3.1 INTRODUCTION
This chapter provides a perspective for the study of public relations practice and education at a global level. Firstly, the term public relations is conceptualised. A critical overview is then provided of some of the approaches to defining public relations, including reference to the evolvement of the profession and worldviews affecting the conceptualisation of the field. Primary research paradigms in public relations are set out next, followed by the selection of a working definition and a research paradigm for this study. The conceptualisation of public relations selected for this study is further related to globalisation and the potential role of public relations to contribute towards global unity and understanding.
Next, an overview is provided of the developmental history of public relations. The systems and structural approaches are identified as examples of possible points of departure for a study of the historical development of public relations. The structural approach, with its focus on professional development, is selected, to provide an overview of the development of public relations practice and education at a global level.
Because public relations in its modern form originated in the USA, the developmental history is first discussed with reference to America. Thereafter an overview of international development follows. African development is discussed next, with specific reference to South Africa. In line with the global mindset adopted for the study, an overview is provided of global connectedness, which currently exists in the field of public relations practice and education. Reference is made to the recently established Global Alliance for Public Relations and Communication Management, as well as other international organisations attempting to unite public relations practitioners and educators around the world.
This is followed by a discussion of the impact of globalisation on public relations practice and education, in terms of new competencies required. An attempt is made to provide insight into
CHAPTER 3:
PUBLIC RELATIONS PRACTICE AND
EDUCATION: A DEVELOPMENTAL AND THEORETICAL
PERSPECTIVE
how public relations is influenced by the forces of globalisation, and the changing role of the profession and new education needs that result.
It is evident in the literature consulted, that public relations has the potential to play a role in counteracting those disintegrating forces of globalisation covered in the previous chapter. Consequently, the role of public relations in the measures outlined in Section 2.7.4 to counteract disintegrating forces of globalisation, is discussed next. This discussion is structured under the same headings as those in Section 2.7.4 in Chapter 2.
Lastly, a theoretical perspective is provided for the study of public relations practice and education. Although public relations has frequently been criticised for its lack of a theoretical base, this does not mean that different principles and models applicable to public relations cannot be identified (Windahl, et al., 1992:91).
Although there have been attempts to link the study of public relations to theoretical approaches such as pragmatism (Van der Meiden, 1993:8-11), social exchange theory (Kendall, 1992:17-18), rhetorical theory (Vestheim, 1992:23-30), ethnography, persuasion models, radical theory of pressure groups, symbolic interactionalism, the excellence model, critical, situational and organisational theory, etc. (Holtzhausen & Verwey, 1996:30-35), systems theory traditionally seems to be the widely used framework for the study of public relations. Angelopulo (1994:41) regards the systems approach as one of the most fruitful approaches to public relations management, while Holtzhausen (quoted by Holtzhausen & Verwey, 1996:30) confirms, based on an overview of theory application, that the systems approach is the most important theoretical approach to public relations.
As systems theory ties in with the aim of this thesis, it is regarded as suitable also for this study. As this study deals with globalisation, systems theory is approached from the viewpoint of complex, dynamic systems and its related paradigm of chaos theory. In the second part of this chapter systems theory is explained in general, and also as applied to public relations practice and education. The network approach, which forms part of systems theory, is discussed next, followed by an outline of the concepts complex, dynamic system, chaos theory and learning organisation. This discussion, as well as the global mindset adopted in the previous chapter,
provides the basis for the formation of a general theoretical framework in the next chapter, on which to develop a model for globalisation in vocationally-oriented public relations education.
3.2 TOWARDS A CONCEPTUALISATION OF PUBLIC RELATIONS
A large number of definitions of public relations have been formulated worldwide. In fact, Wilcox et al. (1992:5) report that a pioneer public relations educator once compiled about 500 definitions from almost as many sources.
3.2.1 Defining public relations in terms of its evolvement
Kendall (1992:13) argues that the maturity of practice in public relations is determined by the maturity of the definition accepted. The available definitions reflect a range of sophistication in the duty owed by the function to the society at large. According to Kendall, this range of perceptions is evident today, as well as throughout the history of the field. Hutton=s conclusion (1999:200-201) that a review of public relations= history reveals how the field has evolved in terms of definitions and metaphors, confirms this viewpoint. According to Hutton (1999:200-201), public relations has evolved through history from >the public be fooled= to >the public be damned= to >the public be manipulated= to >the public be informed= to >the public be involved or accommodated=.
Other theorists who define public relations in terms of its evolvement include Grunig and Hunt (1984:21-43), who introduced four models to explain how public relations has developed through history. These models also reflect the different ways in which public relations is still practised today.
The first two models portray public relations as a one-way flow of communication between an organisation and its publics. The third and fourth models portray public relations as a two-way flow of communication between an organisation and its publics, and highlight the importance of research.
as practised by organisations that equate public relations with publicity or promotions. Practitioners in these organisations concern themselves mostly with getting media attention for their organisations or clients, and their communication with publics is one-sided and rather propagandistic in nature.
* public-information model. This model emphasises the information dissemination function of public relations by means of the mass and minor media.
* two-way asymmetric model. This model describes public relations as an effort to plan communication with the publics of an organisation to achieve maximum change in attitude and behaviour, with the emphasis on persuasion. According to Grunig and Hunt, public relations based on this model has a manipulative nature.
* two-way symmetric model. This model describes public relations as an effort to attain mutual understanding between an organisation and its publics. The emphasis is on social responsibility and investment.
Grunig and Hunt (1984:43) accept that all four models still have a place in today=s society, as a different model works best for different problems. However, as there are few definitions in public relations literature that describe the first two models, it can be assumed that these models can be discarded in the search for a general definition of modern public relations. Lubbe (1994a:6-7) points out that the two former models are primarily based on the >technician= role of public relations, whereas the latter two models utilise both the technician and the management role in their application.
If it is taken into account that there is general acceptance today of the importance of research in public relations (e.g. Mersham & Skinner, 2001b:74; Seitel, 2001:105-106; Paluszek, 2000:28; Steyn & Puth, 2000:18; Center & Jackson, 1995:3), as well as the recognition that public relations should be practised at the level of management (e.g. Mersham & Skinner, 2001b:67-68; Seitel, 2001:174-175; Steyn & Puth, 2000:21; Kinnick and Cameron, 1994:74) the two-way asymmetric and symmetric models should be accepted as the most applicable and advanced models of public relations today.
Grunig and Hunt (1984:100-101), however, regard the symmetric model as the best reflection of public relations in its mature form. In addition, they argue that asymmetric models of public
relations are used by authoritarian dominant coalitions who see the symmetric model as a threat to their power (Grunig & Hunt, 1984:100-101).
Although Grunig and Hunt=s notion of the asymmetric and symmetric models is widely accepted by other theorists of public relations (e.g. Cutlip et al., 2000:409; Dozier and Ehling, 1992:177; Sriramesh & White, 1992:597; Wilcox et al., 1992:57; Windahl et al., 1992:91-93; Brownell & Niebauer, 1991:83-84), this viewpoint is not shared by all.
