This article was downloaded by: [Purdue University]On: 17 August 2011, At: 09:31Publisher: RoutledgeInforma Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954Registered office: Mortimer House, 37-41 Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH,UK

Journal of Public RelationsResearchPublication details, including instructions forauthors and subscription information:http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/hprr20

Strategic Thinking aboutEmployee CommunicationBehavior (ECB) in PublicRelations: Testing the Modelsof Megaphoning and ScoutingEffects in KoreaJeong-Nam Kim a & Yunna Rhee ba Department of Communication, Purdue Universityb Division of Journalism and Mass Communication,Hankuk University of Foreign Studies

Available online: 21 Jun 2011

To cite this article: Jeong-Nam Kim & Yunna Rhee (2011): Strategic Thinking aboutEmployee Communication Behavior (ECB) in Public Relations: Testing the Models ofMegaphoning and Scouting Effects in Korea, Journal of Public Relations Research,23:3, 243-268

To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/1062726X.2011.582204

PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE

Full terms and conditions of use: http://www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-and-conditions

This article may be used for research, teaching and private study purposes.Any substantial or systematic reproduction, re-distribution, re-selling, loan,

sub-licensing, systematic supply or distribution in any form to anyone isexpressly forbidden.

The publisher does not give any warranty express or implied or make anyrepresentation that the contents will be complete or accurate or up todate. The accuracy of any instructions, formulae and drug doses should beindependently verified with primary sources. The publisher shall not be liablefor any loss, actions, claims, proceedings, demand or costs or damageswhatsoever or howsoever caused arising directly or indirectly in connectionwith or arising out of the use of this material.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Purd

ue U

nive

rsity

] at

09:

31 1

7 A

ugus

t 201

1

Strategic Thinking about EmployeeCommunication Behavior (ECB) in

Public Relations:Testing the Models of Megaphoning

and Scouting Effects in Korea

Jeong-Nam KimDepartment of Communication, Purdue University

Yunna RheeDivision of Journalism and Mass Communication,

Hankuk University of Foreign Studies

In public relations, employees are regarded as one of the most importantstrategic constituencies because they interact with external publics on a dailybasis. However, employees’ communication behavior (ECB) has not beenextensively researched in public relations. The purpose of this research wasto conceptualize and develop concrete measurements of ECB that can helptheoretical development and strategic planning in public relations. In parti-cular, the study identified two unique aspects of ECB—megaphoning andscouting—that refer to employees’ voluntary efforts to collect and circulatestrategic information externally and internally. In addition, a new concept,microboundary spanning, based on the two aspects of ECB is conceptualized.In this study, symmetrical internal communication and employee-organizationrelationships were posited as antecedent variables to the proposed ECB vari-ables. A survey research was conducted with 300 employees in different typesof organizations in Korea.

This work was supported by Hankuk University of Foreign Studies Research Fund of 2008

and by Research Incentive Grant of 2008, College of Liberal Arts, Purdue University.

Correspondence should be sent to Jeong-Nam Kim, Department of Communication,

Purdue University, 2114 Beering Hall, 100 North University Street, West Lafayette, IN

47907-2098. E-mail: situationaltheory@gmail.com

Journal of Public Relations Research, 23(3):243–268, 2011

Copyright # Taylor & Francis Group, LLC

ISSN: 1062-726X print=1532-754X online

DOI: 10.1080/1062726X.2011.582204

243

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Purd

ue U

nive

rsity

] at

09:

31 1

7 A

ugus

t 201

1

Employees have been regarded as one of the most important strategicconstituencies in public relations (Jo & Kim, 2005). It is often said that,in practice, employees informally play the role of public relations practi-tioners as they interact with publics outside the organization. Some scholarsargue that the communication behavior of employees who come in directcontact with external publics is important because publics perceive it to bemore neutral compared to sophisticated public relations messages (Center& Jackson, 2003).

If, indeed, employees’ interaction with external publics affects public rela-tions outcomes such as organizational reputation and organization–publicrelationship quality, it is necessary to thoroughly understand employeecommunication behavior (ECB). However, ECB has seldom been a focalresearch topic in public relations. Rather, much public relations researchhas regarded employees as target publics who are recipients of organiza-tional messages (Jo & Kim, 2005).

The purpose of this study was to conceptualize and identify pertinentdimensions of ECB that can aid both theoretical development and strategicplanning in public relations. In this study, two unique aspects of ECBare identified—the megaphoning effect and the scouting effect. The twoconcepts refer to employees’ voluntary efforts to collect and circulateinformation related to the organizationexternally and internally. Further-more, a new concept—microboundary spanning—is proposed by combiningthe measurements of these two effects. Based on a literature review, thestudy also examined under what conditions such effects could be likely. Inparticular, symmetrical internal communication strategies and employees’relationship quality with the organization are posited as antecedent vari-ables that can affect employee communication behavior (ECB). A detaileddiscussion of ECB follows.

EMPLOYEE COMMUNICATION BEHAVIOR (ECB)

Scholars from various disciplines have reported on the importance of ECB.In business management, marketing, and industrial psychology, scholarshave found empirical research evidence that suggests employees’ commu-nicative actions can greatly affect customers’ satisfaction with the organi-zation and, furthermore, organizational performance such as profits(Czaplewski, 2001; Schneider, 1990; Schneider, White, & Paul, 1998).Employees can also become informal agents who collect information thathas strategic value to the organization, or they can relay and circulate learnedinformation to other members of their organization (Dozier, 1986, 1990;Okura, Dozier, Sha, & Hofstetter, 2008). In the communication literature,

244 KIM AND RHEE

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Purd

ue U

nive

rsity

] at

09:

31 1

7 A

ugus

t 201

1

crisis management scholars in particular argue that employees can play therole of organizational advocates in their interactions with external publicsduring emergency situations (Rhee, 2008a, 2008b).

The importance of ECB has also been suggested by annual studies con-ducted by major public relations agencies. Since 2006, Ketchum (a majorUS public relations agency) has been conducting a Media Myth & Realitiessurvey. Through the years, the survey has found that word-of-mouth com-munication is becoming more critical even with changes in new media tech-nology. According to the research, when making decisions about productsand services or in forming opinions about organizations consumers regardadvice from family and friends, people they know and trust, as the mostinfluential factor (Ketchum & USC Annenberg Strategic Communication& PR Center, 2009). In other words, rather than relying on carefully devisedmarketing communication messages, consumers are more likely to believeinformation relayed through interpersonal channels. The survey suggeststhat organizations can reap huge benefits by tapping into the word-of-mouth network, which includes employee-customer interactions.

Another major US PR agency, Edelman, has also been conducting aTrust Barometer survey for the last 10 years. In their recent research report(Edelman, 2009), Edelman found that the credibility of traditional massmedia such as television, radio, and newspapers is continually decreasing.Around the world,1 conversations with friends and peers and conversationswith employees were trusted as sources of information about a company asmuch as mass media. The report singles out employees in particular as acritical communication channel in public relations.

In sum, various scholars and practitioners regard ECB as a phenomenonthat carries significant strategic value for their hosting organizations. How-ever, in public relations little empirical research has closely examined ECBas something that can affect public relations outcomes. To understandhow ECB can affect public relations outcomes, it is necessary to first identifythe specific ECB dimensions that are of relevance to public relations.

