Charting Theoretical Directions for DEI in Public Relations

The opportunity to work on this special issue has been an honor, a privilege, and an inspiring journey. The murders of George Floyd, Breonna Taylor, and Ahmaud Arbery in 2020 changed the narrative force of diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) discourse in every profession, and, in the process, arguably highlighted the crucial importance of the public relations function itself, as organizations of every type scrambled to determine if and how they should respond. Organizations indeed very quickly realized that today’s publics demand a response to social discourse. Accordingly, it was time for the Journal of Public Relations Research to publish a volume dedicated to DEI – a still relatively nascent area of public relations research, the scholars of which are proposing new theoretical directions. So, when we sent out the call for this special issue in summer 2022, we requested contributions on DEI in public relations that demonstrated new and innovative theoretical possibilities and applications. We also emphasized that submissions should not just focus on identity, difference, and representation but go beyond and treat DEI as a holistic concept. We requested submissions that probe into the impacts of diverse representation (or its lack) on the culture, practices, and future direction of the profession, both in domestic and transnational realms. We explained that even if contributors wished to focus on one or two aspects of diversity and identity, the submission should contribute to the theoretical advancement of DEI as a whole and its significance for public relations practice.

Thanks to outstanding submissions, we believe we have accomplished what we set out to do. This is the first special issue on DEI and public relations in this flagship journal’s history, and the contributions within will open doors for creative directions in future scholarship and theoretical development. In fact, because of the number of outstanding submissions and the corresponding positive reviews, this issue became a double issue, comprising 10 articles. The decision to make it a double issue was made deliberately. We wanted the issue to reflect the many different questions being asked and theoretical directions being taken in public relations DEI scholarship.

We hope this special issue also serves as a call to action for a new generation in public relations DEI scholarship. Past scholarship, while valuable, has been sporadic and lacked theoretical and cohesive direction. In fact, DEI as a term and holistic concept in the vocabulary of public relations scholarship is relatively recent. Starting around the mid-1980s, increasing attention was paid to issues of gender and racial/ethnic inequities (e.g., Cline et al., 1986; Kern-Foxworth, 1989a, 1989b; Toth, 1988, 1989; Zerbinos & Clanton, 1993). Some early landmark studies showed how DEI was not at the forefront of practitioners’ agendas (Brunner, 2008; Diggs-Brown & Zaharna, 1995; Hon & Brunner, 2000), but not much scholarship was attempted in any systematic way. A significant turn in the DEI discourse occurred in 2005, when a consortium which called itself the PR Coalition provided professionals and scholars with a charge to lead on DEI. While the call went largely unanswered for some time beyond a handful of researchers (i.e., Brunner, 2008; Pompper, 2007), scholars started to revive the discussion a decade later (i.e., Mundy, 2015, 2016; Tindall & Waters, 2012; Uysal, 2013; Vardeman-Winter, Tindall, & Jiang, 2013).

Since then, research has increasingly explored “diversity” as a concept with complex dimensions beyond the usual siloed focus on race, ethnicity, and gender, and instead has explored DEI as an interconnected and multicultural concept. For example, some scholars have emphasized the need for an intersectional lens to study the role and impact of identity and difference in public relations and to include identity categories beyond race, ethnicity, and gender (e.g., sexuality and disability) (Ciszek, 2018, 2020; Tindall & Waters, 2012; Vardeman-Winter & Tindall, 2010; Vardeman-Winter, Tindall, & Jiang); others have emphasized the role of leadership in DEI success and the state of DEI in public relations education (Bardhan & Gower, 2020; Brown et al., 2019; Mundy et al., 2018; Muturi & Zhu, 2019; Place & Vanc, 2016). Today, scholarship is increasingly asking pressing and critical questions about DEI and its role in correcting systemic inequities, both structural and cultural, and how DEI impacts professional ethics, measurement metrics, organizational culture change, and internal and external communication with diverse publics (e.g., Edwards, 2015; Mundy, 2015, 2016; Pompper, 2014, 2015, 2020; Vardeman-Winter & Place, 2017). The relationship between inclusion, equity, and diversity is also being theoretically investigated, and such scrutiny is revealing new avenues of inquiry (Bardhan & Gower, 2022; Gaither, 2018; Mundy, 2019, 2021). Most importantly, scholarship is foregrounding scaled understandings of the role of power and context in how we make sense of and act on DEI at regional, national, and global levels (Bardhan & Gower, 2022). The DEI narrative is alive and constantly changing in public relations and in every corner of society. We have a long journey ahead of us, and our task as scholars is to guide as well as challenge the profession with theoretical insights and DEI knowledge.