According to Van der Meiden (1993:9), one of the main opponents of Grunig and Hunt=s symmetric model is G. R. Miller, who denies the possibility of a symmetric concept while public relations is interwoven with effective persuasion and control over relevant aspects of the environment. Miller (1989:45) argues that there is a close correlation between effective persuasion and effective public relations, because both are concerned with symbolic control over the environment. Effective, ethically defensible persuasion and effective, ethically defensible public relations are virtually synonymous - in practice public relations professionals rely on persuasive strategies frequently if not almost exclusively (Miller, 1989:45,63).
Van der Meiden (1993:9) also does not share in the viewpoint of Grunig and Hunt. She argues that objective or neutral communication, as implied in the symmetric model, is not possible in public relations, as the latter is inevitably a controlling instrument. As an organisation cannot disconnect its communication activities from its immediate or remote interests, the public relations function of that organisation is essentially a manipulating force. According to Van der Meiden (1993:10), the distinctive perception of asymmetric and symmetric elements is neither realistic nor practical, and cannot be a valid starting point for positioning public relations in society.
Other critics of the symmetric model also claim that the approach is unrealistic or idealistic. They argue that public relations professionals are appointed to advance the interests of their organisations, and that clients would not appoint practitioners who do not practise asymmetric public relations (Grunig & White, 1992:46). To this end, Grunig and Grunig (1992:312) acknowledge that, in practice, professional public relations involves both asymmetric (compliance-gaining) tactics and symmetric (problem-solving) tactics. They also acknowledge
that the symmetric model is normative and idealistic. However, they describe the two-way symmetric model as characteristic of excellent public relations, reporting research that shows that the symmetric model is more ethical and effective than the other models (Grunig & Grunig, 1992:303-308).
3.2.2 Worldviews affecting the conceptualisation of public relations
Grunig and White (1992:31-64) attribute acceptance or criticism of the symmetric model, to different worldviews. Broadly speaking, two worldviews have influenced practitioners and scholars of public relations. The dominant worldview in public relations is that the latter is a way of getting what an organisation wants, without changing its behaviour or compromising. This dominant view in essence reflects an asymmetric worldview. Press agentry, public information and two-way asymmetric models are practised from an asymmetric worldview. They all attempt to change the behaviour of publics without changing the behaviour of the organisation (Grunig and White, 1992:39).
The second worldview is, in essence, a symmetric worldview. A symmetric worldview sees public relations as a non-zero-sum game in which competing organisations or groups can both gain if they play the game right. Public relations is a tool by which organisations and competing groups in a pluralistic system interact to manage conflict for the benefit of all (Grunig, 1992:9).
Grunig and White (1992:51) argue that both the dominant, asymmetric and the alternative, symmetric worldview are influenced by presuppositions about the role of public relations in society. They identify the following three worldviews on the social role of public relations, which lead to asymmetric public relations: a pragmatic social role, a conservative social role and a radical social role (Grunig & White, 1992:51-54).
The view of a pragmatic social role approaches public relations as a useful practice, something that can be used to meet the objectives of an organisation in a way that benefits the organisation. The pragmatic worldview sees society as composed of competing groups, target audiences and markets, from whom commercial advantage is to be won. This view may also underlie arguments against the development of codes of conduct or ethical standards, because they may interfere with what can be done to achieve the client=s objectives.
Public relations based on a conservative social role is essentially aimed at maintaining power by defending the status quo and an ideal capitalist system from attack. The view of a radical social role presupposes that public relations contributes to change and reform by providing power and influence through knowledge and information. Both the latter two worldviews see public relations as a tool to be used in a war among opposing social groups.
Grunig and White (1992:53-54) identify the following two worldviews on the social role of public relations, which lead to symmetric public relations: an idealistic social role and a critical social role.
The idealistic social role viewpoint assumes that a norm of reciprocity governs society and that a diversity of views and their reconciliation lead to social progress. This worldview presupposes that public relations serves the public interest, and facilitates a dialogue to develop mutual understanding between organisations and their publics. The critical social role viewpoint sees organisations and society as constructed systems which can be deconstructed and reconstructed. Scholars and practitioners who operate from this worldview, criticise public relations for poor ethics, negative social consequences or ineffectiveness, and advocate more effective practices. In addition to presuppositions on the social role of public relations, Grunig and White (1992:49-50; 54-55) identify another two factors which influence worldviews in public relations. These include gender differences and technical vs managerial presuppositions about public relations.
With regard to gender differences, traditionally men were regarded as better managers because of their inclination towards competition and toughness. The viewpoint is, however, emerging that women=s preference for nurturance and relationships may be what is needed by managers in the future. Grunig and White (1992:50) believe that the feminine worldview approximates the symmetric worldview better than the masculine worldview, and predicts that the female majority in public relations in many countries could move the field toward excellence, as the symmetric worldview of most women begins to replace the more asymmetric worldview of most men.
Grunig and White (1992:55) also believe that the common view that public relations is a technical function is associated with the press agentry and public information models of public
relations and reinforces the asymmetric worldview. They argue that there is a need for both a technical and a managerial role to move public relations to a position of excellence.
Grunig (1992:10) concludes that excellent public relations embodies a worldview that defines the communication function in organisations as symmetric, idealistic, critical and managerial.
3.2.3 Hutton=s alternative framework to conceptualise public relations
An alternative framework to defining the field of public relations is provided by Hutton (1999:199-212). Hutton (1999:212) challenges the wide acceptance of Grunig and Hunt=s four models, arguing that these models do not meet the requirements of a theory, and have failed the test of empirical confirmation. According to Hutton (1999:199), public relations still lacks a central organising paradigm. For this reason he introduced a three-dimensional framework with which to compare competing philosophies of public relations, and from which to build a paradigm for the field. These dimensions also explain the substantive differences among various orientations or definitions of public relations. These dimensions are referred to as the >Three Is=: interest, initiative and image (Hutton, 1999:204):
* interest refers to the degree to which public relations is focused on client vs the public interest. At one extreme lies a philosophy of >the public be damned=, while at the other extreme lies a belief that the public=s interest should supersede the client=s interest.
* initiative refers to the extent to which the public relations function is reactive vs pro-active. Examples of pro-active techniques include stakeholder surveys, communication audits, crisis planning, issues management and strategic communication planning.
* image refers to the extent to which an organisation is focused on perception vs reality, or image vs substance. This dimension represents the general focus of an organisation=s philosophy, thoughts and actions. A publicity stunt may represent one end of the continuum and an anonymous corporate gift to a charity the other extreme.
territory on each dimension, it is usually possible to locate an organisation=s general orientation along each dimension.
According to Hutton (1999:205-208), the following six distinct orientations, models or metaphors of public relations practice become apparent when the above framework is used to analyse definitions of public relations:
* Persuasion. This includes those philosophies of public relations that are pro-active and oriented towards persuading audiences to think or act in ways that benefit the client or organisation.
* Advocacy. This is similar to persuasion in its intentions, but different in that it arises out of controversy or active opposition. It is reactive in nature and is usually triggered by a crisis or other catalyst.
