Leadership and the role of communication in public marketing management

Original Article


This paper focuses on the leadership and communication as an information source in decision-making. The paper considers models of communication and debate in a public environment. The paper proposes: (I) a normative model showing how communication can be conducted; and (II) a content analysis of three Obama vs. McCain presidential debates with a multidimensional scaling and a Delphi method application. This paper analyse the association of the messages in debates with debaters and the comparison between their use and the results (communicated through instant polls after each debate). Findings indicate that arguments of leaders in presidential debates can explain the behavior of the followers and could be used for forecast analysis since reveal future political decisions. Causes of the economic crisis and strategies for solution were identified.


Communication Public marketing Economic crisis Decision-making Public strategies Content analysis Election forecasting 


  1. Baxter, L. A. (1988). A dialectical perspective on communication strategies in relationship development. In S. W. Duck, D. F. Hay, S. E. Hobfoll, W. Ickes, & B. Montgomery (Eds.), Handbook of personal relationships (pp. 257–273). Chichester: Wiley.Google Scholar
  2. Bélanger, E., & Soroka, S. (2012). Campaigns and the prediction of election outcomes: Can historical and campaign-period prediction models be combined? Electoral Studies, 31, 702–714.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Benoit, W. L., & Harthcock, A. (1999). Functions of the great debates: Acclaims, attacks, and defense in the 1960 presidential debates. Communication Monographs, 66, 341–357.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Bligh, M. C., & Kohles, J. C. (2009). The enduring allure of charisma: How Barack Obama won the historic 2008 presidential election. The Leadership Quarterly, 20, 483–492.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Callahan, K. (2006) Elements of effective governance: measurement, accountability and participation. CRC Press, 360 p.Google Scholar
  6. Carroll, J.D. and Wish, M. (2002) “Multidimensional Scaling: Models, Methods, and Relations to Delphi”, in The Delphi Method Techniques and Applications. Harold A. Linstone and Murray Turoff (Ed.).Google Scholar
  7. Casasanto, D., & Jasmin, K. (2010). Good and bad in the hands of politicians: Spontaneous gestures during positive and negative speech. PlosOne, 5(7), 1–5.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Cicerón, M.T. (1992) El orador. Traducción tovar & bujaldón. Madrid: Consejo Superior de Investigaciones Científicas C.S.I.C.Google Scholar
  9. Cicerón, M.T. (1996) De oratore. Books I–II/Cicero, with an English translation by E.W. Sutton, completed, with an introduction by H. Rackham, 1st ed, 6th repr. rev. Cambridge (MA), London: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  10. Davis, K. M., & Gardner, W. L. (2012). Charisma under crisis revisited: Presidential leadership, perceived leader effectiveness, and contextual influences. The Leadership Quarterly, 23(4), 918–933.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Den Hartog & Verburg (1997) Charisma and rhetoric: Communicative techniques of international business leaders. Leadership Quarterly. Greenwich, Vol. 8, Iss. 4; pg. 355, 37 pgsGoogle Scholar
  12. Descartes, R. (1649) A discourse of a method for the well guiding of reason, and the discovery of truth in the sciences. Printed by Thomas Newcombe, London.Google Scholar
  13. Donmoyer, R. (1993). Art criticism as a guide to student evaluation. Theory into Practice, 32(4), 252–59.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Easton, G., & Araujo, L. (1997). Management research and literary criticism. British Journal of Management, 8, 99–106.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Ekman, P., & Friesen, W. (1969). The repertoire of nonverbal behavior: Categories, origins, usage and coding. Semiotica, 1, 49–98.Google Scholar
  16. Festinger, L. (1962). A theory of cognitive dissonance. Stanford: Stanford University Press.Google Scholar
  17. Fischer, F (2006) Deliberative policy analysis as practical reason: Integrating empirical and normative arguments. In Handbook of public policy analysis. Frank Fischer, Gerald Miller, Mara S. Sidney (Ed.), CRC Press, 223–236.Google Scholar
  18. Fischer, F., Forester J. (1993) The Argumentative turn in policy analysis and planning. Duke University Press, 327p.Google Scholar
  19. Gallo, C. (2008). How to inspire people like Obama does. March: BusinessWeek. 3.Google Scholar
  20. González, J. F. (1998). El Lenguaje Corporal: Claves de la comunicación no verbal. Madrid: Edimat Libros S.A.Google Scholar
