Fortune and Deloitte examined the top challenges that CEOs are currently facing and their perceptions on the global economy.Fortune and Deloitte surveyed CEOs from the Fortune 500, Fortune Global 500, and other select executives from Feb. 13–23, 2024.Key findings include:1.) 65% of CEOs felt geopolitical concerns, most specifically the U.S. election, are one of the three most significant disruptors they expect to face over the coming 12 months, up from 51% in the last survey.2.) 56% of CEOs said their companies are using generative AI to make their companies more efficient.3.) 24% of CEOs said they are pessimistic about the economy over the next 12 months.4.) 22% of CEOs said they are very optimistic about the economy over the next 12 months, an increase from 10% in October 2023.Read about current challenges for CEOs and more ...

This blog is provided by the IPR Organizational Communication Research Center (OCRC)“Now more than ever, decision-makers can’t act alone; they must bring diverse perspectives to the table and ensure that those voices are fully heard” (Fletcher et al., 2023, para 2).  Dissent originates from the Latin dissentire, meaning “feeling apart” (Kassing, 1997). “Dissent” in English means to “differ in opinion” (Merriam-Webster Dictionary). Dissent in the workplace refers to employees expressing disagreement, opposing viewpoints, or objections regarding various aspects of their work environment, including policies, practices, decisions, or actions taken by their organization or superiors. It involves employees speaking out in a manner that challenges the status quo or established norms. From an organizational communication perspective, dissent is primarily examined under the conceptual framework of employee voice and participation. In this tradition, dissent has been viewed as a form of employee voice that can enhance organizational learning and bring diverse perspectives into managerial decision-making. Under this approach, scholars have explored how organizations can foster a culture that can encourage a free flow of employee voice, including dissent, and establish organizational structures and policies that can facilitate employee empowerment. This has been done by examining factors that hinder employee voice and participation (e.g., silence or displaced dissent).Some communications managers may believe employee dissent harms internal organizational harmony and external reputation. This view is not entirely unwarranted, given how devastating media reports about disgruntled employees or former employees’ accounts of their experiences can tarnish the organizational reputation. My study, published in the Journal of Public Relations Research (Kang, 2021), precisely explored this question and found that negative testimonials significantly tarnished the organization’s moral and business reputations. However, dissent at the organizational level has many positive implications for the organization, and growth-oriented leaders consider dissent inherently legitimate and valuable for organizational learning capacities.Positive Implications of DissentDissent is a natural part of organizational politics and necessary for organizational democracy. Dissent as a voicerepresents the inherent right of employees to express their voice safely and openly in a democratic organization, as the concept of voice in the liberal political sense is considered a cornerstone of democratic society. Therefore, the value of dissent lies in the notion of voice as an inherently ethical and democratic thing for organizations to extend to their employees. From this perspective, employee dissent represents employee voice, which democratic organizations must practice earnestly, fostering open and decentralized organizational dynamics and culture. Dissent represents differences in values, opinions, and judgments instrumental to organizational learning and democracy. Dissent often exposes underlying conflicts or problems within the organization that can lead to the creation of collective solutions. When expressed constructively and within appropriate boundaries, dissent can bring new perspectives and alternative approaches to organizational problem-solving and decision-making. Thriving organizations allow diverse views and knowledge to be incorporated into organizational processes for effective problem identification, innovation and improvement, and decision-making.Employees often do not voice their discontent or dissent about workplace problems to their supervisors out of fear or futility. Instead, disgruntled employees may turn to ineffectual internal or external audiences to vent their frustrations or to make sense of the situation. This type of ineffectual dissent can catch management off guard and may lead to internal organizational turmoil and external reputational crisis. While the direct evidence linking organizational processes and dissent (beyond disruptive, displaced, and de-identified dissent) is lacking, we can extrapolate a positive relationship between dissent and supportive and democratic leadership and organizational processes. Also, studies have found that the organizational communication climate that fosters free speech influences how certain types of employee dissent prevail (e.g., Cenkci & Otken, 2019; West & Sacramento, 2023). To foster an organizational