The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available on Emerald Insight at:

www.emeraldinsight.com/1356-3289.htm

CCIJ
21,4
Internal audience segmentation
and diversity in internal
communication
450 Taewon Suh
Received 7 November 2014
McCoy College of Business Administration, Texas State University,
Revised 24 November 2014 San Marcos, Texas, USA, and
6 May 2015
31 December 2015 Jaehun Lee
3 May 2016 SK Holdings Co. Ltd, Seoul, Republic of Korea
Accepted 29 May 2016

Abstract
Purpose – Workforce diversity is becoming a crucial matter in the area of internal communication.
Realizing that there are multiple brackets within the body of a workforce (i.e. internal audience), the
purpose of this paper is to develop an intermediate approach to manage diversity by segmenting the
internal audience.
Design/methodology/approach – Developing a segmentation approach for managing diversity, the
authors recommended the use of a few mathematical methodologies, including the expectation-
maximization algorithm, partial least squares structural equation model (PLS-SEM) methodology, and
Chow test, on a surveyed data set collected from 1,236 nurses of the US healthcare system. A PLS-SEM
model, including employees’ mission awareness, management’s mission fulfillment, employees’
mission fulfillment, and turnover intention, was examined with respect to two internal segments.
Findings – Using a simple set of demographic variables, the authors demonstrated a practical approach to
segmenting an internal audience and showed that causal relationships in a nomological network of
variables regarding mission integration are significantly different between internal segments. Based on the
segmentation approach, the authors proved that managers, in an effort to gain maximum diversity, can mix
and match both the centrifugal force of diversity and the centripetal force of diversity to value individuals
and for mission integration in their practices, respectively.
Research limitations/implications – The authors highlighted a practical matter of internal
communication by connecting the concepts of diversity and internal audience segmentation. However,
the generalizability of the results must be assessed in other settings.
Practical implications – While managing diversity involves valuing employees as individuals, the
segmentation concept can function as a practical and useful intermediate tool for managing diversity.
Practitioners can utilize varied sets of segmented variables according to their contexts.
Social implications – The authors emphasized valuing employees as individuals and developed a
managerial way to make personal differences an asset to the productivity of an organization and society.
Originality/value – Introducing a segmentation approach to internal communication and adopting a
set of useful statistical techniques, the authors attempted to develop a unique managing model of
diversity. The authors suggested a dynamic and substantial segmentation of an internal audience with
a smaller set of appropriate variables in each context.
Keywords Human resource management, Employee communications, Diversity, Segmentation,
Internal communications, Internal marketing
Paper type Research paper

Introduction
The consciousness of diversity, defined as “all characteristics and experiences that define
Corporate Communications: An
International Journal each of us as individual” (Bunton, 2000), can be translated into positive changes within
Vol. 21 No. 4, 2016
pp. 450-464
several dimensions of an organization. According to CIPD (2005a, b), the success stories of
© Emerald Group Publishing Limited
1356-3289
managing diversity can be classified into four balanced scorecard dimensions: customer
DOI 10.1108/CCIJ-05-2015-0024 focus, innovation, creativity and learning, business process improvement, and the
financial bottom line. Managing diversity is strategic in the sense that it is internally Internal
driven, individual-focused, and outcome-focused. In managing diversity, various factors audience
describing individual differences are taken into account to create a productive
environment, in which organizational goals are efficiently and effectively met by making
segmentation
the best use of everyone’s talent and potential.
Regarding the current literature on diversity, however, one may conclude that
discussions surrounding its strategic development still have many stumbling blocks 451
(e.g. CIPD, 2005a; Bunton, 2000; Kapoor, 2011). There is a lack of research, with the
exception of a few (e.g. Grimes, 2002; Hon and Brunner, 2000; Mease, 2015; Swanson,
2002), regarding the concept of diversity in the research area of corporate
communications. Therefore, it is not surprising that we seldom find research endeavors
that discuss the strategic development of corporate communications to promote diversity.
To fill in this gap, we attempt to develop an intermediate approach to internal
audience segmentation to foster the concept of diversity and manage it in corporate
communications. In managing diversity, it is important to know that a body of employees
(i.e. an internal audience) has multiple brackets and that they can be managed in
distinctive ways. For more effective internal communication, therefore, companies can
segment a diverse internal audience into discrete groups that share similar characteristics
(Cantrell and Smith, 2010). While managing diversity fundamentally concerns valuing
employees as individuals, the segmentation approach can function as a practical and
useful tool for managing diversity at an intermediate level in bigger organizations. Such
an approach may enable an organization to gradually develop diversity to a fundamental
level, at which individuals are completely valued.
We denote this aspect of managing diversity as the centrifugal force of diversity, in
which an organization endeavors to further value individual employees and their unique
talents. It involves activities in the commonly observable practices of diversity
management. In contrast, the centripetal force of diversity involves the integrating of a
diverse body of employees using the central, enduring, and distinctive values of an
organization (Albert and Whetten, 1985). The ideal concept of diversity requires
both forces. While valuing individuals, an organization should find a way to integrate a
group of individuals based on the purpose of the organization. We argue that
organizations can enhance the strategic usability of the diversity concept in internal
communication by developing a practical way to combine the two forces of diversity
through internal audience segmentation and its applications. By adopting a segmentation
approach, we attempt to practically manage diversity at an intermediate level.
Internal audience segmentation may have multiple advantages for the development
of diversity management. First, it is a realistic way to advance diversity in an
incremental manner, starting from the traditional practices of workforce management,
by taking a middle-of-the-road approach and thus reducing potential conflict and
resistance due to an abrupt change. More importantly, the centrifugal and centripetal
forces can be managed in a balanced way using an intermediate approach. On the one
hand, the centrifugal force provisionally issues in the segmentation of an internal
audience, clustering a mass into segments. On the other hand, the centripetal force
highlights mission integration as a major tool, making diverse employees embrace
appropriate mission principles and facilitating the tasks of hiring, training, and
motivating employees. Our approach of internal audience segmentation involves that
which spontaneously coordinates the two policies.
Over recent years, mission integration has increasingly been associated with
internal communication and corporate brand management; it involves striving to build
CCIJ stronger links between an employee’s brand experience and customer brand experience
21,4 (Chong, 2007; Henkel et al., 2007; Meyer and Schwager, 2007; Punjaisri and Wilson,
2007). According to this notion, companies not only empower employees and give them
accountability and responsibility but also create a common understanding of the
business organization (Kotler and Keller, 2009; Ruck and Welch, 2012). Although
workforce diversity and mission integration have become more important at several
452 strategic levels, relevant research has not been active in the area of corporate
communication.
In our attempt to demonstrate an approach to managing both the centrifugal force
and centripetal force of diversity, the major research question is twofold:
RQ1. Can a body of employees be properly and meaningfully segmented using a set
of variables?
RQ2. Are causal relationships in a nomological network of variables, with regard to
mission integration, significantly different between segmented groups of
employees?
To answer the first question, we conduct a workforce segmentation using the
expectation-maximization (EM) algorithm; to answer the second question, we build a
structural model that includes employees’ mission awareness, management’s mission
fulfillment, employees’ mission fulfillment, and turnover intention. This study comprises
the following six sections: relevant literature, methods, the proposed segmentation
approach, which uses the EM algorithm, the partial least squares structural equation
model (PLS-SEM) and Chow test, discussion, and conclusions.

