uu.seUppsala University Publications
Change search
Link to record
Permanent link

Direct link
BETA
Pallas, Josef
Publications (10 of 56) Show all publications
Fredriksson, M. & Pallas, J. (2017). Public sector communication and media visibility and mediatization. In: Vilma Luoma-aho & Maria José Canel (Ed.), Handbook of Public Sector Communication: . Boston: Wiley-Blackwell
Open this publication in new window or tab >>Public sector communication and media visibility and mediatization
2017 (English)In: Handbook of Public Sector Communication / [ed] Vilma Luoma-aho & Maria José Canel, Boston: Wiley-Blackwell, 2017Chapter in book (Refereed)
Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
Boston: Wiley-Blackwell, 2017
Keyword
Mediatization, visibility, public sector, communication
National Category
Social Sciences
Research subject
Business Studies; Media and Communication Studies
Identifiers
urn:nbn:se:uu:diva-277194 (URN)
Funder
Swedish Research Council, 2014-36150-113533-18
Available from: 2016-02-17 Created: 2016-02-17 Last updated: 2016-02-17
Fredriksson, M. & Pallas, J. (2017). The localities of mediatization: How organizations translate the ideas of media in everyday practices. In: Stig Hjarvard, Göran Bolin, Andreas Hepp & Olivier Driessens (Ed.), Dynamics of mediatization: Understanding cultural and social change’ enclosed. Boston: Wiley-Blackwell
Open this publication in new window or tab >>The localities of mediatization: How organizations translate the ideas of media in everyday practices
2017 (English)In: Dynamics of mediatization: Understanding cultural and social change’ enclosed / [ed] Stig Hjarvard, Göran Bolin, Andreas Hepp & Olivier Driessens, Boston: Wiley-Blackwell, 2017Chapter in book (Refereed)
Abstract [en]

The rationale for this paper departures from the argument that current literature would benefit from more systematic studies of how mediatization unfolds in organizations (Jensen, 2013). We suggest a perspective where the media – similarly to other institutions– is dealt with in terms of rationalized ideas that are actively translated and transformed in and by organizations (Sahlin & Wedlin, 2008; Sevón & Czarniawska, 1996). This means that media can be addressed as locally negotiated in relations to other institutions that permeate contemporary organizations (Pallas & Fredriksson 2014). This also means that media can be better understood if it is examined as a set of elements - rather than as a monolithic logic - where each element is interpreted, made sense of and negotiated under their own specific conditions often with different outcomes depending on the actual institutional figurations (cf. Hepp & Hasebrink, 2014).

Our previous studies (Fredriksson, Schillemans, & Pallas, 2015; Pallas & Fredriksson, 2013; Pallas, Fredriksson, & Wedlin, 2016) as well as work of others (Kunelius & Reunanen, 2012; Schillemans, 2012; Thorbjornsrud, Ustad Figenschou, & Ihlen, 2014) provide support for this claim. Among other things it is obvious that mediatization has to be seen as a set of rather disparate processes (Heusinkveld, Benders, & Hillebrand, 2013; Meyer & Höllerer, 2010); which in turn means that way in which mediatization unfolds in specific context will be characterized by great diversity and complexity (cf. Røvik, Andersson & Eriksson-Zetterquist 2008). This is especially likely in organizations that operate at the juncture of fragmented streams of interests (Levay & Waks, 2009) and in organizations that are populated by representatives of various professions (Suddaby & Viale, 2011).

That said, the ideas of media are vague and imprecise in many ways and with an apparent shapelessness in contrast to other types of rationalized ideas (e.g. Service Management, Lean, Balanced Scorecards) accompanied by and supported by formal rules, standards and best practices (Morris & Lancaster, 2006; Mueller & Whittle, 2011). Consequently, the translations of the media are open for interests, values and preferences of different professions that in organizations embody the rationales of mediatization. Here, mediatization becomes a way of mobilizing meaning (Waldorff, 2013), as the various interpretations and understanding of media become subjected to various –and often conflicting– professional principles or frames (Kunelius & Reunanen, 2012).

