Technical University of Ilmenau

Faculty of Mathematics and Natural science

Institute of Media and Communication Science
Strategic Communication of Organizations

Strategic communication of organizations

Defining Strategic Communication

Case study of The European Union´s EULEX mission in Kosovo

Summer term 2010

Prof. Dr. Martin Löffelholz

Ioannis Akingonte
Matriculation No.: 46121
Ioannis.akingonte@tu-ilmenau.de
 1

1. Introduction .......................................................................................................... 3

2. Background and literature review ....................................................................... 5

2.1 Public Diplomacy and Strategic Communication ............................................. 5

2.2 Political communication and Strategic communication .................................... 7

2.3 Corporate communication and strategic communication .................................. 9

2.4 Military and strategic communication ............................................................ 10

2.5 Description of the dimensions ........................................................................ 12

2.5.1 Planning process ..................................................................................... 12

2.5.2 Long term ............................................................................................... 13
2.5.3 Intentionality .......................................................................................... 13
2.5.4 Integration .............................................................................................. 13
2.5.5 Pro-activity and flexibility ...................................................................... 13
2.5.6 Consistency ............................................................................................ 14

3. Methodology........................................................................................................ 15

4. Case study ........................................................................................................... 16

4.1 European Union Rule of Law Mission in Kosovo (EULEX ........................... 16

4.2 Analysis of the case study ................................................................................. 17

i. EU public: ......................................................................................................... 19

Strategic Communication: EULEX

 2

ii. Kosovar Albanian public: .................................................................................. 19

iii. Serbs and Kosovar Serbs: .............................................................................. 20

5. Definition, Conclusions and Outlook ................................................................. 22

Definition of strategic communication ..................................................................... 22

References .................................................................................................................. 24

Strategic Communication: EULEX

 3

1. Introduction
The use of the term strategic communication is not necessarily new. It is studied in
various academic fields, as well as used in practice to refer to planned communication
programs and campaigns. Nonetheless, this simplified description does not offer an
informative view about such a broad and complex phenomenon. This also creates a
cloud of confusion about its definition. What is strategic communication? There are as
many views as there are people asking this question. What does it involve? How can it
be defined? In order to set the ground for further research on the topic, there is need for a
more concrete, detailed and accepted definition of strategic communication (just like
any significant topic should) which covers all the various aspects and the various
organizational environments under which it is used. It is the major purpose of this paper
to reach such a comprehensive definition.

The primary objective is to identify and describe certain dimensions that can be used to
explain the different aspects that make up strategic communication and integrate them
into a general definition. The dimensions where developed by a deep look at relevant
texts; that form the theoretical background of this study. They are described in more
detail in the next section of this paper. The theoretical review is divided under four areas
that fall under the general umbrella of strategic communication. They are as follows:
Political communication
Military communication
Public Diplomacy and;
Corporate communication
Resulting from the literature review, the following dimensions were identified:
Planning process
Long term
Intentionality
Pro-activity and flexibility
Consistency
Integration
Strategic Communication: EULEX
 4

Furthermore, a case study about the strategic communication of European Union´s

EULEX in Kosovo was used to identify and compare as many of the dimensions as
where evident in the analysis.

Strategic Communication: EULEX

 5

2. Background and literature review

Widely, strategic communication of organizations involves, the use of research to
identify a problem or issue, relevant publics, and measurable goals and objectives
(Botan, 1997, p.188), orchestration of actions, words images to create cognitive
communication effects (Murphy, 2010, p.105; Paul, 2009), a systematic series of
sustained and coherent activities… that enables understanding of target audiences
develops and promotes ideas and opinions, (Tatham, 2008, p.4), communication aligned
with the company´s overall strategy, to enhance its strategic positioning (Argenti et al,
2005, p.83). These few definitions allows us to view Strategic communication broadly as
all communications that an organization has with its environment; internally and
externally. As already mentioned, the dimensions that form the core of the definition of
strategic communication were developed from a number of texts in the areas of public
diplomacy, military, corporate and political communication. The following part of the
paper briefly outlines each field that forms the backbone of the understanding of
strategic communication.

2.1 Public Diplomacy and Strategic Communication

Cowan and Cull (2008) remark, that wars bring new words and phrases to public notice
(p.6). What they mean is, public diplomacy is nothing new, (Melissen 2005) agrees in
his work on “The new public diplomacy” by accepting the temptation to see public
diplomacy as old wine in new bottles. He continues to explain that in international
relations official communication aimed at foreign publics is nothing new. Image
cultivation and propaganda are some of the activities that we now label public
diplomacy (p.1) and these have existed since the ancient eras, two world wars, the cold
war (Melissen, 2005, p.1-4) and presently post 9/11 and “the war on terror”, of which in
all these periods world powers have, and are investing a lot of effort into communicating
with the world. Let us have a look at this well known definition by (Tuch, 1990) and see
where it stands today. “A government’s process of communicating with foreign publics
in an attempt to bring about understanding for its nation’s ideas and ideals, its
institutions and culture, as well as its national goods and current policies.” (p.3). This

