Integrative communication for organisational sustainability—An integrative communication relationship model as communication management tool

• DOI: http://doi.org/10.1002/pa.1957
• Author: Estelle Beer,Adriaan Taljaard
• Date: 01 November 2019
• Published date: 01 November 2019

ACADEMIC PAPER

Integrative communication for organisational sustainability—An

integrative communication relationship model as

communication management tool

Adriaan Taljaard |Estelle de Beer

Division of Communication Management,

Department of Business Management,

University of Pretoria, Pretoria, South Africa

Correspondence

Adriaan Taljaard¸ Division of Communication

Management, Department of Business

Management, University of Pretoria, Pretoria,

South Africa.

Email: ataljaard46@gmail.com

Communication units within organisations strive to positively manage their internal

and external relationships with stakeholders. The objective of this research was to

develop an integrative communication relationship model to assist communication

practitioners to understand and manage these relationships. The model allows practi-

tioners to develop communication strategies that promote organisational sustainabil-

ity. The study investigated the influence of integrative communication on the

sustainability of organisations, and it examined the important role of the integrative

communication function in organisations, as well as its influence on organisational

sustainability. A key outcome of the study was the development of an integrative

communication relationship model. A quantitative research method was used to col-

lect the data, with the analysis comprising descriptive statistics, inferential statistics,

and structural equation modelling (SEM). The research illustrates that integrative

communication has a definitive influence on organisational sustainability and does

not play the same role in the various organisations investigated. Furthermore, the

results show that within these organisations, integrative communication had a distinct

relationship with stakeholder engagement, corporate governance, the financial per-

spective, and the resource perspective, influencing organisational sustainability.

Unique to the study was the SEM analysis that was performed, highlighting the rela-

tionships between the integrative communication constructs and sustainability con-

structs. What also materialised from the analysis was the emergence of a new

construct, “strategic inclusion,”which should be further investigated in the academic

field of communication management. The managerial implications of the study indi-

cate that there are numerous relationships between integrative communication and

organisational sustainability.

1|INTRODUCTION

Organisational sustainability is characterised by predictability and

competitiveness (Baaij, Greeven, & Dalen, 2004, pp. 517–531). During

an organisation's annual strategic planning process, competitive strat-

egies are developed, enabling the organisation to dominate the market

with its products and services (Griffiths & Finlay, 2004, pp. 29–59).

Part of the strategic planning process is the involvement of

communication. This research focused on four sustainability elements

of an organisation, namely, stakeholder engagement, corporate gover-

nance, resource perspectives, and financial perspectives. More specif-

ically, it highlighted the influence of integrative communication on

these constructs. The Objectives and Hypothesis of the Model as

discussed in the text above is depicted in Table 1 below.

The concept of integrative communication within the research

domain is quite new, and limited literature exists on the topic. de

Received: 25 January 2019 Accepted: 31 March 2019

DOI: 10.1002/pa.1957

J Public Affairs. 2019;19:e1957.

https://doi.org/10.1002/pa.1957

© 2019 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

wileyonlinelibrary.com/journal/pa 1of16

TABLE 1 Research objectives and hypotheses

Strong significance

and relationship

Weak significance

and relationship

Research Objective 1: To determine whether there are significant differences in the perception of integrative

communication between private entities, government entities, and nongovernment entities.

H1: There is a significant difference between the perception of messaging in private entities, government

entities, and nongovernment entities.

X

H2: There is a significant difference between the perception of the strategic positioning of the

communication unit in private entities, government entities, and nongovernment entities.

X

H3: There is a significant difference between the perception of the manager in private entities, government

entities, and nongovernment entities.

X

H4: There is a significant difference between the perception of the strategic role of the communication

manager in private entities, government entities, and nongovernment entities.

X

H5: There is a significant difference between the perception of the leadership role of the communication

manager in private entities, government entities, and nongovernment entities.

X

H6: There is a significant difference between the perception of the core competencies of the

communication unit in private entities, government entities, and nongovernment entities.

X

H7a: There is a significant difference between the perception of the dynamic capabilities (flexibility,

swiftness, adapt to challenges) of the communication unit in private entities, government entities, and

nongovernment entities.

X

H7b: There is a significant difference between the perception of the dynamic capabilities (age above 30,

internal relationship networks, external relationship network) of the communication unit in private entities,

government entities, and nongovernment entities.

X

H8: There is a significant difference between the perception of the co‐value creation of the communication

unit in private entities, government entities, and nongovernment entities.

X

Research Objective 2: To determine whether there are significant differences in the perception of

organisational sustainability between private entities, government entities, and nongovernment entities.

H9: There is a significant difference between the perception of stakeholder engagement in private entities,

government entities, and nongovernment entities.

X

H10: There is a significant difference between the perception of corporate governance in private entities,

government entities, and nongovernment entities.

X

H11a: There is a significant difference between the perception of finance (performance, Balanced

Scorecard) in private entities, government entities, and nongovernment entities.

XX

H11b: There is a significant difference between the perception of finance (revenue, financial productivity) in

private entities, government entities, and nongovernment entities.

H12: There is a significant difference between the perception of resource perspectives in private entities,

government entities, and nongovernment entities.

X

Research Objective 3: To determine whether there are significant differences in the perception of integrative

communication between small, medium, and large organisations.

H13: There is a significant difference between the perception of messaging in small, medium, and large

organisations.

X

H14: There is a significant difference between the perception of the strategic positioning of the

communication unit in small, medium, and large organisations.

X

H15: There is a significant difference between the perception of the role of the communication manager in

small, medium, and large organisations.

X

H16: There is a significant difference between the perception of the strategic role of the communication

manager in small, medium, and large organisations.

X

H17: There is a significant difference between the perception of the leadership role of the communication

manager in small, medium, and large organisations.

X

H18: There is a significant difference between the perception of the core competencies of the

communication unit in small, medium, and large organisations.

X

H19a: There is a significant difference between the perception of the dynamic capabilities (flexibility,

swiftness, adapt to challenges) of the communication unit in small, medium, and large organisations.

X

(Continues)

2of16 TALJAARD AND DE BEER