* Public information. This refers to the style of public relations in which a client or organisation serves primarily as an educator and information clearinghouse. Examples of organisations practising such function include member service organisations and government agencies.
* Cause-related public relations. This is also called crusading, compliments advocacy insofar as it tends to serve a broader public interest rather than any special-interest group. * Image/reputation management. This focuses on the image of the client or organisation,
as measured by its popularity or value.
* Relationship management. This is based on the identification of mutual interests, values and benefits between a client or organisation and its publics. The emphasis is on mutual trust, compromise, cooperation and, whenever possible, win-win situations.
Based on the argument that only the latter category has the power to serve as an organising philosophy, Hutton (1999:208,211) proposes >relationship management= as a dominant paradigm for modern public relations, together with the short definition >managing strategic relationships=. Based on the latter definition and the framework of the >Three Is=, he formulates the following hierarchy of public relations= primary role, functions and tactics (Hutton, 1999:211):
>managing
strategic relationships=
Situational roles
persuader, advocate, educator, crusader, information provider, reputation manager
Primary functions performed
research, image making, counselling, managing, early warning, interpreting, communicating, negotiating
Tactics/tools utilised
publicity, product placement, news releases, speeches, interpersonal communication, websites, publications, trade
shows, corporate identity programmes, corporate advertising programmes, etc.
Hutton (1999:211-212) suggests that the above hierarchy encourages scholars to distinguish between the umbrella definition and the primary purpose of public relations in a given context, as well as between public relations roles and their functions and tactics.
3.2.4 Definitions based on the symmetric model and Hutton=s paradigm
Both the definitions endorsed by IPRA and the South African national professional body for public relations fit the two-way symmetric model, as well as Hutton=s proposed dominant paradigm. The latter body used to be called the Public Relations Institute of Southern Africa (PRISA), but was renamed in 2002 to PRISA, the Institute for Public Relations & Communication Management (Moscardi, 2002b:1). The abbreviation >PRISA= will be used hereafter in reference to this body.
IPRA endorses a definition formulated by Harlow (quoted by Windahl et al., 1992:89-90), which reads as follows:
>Public relations is a distinctive management function which helps establish and maintain mutual lines of communication, understanding, acceptance and cooperation between an organisation and its publics; involves the management of problems or issues; helps management to keep informed on and responsive to public opinions; defines and emphasises the responsibility of management to serve the public interest; helps management keep abreast of and effectively utilize change, serving as an early warning system to help anticipate trends; and uses research
and sound and ethical communication techniques as its principal tools.=
The definition of PRISA reads as follows (Mersham & Skinner, 2001b:67):
>Public relations is the management, through communication, of perceptions and strategic relationships between an organisation and its internal and external stakeholders.=
Other definitions that fit the two-way symmetric model include those adopted by many other public relations societies worldwide. Two examples include the definition adopted by the Institute of Public Relations (IPR) in Britain in 1987 (Mersham et al., 1995:10) and the often quoted definition accepted by the First World Assembly of Public Relations Associations held in Mexico City in 1978. The former definition reads as follows:
>Public relations practice is the planned and sustained effort to establish and maintain goodwill and mutual understanding between an organisation and its publics= (IPR, 2002).
The latter definition reads as follows:
>Public relations is the art and social science of analysing trends, predicting their consequences, counselling organisational leaders and implementing planned programmes of action which will serve both the organisation and the public interest= (Steyn & Puth, 2000:4).
It seems that, in spite of scepticism from authors like Van der Meiden and Miller about the application of a two-way symmetric model, definitions which endorse this model are widely accepted today by professional associations in public relations. Many of these definitions also endorse Hutton=s conceptualisation of public relations as >the management of strategic relationships=.
3.3 RESEARCH PARADIGMS IN PUBLIC RELATIONS
Rhetorical, critical and systems perspectives are three major research paradigms apparent in the body of knowledge of public relations (Toth, 1992:3-4). According to Toth (1992:3,12), these
three perspectives are complementary, and, combined, provide for pluralistic studies that have enriched understanding of the field of public relations.
3.3.1 The rhetorical perspective
This paradigm in public relations is primarily concerned with the use of symbolic behaviour to create and influence relationships between an organisation and its publics (Toth, 1992:5). The areas of corporate advocacy and issues management are of particular concern.
According to Bredenkamp (1997:87), the rhetorical approach can be and is used to put an organisation=s best foot forward. Heath (1992b:24), however, argues that rhetoric can be viewed as one-way, manipulative communication, but also as contested examination of issues and actions - as dialogue. It can thus be deduced that the rhetoric perspective in public relations could include both asymmetric and symmetric models.
3.3.2 The critical perspective
This paradigm also focuses on the symbolic processes of organisational behaviour, but with a view to being confrontational towards organisational interests, power and domination (Toth, 1992:7,11). Heath (1992b:33) suggests that critical judgement is needed to improve skills and to ensure that a profession is responsible and sound.
According to Heath (1992a:39), the critical perspective in public relations entails not only examination of public relations tactics, but also standards and judgements regarding the worth of statements in their service to society at large, and not merely the interest of the client or organisation. If applied in this way, criticism is based on the norm provided by the symmetric public relations model.
3.3.3 The systems perspective
The systems approach is multidisciplinary (Bredenkamp, 1997:84) and approaches organisations as open systems consisting of subsystems and forming part of suprasystems (Grunig, 1989:38). The systems perspective in public relations is based on the premise that organisations should
concern themselves with the environment in order to survive, and seek to maintain an equilibrium with their environment through input, throughput and output (Toth, 1992:8). According to Toth (1992:11), systems theorists use criticism in search of excellence in public relations.
Grunig and Hunt=s symmetric model approaches organisations as open systems (Grunig, 1989:38). As an open systems approach, the symmetric model is based on the following presuppositions: equality; autonomy of people both inside and outside the organisation; innovative thinking; decentralisation of management; responsibility; conflict resolution; and interest group liberalism (Grunig, 1989:38-39).
3.4 THE DEFINITION AND PARADIGM SELECTED FOR THIS STUDY
In line with the endorsement of the symmetric model by professional public relations associations through the definitions they adopt, this study accepts this model as the most suitable portrayal of excellent public relations. By the same token, the study accepts the worldview that defines the public relations function as idealistic, critical and managerial. Being normative and idealist, the symmetric model complements the normative definition of globalisation formulated for this study, and the responsibility the study assigns to public relations to contribute to harmony and unity in the global community. The acceptance of the symmetric model for a study based on the presupposition that technikons should function as learning systems in a global environment, is also in line with Grunig and Grunig=s argument (1992:298) that the practice of two-way symmetric public relations is especially important when environments are complex and turbulent. According to Dozier and Ehling (1992:182), the concept of symmetry suggests that an organisation should adjust to the environment on which its survival and growth depends. In the process, the organisation itself changes.