Relevant literature
Internal audience segmentation
Just as marketers can dissect consumer populations, companies can segment a
workforce (i.e. an internal audience) into discrete groups that share similar
characteristics (Cantrell and Smith, 2010) to manage diversity. Employees may be
grouped based on any relevant criteria, such as value to or performance for the
company, role, function, observed employee behavior, age and generation (Cantrell and
Smith, 2010), and ethnicity (Swanson, 2002). Advances in business intelligence and
analytics have spurred a revolution in how companies can segment their workforces.
Internal audience segmentation has the potential to allow managers to address
each employee in the most effective way with respect to internal communication.
Companies thus creatively group their employees based on such varying dimensions as
learning styles, behavioral patterns, values, personality, wellness profiles, mobility,
and even communication styles and networking (Cantrell and Smith, 2010).
Although the importance of internal audience segmentation has increased, we still
lack theory and methodology with respect to segmenting an internal audience for
internal communication.
In our intermediate approach to internal audience segmentation, we particularly
emphasize dynamic and substantial segmentation with a small set of appropriate
variables. First, according to Yankelovich and Meer (2006), segmentation should
be intuitively understood by managers to be put into practice; failure to do so (in the
frequent case of segmentation with a complex set of variables) may cause the company
to not properly focus their capabilities and resources on the strategy. This argument
may lead practitioners to prefer a simpler, more structured process of segmentation.
Second, segmentation cannot be standardized as a certain single procedure and must Internal
be continuously dynamic. Segmentation is thus expected to become more agile and less audience
costly to better respond to changes by directing their course with respect to just one or
two issues and being redesigned as soon as they have lost their relevance (Yankelovich
segmentation
and Meer, 2006). These discussions elucidate segmentation to be more dynamic and
substantial with a small set of appropriate variables in each context. Our study
therefore attempts to show that internal audience segmentation allows managers to 453
identify discrete groups of a workforce with a high degree of accuracy, for instance,
based on a simple set of demographic indicators.
For our dynamic segmentation of a workforce, we will consider only a few
demographic variables, such as gender, years of tenure, educational level, and age. After
structuring the initial process using these variables, managers can redesign the process
when it has lost its relevance. In the following redesigned waves of segmentation,
managers may utilize other sets of variables from a greater array of socio-demographic
and deep-level dimensions, such as competencies and values. Segmentation should be
appropriate, substantial, and dynamic in this sense.