We were delighted with the number of submissions we received. We also appreciated the variety in methodological focus. In this special issue, we are pleased to offer our readers a collection of articles that engage the topic of DEI and its multiple dimensions from various theoretical standpoints. A brief walkthrough follows.

The type of data we collect, along with the methods we decide to follow in our research, significantly impacts knowledge production and claims we make about groups of people. Damion Waymer, Kenon A. Brown, and Joshua Jackson, in their article “Researcher responsibility to diversity and inclusion in public relations and social scientific research: A call for more inclusive research and researcher participation,” make a meta methodological contribution by presenting convincing evidence that a high volume of public relations scholarship is currently making claims about DEI in the profession on the basis of data gleaned from samples that do not include the “requisite variety” (Grunig et al., 1992; Sha & Ford, 2007) needed for diverse voices to be proportionately represented. Samples, according to the authors’ quantitative content analysis of DEI-oriented studies in leading public relations and related peer-reviewed journals, tend to be mainly White, include mainly women, and voices of Latin origin are significantly underrepresented. Additionally, full demographic information about samples is often not provided. They report that DEI focused research is low in volume compared to other topics but seems to be increasing. The authors provide six helpful guiding principles on how editors and scholars can practice more inclusivity, sample demographic transparency, and methodological responsibility in future DEI and related research.

Taking a nation branding approach to DEI in “Power imbalances and contested notions of the nation: Latin American nation branding through the lens of the cultural-economic model of public relations,” Pablo Miño utilizes Curtin and Gaither’s (2005) cultural-economic model and engages the concepts of dissensus and dialogic public relations to advocate for less functional and more critical and interpretive inquiries into this topic. Through a qualitative analysis of 25 in-depth interviews with strategic communication professionals (or cultural intermediaries) representing various Latin American countries, Miño demonstrates that nation branding is complex strategic communication work which must account for multiple social actors navigating cultural and power inequities. This study demonstrates how problems arise when internal sociopolitical and cultural realities and external branding efforts do not align. It contributes transnational insights on DEI and reminds us that the narrative of DEI is context specific, geographically complex, and interculturally nuanced.

In “Refined by fire: Examining acculturation, resilience, and crucible experiences of U.S. Latinas in public relations,” Rosalynn A. Vasquez and Marlene S. Neill offer qualitative insights on how the life transforming (crucible) experiences of immigrant, first-generation, and non-immigrant Latina public relations practitioners influence their leadership development process. Interviewees narrated that strong resilience and the ability to advocate for themselves and their teams aided them in turning crucible experiences into positive leadership growth. Key differences are noted between the crucible experiences of immigrant and first-generation practitioners on the one hand, and non-immigrant Latinas on the other. Scholarship on women practitioners of color, especially Latina practitioners, is low, making this study a valuable contribution (Vardeman-Winter & Place, 2017). From a DEI and public relations perspective, it weaves together literature on leadership, acculturation stressors, and intercultural identity theory to make a unique theoretical contribution to DEI and public relations at the intersection of gender, race/ethnicity, immigration, and leadership.

Kati Berg and Katharine Miller, in “Leading the charge: Female leaders’ empowerment of DEI initiatives through PR,” analyze publicly available narratives and statements from women leaders in the profession who have been honored as Women of Distinction by PR Week between 2020 and 2022 to demonstrate how these leaders are utilizing feminist values to champion and advance DEI in ways that empower their organizations. A grounded theory analysis revealed empathy, commitment to and celebration of DEI, the ability to reimagine workplace culture through the lens of DEI, and championing purpose-driven work and organizations are values, attitudes and action being employed by these female leaders. The pre-post pandemic and racial upheaval time frame offers an insightful comparison. From a theoretical standpoint, this study supports positioning public relations as a function for advancing DEI (Mundy, 2021), and offers a useful springboard for further developing gendered understandings of how female practitioners may be uniquely positioned within the profession to lead when it comes to DEI.

Neurodiversity as a dimension of diversity is the focus of the article “Branding Neurodiversity: A critical discourse analysis of communicative capitalism among neurodiversity workforce intermediaries.” Taking a social justice approach to neurodiversity, authors Scott Branton, Astrid Villamil, and Joel Reed conduct a critical discourse analysis of discourse produced by neurodiversity workforce intermediaries (NWIs) which are organizations that connect neurodiverse individuals to the neurotypical workforce. Their analysis shows tensive branding efforts that straddle social justice as well as economic productivity frames. The authors conclude that overall, emphasis on the business case for DEI predominates NWI discourse resulting in the prioritization of capitalist logic over a change empowerment approach which advocates prioritizing the voices and perspectives of marginalized identities over organizational interests (Mundy, 2021). This study advances the theoretical perspective of change empowerment over mutuality in relationship building between organizations and their publics, especially historically marginalized ones. In so doing, it also contributes to the debate about the tension between the business case and the moral case for DEI in public relations, in this case in the context of neurodiversity.

