Ethical Decision Making in Issues Management Within Activist Groups

Abstract

Public relations practitioners face many ethical challenges, specifically in issues
 management (e.g., Bowen & Heath, 2005; J. Grunig & L. Grunig, 1996). By its
 definition, issues management is concerned with defining issues and problems,
 manages them through internal and external communication with publics, and often
 confronts conflicting value systems among publics. Therefore, issues management is on
 the forefront of ethical decision making in an organization (Heath, 1990).
 Deontology has been suggested as one of the major theoretical underpinnings for ethics
 research (e.g., Crawley & Sinclair, 2003; Smudde, 2005). Bowen (2004) proposed a
 normative theoretical model for ethical decision making in issues management based
 on Kantian deontology (autonomy, the principle of universality, duty, dignity and respect
 for others, and the morally good will) and two-way symmetrical communication. Support
 was found, but more research is warranted to examine the model in different
 organizational contexts. It is imperative to test the applicability of the normative
 deontological model (Bowen, 2004) in a new context—that of a non-profit activist
 coalition.
 Demands for accountability, ethical transparency, institutionalization concerns,
 competing values and demands of various publics groups have made it necessary to
 examine the ethical basis of decision making in non-profit organizations (Dando & Swift,
 2003). With its mission of problematizing the fiscal policies of the Word Bank (WB) and
 the International Monetary Fund (IMF), the participating activist coalition was actually an
 issues management group engaging thoughtfully in the process of public policies on
 environmental, labor, development, peace, gender, and social justice issues confronting
 less developed nations in the world. Through a five-month participant observation in the
 membership groups of the coalition and 19 in-depth interviews with its issues managers
 and public relations practitioners, this study attempted to answer the following research
 questions:
 (1) What is the process of issues decision making in the coalition?;
 (2) What is the underlying moral philosophy used in the issues management decisionmaking
 process?.
 This study yielded the following findings. Participants argued that decision making
 should be consensus-oriented and based on equal participation and continuous
 discussion. Unfortunately, the lack of consistent, dedicated, and enthusiastic input by
 member groups was a significant impediment to a more inclusive decision making
 process for the management of issues. Participants’ valued equality – their emphases on being against stereotypes, inequality, and biases was consistent with the
 deontological paradigm. Moral autonomy was a dominant theme that also emerged
 through discussion of the sovereign right of each country to decide its own macroeconomic/fiscal
 policies. Transparency was another ethical consideration that the
 coalition used in its issues management. Overall, there was a remarkably high degree
 of congruence between the philosophical approach of deontology and the beliefs
 espoused by coalition members.
 The data gathered in this study has far-reaching implications in the positive social role of
 issues management and public relations. The implications for both businesses and
 activist coalitions are enormous: more responsive organizations, better policy, and more
 inclusive and socially responsible private and government initiatives.