Strategic Communication: EULEX

 6

definition is based on the core diplomacy notion in international relations, based on

functions as “negotiation” or “management” with sovereign states as the actors, with the
main purpose being to “resolve international difficulties” (Melissen 2005; Dyke and
Vercic, 2009). Although this definition captures the idea that the focal constructs are the
nation and publics, it is misleading to treat public diplomacy in an increasingly
globalized and in an ever changing information landscape in this way. Based on
(Melissen, 2005), three areas show the tendency where one may be misled. Firstly, the
actors in public diplomacy have changed; they operate in a network environment. For
instance, NGOs are powerful actors now. Greenpeace is an example but by no means the
only one, and there are numerous NGOs that are influential in world affairs today.
Multinational organizations are another example (one has to look no further than the BP
oil spill situation in the Gulf of Mexico to understand the complexities in the diplomatic
landscape). Secondly, distinguishing audiences in foreign and domestic terms is difficult
with the current rate of communication technology adoption; if not impossible. Thirdly,
the portrayal of public diplomacy as one-way information is losing weight (Snow, 2009,
p.10); actors are realizing that a dialogic approach will more likely lead to successful
foreign policy. As Gilboa (2008) notes public diplomacy has been updated to meet the
developments in international relations and communications (p.57). These changes
reflect the idea of strategic communication. In addition to (Melissen, 2005), Potter
(2002-2003) as contained in Gilboa (2008) added some thoughtful points; the rise in
public opinion, global media, global transparency and cultural diversity. Gilboa (2008)
also adds characteristics that include nation branding, short and long term issues and the
use of “soft power”. The last point he made aligns with (Snow, 2009) who states that,
“public diplomacy is inevitably linked to power” while pointing to the fact that, power is
the most referenced term in the public diplomacy lexicon, she also cautions the use of
“soft” as misleading to many scholars and practitioners who may neglect its combination
with more forceful and threatening forms of compliance and persuasion (p.3). Soft
power refers to the ability to affect others to obtain the outcomes one wants through
attraction rather than coercion and payment (Nye, 2008, p.94). A combination of soft
and hard power (political, military and economic) forms a better stand according to Nye.
The point being that, if public diplomacy is to be more effective it needs to be
Strategic Communication: EULEX
 7

coordinated and integrated with other functions. Such descriptions provide evidence
consistent with the other fields in this study, as will be seen below. A simple or as
(Melissen, 2005) puts it, “succinct” definition of public diplomacy is that by Paul sharp,
which states it as, “the process by which direct relations with people in a country are
pursued to advance the interests and extend the values of those being represented.” (p.8).
This definition removes all the boundaries emphasized by “older” definitions, in terms
of who the actors and the receivers are, while retaining the persuasive dimension. The
use of the word “relations” draws attentions to the debate over the convergence or
separation as argued by Dyke & Vercic (2009), between public relations and public
diplomacy. They argue that, “nations and alliances are integrating public relations and
public diplomacy in global, political-military approaches to strategic communication”
(p.822). Such a convergence highlights an integration dimension of strategic
communication. However, a point of view in the practical sense, is given by Ibrahim
Ndoye (2009) who concludes that, western countries, “…tend to reach out to foreign
publics using public diplomacy…as a mouthpiece versus policy instrument; whereas
developing countries, in the pursuit of their economic survival, are more inclined to use
international public relations to directly reach out to foreign government authorities, not
the foreign countries citizens (p.1) in strategic terms this should not be se seen as a
diverging view but rather as a planning dimension whereby different actors set different
goals and apply efforts that target different audiences. Nonetheless, as Signitzer and
Coombs (1992) put it, “public relations and public diplomacy are in a natural process of
convergence.” (p.146)

2.2 Political communication and Strategic communication

“Politics without communication is like having blood without veins and arteries: it’s not
really going anywhere.” (Romarheim, 2005, p.2) this figurative statement describes the
importance of communication in politics; the same could be said for other human social
processes and as such, allows for a connection with “strategic” communication in
political communications, especially as Gibson and Römelle (2007) put it, in the modern
“information societies” (p.474). They continue that, control of information correlates
with power and social structure; more so in the modern communication landscape. With
Strategic Communication: EULEX
 8

this line of thinking, effective political communicators would therefore need to take note
of strategic communications. Perhaps it is the early intellectual origins of political
communication studies based on modernist theories in psychology that set the ground for
a focus on persuasion and propaganda (Bennette & Iyengar, 2008), but are since being
challenged or at least reformed. It is probably the idea of controlling information that
ties political communication to propaganda. However, regardless of the relationship with
propagandist ideologies, there are a lot of connections that can be made to strategic
communication, especially the persuasive aspects; which will always be important in
political communication.