Based on literature review of various disciplines including public rela-tions, organizational behavior, business management, and marketing, themegaphoning and scouting concepts are proposed as phenomena that canaffect public relations outcomes. Furthermore, this study introduces micro-boundary spanning, which is developed by combining the two uniqueaspects of employees’ voluntary information behaviors.

1In 2009, Edelman conducted its survey in 20 countries, including the United States, Japan,

Korea, United Kingdom, China, Russia, India, and Italy (for a full list of countries, see www.

edelman,com/trust/midyear/).

EMPLOYEE COMMUNICATION BEHAVIOR 245

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Purd

ue U

nive

rsity

] at

09:

31 1

7 A

ugus

t 201

1

Megaphoning2

It is not difficult to find employees who engage in badmouthing theirown organization. For example, they may leak confidential information,or blame management practice as the core reason for organizational pro-blems or issues. It could be that this type of ECB has a negative influenceon organizational reputation or the organization–public relationship per-ceived by external publics. In contrast, there are employees who tend tospread good reports about the organization to external publics. In thisstudy, employees’ positive or negative external communication behaviorsabout their organization are defined as the megaphoning effect, the likeli-hood of employees’ voluntary information forwarding or informationsharing about organizational strengths (accomplishments) or weaknesses(problems).

In conceptualizing information forwarding and sharing, the studyadopted the situational theory of problem solving (STOPS; J.-N. Kim &J. E. Grunig, 2011). STOPS is a theory that generalizes the situationaltheory of publics (J. E. Grunig, 1997) by introducing a model of communi-cative action in problem solving (CAPS; J.-N. Kim, 2006) as the dependentvariable. The theory of STOPS and CAPS explains that the extent of com-municative actions increases as one becomes more motivated in problemsolving. J.-N. Kim and J. Grunig suggested information seeking, infor-mation forwarding, and information forefending as (pro) active communi-cation behaviors; and information attending, information sharing, andinformation permitting as passive or reactive communication behaviors.

Information seeking is defined as ‘‘the planned scanning of theenvironment for messages about a specified topic’’ (J. E. Grunig, 1997,p. 9); information forwarding refers to the extent of planned, self-propelledinformation giving to others; and information forefending is defined as theextent to which a problem solver fends off certain information in advanceby judging its value and relevance for a given problem-solving task (J.-N.Kim & J. E. Grunig, 2011). Information attending is defined as an‘‘unplanned discovery of a message followed by continued processing ofit’’ (J. E. Grunig, 1997, p. 9); information sharing refers to the extent of shar-ing information reactively only when someone requests one’s opinion, idea,or expertise about the problem (J.-N. Kim & J. E. Grunig, 2011); andinformation permitting is the extent to which a problem solver accepts any

2In this study, employees’ positive or negative external communication behaviors about

their organization are defined as the megaphoning effect, the likelihood of employees’ voluntary

and selective information forwarding or information sharing about organizational strengths or

weaknesses.

246 KIM AND RHEE

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Purd

ue U

nive

rsity

] at

09:

31 1

7 A

ugus

t 201

1

information related to a given problem-solving task (J.-N. Kim & J. E.Grunig, 2011).

In J.-N. Kim and J. E. Grunig’s (in press) series of research work,measurements for communication behaviors were found to be reliable andvalid. For the purposes of this research, rather than using the informationacquisition variables suggested in the situational theory of publics, theCAPS dimensions offered more ways to describe the diverse communicationbehaviors of employees. For instance, some employees may equate organi-zational difficulty (organizational problematic situation) as their own prob-lem and, thus, experience heightened communicative action—i.e., seekingand forwarding=sharing by selecting information to advocate the organiza-tion’s position. Other employees may care less about their organization’shardships and engage mainly in passive communicative action—i.e., infor-mation attending, information sharing, and information permitting.

Although the megaphoning concept tries to capture employees’ positiveor negative external communication behaviors about their organizationalaccomplishments or problems, scouting refers to employees’ voluntary com-munication efforts to bring relevant information to the organization.

Scouting

The conceptual basis for scouting can be found in environmental scanningliterature. According to Dozier (1986), environmental scanning can bedefined as ‘‘the gathering of information about publics, about reactions ofpublics toward the organization, and about public opinion toward issuesimportant to the organization’’ (p. 1). He further explained that there aretwo forms of environmental scanning, formal and informal. Scientific orformal scanning tends to generate information about publics that can bemore useful for management than informal scanning (Dozier, 1990). Mostliterature on environmental scanning in public relations (Broom & Dozier,1990; Dozier, 1986, 1990; Lauzen, 1995; Lauzen & Dozier, 1994; Okuraet al., 2008) has conceptually discussed formal, systematic, and continuousscanning of organization environments at the department or functionallevel. Environmental scanning research in public relations emphasizes thatpractitioners should follow a formal scanning procedure.

However, in this study it is assumed that such expert environmental scan-ning efforts can be supplemented by the organization’s nonspecialist mem-bers’ scanning efforts. The study argues that it is desirable and feasible forindividual organization members to enact their environmental scanningroles and become agents for intraorganization information circulation. Thiswould complement formalized environmental scanning in that it coulddecrease the cost of information gathering, expand the scope and

EMPLOYEE COMMUNICATION BEHAVIOR 247

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Purd

ue U

nive

rsity

] at

09:

31 1

7 A

ugus

t 201

1

boundaries of information gathering, and increase the quality of infor-mation because each individual employee tends to identify informationrelated to their own areas of expertise (i.e., provide better chances for detect-ing crucial information than a PR manager).

According to organizational scholar Stoffels (1994), most environmentalinformation comes from personal sources. Inside the organization, moresubordinates communicate strategic information than superiors. Outsidethe firm, persons unrelated to the business, such as customers, lenders,and suppliers, are sources of strategic information. J. E. Grunig and L. A.Grunig (2000) similarly noted that strategic information for the organiza-tion can come from internal and external sources, and can be personal orimpersonal. Chang’s (2000) Delphi study on senior public relations practi-tioners in US corporations further found that personal sources are moreuseful than impersonal sources, and external sources are more useful thaninternal sources. Whereas environmental scanning by formal proceduresand continual functional levels (e.g., the public relations department) is criti-cal, the researchers contend that individual employees’ information seekingthrough external contacts and from informal sources are as crucial as formalprocedures.

This study proposes scouting as the individual employee’s volunteeredinformation behaviors—not only attending and seeking of informationencountered during the employee’s formal and informal interactions withorganizational strategic constituencies, but the employee’s sharing and for-warding of this information with the organization. Different from the exist-ing environmental scanning literature, scouting focuses on the collective sumof nonpublic relations practitioner employees’ communication efforts. Next,based on a review of relevant literature, megaphoning and scouting conceptsare integrated to conceptualize microboundary spanning.

Microboundary Spanning

Boundary spanning has been one of the most actively researched topics(Dean, 2008) in management and organizational behavior literature. Scho-lars have argued that for an organization to be effective—whether in theareas of knowledge management, manufacturing efficiency, or policyimplementation—it needs boundary spanners who serve as bridges betweenthe organization and its environment that transfer valuable ‘‘information,ideas, and resources across intra-organizational or inter-organizationalboundaries’’ (Dean, 2008, p. 34). According to Leifer and Delbecq (1978),boundary spanners can be defined as employees who ‘‘operate at the periph-ery or boundary of an organization, performing organizationally relevanttasks, relating the organization with elements outside of it’’ (pp. 40-41).