Furthermore, it is not accepted that symmetric public relations excludes the use of rhetoric and control. It is assumed that public relations can serve the well-being of society while simultaneously functioning as a controlling instrument. A programme aimed at social investment and development is, in the opinion of the author, a case in point. While the goal of such a programme is aimed at the well-being of the recipient, the communication applied to
reach this goal is of a controlling nature, as it involves changing the behaviour of both the organisation implementing the programme and the social, economic and physical conditions of the community the programme is aimed at.
At the same time, this study accepts Hutton=s proposal of relationship management as a dominant paradigm for public relations. In spite of Hutton=s criticism of Grunig and Hunt=s four models, the relationship paradigm fits the symmetric model of public relations.
However, while Harlow=s definition endorsed by IPRA and Hutton=s hierarchy set out above, are accepted as a summary of the most important functions of public relations for the purpose of this investigation, the study needs a definition which emphasises the responsibility of public relations towards the global community. A definition formulated by Kendall (1992:15) is suitable for this purpose, as it focuses on the social responsibility aspect of public relations and its commitment to the well-being of society as a whole:
>Public relations is a phenomenon within societies by which advocates of a social entity manage that organisation=s performance in the public interest in order to:
* nurture mutually beneficial associations with all groups interdependent with the organisation, by means of
* the responsible use of all the appropriate instruments of one- and two-way communication.=
This definition has certain implications which are of special importance to this study. It implies firstly that the ethical function of public relations is social welfare, and secondly, that public relations activity involves the intentional advancement of a cause. It also implies that an entity=s performance should conform to what is in the best interest of the entire society - in this case the global society - and that its social responsibility should be proactive rather than reactive (Kendall, 1992:15-16).
Kendall=s definition reinforces the view of the public relations function as the >social conscience= (Leonard & Ströh, 2000b:36; Verwey, 2000:64) of organisations. According to Black
(2000:105), social stability and ethical behaviour are the essential underpinning of public relations. Leonard and Ströh (2000b:42), in turn, assign to public relations the role to operate as the ethical and moral consciousness of an organisation, and to help guide the establishment of organisational values, which will determine the nature of all external behaviour.
Kendall=s definition also corresponds with the view that public relations strives towards harmony in society. Seib and Fitzpatrick (1995:1) describe the moral purpose of public relations as that of social harmony. Through their work, public relations professionals promote peaceful existence among individuals and institutions. >Serving the public interest while serving one=s own has always been the hallmark of good public relations work= (Seib & Fitzpartick, 1995:2). Black (2000:104) reinforces this view by arguing that public relations is conditioned by reputation, credibility, confidence, harmony and mutual understanding.
Kendall=s definition is extended, for the purpose of this study, to cover the global community, to make provision for the practice of public relations across borders and globalisation in public relations. Transnational public relations is known as international public relations, an area that has grown extensively since the advent of globalisation (Black, 2000:103).
Wilcox et al. (1992:409) define international public relations as >the planned and organised effort of a company, institution or government to establish mutually beneficial relations with the publics of other nations=. They define these publics as >the various groups of people who are affected by, or who can affect, the operations of a particular firm, institution or government. Each public is united by a common interest vis-à-vis the entity seeking acceptance of its product or programs= (Wilcox et al., 1992:410).
Globalisation in public relations implies, firstly, relationships that exist across national borders and, secondly, relationships - even in one country - which are influenced by global developments (White & Mazur, 1995:18). Globalisation in public relations furthermore implies that the functions of public relations as the social conscience of an organisation, striving towards harmony in society, are extended to the global society.
sensitivities of unfamiliar organisations and individuals, that need to be harmonised (Black, 2000:106). It superimposes an overall perspective on a programme executed in two or more national markets, recognising the similarities among audiences, while necessarily adapting to regional differences (Anderson, quoted by Grunig & Grunig, 2000). International public relations should thus include central consideration of cultural diversity (Banks, 1995:32), planning globally, but acting locally (Black, 2000:103).
Kendall=s definition - extended globally - could contribute towards recognising the full potential of public relations on a global basis. The focus of this definition on ethical behaviour that is in the best interest of the entire society, corresponds with the point of departure of this study, namely that public relations practice and education could contribute towards the common good of the global society.
By focusing on the relationship between public relations and global integration, the study emphasises the potential of public relations to contribute to a move towards global consciousness and understanding. If public relations practitioners and educators aim their public relations activities towards global unity, they practise public relations in its mature form, as represented by the symmetric model. In addition, they follow the emerging paradigm of energy and connectivity, as discussed in Chapter 1 (see Section 1.3).
The research paradigm adopted for this study is the systems approach. This study, with its focus on public relations education programmes, and technikons as systems being influenced by global changes, needs a research paradigm which allows investigation of how these systems are influenced by, and need to adapt, to the global macrosystem. The systems paradigm is regarded as best suited for this purpose, as it allows for critical focus on global influences (input) and skills, knowledge and attitudes that need to be transferred (throughput and output). The systems perspective also allows for the incorporation of a global mindset, network thinking, chaos theory and the requirements of learning organisations into the paradigm chosen for this study. This paradigm makes it possible to focus on the turbulent nature of the global macrosystem as a Network Society, and is in line with the acceptance of Kendall=s definition, extended globally.
PUBLIC RELATIONS
According to Lubbe (1994a:3), the historical development of public relations can be reviewed from either a systems or a structural perspective. The systems approach focuses on the widening scope of public relations in relation to the social and economic development of a society, whereas the structural approach depicts the professionalisation of public relations in terms of the establishment of professional bodies, codes of conduct, accreditation, etc.
In the available literature, the earlier history of public relations is discussed mostly from a systems perspective, whereas the state of public relations in its modern form is discussed mostly from a structural perspective.
According to Roodt (1988:18), the knowledge dimension can be regarded as the most fundamental requirement in the professionalisation of any profession, and particularly of public relations. According to a model of professionalisation formulated by De Beer (1982:13-14), the knowledge dimension of professionalisation comprises the following attributes: knowledge, education, skills, research and subject literature.
As education, the topic of this study, is one of the attributes of professionalisation, it can be deduced that a discussion of public relations development in terms of the structural approach will be more relevant to this study. Therefore, while a brief overview is provided of the development of public relations according to the systems approach, the emphasis in the rest of the chapter is on the structural approach.
3.6 HISTORICAL DEVELOPMENT OF PUBLIC RELATIONS IN TERMS OF THE
SYSTEMS APPROACH
A study of the available literature on public relations history from a systems approach reveals two tendencies.
The first is to focus on the changing role of public relations as it adapted to changes in the environment. The four models formulated by Grunig and Hunt, as discussed in Section 3.2.1, are a case in point. Grunig and Hunt (1984:25) even assign certain historical periods to each
developmental model: press agentry - 1850-1900; public information - 1900-1920; two-way asymmetric - 1920s onward; and two-way symmetric - 1960s onward.
Another case in point is the identification by Aranoff and Baskin (1983:15-19) of three major phases in the development of public relations - manipulation, information and mutual influence and understanding. Manipulation is associated mostly with the techniques of 19th century press agents, information with the work of the publicity officers at the beginning of the 20th century and mutual influence and understanding with public relations as a management function in its modern form.