climate of psychological safety (Edmondson, 1999), relying on individual and interpersonal virtues of empathy and humility is not enough. Structural elements and organizational norms must be in place to safeguard the abuse of power in organizational processes and ensure democratic communication for effective organizational learning. For example, taking turns to speak up during a meeting can lessen the likelihood of a few influential voices dominating the conversation and provide the best outcome. Also, establishing protocols (norms) for expressing dissenting opinions can reduce the perils of group thinking and bring diverse perspectives to the surface by promoting dissent.How to Cultivate Dissent for Organizational Learning CapabilitiesCultivating an open climate for employee dissent requires deliberate actions and practices. Here are practical suggestions for creating such an environment:1.) First, create a culture of respectful dialogue by emphasizing the importance of respectful communication, even during disagreements. Encourage active listening, empathy, and understanding of differing perspectives. As part of this effort, diversity should be represented in decision-making teams, and leadership should demonstrate an excellent example of encouraging and valuing dissenting opinions.2.) Second, establish transparent decision-making protocols that incorporate dissent, such as soliciting diverse opinions, considering dissenting viewpoints, and outlining how decisions are reached. Establish regular feedback mechanisms and acknowledge that dissent can be a crucial part of the protocol.3.) Lastly, establish clear communication channels such as suggestion boxes, regular team meetings, anonymous feedback systems, or open-door policies to allow employees to express dissenting opinions without fear of reprisal.Dissent can be muted, ignored, reprimanded, expressed, and incorporated via formal and informal organizational channels. Employees can express their dissent in many ways through various stages of interactions within the organization. Dissent is more likely to occur as employees become more involved in organizational functions and are provided with routes to voice their input. In other words, dissent, in some ways, is a form of employee engagement and commitment to organizations.   Minjeong Kang, Ph. D. (Mass Communication, Syracuse University) is an associate professor at Indiana University. Dr Kang’s research has received national and international recognition, including Emerald Publishing’s Literati Award of Excellence for Highly Commended in 2018, Gallup Korea’s Outstanding Research Award in 2020, and the 2009 Ketchum Excellence in Public Relations Research Award by the Institute of Public Relations. Her recent work has focused on developing organizational listening diagnostics for participatory workplace communication and employee engagement. ...

Weber Shandwick and KRC Research examined American consumer and employee opinions on the role businesses play in national elections.An online survey of 1,009 U.S. adults was conducted from February 9–12, 2024.Key findings include:1.) 44% of respondents somewhat agreed with the statement that “businesses are a constructive force for positive change.”— 25% of respondents strongly agreed with that statement.2.) 75% of employees and 68% of consumers said “businesses should help find common ground to bridge societal decisions.” 3.) 72% of consumers and 71% of employees said “the workplace should be kept politically neutral during this election year.”4.) 81% of employees and 80% of consumers said “American businesses should encourage a free and fair election.”5.) 25% of employees and 23% of consumers said American businesses should endorse candidates.Read more about American businesses involvement in politics ...

Alethea examined how disinformation tactics are being used in social media to influence individuals. Specifically, Alethea studied X (formerly Twitter) accounts that they believed were being leveraged by Russia’s main military intelligence directorate to influence U.S. citizens on the war in Ukraine.Alethea analyzed 5,314 accounts on X (formerly Twitter) and 81 websites that the company believed were being used by a Russian military intelligence directorate, commonly known as the GRU, in February – March 2024. Accounts were classified in two ways:— “Poster” accounts that create content— “Amplifier” accounts from the same group that repost poster accounts or quote “poster” account contentKey findings include:1.) Amplifier accounts used the “Invisible Ink” technique (re-sharing poster account content without additional text) to amplify “poster” account content in reply threads in order to go undetected.2.) At least 50 accounts shared original posts in English about U.S. domestic and foreign policy containing images and external links.3.) Despite the fact that a majority of these accounts had zero followers and only published one or two total posts, the posts by poster accounts consistently received approximately 1,300 or 2,600 reposts and over 5,000 views, which is a result of of inauthentic amplification.4.) At least five accounts shared original posts about foreign and domestic policy in a mix of English, French, German, and Ukrainian. Continue reading more on the hidden influence of GRU operatives ...