248 KIM AND RHEE

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Purd

ue U

nive

rsity

] at

09:

31 1

7 A

ugus

t 201

1

Tushman and Scanlan (1981) explained that these people do not necessarilyhold formal positions within the organization. They describe boundaryspanning as a two-step process, ‘‘obtaining information from outside unitsand disseminating this information to internal users’’ (p. 292).

In public relations, the concept of boundary spanning was adopted toexplain the role that public relations practitioners play in organizations(J. E. Grunig &Hunt, 1984). However, the concept was never used to explorethe possible public relations roles that employees may play. As was discussedin the introduction, public relations scholars consider nonpublic relationsemployees to be important public relations assets because they may be con-sidered a more credible source of information by external publics.

In boundary spanning literature, clear differentiation exists between thedesignated boundary spanners and those who are not formally designatedbut are considered boundary spanners in the organizations (Levina & Vaast,2005). According to Levine and Vaast (2005), the term ‘‘nominated bound-ary spanners’’ refers to ‘‘agents who were assigned by the empowered agentsin a field to perform certain roles in spanning boundaries of diverse fields’’(p. 342). In contrast, ‘‘boundary spanners-in-practice refers to agents who,with or without nomination, engage in spanning (navigating and negotiat-ing) boundaries of diverse fields’’ (p. 342). This research focuses on employ-ees who are not public relations practitioners, and who engage incommunication behaviors that can influence public relations outcomes. InLevine and Vaast’s terms, this study is interested in the individual employ-ee’s likelihood of becoming a boundary spanner-in-practice.

In this study, the term microboundary spanning is introduced to refer tononnominated (nondesignated) employees’ voluntary communication beha-viors to (a) disperse positive information for one’s organization, (b) searchand obtain valuable organization-related information from internal andexternal constituencies, and (c) disseminate acquired information internallywith relevant internal personnel and groups. In other words, the new con-cept of microboundary spanning describes the extent of voluntary two-waycommunication efforts by nonnominated employees between organizationsand its strategic publics. In the following, conditions that may prompt theproposed ECBs are examined.

ANTECEDENTS TO ECB

It is not hard to imagine that employees who have experienced good qualityrelationships will tend to engage in communicative behaviors that increase‘‘strategic opportunities’’ and decrease ‘‘strategic threats’’ (J.-N. Kim,Ni, & Sha, 2008, p. 752). In other words, those employees with good

EMPLOYEE COMMUNICATION BEHAVIOR 249

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Purd

ue U

nive

rsity

] at

09:

31 1

7 A

ugus

t 201

1

relationships are likely to select, forward, and share information aboutpositive aspects of their organizations in their routine interactions withother strategic publics—i.e., the positive megaphoning effect. In addition,those employees are more likely to voluntarily seek, process, forward, andshare information related to (potential) organizational problems (strategicthreats), or identify and circulate information that cultivates organizationalinterests (strategic opportunities)—i.e., the scouting effect. Scouting andmegaphoning effects are both likely because employees with good relation-ships are more empathic to organizational problems. In the following, a briefliterature review on relationship management in public relations is provided.

Employee Relationships

Prompted by Ferguson’s (1984) argument, the relationship between anorganization and its key publics became the focus of recent public relationsresearch. In much public relations research, organization–public relation-ship is operationally defined as a variable that can be represented by specificsubdimensions.

For instance, Bruning and Ledingham (1998) surveyed literature in inter-personal communication and social psychology and identified five dimen-sions of relationships: trust, openness, involvement, investment, andcommitment. According to Huang (2001), the quality of organization–publicrelationships that results from public relations practice can be measured bytrust, control mutuality, relational commitment, and relational satisfaction.They also suggest indicators of these outcomes that provide evaluative mea-sures for the quality of organization–public relationships (for a detailed dis-cussion on each dimension, see J. E. Grunig & Huang, 2000).

The validity and reliability of J. E. Grunig and Huang’s (2000)organization–public relationship constructs have been tested in variousresearch works and have been widely discussed in public relations research(Jo, 2006; Ki & Hon, 2007; Y. Kim, 2001; Moon & Rhee, 2008). For thepurposes of this study, the widely tested organization–public relationshipconstruct of J. E. Grunig and Huangwas adopted to measure the qualityof employee–organization association.

Based on literature review, the following hypotheses are posited:

H1: Employees who evaluate their relationship with the organizationpositively are more likely to engage in forwarding and sharing orga-nizational accomplishments to external constituencies (positivemegaphoning effect).

H2: Employees who evaluate their relationship with the organizationnegatively are more likely to engage in forwarding and sharing

250 KIM AND RHEE

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Purd

ue U

nive

rsity

] at

09:

31 1

7 A

ugus

t 201

1

organizational problems to external constituencies (negativemegaphoning effect).

The effects of quality relationships on employees’ communication beha-viors can be more substantial when organizations experience turbulenceand crisis. If members of an employee public have experienced good-qualitylong-term relationships with their employer organization, they are likely toconsider organizational problems as their own, and are thus likely to for-ward and share supportive information for their organization during theorganizational turbulence. In contrast, if employees have experiencedpoor-quality relationships, they are less empathic to the organizational situ-ation and more likely to disassociate themselves from their working organi-zation. Even worse, they empathize with external active publics who criticizeand attack the troubling organization and attribute problematic situationsto organizational management. As in H1–H2, we expected that the qualityof relationships would influence the empathic direction of employees duringturbulent periods. Hence the following is hypothesized:

H3: During organizational turbulence, employees who evaluate theirrelationship with the organization positively are more likely toengage in forwarding and sharing of positive information abouttheir organization to external constituencies (positive megaphoningeffect—advocate).

H4: During organizational turbulence, employees who evaluate theirrelationship with the organization negatively are more likely toengage in forwarding and sharing of negative information abouttheir organization to external constituencies (negative megaphoningeffect—adversary).

This study argues that the quality of relationships that employees experi-ence will be the key antecedent condition for increasing scouting effortsbecause employees who experience good-quality relationships with theirworking organizations would want their working organization to performbetter and succeed. In other words, when individual employees have a goodrelationship with their organizations, they are more likely to equate organi-zations’ interests and problems as their own. From the CAPS frame, it isexpected that good relationships will also increase information seeking, for-warding, and sharing via heightened shared problem perception amongemployees. Thus the following hypothesis is proposed:

H5: Employees who evaluate their relationships with the organizationpositively are more likely to engage in scouting.

EMPLOYEE COMMUNICATION BEHAVIOR 251

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Purd

ue U

nive

rsity

] at

09:

31 1

7 A

ugus

t 201

1

By combining the positive megaphoning and scouting effect, this studyproposes the microboundary spanning concept in an attempt to examinewhether the boundary spanning concept that had been used mainly by PRpractitioners could be expanded to explain ECB. In this vein, the followinghypothesis is posited:

H6: Employees who evaluate their relationships with the organizationpositively are more likely to engage in microboundary spanning.

