The CSC provides the following communication services to the DSR:
Marketing & Promotion;
Media Liaison & Publicity;
Public Relations;
Corporate imaging & brand management;
Eventing;
Information management; and
Internet, website and Intranet management services.
There is a misnomer that communication, strategic or otherwise, is restricted to a particular component tasked with that function. This perception is shared by Holtz (2004:
66) who is of the view that “most professional communicators enter the business because they are skilled at producing communication tools, such as words, publications, videos, or website. Often it is this focus on their craft that leads company leaders to believe communication is not strategic, and that it has little to do with the bottom line.” This misconception leads to senior management undermining the use of communication as a strategic tool to give effect to their deliberations and decisions.
Similarly, Stahl et al. (1992:94) believe that there “must be a clear integration between the selection of an information technology project and the company’s strategy.”
Information technology, as incorporated into communication strategy, could provide the DSR with a competitive edge in service delivery.
The marketing function is integral to the strategic communication process. Stahl et al.
(1992:111) further maintain the “need for marketing decisions to be consistent with the corporate and business-level strategic decisions and with other functional decisions.”
In complementing the above, Holtz (2004:207) also believes that “an effective internal communications department – one that helps you achieve the business results shareholders expect of you – depends on many factors, including:
Where it reports;
How much influence it has;
How is it structured; and
What kind of expertise it contains”
Munslow (2013:6) emphasises the importance of internal branding which realigns fundamentally employees to business. The author identifies the following key aspects necessary to ensure that internal branding delivers to best practice (Munslow 2013:7):
An internal brand initiative is a long-term proposition and should not confused with a deliverable;
Internal branding follows a sequential process – employees first need to be made aware, then have their perceptions changed so as to focus and buy-in;
Senior leadership must be actively involved in the process as internal branding and internal communication cannot be delegated;
Set clear and measurable objectives and well-defined roles. Measurement must be about shifting a current state to a desired state by a specific percentage over a defined period of time – to which you will be held accountable;
Use brand ambassadors to drive the process on the ground and coach them on how to engage employees;
Conduct a detailed communication audit on the understanding of the initiative you are communicating;
Define your internal brand, as often the company does not see it in the same way that the staff does, and these two have to be aligned;
What is your Employee Value Proposition (EVP) and how well does it reflect, support and help your internal brand come to life? and
Aim for participation. Only through participation will staff engage, understand and believe in the brand.
These shareholders, in this instance the electorate and citizens of KZN, need to be considered as a key audience to the government-of-the-day. Holtz (2004:209) goes further to expand on the following question: “So where, then, should employee communications report? Ideally, the function should report directly to the CEO, for whom employees are a critical audience … if the leaders set a strong agenda for communications by articulating its expectations, the management of the function to which communication reports will ensure that the department has the resources and backing it needs to meet those goals.” This postulation is of dire consequence to the DSR in that the CSC is not represented at senior management level meetings to impact on the decision-making process. Neither is there access to senior management at such meetings as the HoC is not included even as an observer. This situation presents serious gaps in the communication channels and impacts on the overall service-provision by the DSR.
This above assertion underscores the fact that the communication of information needs to be strategically managed for each audience to receive such communication in as efficient, effective and acceptable manner as possible – there is no ‘one-size fits all’
situational expectation. Holtz’s (2004:210) statement that “The highest ranking internal communicator needs to have a seat at the leadership table where decisions are made.
You need communication input about the effect on employees of decisions you are making and how the decision will be communicated – before the decision is made,” is a clear indicator that recipient considerations play a major role in decisions taken at top management level. A revision of the loosely adopted communication policy will ensure that communication services will be present to advise senior management on issues of communication consequence.
The use of the Systems Approach to Policy-making at this juncture will inform the new communication policy effectively in the light of the ten years of establishment of the DSR.
This process would allow for the inclusion of new policy imperatives such as social media
and ICT, and the revision of the current policy would be a systemic one. The wider opportunities for collaboration with emerging stakeholders can be embraced. This systems approach will also include the shifting priorities of the DSR in its own evolution.
Research by Ellis and Shockley-Zalabak (cited in Cho & Ringquist 2011:60), has indicated that “managers displaying the characteristics of honesty, consistency, professionalism, interpersonal benevolence, and openness in communication presided over organisations seen as more effective by their employees.”
Dlamini (2011:8) is of the view that “given that the bulk of public sector organizations have to deliver their services or products to an enormously diverse population, it is important for them to communicate smarter but for a lot less.” This assertion brings into question the government regulation on the non-use of social media such as Twitter and Facebook, which are the cheapest and fastest forms of communication as well as key conduits to the youth in the main. President Jacob Zuma’s challenge to all government communicators (Dlamini, 2011:11) that government needs to communicate more consistently and regularly to the media “as the people need to know what services are being delivered, how, where and by whom, and we can inform them through meaningful and regular communication.” The current communication policy needs to be revised to include the use of social media, as emphasised in the research study.