Mission integration
In our research framework, we intend to simultaneously work with the two forces of
diversity. On the one hand, managers want to break down the workforce into diminutive
segments to manage diversity. This is the centrifugal force of diversity, which we attempt
to treat by adopting an intermediate approach to internal audience segmentation. On the
other hand, they also want to integrate different groups in the organization into one entity,
i.e., the centripetal force of diversity. Our focus regarding the centripetal force of diversity,
i.e., mission integration, is given with respect to whether both management and employees
mutually fulfill their public statement. According to the literature, an organization’s
fulfillment of or failure to live up to its public statements represents a meaningful research
area for the following three reasons (e.g. Alvesson, 1998; Ashforth and Mael, 1989;
Celsi and Gilly, 2010; Dutton et al., 1994; Gilly and Wolfinbarger, 1998). The deliberated
reasons become the theoretical foundation of our nomological network of variables for
mission integration, within which employee segments are assumed to be different and
orchestrated. First, the character and nature of an organization provide important referents
for an employee’s self-esteem. Second, if an organization’s fidelity to its public statements is
of consequence to service employees, we must understand how actions that relate to such
statements affect not only external audiences but also the internal audience of employees.
Third, it is vital that we understand how actions related to an organization’s character or
nature, such as public, symbolic statements of its mission, influence internal audiences.
Internal communication is grounded in an organization’s vision and values so that
proactive changes can be made (D’Aprix, 2006; Lies, 2012). Mission integration, which may
be achieved through internal communication, is important when collecting the centripetal
force to realize the benefits of diversity in an organization. We particularly focus on
organization mission fulfillment in our comparison of different workforce segments.
Mission fulfillment occurs when an organization’s behavior fits its mission statement,
which is formally defined as the state in which an organization consistently acts in a
manner that is congruent with and leads to the fulfillment of its corporate mission
statement, that is, its fidelity to, vs violation of, its professed mission (Suh et al., 2011).
A mission statement refers to the formal statement of the philosophy, values, and goals
that define an organization (Alvesson, 1998). Integrated with other communication
messages, the mission statement can summarize the purpose of a firm for both customers
CCIJ and employees (Celsi and Gilly, 2010; Gilly and Wolfinbarger, 1998). The literature
21,4 suggests that mission fulfillment pays off through increased positive (i.e. reduced negative)
outcomes for employees (Alvesson, 1998; Suh et al., 2011). Organizational identity exists
somewhat enigmatically at the intersection of the attitudes of all organizational
stakeholders, not just those in the external environment. Mission fulfillment also creates a
positive feedback loop, in which employees become more committed and may provide
454 enhanced customer service. Customers then respond to direct communications from the
company regarding its mission and to the positive experiences they enjoy with employees,
which should make them more loyal and attached to the brand or company (Suh et al.,
2011). Employees are positioned to serve as either ambassadors of the organization or as
liabilities, depending on the way in which they speak regarding the organization to those
both within and outside their workplace through regular discussion of their work
experiences with those outside the organization and frequent use of social media,
potentially reaching large audiences (Omilion-Hodges and Baker, 2014).
Mission integration has psychological and behavioral outcomes (e.g. Collini et al.,
2013; Musgrove et al., 2014; Schepers et al., 2012). A range of studies predicted a
positive relationship of mission integration between attraction and attitudes and
negative relationships between mission integration and withdrawal behaviors
(i.e. turnover). In our PLS-SEM model, we will use variables of mission integration,
such as mission fulfillment and mission awareness, to show their causal relationships
with turnover intention, which is often associated with organizational withdrawal and
can thus be considered as one of the most critical managerial variables with respect to
mission integration (Collini et al., 2013).

Methods
Our data set was collected through an institutional survey at a healthcare service
system in the USA. For our particular test, we required an informational context in
which the practices of diversity and mission statement are salient to employees.
Therefore, we chose a large healthcare system in a major Midwestern US city with a
heavily publicized diversity policy and mission statement. Pretests indicated sufficient
variance across employees regarding their perceptions of the diversity policy and
mission integration to test our model, without introducing additional variance from a
cross-sectional sample.
Final returns arrived from 1,236 nurses, a response rate of approximately
25 percent. The large sample provides a high level of power that enables greater
certainty when estimating specific model paths and thus is desirable for hypothesis
testing (Hu et al., 1992). Despite our large sample, non-response bias can be a concern;
thus, we compared the characteristics of our sample with those of the population of
potential respondents across four key demographic variables, available from the
healthcare system (i.e. age, gender, tenure, and education level). Our sample does not
differ significantly from the broader population, which supports the representativeness
of our sample and reveals no systematic inclusion or exclusion biases.
We used multi-item measures and a five-point Likert scale for all constructs in
our study. We report the specific items and scale reliabilities in the Appendix.
We developed measures specific to this study by drawing on extant theory. We refined
these measures by engaging in extensive qualitative interactions with managers of
the healthcare system and conducting a pretest with employees. We also worked to
make the survey instrument concise because many of the employees would be
completing the survey at work. A research team comprising four senior managers and
one of the authors conducted a series of meetings to develop and refine the appropriate Internal
items. After the meetings, a draft was distributed to 36 managers in the system to audience
obtain their comments, insights, and suggestions for improvement. Revisions followed
at each stage. Finally, in a pilot study, we distributed 50 surveys to randomly chosen
segmentation
employees of the healthcare system. These pretest participants and results do not
appear in the main analyses.
The construct measures come from existing scales in the literature related to the 455
same context of research, i.e., healthcare (Collini et al., 2013). Because the constructs in
our study were perceptions and attitudes, we did not have a second source of data.
Company privacy policies also prohibited us from gathering actual longitudinal
turnover data. Our measures came from a single source; thus, we recognize the
potential for bias in the tests of the direct relationship hypotheses. Consistent with
Podsakoff et al. (2003), we therefore took steps during the design and administration of
the data collection instrumentation to minimize the likelihood of common source bias
and empirically assessed whether any common source effects biased our results.
During our administration of the survey, to create psychological separation, we used
distinct instructions for different groups of survey items in the questionnaire and thus
avoided the implication that particular items were related to others (Podsakoff et al.,
2003). We report the empirical tests for common source bias in the results section.
Descriptive statistics from the measurement are summarized in Table I. The reliability
indexes were acceptable, with composite reliabilities ranging from 0.72 to 0.89 and
individual-item reliabilities greater than 0.70. Cronbach’s α ranged from 0.74 to 0.91.
For discriminant validity, we conducted a series of χ2 difference tests between a
constrained model and an unconstrained model for pairs of constructs (Anderson and
Gerbing, 1988). Specifically, for each pair of constructs, the χ2 difference tests revealed
that χ2 was significantly lower ( po0.05) for an unconstrained two-factor model, in which
the correlation may vary, than for a constrained model, in which the correlation was fixed
at 1. The results suggest that the variance extracted exceeded the squared correlation.