Internal Communication

In employee relations research, internal communication has often beendiscussed and proposed as one of the key antecedents that influences thequality of the relationship between an organization and its employees (Jo& Shim, 2005; H. Kim, 2007; Robertson, 2003; Welch & Jackson, 2007).In public relations J. E. Grunig (1992) proposed the application of sym-metrical and asymmetrical communication concepts; a series of studiesfollowed (H. Kim, 2007; Moon & Rhee, 2008; Rhee, 2008b). Symmetricalcommunication behavior is characterized by its emphasis on ‘‘trust, credi-bility, openness, . . . reciprocity, network symmetry, horizontal communi-cation, feedback, . . . negotiation’’ (J. E. Grunig, 1989, p. 558). In contrast,asymmetrical communication is described as a one-way driven, top-downapproach in which lower-level employees have little chance to offer inputin organizational decision-making processes (J. E. Grunig, 1992). Asym-metrical communicators are more likely to be authoritarian and allow theiremployees little autonomy (Sriramesh & White, 1992). In his research, J. E.Grunig (1992) developed an internal communication audit survey that usedmeasures of symmetrical and asymmetrical communication.

Studies have shown that there are positive associations between sym-metrical internal communication and employee-related variables such asjob satisfaction, trust, and empowerment (Jo & Shim, 2005; Liden, Wayne,& Sparrowe, 2000; Smidts, Pruyn, & van Riel, 2001; Spreitzer, 1995). In thisstudy, symmetrical internal communication is defined as two-way communi-cation that opts for mutual benefit and is characterized by openness, feed-back, listening, opportunities for participation in the decision-makingprocess, and accessibility. Based on past research results, the study assumedthat symmetrical internal communication will positively contribute torelationship outcomes.

H7: Symmetrical internal communication efforts contribute to the devel-opment of positive employee-organization relationships.

252 KIM AND RHEE

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Purd

ue U

nive

rsity

] at

09:

31 1

7 A

ugus

t 201

1

METHOD

Participants3

Participants in this study were recruited through a research companybetween September and October, 2008. They were current employees ofvarious organizations in Seoul, Korea. Rather than recruiting specific orga-nizations, this study recruited individuals currently working for any type oforganization. This decision was made in part because the study’s main focuswas to develop and test theoretical concepts of employees’ external com-munication behavior. The research company solicited participation fromtheir existing research panel members of 400,000 in Korea by sending oute-mails. When participants accepted the e-mail solicitation, they were linkedto a Web-site survey. Our final sample size was 300; the researchers adopteda stratified random sampling4 by using the research panel population as thesampling frame to recruit equal gender ratio (n¼ 150 of male vs. n¼ 150 offemale).

In addition, we aimed at having comparable numbers in four age groups:20–29 (n¼ 86, 28.7%), 30–39 (n¼ 100, 33.3%), 40–49 (n¼ 76, 25.3%), and50–59 (n¼ 38, 12.7%). Participants’ education varied from high school(n¼ 55, 18.3%), 2-year college (n¼ 55, 18.3 percent), 4-year college (n¼ 151,50.3%), graduate school (n¼ 36, 12%), and others (n¼ 3, 1%). Finally, parti-cipants’ ranks in their organizations were low-level worker (n¼ 112, 37.3%),low-level manager (n¼ 34, 11.3%), middle-level manager (n¼ 91, 30.3%),upper-level manager (n¼ 44, 14.7%), and others (n¼ 19, 6.3%).

Measurements

In this study, all items used a seven-point Likert-type scale, ranging fromvery strongly disagree (¼1) to very strongly agree (¼7). Detailed items foreach variable are shown in Table 1. Measurements for symmetrical internal

3Because the research panel was created by identifying and recruiting candidate individuals

independent of each other, the chances are very low that the participants overlapped in their

working organizations. To determine the sample size, we followed Hancock’s (2006) power

analysis in covariance structure modeling to estimate acceptable level of power (e.g., .80).

Although there is no golden rule in determining a priori power analysis in structural equation

modeling (SEM), in his simulation studies Hancock recommends that at the RMSEA (e)¼ .02

and models’ df� 60, to achieve power (p), sample sizes of n¼ 300 are sufficient to test overall

data-model fit.4The study chose a probability sampling method—a stratified random sampling. However,

it is important to note that the study’s goal was to develop new theoretical concepts. In other

words, statistical generalization to the Korean population was not the purpose of this study.

EMPLOYEE COMMUNICATION BEHAVIOR 253

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Purd

ue U

nive

rsity

] at

09:

31 1

7 A

ugus

t 201

1

TABLE1

MeasurementModelParameterEstim

ates(N

¼300)

Latentvariable

Measurementitem

Parameter

estimate

R2

Megap

honingpositive

(a¼.88)

Write

positivecomments

oradvo

catingpostingformyorganizationontheInternet.

.34��

�.11

Saygoodthingsto

friendsandneighbors

aboutpositiveaspects

ofthemanagementand

company.

.68��

�.46

Routinelyrecommendmyorganizationanditsservice=productsto

people.

.77��

�.60

Attem

ptto

persuadepeople

whohavenegativeopinionsaboutmyorganization.

.86��

�.74

Refute

prejudiced

orstereotyped

opinionsaboutmyorganization.

.73��

�.53

Inthepast,foughtwiththose

whocriticized

myorganizationandbusiness.

.68��

�.47

Becomeupsetandtendto

speakupwhen

encounteringignorantorbiasedopinionsaboutmy

organization.

.71��

�.51

Megap

honingnegative

(a¼.78)

Post

negativethingsaboutmyorganizationontheInternet.

.23��

�.05

Talk

aboutthemistakes

andproblemsofourmanagementto

familyandfriends.

.80��

�.63

State

tofriendsandfamilythatmyorganizationisrunmore

poorlythancompetitors.

.94��

�.89

Talk

topeople

abouttheproblemsofourservice=products.

.68��

�.47

Agreewithpeople

whocriticizemyorganization.

.55��

�.31

Scouting(a¼.90)

Meetandcheckwithsuppliersandgovernmentofficialsto

collectnew

inform

ation.

.82��

�.67

Voluntarily

meetandcheckwiththose

people

whohavegrievanceswithorganization.

.80��

�.63

Voluntarily

checkpeople’sfeedback

onorganizationalevents.

.79��

�.62

Searchfornew

inform

ationandsubscribeto

Listserv,new

sletters,publicationsfor

organization.

.81��

�.66

Even

after

workinghours

contact

strategicpublics

andstakeholdersfortheircomplaints

and

new

inform

ationandshare

theinform

ationwithcolleagues.

.85��

�.73

Makeextraeffort

tocultivate

andmaintain

relationshipswithexternalstakeholdersand

strategicpublics.

.74��

�.55

Meetpeoplewhowork

forsimilarbusinessesandcheckrumors

andnew

saboutorganizationor

business.

.75��

�.56

Start

conversationorgiveinform

ationto

relevantcolleagues

aboutnew

trendsorunusual

signalsrelatedto

work.

.70��

�.48

254

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Purd

ue U

nive

rsity

] at

09:

31 1

7 A

ugus

t 201

1

Trust

(a¼.87)

Whenever

thiscompanymakes

anim

portantdecision,Iknow

itwillbeconcerned

aboutme.

.85��

�.72

Thiscompanycanberelied

onto

keepitspromises.

.75��

�.57

Ibelievethatthiscompanytakes

myopinionsinto

accountwhen

makingdecisions.

.85��

�.72

Ifeel

veryconfidentaboutthiscompany’sskills.

.76��

�.58

Controlmutuality

(a¼.86)

ThiscompanyandIare

attentiveto

whateach

other

says.

.67��

�.45

Thiscompanybelieves

myopinionsare

legitim

ate.

