion and Communications (1)
Public Relations (8)
Brand and Communications (1)
Public Relations and Press Office (1)
Consumer Product Division (1)
Public Relations and Publications (3)
Commercial (1)
Publications, Events, and Public Relations (1)
Corporate Affairs (2)
Press offices (1)
Press office, Public Relations and CSR(1)
External Relations (1)
International and Public Relations (2)
Table 1 shows that the Cronbach's Alpha score of LCOC 0.701 indicated that the LCOC variable
was reliable. Hair et al. (2014) stated that the limit for Cronbach's Alpha was 0.6. The bivariate
correlation analysis in Table 1 also suggests that the correlation between each LCOC indicator and the
total LCOC scores had a significant effect. Hence, each LCOC question indicator was valid.
4.2. Strategic Activities
A fifteen-item scale was used to measure the practice of public relations in Greece in regard to its
strategic activities for organizations. Then, an exploratory factor analysis was performed through the
principal component method and the varimax rotation in order to identify possible clusters of related
variables. Looking at the rotated component matrix we had to drop the item “promoting the
organization through social media” as it loaded high in two factors. Thus, we re-ran the factor analysis
with fourteen items. All variables had communalities above 0.4 and the factor loadings were above
0.55. Three factors emerged from the analysis capturing 64.8% of the total variance. The first factor
was named “positive publicity” (25.07% of variance) and reflected a focus towards the creation of a
positive image and downplaying negative publicity. This factor also emphasized relationships with
media as well as other groups such as the community, government, employees etc. The second factor
was named “social responsibility(21.64% of variance) and reflected the efforts of public relations to
implement social responsibility initiatives, to take a public stance, and create public awareness on
social issues. The third factor was named “marketing support” (18.12% of variance) and was associated
with public relations activities that mainly support marketing and product or services promotion
campaigns. All three factors showed high internal reliability as the Cronbach’s alpha values of all
factors were well above the 0.70 threshold (Table 4). Then, the three factors were converted to three
Amalia Triantafillidou and Prodromos Yannas
composite variables based on the average item scores of the variables that comprised each factor. To
compose the measurement tool of the strategic role of public relations these three composite factors
produced the total score of the strategic activities index.
Table 4. Results of Factor Analysis of Public Relations Practice
Positive publicity
Mean (SD) (a=0.883)
Social responsibility
Building and preserving positive image for the
Building and preserving corporate reputation
4.68 (0.64)
Communicating during crisis
4.57 (0.72)
Building relationships with media
4.55 (0.72)
Building relationships with stakeholders such as
community, government, employees, NGOs.
4.36 (0.76)
Eliminating negative publicity
4.15 (0.86)
Promoting organizational values
4.35 (0.88)
Implementing and communicating social
responsibility activities
4.32 (0.88)
Communicating initiatives with NGOs and
philanthropic organizations
3.85 (1.07)
Positioning the stance of the organization on
public matters
3.79 (0.89)
Creating public awareness on social issues (e.g.,
racism, sexual harassment, etc.)
3.57 (1.15)
Promoting the organization’s positive image
4.48 (0.66)
Identifying communication opportunities
4.27 (0.84)
Promoting products, services and supporting the
launch of new products/services
4.16 (1.00)
Supporting marketing and promotional
4.15 (0.82)
Mean scores of composite factors
4.49 (0.58)
3.97 (0.77)
4.26 (0.65)
A one-way anova was performed to test whether organizations from different industry sectors
showed similarities or differences in their mean scores for each factor. The results of the analyses of
variance showed that the industry sectors do not differ significantly (p>0.05) in their mean scores of the
positive publicity factor (F=1.537, sig=0.180). However, significant (p<0.05) differences were
observed in the mean scores of the social responsibility factor across the various industry sectors
(F=2.853, sig=0.015). In addition, the industry sectors differed significantly (p<0.05) in their mean
scores on the marketing support factor (F=3.23, sig=0.08). In general, the energy-technology-industrial
manufacturing sector and the services sector exhibited the highest scores in the positive publicity factor,
while the logistic-transportation and the retail and consumer goods sectors scored highly on the
marketing support factor. Regarding the social responsibility factor, the sectors of logistic-
transportation and energy-technology-industrial manufacturing showed the highest scores. On the other
hand, organizations from the public sector had the lowest scores on all the three factors, while the food-
beverage-hospitality sector exhibited the lowest scores on the positive publicity factor.