What is political communication? Franklin (1995) provides a descriptive definition

stating that political communication, “…studies the interactions between media and
political systems, locally, nationally, and internationally”. As contained in Gibson and
Römelle (2007), Franklin argues that political communication analyses: (1) political
content in the media (2) actors involved in the production of content (3) the effect (4)
impact of the political on the media system and (5) and the impact of the media on the
political system; thus, the focus is on the connection between politicians, voters and the
media (p.474). These points are helpful in identifying the dimensions of strategic
communication within political communication and what needs to be seen in a strategic
light (especially as already mentioned, in the new “information society”). To put it in
other words, what needs to be managed? Firstly, content in the media and production of
content is very different nowadays. As Gibson and Römelle (2007) state, “political
institutions and organizations are facing an increasingly difficult task in disseminating
their message across a range of new media forums and platforms. The ability of the
traditional players to control the flow and dosage of political information circulating to
the masses is being eroded as more independent news sources emerge to rival the
mainstream media outlets.” (p.484). the media landscape is very diverse and competitive
in a globalized world. Secondly, because of such changes the actor, effects and impact of
political communication on the media and political systems are different. From these
points of view, some of the elements or dimensions of strategic communication can be
realized.
Strategic Communication: EULEX
 9

Another helpful definition of political communication is given by Perloff (1998) “… the

process by which a nation´s leadership, media and citizenry exchange and confer
meaning upon messages that relate to the conduct of public policy.” (p.8) Firstly, this
definition highlights the idea of “process”, implying the different aspects of continuous
and consistent planning and “re” planning that are major themes of strategic
communication. Secondly, it captures the “politicians, voters and the media” concept of
the major players in political communication. Perloff however, substitutes Franklin´s
“interactions” with “exchange of meanings” which sheds a brighter light on the dialogic
nature of strategic communication. That public policy is the distinguishing characteristic
of political communication seems questionable because political communication
encompasses a greater field of areas including, political marketing, campaigning
(elections), political PR, political advertising etc. bringing about another theme in
strategic communication-that of integration and consistency in message delivery and
feedback. Perloff (1998) defends his point by stating that politics “concerns the process
by which society reaches consensus on policy issues. Thus political communication
occurs when citizens, media and leaders „dialogue‟ about issues of broad concern to
elites or the public.” (p.10)

2.3 Corporate communication and strategic communication

From a general perspective corporate communications is the umbrella term used to

describe how both a profit and non-profit corporation talks to itself and to the outside
world, it is grounded in corporate reputation and identity, based on the core purpose of
an organization (Franklin et al, 2009, p. 61). This is a simple definition that covers the
scope of the expression. It recognizes a long term approach based on core corporate
strategy both within and around an organization. An in depth definition is given by
Zerfass (2008) “…embraces all communication processes which contribute to the
definition of tasks, and the said tasks´ realization, with profit oriented economic
organizations, and which, in particular, contribute to the internal and external
coordination of actions and to the clarification of interests defining the relation between
companies and their specific stakeholders.” (p.66) the purpose he continues is to inform
Strategic Communication: EULEX
 10

and to construct meaning. “…all communication processes” addresses the integrative

dimension which Zerfass continues to elaborate in detail using social integrative
dimensions to link integration with communication. He uses integration in the normative
sense, as forming a shared context or a unitary whole and coordination in the sense of
mutual self-adjustment and the arrangement of action, arguing that they form the key
positive effects of corporate communication (p.70) “contribute to the definition of tasks”
we can take this part of the definition to refer to the contributions of communication to
long-term strategic planning and decision making. Corporate communication helps to
build up longer-term “potentials of success” (p.70) “clarification of interests defining the
relation…” identifies with planning in terms of considering the organization´s
stakeholders and understanding the environment. A stakeholder is “any individual or
group who can affect or is affected by the actions, decisions, policies, practices or the
goals of the organization.” (Freeman, 1984, p.25) Grunig &Pepper (1985) expand on the
stakeholder to define publics as aware and active stakeholders who are linked to an
organization because they and the organization have consequences on each other (p.
125). In order to achieve long term goals, understand and cultivate relationships and
create value, organizations would need to practice a two-way symmetrical form of
communication (Grunig & Grunig, 2008, p.334). As Bütschi (2006) notes, corporate
communication has become more prominent as the need to respond to a continuously
changing environment. To this it could also be added the consistency in adapting to such
changes. He also highlighted that CEOs are expecting a more pro-active role of
communication managers on the macro organizational level (p.107)

2.4 Military and strategic communication

The Defense science board is a committee that advices the US Department of Defense
(DOD) on scientific and technical issues. On the case of strategic communication they
gave the following definition in 2004:

“…a variety of instruments used by governments for generations to understand global

attitudes and cultures, engage in the dialogue of ideas between people and institutions,
Strategic Communication: EULEX
 11

advice policymakers, diplomats, and military leaders on the public opinion implications
of policy choices and influence attitudes and behavior through communication
strategies.”