.74��

�.54

Indealingwithme,

thiscompanyhasatendency

tothrow

itsweightaround.1

.84��

�.71

Thiscompanyreallylistensto

whatIhave

tosay.

.82��

�.67

Commitment(a¼.80)

Ifeel

thatthiscompanyistryingto

maintain

along-term

commitmentto

me.

.61��

�.37

Icanseethatthiscompanywants

tomaintain

arelationship

withme.

.73��

�.53

Thereisnolong-lastingbondbetweenthiscompanyandme.

.68��

�.46

Satisfaction(a¼.88)

Iam

happywiththiscompany.

.78��

�.60

Both

theorganizationandIbenefitfrom

therelationship.

.69��

�.47

Iam

nothappyin

myinteractionswiththiscompany.

.83��

�.69

Generallyspeaking,Iam

pleasedwiththerelationship

thiscompanyhasestablished

withme.

.83��

�.69

OPRA

(a¼.87)

Trust

.94��

�.89

Controlmutuality

.95��

�.91

Commitment

.89��

�.80

Satisfaction

.84��

�.70

Symmetrical

communicationeffort

(a¼.93)

Mostcommunicationbetweenmanagers

andother

employeesin

ourcompanycanbesaid

tobe

two-w

aycommunication.

.77��

�.59

Ourcompanyencourages

differencesofopinion.

.88��

�.78

Thepurpose

ofcommunicationin

ourcompanyisto

helpmanagers

beresponsiveto

the

problemsofem

ployees.

.87��

�.76

Supervisors

encourageem

ployeesto

express

differencesofopinion.

.92��

�.84

Employeesare

usuallyinform

edaboutmajorchanges

inpolicy

thataffectourjobbefore

they

takeplace.

.80��

�.64

Employeesare

notafraid

tospeakupduringmeetingswithsupervisors

andmanagers.

.72��

�.51

Microboundary

spanning(a¼.93)

Writingpositivecomments

oradvocatingpostingformyorganizationontheInternet.

.40��

�.161

Saygoodthingsto

friendsandneighbors

aboutpositiveaspects

ofthemanagementand

company.

.47��

�.22

(Continued

)

255

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Purd

ue U

nive

rsity

] at

09:

31 1

7 A

ugus

t 201

1

TABLE1

Continued

Latentvariable

Measurementitem

Parameter

estimate

R2

Routinelyrecommendmyorganizationanditsservice=productsto

people.

.60��

�.37

Attem

ptto

persuadepeople

whohavenegativeopinionsaboutmyorganization.

.66��

.44

Refute

prejudiced

orstereotyped

opinionsaboutmyorganization.

.65��

�.43

Inthepast,foughtwiththose

whocriticized

myorganizationandbusiness.

.60��

�.36

Becomeupsetandtendto

speakupwhen

encounteringignorantorbiasedopinionsaboutmy

organization.

.56��

�.32

Meetandcheckwithsuppliersandgovernmentofficialsto

collectnew

inform

ation.

.81��

�.66

Voluntarily

meetandcheckwiththose

people

whohavegrievanceswithorganization.

.80��

�.63

Voluntarily

checkpeople’sfeedback

onorganizationalevents.

.78��

�.61

Searchfornew

inform

ationandsubscribeto

Listserv,new

sletters,publicationsfor

organization.

.81��

�.66

Even

after

workinghours

contact

strategicpublics

andstakeholdersfortheircomplaints

and

new

inform

ationandshare

theinform

ationwithcolleagues.

.84��

�.71

Makeextraeffort

tocultivate

andmaintain

relationshipswithexternalstakeholdersand

strategicpublics.

.75��

�.57

Meetpeoplewhowork

forsimilarbusinessesandcheckrumors

andnew

saboutorganizationor

business.

.74��

�.54

Start

conversationorgiveinform

ationto

relevantcolleagues

aboutnew

trendsorunusual

signalsrelatedto

work.

.69��

�.48

NOTE.OPRA

Scale¼Organ

ization-PublicRelationship

Assessm

entScale.

��� p

<.001.

256

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Purd

ue U

nive

rsity

] at

09:

31 1

7 A

ugus

t 201

1

communication were largely adopted from H. Kim’s (2007) work based onJ. E. Grunig’s auditing scale. To measure employee–organization relation-ships, J. E. Grunig and Huang’s (2000) items for commitment, trust, satis-faction, and control-mutuality were imported.

As for scouting, the researchers conducted a theoretical analysis of exist-ing literature on environmental scanning and boundary spanning, such asStoffels (1994) and Tushman and Scanlan (1981), and drafted originalmeasurement scale items to fit the study’s conceptual definition. Likewise,in connection with the new megaphoning concept, the study developedoriginal items according to the operationalization of negative megaphoningand positive megaphoning. J.-N. Kim and J. E. Grunig’s (in press) measure-ment items were modified to draft scale items—i.e., information seeking,information forwarding and sharing, and information forefending. To cre-ate measures for microboundary spanning, all the items for positive mega-phoning were selected as an employee’s external communicative efforts(i.e., information forefending and forwarding=sharing externally), and allthe items for scouting as an employee’s internal communicative efforts(i.e., information seeking and forwarding=sharing internally). Detaileddescriptions of items are shown in Table 1.

Analysis

An internal consistency test using Cronbach’s alpha was conducted for thelatent variables. Structural equation modeling (Byrne, 1994; Kline, 1998)was conducted to test the hypotheses. In the first stage, the best measure-ment items for each latent variable were analyzed and selected. The cor-related residuals and possible cross-loadings were examined using anlagrange multipliers (LM) test, and poorly loading items were excluded.In the second stage, the final confirmatory models from the measurementphase were tested against the a priori structural models. All the structuralmodels reached good model fits in terms of various multiple-fit indices.

RESULTS

Reliability and Validity of the Dependent and Independent Variables

As a first step, four key dependent variables—positive megaphoning, nega-tive megaphoning, scouting, and microboundary spanning—were examined.Reliability and internal consistency were examined by using the SPSS 16program. Cronbach’s alpha was .88 for positive megaphoning comparativefit indices (CFI)¼ .99, standardized root mean square residual (SRMR)¼.03; root mean square error of approximation (RMSEA)¼ .07,

EMPLOYEE COMMUNICATION BEHAVIOR 257

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Purd

ue U

nive

rsity

] at

09:

31 1

7 A

ugus

t 201

1

v2ðdfÞ ¼ 23:76 ½10�, p¼ .01), .78 for negative megaphoning (CFI¼ 1.00,SRMR¼ .01; RMSEA¼ .00, v2ðdfÞ ¼ :34 ½1�, p¼ .34). The megaphoningeffect for those participants whose organizations recently experienced issuesand crises (n¼ 127) was tested. The reliability coefficient was .88 for nega-tive megaphoning and .83 for positive megaphoning. In addition, Cron-bach’s alpha was .90 for the extent of scouting (CFI¼ 1.00, SRMR¼ .02;RMSEA¼ .07, v2ðdfÞ ¼ 8:99 ½4�, p¼ .06). Finally, Cronbach’s alpha was .93for the extent of microboundary spanning effort (CFI¼ .96, SRMR¼ .06;RMSEA¼ .07, v2ðdfÞ ¼ 190:37 ½79�, p¼ .00).

