Public Relations Crisis Management: Theory and Strategy
This paper presents a critique and synthesis of key research on crisis management within the field of public relations. Drawing on foundational theorists including Coombs, Kent and Taylor, Schannon, and others, the paper examines the tools, roles, and activities of public relations, the evolution of issues management models, Situational Crisis Communication Theory (SCCT), and the Dialogic Theory of Public Relations. The paper traces the growth of crisis communication scholarship from the 1980s to the mid-2000s and evaluates how communication strategy, stakeholder management, and organizational dialogue have become increasingly central to effective crisis management in a globalized environment.
- Introduction to Public Relations and Crisis Management: Historical origins and definition of PR crisis management
- Tools, Roles, and Activities of Public Relations: Core PR tools, roles, and operational activities
- Conventional Issues Management Model: Critique of the traditional linear issues management model
- Situational Crisis Communication Theory: SCCT framework and crisis anticipation process
- Dialogic Theory of Public Relations: Dialogue as an ethical communication framework in PR
- Crisis Communication Research Trends: Bibliometric growth of crisis communication scholarship
- Discussion and Conclusion: Integrated dialogue and communication in modern crisis management
✍️ How to write this paper — guide, tools & examples ▾
What makes this paper effective
- It synthesizes multiple theoretical frameworks — SCCT, dialogic theory, and stakeholder-based crisis models — into a cohesive argument about the evolution of crisis management in public relations.
- It grounds abstract theory in concrete examples, such as the Three Mile Island nuclear accident and the growth of scholarly publications on crisis communication from 1981 to 2005.
- The paper moves logically from definitional groundwork (tools, roles, activities) through theoretical critique and toward a practical conclusion about organizational preparedness.
Key academic technique demonstrated
The paper demonstrates effective literature synthesis: rather than summarizing each source in isolation, it positions multiple theorists in relation to one another — showing, for example, how Pearson's early dialogic framework laid groundwork that Kent and Taylor later formalized, and how Schannon's critique of the conventional issues management model points toward the need for non-linear thinking in crisis response.
Structure breakdown
The paper opens with historical context, then defines the scope and function of public relations through a structured breakdown of tools, roles, and activities. It proceeds through three theoretical frameworks — the conventional issues management model, SCCT, and dialogic theory — before incorporating empirical bibliometric data from Chong's database study. The conclusion ties all threads together by arguing for integrated, dialogue-ready organizational communication as the foundation of modern crisis management.
Introduction to Public Relations and Crisis Management
Tim Ziaukas, from the Department of Communication Arts, states that "the 1980s witnessed the early development of a subgenre of public relations — crisis management — spawned in large part by the 1979 nuclear accident at Three Mile Island and the communication challenges that occurred nearly simultaneously" (2002). He further notes that "this emerging subgenre of public relations was, in turn, refined and reinforced by a series of crises that occurred during the 1980s and early 1990s, ranging from product tampering to environmental and natural disasters, and set against a backdrop of burgeoning media outlets and exponentially expanding access by an increasingly sophisticated public" (Ziaukas, nd).
Public relations is a function of management that works toward establishing and maintaining mutually beneficial relationships with other public entities, specifically for the purpose of managing the reputation of the organization in an effective manner. The responsibilities that fall within public relations management include dissemination of information throughout the organization, with a focus on ensuring that policies and procedures are understood by all members.
Tools, Roles, and Activities of Public Relations
The tools and strategies of public relations include: (1) identification of relevant publics and their associated reactions; (2) effective message design; and (3) effective use of the media (Australian Government, nd).
The role of public relations encompasses: (1) placing a subject on the public agenda; (2) garnering public support and endorsement of a person, product, organization, or idea; (3) extending advertising campaigns; and (4) delivering complex information and messages (Australian Government, nd).
Public relations activities include:
(1) issues management; (2) crisis management; (3) media relations; (4) merchandising support; (5) event management; (6) promotion; (7) public affairs; (8) publicity; and (9) sponsorship (Australian Government, nd).
Issues management "involves proactive, systematic identification of issues of potential concern to an organization and development of a system to respond to them." Crisis management is the systematic identification of existing issues and appropriate responses to unplanned events. Media relations involves coping with the media through providing information, responses, and other communications. Merchandising support revolves around product, idea, or image packaging. Event management involves planning in order to gain media attention. Promotional activities represent the organization's attempts to gain support. Public affairs is an intricate area of public relations that includes dealing with community officials, pressure groups, and legislative bodies. Publicity must be managed to further the organization's goals and execute public messages. Sponsorship is a contractual agreement in which promotional opportunities are exchanged for services or money.
Conventional Issues Management Model
Mark Schannon, in his work "Issue Management: Trying to Create Rational Explanations in a Non-Rational World," states that millions of dollars are spent each year in the attempt to answer questions related to crisis management. Schannon notes that "sophisticated research, econometric analyses, media analyses, NGO analyses, and past and future trends are scoured" in the attempt to address these questions. Schannon reviews the conventional issues management model, which was used by many organizations — including the Public Affairs Council — until approximately 2001. This model, according to Schannon, "tracks the intensity of audience engagement in an issue over time. It presupposes a rational linear system that can be measured and predicted. But it fails to capture the reality of the experience" (2004).
Schannon argues that the old model of crisis management did not work for the following reasons:
First, issue change does not occur gradually but may be "abrupt and violent, based on having reached certain thresholds. Something happens to an issue's system, causing it to instantly leap or fall to a new level of engagement. One can envision adding energy into the system until it reaches a threshold level and intensifies, or draining enough energy from the system so that the issue immediately drops to a lower engagement level. This hypothesis is at the heart of a new approach to issues management" (Schannon, 2004).
Second, issue progression is not linear. Awareness does not flow neatly from one target audience to another. Issues arise in unexpected places, affecting disparate and unlikely populations, and they can disappear just as quickly (Schannon, 2004).
Third, issues do not evolve arithmetically. One plus one does not equal two, but sometimes four, and sometimes zero. Twice the number of activists can cancel each other out or quadruple awareness of the issue (Schannon, 2004).
Bibliography
Chong, M. (nd). Crisis communication through the years: A preliminary analysis of articles in the Business Source Premier database (1981–2005).
Coombs, T. W. (2004). Impact of past crises on current crisis communication: Insights from Situational Crisis Communication Theory. Journal of Business Communication, July 2004.
Heath, R. L. (2002). Handbook of Public Relations.
How to Write a Brief for a Public Relations Consultant (nd). Australian Government — Department of the Prime Minister and Cabinet, Government Communications Unit.
Kent, M. L. and Taylor, M. (2002). Toward a dialogic theory of public relations. Public Relations Review, 28(2002), 21–37.
Pearson, R. (1989a). Business ethics as communication ethics: Public relations practice and the idea of dialogue. In C. H. Botan and V. Hazleton (Eds.), Public Relations Theory. Lawrence Erlbaum, Hillsdale, NJ, pp. 111–131.
Pohl, G. M. (nd). Teaching public relations in a crisis: The terrorist attacks on the United States. Department of Communication Studies.
Schannon, M. (2006). Issue management: Trying to create rational explanations in a non-rational world. The Journal of Promotion and Management, 6 April 2007.
Ziaukas, T. (2002). Environmental public relations and crisis management: Two paradigmatic cases — Bhopal and Exxon. In A. Farazmand (Ed.), Handbook of Crisis and Emergency Management.
Always verify citation format against your institution’s current style guide requirements.