The second tendency is to link public relations to historical events and periods in the world. Such a study of public relations history reflects the social, economic, political and technological changes the world went through, the influences of these changes on communication and the impact of public opinion.
The origin of public relations is, for example, linked to efforts to inform and persuade in the earliest civilisations. Seitel (2001:25-26), Cutlip et al. (2000:102), Wilcox et al. (1992:36), Moore and Kalupa (1985:24) and Grunig and Hunt (1984:15) refer to techniques used by leaders in ancient societies such as those of Egypt, Greece, India and Iraq, to inform, to persuade and to impress. Wilcox et al. (1992:36), Truter (1991:35-37), Grunig and Hunt (1984:15) and Van der Meiden and Fauconnier (1982:121-122) refer to Biblical figures like David, Solomon, John the Baptist and Paul, who understood the art of influencing large groups of people. Reilly (1987:13) also refers to historical persons like Napoleon, Catherine the Great and Charles Dickens as examples of public figures who used public relations techniques to promote personal image and to influence public opinion.
The development of public relations is also discussed with reference to: propaganda by the early Roman Catholic Church (Seitel, 2001:26; Wilcox et al., 1992:36); the invention of the printing press by Gutenberg and the development of mass communication (Truter, 1991:36; Grunig & Hunt, 1984:16-17); social changes such as the Renaissance and Reformation, the rise of Humanism and the abolition of censorship (Grunig & Hunt, 1984:17); economic changes brought about by industrialisation (Seitel, 2001:29; Wilcox et al., 1992:42); political changes
such as the American Revolution (Cutlip et al., 2000:102; Grunig & Hunt, 1984:17) and the rise of trade unions (Truter, 1991:37); technological development and the onrush of the global information age (Cutlip et al., 2000:135-136); and the emergence of consumer rights and activist organisations (Grunig & Hunt, 1984:13,18).
Cutlip et al. (2000:106) also link the most important growth periods in public relations to some of the world=s most significant crisis periods such as World Wars I and II, the wars in Vietnam and Korea, the Great Depression, the Cold War, the invasion of Panama and the Persian Gulf War.
3.7 HISTORICAL DEVELOPMENT OF PUBLIC RELATIONS IN TERMS OF THE
STRUCTURAL APPROACH
A structural approach to the history of public relations focuses on its professional development. The discussion that follows focuses mainly on aspects of developmental history which relate to professional bodies and education.
3.7.1 American development
This section provides an overview of the development of public relations practice and education in the USA.
3.7.1.1 Public relations practice
Public relations as it is known today originated in America (Seitel, 2001:30-31; Jefkins, 1992:5; Grunig & Hunt, 1984:14). Public relations in this country has in fact produced many >firsts=.
The first book on public relations, Crystallizing Public Opinion, was written in 1923 by Edward Bernays, an American whom Grunig and Hunt (1984:39) regard as >the intellectual= of early public relations.
in America in 1929 (Jackson, 1988:28). The American Council on Public Relations was formed in 1939 (Seitel, 1992:39). In 1947 this organisation merged with two others societies to form the Public Relations Society of America (PRSA) (Grunig & Hunt, 1984:41). In 1968 the Public Relations Student Society of America was founded by the PRSA, to facilitate communication between students and professionals (Seitel, 2001:38). The PRSA adopted its Code of Conduct in 1954 and in 1964 approved a voluntary accreditation scheme, whereby it accredited members by means of an examination (Skinner et al., 2001:20).
An umbrella organisation, the North American Public Relations Council, was founded in 1980 to produce a uniform accreditation system and code of ethics (Jackson, 1988:28). This council was later replaced by the Universal Accreditation Board. Accreditation is still a voluntary programme in America today, and is available to practitioners with at least five years of experience (UAB, 2001).
The PRSA also formed a task force in 1986 to develop guidelines for professional development, and to codify a body of knowledge for public relations in America. This body of knowledge was published in 1986 (Jackson, 1988:28).
Today the PRSA is the world=s largest organisation for public relations. It has nearly 20 000 members, organised into over 100 chapters (PRSA, 2001).
The PRSA assists with education of Russian public relations students by means of a joint PRSA-Russian Public Relations Association (RPRA) programme established in 1992. This programme enables Russian students to do an internship in America (Epley, 1993:4).
The PRSA decided in 1997 to make global outreach one of its priorities. A Global Initiatives Committee was consequently formed, to open the lines of communication with other public relations associations regarding the idea of global collaboration (Pelfrey, 2001:39).
Another influential public relations body in America is the International Association of Business Communicators (IABC), founded in 1970 (Skinner et al., 2001:20) as an international network, aiming to improve the effectiveness of organisations through strategic interactive and integrated
business communication management. This organisation has more than 13 700 members in over 58 countries all over the world. The IABC has its headquarters in San Francisco, and is organised into chapters in different districts and regions. The South African chapter of the IABC is based in Johannesburg. The IABC also has a research and development arm in the form of the IABC Research Foundation (IABC, 2001).
3.7.1.2 Public relations education
The first course in public relations was taught by Edward Bernays at the New York University in 1922 (Grunig & Hunt, 1984:39). The first master=s programme in public relations was established at Boston University in 1947 (Ogbondah & Pratt, 1991-1992:37). The first education department in public relations was established in 1949 at the Boston University (Jackson, 1988:28). Thereafter followed a period of phenomenal growth in public relations education. By 1951, twelve American universities had introduced education programmes in public relations (Seitel, 2001:38). Post-graduate courses were introduced on large scale in the late 1970s (Hesse, 1984:22). Today, approximately 300 colleges and universities in America offer at least one course dealing with public relations. Of these, approximately 200 offer a public relations sequence or degree programme (Seitel, 2001:38).
An organisation that plays a major role in public relations education in the USA is the Association for Education in Journalism and Mass Communication (AEJMC). The AEJMC has a Council on Education in Journalism and Mass Communication, which accredits public relations sequences in schools of journalism and mass communication (IPRA, 1990:25). The AEJMC has a membership of approximately 3 300 from more than 30 countries (AEJMC, 2001).
3.7.2 International development
This section provides an overview of the development of public relations practice and education at an international level.
Formal professional organisation of public relations came into being in Europe in the late 1940s and early 1950s. The second known public relations society in the world was formed in the Netherlands in 1948 (Van der Meiden & Fauconnier, 1982:127). A public relations society was established in the same year in England (Skinner et al., 2001:21). The Public Relations Institute of Ireland (PRII) was founded in 1953 (Carty, 1993:21).
According to Josephs and Josephs (1994:14), the UK has the second biggest public relations industry in the world, surpassed only by America in size and dynamism. This view is reinforced by White (1991:183), who refers to the UK as >the second most developed centre of public relations practice after the USA=. The Institute of Public Relations in Britain is also the largest professional association for public relations in Europe (Anon., 1998:29).