Segmenting internal audience

Segmentation is a technique for classifying people into segments or cluster that are
relatively homogenous within themselves and heterogeneous with respect to each
other. Note that homogeneity and heterogeneity could be measured based on a defined
set of characteristics. Segmentation is one of the superseding techniques in the area of
marketing. It allows marketing managers to calibrate each marketing mix differently
based on groups’ characteristics (Berrigan and Finkbeiner, 1992).
Cluster analysis is normally used in segmentation. There are two main approaches to
clustering: a hierarchical and non-hierarchical procedure. The hierarchical procedure is

Mean SD ACa 1 2 3 4 5

1. Management’s mission fulfillment 3.37 0.93 0.74* –

2. Employee’s mission awareness 4.05 0.77 0.89 0.23 –
3. Employee’s mission fulfillment 4.02 0.79 0.87 0.44 0.47 –
4. Employee’s role clarity 4.04 0.68 0.86 0.30 0.22 0.31 –
5. Employee’s turnover intention 2.26 1.07 0.91 −0.34 −0.18 −0.31 −0.29 – Table I.
Notes: Construct correlations, italicized, are located off the diagonal in the last five columns. All are Measurement and
significant at the 0.05 level. aThe α coefficient (*inter-item correlation) correlation matrix
CCIJ a method for building a hierarchy of clusters. However, regarding this method, initial
21,4 decisions are so influential that they might lead to inaccurate results (Srivastava et al.,
1981). The non-hierarchical procedure groups a set of individuals into a pre-determined
number of groups using an iterative algorithm to retrieve the best result. It is faster,
more reliable, and works well with large data sets. The most well-known approach is
the k-means algorithm. Briefly, the k-means algorithm produces exactly k different
456 clusters of greatest possible distinction via repetition. The basic operation of that
algorithm is relatively simple: given a fixed number of (desired or hypothesized)
k clusters, assign observations to those clusters so that the means across clusters
(for all variables) are as different from each other as possible.
Recently, the EM algorithm extended this k-means algorithm for clustering in two
important ways. Instead of assigning observations to clusters to maximize the differences
in means for continuous variables, the EM clustering algorithm computes the probabilities
of cluster memberships based on one or more probability distributions. The goal of the
clustering algorithm then is to maximize the overall probability or likelihood of the data,
given the (final) clusters. Unlike the k-means algorithm, the EM algorithm can be applied
to both continuous and categorical variables ( Jain, 2010).
To segment the sampled employees, we therefore conducted a clustering using an
EM algorithm. The EM algorithm has the ability to create both traditional hard clusters
(i.e. a disjoint partition of the data) and not-so-traditional soft clusters (i.e. those that
allow data points to belong to two or more clusters at the same time) by simultaneously
optimizing a large number of variables. Depending on unobserved latent variables, it is
used to find the maximum likelihood parameters of a statistical model, the equations of
which cannot be solved directly (Fraley and Raftery, 2002).
In our modeling process, demographic descriptors, including gender, length of
employment, educational level, age, and position, for each cluster are observed after
clustering. This clustering involves a complicated optimization problem because the
data set includes both discrete and continuous variables. The problem can be simplified
by assuming that some of the unknowns are known while estimating the others and
vice versa. Thus, we are faced with the
problem n of estimating the unknown
parameters of our model, denoted as y ¼ mj ; Sj ; pj j¼1 . Given the parameters of the
model, the likelihood function of the data has the following form:

  X n X
n
p x9y ¼ pðx9z; yÞpðz9yÞ ¼ pðx9z ¼ j; yÞpj
z¼1 j¼1

where z is a hidden unknown variable. Note that because z is not observed, we have to
marginalize over all possible values of z. One possibility would be to write down the
total log likelihood of all data and find the values of the parameters of the model that
maximize that likelihood. Assuming that the samples are i.i.d, the total likelihood has
the following form:
  !
YN X n xi uj 2
‘ðy; DÞ ¼ log pj exp 
i¼1 j¼1
2s2i