For the first independent variable, symmetrical communication efforts,Cronbach’s alpha was .93. The second independent variable, the quality oforganization–employee relationships, consists of four subvariables; .87 fortrust, .86 for control mutuality, .80 for commitment, and .88 for satisfaction.Based on the composite scores of each dimension, Cronbach’s alpha of thequality of relationships was .89. Overall, the items measuring both the depen-dent and independent variables resulted in strong alphas. The researchersthus proceeded to test the structural model using the selected best items.

Structural Model Testing and Hypothesis Testing

To evaluate the proposed structural equation models, the Hu and Bentler(1999) joint-criteria approach was applied. In this approach, a model isdeemed viable when it approaches CFI� .96 and SRMR� .10, orRMSEA� .06 and SRMR� .10. The models were tested as originally speci-fied without any changes in the structural models; these two structuralmodels met the joint criteria (see Figures 1 and 2). Wethus interpreted themodel parameter estimates to test the seven hypothesis posited in this study.Findings for the three structural testing models are summarized in Figures 1and 2.

In H1, it was expected that a positive relationship exists between thequality of perceived organization–employee relationships and the likelihoodof the positive megaphoning effect. A strong positive relationship (.66,p< .001) was found. In H2, the study posited that a negative relationshipexists between the quality of perceived organization–employee relationshipsand the likelihood of the negative megaphoning effect. A negative relation-ship supporting the prediction (�.14, p< .05) was found. The findings indi-cate that as employees experience good relationships with their workingorganizations, they tend to forward and share positive information abouttheir employer organization. In addition, good quality relationships decreaseto some extent negative information giving to external strategic publics.

Because H3 and H4 address more potential communicative actions for oragainst the organization that employees are currently working for, we

258 KIM AND RHEE

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Purd

ue U

nive

rsity

] at

09:

31 1

7 A

ugus

t 201

1

further tested whether positive and negative megaphoning actually occurswhen the hosting organizations experiences crises or issues. We identifiedthose participants whose working organizations had recently gone throughorganizational turbulence (e.g., crises, management scandal, recall, and so

FIGURE 1 Conceptual model of megaphoning effect and findings.

EMPLOYEE COMMUNICATION BEHAVIOR 259

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Purd

ue U

nive

rsity

] at

09:

31 1

7 A

ugus

t 201

1

FIGURE 2 Conceptual model and findings: Scouting effect and microboundary spanning.

260 KIM AND RHEE

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Purd

ue U

nive

rsity

] at

09:

31 1

7 A

ugus

t 201

1

on).5 Using the identified subsample (n¼ 127), actual positive and negativemegaphoning effects from the quality of perceived organization–employeerelationships were examined. Both the megaphoning effects were supported.In H3, the path was .65, p< .001, which is almost identical in the previoustesting of positive megaphoning potential. In H4, we found �.31, p< .01,which is a stronger effect size than the negative megaphoning potential.Notably, during turbulent periods employees with good-quality relation-ships are more likely to advocate for their employer organizations, and lesslikely to give negative information related to the organizational difficulties.

In H5, the study predicted another positive causal influence from thequality of perceived organization–employee relationships on the extent ofscouting activities among employees. A positive path coefficient supportingthis prediction (.58, p< .001) was found. The finding suggests that employ-ees with good relationships would engage in voluntarily seeking informationabout their task-related or organization-related problems from their routinecontacts. They thus play the role of nondesignated environmental scannersand circulate information internally.

In H6, we developed the microboundary spanning variable by combiningpositive megaphoning behaviors and scouting behaviors of employees. Itwas hypothesized that microboundary spanning would increase as employ-ees experience and perceive a good relationship with their hosting organiza-tion. A strong effect of relationship quality on microboundary spanningefforts was found: .62, p< .001. This indicates that the quality of organiza-tion–employee relationships will lead employees to perform a nondesignatedboundary spanner role: They disperse supportive information and activelyadvocate for their employer organizations, scan and collect strategic intelli-gence for their organization, and circulate obtained information internally.

Finally, in H7, a positive causal influence of the extent of organization’sefforts of symmetrical communication on the perceived quality of relation-ships among employees was expected. A strong positive path coefficient sup-porting this prediction (.84, p< .001) was found. This thus suggests thatmanagement’s internal communication style and efforts can cultivate andimprove the quality of relationships among employees.

5The survey included a question (yes vs. no) that asked whether participant’s hosting organi-

zation had experienced a difficult situation such as managerial crisis, recall, consumer claims,

information leakages, and so on in recent (past 1 or 2) years. Positive and negative megaphon-

ing effects questions, tailored for those who responded yes to the question,were also included:

e.g., ‘‘When my organization was experiencing a difficult situation: I wrote positive comments

or advocating posting for my organization on the Internet.’’ Those who answered no to the

organizational turbulence experience question were directed to skip these modified questions.

EMPLOYEE COMMUNICATION BEHAVIOR 261

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Purd

ue U

nive

rsity

] at

09:

31 1

7 A

ugus

t 201

1

DISCUSSION

In this study, two distinct employee communication behaviors—megaphoning and scouting—were identified. Furthermore, by combiningmegaphoning and scouting, we proposed a new concept, microboundaryspanning, which may enhance or lessen organizational efficacy. Further-more, three conceptual models tested which factors amplify or decreasethese communication effects.

Test results for the first model for the megaphoning effect indicated thatdeveloping good relationships with its employees can lead to strategicadvantages for organizations in either a peaceful or turbulent businessenvironment, because those employees may engage in megaphoning beha-vior. In other words, employees can act as volunteer promoters and organi-zational advocates through positive megaphoning. Employees can also actas organizational adversaries by selecting and dispersing negative infor-mation to external strategic constituencies, which amplifies organizationalproblems. Notably, it was found that the negative megaphoning effect canbe more salient during organizational crises or scandals. In sum, the resultsindicated that employee megaphoning not only provides opportunities formaximizing strategic opportunities for organizations, but also opportunitiesto minimize strategic threats such as revealing organizational secrets orexaggeration of managerial responsibilities in crises.

In the second model regarding the scouting effect, findings suggestedthat, through symmetrical communication efforts, organizations can fostera positive relationship with their employees, and quality relationships, inturn, increase the likelihood of scouting behavior (voluntary seeking, for-warding, and sharing of information related to organizational problemsor interests) among employees.

Based on the two communicative actions among employees, then, thethird model on microboundary spanning was developed. It was posited that,in addition to the formal procedures and functional staff that perform asboundary spanners, individual employees and their microbehaviors in rou-tine interactions with strategic constituencies can bring the macroeffects ofenhancing organizational efficacy. In other words, as employees engage inself-propelled information seeking, selecting, forwarding, and sharing, theirhosting organizations will gain supplementary or serendipitous informationthat is often more valuable than that brought by a formal procedure or func-tion, and generate healthy circulation of strategic information in their mana-gerial process. The study has shown that employees do, indeed, engagein microboundary spanning activities when they experience good-qualityrelationships with their organizations.

262 KIM AND RHEE

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Purd

ue U

nive

rsity

] at

09:

31 1

7 A

ugus

t 201

1

Overall, the study results indicate that symmetrical internal communi-cation efforts opting for initiation and maintenance of positive relationshipswith employees should be in place for an organization to benefit fromemployees’ communicative actions. Management research often reports thatthe majority of strategic information comes through informal networks andin serendipitous ways among the members of an organization (Dozier, L. A.Grunig, & J. E. Grunig, 1995; Stoffels, 1994). Following this line of think-ing, the level of employees’ voluntary information seeking, forwarding, andsharing of organization-related issues can be regarded as one of the criticalfactors leading to organizational effectiveness. In this sense, the studyshowed how organizational members’ boundary-spanning activity can beconceptualized and concretely measured.