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
Boston: Wiley-Blackwell, 2017
Keyword
Mediatization, translation, rationalised ideas, professions
National Category
Social Sciences
Research subject
Media and Communication Studies; Business Studies
Identifiers
urn:nbn:se:uu:diva-277193 (URN)
Funder
Swedish Research Council, 2014-36150-113533-18
Available from: 2016-02-17 Created: 2016-02-17 Last updated: 2016-02-17
Fredriksson, M. & Pallas, J. (2017). Translated Inconsistency: Management Communication Under the Reign of Institutional Ambiguity. Management Communication Quarterly, 31(3), 473-478
Open this publication in new window or tab >>Translated Inconsistency: Management Communication Under the Reign of Institutional Ambiguity
2017 (English)In: Management Communication Quarterly, ISSN 0893-3189, E-ISSN 1552-6798, Vol. 31, no 3, p. 473-478Article in journal, Editorial material (Other academic) Published
National Category
Communication Studies Business Administration
Identifiers
urn:nbn:se:uu:diva-335805 (URN)10.1177/0893318917699887 (DOI)000405077900008 ()
Available from: 2018-01-22 Created: 2018-01-22 Last updated: 2018-01-22Bibliographically approved
Pallas, J. & Bartlett, J. (2016). Accreditations & Certifications. In: Craig E. Carroll (Ed.), The SAGE Encyclopedia of Corporate Reputation: . Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications
Open this publication in new window or tab >>Accreditations & Certifications
2016 (English)In: The SAGE Encyclopedia of Corporate Reputation / [ed] Craig E. Carroll, Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications, 2016Chapter in book (Refereed)
Abstract [en]

A wide range of literature on for example non-state governance, market construction, accounting and management in general refers to the notion of accreditations and certifications as crucial for the mechanisms through which organizations and organizational practices gain acceptance and appreciation within their relevant fields or contexts. Accreditations as well as certifications might operate both through legal and informal requirements on organizations to meet standards of acceptable behavior (accreditations) or quality of specific activities or products (certifications). As both concepts seek to capture the processes trough which third parties (i.e. certification and accreditation agents/bodies) evaluate and thereby also monitor different aspects of organizational life; and as they both influence an organization’s ability to operate within a given social context in similarly there is no reason to uphold theoretical distinction between these two.

 

Accreditation and certifications are usually seen as an expression of what Michael Power described as audit society where different forms of measurement have become an integrated part of how we organize and manage a wide range of uncertainties and risks in areas such as politics, economy and sustainability. The production, circulation and use of accreditations and certifications function not only as tools by which individual organizations can be assessed, evaluated and governed. In more general terms these tools create stability and predictability in a given area of the social life by signaling what characteristics of an organization are crucial and attractive; and how to assure that these characteristics are achieved, upheld and communicated. Accreditations and certifications are involved in forming both individual as well collective perceptions about organizations in terms of their identities, goals, structures and activities.

 In the following we start by addressing the way in which accreditations and certifications are produced and diffused. In the second part of this entry we pay a closer attention to how these forms of evaluations influence the way organizations are perceived (and eventually also acted upon) by their constituencies – i.e. the role of accreditations and certifications for organizations’ legitimacy, reputation and status. 

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications, 2016
Keyword
Accreditations, certifications, audit society, media, communication
National Category
Social Sciences
Research subject
Media and Communication Studies; Business Studies
Identifiers
urn:nbn:se:uu:diva-277204 (URN)
Available from: 2016-02-17 Created: 2016-02-17 Last updated: 2016-02-17
Fredriksson, M. & Pallas, J. (2016). Diverging principles for strategic communication in government agencies. International Journal of Strategic Communication
Open this publication in new window or tab >>Diverging principles for strategic communication in government agencies
2016 (English)In: International Journal of Strategic Communication, ISSN 1553-118X, E-ISSN 1553-1198Article in journal (Refereed) Published
Abstract [en]

The aim of this article is to analyze how public authorities deal with strategic communication and how it gets redefined and reformulated in relation to rules, norms and ideas permeating different contexts. Research on strategic communication tends to oversee such differences and what consequences they have for what it is that mobilizes the use of communication in various settings. Instead mainstream literature often stresses the commonalities and the idea of strategic communication as guided by one set of values. This limited focus tends to make the literature insensitive to the context where communication takes place, what aim it is set to fulfil, and what organization there is at hand.