In this study, we adopted the EM algorithm of the WEKA program for segmentation.
Note that the WEKA program implements the likelihood function model. Thus, four
clusters are detected as a result of clustering. Table II portrays the major demographic
descriptors for each cluster. Particularly, Groups A and B show conspicuous Internal
differences between their descriptors among the four groups. Group A, the largest audience
cluster, is composed of females with longer tenure, while Group B contains males with
shorter tenure. The following analyses will be focused on Groups A and B. The
segmentation
other two groups contain relatively fewer people (1 and 2 percent), making a
statistical comparison difficult to conduct. We thus drop Groups C and D in the
following analyses. 457
PLS-SEM model and Chow test
A PLS-SEM model was built to compare Groups A and B to verify the effectiveness of
our internal audience segmentation. By showing different results from the two
segments in a nomological network of variables regarding mission integration, a
Chow test will prove the effectiveness of our approach with respect to internal
audience segmentation.
The PLS-SEM is more prediction oriented, explaining variances rather than
explaining covariance’s. The method is useful if the premises of covariance-based SEM
are violated and the assumed relationships are not sufficiently explored. Its additional
advantage is the unrestricted incorporation of latent variables (Hair et al., 2014).
We attempt to show that our internal audience segmentation is meaningful because the
different groups have different tendencies with respect to their responses to
management policies.
Our structural model has two exogenous variables (employee’s mission awareness and
management’s mission fulfillment), which directly affect employee’s mission fulfillment.
Also, employee’s mission fulfillment fully mediates the relationship between the two
exogenous variables and employee’s turnover intention. Employee’s perceived role clarity
is used as a covariate. We thus tested three paths: employee’s mission awareness→
employee’s mission fulfillment; management’s mission fulfillment→employee’s mission
fulfillment; employee’s mission fulfillment→employee’s turnover intention. All paths were
significant. The standardized path coefficients of both models are displayed in Figure 1.
The first path was significant in both segments (Group A: t ¼ 4.14, β ¼ 0.37, po0.001;
Group B: t ¼ 5.01, β ¼ 0.44, po0.001), as was the second path (Group A: t ¼ 3.63, β ¼ 0.37,
po0.001; Group B: t ¼ 4.70, β ¼ 0.41, po0.001). The third path was negatively significant
(Group A: t ¼ −1.89, β ¼ −0.22, po0.05; Group B: t ¼ −2.67, β ¼ −0.27, po0.01). However,
the control path was not significant (Group A: t ¼ −1.32, β ¼ −0.17, pW0.05; Group B:
t ¼ −1.06, β ¼ −0.14, pW0.05). We calculated the values by following Wetzel’s et al. (2009).
The results overall confirm the previous literature (e.g. Babnik et al., 2014; David et al., 2014).
The Chow test was used to verify the difference between two groups (Chow, 1960).
It tests whether the coefficients in two path models of different data sets are equal.
For the test, we calculated the F-value (shown below) to compare each path between
the two groups. F-values were 9.30, 8.10, and 11.25, respectively. Note that

Major demographic trait

Cluster name Gender Years of tenure Educational level Age No. of people (ratio)

Group A Female 10-20 College 30-40 1,111 (90%) Table II.

Group B Male 5-10 College 36-45 81 (7%) Demographic
Group C Female 5-10 College 40-50 26 (2%) descriptors of
Group D Female 20 College 46-55 18 (1%) clusters
CCIJ Employee’s A: 0.37
21,4 Mission B: 0.44
Awareness

A: –0.22
Employee’s B: –0.27 Employee’s
Mission Turnover
Fulfillment Intention
A: 0.37
458 B: 0.41
Figure 1. Management’s A: –0.17
PLS-SEM results: Mission B: –0.14
standardized Fulfillment
Covariate
coefficients of Employee’s
both groups Role Clarity

F(0.05; k−1, m + n−k) ¼ F(0.05; 6 − 1, 1,109 + 79 − 6) ¼ 2.22. From the test results, we
can conclude that a difference between the groups existed in all three paths. All
F-values (9.30, 8.10, and 11.25) were larger than F(0.05; k − 1, m + n−k). These tests
showed that our internal audience segmentation is meaningful in the nomological
network of mission integration.

Discussion
We attempted to develop a methodological and technical procedure to coordinate the
issue of diversity using internal audience segmentation. We segmented the internal
audience into different clusters to reflect the centrifugal force of diversity in an
intermediate way and tested a theoretical network of mission integration between the
internal audience segments to examine the centripetal force of diversity. A few
statistical techniques and tools were illustrated to build a practical managing model of
diversity. The technical procedure of our model can be applied to the different stages of
internal communication.
Our approach to internal audience segmentation using the EM algorithm may be
able to enhance the effectiveness of internal communication tasks. While managing
diversity involves both the centrifugal and centripetal forces, managers can coordinate
both forces during their decision making by applying our approach. Our Chow test
results additionally provide insights for managers’ mixing and matching of the forces
of diversity in their human resource practices. By testing different segments using
different sets of variables, for example, managers can improve the effectiveness of
internal communication tasks using internal audience segmentation as an intermediate
diversity tool. Specifically, we discovered that gender difference significantly exists in
the relationships between mission awareness and fulfillment, as well as turnover
intention. From this particular insight, managers can establish a policy that treats
both genders differently. One of the contributions of our intermediate approach to
managing diversity is to show that through a proper procedure, a simple set of
appropriate variables can be a useful tool for enhancing the benefits of valuing
diversity in internal communication.
We hope that our attempt can draw the attention of both academics and
practitioners to the need for a sophisticated strategy for managing diverse workforces.
Most companies have various employees, whose attributes are as complex as those of
their customers. Although segmentation is a well-known concept in marketing, it has
rarely been used for internal audiences. While managing diversity involves valuing Internal
employees as individuals, the segmentation concept may function as a practical and audience
useful intermediate tool for managing diversity in internal communication.
Practitioners can utilize varied sets of segmentation variables according to different
segmentation
stages and contexts.
It is notable that our technical suggestion is in line with the extant literature of
internal communication. For instance, suggesting a multidimensional stakeholder 459
approach, Welch and Jackson (2007) questioned the tendency to treat an internal
audience as a single, unit-dimensional public. Our study was a continuation of this
notion, providing a practical option to better treat internal audiences. Also, our use of
mission integration as a tool to deal with the centripetal force of diversity is linked to
the previous discussion of organization engagement within internal communication
(e.g. Welch, 2011). As such, regarding this particular topic, further theoretical
development would simultaneously call for more practical and technical papers, with
empirical evidence, of proposed policies. The dynamic procedure of internal audience
segmentation can be connected to the typologies of internal communication and the
ideal practices of integrated internal communications (Kalla, 2005). It is possible to
dynamically target a specific internal segment regarding a particular task of
communication in the different stages of integrated internal communications.
The increasing interest in diversity in internal communication and human resource
management reveals that many companies recognize that not all employees are alike
and offer different employee value propositions based on the preferences and
characteristics of various groups. Segmentation is a basic technique for building such a
program, which fosters diversity if it is used dynamically, substantially, and
appropriately. By learning what motivates each group of employees, offering a
customized communication program, and aligning the workforce under a single vision,
companies may be able to maximize their shared values and thus increase both
productivity and sustainability.
Based on the insights from our results, this study can open up a new venue for
future study. For instance, by enhancing diversity through internal audience
segmentation regarding both centrifugal and centripetal forces, companies can become
capable of developing diverse communication strategies that can enable employees to
more actively and more effectively communicate with their stakeholders (Mazzei, 2014).
Beyond the technical procedure of enhancing diversity, researchers need to search for
further causal links in the whole value chain regarding the proven impact of managed
diversity. There are also more topics with respect to the issues of designing internal
audience segmentation for diversity. More detailed steps for the procedure of internal
audience segmentation should be designed and empirically tested. A wide array of
distinctive types of variables need to be introduced, aligned, and tested during the
course of design.