This summary is provided by the IPR Digital Media Research CenterVictoria Oldemburgo de Mello, Dr. Felix Cheung, and Dr. Michael Inzlicht analyzed how X impacts user well-being, political polarization, outrage, and sense of belonging.A survey of 309 X users was conducted from March – June 2021.Key findings include:1.) Respondents said they used the platform for entertainment (66%), followed by information seeking (49%), and to interact with others (23%).2.) Different actions on X predicted behavior outcomes:— “Scrolling down the feed” predicted a decrease in well-being.— “Replying to others’ tweets,” “visiting trending topics,” and “visiting others’ profiles” predicted an increase in a “sense of belonging.”— “Retweeting” predicted an increase in polarization.3.) X use was related to overall decreases in well-being and increases in a sense of belonging, polarization, outrage, and boredom.4.) Users who frequented the platform were found to be “lonelier” and “more bored.”— Users who frequently retweeted content were found to be “more polarized.”Learn more about how X affects user well-being and emotional wellness ...

Congratulations to Morgan Badurak who is the Fall 2023 Cision Insights Fellow, awarded by IPR. Her full paper can be downloaded here.Is Corporate Social Advocacy the Pathway to Gen Z Engagement?A Case Study of Amazon, SpaceX, and Trader Joe’s Legal Actions Against the NLRB on Social MediaGen Z is a generation deeply invested in social advocacy, wielding significant influence over market trends and brand loyalty. Societal impact is not just a bonus but a prerequisite for support from this generation of consumers. Gen Z expects brands to reflect their values and actively champion social justice and advocacy both internally and externally (Coman et al., 2022). Amazon, SpaceX, and Trader Joe’s legal battle over workers’ rights with the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) provides compelling case studies for understanding Gen Z’s expectations of brands to navigate socio-political issues. By embracing internal and external corporate political advocacy, brands can forge meaningful connections and secure long-term loyalty within this influential demographic while reaping the practical benefits of increased brand credibility, customer engagement, and sustainable growth.Due to their socially and environmentally conscious nature, Gen Z values brands aligned with their principles, particularly in ethical labor practices (ICSC, 2023). Therefore, the NLRB lawsuits are beneficial case studies for understanding how internal and external corporate political advocacy (or lack therefore) impact Gen Z’s perception of and conversations around brands online. The study was a comparative analysis of messaging frames in Twitter discussions related to the NLRB and Gen-Z social media networks. The analysis was guided by research questions to uncover what frames Gen Z used to discuss the corporate action against the NLRB and how these frames differed from other generations. It also sought to examine the dynamics of Gen Z’s social networks and how their connections could shape discourse and impact perceptions of brand identity. Brandwatch data from January 1, 2024, to March 31, 2024, was used to answer these research questions. It was gathered with queries focused on the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) and general labor/union conversations on Twitter, resulting in 35,443 NLRB mentions and approximately 1.32 million general labor mentions. Duplicate panels were created to segment conversations between Generation Z (Gen Z) and non-Gen-Z users, with specific tags for Amazon, SpaceX, and Trader Joe’s for further analysis.In examining Generation Z’s discussions surrounding corporate actions and the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) on social media, findings indicate that approximately 61% of Gen Z’s tweets expressed support for unions or the NLRB, a notably higher proportion than non-Gen-Z users. Neutral news sharing comprised around 32.48% of Gen-Z tweets, while opposition to unions or the NLRB was minimal at 3.51%. A comparison of Gen Z’s discourse with other social media users revealed distinct differences. Gen Z focused on specific messages and displayed a cohesive opinion, while non-Gen-Z users exhibited more varied views. While Gen Z focused primarily on pro-union conversation, non-Gen-Z users shared more neutral and news-focused content (approximately 55.24%), with greater diversity of opinion observed among them.          