The European Confederation of Public Relations (Confederation Europeenne des Relations Publiques - CERP), a regional confederation, was established in 1959 (Skinner et al., 2001:21). CERP established a body charged with the development of public relations and research in Europe. It was called CEDET. In 1990 CEDET became a new body called CERP Education. Full membership is restricted to colleges and individuals concerned with public relations education in Europe. Colleges and persons outside Europe may, however, become correspondence members (Black, 1990b:15).
The 1960s and 1970s saw professional bodies for public relations emerging all over the globe. Examples include: the Public Relations Institute of Australia (PRIA), formed in 1960 (Wilcox et al., 1992:47); the Arab Public Relations Society, founded in 1966 (Borhan, 1993:19); the Advanced Institute for Press and Public Relations, established in Iran in 1970 (Kamalipour & Rad, 1997:30); Asean, a public relations body representing the South East Asian region and formed in 1967; and the Federation of Asian Public Relations Organisations based in the Philippines and formed in 1977 (Noeradi, 1992:39).
According to Seitel (2001:476), public relations evolved more slowly in Asia than in the West, although sharp growth in this region was experienced in the 1990s. Asian countries with active public relations sectors include Japan, Korea, Indonesia, Taiwan, Singapore (Hickson, 1998:26; Seitel, 2001:476), the Philippines (Virtusio, 1998:23), HongKong, India, Pakistan, Malaysia and
Thailand (IPRA, 2001c).
Public relations developed rapidly in China after it was first introduced to the country in 1981. By 1990 nearly every Chinese city had an active public relations society. The first academic programme in public relations was introduced at Shenzhen University in 1985. By 1990 more than 100 universities and colleges offered public relations education. Shenzhen University=s distance learning programme also reaches students from HongKong and Macao (Black, 1990-1991:29-30).
According to Seitel (2001:475), the public relations field in Latin America is most developed in Mexico, where most corporations have public relations departments, and many employ local or American public relations agencies. Tertiary institutions in this country also offer education in public relations. Kotcher (1998:26) foresees that, in the light of flourishing media fuelled by democratic reforms, and the growth of online communication in this region, public relations will play an increasingly critical role in Latin America. Seitel (2001:475) also predicts growth in the industry in this region, especially as far as Argentina, Brazil, Venezuela and Chile are concerned.
Public relations started growing in the former Eastern Bloc after the collapse of communism in this region. The Hungarian Public Relations Association (HPRA) was formed in 1990 (Tabori & Szeles, 1992:41) and has since developed an accreditation process modelled after that of the PRSA (Hiebert, 1994:364). The Soviet Public Relations Association and the Polish Public Relations Association were also founded soon after the demise of the Iron Curtain (Anon., 1992a:14). Examples of other Eastern Bloc countries where public relations associations were formed include Bulgaria, Czech Republic, Latvia, Lithuania, Romania, Slovakia, Slovenia, the Ukraine (IPRA, 2001c) and Estonia (GAPR&CM, 2001). IPRA also established the Eastern European Task Force to deal with matters relating to these countries (Tabori & Szeles, 1992:41).
Although press freedom became a reality in the former Soviet Bloc in the 1990s, Hiebert (1994:364) points out that public relations was slower than advertising to emerge from communism. Guth (1998:53) adds that, in Russia, public relations in the commercial sector is still lagging behind that of public relations in the government sector, as far as development is concerned. Seitel (2001:477), however, suggests that the approximately 370 million consumers
in Eastern Europe and the well-established mass communication system in the region mean that the prospects for public relations expansion are immense. Djuric (1998:24) further points to considerable growth in the number of public relations practitioners in the former Yugoslavia, especially in banks and privately-owned companies.
According to Seitel (2001:478), the public relations profession is less active in the Middle East, although it is growing in this region. Seitel (2001:478) mentions the admission of 20 women students into the public relations major programme at the United Arab Emirates University in Al-Ain in 1995, as a sign of the growth of public relations in the Middle East, and cites Saudi Arabia as an example of a country where there is an increased recognition of the significance of public relations. Another example is Iran, where the first book on public relations was published in 1966 and the first B.A. degree in public relations was introduced in 1983 (Kamalipour & Rad, 1997:31). Egypt is said to be the first country in the Middle East to look upon public relations as a profession. The Arab Public Relations Society is based in Egypt, but includes members from other Middle Eastern countries. Since its inception this association has participated in more than 50 conferences and world congresses (Borhan, 1993:19).
International organisation of public relations originated in Europe. The idea came into being in 1949 when two Dutch and four British public relations persons met in London to discuss international liaison. They formed an international committee, which eventually led to the establishment of IPRA in 1955 (IPRA, s.a.: 1,8). IPRA held its first congress in 1958 in Brussels (Oeckl, 1976:2).
This body aims to bring together public relations practitioners at a global level to further the skills and ethics of the profession. The UN recognises IPRA as an NGO. IPRA also holds a consultative status with the UN Economic and Social Council, and has been awarded the right to participate in UNESCO-funded programmes (IPRA, 2001a).
IPRA formulated its first code of conduct in 1961. In 1965 the organisation adopted the Code of Athens, a European code of professional conduct formulated in the same year by CERP (Skinner et al., 2001:21). This is a moral code, inspired by the UN Declaration of Human Rights (IPRA, 2001b). IPRA publishes a journal which was recently renamed IPRA Frontline (IPRA, 2001a:3).
Today IPRA has members in 92 countries all over the world, including Europe, the Americas, Asia, Britain, Scandinavia and Iceland, Africa, the Middle East, Australia and New Zealand, as well as on various islands (IPRA, 2001c).
IPRA is instrumental in assisting the growth of public relations in emerging markets such as Russia, Bulgaria and Estonia, and runs the world=s largest public relations website and Internet e-group (Sutherland, 2001).
IPRA also has a student section, membership of which is open to students of public relations worldwide. Membership entitles students to IPRA=s virtual library and publications, as well as a student members= chat room and guestbook on IPRA=s website (IPRA, 2002a).
Other regional public relations federations in the world include the Inter-American Confederation of Public Relations Associations (FIARP), based in Argentina and Uruguay (IPRA, 2001c), and the Pan-Pacific Public Relations Federation (PPPRF), based in Thailand (Skinner et al., 2001:22).
There are also a number of global organisations in the field of communication, examples of which include: the International Communication Association (ICA); the World Communication Association (WCA) (Gibson, 1992-1993:47); the International Association for Media and Communication Research (IAMCR); the International Society for Intercultural Education, Training and Research (SIETAR); and the International Federation of Communication Associations (IFCA) (IAMCR, 2001; IFCA, 2001; SIETAR, 2001).
3.7.2.2 Public relations education
A principle objective of IPRA is the encouragement of education (IPRA, 1997:5). Through its involvement with the UN and UNESCO, it contributes to public relations education, particularly in developing countries (IPRA, s.a.:7).
Since the first public relations course was introduced in America in 1923, public relations education has been developing at educational institutions for eight decades. However, it was
only after the publication of IPRA=s Gold Paper No. 4 in 1982 that there has been major international development in public relations education beyond the basic bachelor=s degree (IPRA, 1990:6).
