Talking with the silent majority: An interest–identity framework

Abstract

The primary contribution of this article to public relations theory and practice is to provide an interest–identity framework for guiding the formulation of public relations strategy in relation to issues-related engagement with public. We draw upon an analysis of the public consultation and communication processes undertaken by New Zealand’s Environmental Risk Management Authority (ERMA) following the lifting of a moratorium on field trials for genetically modified (GM) organisms. ERMA is charged with the oversight of biotechnology research and the introduction of new organisms and dangerous substances into New Zealand. Following the lifting of the GM moratorium, ERMA identified a need to communicate with the general public, rather than just scientific organisations or those that identified strongly with anti-GM activist groups, about the way in which it would perform its role in the new environment. ERMA engaged in a wide variety of communication initiatives designed to appeal to the general public but was disappointed by the lack of response. Drawing on a mobilization model from stakeholder theory that categorises stakeholder groups that take action with regards to a focal organization as being either interest-based or identity-based (Rowley & Moldoveanu, 2003), we explore the ramifications for organizations like ERMA of attempting to engage with the general public. According to Rowley and Moldoveanu (2003), interest-based stakeholder groups act to protect their interests while identity-based stakeholders mobilize as an expression of their identity. Consultation processes around issues, processes and events are usually designed to elicit views from publics and thus to awaken latent perspectives. As the threshold for mobilization is much lower for identity-based than interest-based groups (Ibid), communication strategies are more likely to mobilize members of the general public who have not yet taken a position, towards identitybased positions. This response, which is likely to increase rather than reduce public dissatisfaction with the organization and/or the issue, raises a number of potential challenges for organizations.