Interpersonal approaches to relationship building: diplomat as a human agent of public diplomacy

Abstract

In extant literature, it has been advised that the central purpose of public diplomacy should be redefined as relationship management. Against this backdrop, the effects of engagement efforts made to build and nurture relationships has been contested. On one hand, relationship management is presented as an approach to promote mutual understanding while, on the other, research studies show that diplomatic agencies remain focused on advocacy and that foreign publics are unwilling to engage. As public relations research has identified the positive effects of using interpersonal approaches to build and nurture relationships, this study conducted a case analysis on the engagement efforts made by a diplomat to build relationships. It was found that relationships were built with multiple publics both locally and globally and that offline relationships preceded online relationships. In relating to foreign publics, relational capabilities, including relational continuation, relational attentiveness, relational curiosity, and relational empathy, were portrayed. Although shared values and interactions were promoted, foreign publics were only invited to engage on soft topics, such as cultural and social issues.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.

Fig. 1

References

  1. Banks R. 2011. A resource guide to public diplomacy evaluation. http://uscpublicdiplomacy.org/publications/perspectives/CPD_Perspectives_Paper9_2011.pdf. Accessed 11 Nov 2014.

  2. Barder, B. 2010. Diplomacy, ethics and the national interest: What are diplomats for? Hague Journal of Diplomacy 5: 289–297.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Bettie, M. 2015. Ambassadors unaware: The Fulbright Program and American public diplomacy. Journal of Transatlantic Studies 13 (4): 358–372.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Braun, V., and V. Clarke. 2006. Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology 3 (2): 77–101.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Buckle A. 2012. The new diplomacy: Devising a relational model of public diplomacy. Pursuit - The Journal of Undergraduate Research at the University of Tennessee 3 (2): 1–47. http://trace.tennessee.edu/pursuit/vol3/iss2/3. Accessed 11 Nov 2014.

  6. Comor, E., and H. Bean. 2012. America’s ‘engagement’ delusion: Critiquing a public diplomacy consensus. International Communication Gazette 74 (3): 203–220.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Copeland, D. 2009. Transformational public diplomacy: Rethinking advocacy for the globalisation age. Place Branding and Public Diplomacy 5 (February): 97–102.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Cornut, J. 2015. To be a diplomat abroad: Diplomatic practice at embassies. Cooperation and Conflict 50 (3): 385–401.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Cull, N.J. 2013. The long road to public diplomacy 2.0: The internet in US public diplomacy. International Studies Review 15 (1): 123–139.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Dhanesh, G.S. 2017. Putting engagement in its PRoper place: State of the field, definition and model of engagement in public relations. Public Relations Review 43 (5): 925–933.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Dodd, M.D., and S.J. Collins. 2017. Public relations message strategies and public diplomacy 2.0: An empirical analysis using Central-Eastern European and Western Embassy Twitter accounts. Public Relations Review 43 (2): 417–425.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Eyal, K., and R.M. Dailey. 2012. Examining relational maintenance in parasocial relationships. Mass Communication and Society 15 (5): 758–781.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Fitzpatrick, K., J. Fullerton, and A. Kendrick. 2009. Public relations and public diplomacy: Conceptual and practical connections. Public Relations Journal 7 (4): 1–21.

    Google Scholar 

  14. Fitzpatrick, K.R. 2007. Advancing the new public diplomacy: A public relations perspective. The Hague Journal of Diplomacy 2 (3): 187–211.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Gilboa, E. 2008. Searching for a theory of public diplomacy. Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science 616 (March 2008): 55–77.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Gregory, B. 2008. Public diplomacy: Sunrise of an academic field. Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science 616 (March): 274–290.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Gregory, B. 2011. American public diplomacy: Enduring characteristics, elusive transformation. The Hague Journal of Diplomacy 6 (3): 351–372.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Grunig, J.E. 1993. Public relations and international affairs: Effects, ethics and responsibility. Journal of International Affairs 47 (1): 137–162.