Int. Journal of Business Science and Applied Management / Business-and-Management.org
Figure 1. Public Relations Practice across Industry Sectors
4.3. Model of Public Relations
To understand the model of public relations that is practised by public relations practitioners of the
sample, respondents were asked to indicate which of the three models - one-way information model,
two-way asymmetrical, and two-way symmetrical - is practised more often. The results suggest that
most organizations favour the two-way asymmetrical model (49.3%) followed by the two-way
symmetrical one (30.7%). The one-way model was the least preferred model by public relations
professionals (20%).
Figure 2 shows the models utilized by each sector. Most of the industry sectors mainly utilize the
two-way asymmetrical model with the exception of the energy-technology-industrial manufacturing
sector, which makes use of the two-way symmetrical model. However, results of the chi-square test
indicate that no significant differences exist between organizations of different sectors with respect to
the public relations model that is used by practitioners (χ
=10.79, sig=0.547).
Figure 2. Public Relations Model by Industry Sector (Percentages Are Per Industry)
4.4. Empowerment and relationship with senior management
Results indicate that 13.3% of the respondents report to the marketing manager, implying that
public relations is not empowered by top management. In addition, 14.7% of practitioners report that
they act only as consultants and offer their communication advice to the CEO or members of the top
Amalia Triantafillidou and Prodromos Yannas
management in meetings. On the other hand, 45.3% or practitioners indicated that they have a direct
reporting relationship with the CEO, an indication of empowerment in the dominant coalition.
Interestingly, 26.7% act as strategic public relations managers as they report directly to the CEO and
act as communication consultants in the top management. Chi-squares tests indicated that there are no
significant differences in the role of public relations head enacted across the industry sectors. However,
it can be argued that non-strategic roles (e.g., reporting to the marketing manager) were found in
organizations from the retail and consumer goods and entertainment-publication-sports sectors. Public
relations managers of the public sector serve mainly as communication consultants. On the other hand,
more strategic roles (direct reporting to the CEO and communication consultant) were found in the
energy-technology-industrial manufacturing and logistic-transportation sectors.
We identified three main types of public relations influence and involvement in the strategic
management of organizations: (a) advising, (b) operational - implementing communication programs to
support organizational strategy, and (c) strategic-participating in strategic decision making at the
organizational level by proposing strategies and being part of the dominant coalition. Findings indicate
that public relations heads reported that they are involved in the strategic decision-making process of
the organization and thus have a strategic role (58.7%). An important number of respondents are
regarded as operational supporters and communicators of the organizational strategy as they mainly
execute communication programs to achieve the organizational goals (32%). To a lesser extent, public
relations practitioners act as advisors regarding the main communication problems and the public's
reactions to the organizational strategies (9.3%). Based on a chi-square test, no significant differences
(p<0.05) were found between the industry sectors in regard to the involvement of public relations in the
strategic management process (χ
=18.62, sig=0.098). However, it can be argued that practitioners in the
entertainment-publications-sports sector mainly function as advisors, while the retail and consumer
goods sector and the food and beverage sectors mainly implement communication programs.
Participating in the strategic decision-making process was mainly observed in organizations from the
retail and consumer goods and the energy-technology-industrial manufacturing sectors.
4.5. Strategic Research and Evaluation
Research and evaluation activities received moderate scores, suggesting that practitioners are not
utilizing research methods to a high extent to derive their objectives and evaluate their strategies (Table
5). More specifically, respondents indicated that they conduct mainly internet research (M=3.47)
followed by analysis of the media coverage (M=3.36), and research on secondary sources for the
identification of social trends (M=3.13). In regard to the evaluation methods, again, web and social
media analysis was the most preferred method (M=3.71) followed by output evaluation in terms of
public relations activities executed (M=3.08). Outcome evaluation and other more sophisticated
research techniques were utilized to a lesser extent.
Analyses of variance indicated that organizations across sectors differ only with respect to the
usage of research methods such as interviews with representatives (F=2.617, sig=0.024), focus groups
(F=2.298, sig=0.044), and the evaluation technique of web and social media analysis (F=2.353,
sig=0.040). Specifically, the logistic-transportation sectors utilized the research technique of interviews
to a higher extent, while the energy-technology-industrial manufacturing sector scored higher on the
usage of focus groups. The entertainment-publications-sports is utilizing more the evaluation method of
web and social media analysis.