Theoretical Implications

This study has several important contributions to theory building and prac-tice in public relations. First, the megaphoning behavior of employees andits predictors were introduced and operationalized. In the past, public rela-tions research and theories paid less attention to how an employee public’scommunication behavior can be conceptualized and measured. This studyintroduced a new concept that can contribute to further understanding ofthe impact that internal public’s communication behavior can have onmanagerial processes.

In addition, despite a large number of past studies on environmentalscanning, few studies have focused on employees’ voluntary environmentalscanning efforts and the predictors of such behaviors. This study introduceda new concept, the scouting effect, to highlight informal and voluntaryenvironmental scanning efforts and intelligence sharing among thoseemployees who are not officially responsible for performing the scannerrole. Further, the microboundary spanning concept can help public relationsscholars capture, communicate, and further research the link among internalpublics, external publics, and organizational outcomes.

The findings of this study also help advance the theory of strategic publicrelations management (J. E. Grunig, 1992; L. A. Grunig, J. E. Grunig, &Dozier, 2002). In the strategic public relations frame, organization–publicrelationships contribute to organization effectiveness because strategic pub-lics would support, or at least not oppose or interrupt, the organizationalgoal-pursuit process (L. A. Grunig et al., 2002). The new concepts andthe hypothesized models specified how relationships can be enhanced andhow the resulting quality relationships lead to internal publics’ supportiveor unsupportive communication behaviors.

EMPLOYEE COMMUNICATION BEHAVIOR 263

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Purd

ue U

nive

rsity

] at

09:

31 1

7 A

ugus

t 201

1

The study specified and tested the conditions under which these com-municative effects are likely to occur. As organizational internal communi-cation is managed more symmetrically, PR management can increasepositive potential and decrease negative employee communication effectsvia improved quality of organization–employee relationships. This study’sfindings provide new understanding of the relationship research in that noprior research has investigated the associations between employees’ com-municative behaviors and organization–public relationships.

Practical Implications

This study has the following practical implications. The three measurementscales for megaphoning, scouting, and the microboundary spanning effectcan be used for a communication audit that opts for understanding the over-all sentiment of employees toward the organization and management ofemployees’ communication behaviors. This study also provides practicalimplications for managerial enhancement at the organizational level. Modeltesting and findings indicate that symmetrical internal communication pro-grams can cultivate quality relationships with employees, which in turn canfoster voluntary environmental scanning and delivery of learned infor-mation to peers and relevant working colleagues. In addition, the studyshowed how overall symmetrical internal communication efforts can alsofacilitate employees in becoming corporate advocates and=or amplifyingorganizational kudos to external publics as they routinely interact withexternal strategic constituencies. Public relations managers could use ourfindings to validate and demonstrate to their senior management the valuesof symmetrical internal communication and relationship building withemployees.

Future Studies

Data on national-level culture was not collected for this study. However,because this study was conducted in Korea, the positive associations foundamong employee–organization relationship quality and ECBs warrantfurther explanation. In other words, the study results may reflect the societalculture of Korea.

Korea is a country that has a 5,000-year history, often characterized bythe strong influence of Confucianism (Lee, 2000). ‘‘Proper human relation-ships’’ (Yum, 1988, p. 377) is the basis for Confucian societies. In organiza-tional studies in Korea, it is often reported that Korean organizations tendto apply the concept of family in managing their employees (Lee, 2000).When an individual becomes a member of an organization, that person

264 KIM AND RHEE

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Purd

ue U

nive

rsity

] at

09:

31 1

7 A

ugus

t 201

1

expects the organization to provide protection and support as a fatherwould for his children. When employees identify themselves as a familymember of an organization, they are more likely to actively advocate andprotect their organizations. It may be that the results found in this studyreflect the aforementioned tendencies reported in Korean organizationalstudies.

On the other hand, as Rhee (2002) found in her study, Korea is a rapidlychanging society that shows lower levels of Confucianism and collectivismcompared to past studies. It may be that Korean society is becoming a moreindividualistic one in which one cannot expect people to readily accept thefamily as the prototype of all organizations. When this change is considered,it may be that the results of this study do not differ significantly from studyresults conducted in other countries. To examine the cultural influence, itwill be necessary to conduct comparative empirical studies in countries otherthan Korea.6

Although not tested in this study, we speculate that there are additionalorganizational antecedent factors other than perceived quality of relation-ships and symmetrical internal communication. In particular, organiza-tional culture and structural variables should be examined as influentialfactors that can affect employees’ microboundary spanning behavior.

REFERENCES

Broom, G. M., & Dozier, D. M. (1990). Using research in public relations: Applications

toprogram management. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.

Bruning, S., & Ledingham, J. (1999). Relationships between organizations and publics:

Development of a multi-dimensional organization-public relationship scale. Public Relations

Review, 25, 157–170.

Byrne, B. M. (1994). Structural equation modeling with EQS and EQS=Window: Basic concepts,

applications, and programming. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Center, A., & Jackson, P. (2003). Public relations practices: Managerial case studies and

problems. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.

Chang, Y. C. (2000). A normative exploration into environmental scanning in PR. Unpublished

master’s thesis, University of Maryland, College Park.

Czaplewski, J. (2001). Southwest Airlines: How internal marketing pilots success. Marketing

Management, 10, 14–17.

6Previous studies in Asian and Western societies on the effects of organizational factors

(e.g., communication management styles, cultures) on employee relationships are quite consist-

ent and similar (e.g., Jo & Shim, 2005; Liden et al., 2000; Spreitzer, 1995). Based on existing

literature, it is reasonable to expect that ECB such as badmouthing are likely to occur as a result

of relationship qualities. We expect that cross-cultural studies will observe ECB effects similar

to those we found in this study.

EMPLOYEE COMMUNICATION BEHAVIOR 265

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Purd

ue U

nive

rsity

] at

09:

31 1

7 A

ugus

t 201

1

Dean, K. (2008). At the base of the bridge: A case study of boundary spanning by members of a

university’s presidential leadership team. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of

Maryland, College Park.

Dozier, D. M. (1986, August). The environmental scanning function of public relations

practitioners and participation in management decision making. Paper presented at the meeting

of the Public Relations Division, Association for Education in Journalism and Mass

Communication, Norman, OK.

Dozier, D. M. (1990). The innovation of research in public relations practice: Review of

aprogram of studies. In J. E. Grunig & L. A. Grunig (Eds.), Public relations research annual

Vol. 2, (pp. 3–28). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

Dozier, D. M., Grunig, L. A., & Grunig, J. E. (1995). Manager’s guide to excellence in public

relations and communication management. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

Edelman. (2009). 2009 Edelman Trust Barometer. Retrieved 1 June 2010. from http://www.

edelman.com/trust/midyear/

Ferguson, A. (1984, August). Building theory in public relations: Interorganizational relationships

as a public relations paradigm. Paper presented to the Association for Education in Mass

Communication and Journalism, Gainesville, FL.

Grunig, J. E. (1989). Symmetrical presuppositions as a framework for public relations theory.