    Google Scholar 

  19. Gupta, C., and J.L. Bartlett. 2007. Guanxi, astrology and symmetry: Asian business and its impact on public relations practice. Asian Pacific Public Relations Journal 8 (1): 1–18.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Hsieh, H.-F., and S.E. Shannon. 2005. Three approaches to qualitative content analysis. Qualitative Health Research 15 (9): 1277–1288.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Huang, Y.-H. 2001. OPRA: A cross-cultural, multiple-item scale for measuring organization-public relationships. Journal of Public Relations Research 13 (1): 61–90.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Johnston, K.A. 2014. Public relations and engagement: Theoretical imperatives of a multidimensional concept. Journal of Public Relations Research 26 (5): 381–383.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Khakimova, L.F. 2013. Public diplomacy at Arab embassies: Fighting an uphill battle. International Journal of Strategic Communication 7 (1): 21–42.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Khakimova Storie, L. 2015. Lost publics in public diplomacy: Antecedents for online relationship management. Public Relations Review 41 (2): 315–317.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Ki, E.-J. 2015. Application of relationship management to public diplomacy. In International public relations and public diplomacy: Communication and engagement, ed. G.J. Golan, S.-U. Yang, and D.F. Kinsey, 93–108. New York, NY: Peter Lang Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  26. Kim, J. 2016. Public relations and public diplomacy in cultural and educational exchange programs: A coorientational approach to the Humphrey Program. Public Relations Review 42 (1): 135–145.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Kim, J.-.N, and L. Ni. 2010. Seeing the forest through the trees: The behavioral, strategic management paradigm of public relations and its future. In: The Sage handbook of public relations, ed. R.L. Heath, 35–57. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  28. Kim, J.-N., and L. Ni. 2011. The Nexus between Hallyu and soft power: Cultural public diplomacy in the era of sociological globalism. In Hallyu: Influence of Korean popular culture in Asia and beyond, ed. D.K. Kim and M.S. Kim, 131–154. Seoul, South Korea: Seoul National University Press.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  29. Kim, J.-N., L. Ni, and B.-L. Sha. 2008. Breaking down the stakeholder environment: Explicating approaches to the segmentation of publics for public relations research. Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly 85 (4): 751–768.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. Kwok, B. 2016. Goodbye, Clifford BB. EJ Insight. http://www.ejinsight.com/20160720-goodbye-clifford-bb/. Accessed 20 July 2016.

  31. L’Etang, J. 2009. Public relations and diplomacy in a globalized world: An issue of public communication. American Behavioral Scientist 53 (4): 607–626.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  32. Lau, S., and G. Cheung. 2015. How Hong Kong got under the skin of United States Consul General Clifford Hart. South China Morning Post. http://www.scmp.com/news/hong-kong/article/1848096/how-hong-kong-got-under-skin-united-states-consul-general-clifford. Accessed 10 Aug 2015.

  33. Lee, H.M., and J.W. Jun. 2013. Explicating public diplomacy as organization–public relationship (OPR): An empirical investigation of OPRs between the US embassy in Seoul and South Korean college students. Journal of Public Relations Research 25 (5): 411–425.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  34. Leonard, M. 2002. Diplomacy by other means. Foreign Policy 132 (October): 48–56.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  35. Leung, P. 2013. Outside interference bad for HK. China Daily. http://www.chinadaily.com.cn/opinion/2013-11/27/content_17133662.htm. Accessed 27 Nov 2013.

  36. Lim, S., J. Goh, and K. Sriramesh. 2005. Applicability of the generic principles of excellent public relations in a different cultural context: The case study of Singapore. Journal of Public Relations Research 17 (4): 315–340.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  37. Macnamara, J. 2014. Emerging international standards for measurement and evaluation of public relations: A critical analysis. Public Relations Inquiry 3 (1): 7–29. 

    Article  Google Scholar 

  38. Men, L.R., and C.F. Hung. 2012. Exploring the roles of organization-public relationships in the strategic management process: Towards an integrated framework. International Journal of Strategic Communication 6 (2): 151–173.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  39. Men, L.R., and W.H.S. Tsai. 2015. Infusing social media with humanity: Corporate character, public engagement, and relational outcomes. Public Relations Review 41 (3): 395–403.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  40. Men, L.R., and W.H.S. Tsai. 2016. Public engagement with CEOs on social media: Motivations and relational outcomes. Public Relations Review 42 (5): 932–942.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  41. Nye, J. 2008. Public diplomacy and soft power. The Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science 616 (1): 94–109. 

    Article  Google Scholar 

  42. Nye, J. 2010. Smart power needs smart public diplomacy. Harvard Kennedy School. http://www.hks.harvard.edu/news-events/news/news-archive/smart-power-needs-diplomacy. Accessed 11 Nov 2014.

  43. Orum, A.M. 2015. Case study: Logic. In International encyclopedia of the social & behavioral sciences, ed. J. Wright, 202–207. Second edition. London: Elsevier.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  44. Pamment, J. 2016. Digital diplomacy as transmedia engagement: Aligning theories of participatory culture with international advocacy campaigns. New Media & Society 18 (9): 2046–2062.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  45. Park, S.J., and Y.S. Lim. 2014. Information networks and social media use in public diplomacy: A comparative analysis of South Korea and Japan. Asian Journal of Communication 24 (1): 79–98.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  46. Pouliot, V. 2011. Diplomats as permanent representatives. International Journal 66 (3): 543–561.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  47. Rawnsley, G. 2012. Approaches to soft power and public diplomacy in China and Taiwan. The Journal of International Communication 18 (2): 121–135.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  48. Redsicker, P. 2014. Social photos generate more engagement: New research. http://www.socialmediaexaminer.com/photos-generate-engagement-research/. Accessed 13 May 2014.