Even though this is more of a historical explanation from a military angle, “used by
governments…” identifies some issues that can be used to understand strategic
communication in the context of this paper. It captures the two-way communication
theme, exchange of ideas, planning and evaluating opinions and the use of different
channels. In 2006 the Quadrennial Defense Review (QDR) stated the requirement for the
US Government to “integrate communications efforts horizontally across the enterprise
to link information and communication issues with broader policies, plans and actions.”
Thereafter, the roadmap was created to ensure that the objectives identified in the QDR
are achieved. The first task according to the plan was to establish a new strategic
communication organization Stovicek (2007). The fundamental problem lies within the
lack of a US Government strategy and the absence of a precise definition of strategic
communication resulting in an unclear understanding of its supporting role (p.2) Jeffery
Jones, Director for Strategic Communications and Information on the National Security
Council defined strategic communication as “the synchronized coordination of
statecraft, public affairs, public diplomacy, military information operations, and other
activities, reinforced by political, economic, military and other actions, to advance U.S.
foreign policy objectives.” A simpler version of this begins as “the direct transmission of
USG „intent‟…” (Stovicek, 2007, p.4) thus, signaling the intentionality of strategic
communication. In reaction to Jeffery Jones´s definition, Stovicek argues that,
contributions of United States Government departments are not by themselves strategic
communication, rather it is the coordination, synchronization and integration of these
contributions (as stated by Jones) to the broader USG strategic communication
objectives that can be described as strategic communications (p.4)

In 2009, the interagency strategy for Public diplomacy and strategic communication
report was released to the US Federal Government defining strategic communication and
its role for the US Government. Defining it as, “the synchronization of words and deeds
Strategic Communication: EULEX
 12

and how they will be perceived by selected audiences” and “programs and activities
aimed at communicating and engaging with intended audiences…” (p.2) the report
continues to explain the strategy for carrying out these tasks, the resources, roles,
research, analysis and measurement methods. It is a very clear document that really
captures the length and breadth of strategic communication and as such a very valuable
source for verifying the dimensions that were listed earlier in this paper.

The so called “jihadists” or “terrorists” also use methods from which dimensions of
strategic communication can be realized. Terrorism could be defined as “political
violence in an asymmetrical conflict that is designed to induce terror and psychic fear…
through the violent victimization and destruction of noncombatant targets” (Bockstette,
2009, p.8). According to Bockstette (2009) the purpose is to exploit the media for
publicity in order to influence targeted audiences. The primary target of the terrorists
does not aim at the physical but on the psychological effects of their actions (p.4) they
strategically use the internet and push their actions on the traditional media in order to
push their political agenda. In a nutshell, they have intentional long term communication
plans inseparable from their political one. As such they consider their target audience,
and integrate different methods to reach their end goal in a consistent manner.

2.5 Description of the dimensions

This part describes the different dimensions. The dimensions are largely interdependent
and interwoven. This forms the base for the analysis of the case study that follows.

2.5.1 Planning process

Plans are actions that are considered with the intention to reach some objective. The
Planning process is a set of activities that lead to achieving that objective. In the context
of strategic communication the dimension of planning is ideally aimed at achieving a
desirable objective and the desire when achieved will define the success of what was
planned. When communications are strategic they should contribute to overall desired
objectives in a manner that proves their impact. Planning involves but is not limited to

Strategic Communication: EULEX

 13

environmental scanning and monitoring, stakeholder, public, market segmentation or in

other words identification of target groups, campaign or program preparation in terms of
the message sources, receivers, mediums used, emotionality in the message and
predicting the message impact. The later stages of planning require a feedback loop
through assessment, analysis and evaluation of activities for the purpose of restructuring
and reexamining plans.

2.5.2 Long term

The long term approach to strategic communication is tied to planning. Plans should
address major issues and target long term (or at least midterm) goals. It does not focus
on specifics. Tactical and operational activities should be focused on specifics with
strategy in mind. However, it should not be mistaken that the sum total of tactics are the
strategy, rather strategy could be seen as a collection of tactics which focus on different
areas.

2.5.3 Intentionality

This dimension describes strategic communication as always having an intention and a

purpose. The purpose is usually in support of a broader strategic goal and most likely it
will be a complex one.

2.5.4 Integration

This dimension describes that strategic communication requires that processes, channels,
tools and functions are integrated in a way that, as much as possible unifies message
delivery, information gathering and external/internal environment understanding.

2.5.5 Pro-activity and flexibility

This dimension suggests that strategic communication requires an anticipatory approach

to situations and events rather than a reactive approach. In other words, it means causing
something to happen instead of waiting to respond after it has occurred. Ideally pro-

Strategic Communication: EULEX

 14

activity would mean that all steps are properly calculated and will result to expected
outcomes. This is a reality that is highly unlikely, and that is the reason this dimension is
fused with flexibility; in order to adjust to unexpected situations. Which means being
reactive. This dimension also captures the need for a two-way or dialogic
communication approach.

2.5.6 Consistency

This dimension suggests that strategic communication requires a consistent approach

especially in aspects like credibility and image. It means that actions and messages
should be consistent and should be carried out in a synchronized manner. The goal of
consistency is to create trust which may be lost if actions and messages are conflicting.