Informed by an increasing literature on organizational institutionalism we seek to challenge these assumptions. With a textual analysis of policies and strategy documents from 173 Swedish government agencies we examine what multiple and contradictory institutional conditions mean for how strategic communication is conceptualized. The results show that there are four frequent principles for strategic communication mobilized by the agencies. The results also show that a vast majority of the agencies are trying to handle conflicting principles when they form frameworks and strategies for their communication activities.

We use the results as a point of departure for a critical discussion whether complex and pluralistic conditions are to be defined as problematic and necessary to be resolved (as mainstream literature would suggest) or as unavoidable and something authorities must be able to handle.

Keyword
Diverging principles; Government agencies; Organizational institutionalism; Strategic communication
National Category
Social Sciences
Research subject
Media and Communication Studies; Business Studies
Identifiers
urn:nbn:se:uu:diva-277162 (URN)
Projects
Management structures and mediatization of governmental agencies - translations and consequences
Funder
Swedish Research Council, 2014-36150-113533-18
Available from: 2016-02-17 Created: 2016-02-17 Last updated: 2017-11-30
Pallas, J. (2016). Divided we stand: Akademiska ledares idéer om vad vi har universitet till. In: Linda Wedlin (Ed.), Det styrda universitet.:  Perspektiv på styrning, autonomi och reform av svenska lärosäten.. Stockholm: Santérus Förlag
Open this publication in new window or tab >>Divided we stand: Akademiska ledares idéer om vad vi har universitet till
2016 (Swedish)In: Det styrda universitet.:  Perspektiv på styrning, autonomi och reform av svenska lärosäten. / [ed] Linda Wedlin, Stockholm: Santérus Förlag, 2016Chapter in book (Other academic)
Abstract [sv]

Diskussionen kring vad vi har universitet – och högre utbildning och forskning i allmänhet till – har alltid varit levande och aktuella. Demokratiska, politiska, kulturella, religiösa, sociala och ekonomiska överväganden och prioriteringar har tydligt präglat universitetets drygt tusenåriga historia. Därmed har frågor om dess syfte, utbyggnad, organisation och styrning också fått kantats av en bred skara varierande och konkurrerande viljor och perspektiv. Såväl svenska som internationella studier visar att synen på universitet kan i grunden kopplas till universitetens skiftande position, roll och förhållanden till olika historiska och samhälleliga arrangemang och förutsättningar. Universitetet existerar därmed i multipla och komplexa miljö där det råder otydlighet kring hur det ska förstå och hantera sin verksamhet och sin identitet. Men universitet är inte bara föremål och arena för andras idéer om dess syfte och organisering. Universitet är i högsta grad aktiva i mottagandet av de förväntningar och modeller som definierar dess verksamhet. Trots att många studier har tagit utgångspunkt i denna komplexitet vet vi relativt lite om hur olika föreställningar och idéer interagerar, och hur de kommer till uttryck när de internt formuleras och tolkas på en nivå – dekaner och prefekter – där de kan förväntas vara centrala för universitetens övergripande syfte, organisering och styrning.

Utifrån 24 intervjuer med akademiska ledare (13 dekaner, 7 prefekter och 4 forskningsledare) vid Uppsala universitet (5), Göteborgs universitet (9) och Lunds universitet (10), och med stöd av en innehållsanalys av styr- och strategidokument från 29 svenska universitet och högskolor kommer jag här att illustrera hur idén om universitetet tar sin (varierande?) form där den kan antas vara vägledande för hur resten av universitetet ser på och förstår sina aktiviteter. Utifrån frågan ”Vad är ett universitet?” har dessa ledare ombetts att förklara hur de förstår och sedan även översätter och kommunicerar – både formellt och i sina dagliga interaktioner med kollegor, studenter, politiker, finansiärer m fl. – det ansvar och de prioriteringar som ställs på universitetet i allmänhet och deras egen organisation i synnerhet. Kapitlet söker därmed svar på frågan om det är möjligt att identifiera och formulera en sammanhållen och gemensam definition av universitet är och vad vi har det till. 

