Adelaide University

Report on Australian and New Zealand Communication Association Conference, 5-7 July 2006.

Report by Kate Fitch, Lecturer in Mass Communication (Public Relations), Murdoch University, Western Australia.

The ANZCA 2006 conference at the University of Adelaide offered a wealth of research and ideas on many aspects of communication. Of the eight papers in the public relations stream, four came from one institution, the Queensland University of Technology (QUT). All credit goes to QUT for their sustained research output, and for their encouragement and mentoring of postgraduate students through co-authorship of papers.

However, where is everyone else? We missed the diversity of approaches and critical engagement with public relations practice and theory offered at last year’s conference. ANZCA gives public relations academics the opportunity to share ideas and scholarship with other academics in many related areas of communication and, arguably, the chance to confirm public relations’ status as an academic discipline.

With four parallel sessions over three days, I cannot comment on all papers at the conference. So, the following is a highly subjective report on some of the sessions I did attend, with apologies to the many I missed.

Deakin University’s Steve Mackey addressed the growing use of rhetorical theory in public relations scholarship with an erudite and entertaining plea for public relations scholars to develop a proper understanding of rhetorical tradition and its heir, public relations. Mackey argues that rhetoric – and consequently public relations – has a tarnished reputation because of modernist trends towards empirical and positivist research. By viewing public relations as part of the classical rhetorical tradition, he argues, we may better understand the role of public relations in developing and maintaining new concepts in society through deliberate, persuasive, discursive practice.

Anne Lane, QUT, offered an eloquent paper which advocated treating senior management as a distinct public and applying the RACE formula to managers. In this way, the effectiveness of public relations in terms of an organisation’s commitment to symmetrical dialogue and willingness to change in response to feedback from publics can be evaluated. Zoe Hibbert, Charles Sturt University, also considered the role of managers in communication in her case study of the Australian Defence Force (ADF), co-written with the ADF’s Mike Hannan. They argue that since the initial presence in East Timor with media-friendly Major-General Peter Cosgrove in 1999, the ADF has not only come to see the value of public affairs but has developed a more strategic and integrated approach to communication where it is the responsibility of all line managers.

The ‘most fun’ presentation was Lawrie Kirk’s workshop ‘A Communication Plan in less than three hours – I’d like to see that!’ where he showcased a communication strategy he developed at the Murray-Darling Basin Commission. In addition to providing the most innovative use of toilet paper I have ever seen, the strategy offers an effective method for collective decision-making and development of a communication plan. Its low tech approach means it can be used with ease in remote areas and developing countries.

Two papers explored aspects of public relations pedagogy. ‘Great Expectations’ by QUT’s Robina Xavier, Amisha Patel and Ingrid Larkin engendered passionate discussion about how best to engage first year students in public relations theory, and to shift them from a naïve understanding of the profession. Similarly, Xavier and Patel’s paper on the introduction of criterion-referenced assessment (with the aim of increasing transparency in marking) resulted in some debate as to whether normative, contextualised assessment may encourage more creative thinking.

Many papers in other streams had relevance for public relations scholars. I missed by all accounts strong presentations on activism, organisational communication, political communication, civil society, ethics and the impact of technology. One I did manage to attend was the University of Canterbury’s Colleen Mills’ paper on change communication. Mills highlighted the importance of informal networks to communication and argued that rather being seen as a response to ambiguity, it is through informal networks that the bulk of communication occurs and through which employees make sense of events. Colleen skilfully married academic discourse with change management, and never lost sight of the impact of change on individuals.

Conference proceedings will soon be published on the ANZCA 2006 website http://www.adelaide.edu.au/anzca2006/. The next ANZCA conference is in Melbourne next July.

Kate Fitch lectures in public relations at Murdoch University. She is the ANZCA representative in Western Australia and, with Anne Surma, presented a paper ‘Challenges for public relations: working in an international framework’ at the conference.