Strategic Communication: EULEX

 15

3. Methodology
To reach a definition this paper uses a qualitative case study. The case study is guided by
an analysis by Severin Peters (2010) a communication consultant for GTZ (Deutsche
Gesellschaft für Technische Zusammenarbeit) in Germany. The analysis is based on his
Master‟s thesis presented at the college of college of Europe in Bruges and published as
an EU Diplomacy paper for the department of EU International Relations and
Diplomacy Studies entitled “Strategic Communication for Crisis Management
Operations of International Organisations:ISAF Afghanistan and EULEX Kosovo.”.
Data was collected through qualitative interviews with EU officials and analysis of
EULUX communication materials such as their website, three advertisements and press
releases.

The exploration into the dimensions was carried out in a similar fashion as suggested by
Donohew & Palmgreen (2000). The first step in this systematic analysis began with an
unstructured and informal brainstorming period, which they refer to as observation
(p.119). During the basic observation, general dimensions about strategic
communication were pointed out. Specifically, the dimensions of planning, long term,
integration and purpose/intentionality were discovered. The second step was to develop
these dimensions, or constructs as Donohew & Palmgreen (2000) would say, that helped
in describing the phenomenon of strategic communication. A review of relevant
literature was analyzed in order to: (1) support the dimensions proposed in the
brainstorming period, (2) identify similarities and differences and; (3) discover more
dimensions that were important and that were not identified in the first step. This
process, helped to solidify and categorize the dimensions in a consistent manner. The
third and final step; which is the primary goal of this paper was to integrate the final set
of dimensions that formed the definition of the term strategic communication.

Strategic Communication: EULEX

 16

4. Case study

4.1 European Union Rule of Law Mission in Kosovo (EULEX)

“Strategic communication is crucial for the success of civilian and military crisis
management operations. Domestic publics have to be convinced that the operations are
worth pursuing, and the publics in the countries where the operations take place have to
be persuaded to support the missions’ objectives.” (Peters, 2010, p.3)

The above statement highlights the difficulties faced by international actors and
sovereign states to communicate security objectives in a globalized world, especially in
crisis afflicted regions, such as Kosovo.

The Republic of Kosovo is a landlocked nation bordered by Albania, Montenegro,

Macedonia and Serbia. Following the NATO bombing against Yugoslavia in the
Kosovo war between March to June 1999 and that led to the eventual withdrawal of
Serbian forces from Kosovo, the UN Security Council resolution 1244 placed Kosovo
under a transitional administration through the United Nations Interim Administration
Mission in Kosovo (UNMIK) pending a determination of Kosovo´s future. (CIA fact
book 2010; NATO 1999)

The first EU officials arrived in Kosovo in 2006 to set the ground for a European
Security and Defense Policy (ESDP- now called CSDP) operation aimed at supporting
local authorities in preparation for independence. After attempts at reaching an
agreement with Russia and Serbia about Kosovo´s independence had failed, the
European Union Rule of Law Mission in Kosovo (EULEX) was launched in February
2008 to strengthen the Kosovar authorities which were supposed to take over
responsibility for governing the territory from the UNMIK. Even though all EU
members supported the deployment of EULEX, Kosovo´s unilateral declaration of
independence only a day after the launch of EULEX was questioned from a legal
perspective by five EU member states because of fears of separatist movements in their

Strategic Communication: EULEX

 17

own countries. Russia denied it a mandate in the UN Security Council however, Serbia a
potential candidate to join the EU agreed on the grounds that EULEX remain neutral
about Kosovo´s independence (Peters, 2010, p.3). On 22 July 2010 the International
Court of Justice, the United Nations primary judicial organ declared that Kosovo´s
unilateral declaration of independence did not violate international law (Reuters.com,
2010)

The EULEX is the largest-and most important-civilian mission ever launched under the
Common Security and Defense Policy (CSDP-formerly the ESDP). The aim is to assist
Kosovo authorities in the rule of law areas; Police, Judiciary and Customs (eulex-
Kosovo.eu; Kosovo´s fragile transition, 2008, p.ii). EULUX operates under the ESDP
which are both part of the commitment of EU member states on a common foreign
policy called the Common Foreign and Security Policy (CFSP) (ec.europa.eu, 2010)

4.2 Analysis of the case study

EULEX was seen by the EU as a chance to step up communication efforts and portray
them as a powerful and responsible international actor with regard to foreign policy that
was inadequate in former missions (Peters 2010, p.16) the purpose of this analysis is to
identify the dimensions of strategic communication that leads to a definition of the term.
Besides the fact that the Kosovo case is still an ongoing controversial and complex issue,
the normative question about excellent or ideal strategic communication could be
answered by other researches using other methods and designs. This will be addressed in
the concluding section of this paper.