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
Stockholm: Santérus Förlag, 2016
Keyword
Universitet, styring, idéer, konflikter, otydlighet
National Category
Social Sciences
Research subject
Business Studies
Identifiers
urn:nbn:se:uu:diva-277195 (URN)
Projects
Organiserad frihet - Styrning och reform i svenska universitet
Funder
Swedish Research Council
Available from: 2016-02-17 Created: 2016-02-17 Last updated: 2016-02-17
Fredriksson, M. & Pallas, J. (2016). Media at the center: Public relations in public administrations in the wake of managerialism. Mediatization of bureaucracy. In: : . Paper presented at 4th workshop on the Comparative Analysis of Bureaucracy in Society.. Oslo: University of Oslo
Open this publication in new window or tab >>Media at the center: Public relations in public administrations in the wake of managerialism. Mediatization of bureaucracy
2016 (English)Conference paper, Published paper (Refereed)
Abstract [en]

This paper rests on an assumption that media is much more than a channel or type of organization and that we have to take media under consideration if we want to understand

the conditions for public administrations and their public relations activities. This is very much due to the processes of mediatization; that is to say, the double-sided process through which media a) emerge as an autonomous institution with its own set of rationalities that other institutions adapt to; and b) become an integrated part of other institutions’.

A second assumption is that the extent to which public administrations adapt to media varies between different types of organizations, mostly as a consequence of an organization’s management structure. Public administrations governed by career managers are more eager to get media attention and control the media image of their organizations compared to administrations governed by field professionals. Circumstances that position public relations at the center of these organizations’ activities but with limited freedom of action.

This raises a number of questions concerning circumstances, motives and consequences for public relations and in this paper we suggest three propositions for how we

can understand the interplay between media in its institutional form, public administrations and public relations 1) public administrations are mediatized beyond discretion and influence of public relations; 2) media activities of public administrations are formalized and standardized beyond the scope of public relations and 3) media activities of public administrations are more autonomous than public relations. 

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
Oslo: University of Oslo, 2016
Keyword
Management structure, media, mediatization, public administrations, public relations
National Category
Social Sciences
Research subject
Business Studies; Media and Communication Studies
Identifiers
urn:nbn:se:uu:diva-277196 (URN)
Conference
4th workshop on the Comparative Analysis of Bureaucracy in Society.
Funder
Swedish Research Council, 2014-36150-113533-18
Available from: 2016-02-17 Created: 2016-02-17 Last updated: 2016-02-17
Pallas, J. (2016). Mediatization & Corporate Reputation. In: Craig E. Carroll (Ed.), The SAGE Encyclopedia of Corporate Reputation: . Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications
Open this publication in new window or tab >>Mediatization & Corporate Reputation
2016 (English)In: The SAGE Encyclopedia of Corporate Reputation / [ed] Craig E. Carroll, Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications, 2016Chapter in book (Refereed)
Abstract [en]

Mediatization as a theoretical, analytical and empirical concept has over the last couple of decades made a serious and influential entry in a number of disciplines and academic fields. The notion of mediatization has been picked up, used and developed in areas such as media and communication science, public relations, journalism, psychology, sociology, business administration, religion, political science and many others. By way of describing the processes and changes that come with an increased used and importance of (mass) media, scholars on mediatization contribute to our understanding of how different parts of our societies - and actors within these –communicate and organize their activities. Mediatization reflects thus both cultural, institutional as well as material perspectives on the changing patterns of interactions. In relation to the main theme of the encyclopedia this chapter focuses on how mediatization can relate to the challenges in re-conceptualizing corporate reputation as an institutional – as in opposition to organization specific - process. 

