Redirecting to http://dergipark.org.tr/_fragment?_hash=S-h_Qusef8C8y6AZ5CfaFGJth2J6MKjSL7pKew0Vg0I&_path=id%3D373224%26_format%3Dhtml%26_locale%3Dtr%26_controller%3DApp%255CController%255CSite%255CArticleController%253A%253AesiArticleStats.
Araştırma Makalesi
BibTex RIS Kaynak Göster

Halkla İlişkilerde Karar Alım Süreçlerine Etki Eden Faktörlerin Bilişsel Haritalama Yöntemi ile Değerlendirilmesi

Yıl 2017, Sayı: 27, 33 - 56, 29.12.2017

Aslı İcil Tuncer M.Umut Tuncer

https://doi.org/10.16878/gsuilet.373224

Öz

Bu araştırma, ortamın halkla ilişkiler kararlarını nasıl etkilediğini açıklamak için teorik ve ampirik bir çerçeve çizme amacındadır. Böylece, halkla ilişkiler uygulamalarını etkileyen faktörleri tartışmayı, bu faktörler arasındaki ilişkileri açıklamayı ve halkla ilişkilerde alınan kararların çıkış noktalarını keşfetmeyi hedeflemiştir. Araştırmada Brand Finance’ın hazırladığı Türkiye’nin en değerli 100 markası listesinde yer alan şirketlerin halkla ilişkiler uygulayıcıları ile yüzyüze görüşmeler gerçekleştirilmiştir. Bilişsel haritalama yöntemi ile, halkla ilişkiler kararlarına etki eden faktörlerin merkeziyet dereceleri ve yoğunlukları analiz edilmiş, bilişsel haritalama şablonu ve komşuluk matrisi oluşturulmuştur. Sonuçlara göre halkla ilişkiler kararlarında makro ortamdan daha ziyade iç ortamdaki faktörler, özellikle karar alıcılar ve maliyet faktörleri öncelenmektedir. Öte yandan sosyal medya ve ülke gündemlerinin halkla ilişkiler kararlarında önemli bir etkiye sahip olduğu gözlenmiştir.

Anahtar Kelimeler

halkla ilişkiler karar alımı bilişsel harita ortam halkla ilişkiler uygulayıcısı

Kaynakça

  • Agor, W.H. (1989). Intuition and Strategic Planning: How Organisation Can Make Productive Decisions. The Futurist, 23, 20-23.
  • Alkhafaji, A.F. (2003). Strategic Management: Formulation, Implementation, and Control in a Dynamic Environment. New York: Haworth.
  • Botan, C. H., Taylor, M. (2004). Public Relations: State of The Field. Journal of Communication, 54, 645–661.
  • Bowen, S.A, (2004). Organizational Factors Encouranging Ethical Decision Making: an Exploration into The Case of An Exemplar. Journal of Business Ethics, 52, 311-324.
  • Bowen A.S. (2008). A State of Neglect: Public Relations as ‘Corporate Conscience’ or Ethics Counsel, Journal of Public Relations Research, 20(3), 271-296.
  • Bowen Shannon A. (2006). Autonomy in Communication: Inclusion in Strategic Management and Ethical Decision-Making. A Comparative Case Analysis. Journal of Communication Management, 10(4), 330-352.
  • Broom, G.M., Dozier, D.M. (1985). Determinants and Consequences of Public Relations Roles. Paper presented at the meeting of the Association for Education in Journalism and Mass Communication, Memphis, TN. Broom, G. M., Dozier, D. M. (1986). Advancement for Public Relations Role Models, Public Relations Review, 12, 37–56.
  • Byrd, S. (2012). Hi Fans! Tell Us Your Story!: Incorporating A Stewardship Based Social Media Strategy To Maintain Brand Reputation During A Crisis, Corporate Communications: An International Journal, 17(3), 241-254.
  • Center, A.H., Jackson, P. (1995). Public Relation Practices: Management Case Studies and Problems (5.Baskı). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
  • Chao, E.J. (2017). Core Corporate Strategic Capabilities: Role of Corporate Capabilities, Integrity, Institutions, and Implications Toward Sustainable Corporate Reputation and Performance. In: Campbell C.L. (Ed.), The Customer is NOT Always Right? Marketing Orientationsin a Dynamic Business World içinde (759-859). New York: Springer.
  • Chen, M.C., Nguyen, B., Melewar, T.C., Dennis C. (2017). Investigating the Uses of Corporate Reputation and Its Effects on Brand Segmentation, Brand Differentiation, and Brand Positioning: Evidence from the Taiwanese Pharmaceutical Industry, International Studies of Management & Organization, 47(3), 240-257.
  • Clarkson, G.P., Hodgkinson G.P. (2005). Introducing CognizerTM: A Comprehensive Computer Package for The Elicitation and Analysis of Cause Maps. Organizational Research Methods, 8(3), 317-341.