  21. Goodell, J. W., & Vahamaa, S. (2013). US presidential elections and implied volatility: The role of political uncertainty. Journal of Banking and Finance, 37(3), 1108–1117.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Gordon, A., & Miller, J. L. (2004). Values and persuasion during the first Bush–Gore presidential debate. Political Communication, 21(1), 71–92.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Gottweis, H. (2006). Rhetoric in policy making: between logos, ethos, and phatos. In: F. Fischer, G. Miller, M. S. Sidney (Ed.) Handbook of public policy analysis. CRC Press, 223–236.Google Scholar
  24. Gronbeck, B.E. (2004). Rhetoric and politics. In: L.L. Kaid (Ed.) Handbook of political communication research. Routledge 135–154.Google Scholar
  25. Habermas, J. (1998). On the pragmatics of communication. Cambridge: The MIT Press.Google Scholar
  26. Hajer, M.A. (2003). Deliberative policy analysis: Understanding governance in the network society. Cambridge University Press, 307p.Google Scholar
  27. Hart, R. P., & Lind, C. J. (2010). Words and their ways in campaign’08. American Behavioral Scientist, 54(4), 355–381.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Hatry, H.P. (2007). Performance measurement: Getting results. Urban Institute Press, 326 p.Google Scholar
  29. Heider, F. (1946). Attitudes and cognitive organization. Journal of Psychology, 21, 107–12.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Heider, F. (1958). The psychology of interpersonal relations. New York: Wiley.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Holzer, M., Yi, S., Lee, S. (2004). Public productivity handbook. CRC Press, 715 p.Google Scholar
  32. Hovland, C. I., Janis, I. L., & Kelley, H. H. (1953). Communication and persuasion. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
  33. Hovland, C. I., Janis, I. L., & Kelley, H. H. (1967). Reinforcement theory. In R. M. Elliot, G. Lindzey, & K. MacCorquodale (Eds.), Theories of attitude change (pp. 12–63). New York: Appleton.Google Scholar
  34. Jorgensen, C., Kock, C., & Rorbech, L. (1998). Rhetoric that shifts votes: An exploratory study of persuasion in issue-oriented public debates. Political Communication, 15, 3(1), 283–299.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Kant, I. (2005a). Critica de la razón pura, traducción Pedro Rivas. Madrid: Taurus Ediciones, S.A. Grupo Santillana.Google Scholar
  36. Kant, I. (2005b). Metafísica de las costumbres, traducción Adela Cortina Orts. Madrid: Tecnos.Google Scholar
  37. Kruskal, J. B. (1964). Multidimensional scaling by optimizing goodness of to a nonmetric hypothesis. Psychometrika, 29, 1–27.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Kruskal, J. B., & Wish, M. (1978). Multidimensional scaling. Beverly Hills: Sage.Google Scholar
  39. Lakatos, I., & Musgrave, A. (1970). Criticism and the growth of knowledge, vol. 4. London: Proceedings of the International Colloquium in the Philosophy of Science, Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  40. Lassus, R. (1992). La communication efficace par la PNL (The effective communication for NLP). Alleur: Marabout.Google Scholar
  41. Leong, E., Ewing, M. & Pitt, L. (2004) “Analysing competitors’ online persuasive themes with text mining”. Marketing Intelligence & Planning, Vol. 22 Nº 2 pp.187-200.Google Scholar
  42. Lloyd, J. (2009). Keeping both the baby and the bathwater: scoping a new model of political marketing communication. International Review on Public and Non-Profit Marketing, 6, 119–135.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Marx, K. (1992). El capital: Crítica de la economía política. México: Fondo de cultura económica.Google Scholar
  44. McCloskey, D. N. (1985). The rhetoric of economics. Madison: The University of Wisconsin Press.Google Scholar
  45. McCornack, S.A. (1992). Information manipulation theory. Communication Monographs, 59(1), 1–16.Google Scholar
  46. McDavid, J.C., Hawthorn L.R.L. (2005) Program evaluation & performance measurement: An introduction to practice. SAGE, 477 p.Google Scholar
  47. McGee, B. R. (2001). Assessing argumentation in the 2000 political campaigns. Contemporary Argumentation & Debate, 22, 41–42.Google Scholar
  48. McGuire, W. (1961). Resistance to persuasion conferred by active and passive prior refutation of the same and alternative counterarguments. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, September, 63(2), 326–332.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Mehrabian, A. (1971). Silent messages. Belmont: Wadsworth.Google Scholar
  50. Mey, J. L. (1993). Pragmatics. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
  51. Morris, E., & Johnson, J. M. (2011). Strategic Maneuvering in the 2008 Presidential Debates. American Behavioral Scientist, 55(3), 284–306.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Norpoth, H., & Perkins, D. F. (2011). War and momentum: The 2008 presidential nominations. PS-Political Science & Politics, 44(3), 536–543.Google Scholar
