S

B

IK

Twfiafat(FlaAa

w“atdobSdmwnoJtSsa

swh(Iohitfnisw

h1

ARTICLE IN PRESSG ModelCOMS-48; No. of Pages 2

Studies in Communication Sciences xxx (2014) xxx–xxx

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Studies in Communication Sciences

journa l h om epage: www.elsev ier .com/ locate /scoms

ook review

nternationale PR-Forschung, D. Ingenhoff (Ed.). UVK,onstanz (2013)

his volume includes 15 articles (of which three in English), which,ith the exception of the introduction by the editor, originate

rom presentations at the International and Comparative Researchn Organizational Communication and Public Relations conferencet the University of Fribourg (CH) in November 2011. Nine worksocus on the analysis of specific case studies. These include stronglypplication-oriented works, such as Sabrina Bresciani’s experimen-al research on the efficacy of “visual mapping” as a method forbetter) conveyance of (PR) messages in various cultural contexts.ive articles deal with fundamental theoretical and/or methodo-ogical questions of internationally comparative PR research, suchs Jens Seiffert’s work on the cultural aspect of case studies, andstrid Spatzier’s theoretical explanations regarding the workplaces an arena for intercultural communication.

In the introduction, the editor demonstrates convincingly thate do not have an understanding of “international PR” and/or

international PR research” solidly founded in theory, and offersn explanation. This is by no means a phenomenon unique tohe German-speaking research area: It represents a general, fun-amental deficit that this volume alone cannot rectify. Here, too,rdinary PR case studies become ‘international PR research’ solelyy virtue of employing a comparative research design. The work ofabine Einwiller and Alexandra Schnauber, for instance, examinesifferences and similarities of CSR media coverage of large Ger-an and American companies. Other articles, in turn, show thate still have a remarkably basic understanding of the term ‘inter-ational PR’ as PR practised by companies, organisations, or statesperating internationally. This understanding is the basis for Stefanarolimek’s article concerning the Deutsche Bank’s CSR communica-ion in Germany, Russia, and the USA, and also indirectly for Clarissachöller and Thomas Koch’s work on “Success Factors of PR Con-ulting” from the perspective of companies operating nationallynd internationally.

Jochen Hoffmann’s article shows how highly complex an under-tanding of international PR solidly founded in theory can (andould have to) be. Under the title “The Communicative Anni-ilation of Cultural Contingency”, the author develops initialconvincing) reflections on a theory of (international) tourism PR.n keeping with the motto ‘nothing is as practical as a good the-ry’, the author succeeds in an exemplary manner in providingighly relevant insight into applied tourism PR. However, concern-

ng the majority of the articles in this volume, questions arise aso whether (1) all internationally comparative PR research is inact automatically international PR research, (2) whether all orga-

Please cite this article in press as: Fröhlich, R. Boohttp://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.scoms.2014.03.001

isational communication in the globalised area is automaticallynternational PR, (3) what exactly international PR research under-tood in this way contributes to foundational PR research, and (4)hat specific relevance this research has for foundational research.

ttp://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.scoms.2014.03.001424-4896/

To come straight to the point: this volume cannot provide anyanswers in this regard. There is hardly an article that deals withthese questions within the scope of its project. In general, this isa typical deficit of internationally comparative research, which forthe most part implicitly assumes that its internationally compar-ative nature is of the utmost relevance. Not in the last! AndreasSchwarz’s article on the “Relevance, State of the Art, and ResearchAgenda” of international and comparative crisis communicationresearch represents one of the few exceptions to this rule (alongwith Jochen Hoffmann’s article mentioned above). Most of the otherstudies follow a concrete (mainly application-oriented) researchquestion, which could have also been handled in that form withoutan international comparison. At any rate, it often remains unre-solved which specific additional value is linked to the decision forthe internationally comparative design of the project in question– a value that exceeds the mere description of differences andsimilarities (of the examined countries or organisations). Thus, thequestion almost always remains as to what the fact that differencesor similarities have been found contributes to research.

This deficit is largely owing to the fact that this volume con-sists of conference proceedings. Naturally, conference proceedings’compositions follow the logic of what are in part very differentpresentations, rather than that of a coherent, homogenous, sci-entific analysis of a theoretically clearly defined phenomenon orproblem, which then ideally constitutes the common theme of allthe articles. Therefore, it is generally rather difficult for conferenceproceedings and their editors to produce a convincing contentualstringency, and in such a relatively new and undeveloped field asinternational PR research this is practically impossible. Instead, thestrength of this volume is that it presents an interesting variety ofperspectives and research questions, which, taken together, offera kind of starting point for further discussion and development.The breadth is exceedingly fascinating and gainful. In this way,nearly every article in this volume delivers – if only implicitly – aspecific perspective for getting started in the development of a fun-damental theoretical approach to international PR and its analysis.Whoever is prepared to derive a common theme from the enor-mous spectrum of indications and approaches and link this with amore comprehensive understanding of the ‘international PR’ and‘international PR research’ phenomenon will profit greatly fromthis volume.

Against this backdrop, it would have been desirable if aconcluding analytic-synoptical article had dealt with the ques-tion regarding how the very different empirical and theoreticalapproaches and methods could represent potential for synergeticmodelling (international PR) and/or synergetic theorising (interna-tional PR research). In this respect, most of the articles offer a great

k review. Studies in Communication Sciences (2014),

deal of material for getting started and constructing arguments yetdo not get beyond the very specific descriptive approach, respec-tively. This is unfortunately also the case where the title and topicof the article may have indicated otherwise: In Dejan Vercic’s article

ING ModelS

2 k revi

(atsitwh

aqss2cPitto

ARTICLECOMS-48; No. of Pages 2

Boo

“(. . .) From Europe to Global Research Designs”), for instance, theuthor argues convincingly with regard to how difficult interna-ionally comparative PR research is even in Europe, since there areuch extreme variations in the respective understandings of “PR”n different countries. However, he does not venture further thanhe description of the problem. This article therefore does not showhat a particular path towards a “Global Research Design” wouldave to look like.

By concentrating (only) on problems in connection with variousreas of language and culture, Vercic also overlooks the importantuestion concerning the meaning of political systems for the under-tanding of PR. What about research on “PR” in totalitarian politicalystems, of which a good number exist today (e.g. Julia Klare,009)? Do such works really teach us something about PR in otherountries, or do they in fact deal with propaganda rather than withR? I am convinced that it neither sufficient simply to point to how

Please cite this article in press as: Fröhlich, R. Boohttp://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.scoms.2014.03.001

n some cultures and countries PR is understood as propaganda, noro point to how PR does not find application within a free journalis-ic system, without drawing very specific conclusions for a particularperationalisation. Incidentally, international journalism research

PRESSew

was (and is) confronted with quite similar problems and has alreadydeveloped some initial solutions, which PR research could certainlyfollow. The preconditions for doing this are favourable: There isno lack of researchers, who in the last few years have contributedincreasingly to the international presence of German-speaking PRresearch, as Swaran Sandhu and Simone Huck-Sandhu show in aconcluding article with bibliometric analysis. In Germany, Austria,and Switzerland, there are countless research scientists, who arepart of an adequate international network. Such a network is abso-lutely necessary to conduct international PR research, whateverthat may mean exactly.

Romy FröhlichProfessorin für Kommunikationswissenschaft,

Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität München, Institutfür Kommunikationswissenschaft und

k review. Studies in Communication Sciences (2014),

Medienforschung, GermanyE-mail address: froehlich@ifkw.lmu.de

Received 3 March 2014