Évaluation des facteurs affectant les processus de prise de décision en relations publiques par la méthode de cartographie cognitive

Yıl 2017, Sayı: 27, 33 - 56, 29.12.2017

Aslı İcil Tuncer M.Umut Tuncer

https://doi.org/10.16878/gsuilet.373224

Öz

Cette recherche vise à établir un cadre théorique et empirique pour expliquer comment l'environnement affecte les décisions de relations publiques. Ainsi, il vise à discuter les facteurs qui affectent les pratiques de relations publiques, à expliquer les relations entre ces facteurs et à explorer les points d'origine des décisions prises dans les relations publiques. Dans le cadre de la recherche, des les praticiens des relations publiques des entreprises figurant sur la liste des 100 marques les plus précieuses de Turquie, préparée par Brand Finance, ont été interviewés. Avec la méthode de cartographie cognitive, les ratios de centralité et les densités de facteurs affectant les décisions de relations publiques ont été analysés, le modèle de cartographie cognitive et la matrice de voisinage ont été formés. Selon les résultats, dans les décisions de relations publiques, les facteurs internes, en particulier les décideurs et les facteurs de coût, sont plus importants que le macro-environnement. D'un autre côté, il a été observé que les médias sociaux et les agendas des pays ont une influence importante sur les décisions de relations publiques.

Anahtar Kelimeler

relations publiques prise de décision carte cognitive environnement praticiens des relations publiques

Kaynakça

  • Agor, W.H. (1989). Intuition and Strategic Planning: How Organisation Can Make Productive Decisions. The Futurist, 23, 20-23.
  • Alkhafaji, A.F. (2003). Strategic Management: Formulation, Implementation, and Control in a Dynamic Environment. New York: Haworth.
  • Botan, C. H., Taylor, M. (2004). Public Relations: State of The Field. Journal of Communication, 54, 645–661.
  • Bowen, S.A, (2004). Organizational Factors Encouranging Ethical Decision Making: an Exploration into The Case of An Exemplar. Journal of Business Ethics, 52, 311-324.
  • Bowen A.S. (2008). A State of Neglect: Public Relations as ‘Corporate Conscience’ or Ethics Counsel, Journal of Public Relations Research, 20(3), 271-296.
  • Bowen Shannon A. (2006). Autonomy in Communication: Inclusion in Strategic Management and Ethical Decision-Making. A Comparative Case Analysis. Journal of Communication Management, 10(4), 330-352.
  • Broom, G.M., Dozier, D.M. (1985). Determinants and Consequences of Public Relations Roles. Paper presented at the meeting of the Association for Education in Journalism and Mass Communication, Memphis, TN. Broom, G. M., Dozier, D. M. (1986). Advancement for Public Relations Role Models, Public Relations Review, 12, 37–56.
  • Byrd, S. (2012). Hi Fans! Tell Us Your Story!: Incorporating A Stewardship Based Social Media Strategy To Maintain Brand Reputation During A Crisis, Corporate Communications: An International Journal, 17(3), 241-254.
  • Center, A.H., Jackson, P. (1995). Public Relation Practices: Management Case Studies and Problems (5.Baskı). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
  • Chao, E.J. (2017). Core Corporate Strategic Capabilities: Role of Corporate Capabilities, Integrity, Institutions, and Implications Toward Sustainable Corporate Reputation and Performance. In: Campbell C.L. (Ed.), The Customer is NOT Always Right? Marketing Orientationsin a Dynamic Business World içinde (759-859). New York: Springer.
  • Chen, M.C., Nguyen, B., Melewar, T.C., Dennis C. (2017). Investigating the Uses of Corporate Reputation and Its Effects on Brand Segmentation, Brand Differentiation, and Brand Positioning: Evidence from the Taiwanese Pharmaceutical Industry, International Studies of Management & Organization, 47(3), 240-257.
  • Clarkson, G.P., Hodgkinson G.P. (2005). Introducing CognizerTM: A Comprehensive Computer Package for The Elicitation and Analysis of Cause Maps. Organizational Research Methods, 8(3), 317-341.

