Exploring the dynamics of the legitimacy judgment about the public sectorthe case of the Spanish Ministry of Education and its media legitimacy (2011-2015)

  1. Carmen María ROBLES LÓPEZ 1
  2. María José CANEL CRESPO 1
  1. 1 Universidad Complutense de Madrid
    info

    Universidad Complutense de Madrid

    Madrid, España

    ROR 02p0gd045

Revista:
Comunicación y sociedad = Communication & Society

ISSN: 2386-7876

Año de publicación: 2017

Volumen: 30

Número: 3

Páginas: 215-228

Tipo: Artículo

DOI: 10.15581/003.30.35778 DIALNET GOOGLE SCHOLAR lock_openAcceso abierto editor

Otras publicaciones en: Comunicación y sociedad = Communication & Society

Resumen

This paper is part of a research project that looks at how management of intangible assets can play a role to rebuild trust in the public sector. More specifically, it looks at legitimacy conceptualized as an intangible asset. The aim is to explore the logic of legitimacy judgments about public organizations and to assess whether there is congruence between a ministry (and the minister)’s actions and how the media perceive and assess them. Four types of legitimacy are examined: ‘Procedural’, based on evaluations of the soundness of the ministry’s procedures and processes; ‘Consequential’, which regards outcomes, results and achievements of the ministry’s public policies; ‘Structural’ refers to buildings, working policies, budgets and resources; and finally, ‘Personal legitimacy’ regards judgments which refer to the minister. It is also analyzed whether these dynamics of the legitimacy judgment followed a hybridization logic between online and offline organizational communication and between online and offline media. The analysed organization is the Ministry of Education, Culture and Sports, 2011-2015. Based on findings, the paper discusses practical implications for government communication legitimacy strategies.

€ Ver financiación

Información de financiación

This research has been conducted with funds fro the Instituto Nacional de Administración Pública (INAP), project titled La comunicación de la Administración Pública: La generación de bienes intangibles para recuperar la confianza ciudadana. Análisis crítico de casos prácticos, Programa de Fomento de la Investigación, 2016-2017.

