Strategic communication and the entrepreneurial role of the corporate communication officer

Considering the recent evolution of the communication/PR profession in large organizations both private and public, many scholars agree that a process of institutionalization is occurring. In other words, communication’s importance has been growing, reaching in recent years a strategic position as a lever for companies’ governance. A first objective of this chapter is to describe, looking at management and communication/PR literature, how and to what extent communication has become strategic. The main hypothesis is that communication has become strategic within companies’ governance in order to help each organization to develop consistently – mainly in terms of values – within its environment. A second objective is to describe, looking at the entrepreneurial organization theory and communication/PR literature, another side of the strategic evolution of communication, which is to help each organization to develop – mainly in terms of services, products and reputation – as a different, or preferably unique, entity as compared to the other organizations. The evolution of the strategic contribution of communication/PR within organizations’ decision-making has a strong impact on the role that corporate communication officers (CCOs) play in organizations both on the isomorphic and on the entrepreneurial–innovative sides of the communicational activity they carry out to support the evolution of their organizations

Caspase cleavage of the Golgi stacking factor GRASP65 is required for Fas/CD95-mediated apoptosis

GRASP65 (Golgi reassembly and stacking protein of 65 KDa) is a cis-Golgi protein with roles in Golgi structure, membrane trafficking and cell signalling. It is cleaved by caspase-3 early in apoptosis, promoting Golgi fragmentation. We now show that cleavage is needed for Fas-mediated apoptosis: expression of caspase-resistant GRASP65 protects cells, whereas expression of membrane proximal caspase-cleaved GRASP65 fragments dramatically sensitises cells. GRASP65 coordinates passage through the Golgi apparatus of proteins containing C-terminal hydrophobic motifs, via its tandem PDZ type ‘GRASP' domains. Fas/CD95 contains a C-terminal leucine–valine pairing so its trafficking might be coordinated by GRASP65. Mutagenesis of the Fas/CD95 LV motif reduces the number of cells with Golgi-associated Fas/CD95, and generates a receptor that is more effective at inducing apoptosis; however, siRNA-mediated silencing or expression of mutant GRASP65 constructs do not alter the steady state distribution of Fas/CD95. We also find no evidence for a GRASP65–Fas/CD95 interaction at the molecular level. Instead, we find that the C-terminal fragments of GRASP65 produced following caspase cleavage are targeted to mitochondria, and ectopic expression of these sensitises HeLa cells to Fas ligand. Our data suggest that GRASP65 cleavage promotes Fas/CD95-mediated apoptosis via release of C-terminal fragments that act at the mitochondria, and we identify Bcl-XL as a candidate apoptotic binding partner for GRASP65

Negotiating the Meaning of Team Expertise: A Firefighter Team’s Epistemic Denial

In this case study, we report how a team of firefighters critiqued one of its member’s decisions to facilitate learning and process improvement. The study is supported by 500+ hr of ethnographic observations, documents, and 11 retrospective interviews, which captured how the team’s talk about the member’s decision shaped their interpretations of their own and others’ expertise—interpretations that ironically undermined learning. Constant comparative analysis revealed that these firefighters positioned themselves as experts by crediting either personal experience or technical knowledge and then discrediting the alternative way of knowing. We labeled this process epistemic denial. The process of epistemic denial was rooted in identity concern; specifically, veteran team members relied on personal experience and newer members relied on technical information gained from training to assert their expertise, and to devalue others’ expertise. The article concludes with recommendations for avoiding problems associated with epistemic denial in high-reliability teams.Yeshttps://us.sagepub.com/en-us/nam/manuscript-submission-guideline