Table 5. Research and Evaluation Activities
Pre-Campaign research practices
Mean Scores
Post-campaign evaluation
Mean Scores
Internet research
3.47 (1.08)
Web and social media
3.71 (112)
Content analysis of media coverage
3.36 (1.14)
Output evaluation (e.g.,
activities performed)
3.08 (1.19)
Identification of trends through
secondary sources and studies
3.13 (1.08)
Outcome evaluation in terms
changes in perceptions,
attitudes, behaviours of the
2.95 (1.18)
Interviews with key representatives
from their public
2.45 (0.99)
Qualitative or quantitative
2.88 (1.13)
Surveys through questionnaires
2.43 (1.13)
Focus groups
2.37 (1.06)
Int. Journal of Business Science and Applied Management / Business-and-Management.org
It should be noted that for the development of the measurement tool for the strategic role of public
relations, two composite scales (with averaged items) were developed, one for the research index
(Cronbach’s alpha: 0.746) and one for the evaluation index (Cronbach’s alpha: 0.813).
4.6. Communication Strategy
Further, the study addressed the way the communication strategy is formulated by practitioners in
order to shed more light on the strategic role of public relations and the prevalence of prescriptive
versus emergent strategies. The findings suggest that only 9.3% of respondents are shaping their
communication strategies without a strategic focus and based on subjective knowledge and ideas from
executives. On the other hand, 41.3% of practitioners design their strategy based on organizational
goals and objectives indicating an operational focus that aims at prescriptive strategy communication.
20% of respondents formulate their communication strategy by considering organizational goals along
with results from research activities. Almost one third (29.3%) of respondents are designing emerging
strategies through active listening and exchange of ideas with relevant publics. Chi-square tests indicate
that there are no differences across sectors in the way that practitioners design their communication
strategies (χ2=12.48, sig=0.821). However, it can be noted that although practitioners of most sectors
are designing their strategy based on corporate goals, the sector of entertainment-publication-sports
mainly utilizes input from ideas of public relations executives while active listening is employed by
practitioners of sectors such as logistics-transportation and services.
4.7. Overall Measurement Tool for the Strategic Role of Public Relations
To develop the overall index for the strategic role of public relations, the eight constructs [i.e.,
autonomy, strategic activities (mean scores), public relations model, empowerment in strategic
management, reporting relationship with CEO, research (mean score), evaluation (mean score), and
communication strategy] were summed. The scores of the overall index for each organization had a
range between 7 and 31.
The average score of the overall index for the organizations of the sample was 21.74 (SD=3.36).
The top two organizations with the highest score in the strategic role of public relations originated from
the sectors of energy-technology-industrial manufacturing (M=29.42) and logistic-transportation
(27.97). These two public relations functions are medium-sized autonomous departments and originate
from large companies which mainly perform strategic activities related to publicity and social
responsibility and to a lesser extent support marketing activities. They also employ the two-way
symmetrical model, are empowered in strategic management processes, have a direct reporting
relationship with the CEO and are invited to top management meetings, and implement emergent
strategies. Interestingly, these departments did not exhibit higher scores in terms of research and
evaluation compared to the other departments of the sample.
Concerning the different sectors, the results of analysis of variance suggest that the different
industries do differ significantly (p<0.05) in their overall strategic scores (F=1.640, sig=0.150).
However, as Figure 3 shows, the energy-technology-industrial manufacturing sector (M=23.93,
SD=2.57) and the logistics and transportation sector (M=23.09, SD=3.58) performed better in terms of
their strategic orientation in public relations.
Figure 3. Overall Index of The Strategic Role of Public Relations Across Industries
Amalia Triantafillidou and Prodromos Yannas
The present study has tried to shed light on the nature and extent of strategic public relations
practice in Greece as well as develop a holistic overall measurement tool for the assessment of the
strategic role of the public relations function. The impact of the industry on the strategic focus of public
relations was also examined.
Findings suggest that almost half of the public relations departments are autonomous functions.
