Thinking about Strategy: Understanding the Four Modes of Public Relations Strategizing
In multiple job applications and in a couple of interviews, I have been asked about my approach to PR strategy. And, while my answers have been fairly consistent, I realized that I do have variety in my strategy(ies). So, it got me thinking about why as well as how I truly approach PR strategy. Turns out, I don’t have just one approach; it’s multifaceted and varied. But, in PR, the common perspective is to have a singular approach to strategy. Am I doing this wrong? Or, is there more to it?
PR has long been discussed as a strategic management activity, with scholars from Coombs & Holladay to Tam et al. emphasizing its integral role in shaping organizational outcomes. In essence, PR isn’t just about managing communications or handling crises — it’s a strategic practice (or practices — more on this later) that influences both the present and future direction of an organization. Yet, the question arises: how exactly do we "do" strategy in PR? This is where Rickard Andersson’s framework on strategizing in PR becomes particularly valuable.
Andersson contends that strategizing is a “black box concept ”— something that we engage in routinely yet often fail to analyze or dissect. He introduces a framework with four distinct modes of strategizing in PR: absorbed strategizing, deliberate strategizing, deliberative strategizing, and abstract strategizing. While many of us in the field may instinctively "just do" strategy, recognizing and understanding these different modes can enhance our approach, whether for our organizations or clients.
Absorbed Strategizing
Absorbed strategizing is the primary mode of strategizing during which PR professionals, managers, and employees carry out their day-to-day activities without consciously reflecting on the strategy behind them. It’s characterized by routine, habitual actions, and responses, where practitioners are deeply immersed in their work. This mode isn’t about mindless repetition — it’s more akin to a state of "flow," as described by Dreyfus (1993), where actions unfold seamlessly in response to the environment.
In absorbed strategizing, practitioners rely on their experience, intuition, and understanding of the situation at hand to make decisions, often without explicitly thinking about the strategy behind those decisions. It’s not that strategy is absent; rather, it’s embedded in the process and becomes a natural part of how we navigate challenges. This mode varies in degree — it can be more or less intuitive, depending on the complexity of the task or the environment. At its best, absorbed strategizing allows us to respond to situations quickly and effectively, drawing on a deep, tacit understanding of our work and surroundings.
Deliberate Strategizing
Deliberate strategizing occurs when PR professionals move beyond routine actions and consciously shift their focus to the task at hand. In this mode, things, objects, and people are no longer seen simply as tools to achieve a goal ("something-in-order-to"). Instead, they become more significant and “unavailable” in the sense that they require practitioners to pause and carefully consider their actions. This shift forces practitioners to enter a deliberate mode of strategizing, where they actively pay attention to what they are doing.
This mode often emerges when PR professionals encounter disturbances or temporary breakdowns—situations that disrupt the usual flow of work and require conscious thought and decision-making. For example, a sudden crisis, an unexpected media inquiry, or a shift in organizational priorities might push practitioners to momentarily step back and reassess their approach. Rather than relying on intuition or routine, they must engage in structured planning, analysis, and problem-solving.
In deliberate strategizing, the focus is on careful assessment, goal-setting, and aligning actions with broader organizational objectives. It is particularly critical in complex or high-stakes situations, such as managing a communications campaign or responding to a crisis. Practitioners take the time to assess the disturbance, identify the best course of action, and adapt their strategy accordingly. While deliberate strategizing requires more time and effort, it ensures that actions are purposeful and well thought out, particularly when clarity and direction are needed.
In essence, deliberate strategizing is the process of actively reorienting oneself when the usual flow of work is interrupted, and requires careful attention to both immediate needs and long-term objectives. It’s methodical, intentional, and provides the structure necessary to navigate disturbances effectively.
Deliberative Strategizing
Deliberative strategizing comes into play when the breakdown or disturbance is more extreme and requires not just attention but a complete reevaluation of the situation (e.g. when a public relations campaign exceeds its budget). These situations force PR professionals to stop their activities altogether and engage in deeper reflection, often with others involved in the decision-making process.
Unlike deliberate strategizing, which is focused on structured decision-making to address immediate challenges, deliberative strategizing involves practitioners stepping back to consider how to resolve the current breakdown and reflect on past actions and future strategies. In this mode, PR professionals think critically about how their actions align with the overall strategy, how they can adjust plans, and how they might communicate their revised approach to stakeholders.