Analysis of social media networks expanded on differences between Gen Z and other user groups. Gen-Z networks appeared to be more insular with less interaction between groups. This finding suggests that Gen Z engages more in localized discussions within their circles, potentially influencing brand discourse on social platforms. Lastly, the study explored how Gen Z’s framing and social networks influence their perceptions of brand identities. While it is difficult to make a direct correlation with this study, Gen Z’s positive union perspective in contrast with the lack of corporate social action had seemingly negative impacts on brand identity.The study’s findings underscore Gen Z’s unique identity and online discourse compared to previous generations, revealing their cohesive networks and active engagement in social and political matters. Gen Z’s emphasis on corporate accountability and advocacy for social justice contrasts with historical consumer behavior, posing a challenge for brands seeking to authentically align with their values. However, this presents an opportunity for brands to forge strong, loyal relationships with this young consumer demographic. Gen Z’s online discourse reflects their capacity to drive meaningful change in consumer behavior and corporate practices. These findings offer valuable guidance for public relations practitioners and corporate communication leadership, suggesting the incorporation of corporate political advocacy, particularly in addressing employee labor movements, to bolster perceptions of overall brand image and loyalty among the socially conscious demographic (Coman et al., 2022). Based on these findings, the following takeaways are suggested:1) Proactive Advocacy: Embed social justice initiatives into brand campaigns to resonate with Gen Z’s values.2) Transparency and Accountability: Communicate openly about corporate policies and practices, demonstrating accountability for actions.3) Engagement with Community: Foster connections with Gen Z through social media campaigns and events centered around shared causes.4) Prioritize Authenticity: Steer clear of performative activism, opting instead for genuine engagement and transparent communication. Morgan Badurak is a first-year media and public affairs doctoral student in the Manship School of Mass Communication at Louisiana State University. She holds an M.A. in Advertising and Public Relations from the University of Alabama and double-majored in Mass Communication (B.A.) and Music Industry Studies (B.S.) at Loyola University New Orleans. Her research interests are centered around social and digital media effects on socio-political issues in the United States.  ...

This blog is provided by the IPR Measurement Commission.What kind of news source do you trust most to get your vital information? Turns out, the answer may depend on your age.That’s because a recent survey on news consumption preferences conducted by Researchscape in collaboration with Fullintel, results found that media preferences often differ sharply along generational lines.The survey findings indicated that older generations are more likely to trust broadcast news, while younger generations tend to prefer online news, email newsletters, and social media. Younger generations also indicated one of their most preferred types of newsletters are of the personal/influencer variety.The omnibus survey conducted in February 2024 gauged the opinions of more than 1,000 U.S. adults across the country weighted against the U.S. population.Overall, respondents ranked broadcast news as the most trusted news source. It was followed by print newspapers, cable news, online news, email newsletters, and social media.The Great Age Schism in News PreferencesBut while more than 80 percent of the Silent Generation (born 1928-45) and more than 60 percent of Baby Boomers (1946-64) said they trust either broadcast or cable news the most, that number dropped to just 43 percent of Millennial (1981-96) and 37 percent of Generation Z (1997-2012) respondents.As mainstream news organizations face near-constant layoffs and traditional news sources such as broadcast and cable deal with declining audiences, there appears to be an opportunity for newer mediums such as online news and email newsletters to become the most trusted sources for younger generations.Case in point: Online news, trusted most by zero percent of the Silent Generation, was the go-to choice for nearly a quarter of Millennials and 18 percent of Gen Z.Social media was also more trusted among younger generations, with nearly 20 percent of Gen Z respondents trusting the medium the most compared to none from the Silent Generation, just three percent of Boomers, and nine percent of Generation X (1965-80).Indeed, even though social media ranked last in overall trust, the percentage of Millennials and Gen Z respondents was almost 70 percent of all those who ranked social media as their No. 1 news source.Email Newsletters: A Small, But Growing, MediumWhile trust in email newsletters was relatively low across the board, they still ranked higher overall than social media – and earned the most trust (seven percent) among Gen Z participants.Part of this could be because newsletters have traditionally been associated with retailers or brands, but have shifted more towards news-based content over the past decade or so.Self-identified newsletter subscribers were multigenerational, with a nearly even split of between 18 and 25 percent of respondents in every age category saying they subscribe to newsletters published by newspapers or magazines. Newspaper/magazine newsletters and personal/influencer newsletters were also two of the most popular subscriptions for Millennials and Gen Z’s.Those who