Shirley Leitch

Corporate branding in the new economy

This article offers the “brand web” model as a conceptual framework for the creation and ongoing analysis of corporate brands and brand relationships. The framework is particularly relevant for new economy ventures that result from alliances. In deploying the brand web model, marketers are asked to consider: the power relationship between the corporate brands; their corporate identities and brand values; the goals of each brand; and the relative strategies pursued to achieve these goals. These questions are posed within the context of the semiotic model of corporate identity.

Equity in corporate co-branding: The case of adidas and the All Blacks

Corporate co‐branding is analysed within the context of a case study of the sponsorship relationship between adidas and the New Zealand Rugby Union. The study indicates that corporate brands may develop co‐branding relationships in order to redefine brand identity, discursively reposition the brand and build brand equity. Corporate co‐branding is established at a fundamental brand values level that, in turn, influences the type of marketing communication campaign that may be undertaken. Discourse theory provides insights into the importance of an articulation campaign in order to increase the equity of corporate brands. Co‐branding offers corporate brands access to the brand strategy of the co‐brand partner, the alignment of brand values, the marketing communication association and brand reach and network of relationships.

Circuits of Power in Practice: Strategic Ambiguity as Delegation of Authority

Most power relationships between organizations and stakeholders are episodic circuits of power whereby resource dependence is exacerbated by prohibitive rules. Such relationships are usually constraining rather than empowering and generate resistance and reluctant compliance rather than co-operation and creativity. Cleggs (1989) concept of facilitative circuits of power, however, suggests that some power relationships, particular where high amounts of discretion are delegated, can result in innovation by stakeholders. Public sector agencies have multiple and diverse external stakeholder groups that they need to influence in order to implement their strategies. In this paper, we explore a facilitative circuit of power using a case study of a public sector research funding organization that employed strategic ambiguity to delegate considerable authority to stakeholders, stimulating a variety of creative responses during a period of major system restructuring. Risks associated with such a practice include the generation of active and passive resistance as well as a propensity for the system to revert to an episodic power circuit over time. Despite these risks, we propose that the deployment of strategic ambiguity is a previously unrecognized mode of high discretionary strategic agency in authority delegation that can generate creative responses on the part of stakeholders within a facilitative circuit of power.

A Discursive Perspective from New Zealand: Another World View.

Abstract In this article we employ Faircloughs model of critical discourse analysis to explore the roles that public relations practitioners play in discursive struggles. We also draw on Moffitts work on articulation and overdetermination to analyze the discursive practices employed by public relations practitioners in the research, redesign and training phases of discourse transformation. At the societal level, discourse transformations emerge out of the discursive struggles engaged in by competing institutions and groups over sociocultural practices. The instances of discursive struggle over sociocultural practices which are analyzed in this article are drawn from the environmental, labor relations and education policy areas in New Zealand and Western Australia.

Strategic ambiguity as a discourse practice: the role of keywords in the discourse on ‘sustainable’ biotechnology

In this article we examined the ways in which strategic ambiguity (Eisenberg, 1984) in the use of keywords (Williams, 1976/1983) served an enabling function within a discourse marked by conflict and ideological divisions. Our analysis focused on the intertextual relationships between five documents intended by the government to guide the development of biotechnology in New Zealand. Through our analysis we identified ‘sustainability’ as a keyword and three major roles for the deployment of the discourse strategy of strategic ambiguity in the use of this keyword. First, strategic ambiguity lent an internal and intertextual coherence to the texts (albeit superficial). Second, it allowed multiple perspectives and objectives to co-exist. Third, strategic ambiguity facilitated the participation of discourse actors who subscribed to ideologies that were more or less incommensurable.

Multiplicity in corporate identity strategy

In this article, van Riel’s theory of common starting points is applied to an organisation in order to further our understanding of the way in which multiplicity may be managed within the corporate identity mix. The article begins by outlining the challenges that postmodern theory has posed for corporate identity theory and the contribution that van Riel’s theory can make to addressing these challenges. The theory of common starting points is then applied to the corporate identity of the Mainfreight corporation.

Strategic ambiguity in communicating public sector change

This paper applies Eisenberg’s theory of strategic ambiguity to stakeholder relationship management during a period of significant change within a public sector organisation. Public sector organisations generally have a wider range of stakeholders than private sector organisations and must discharge their statutory responsibilities within the highly charged environment of the political arena. This paper will contend that communication professionals may deploy strategic ambiguity to manage the competing demands of public sector stakeholders and also to stimulate a diversity of actions and creative responses in the stakeholder community. The paper draws upon an extensive case study of the major science‐funding agency in New Zealand – the Foundation for Research, Science and Technology (FRST) – to illustrate the potential value of and identify some limits to the use of strategic ambiguity.

The Transformational Potential of Public Policy Discourse

In this paper we examine the relationship between public policy, legitimacy and organizational identity in the context of a societal controversy. Public policy is theorized as a mode for effecting discourse transformations which offer new possibilities and rules for organizational legitimacy and societal relations. Our study highlights the legitimating function of public policy formation processes and possible legitimacy-appreciating and-depreciating identity attributes for organizations at the centre of controversy. We develop a macro-level understanding of discursive legitimacy and organizational identity, examining the broader societal context and associated democratic implications of power/knowledge and truth claims.

The politics of discourse: Marketization of the New Zealand science and innovation system

The politics of change are both played out within the arena of discourse and dedicated to transforming that arena. In this article, we bring together critical discourse theory and political process theory in order to highlight the ways in which a process of discourse transformation can be deployed by organizations to effect political and economic change. In the process we examine the discursive interplay between the actors as well as the discursive constraints on action. The context for our analysis was the attempt by a national science funding body to transform the New Zealand discourse of science and innovation in order to significantly change the behaviour of multiple stakeholder organizations. This discourse transformation had internal and external dimensions and required a radical restructuring of the organization to create a structure capable of driving and supporting the desired changes.

The ‘user’ in research funding negotiation processes

National research priorities are often the outcome of negotiations between multiple research stakeholders. These stakeholders include groups of research ‘users’, which means that the negotiation processes are no longer controlled by ‘science’. In this paper, we explore the use of the ideographic term ‘users’ in the discourse surrounding the negotiation processes between a New Zealand funding agency, a research institute and an industry body. The case study highlights the implications of translating the ideographic user collective, as it appears in policy, into an individual representative to participate in a negotiation process. The design of negotiation processes should, therefore, recognize that ‘ideal’ user representation may be an unobtainable goal.