This Gold Paper was the result of work of an International Commission for Public Relations Education, set up in 1980 to assist the IPRA Education and Research Committee to produce a model and recommendations for public relations education worldwide. Based on the belief that public relations should have an intellectual base, and aiming to provide students with a common body of knowledge, it was suggested in Gold Paper No. 4, among other recommendations, that public relations education should go beyond the bachelor=s degree (IPRA, 1982:4-6).
Since then, major post-graduate courses in public relations have been introduced. Examples include: an M.A. in European Public Relations, introduced in 1991, and offered jointly by universities in Britain, Belgium, France, Italy and Portugal; an M.Sc. degree in public relations offered by the University of Scotland; an M.Sc. degree in communication specialising in public relations, offered by the University of Helsinki; and an M.Sc. in public relations started by the Nigerian Institute of Public Relations in association with the University of Nigeria (Okereke, 1993:23; IPRA, 1990:31,34-36 ). Stirling University in Britain started an M.Sc. degree in public relations by distance learning in 1991. This course is also available to students outside Britain (Black, 1990b:16). India also started preparing for the introduction of public relations graduate programmes at various universities (Basu, 1992:10).
Public relations education worldwide is also available in the form of certificate and diploma courses offered by various kinds of institutions, including professional public relations associations. In some countries, such as Switzerland and the Netherlands, the latter enjoys official government recognition (IPRA, 1990:26). In some countries, such as Australia and New Zealand, the local public relations association formally accredits courses in public relations (Ferreira, 2000:67).
Foreign individuals and organisations have been instrumental in assisting the countries of the former Eastern Bloc to introduce education programmes in public relations. For example, an education model based on international standards was developed in the former Yugoslavia in the
early 1990s in collaboration with IPRA and Prof. Van der Meiden from the Netherlands (Djuric, 1998:25). And in Russia, American universities, private foundations and government agencies have assisted in the establishment of education programmes at various universities and colleges (Guth, 1998:54).
3.7.3 African development
This section provides a brief overview of the development of public relations practice and education on the African continent.
3.7.3.1 South African development
3.7.3.1.1 Public relations practice
The structural development of public relations on the African continent first started in South Africa. Although professional organisation in the country started somewhat later than in America and Western Europe, public relations saw a massive growth in the last four decades of the last century. South Africa has two >firsts= to its credit, being the first country to research and evolve a body of knowledge for public relations (Skinner et al., 2001:3), and the first public relations institute in the world to obtain certification for quality management from the International Standards Organisation (ISO), a body for quality assurance (PRISA, 2002a). In terms of membership, PRISA is the third largest public relations institute in the world behind PRSA and the IPR in Britain (Rowe, 2002:4).
The first public relations officer in the country was appointed by the South African Railways in 1943, and the first public relations consultancy was established in Johannesburg in 1948 (Skinner et al., 2001:22).
The profession in this country is organised into PRISA, which was established in 1957 (Skinner et al., 2001:22). By 2002 PRISA had more than 4 400 members in sub-regions throughout South Africa and neighbouring countries, as well as countries such as Canada, America, Australia and Britain (Richardson, 2002).
The PRISA Students= Association, now known as the Public Relations Student Chapter (PRSC), was launched in 1995. PRISA holds regular student conferences and publishes a newsletter for members of the PRSC (Anon., 1995b:1). PRISA also has a chapter for consultants.
PRISA established a directorate in Johannesburg in 1986 (Anon., 1986:2), and has a full-time staff who coordinate various membership services.
Members of PRISA subscribe to a code of conduct based on the international Code of Athens and the IPRA Code of Conduct (Lubbe, 1994a:5).
In 1993 PRISA introduced a new system for membership registration, by which points are allocated, based on qualifications and experience, to determine an individual member=s level of membership. The new registration system makes provision for the following membership categories: Affiliate and Associate (non-voting), Public Relations Practitioner (PRP), Chartered Public Relations Practitioner (CPRP) and Accredited in Public Relations (APR) (Skinner et al., 2001:22-23).
The South African body of knowledge for public relations was completed in 1980 as part of PRISA=s professionalisation action launched in the late 1970s (Krause, quoted by Ferreira, 1990:34).
PRISA appointed its first education committee in 1957, and introduced its first short course in 1958 (Lean, quoted by Roodt, 1988:60). The Institute appointed a full-time director of education (now called managing director) in 1989 (Ferreira, 1990:36), and has since established the PRISA Education & Training Centre (PE&TC) - which is registered as a separate company - at its directorate in Johannesburg. Full-time staff members of the PE&TC serve on the advisory committees for public relations education at a number of technikons, and also act as moderators for the subjects Public Relations III and IV for a number of technikons in the country. In addition, the managing director of the PE&TC serves on the NSB for Business, Commerce and Management Studies, and two other staff members serve on the SGB for Public Relations and Communication Management (Van Niekerk, 2002a).
The PE&TC is conditionally registered as a private higher educational institution by the South African Department of Education (PE&TC, 2002:3). The Centre offers a number of public relations courses including introductory, specialisation and continuing education learning programmes; a public relations management course aimed at senior practitioners; and a three-year tertiary diploma. In designing these courses, PRISA made provision for a non-formal career path as well as a formal career path in public relations, both leading to accreditation status. The formal career path is followed by candidates who have a three-year diploma or degree, whereas the non-formal path is followed by candidates without matric (PE&TC, 2002:3,5).
PRISA has a licence agreement with several commercial colleges in South Africa and neighbouring countries, as well as a number of technikons to offer some of its courses (PE&TC, 2001b).
In terms of an agreement signed with Technikon Witwatersrand in 2000, graduates of the three-year PRISA Diploma can further their studies at this technikon through higher degrees in Public Relations Management (Anon., 2000:4). The PRISA Diploma is also recognised internationally by the IPR in Britain. This is the first qualification outside Britain which has been recognised by the IPR (Anon., 2001b:5).
The PE&TC facilitates an annual academic conference which is attended by academics involved with public relations and communication education (PE&TC, 2001a:3). The first conference of this kind was held in 1992. In the same year PRISA introduced an educator=s award, a prize awarded annually to a meritorious public relations educator (Anon., 1992b:5). The first award was presented in 1993 (Moscardi & Honiball, 1993:6). The Institute=s magazine, Communika, also has a regular section on education.
PRISA introduced a voluntary accreditation examination in 1987 (Skinner & Von Essen, 1995:23). Accreditation enables a practitioner to use the designation APR as a symbol of professional status (Skinner et al., 2001:23). A new system for accreditation, doing away with the written examination, was introduced in 1997 (Anon., 1997:1). The new process was based on an oral assessment, and one of two routes could be followed to gain admission. The first was successful completion of the PE&TC course in Public Relations Management, while the second
entailed presenting a proposal document. In both instances candidates first had to obtain 70 points under the PRISA registration system, which means that comprehensive experience in the practice or teaching of public relations was required (PRISA, 2001). In January 2003 the accreditation examination process was changed again, with the new format consisting of self-study, a two-day workshop and both written and oral assessments (Moscardi, 2002b:1).