In their article, “Ventriloquizing Institutional Ethos: Social Issues Management, Internal Public Relations, and the Institutionalization of Neoliberalism and Whiteness in U.S. Universities’ Diversity Discourse,” Drew Ashby-King and Lindsey Anderson performed a critical thematic analysis on 37 universities’ strategic plans to understand institutional contexts when those universities subsequently communicated about socio-political issues. The frameworks of neoliberalism and ventriloquism guide this exploration, emphasizing how the power of neoliberalism (and resulting whiteness) has permeated high education, and conversely how ventriloquism offers an effective way to understand how social discourse and ideologies can influence organizational communication practices. They found that while broader socio-political forces influenced the need for institutional focus on diversity, the universities’ communication actually reinforced the status quo thus reinforcing neoliberalism and whiteness at those institutions. Theoretically, the authors offer a strong argument for how the use of ventriloquism can provide an important framework through which to understand how broader social discourse can influence organizational communication practices specific to issues around DEI.

In a second article exploring university DEI communication, “Automated Linguistic and Visual Content Analysis of Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion Perspectives in Advertising and Public Relations Program Websites,” Vaibhav Shwetangbhai Diwanji, Yvonnes Chen, and Joseph Erba used automated linguistic and AI-enabled visual analysis to explore the websites of 69 ACEJMC-accredited advertising and public relations programs. Their linguistic analysis found that approximately one-fifth of those websites contained DEI terms, while the visual analysis reflected a prominence of white women. That said, reflective of prior studies in university promotional material, the authors also found that based on known statistics in higher education and the Ad and PR fields, the representation of racial diversity on the researched websites may be misleading and overrepresent the actual diversity at those institutions. Guiding this study is the theory of Culturally Responsive Pedagogy (CRP), and the authors offer ways in which CRP can be used to explore critical-theory, identity theory, and intersectionality as it asks questions around lived experience, meaning, and human subjectivity.

In “Social Identity Signaling in Public Relations: Job Pursuit Intention among Students with Marginalized Racial and Ethnic Identities and Queer Identities,” Solyee Kim integrates social identity theory, intergroup emotions theory, and signaling theory to explore specifically how DEI cues on two fictional PR agency websites influenced job seeking intention among public relations practitioners from underrepresented and marginalized communities. Interestingly, the online quasi-experiment which employed a 2 × 2 mixed factorial design, found that among the practitioners researched, those who do not identify with a historically underrepresented or marginalized group reported the lowest level of intent in pursuing employment with the fictional agency website that had the highest level of DEI cues. That same group reported highest levels of social fit with the website that had the lowest level of DEI cues.

In their article, “Engaging Employees via An Inclusive Climate: The Role of Organizational Diversity Communication and Cultural Intelligence,” Rita Men, Sunny Qin, Renee Mitson, and Patrick Thelan surveyed 657 full-time employees to understand how diversity communication efforts, coupled with employees’ cultural intelligence affect an inclusive organizational culture and overall employee engagement. The authors found that, indeed, an organization’s demonstrated commitment to communicate internally about diversity-related issues can be a strong catalyst for creating an inclusive culture. That said, diversity-focused communication had a stronger effect on employees from historically underrepresented and marginalized communities. Theoretically, the study reinforces complements to the growing body of knowledge regarding the factors that contribute to employee engagement and an inclusive culture, citing that an internal focus on diversity communication can be a driver for both.

Finally, Lan Ni, Yan Huang, and Weidong Shi surveyed just under 800 respondents in their article, “Combating Race-Related Hate Speech: The Role of Symmetrical Communication in Addressing Racism through Perceptual and Behavioral Outcomes.” They found that cultural empathy is a key factor in nurturing and enhancing symmetrical communication at the societal level. In so doing, their research supports prior studies that emphasize cultural empathy, and extends it DEI issues, specifically regarding race relations. The authors go further to address prior critiques of the symmetrical communication model, emphasizing the plausible, motivating role of cultural empathy in the process.

As our brief walkthrough implies, the body of research in this special issue reflects not only a robust focus on DEI-related topics in public relations but also a diversity of thought in terms of methods, theoretical development, and sites of study. The authors ask new questions in new ways, using innovative theoretical approaches and applications. In so doing, they set the stage for the next generation of DEI scholarship in public relations. We thank the JPRR editorial staff for not only deciding to publish this special issue but also for inviting us to help lead its development. To all of the authors who submitted their research, thank you for the work you are doing in this space. Let’s continue the conversation.