subscribe to personal/influencer newsletters were also much more likely to trust newsletters than those who don’t subscribe.Of newsletter types, retailer/brand and loyalty program newsletters were the most popular followed by newspaper/magazine newsletters. But news-driven newsletters combined – including local/regional and industry newsletters – captured the largest share of email newsletter readership.The Top 10 NewslettersThe top 10 newspaper/magazine newsletters, according to the survey, were produced by:The New York TimesCNNThe Washington PostThe Wall Street Journal (WSJ)NPRMorning BrewThe AtlanticWiredPoliticoThe HustleGenerational differences, however, also made an appearance when analyzing the top five most popular news-driven newsletters:— The New York Times, CNN, The Washington Post, and The WSJ’s newsletters are popular among Gen Z respondents, but NPR newsletters are not.— NPR newsletters are more popular among Boomers and Gen X’ers.— The most popular email newsletter among Millennials is from The New York Times.How PR Pros Can Use the Survey DataThese findings could be considered something of a canary in a coal mine for PR and communications professionals.That’s because while broadcast and cable news are still an important medium for reaching older generations, the survey indicates that the popularity of both mediums nose-dive among younger cadres.That’s likely a sign that broadcast and cable news will grow even less relevant in the future, while other mediums will likely become more relevant. It stands to reason that PR pros who want to reach younger audiences (and, likely, all audiences in the future) will need to focus more on social media, online news, print news, and to a lesser extent, email newsletters.News-driven email newsletter platforms such as Substack may also have an advantage over legacy media among some younger consumers because trust in traditional media has declined precipitously over the past several years.Many Substack newsletters are produced by trained journalists with name recognition, but without the distrust and baggage of legacy media brands (which in most cases are owned by large corporations). Newsletters also have a personal touch most mainstream news sources just cannot replicate.Indeed, while trust in the mainstream media has dropped, at the same time some research shows trust in email newsletters has remained relatively constant. And as news-driven email newsletter platforms mature, it’s possible they’ll become even more trusted in the future.Considering Email Newsletters in Media MeasurementPR professionals already know how to measure traditional and social media. But how should we measure email newsletter content?There’s no site traffic or similar third-party metric sources for Substack-style news content, but you can get a good sense of audience from authors’ subscriber counts. Engagement metrics can be determined by likes and comments. And you can even reach out to individual writers to ask for click-through and open rates (there’s no guarantee they’ll provide that data, but it doesn’t hurt to ask).Newsletters are important because they have a captive audience. From the survey, we also know that younger people trust this content more than older audiences. And as broadcast and print sources decline, it is likely that newsletters–more personalized news–will claim their share of trust.That’s why it’s important to include email newsletters in your measurement program. It also means that, when measuring, PR professionals may consider giving newsletters a higher impact weight for this demographic than for others. Angela Dwyer is Head of Insights at Fullintel, IPR Measurement Commission director, and IPRRC board member. She is an award-winning, media measurement expert who helps brands improve business results through data-driven, actionable insights. Tony Cheevers has worked as a sales and marketing leader for global brands like Schlumberger, KLM Royal Dutch Airlines, Virgin Aviation Group and the United States Postal Service. He is currently the Customer Success Officer at Researchscape International where he’s on a mission to make compelling data available to every storyteller.’ ...

Muck Rack analyzed current trends in journalism, including concerns about funding and trust, employment practices, and the implementation of generative AI.An online survey of 1,106 U.S. journalists was conducted Jan. 3 – Feb. 9, 2024.Key findings include:1.) 28% of journalists said they currently use generative AI, followed by 20% who plan to explore its uses in journalism.2.) 45% said their does not have an AI use case policy, compared to 24% who said their company does have a policy in place.3.) 70% of journalists said public relations professionals were at least “moderately important” to their success.4.) Journalists’ top concerns currently include a lack of funding (35%), trust in journalism/media (31%), disinformation (28%), and the decline in local news (24%).5.) 69% said digital publication is the primary medium for their work, followed by print (19%), and TV (4%). Read more about current concerns and trends in the journalism industry ...