PRISA negotiated cross-recognition of qualifications with other countries, resulting in accreditation status of PRISA members being recognised in the USA, Canada, Britain, Australia and New Zealand (Anon., 2002:22; PE&TC, 2001a:4).
A process is also underway to register PRISA=s accreditation programme with the National Qualifications Framework in South Africa, which will mean that APR status will be recognised by the Government as a professional qualification (Van Niekerk, 2002a).
PRISA=s contact with the rest of Africa takes place mainly through IPRA. The PRISA Directorate also occasionally receives newsletters from public relations societies in Kenya, Zimbabwe and Nigeria. Some consultants in Africa use PRISA for networking, while countries such as Nigeria and Mozambique send practitioners to South Africa to complete PRISA courses (Van Niekerk, 2002a).
Apart from PRISA, there are a number of smaller public relations societies in South Africa. Examples include the Institute for Municipal Public Relations Officers (IMPRO); the Southern Africa Institute of Fundraising (SAIF); UNITECH, the organisation that unites public relations practitioners employed by technikons and universities; and the Exhibition Association of Southern Africa (EXSA) (EXSA, 2000; Moscardi, 2002a; SAIF, s.a.).
3.7.3.1.2 Public relations education
According to Roodt (1988:59), public relations education is by far the most developed knowledge attribute of the profession in South Africa. At tertiary level, public relations can be studied at public and private universities and colleges, technikons, through the Institute of Administration and Commerce (IAC) and through PRISA.
At public universities in South Africa, public relations is taught as part of a degree in communication, journalism and media studies, communication management or business communication (Anon., 1995a:12-13). Students may also continue their studies and specialise in public relations at the honours, master=s and doctoral level. At some universities, public relations is also taught as a separate management function, as part of business economics within a bachelor of commerce degree (Moscardi & Honiball, 1993:5) or an MBA. A number of universities have also recently introduced structured master=s degrees in corporate communication. Examples include the Rand Afrikaans University (RAU), Potchefstroom University for Christian Higher Education (PU for CHE) and the University of the Free State (UFS).
Communication education at universities began in South Africa in 1960 when the PU for CHE launched a degree programme in journalism. The University of South Africa (UNISA) followed, with the introduction of a post-graduate diploma in journalism in 1963 (Gerbner & Schramm, 1990:17), which was replaced by a degree programme in communication in 1969 (Fourie, 1990:3). After this, many other universities introduced degrees in communication, with subdisciplines like mass communication and public relations (Fourie, 1990:2). In 1978 the Southern African Communication Association (SACOMM) was founded, to promote Communication Science as an academic discipline (SACOMM, 1995:1). In 1999, SACOMM expressed an interest in joining IFCA, and intends to do so when the envisaged restructuring of the former association is completed (Ströh, 1999:1-2).
A three-year N Dip Public Relations was introduced in 1981 at Technikon Witwatersrand, Technikon Pretoria, Natal Technikon (now called the Durban Institute of Technology) and Cape Technikon. By the mid-1980s, the Port Elizabeth Technikon, ML Sultan Technikon (now also part of the Durban Institute of Technology) and Vaal Triangle Technikon had also introduced this programme (Ferreira, 1990:38). Technikon SA introduced this diploma, as a distance learning programme, in 1994.
In 1988 a task group was formed by the relevant technikons, to revise the existing diploma and to plan further qualifications in public relations (Ferreira, 1990:39). The revised diploma and two new qualifications, the National Higher Diploma and the M Tech Diploma in Public Relations,
were approved by the Minister of National Education in 1991 (Garbers, 1991:1; Klopper, 1991:1). In 1993 the Technikon Act (no. 125) was amended, allowing technikons to issue degrees (SA, 1993:1-26). The Higher and M Tech diplomas have consequently been phased out, and replaced by the four-year B Tech and a five-year M Tech degree in Public Relations Management, approved by the Minister of Education in 1994. The D Tech degree in Public Relations Management was approved by the Minister in the same year (Strydom, 1994:1). The name of the three-year diploma simultaneously changed to that of N Dip in Public Relations Management.
Eastern Cape Technikon started offering the N Dip in Public Relations Management in 2002 (Ndaba, 2002).
The IAC introduced a three-year course in management with specialisation in public relations in 1987 (Ferreira, 1990:39). The IAC administers the examination and the course can be studied through various colleges (IAC, 2001).
In accordance with the Higher Education Act (1997), private higher education providers are required to register with the South African Department of Education. The courses that these institutions offer are accredited by the Council on Higher Education (CHE), established in 1998 (SAQA, 2002b). In accordance with a new academic policy for higher education, including a diploma/degree structure, private and foreign higher education providers can apply to the CHE to offer degrees (CHE, 2002). PRISA has submitted an application to change its three-year diploma to a degree course (Van Niekerk, 2002b), while a number of private institutions, such as the Graduate Academy of South Africa, Bond South Africa and the Midrand Graduate Institute, have conditionally registered degree courses in public relations or communication with SAQA (SAQA, 2002a).
An honours degree in communication, the three-year N Dip in Public Relations Management offered by technikons and PRISA=s three-year diploma are all accepted by PRISA as equal qualifications for membership registration purposes (PRISA, 2002b). Private education providers who offer three-year diploma or degree courses in public relations still need to apply to PRISA to obtain formal recognition of those courses for registration purposes (Van Niekerk,
2002b).
3.7.3.2 Development on the rest of the continent
This section provides a brief overview of the development of public relations practice and education on the rest of the African continent.
3.7.3.2.1 Public relations practice
In most countries in the rest of Africa, professional organisation in public relations started later than in South Africa (Ferreira, 1999:32). One exception is Zimbabwe, where an association for public relations - now called the Zimbabwe Institute of Public Relations (ZIPR) - was also established in 1957 (Dickens, 1997).
According to Rhodes and Baker (1994:287), in the Southern African region, the practice of public relations is most advanced in South Africa and Zimbabwe. In the other nine countries, public relations is served by few practitioners, although the industry is growing in size. Swaziland recently formed its own public relations association (IPRA, 2001c), while Botswana, Lesotho and Namibia rely on neighbouring PRISA for professional organisation and education and development (Ferreira, 1999:36). PRISA has recently formed chapters for practitioners in Namibia and Botswana (Van Niekerk, 2002a).
Examples of public relations societies established not long after PRISA include: the Nigerian Institute of Public Relations, formed in 1963 in the form of the then Public Relations Association of Nigeria; the Public Relations Society of Kenya, established in 1971; the Sudan Public Relations Association, formed in 1973; and the Public Relations Association of Uganda, formed in 1976 (Mutabaah, quoted by Ferreira, 1999:32; Njuguna, quoted by Ferreira, 1999:38; Borhan, 1993:19; Ogunmakin, 1993:71-73).
In 1975 an organisation that attempts to unite public relations practitioners in Africa was formed in Nairobi, and named the Federation of African Public Relations Associations (FAPRA)