On the positive side, the assessment of the overall strategic focus of the public relations functions of the
sample revealed that practitioners exhibited a considerable amount of strategic orientation driven by
satisfactory levels of empowerment in the strategic management of organizations and involvement in
decision-making. Although public relations practitioners seem to have “a seat at the table” their input in
the organizational strategy formulation is far from strategic given that it is not driven by formal and
informal research and outcome evaluation methods since they place emphasis on tactical web analysis
and social media metrics to assess their performance without really engaging in active listening and
assessment of the true outcome of public relations.
Concerning the strategic activities of the Greek public relations function, results suggest that they
focus on inbound (positive publicity) and outbound activities (marketing support) (Verhoeven et al.,
2011). Social responsibility activities which capture the most strategic and reflective role of public
relations were embraced to a minor degree. The public relations practitioners of the sample utilize
mainly two-way asymmetrical communication models and employ prescriptive communication
strategies to support organizational goals. However, a closer look at the results suggests that
practitioners' strategic way of supporting organizational goals takes two forms: (a) strategic advising
and counselling of top managers as practitioners have access to the decision-making process but exhibit
a low level process without though engaging in boundary spanning or being reflective of their
observations, and (b) operationally supporting organizational strategy (Verčič and Zerfass, 2016) by
employing two-way asymmetrical communication and prescriptive strategies. The above findings could
be attributed to several reasons. Practitioners might be lacking the knowledge or might have limited
resources to design and conduct research and thus evaluate the outcome of their strategies. Failing to do
so holds them back from becoming strategic facilitators and enhancing the status of their
communication unit. This finding confirms the arguments of Macnamara and Zerfass (2017) that the
“lack of rigorous measurement and evaluation of PR is paradoxical given that the field of practice is
growing rapidly and allegedly becoming increasingly professionalized” (p. 322).
The present study enriches our limited knowledge about the practice of public relations in Greece
by also contributing to the literature about strategic communication and strategic management of public
relations. The present study has several theoretical implications. First, the strategic focus of public
relations/communication was assessed using alternative measures compared to existing studies such as
the Excellence Study (Grunig et al., 2002) that do not effectively capture the practice of public relations
in non-American contexts. The proposed framework developed an overall measurement tool for the
strategic focus of public relations by assessing: the strategic activities of public relations; the autonomy
of the function, the model of public relations; the empowerment in strategic decision making, the
reporting relationship with the CEO, the research and evaluation activities; and the communication
Second, the present study adds to the scant literature regarding the extent to which public relations
are managed in a strategic way and contribute in a strategic manner to organizations in the Greek
context. While the data collected do not allow us to generalize regarding the public relations practice in
Greece, some initial findings were observed. Greek practitioners are not isolated experts on
communication in organizations but enact strategic roles such as advisors of the top management for
strategy formulation issues and operational supporters of the enterprise strategy by implementing
mainly prescriptive communication strategies.
Third, the study sheds light on differences that might exist across the different sectors in a given
country in regard to the strategic focus of public relations. Until now, most studies have focused on
analyzing public relations in one industry/sector (e.g., Moss et al., 1996; Valentini, 2021; Anani-
Bossman and Mudzanani, 2020). Findings indicate that there are no major significant differences
across sectors, and that there might be a homogeneity in the practice of public relations across
organizations of various industries. However, it was found that several sectors showed a more strategic
focus compared to others. For example, of all the industry sectors the energy-technology-industrial
manufacturing sector along with the logistics-transportation one exhibited the highest scores in most
strategic aspects. This finding corroborates the arguments of Moss et al. (2000), who suggested that
public relations departments working for organizations in highly competitive industries or in politically
influenced environments show a strong strategic focus to achieve competitive advantage and have an
Int. Journal of Business Science and Applied Management / Business-and-Management.org
impact on the political decisions. On the other hand, managers from the public sector are practising
public relations mainly in a non-strategic manner.
Several practical implications could be derived from the present study. The overall measurement
model of the strategic role of public relations can be used a tool for public relations managers to assess
their strategic orientation and demonstrate their value to top managers. It is herein proposed that public
relations practitioners need to provide strategic input to the organizational decision-making process by
gathering intelligence, conducting environmental scanning, formal and informal research, emphasizing
organizational listening and evaluating their efforts on an outcome basis. Only if practitioners offer
advice and input that is research-driven can they create value for the organization. In addition,
practitioners need to implement two-way symmetrical models of communication to a greater degree
and intensify the employment of emergent communication strategies that consider the needs and
desires of stakeholders and adapt the communication policy to them. Public relations practitioners in
Greece need to increase the reflective and societal focus of their practice by implementing social
responsibility campaigns and working closely with various societal groups. A strategic turn in the
public relations of the public sector in Greece is imperative even though bureaucratic obstacles stand in
the way.