Financiadores

  • Instituto Nacional de Administración Pública

Referencias bibliográficas

  • Aerts, W., & Cormier, D. (2009). Media legitimacy and corporate environmental communication. Accounting, organizations and society 34(1), 1-27.
  • Ashforth, B. E. & Gibbs, B. W. (1990). The double-edge of organizational legitimation. Organization science 1(2), 177-194.
  • Baum, J. A. C., & Oliver, C. 1991. Institutional linkages and organizational mortality. Administrative Science Quarterly 36, 187-218.
  • Bertot, J. C., Jaeger, P. T., & Hansen, D. (2012). The impact of polices on government social media usage: Issues, challenges, and recommendations. Government information quarterly 29(1), 30-40.
  • Bitektine, A. (2011). Toward a theory of social judgments of organizations: The case of legitimacy, reputation, and status. Academy of Management Review 36 (1), 151-179.
  • Canel, M. J., & García, Á. (2013). Comunicar gobiernos fiables. Análisis de la confianza como valor intangible del Gobierno de España. Zer-Revista de Estudios de Comunicación 18(34), 29-48.
  • Canel, M. J. (2014). Reflexiones sobre la reputación ideal de la Administración Pública. Escribir en las almas. Estudios en honor de Rafael Alvira, 69-88.
  • Canel, M.J. & Luoma-Aho, V. (2015). Crisis en la Administración Pública, oportunidad para la intangibilidad [Crisis in Public Administration, a chance for intangibility]. In Villafañe, J. (Dir.). Anuario. La comunicación empresarial y la gestión de los intangibles en España y Latinoamérica (pp. 121-132). Madrid: Gedisa.
  • Canel, M.J., Oliveira, E. & Luoma-aho, V. (2016). Exploring citizens’ judgments about the legitimacy of public policies. A crosscountry comparison about governmental policies on refugees. Paper presentado en el Congreso Anual de la European Group for Public Administration (EGPA), Utrecht, Septiembre 24-27.
  • Canel, M.J. & Luoma-aho, V. (in press). Public Sector Communication. Closing gaps between citizens and organizations. Wiley-Blackwell.
  • Carpenter, D. P., & Krause, G. A. (2012). Reputation and public administration. Public Administration Review 72(1), 26-32.
  • Castelló, A., Del Pino, C., & Ramos, I. (2014). Twitter como canal de comunicación corporativa y publicitaria. Communication & Society 27(2), 21-54.
  • Castelló, I., Etter, M., & Arup Nielsen, F. (2016). Strategies of Legitimacy Through Social Media: The Networked Strategy. Journal of Management Studies 53(3), 402–432.
  • Chadwick, A. (2013). The hybrid media system: politics and power. New York: Oxford University Press.
  • Colleoni, E. (2013). CSR communication strategies for organizational legitimacy in social media. Corporate Communications: an International Journal 18(2), 228-248.
  • Deephouse, D. L. (1996). Does isomorphism legitimate? Academy of management journal 39(4), 1024-1039.
  • Deephouse, D. L. (1999). To be different, or to be the same? It’s a question (and theory) of strategic balance. Strategic management journal 20(2), 147-166.
  • Deephouse, D. L. (2000). Media reputation as a strategic resource: An integration of mass communication and resource-based theories. Journal of Management 26(6), 1091-1112.
  • Deephouse, D. L., & Carter, S. M. (2005). An Examination of Differences Between Organizational Legitimacy and Organizational Reputation. Journal of Management Studies 42(2), 329-360.
  • DiMaggio, P. J., & Powell, W. W. (Eds.). (1991). The new institutionalism in organizational analysis (Vol. 17). Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
  • Dincer, O. C., & Uslaner, E. M. (2010). Trust and growth. Public Choice 142(1-2), 59-67.
  • Egginton, D. A. (1990). Towards some principles for intangible asset accounting. Accounting and Business Research 20(79), 193-205.
  • Fieseler, C., & Fleck, M. (2013). The pursuit of empowerment through social media: Structural social capital dynamics in CSR-Blogging. Journal of business ethics 118(4), 759-775.
  • García, C. & Zugasti, R. (2014). La campaña virtual en Twitter: análisis de las cuentas de Rajoy y de Rubalcaba en las elecciones generales de 2011 [The virtual campaign: Analysis of the Twitter accounts of Rajoy and Rubalcaba in the 2011 Spanish general elections]. Historia y Comunicación Social 19, 299.
  • Giansante, G. (2015). La comunicación política online: cómo utilizar la web para construir consenso y estimular la participación. Barelona: UOC.
  • Golant, B. D. & Sillince, J. A. (2007). The constitution of organizational legitimacy: A narrative perspective. Organization Studies 28(8), 1149-1167.
  • Grimmelikhuijsen, S.G. & A.J. Meijer (2015). Does Twitter Increase Perceived Police Legitimacy? Public Administration Review, Article published online ahead of print: 20 APR 2015. DOI: 10.1111/puar.12378.
  • Hamilton, E. A. (2006). An exploration of the relationship between loss of legitimacy and the sudden death of organizations. Group & Organization Management 31(3), 327-358.
  • Hall, R. (1992). The strategic analysis of intangible resources. Strategic Management Journal 13 (2), 135-144.
  • Hunt, C. S. & Aldrich, H. E. (1996). Why even Rodney Dangerfield has a home page: Legitimizing the world-wide web as a medium for commercial endeavors. In Annual Meeting of the Academy of Management. Cincinnati, OH: Academy of Management.
  • Johnson, C., Dowd, T. J., & Ridgeway, C. L. (2006). Legitimacy as a social process. Annual Review of Sociology, (32), 53-78.
  • Kim, S. K., Park, M. J., & Rho, J. J. (2015). Effect of the Government’s Use of Social Media on the Reliability of the Government: Focus on Twitter. Public Management Review 17(3), 328-355.
  • Meyer, J. W., & Scott, W. R. (1983). Centralization and the legitimacy problems of local government. In J.W. Meyer & W.R. Scott (eds.), Organizational environments: Ritual and rationality (pp. 199-215), Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.
  • Moreno, A., & Capriotti, P. (2009). Communicating CSR, citizenship and sustainability on the web. Journal of Communication Management 13(2), 157-175.
  • Mossberger, K., Wu, Y., & Crawford, J. (2013). Connecting citizens and local governments? Social media and interactivity in major US cities. Government Information Quarterly 30(4), 351-358.
  • Lee, C. S., & Ma, L. (2012). News sharing in social media: The effect of gratifications and prior experience. Computers in Human Behavior 28(2), 331-339.
  • Lev, B., & Daum, J. H. (2004). The dominance of intangible assets: Consequences for enterprise management and corporate reporting. Measuring Business Excellence 8(1), 6-17.
  • Luoma-aho, V. L., & Makikangas, M. E. (2014). Do public sector mergers (re) shape reputation? International Journal of Public Sector Management 27(1), 39-52.
  • Oliveira, G. H. M., & Welch, E. W. (2013). Social media use in local government: Linkage of technology, task, and organizational context. Government Information Quarterly 30(4), 397-405.
  • Pollock, T. G., & Rindova, V. P. (2003). Media legitimation effects in the market for initial public offerings. Academy of Management Journal 46(5), 631-642.
  • Ramos del Cano, F. (2013). Redes sociales en el entorno radiofónico: el uso de Twitter como fuente periodística en la Cadena SER. Revista Mediterránea de Comunicación 4(2), 173-188.
  • Robles, C.M (2015). La reputación como un bien intangible de los líderes políticos. El caso del Ministro de Educación, Cultura y Deporte en España (2012-2013). Libro electrónico AIRP. ISBN: 978-84-697-0291-8.
  • Scott, W.R & Meyer, J.W. (1991). The organization of societal sectors. In W.W Powell & P.J. DiMaggio (Ed). The new instutionalism in oganizational analysis: 180-140. Chicago: University of Chigago Press.
  • Suchman, M. C. (1995). Managing legitimacy: Strategic and institutional approaches. Academy of Management Review 20(3), 571-610.
  • Thomas, E. F., & Louis, W. R. (2013). When will collective action be effective? Violent and non-violent protests differentially influence perceptions of legitimacy and efficacy among sympathizers. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin 40(2), 263-276.
  • Tyler, T. R. (2006). Psychological perspectives on legitimacy and legitimation. Annual Review of Psychology (57), 375-400.
  • Yoon, Y. (2005). Legitimacy, public relations, and media access: Proposing and testing a media access model. Communication Research 32(6), 762-793.
  • Zamora, R. & Zurutuza, C. (2014) “Campaigning on Twitter: Towards the ‘Personal Style’ Campaign to Activate the Political Engagement During the 2011 Spanish General Elections”, Communication & Society 27(1), 83-106.
Fuente de los datos: Dialnet