  53. Olson, J., Ouyang, Y., Poe, J., Trantham, A., & Waterman, R. W. (2012). The Teleprompter Presidency: Comparing Obama’s Campaign and Governing Rhetoric. Social Science Quarterly, 93(5), 1402–1423.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Ortigueira Bouzada, M. & Ortigueira Sánchez, M. (2001) Liderazgo organizacional: instrumentos para dominar y controlar situaciones y problemas difíciles (Organizational leadership: Instruments to dominate and control situations and difficult problems). Seville: Editorial @ 3D.Google Scholar
  55. Ortigueira Sánchez, Luis Camilo (2008). Criticism and Counter-Criticism of Public Management: Strategy Models. In R.A. Oglesby & M.G. Adams (Eds.), Business Research Yearbook, Publication of the International Academy of Business Disciplines, Vol XV number 2, 743–748.Google Scholar
  56. Osgood, C., & Tannenbaum, P. (1955). The principle of congruity in the prediction of attitude change. Psychology Review, 62, 42–55.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. Pease, A. (1994). El lenguaje del cuerpo. Barcelona: Ediciones Altaya S.A.Google Scholar
  58. Poister, T.H. (2003). Measuring performance in public and nonprofit organizations. John Wiley and Sons, 289pGoogle Scholar
  59. Rank, H. (1976). Teaching about public persuasion. In D. Dietrich (Ed.), Teaching and doublespeak. Urbana: National Council of Teachers of English.Google Scholar
  60. Real, J.E. (2001). Escalamiento Multidimensional (Multi-dimensional Scaling). Edit. La Muralla, Edit. Hespérides. Madrid.Google Scholar
  61. Rokeach, M., & Rothman, G. (1965). The principle of belief congruence and the congruity principle as models of cognitive interaction. Psychological Review, 72, 128–142.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. Salanti, A. (1989). Distinguishing ‘Internal’ from ‘external’ criticism in economic methodology. History of Political Economy, 21(4), 635–639.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  63. Seyranian, V., & Bligh, M. C. (2008). Presidential charismatic leadership: Exploring the rhetoric of social change. The Leadership Quarterly, 19, 54–76.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  64. Shapiro, I. (1992). Political criticism. Berkeley: University of California Press.Google Scholar
  65. Sheppard, I. (1986). “Silent signals”, Supervisory Management, vol. 31. Iss., 3, 31–33.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  66. Sherif, M., & Hovland, C. I. (1961). Social judgment. New Haven: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
  67. Silverman, B. (1992). Survey of expert critiquing systems: Practical and theoretical frontiers. Communications of the ACM, 35(4), 106–127.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  68. Studer, J. (1999). Guía práctica de oratoria. Madrid: Editorial El Drac, S.L.Google Scholar
  69. Tresch, A. (2009). Politicians in the media: Determinants of legislators’ presence and prominence in Swiss newspapers. The International Journal of Press/Politics, 14(1), 67–90.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  70. Vahidov, R., & Elrod, R. (1999). Incorporating critique and argumentation in DSS. Decision Support Systems, 26, 249–258.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  71. Vahidov, R., & Fazlollahi, B. (2004). Pluralistic multi-agent decision support system: A framework and an empirical test. Information & Management, 41(7), 883–98.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  72. Van Buuren, A. W., Klijn, E.-H., & Edelenbos, J. (2012). Democratic legitimacy of new forms of water management in the Netherlands. International Journal of Water Resources Development, 28(4), 629–645.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  73. Von Wartburg, W. P. (1998). Dealing with public criticism—The lessons of experience. Strategic Communication Management, 2(4), 38–41.Google Scholar
  74. Walliser, B. (1977). Systèmes et modèles. Introduction critique à l’analyse de systèmes (pp. 220–222). Paris: aux Éditions du Seuil.Google Scholar
  75. Warner, B. R., Carlin, D. B., Winfrey, K., Schnoebelen, J., & Trosanovski, M. (2011). Will the “Real” Candidates for President and Vice President Please Stand Up? 2008 Pre- and Post-Debate Viewer Perceptions of Candidate Image. American Behavioral Scientist, 55(3), 232–252.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  76. Wholey, J.S., Hatry, H.P., Newcomer K.E. (2004). Handbook of practical program evaluation. John Wiley and Sons, 720 p.Google Scholar
  77. Wilson-Kratzer, J. M., & Benoit, W. L. (2010). A functional analysis of press releases from Senator Barack Obama and Senator John McCain during the 2008 primary presidential election. Public Relations Review, 36, 178–180.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2013

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.International University of AndalusiaSevilleSpain

Personalised recommendations