Contingency Theory in Communication

  Contingency theory tries to explain the stance of an organization towards their public. The stance is on a continuum of accommodation and advocacy on the other side of the continuum.


 When an organization's stance is likely to be advocacy; it means that they don't pay attention to the environments, don't interact with their public, have closed system, and have internal orientation. This kind of stance can be considered as two-way asymmetrical communication since the organization don't want to interact with their public, but just notify the public about the organization because the organization don't take the public's opinion significant. The organization try to appeal themselves to the public but the communication mostly flows from the organization to the public.


  Thus, in the stance of advocacy, an organization mainly holds and controls the power. Because the organization thinks they know the best.


 On the other hand, in the accommodation stance, an organization actively interact with their public. The organization respect and adopt their public's opinion and share the power with them. This stance can be seen as two-way symmetrical communication where the company try to accept the public and appreciate them. This kind of communication is what the contingency theory proposes. In the accommodate stance, an organization listens to the public, has open system, understanding-based communication and they are more innovative. Also, the organization and the public keep the interdependent relationship when the organization is in this stance.

 In current society, stance of accommodation sounds more suitable because in the stance, an organization can  flexibly deal with various unpredictable situations. Also, since they respect  and pay attention the external public, they can see what the public wants from them. In that way, the public's satisfaction towards the organization also can be increased.






 They are many variables that affect an organization's tendency of its stance. As I feel, there can be too many variables, even more than the stated ones from the contingency theory. Even a small event or factor can really affects. From the theory, one of the interesting variables to me is the public relations access to dominant coalition. Public relation practitioner not only deals with the external public but also the internal decision makers. Even though how hard a practitioner try to promote an organization, the final decision is made by its dominant coalition, or the board. Hence, one of the important tasks for PR practitioners would be to enlighten dominant coalition. How to do this? I think that's why PR practitioners need to acquire expertise and to be open minded.