What distinguishes deliberative strategizing from the previous modes is its inherently communicative nature. Practitioners do not work alone in this mode; they actively engage with others, discussing the issue, sharing perspectives, and working together to make sense of the situation. This collaborative process of reflection and discussion is essential for determining the next steps and ensuring that the intended strategy is still achievable.
In contrast to absorbed and deliberate strategizing, which may not always involve extensive verbal communication, deliberative strategizing requires ongoing dialogue, where practitioners reassess their actions and collectively decide how to navigate the crisis. It’s a social and reflective mode of strategizing that emphasizes collaboration, making it particularly effective when issues require input from multiple stakeholders and a more thoughtful, coordinated response.
Abstract Strategizing
Abstract strategizing is characterized by stepping back from day-to-day operations to engage in high-level reflection and strategic planning. Unlike absorbed and deliberate strategizing, where practitioners are immersed in immediate tasks, abstract strategizing focuses on broader, long-term goals. In this mode, PR professionals no longer view activities as simply “things-in-order-to” achieve immediate objectives. Instead, they consider the overarching purpose of their actions, reflecting on the broader strategic vision and adjusting plans accordingly.
This mode is similar to Botan’s concept of grand-level and strategy-level decision-making, where the focus shifts from operational concerns to higher-level strategy formulation. While abstract strategizing is informed by everyday activities, it is distinct because it involves taking a step back from these tasks to think critically about the long-term direction. It might involve revising or adjusting an articulated strategy or discussing how current practices align with broader organizational goals. For example, when revisiting the PR strategy for a brand’s image, practitioners might look at the long-term vision for the organization and its role in society, considering how public relations efforts can support or redefine that vision.
What sets abstract strategizing apart from deliberative strategizing is its detachment from immediate operational concerns. In deliberative strategizing, practitioners focus on resolving current breakdowns or crises, often through collaborative decision-making. In contrast, abstract strategizing is more about reflecting on the bigger picture, considering the "ends" of the social practices — whether it’s business, PR, CSR, or any other organizational practice. It involves reflecting on the purpose behind these activities and ensuring that the strategy aligns with broader organizational values and long-term goals.
Despite being removed from day-to-day operations, abstract strategizing is still deeply rooted in the social practices carried out by practitioners. These practices provide the context and possibilities for action. It is not pure contemplation or theoretical musings; it is an active form of reflection aimed at ensuring strategic coherence and alignment with larger organizational aims. Essentially, abstract strategizing is the mode where PR professionals evaluate, refine, and articulate strategies that will guide their actions in the future, helping to ensure that their long-term vision remains aligned with the evolving needs of the organization and its stakeholders.
The Integration of PR and Strategy
Andersson positions PR as an “integrative social practice,” highlighting how PR functions are intertwined with overall strategic decision-making. He acknowledges that PR is not a monolithic practice but a collection of practices that have evolved significantly in the past few decades. PR strategy, therefore, is not just about creating a communication plan; it’s about understanding how PR activities influence — and are influenced by — broader organizational goals.
Andersson also challenges the traditional view of strategizing as a binary process: strategizing versus non-strategizing. Instead, he proposes thinking of strategizing in degrees, acknowledging that PR professionals engage in both deliberate and non-deliberate modes of strategizing. Non-deliberative strategizing, as Andersson explains, involves more intuitive, reactive decisions, akin to Heidegger’s concept of “non-deliberative coping.” In this mode, PR professionals are deeply involved in the situation, adapting as needed, and making decisions in real time without consciously reflecting on them as “strategic.”
Consider this example from Andersson: “While writing a press release might involve extensive non-deliberate coping for an expert public relations consultant on one occasion in the sense that the consultant does much of the writing by routine and habit, a press release might on another occasion be one the most significant activities for the consultant’s client, demanding that the expert consultant is in a deliberate mode for most of the time while writing to think through the formulations carefully.”
If we take this into account and by breaking down strategizing into the aforementioned four modes, PR professionals gain a more nuanced understanding of their work. We often operate in a mix of these modes, depending on the situation at hand. Recognizing these different modes not only enhances our strategic thinking but also makes us more adaptable, responsive, and aligned with the broader goals of the organizations we represent.
PR is not just a reactive or tactical function — it’s a strategic set of practices that shapes the long-term direction of an organization. Whether absorbed, deliberate, deliberative, or abstract, each mode of strategizing plays a critical role in how we manage communication, reputation, and organizational success. Understanding the interplay between these modes can elevate our approach to PR strategy and ultimately make us more effective in the dynamic, fast-paced world of public relations.