An Intertwined Future: Exploring the Relationship between the Levels of Professionalization and Social Roles of Public Relations Professionals
This article by Juan-Carlos Molleda originally appeared on the Institute for PR on Nov. 2, 2015
Looking towards the future of public relations, Richard Edelman (2011) stated that viability relied on the urgency and ability of professionals to adapt to the evolving roles of the practice. To address the evolving requirements of the industry, this study expounds upon two important topics of professionalization and social roles in public relations scholarship. J.E. Grunig and Hunt (1984) outlined two core professional values that are important for public relations work: respect for society and a common code of ethics. In the practice and study of public relations, the relationship between the levels of professionalization and social roles of professionals could help to further define the future of the public relations profession.
Over four decades, professionalization has been a core construct of public relations scholarship. This study uses the construct of levels of professionalization in public relations (as a sector of the labor market), instead of the professional orientation of who are in charge of the function in organizations and agencies, which has been the focus of most studies since the 1970s (J.E. Grunig, 1976; Nayman, McKee, & Lattimore, 1977; Wright, 1979). The connection between public relations and its social role has been frequently articulated in public relations literature. Scholars have long since claimed that public relations and social responsibility are not separate activities and, therefore, should not be evaluated separately (L’Etang, 1994). J.E. Grunig and Hunt (1984) stated that “public, or social, responsibility has become a major reason for an organization to have a public relations function, because the public relations professional can act as an ombudsman for the public inside the corporation” (p. 48). Based on the conceptualization of professionalization and social roles, and the relation between the two, we tested a model hypothesizing the relationship between the levels of professionalization and social roles of professionals: (H1a) institutionalization is positively associated with internal social roles of practitioners; (H1b) institutionalization is positively associated with external social roles of practitioners; (H2a) market-driven values is positively associated with internal social roles of practitioners; (H2b) market-driven values is positively associated with external social roles of practitioners; (H3a) specialization is positively associated with internal social roles of practitioners; (H3b) specialization is positively associated with external social roles of practitioners.