  49. Rubin, R.B., and M.P. McHugh. 1987. Development of parasocial interaction relationships. Journal of Broadcasting & Electronic Media 31 (3): 279–292.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  50. Seib, P. 2013. Hillary Clinton was a champion of public diplomacy. The New York Times. http://www.nytimes.com/roomfordebate/2013/05/12/judging-hillary-clinton-as-secretary-of-state/hillary-clinton-was-a-champion-of-public-diplomacy. Accessed 11 Nov 2014.

  51. Seo, H. 2013. The ‘virtual last three feet’: Understanding relationship perspectives in network-based public diplomacy. In Relational, networked and collaborative approaches to public diplomacy, ed. R.S. Zaharna, A. Arsenault, and A. Fisher, 209–226. New York, NY: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  52. Shen, S. 2016. How Clifford BB set a new tone for diplomacy. EJ Insight. http://www.ejinsight.com/20160801-how-clifford-bb-set-a-new-tone-for-diplomacy/. Accessed 1 Aug 2016.

  53. Signitzer, B., and C. Wamser. 2006. Public diplomacy: A specific governmental public relations function. In Public relations theory II, ed. C.H. Botan and V. Hazelton, 435–464. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

    Google Scholar 

  54. Signitzer, B.H., and T. Coombs. 1992. Public relations and public diplomacy: Conceptual convergences. Public Relations Review 18 (2): 137–147.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  55. Snow, N., and P.M. Taylor. 2009. Routledge handbook of public diplomacy. New York, NY: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  56. Stengel, R. 2011. Q&A: Hillary Clinton on Libya, China, the Middle East and Barack Obama. Time. http://swampland.time.com/2011/10/27/qa-hillary-clinton-on-libya-china-the-middle-east-and-barack-obama/. Accessed 11 Nov 2014.

  57. Strauss, A.L. 1987. Qualitative analysis for social scientists. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  58. Vibber, K., and J.-N. Kim. 2015. Diplomacy in the globalized world: Focusing internally to build relationships externally. In International public relations and public diplomacy: Communication and engagement, ed. G.J. Golan, S.-U. Yang, and D.F. Kinsey, 131–146. New York, NY: Peter Lang Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  59. Wang, J. 2005. Consumer nationalism and corporate reputation management in the global era. Corporate Communications: An International Journal 10 (3): 223–239.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  60. Wang, J., and T.K. Chang. 2004. Strategic public diplomacy and local press: How a high-profile ‘head-of-state’ visit was covered in America’s heartland. Public Relations Review 30 (1): 11–24.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  61. Wheeler, N.J. 2013. Investigating diplomatic transformations. International Affairs 89 (2): 477–496.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  62. Yin, R.K. 2015. Case studies. In International encyclopedia of the social & behavioral sciences, ed. J. Wright, 194–201. Second edition. London: Elsevier.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  63. Yuksel, M., and L.I. Labrecque. 2016. ‘Digital buddies’: Parasocial interactions in social media. Journal of Research in Interactive Marketing 10 (4): 305–320.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  64. Yun, S. 2007. Exploring the embassy sampling strategy for large-scale cross-national study in replicating the normative theory of global public relations. Public Relations Review 33: 224–226.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  65. Yun, S. 2012. Relational public diplomacy: The perspective of sociological globalism. International Journal of Communication 6: 2199–2219.

    Google Scholar 

  66. Zaharna, R.S., and N. Uysal. 2016. Going for the jugular in public diplomacy: How adversarial publics using social media are challenging state legitimacy. Public Relations Review 42 (1): 109–119.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  67. Zhang, J. 2013. A Strategic Issue Management (SIM) approach to social media use in public diplomacy. American Behavioral Scientist 57 (9): 1312–1331.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  68. Zhong, X., and J. Lu. 2013. Public diplomacy meets social media: A study of the U.S. Embassy’s blogs and micro-blogs. Public Relations Review 39 (5): 542–548.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Lisa Tam.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Tam, L. Interpersonal approaches to relationship building: diplomat as a human agent of public diplomacy. Place Brand Public Dipl 15, 134–142 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1057/s41254-018-0101-2

Download citation

Keywords

  • Diplomat
  • Engagement
  • Interpersonal
  • Public diplomacy
  • Relationship
  • Social media