Page 94 - Parimad teadustööd 2013/2014

94
TALLINNA ÜLIKOOLI ÜLIÕPILASTE 2013/2014. ÕPPEAASTA PARIMAD TEADUSTÖÖD / ARTIKLITE KOgUMIK SOTSIAALTEADUSED
CONSTRUCTING CORPORATE IDENTITY: A HOLISTIC APPROACH TO IDENTITY MANAGEMENT AND CORPORATE BRANDING
KORPORATIIVSE IdENTITEEdI KONSTRuEERIMINE: TERVIKLIK LÄHENEMINE IdENTITEEdI JuHTIMISELE JA KORPORATIIVSELE BRÄNdINGuLE
Karin Luiga
Abstract
Theory of corporate branding and identity management is shifting from a conduit model to more com- plex understanding of the process, taking into account much more the role of target orientated commu- nication. The topic is seen through the lenses of radical constructivism and complexity theory in order to help communication professionals to manage meaning and understand the relations behind creating knowledge. A model of identity management and corporate branding is presented to bind the theories together for a more holistic approach on constructing corporate identity.
Problem Statement
Communications professionals but also managers have been ignoring the elephant in the room for too long, unaware of the insights scientists´ have found out in their research, and still operate based on theories that could have been replaced by newer ones. I have pointed out some dimensions that in post- modern times should be kept in mind in order to make a company more effective, help adopting multi- dimensional thinking and to cope with complexity.
Observation on the current situation and its shortcomings
Christensen, Firat and Cornelissen, (2009) argue that integrated communication, as an assumption that it is possible to combine an all-inclusive approach of the organization and its messages to stakeholders under the same umbrella, is purely an illusion. As a number of authors (Maturana, Varela 1987, Morin 2008) also show, there is no privileged perspective from where one would claim to have the whole over- view. Our linear way of thinking has made us believe such a general overview is possible, but that ac- cording to more recent research has turned out not to be possible. Christensen, Firat and Cornelissen (2009: 211) claim “While the desire to produce a general overview of an object or situation, including an organisation’s communication, is understandable, nobody ever meets an organisation in full - neither its own members nor its external stakeholders. Nobody, therefore, is able to describe the organisation in its “entirety”. By skipping this reaching out for a dream that is hardly ever meant to be fulfilled, at least according to the current position of science, corporate communicators could instead focus on what the same science has to offer. And instead of trying to get hold of this big picture to manage everything, they could start from adopting the more recently discovered valances archetypal branding, as Martin-Vallas proposes “the archetype is an emergent structure, a by-product of the encounter between culture and instinct, in other words, a higher level of complexity” (Martin-Vallas 2013: 283). So using that as a key to customers’ mind might have a real life value and advantage.