Managerial implications
Starting from such an intermediate, simpler segmentation approach, companies may
adopt a whole dynamic set of stages in internal audience segmentation and accordingly
implement the strategic insights gained from each stage. It is important to maintain the
relevancy of the strategy by being agile to respond to changes and directing the course
of the stages regarding a simple set of issues.
The wisdom from the extant literature may enrich such a process of strategic
implementation. For instance, the principle of requisite variety states that there must be at
CCIJ least as much variety or diversity inside an organization as outside for the organization to
21,4 build effective relationships with all critical or strategic parts of the environment (Grunig
et al., 1992; Wick, 1979). Correspondingly, companies can match internal audience segments
with market segments. After segmenting customers based on their demand characteristics,
they can match the complexity and potential revenue streams of the customer segments to
different employee segments with different skills through a human resource system that
460 shapes the customer-employee interface (Batt, 2000). Service organizations are likely to use
high-involvement systems to serve only higher value-added customers because of the high
costs of these systems and the labor-intensive nature of services.
Our results also provide insight for managing the motivation of a workforce.
High-involvement systems have been defined in various ways but generally include three
dimensions: high relative skill requirements, jobs designed to provide an opportunity to use
those skills in teams or in collaboration with other workers, and an incentive structure to
induce discretionary effort (Appelbaum et al., 2000). The literature on high-involvement
systems argues that employers do best when they adopt a coherent set of practices.
To increase performance in such a high-involvement system, managers can adopt a
segmentation approach to better recruit, train, and group their employees and for them to
more willingly adopt a coherent set of practices. This type of segmentation may focus on
values, attitudes, working styles, and task orientations, among others. We leave this for a
future study. Regarding the current segmentation approach based on demographic
diversity, future studies need to add more advanced techniques using various types of
workplace variables.
Diversity enhances the effectiveness of organizations that employ it (Grunig et al.,
1992). Proper management of diversity in internal communication will eventually
enable every employee to function in the way that best benefits the business. In valuing
employees as individuals, personal differences become an asset to the productivity of
an organization (CIPD, 2005b). Poor communication that undervalues diversity can be
counter-productive and poses a threat to organizational relationships (Welch, 2012).
In fact, individual differences are recognized as resources and assets that can enrich
and energize the corporate experiences of a business. As every employee’s difference is
acknowledged, appreciated, and celebrated, all employees will feel more comfortable
utilizing these resources (e.g. variety of backgrounds, upbringings, personality,
interests, and needs) to produce common benefits and advantages that are aligned with
the mission of the company. More advanced techniques and procedures in internal
communication can be developed in this regard.