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications, 2016
Keyword
Mediatization, Corporate Communication, Institutional theory, Media
National Category
Business Administration Communication Studies Media Studies
Research subject
Business Studies; Media and Communication Studies
Identifiers
urn:nbn:se:uu:diva-229103 (URN)
Available from: 2014-07-30 Created: 2014-07-30 Last updated: 2016-02-17
Fredriksson, M. & Pallas, J. (2016). Much ado about media: Public relations in public agencies in the wake of managerialism. Journal of Public Relations Research, 42(4), 600-606
Open this publication in new window or tab >>Much ado about media: Public relations in public agencies in the wake of managerialism
2016 (English)In: Journal of Public Relations Research, ISSN 1062-726X, E-ISSN 1532-754X, Vol. 42, no 4, p. 600-606Article in journal (Refereed) Published
Abstract [en]

This paper rests on an assumption that media is much more than a communication channel or type of organization and that we have to take media under consideration if we want to understand the conditions for public agencies and their public relations activities. This is very much due to the processes of mediatization; that is to say, the double-sided process through which media a) emerge as an autonomous institution with its own set of rationalities that other institutions adapt to; and b) become an integrated part of other institutions’. 

A second assumption is that the extent to which public agencies adapt to media varies between different types of organizations, mostly as a consequence of an organization’s management structure. Public agencies governed by career managers are more eager to get media attention and control the media image of their organizations compared to agencies governed by field professionals. Circumstances that position public relations at the centre within agencies governed by career managers, but with limited freedom of action.

This raises a number of questions concerning circumstances, motives and consequences for public relations and in this paper we suggest three propositions for how we can understand the interplay between media in its institutional form, public agencies and public relations 1) public relations professionals have limited control to what degree public agencies adapt to the media logic 2) public relations professionals have limited control over public agencies media activities due to their high level of formalization and standardization 3) public relations in public agencies is to an extensive degree limited to media activities.

Keyword
Management structure, media, mediatization, public agencies, public relations
National Category
Business Administration
Research subject
Media and Communication Studies; Business Studies
Identifiers
urn:nbn:se:uu:diva-277191 (URN)10.1016/j.pubrev.2016.03.016 (DOI)000384039200014 ()
Funder
Swedish Research Council, 2014-36150-113533-18
Available from: 2016-02-17 Created: 2016-02-17 Last updated: 2017-11-30Bibliographically approved
Pallas, J., Wedlin, L. & Grünberg, J. (2016). Organizations, Prizes and Media. Journal of Organizational Change Management, 29(7), 1066-1082
Open this publication in new window or tab >>Organizations, Prizes and Media
2016 (English)In: Journal of Organizational Change Management, ISSN 0953-4814, E-ISSN 1758-7816, Vol. 29, no 7, p. 1066-1082Article in journal (Refereed) Published
Abstract [en]

There is a wide range of media prizes that are awarded to businesses, business leaders and entrepreneurs. This is easily verified by a quick browse of the latest editions of the business press such as Fortune, Management Today, Financial Times or The Economist. Although the awarding of prizes to organizations and their representatives is a highly visible phenomenon the analysis of such prizes has hitherto been scant. What role do media prizes play in shaping the view of businesses and organizations? The architecture of a prize and its ensuing winners, distils a concentrated formula of what is commendable for business corporations at a given time. Thus such prizes and awards present a unique opportunity to study the production of norms and ideals for corporate management. Following contemporary research on media and organizations we know that the contexts were these prizes are awarded and reported on rely on the interactions of many organizations, where the initiatives and actions of mass media increasingly get tied into the activities and actions of organizations. In a dialectic relationship between media and business, it is clear that corporations are highly involved in shaping not only their brands and their images, but also the norms and ideals for good business. It has even been argued that it is useful to see the contemporary business enterprises as “edited corporations”, where governance is intimately tied to communication processes and where corporations are shaped in part by images and ideals that are circulated around them. Studying prizes thus allows a further investigation of such management ideals; in particular the processes that bring these ideals into being and allow them spread to wide audiences in and around organizations. 

Keyword
Prizes, Awards, Media, Mediatization, Status, Popularity
National Category
Social Sciences
Research subject
Business Studies; Media and Communication Studies
Identifiers
urn:nbn:se:uu:diva-277164 (URN)10.1108/JOCM-09-2015-0177 (DOI)000392184000003 ()
Available from: 2016-02-17 Created: 2016-02-17 Last updated: 2017-11-30Bibliographically approved
Organisations

Search in DiVA

Show all publications