The main limitations of the present study stem from the low response rate and the lack of
generalizability of the results to all organizations in Greece. According to Baruch and Brooks (2018),
the low response rate could be attributed to factors that researchers cannot control or the inability of the
survey to reach the target audiences since the majority of the emails were sent to generic email
addresses of organizations. As Anani-Bossman and Mudzanani (2020) argue, the purpose of the study
was not to generalize results but to “explore meaning and gain insight into an issue rarely studied” in
Greece (p. 546) and to create a diversified sample that includes organizations of various sectors.
Future research could replicate the method of the present study to assess the practice of public
relations in other countries of Southern Europe with similar cultural characteristics to Greece. The
study could be expanded to include the views of executives that work in public relations agencies
regarding the strategic orientation of their practices. The impact of variables such as environmental
uncertainty, role ambiguity and role conflict on the strategic focus of public relations could also yield
additional fruitful insights.
Anani-Bossman, A. A. (2021). An exploration of strategic public relations management in Ghana.
Public Relations Inquiry, 10(1), 73-96.
Anani-Bossman, A. A., & Tella, F. (2017). The use of research by public relations practitioners: A
study of selected organisations in Ghana. Communicare: Journal for Communication Sciences in
Southern Africa, 36(2), 55-74.
Anani-Bossman, A., & Mudzanani, T. E. (2020). Towards a framework for public relations practice in
the financial services sector of Ghana. Corporate Communications: An International Journal,
25(3): 533-550.
Baruch, Y., & Holtom, B. C. (2008). Survey response rate levels and trends in organizational research.
Human relations, 61(8), 1139-1160.
Bowen, S. A. (2006). Autonomy in communication: Inclusion in strategic management and ethical
decision‐making, a comparative case analysis. Journal of Communication Management, 10(4):
Broom, G. M., & Dozier, D. M. (1986). Advancement for public relations role models. Public
Relations Review, 12(1), 37-56.
Cardwell, L. A., Williams, S., & Pyle, A. (2017). Corporate public relations dynamics: Internal vs.
external stakeholders and the role of the practitioner. Public Relations Review, 43(1), 152-162.
European Communication Monitor (2019), http://www.communicationmonitor.eu/wp-
Amalia Triantafillidou and Prodromos Yannas
García, C. (2014). Clientelism and guanxi: Southern European and Chinese public relations in
comparative perspective. Public Relations Review, 40(5), 798-806.
García, C. (2015). PR, clientelism and economics: a comparison of southern Europe and Latin
America. Journal of Communication Management, 19(2), 133-149.
Gregory, A. (2020). Planning and managing public relations campaigns: A strategic approach. Kogan
Page Publishers.
Gregory, A., & Macnamara, J. (2019). An evaluation u-turn: From narrow organisational objectives to
broad accountability. Public Relations Review, 45(5), 1-12.
Grunig, J. E., & Grunig, L. A. (2000). Public relations in strategic management and strategic
management of public relations: Theory and evidence from the IABC Excellence project.
Journalism Studies, 1(2), 303-321.
Grunig, J. E., Grunig, L. A., Sriramesh, K., Huang, Y. H., & Lyra, A. (1995). Models of public
relations in an international setting. Journal of Public Relations Research, 7(3), 163-186.
Grunig, J., & Grunig, L. (1998), The relationship between public relations and marketing in excellence
organizations: Evidence from the IABC study, Journal of Marketing Communications, 4, 141-162.
Grunig, L. A., Grunig, J. E., & Dozier, D. M. (2002). Excellent public relations and effective
organizations: A study of communication management in three countries. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence
Erlbaum Associates, Inc.
Hallahan, K., Holtzhausen, D., Van Ruler, B., Verčič, D., & Sriramesh, K. (2007). Defining strategic
communication. International Journal of Strategic Communication, 1(1), 3-35.
Hutton, J. G., Goodman, M. B., Alexander, J. B., & Genest, C. M. (2001). Reputation management: the
new face of corporate public relations?. Public Relations Review, 27(3), 247-261.