As mentioned above, the plan of the overall strategy is to portray the European Union as
a strong and responsible international actor. The communication dimension of the
strategy was pushed strongly in the operation in order to strengthen the image of EU´s
foreign policy not only in this operation but in the long term. Based on the EULEX case,

Strategic Communication: EULEX

 18

long term planning is at the core of strategic communications. There are two major
actors charged with the responsibility of communicating to the public (1) Office of the
spokesperson of the high representative (2) Press and public information office that is
part of the mission and on the ground, in the capital Pristina. Only these two people can
be quoted by the press. The PPIO is advised from Brussels who are in charge of strategic
planning and press relations. Local issues concerning the Kosovo public are left to the
PPIO. The PPIO develops its own press lines, website, local events and meetings with
civil society and has produced its own TV advertisements; something new in ESDP
operations.

This brief explanation of the structure highlights the dimensions of consistency in

delivering messages. Furthermore, on the consistency dimension, EU member states do
not interfere with the communication activities of the EULEX operation by taking any
extra initiatives unless it is about Kosovo in general. Instead, they refer people to EU
when they seek information about EULEX. For instance, the external relations websites
of Germany and France link to the EU on such matters. EULUX shows more signs of
consistency and integration with other EU actors present in Kosovo, namely an EU
Special Representative and a European Commission Liaison Office. Together they
jointly conducted a road show in 2008 to announce the deployment of EULEX and the
actions of the EU in Kosovo. Apart from the road show being a way of creating platform
for dialogue and participation, as does their website, it shows the integration dimension
by combining the road show with the other communication channels mentioned earlier
to deliver messages, receive feedback and understand their publics better. As part of the
planning process three distinct groups where identified. This must have been based on
at least some minimal research, assessment, analysis etc. because the strategies for each
group vary considerably, as they have different attitudes towards the EULEX
deployment. The target groups are (1) The EU public (2) The Kosovar Albanians and (3)
the Serbian community in Serbia and Kosovo. A look into these groups separately can
help identify more dimensions and provide further proof of the ones already stated.

Strategic Communication: EULEX

 19

i. EU public:

The intention of the EU to promote itself as a powerful international actor through its
communication strategy was a pro-active move. However, their hopes where dampened
due to political complexities beyond their control. A number of issues damaged the
reputation of EULEX even before the mission began. Firstly, putting the EULEX under
the wings of the UN mission undermined its legitimacy. Secondly, the opposition by
Serbia and Russia and the lack of unanimity among the EU member states on the
question of Kosovo have led to a status neutrality of EULEX. This also points to the
general problem of EU´s inability to speak and act as one international actor in
controversial foreign policy issues (p.20) the above points demanded from the EU and
EULEX to be flexible and take up a reactive approach to their communication. The EU
had to forfeit the political dimension of their involvement in Kosovo by presenting
EULEX as having a neutral stand on the Kosovo status question by not participating or
shaping public discourse on that issue on the one hand, and as an apolitical and technical
mission on the other. The complexity about their initial pro-active intentions is more
evident here because the media agenda and the public discussions about Kosovo was on
exactly that point (p.21). Therefore, their communication was modest and passive and
not pushing EULEX in the media unless requested and only by presenting as it as sign of
a EU´s growing foreign policy capabilities (as the largest civilian mission it has ever
deployed) (p.21)

ii. Kosovar Albanian public:

The perception of the Albanian public is that the international community is responsible
for solving their problems. This perception is shaped as result of the latter‟s involvement
in Kosovo since 1999. In addition to the fact that the Kosovo media is sensitive about
threats to their independence, the Albanian public has high expectations of the EU. Thus,
EULEX has had to react defensively by consistently explaining that its mandate is much
narrower than the UN and that its role is that of assistance through advice and training.
So instead of promoting its image as a powerful actor, EULEX has had to downplay its
Strategic Communication: EULEX
 20

role and communicate that it is not as powerful as they think. It is no wonder the slogan
of their website reads “supporting local ownership” (eulex-kosovo.com). On a positive
and pro-active note, the EU and EULEX communicate a promise of a future EU
membership towards the Albanian public, conflicting with their primary objective which
is establishing the rule of law, even as it strategically results in promoting pro-EU
reforms. The core mission of EULEX is the rule of law and as such is a daily affair of
the communication strategy in their media relations. Their two-way communication
approach with civil society gives both the Albanians and the Serbs in Kosovo a feeling
of the positive impact EULEX is having and thus, their trust in the organization.

iii. Serbs and Kosovar Serbs:

The strategic goal of EULUX is to convince the Kosovar Serbs that their presence in
Kosovo is in their interest. The complexity in EULEX´s intention is that, the Kosovar
Serbs reside in the northern part of the country that borders Serbia and have refused to
cooperate with or be governed by Kosovar Albanians. In addition, under the UN mission
the northern region was practically Serbian and where influenced by Belgrade media. A
minor plus to EULEX is the positive press it has received from the Kosovar Albanian
press as they managed to also operate in the Serbian part of Kosovo, even though it is
still unclear about the extent to which this cooperation is strong, it will surely if positive,
contribute to the reputation of EU and EULEX (P.23) EULEX does not only defend
itself against Serbian nationalists, it also pro-actively and in a consistent manner
communicates the multi-ethnicity in the administration of Kosovo and any opposition
from Kosovar Albanians will be confronted by EULEX (p.24) acting once again pro-
actively EULEX also communicates to the Serbs about a future with EU, integrating the
road show “come to Europe” in the Serbian language without necessarily stressing any
requirements about an autonomous Kosovo.