Evaluation of Factors Affecting Public Relations Decision Making Processes by Cognitive Mapping Method

Yıl 2017, Sayı: 27, 33 - 56, 29.12.2017

Aslı İcil Tuncer M.Umut Tuncer

https://doi.org/10.16878/gsuilet.373224

Öz

This research aims to draw a theoretical and empirical framework for explaining how the environment affects public relations decisions. Thus, it aims to discuss the factors that affect the public relations practices, to explain the relations between these factors and to explore the points of origin of the decisions taken in public relations. In the research, public relations practitioners of the companies that are on the list of Turkey’s 100 most valuable brands prepared by Brand Finance were interviewed. With cognitive mapping method, centrality ratios and densities of factors affecting public relations decisions were analysed, cognitive mapping template and neighbourhood matrix were formed. According to the results, in the decisions of public relations, the internal factors, especially the decision makers and the cost factors, are more prevalent than the macro environment. On the other hand, it has been observed that social media and country agendas have an important influence on public relations decisions.

Anahtar Kelimeler

public relations decision making cognitive map environment public relations practitioners

Kaynakça

  • Agor, W.H. (1989). Intuition and Strategic Planning: How Organisation Can Make Productive Decisions. The Futurist, 23, 20-23.
  • Alkhafaji, A.F. (2003). Strategic Management: Formulation, Implementation, and Control in a Dynamic Environment. New York: Haworth.
  • Botan, C. H., Taylor, M. (2004). Public Relations: State of The Field. Journal of Communication, 54, 645–661.
  • Bowen, S.A, (2004). Organizational Factors Encouranging Ethical Decision Making: an Exploration into The Case of An Exemplar. Journal of Business Ethics, 52, 311-324.
  • Bowen A.S. (2008). A State of Neglect: Public Relations as ‘Corporate Conscience’ or Ethics Counsel, Journal of Public Relations Research, 20(3), 271-296.
  • Bowen Shannon A. (2006). Autonomy in Communication: Inclusion in Strategic Management and Ethical Decision-Making. A Comparative Case Analysis. Journal of Communication Management, 10(4), 330-352.
  • Broom, G.M., Dozier, D.M. (1985). Determinants and Consequences of Public Relations Roles. Paper presented at the meeting of the Association for Education in Journalism and Mass Communication, Memphis, TN. Broom, G. M., Dozier, D. M. (1986). Advancement for Public Relations Role Models, Public Relations Review, 12, 37–56.
  • Byrd, S. (2012). Hi Fans! Tell Us Your Story!: Incorporating A Stewardship Based Social Media Strategy To Maintain Brand Reputation During A Crisis, Corporate Communications: An International Journal, 17(3), 241-254.
  • Center, A.H., Jackson, P. (1995). Public Relation Practices: Management Case Studies and Problems (5.Baskı). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
  • Chao, E.J. (2017). Core Corporate Strategic Capabilities: Role of Corporate Capabilities, Integrity, Institutions, and Implications Toward Sustainable Corporate Reputation and Performance. In: Campbell C.L. (Ed.), The Customer is NOT Always Right? Marketing Orientationsin a Dynamic Business World içinde (759-859). New York: Springer.
  • Chen, M.C., Nguyen, B., Melewar, T.C., Dennis C. (2017). Investigating the Uses of Corporate Reputation and Its Effects on Brand Segmentation, Brand Differentiation, and Brand Positioning: Evidence from the Taiwanese Pharmaceutical Industry, International Studies of Management & Organization, 47(3), 240-257.
  • Clarkson, G.P., Hodgkinson G.P. (2005). Introducing CognizerTM: A Comprehensive Computer Package for The Elicitation and Analysis of Cause Maps. Organizational Research Methods, 8(3), 317-341.
Toplam 12 adet kaynakça vardır.

Ayrıntılar

Bölüm Makaleler
Yazarlar

Aslı İcil Tuncer

M.Umut Tuncer

Yayımlanma Tarihi 29 Aralık 2017
Yayımlandığı Sayı Yıl 2017 Sayı: 27

Kaynak Göster

APA Tuncer, A. İ., & Tuncer, M. (2017). Halkla İlişkilerde Karar Alım Süreçlerine Etki Eden Faktörlerin Bilişsel Haritalama Yöntemi ile Değerlendirilmesi. Galatasaray Üniversitesi İletişim Dergisi(27), 33-56. https://doi.org/10.16878/gsuilet.373224
 Kapak Resmi İndir

Creative Commons Lisansı TRDizinlogo_live-e1586763957746.png