Limitations and conclusion

Our approach is not a complete one, being merely an intermediate approach to
managing diversity by segmenting an internal audience within which are multiple
brackets. According to our segmentation approach, along with the PLS-SEM and Chow
test results, managers should emphasize both the centrifugal force of diversity to value
individuals and the centripetal force of diversity toward mission integration.
We acknowledge a few limitations of our study. First, because our study involves a
single healthcare system, the generalizability of these results must be assessed in other
settings by a future study. Second, our study is not totally immune from a certain bias.
Although we control empirically for same-source effects, additional sources of outcome
data, such as historical data regarding actual employee turnover, would be desirable.
Third, our PLS-SEM model is based on theory; as with any research model, it is not
comprehensive in terms of capturing all variables that could affect the key intervening
and outcome variables. Fourth, diversity and management can be contested terms Internal
(Bendl et al., 2008). Though we recommend a dynamic procedure of internal audience audience
segmentation to foster diversity, it would still be challenging to isolate some of
the features of diversity for the purpose of segmentation. Research should continue to
segmentation
fine-tune our understanding of diversity to help us manage internal communication
and organizational performance.
461
References
Albert, S. and Whetten, D.A. (1985), “Organizational identity”, in Cumming, L.L. and Staw, B.M.
(Eds), Research in Organizational Behavior, Vol. 7, JAI Press, Greenwich, CT, pp. 263-295.
Alvesson, M. (1998), “The business concepts as a symbol”, International Studies of Management
and Organization, Vol. 28 No. 3, pp. 86-108.
Anderson, J.C. and Gerbing, D.W. (1988), “Structural equation modeling in practice: a review and
recommended two-step approach”, Psychological Bulletin, Vol. 103 No. 3, pp. 411-423.
Appelbaum, S.H., Gandell, J., Yortis, H., Proper, S. and Jobin, F. (2000), “Anatomy of a merger:
behavior of organizational factors and processes throughout the pre-during-post-stages”,
Management Decision, Vol. 38 No. 9, pp. 649-662.
Ashforth, B.E. and Mael, F. (1989), “Social identity theory and the organization”, Academy of
Management Review, Vol. 14 No. 1, pp. 20-39.
Babnik, K., Breznik, K., Dermol, V. and Širca, N.T. (2014), “The mission statement: organisational
culture perspective”, Industrial Management and Data Systems, Vol. 114 No. 4, pp. 612-627.
Batt, R. (2000), “Strategic segmentation in frontline services: matching customers, employees, and
human resource systems”, CAHRS Working Paper No. 00-06, Center for Advanced Human
Resource Studies, School of Industrial and Labor Relations, Cornell University, Ithaca, NY.
Bendl, R., Fleischmann, A. and Walenta, C. (2008), “Diversity management discourse meets queer
theory”, Gender in Management: An International Journal, Vol. 23 No. 6, pp. 382-394.
Berrigan, J. and Finkbeiner, C. (1992), Segmentation Marketing: New Methods for Capturing
Business Markets, HarperCollins, New York City, NY.
Bunton, W. (2000), “Best practices in achieving workforce diversity: benchmarking study of the
U.S. department of commerce and Vice President Al Gore’s national partnership for
reinventing government”, available at: http://govinfo.library.unt.edu/npr/library/
workforce-diversity.pdf (accessed September 24, 2014).
Cantrell, S.M. and Smith, D. (2010), Workforce of One Outlook: Revolutionizing Talent
Management through Customization, Harvard Business School Publishing, Boston, MA.
Celsi, M.W. and Gilly, M.C. (2010), “Employees as internal audience: how advertising affects
employees’ customer focus”, Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, Vol. 38 No. 4,
pp. 520-529.
Chong, M. (2007), “The role of internal communication and training in infusing corporate values
and delivering brand promise: Singapore Airlines’ experience”, Corporate Reputation
Review, Vol. 10 No. 3, pp. 201-212.
Chow, G.C. (1960), “Tests of equality between sets of coefficients in two linear regressions”,
Econometrica, Vol. 28 No. 3, pp. 591-605.
Collini, S.A., Guidroz, A.M. and Perez, L.M. (2013), “Turnover in health care: the mediating effects
of employee engagement”, Journal of Nursing Management, Vol. 23 No. 2, pp. 169-178.
CIPD (2005a), Managing Diversity: People Make the Difference at Work – But Every One Is
Different, Chartered Institute of Personnel and Development, London.
CCIJ CIPD (2005b), Managing Diversity: Linking Theory and Practice to Business Performance,
Chartered Institute of Personnel and Development, London.
21,4
D’Aprix, R. (2006), “Throwing rocks at the corporate rhinoceros, the challenges of employee
engagement”, in Gillis, T.L.E. (Ed.), The IABC Handbook of Organisational
Communication, John Wiley and Sons, San Francisco, CA, pp. 227-239.
David, M.E., David, F.R. and David, F.R. (2014), “Mission statement theory and practice: a content
462 analysis and new direction”, International Journal of Business, Marketing, and Decision
Science, Vol. 7 No. 1, pp. 95-110.
Dutton, J.E., Dukerich, J.M. and Harquail, C.V. (1994), “Organizational images and member
identification”, Administrative Science Quarterly, Vol. 39 No. 2, pp. 239-263.
Fraley, C. and Raftery, A.E. (2002), “Model-based clustering, discriminant analysis, and density
estimation”, Journal of the American statistical Association, Vol. 97 No. 458, pp. 611-631.
Gilly, M.C. and Wolfinbarger, M. (1998), “Advertising’s internal audience”, Journal of Marketing,
Vol. 62 No. 1, pp. 69-88.
Grimes, D.S. (2002), “Challenging the status quo? Whiteness in the diversity management
literature”, Management Communication Quarterly, Vol. 15 No. 3, pp. 381-409.
Grunig, L.A., Grunig, J.E. and Ehling, W.P. (1992), “What is an effective organization”, in
Grunig, J.E. (Ed.), Excellence in Public Relations and Communication Management,
Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Publishers, Hillsdale, NJ, pp. 65-90.
Hair, J.F., Hult, G.T.M., Ringle, C.M. and Sarstedt, M. (2014), A Primer on Partial Least Squares
Structural Equation Modeling (PLS-SEM), Sage, Thousand Oaks, CA.
Henkel, S., Tomczak, T., Heitmann, M. and Herrmann, A. (2007), “Managing brand consistent
employee behaviour: relevance and managerial control of behavioural branding”, Journal
of Product and Brand Management, Vol. 16 No. 5, pp. 310-320.
Hon, L.C. and Brunner, B. (2000), “Diversity issues and public relations”, Journal of Public
Relations Research, Vol. 12 No. 4, pp. 309-340.
Hu, L.T., Bentler, P.M. and Kano, Y. (1992), “Can test statistics in covariance structure analysis be
trusted?”, Psychological Bulletin, Vol. 112 No. 2, p. 351.
Jain, A.K. (2010), “Data clustering: 50 years beyond K-means”, Pattern Recognition Letters, Vol. 31
No. 8, pp. 651-666.
Kalla, H.K. (2005), “Integrated internal communications: a multidisciplinary perspective”,
Corporate Communications: An International Journal, Vol. 10 No. 4, pp. 302-314.
Kapoor, C. (2011), “Defining diversity: the evolution of diversity”, Worldwide Hospitality and
Tourism Themes, Vol. 3 No. 4, pp. 284-293.
Kotler, P. and Keller, K.L. (2009), A Framework for Marketing Management, 4th ed., Pearson
Prentice Hall, New York City, NY.
Lies, J. (2012), “Internal communication as power management in change processes: study on the
possibilities and the reality of change communications”, Public Relations Review, Vol. 38 No. 2,
pp. 255-261.
Mazzei, A. (2014), “Internal communication for employee enablement: strategies in American and
Italian companies”, Corporate Communications: An International Journal, Vol. 19 No. 1,
pp. 82-95.
Mease, J.J. (2015), “Embracing discursive paradox consultants navigating the constitutive tensions of
diversity work.”, Management Communication Quarterly, Vol. 30 No. 1, pp. 59-83.
Meyer, C. and Schwager, A. (2007), “Understanding customer experience”, Harvard Business
Review, Vol. 85 No. 2, pp. 116-127.
Musgrove, F.C., Ellinger, A.E. and Ellinger, A.D. (2014), “Examining the influence of strategic Internal
profit emphases on employee engagement and service climate”, Journal of Workplace
Learning, Vol. 26 Nos 3/4, pp. 152-171.
audience
segmentation
Omilion-Hodges, L. and Baker, C.R. (2014), “Everyday talk and convincing conversation:
utilizing strategic internal communication”, Business Horizons, Vol. 57 No. 3,
pp. 435-445.
Podsakoff, P.M., MacKenzie, S.B., Lee, J. and Podsakoff, N.P. (2003), “Common method biases in 463
behavioral research: a critical review of the literature and recommended remedies”, Journal
of Applied Psychology, Vol. 88 No. 5, pp. 879-903.
Punjaisri, K. and Wilson, A. (2007), “The role of internal branding in the delivery of employee
brand promise”, Journal of Brand Management, Vol. 15 No. 1, pp. 57-70.
Ruck, K. and Welch, M. (2012), “Valuing internal communication: management and employee
perspectives”, Public Relations Review, Vol. 38 No. 2, pp. 294-302.
Schepers, J., Falk, T., Ruyter, K.D., Jong, A.D. and Hammerschmidt, M. (2012), “Principles
and principals: do customer stewardship and agency control compete or complement
when shaping frontline employee behavior?”, Journal of Marketing, Vol. 76 No. 6,
pp. 1-20.
Srivastava, R.K., Leone, R.P. and Shocker, A.D. (1981), “Market structure analysis: hierarchical
clustering of products based on substitution-in-use”, Journal of Marketing, Vol. 45 No. 3,
pp. 38-48.
Suh, T., Houston, M.B., Barney, S.M. and Kwon, I.G. (2011), “The impact of mission fulfillment on
the internal audience: psychological job outcomes in a services setting”, Journal of Service
Research, Vol. 14 No. 1, pp. 76-92.
Swanson, D.R. (2002), “Diversity programs: attitude and realities in the contemporary corporate
environment”, Corporate Communications: An International Journal, Vol. 7 No. 4,
pp. 257-268.
Wick, K. (1979), The Social Psychology of Organisations, Addison Wesley, Reading, MA.
Welch, M. (2011), “The evolution of the employee engagement concept: communication implications”,
Corporate Communications: An International Journal, Vol. 16 No. 4, pp. 328-346.
Welch, M. (2012), “Appropriateness and acceptability: employee perspectives of internal
communication”, Public Relations Review, Vol. 38 No. 2, pp. 246-254.
Welch, M. and Jackson, P.R. (2007), “Rethinking internal communication: a stakeholder
approach”, Corporate Communications: An International Journal, Vol. 12 No. 2, pp. 177-198.
Wetzel’s, M., Odekerken-Schröder, G. and Van Oppen, C. (2009), “Using PLS path modeling
for assessing hierarchical construct models: guidelines and empirical illustration”,
MIS Quarterly, Vol. 33 No. 1, pp. 177-195.
Yankelovich, D. and Meer, D. (2006), “Rediscovering market segmentation”, Harvard Business
Review, Vol. 86 No. 1, pp. 122-131.