In C. Botan & V. Hazelton (Eds.), Public relations theory (pp. 17–44). Hillsdale, NJ:

Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

Grunig, J. E. (1992). Symmetrical systems of internal communication. In J. Grunig (Ed.),

Excellence in public relations and communication management (pp. 531–576). Hillsdale, NJ:

Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

Grunig, J. E. (1997). A situational theory of publics: Conceptual history, recent challenges and

new research. In D. Moss, T. MacManus & D. Vercic (Eds.), Public relations research: An

international perspective (pp. 3–46). London, UK: ITB Press.

Grunig, J. E., & Grunig, L. A. (2000). Research methods for environmental scanning. In Jim &

LauriGrunig’s research, a supplementary ofPR Reporter (No. 7).

Grunig, J. E., & Huang, Y. (2000). From organizational effectiveness to relationship indicators:

Antecedents of relationships, public relations strategies, and relationship outcomes. In

J. Ledingham & S. Bruning (Eds.), Public relations as relationship management: A relational

approach to the study and practice of public relations (pp. 23–53). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence

Erlbaum Associates.

Grunig, J. E., & Hunt, T. (1984). Managing public relations. Orlando, FL: Harcourt Brace

Jovanovich College Publishers.

Grunig, L. A., Grunig, J. E., & Dozier, D. M. (2002). Excellent public relations and effective

organizations: A study of communication management in three countries. Mahwah, NJ:

Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

Hancock, G. R. (2006). Power analysis in covariance structure modeling. In G. R. Hancock &

R. O. Mueller (Eds.), Structural equation modeling: A second course (pp. 69–115). Greenwich,

CT: Information Age.

Hu, L., & Bentler, P. M. (1999). Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariances structure

analysis: Conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Structural Equation Modeling, 6,

1–55.

Huang, Y. (2001). OPRA: A cross-cultural, multiple-item scale for measuring organization–

public relationships. Journal of Public Relations Research, 13, 61–90.

Jo, S. (2006). Measurement of organization–public relationships: Validation of measurementus-

ing a manufacturer–retailer relationship. Journal of Public Relations Research, 18, 225–248.

Jo, S., & Shim, S. (2005). Paradigm shift of employee communication: The effect of manage-

ment communication on trusting relationships. Public Relations Review, 31, 277–280.

266 KIM AND RHEE

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Purd

ue U

nive

rsity

] at

09:

31 1

7 A

ugus

t 201

1

Ketchum & USC Annenberg Strategic Communication & PR Center. (2009). Media myths &

realities.Perspectives. Retrieved 1 June 2010. from http://ketchumperspectives.com/

archives/2009_i1/index.php

Ki, E.-J., & Hon, L. C. (2007). Testing the linkages among the organization–public relationshi-

pand attitude and behavioral intentions. Journal of Public Relations Research, 19, 1–23.

Kim, H. (2007). Organizational structure and internal communication as antecedents of

employee–organization relationships. Gwangohongbohakbo [Journal of Advertising & PR],

9, 61–94.

Kim, J.-N. (2006). Communicant activeness, cognitive entrepreneurship, and a situational theory

of problem solving. Unpublished doctoral dissertation. University of Maryland, College Park.

Kim, J.-N., & Grunig, J. E. (2011). Problem solving and communicative action: A situational

theory of problem solving. Journal of Communication, 61, 120–149.

Kim, J.-N., & Grunig, J. E. (in press). Situational theory of problem solving: Communicative,

cognitive, and perceptive bases. New York: Routledge.

Kim, Y. (2001). Searching for the organization–public relationship: A valid and reliable

instrument. Journalism and Mass Communication Quarterly, 78, 799–815.

Kline, L. B. (1998). Principles and practice of structural equation modeling. New York: Guilford.

Lauzen, M. M. (1995). Toward a model of environmental scanning. Journal of Public Relations

Research, 7, 187–203.

Lauzen, M. M., & Dozier, D. M. (1994). Issues management mediation of linkages between

environmental complexity and management of the public relations function. Journal of Public

Relations Research, 6, 163–184.

Lee, S. Y. (2000). Historical perspectives on Korean corporate culture: The transition and its

future. KukjeJiyeokYeongu [Journal of International Area Studies Research], 4, 3–29.

Leifer, R., & Delbecq, A. (1978). Organizational=environmental interchange: A model of

boundary spanning activity. Academy of Management Review, 3, 40–50.

Levina, N., & Vaast, E. (2005). The emergence of boundary spanning competence in practice:

Implications for implementation and use of information systems. MIS Quarterly, 29,

335–363.

Liden, R., Wayne, S., & Sparrowe, R. (2000). An examination of the mediating role of psycho-

logical empowerment on the relationship between the job, interpersonal relationships, and

work outcomes. Journal of Applied Psychology, 85, 407–416.

Moon, B., & Rhee, Y. (2008). Organizational culture, employee communication strategies, and

employee–organization relationships. Korean Journal of Journalism & Communication, 52,

122–150.

Okura, M., Dozier, D., Sha, B., & Hofstetter, R. (2008). Use of scanning research in decision

making: An examination of the environmental imperative and power-control perspective.

Journal of Public Relations Research, 21, 1–20.

Rhee, Y. (2002). Global public relations: A cross-cultural study of the excellence theory in

South Korea. Journal of Public Relations Research, 14, 159–184.

Rhee, Y. (2008a). Risk communication management: A case study of the Brookhaven National

Laboratory. Journal of Communication Management, 12, 224–242.

Rhee, Y. (2008b). Structural relationships among employee psychological empowerment,

relational strategies, and relational trust in employee communication. Korean Journal of

Communication Studies, 16, 5–27.

Robertson, E. (2003). How to use a communication climate model. Strategic Communication

Management, 7, 28–32.

Schneider, B. (1990). The climate for service: An application of the climate construct. In

B. Schneider (Ed.), Organizational climate and culture (pp. 384–412). San Francisco:

Jossey-Bass.

EMPLOYEE COMMUNICATION BEHAVIOR 267

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Purd

ue U

nive

rsity

] at

09:

31 1

7 A

ugus

t 201

1

Schneider, B., White, S., & Paul, M. (1998). Linking service climate and customer perceptions

of service quality: Test of a causal model. Journal of Applied Psychology, 83, 150–163.

Smidts, A., Pruyn, A., & van Riel, C. (2001). The impact of employee communication and

perceived external prestige on organizational identification. Academy of Management

Journal, 44, 1051–1062.

Spreitzer, G. (1995). Psychological empowerment in the workplace: Dimension, measurement,

and validation. Academy of Management Journal, 38, 1442–1465.

Sriramesh, K., & White, J. (1992). Societal culture and public relations. In J. E. Grunig (Ed.),

Excellence in public relations and communication management (pp. 597–614). Hillsdale, NJ:

Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

Stoffels, J. D. (1994). Strategic issues management: A comprehensive guide to environmental

scanning. Oxford, OH: Pergamon.

Tushman, M., & Scanlan, T. (1981). Boundary spanning individuals: Their role in information

transfer and their antecedents. Academy of Management Journal, 24, 83–98.

Welch, M., & Jackson, P. R. (2007). Rethinking internal communication: A stakeholder

approach. Corporate Communication: An International Journal, 12, 177–198.

Yum, J. (1988). The impact of Confucianism on interpersonal relationships and communication

patterns in East Asia. Communication Monographs, 55, 374–388.

268 KIM AND RHEE

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Purd

ue U

nive

rsity

] at

09:

31 1

7 A

ugus

t 201

1