As far as I am currently studying to get my
public relation certificate, my intuition on this topic will be the task of a
public relation practitioner. The structural model of associate in public
relation is similar as the example of law firm. Public relation associate
should report to both client and the firm. This is a common model in real world
practice. Once we have clients, we need to balance both clients and company's
needs.
If we consider the professor as the boss in
company and the class is an organization, my project in public relation class
can be a triangle model. This project require us to choose a RSO and do a
communication audit on them, then develop strategic plans to realize its goal
with $1,000 budget. Even though the syllabus is based on assumption and does
not require us to implement those plans, we tried to set it as practical
because we really want this RSO have more awareness on campus. However, if we
directly write what we really suggest it to do on the assignment, it might
become a less fancy one and imply a sense that we don’t fully understand the
course material. As a result, we decided to write a different plan in the
assignment, such as 5k run and social events, instead of something we really
suggest them to do. This is a little bit far from real world experience because
it doesn’t have profit and budget involved between the “company” and “client.”
In real world experience, triangle
conflict is something must be solved rather than make up plans and statistics.
I used to intern in an investment bank during summer and observed many
inconsistencies between clients and company. One possible solution is “end
justifies means,” which means associate will take the success of getting
clients pleasant and finally earning the deal as their primary consideration.
In this circumstance, they might ignore some needs of the company. For example,
they might use the company’s resource and network to solve the client’s personal
project in order to make an unofficial connection with the clients. This is a
grey zone of company’s policies because associate sometimes inappropriately
utilizes company’s resource but they can justify themselves as achieving the
goal of company. I felt like it’s the implicit rules for industry with triangle
structure. Both principals have some tolerance level of something that might
incompatible with their goals in short run. Their concerns are whether this
associate can help them achieve their goals in the end.
There are absolutely various ways to resolve
the condition. If both principals can sit down and negotiate about the deal, it
should be the ideal condition. But due to the limit on time and resource,
associate must act independently without noticing both principals in lots of
circumstance. I also had experience that when our associate ignored some
request of the clients, they just turned to another investment bank, which can
provide them more benefits. I think the balance of clients and company’s needs
are based on the market structure. If the competition in getting the clients is
really intense, the associate might ignore the company in some situation. But it
really depends on the circumstance and base line in different people’s
concerns.
It may be that what you experienced at the bank was not quite the triangle problem because, as you said customers can go elsewhere. So giving good service, especially to a new customer, may be what bank management wants. If the customer was a personal friend, then the triangle problem might come up.
ReplyDeleteThe project sounds interesting. It sounds like the two principals in the case are the professor and the RSO. Since the final result is a grade in the class, when it came to the project the professor's wishes took precedent over the best interests of the RSO. I wonder if since there is a hierarchy if it is technically considered to be a true triangle. Also it sounds like if you were to go back and do the project outside of class for the RSO, the output would be substantially different. I think it's interesting that for class what would be most beneficial and what gets the best grade are two different things.
ReplyDeleteYour example about your class project is unique and I have never heard/been a part of something like that. It sounds like because of your concern with how your proposal may be viewed by the professor, you were more apt to make him happy than if you to make the RSO happy. If such a hierarchy didn't exist, do you think you would have definitely done a different sort of project? In the bank example, although the customers can go somewhere else if they feel they aren't happy, I feel that the industry as a whole might encompass this sort of employees trying to strike a deal, even if it doesn't really follow the lines that the company wants(like the use of resources).
ReplyDelete