Appendix. Measurement items

Management’s mission fulfillment

Developed for this study; Cronbach’s α ¼ 0.74
(1) I recognize the impact of the leadership/administration living out the mission.
(2) I experience the leadership/administration living out the mission.
CCIJ Employee’s mission awareness
Developed for this study; Cronbach’s α ¼ 0.89
21,4
(1) I know the mission of the health system.
(2) I have memorized the mission of the health system.
(3) I understand the meaning of the mission of the health system.
464
Employee’s mission fulfillment
Developed for this study; Cronbach’s α ¼ 0.87
(1) I am motivated by the mission to do my work.
(2) I work hard to ensure ___ is successful in living out our mission.
(3) I carry out the mission when I do my work well.

Employee’s turnover intention

Developed for this study; Cronbach’s α ¼ 0.91
(1) I think I will be more satisfied with a new job.
(2) I think about quitting this job.
(3) I will probably look for a new job next year.

Employee’s role clarity

Developed for this study; Cronbach’s α ¼ 0.86
(1) I know how to prioritize my work to complete my job tasks.
(2) I know clearly what work I am expected to complete.
(3) I know what behaviors would cause me to lose my job.
(4) I know what I need to do to be promoted.

Corresponding author
Taewon Suh can be contacted at: ts21@txstate.edu

For instructions on how to order reprints of this article, please visit our website:
www.emeraldgrouppublishing.com/licensing/reprints.htm
Or contact us for further details: permissions@emeraldinsight.com