Kim, S. Y., & Reber, B. H. (2008). Public relations’ place in corporate social responsibility:
Practitioners define their role. Public Relations Review, 34(4), 337-342.
Kitchen, P. J., & Panopoulos, A. (2010). Online public relations: The adoption process and innovation
challenge, a Greek example. Public Relations Review, 36(3), 222-229.
Lim, S., Goh, J., & Sriramesh, K. (2005). Applicability of the generic principles of excellent public
relations in a different cultural context: The case study of Singapore. Journal of Public Relations
Research, 17(4), 315-340.
Macnamara, J., & Gregory, A. (2018). Expanding evaluation to progress strategic communication:
Beyond message tracking to open listening. International Journal of Strategic Communication,
12(4), 469-486.
Macnamara, J., & Zerfass, A. (2017). Evaluation stasis continues in PR and corporate communication:
Asia-Pacific insights into causes. Communication Research and Practice, 3(4), 319-334.
Memon, K. R., Ghani, B., & Khalid, S. (2020). The relationship between corporate social responsibility
and employee engagement-A social exchange perspective. International Journal of Business
Science & Applied Management, 15(1), 1-16.
Moss, D., & Warnaby, G. (1998). Communications strategy? Strategy communication? Integrating
different perspectives. Journal of Marketing Communications, 4(3), 131-140.
Moss, D., Warnaby, G., & Newman, A. J. (2000). Public relations practitioner role enactment at the
senior management level within UK companies. Journal of Public Relations Research, 12(4), 277-
Moss, D., Warnaby, G., & Thame, L. (1996). Tactical publicity or strategic relationship management?
An exploratory investigation of the role of public relations in the UK retail sector. European
Journal of Marketing, 30(12), 69-84.
Panigyrakis, G. G. (2015). The role of Public Relations Managers in Consumer PRODUCTS
Companies in Great Britain, Ireland, France and Greece: A Comparison Study of Demographic
Individual Characteristics and Job-Related Attitudes. In Proceedings of the 1994 Academy of
Marketing Science (AMS) Annual Conference (pp. 167-173). Springer, Cham.
Panigyrakis, G. G., & Poulis, A. G. (2009). Men and women as public relation managers in Greece and
Turkey: a comparison study of background variables, job-related factors and activities. EuroMed
Journal of Business, 4(3), 287-303.
Panigyrakis, G. G., & Veloutsou, C. A. (1998). Sex-related differences of public relations managers in
consumer goods companies in Greece and Italy. Women in Management Review, 13(2), 72-82.
Int. Journal of Business Science and Applied Management / Business-and-Management.org
Papatriantafyllou, G. (2008), Προγράμματα δημοσίων σχέσεων: Στρατηγική και εκτέλεση [Public
relations programs: Strategy and execution], Stamoulis Publishers, Athens, Greece.
Porter, L. V., & Sallot, L. M. (2005). Web power: a survey of practitioners’ World Wide Web use and
their perceptions of its effects on their decision-making power. Public Relations Review, 31(1),
Porter, L., Sweetser, K., & Chung, D. (2009). The blogosphere and public relations: Investigating
practitioners' roles and blog use. Journal of Communication Management, 13(3): 250-267.
Reber, B. H., & Berger, B. K. (2006). Finding influence: examining the role of influence in public
relations practice. Journal of Communication Management, 10(3): 235-249.
Rhee, Y. (2002). Global public relations: A cross-cultural study of the excellence theory in South
Korea. Journal of Public Relations Research, 14(3), 159-184.
Singh, K. S. D., Abbasi, M. A., Abbasi, G. A., Amran, A., & Ahmed, E. R. (2021). Contemporary CSR
Model: Conceptualization, scale development, and validation to measure consumer
perceptions. International Journal of Business Science and Applied Management, 16(3), 63-85.
Steyn, B. (2007). Contribution of public relations to organizational strategy formulation. In E. L. Toth
(Ed.), The future of excellence in public relations and communication management. Challenges
for the next generation (pp. 137-72). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Steyn, B. (2009). The strategic role of public relations is strategic reflection: A South African research
stream. American Behavioral Scientist, 53(4), 516-532.
Steyn, B., & Niemann, L. (2014). Strategic role of public relations in enterprise strategy, governance
and sustainabilityA normative framework. Public Relations Review, 40(2), 171-183.