This summary is provided by the IPR Digital Media Research CenterDr. Yuan Sun, Dr. Jin Chen, and Dr. S. Shyam Sundar analyzed AI chatbots’ capability to simulate human-like conversations and whether they are more persuasive when they appear human-like in their appearance, interactions, and delivery of advertising content.An online experiment with 414 adult respondents was conducted from Jan. 10–14, 2021. The participants interacted with either human-like chatbot profiles or machine-like chatbot profiles. Participants were also presented with narrative ads (ads “similar to human ‘storytellers’ which conveyed key messages through stories”) or factual ads (ads which “delivered product details and statistical evidence in a manner that would be consistent with a machine-like presenter”).Key findings include:1.) When respondents were able to interact with the chatbot, their attitudes toward the advertisement were more likely to be positive.— Greater interactivity also led to increased behavioral intention with the advertised product.2.) Narrative ads enhanced consumer engagement and reduced respondents’ awareness of the advertiser’s intent to persuade.3.) Narrative ads from interactive, machine-like chatbots generated the most positive attitudes toward advertisements.4.) Factual ads from less interactive, human-like chatbots generated the least positive attitudes toward advertisements.Learn more about different types of chatbots and their influence on consumers ...

Updated March 8, 2024 Thanks to the IPR Digital Media Research Center team for their considerations and input.  With the increased use of generative AI and the potential for increased misinformation and decreased transparency in the research space, the Institute for Public Relations (IPR) has created a disclosure policy for labeling generative AI use in research-related content. Content labels help prevent disinformation, allow transparency for material sources, and help prevent plagiarism. This ensures openness, accountability, honesty, and rigor of the material that IPR creates and publishes. Considerations When Using Generative AI●      Generative AI cannot verify the quality or accuracy of the work it draws upon and is prone to hallucinations (or making up content). ●      Generative AI output may contain biased information.●      Generative AI stops collecting information at a certain period of time, so it does not use the most updated research or material. ●      Confidential or proprietary information should not be uploaded or fed to generative AI (including the responses of participants who have requested confidentiality or anonymity).Therefore, IPR requires in-text disclosures of substantive generative AI use in its research-related materials. The research materials that require disclosure include:●      Blogs, blurbs, and research summaries●      IPR Research Letter articles●      IPR Signature Studies●      Public Relations Journal articles●      IPR Deconstructing series articles●      Presentation materials at IPR events or programsRules and Guidelines for AI Use in IPR-Published Work●      Authors must disclose how generative AI was used and to what extent. ●      Generative AI should be used primarily for editorial assistance. AI should not be used as a co-author for a research paper, as it cannot take responsibility for the work. ●      Authors and creators must take full responsibility for all content created by generative AI, including the use of copyrighted material, and ensure the content is factual, credible, accurate, and supported by other reliable sources. ●      AI should not be used as a primary or secondary source. Instead, it is the author’s responsibility to track original content sources for proper attribution. ●      Each use of generative AI within a document should be addressed individually.●   Authors are responsible for complying with relevant laws and regulations related to AI-generated content.Generative AI use should be labeled or disclosed when used for:●      The research process, such as collecting or analyzing the data●      New content generation (visual or written)●      Content a reader would assume to be human-created●      Language translation (content should also be checked by a fluent speaker)●      Editing that changes the style, voice, or composition of the writingGenerative AI typically does not require a label or disclosure for:●      Idea or topic generation/brainstorming●      Grammatical changes or other minor edits that do not change the overall content, style, or voice of the piece●      Summarizing of material if it does not change the contentWays to disclose:●      In-text citation using APA style●      A reference in a paragraph in the report●      Footnote●      EndnoteWhat should be included in the label or disclosure:●      The generative AI program used (e.g., ChatGPT 4.0)●      The prompt used (e.g., summarize these research findings in two paragraphs)●      The section where generative AI was applied (e.g., introduction)●      Who used the generative AI (e.g., Dr. Tina McCorkindale)●      The date, if applicableHere is an example of a footnote: The introduction was created by inserting the bulk of the report written solely by Dr. McCorkindale, the primary author of this report, into ChatGPT 4 and then asking it to create two introductory paragraphs. Dr. McCorkindale checked the accuracy of the content and edited the introduction.For more information about content disclosure, please refer to Dr. Cayce Myers’s IPR article, “To disclose or not to disclose: That is the AI question.” IPR suggests that if in doubt whether AI-generated content should be labeled, it’s best to over-disclose rather than under-disclose.Please note: This policy will evolve to ensure it remains relevant and effective throughout changes in the AI disclosure landscape. ...