From the above analysis it can be seen that the communication efforts of the EULEX are
quite modest. Faced with political complexities they have had to use reactive
communication strategies even if they had hoped from the onset to engage their various

Strategic Communication: EULEX

 21

publics pro-actively. Nonetheless, this cannot be seen as a perfect success but it is a

commendable effort by the EU to promote their image as an international actor,
especially since the major dimensions could be identified in the analysis of their
strategic communication efforts.

Strategic Communication: EULEX

 22

5. Definition, Conclusions and Outlook

With an understanding of these dimensions through the case study and a review of
relevant texts the following definition of strategic communication is given:

Definition of strategic communication

Strategic communication is the process whereby organizations intentionally plan long

term communication activities linking them to overall strategy; engage stakeholders in a
pro-active and consistent manner by integrating processes, methods, structures and
enabling it to build relationships based on understanding, using a two-way form of
communication.

The theoretical background on different aspects of strategic communication revealed

some recurrent dimensions that helped to propose the above definition. The EULUX
case study was used to identify the dimensions and further support them. One may argue
that using one case study may not be sufficient to defend and generalize these
dimensions that define strategic communication. The case study however, helped to
identify these dimensions. Nonetheless, it definitely implies that more case studies about
different organizational environments need to be carried out and/or re-analyzed in order
to fully confirm, support, re-categorize, re-define and/or even dismiss them.

This definition forms the foundation for further research that will be helpful in building a
theory of strategic communication. The next step is to develop hypotheses, design a
research study to test the hypotheses and evaluate the outcome of the research. The best
approach will make use of both qualitative and quantitative designs. An interesting but
difficult to achieve research study; in terms of time and expense limitations could be
based on longitudinal observations of strategic communication campaigns. This will be
realistically achievable if the actor or entity embarking on the campaign collaborates
with some research team (independent of the entity) during this process. Using the
dimensions of the definition and comparing them with the result of the study (or a
combination of similar studies) will get us closer to identifying and explaining how
“excellent”-in Grunigian terminology-strategic communications departments, structures,
Strategic Communication: EULEX
 23

processes, programs and methods should act when applying Strategic communication.
This demands a collection of studies that specify on different areas of this critical aspect
of the behaviors of organizations in the increasingly open, evolving and globalized
world environment.

Strategic Communication: EULEX

 24

References
Argenti, P., Howell, R., & Karen, B. (Spring 2005). The strategic Communication
Imperative. MIT SLOAN Management Review , S. 83-89, vol.46 No.3.

Bennett, W. L., & Iyengar, S. (2008). A new era of minimal effects? The changing
foundations of political communication. Journal of Communication , 58(4), 707–
731.

Bockstette, C. (December 2008). Jihadist Terrorist Use ofStrategic Communication

Management Techniques. European Center For Security Studies .

Botan, C. (1997). Ethics in Strategic Communication Campaigns: The Case for a New
Approach to Public Relations. Journal of Business Communication , 188-202.

Bütsch, G., & Steyn, B. (2006). Theory on strategic communication management is the
key to unlocking the boardroom. Journal of Communication Management , 106-
109.

Cowan, G., & Cull, N. J. (2008). Public diplomacy in a changing world. Annals of the
American Academy of Political and Social Science , 616, p. 6-8.

Department of Defense . (2006). Quadrennial Defense Review Strategic Communication

Execution Roadmap.
http://www.defense.gov/pubs/pdfs/QDRRoadmap20060925a.pdf.

Department of Defense. (2006). Quadrennial Defense Review Report . Washington DC:

http://www.defense.gov/pubs/pdfs/QDR20060203.pdf.

Donohew, L., & Palmgreen, P. (2003). Constructing theory. In G. H. Stempel, W. D. H.,

& C. Wilhoit, Mass Communication Research and Theory (pp. 111-127). Allyn
& Bacon.

Strategic Communication: EULEX

 25

Dyke, M. A., & Vercic, D. (2009). Public Relations, Public Diplomacy and Strategic
Communication. In K. Shrimamesh, & D. (. Vercic, The Global Public Relations
Handbook. Theory, Research and Practice (pp. p. 822-842). New York:
Routledge.