Tam, L., Kim, J. N., Grunig, J. E., Hall, J. A., & Swerling, J. (2022). In search of communication
excellence: Public relations’ value, empowerment, and structure in strategic management. Journal
of Marketing Communications, 28(2), 183-206.
Theofilou, A., & Watson, T. (2014). The history of public relations in Greece from 1950 to 1980:
Professionalization of the “art”. Public Relations Review, 40(4), 700-706.
Toledano, M. (2018). Dialogue, strategic communication, and ethical public relations: Lessons from
Martin Buber’s political activism. Public Relations Review, 44(1), 131-141.
Tong, S. C., & Chan, F. F. Y. (2020). Exploring market-oriented relations in the digital era: A study of
public relations and marketing practitioners in Hong Kong. Journal of Communication
Management, 24(1): 65-82.
Triantafillidou, A., & Yannas, P. (2014). How public relations agencies in Greece respond to digital
trends. Public Relations Review, 40(5), 815-817.
Triantafillidou, A., & Yannas, P. (2021). Women in Public Relations in Greece. EUPRERA Report 3
(2)., in - Topić, M. (ed), EUPRERA report series. Leeds/Brussels: Creative Media and
Communications Research Ltd. & EUPRERA. ISSN 2633-2353.
Valentini, C. (2013). Public relations in the public sector. The role of strategic communication in the
Italian public administration. Sinergie Italian Journal of Management, 31(Sep-Dec), 93-113.
Valentini, C., & Sriramesh, K. (2014). To be, or not to be: Paradoxes in strategic public relations in
Italy. Public Relations Review, 40(1), 3-13.
Van Ruler, B. (2018). Communication theory: An underrated pillar on which strategic communication
rests. International Journal of Strategic Communication, 12(4), 367-381.
Van Ruler, B. (2020). An underrated pillar on which strategic communication rests. In Nothhaft, H.,
Werder, K. P., Verčič, D., & Zerfass, A. (Eds.)., Future Directions of Strategic Communication,
Routledge, New York.
Verčič, D., & Zerfass, A. (2016). A comparative excellence framework for communication
management. Journal of Communication Management, 20(4), 270-288.
Verčič, D., Van Ruler, B., Bütschi, G., & Flodin, B. (2001). On the definition of public relations: A
European view. Public Relations Review, 27(4), 373-387.
Verhoeven, P., Zerfass, A., & Tench, R. (2011). Strategic orientation of communication professionals
in Europe. International Journal of Strategic Communication, 5(2), 95-117.
Volk, S. C., & Zerfass, A. (2018). Alignment: Explicating a key concept in strategic communication.
International Journal of Strategic Communication, 12(4), 433-451.
Amalia Triantafillidou and Prodromos Yannas
Xavier, R., Johnston, K., Patel, A., Watson, T., & Simmons, P. (2005). Using evaluation techniques
and performance claims to demonstrate public relations impact: An Australian perspective. Public
Relations Review, 31(3), 417-424.
Yannas, P. (2004), Greece, In B. Van Ruler, D. Verčič (Eds.), Public relations and communication
management in Europe, Mouton de Gruyter, Berlin, pp. 169-184.
Zerfass, A., & Sherzada, M. (2015). Corporate communications from the CEO’s perspective: How top
executives conceptualize and value strategic communication. Corporate Communications: An
International Journal, 20(3): 291-301.
Zerfass, A., & Volk, S. C. (2018). How communication departments contribute to corporate success:
The communications contributions framework. Journal of Communication Management, 22(4):
Zerfass, A., Verčič, D., & Volk, S. C. (2017). Communication evaluation and measurement: Skills,
practices and utilization in European organizations. Corporate communications: An International
Journal. 22(1): 2-18.
Zerfass, A., Verčič, D., Nothhaft, H., & Werder, K. P. (2018). Strategic communication: Defining the
field and its contribution to research and practice. International Journal of Strategic
Communication, 12(4), 487-505.
Zerfass, A., Verhoeven, P., Tench, R., Moreno, A., & Verčič, D. (2011). European Communication
Monitor 2011. Empirical insights into strategic communication in Europe. Results of an empirical
survey in 43 countries. Brussels, Belgium: EACD, EUPRERA.