EULEX. (2010). EULEX KOSOVO. Retrieved July 19, 2010, from European Union
Rule of Law Mission: http://www.eulex-kosovo.eu/en/front/

European Security and Defence Policy (ESDP). (2010, July 19). Retrieved from
www.europa.eu:http://europa.eu/scadplus/glossary/european_security_defence_p
olicy_en.htm

European Union. (2010, July 01). Common Foreign and Security Policy (CFSP) for the
European Union. Retrieved July 2010, 19, from European Commission External
Relations: http://ec.europa.eu/external_relations/cfsp/index_en.htm

Franklin, B. (1995). Packaging politics: causes and consequences for Britain’s media
democracy, in Lovenduski, J., Stanyer, J. (Eds),Contemporary Political Studies
1995: Proceedings of the Annual Conference of the Political Studies Association
of the UK. Political Studies Association of the UK, Belfast, pp. 582-92.

Freeman, E. R. (1984). Strategic Management: A Stakeholder Approach. Boston:

Pitman.

Gibson, R. K., & Römmele, A. (2007). Political Communication. In C. Daniele,

Comparative Politics (S. 473-491). Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Gilboa, E. (2008). Searching for a Theory of Public Diplomacy. Annals of the American
Academy of Political and Social Science , 616(1) p.55-77.

Strategic Communication: EULEX

 26

Grunig, J. E., & Repper Fred, C. (1992). Strategic management, publics, and issues. In J.
E. Grunig, Excellence in Public Relations and Communication Management (pp.
117–157). NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.

Grunig, J., & Grunig, L. (2008). Excellent theory in Public Relations: past, present and
future. In A. Zerfass, v. R. Betteke, & K. Sriramesh, Public Relations Research
(pp. 327-347). Wiesbaden.

International Crisis Group. (2008). Kosovo´s Fragile Transition. Europe Report NO.
196.

Jones, J. B. (October 2005). Strategic communication: A Mandate For The United

States. S. 180.

Kosovo independence declaration deemed legal. (23. July 2010). Reuters , S. retreived
16.08.2010 http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSTRE66L01720100723.

Kosovo.CIA Fact book. (2010). https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-

factbook/geos/kv.html.

Mellissen, J. (2005). Wielding Soft Power: The New Public Diplomacy. Clingendael
Diplomacy Papers No.2. The Hague: Netherlands Institute of International
Relations.

Murphy, D. (2010). In search of the Art and science of strategic communication.

Carlisle: U.S Army War College.

NATO. (1999, July 15). NATO's role in relation to the conflict in Kosovo. Retrieved 07,
18, 2010, from www.NATO.int: http://www.nato.int/kosovo/history.htm

Ndoye, I. (2009). Crafting the Image of Nations in Foreign Audiences: How Developing
Countries Use Public Diplomacy and Public Relations? 12th Annual
International Public Relations Research Conference. Institute of public relations
Strategic Communication: EULEX
 27

: Retrieved 12.07.2010 from:

http://www.instituteforpr.org/files/uploads/ImageInForeignAudiences.pdf.

Nye, J. S. (2008). Public Diplomacy and Soft Power. Annals of the American Academy
of Political and Social Science , 616, p. 94-109.

Paul, C. (2009). Whither Strategic Communication. Rand Corporation:

http://www.rand.org/pubs/occasional_papers/2009/RAND_OP250.pdf.

Pelosi, N., & Biden, J. (2009). White house report on strategic communication.
http://www.fas.org/man/eprint/pubdip.pdf.

Perloff, R. (1998). Political communication: politics, press, and public in America. New
Jersey: Lawrence erlbaum and associates.

Peters, S. (2010). Strategic Communication for Crisis Management Operations of

International Organisations:ISAF Afghanistan and EULEX Kosovo. EU
Diplomacy Papers. Department of EU International Relations and Diplomacy
Studies: Brugges, Belgium.

Romarheim, A. G. (2005). Definitions of strategic political communication. Retrieved

may 17, 2010 http://english.nupi.no/Publications/Working-
Papers/2005/Definitions-of-strategic-political-communication.

Security Council Resolution 1224. (1999). http://daccess-dds-

ny.un.org/doc/UNDOC/GEN/N99/172/89/PDF/N9917289.pdf?OpenElement.

Signitzer, B., & Coombs, T. (1992). Public Relations and Public Diplomacy: Conceptual
Convergences. Public Relations Review , 18(2), 137-147.

Snow, N. (2009). Rethinking Public Diplomacy: In Snow, N., Taylor, R. (2009) the
Routledge Handbook of Public Diplomacy. New York.

Strategic Communication: EULEX

 28

Stovicek, B. (2007). Strategic communication:a Department of Defense Approach .

http://www.au.af.mil/au/awc/awcgate/army-usawc/stovicek.pdf.

Tatham, S. (2008). Strategic Communication: A Primer. United Kingdom: Advanced

Research and Assessment group, Defence Academy.

Tuch, H. (1990). Communicating With The World: US Public Diplomacy Overseas. New
York: St. Martin‟s.

Zerfass, A. (2008). Corporate communication revisited:integrating business strategy and

Strategic communication. In A. Zerfass, & D. Vercic, Public Relations Research
(pp. 66-96). Wiesbaden.

Strategic Communication: EULEX