Internal Communication in Building Organizational Culture

and Organizational Branding of Government Institution

Shabriena Wardhani

and Dorien Kartikawangi

Student of Departement of Communication, University of Indonesia, Salemba, Jakarta, Indonesia

Lecturer of Department of Communication, University of Indonesia, Salemba, Jakarta, Indonesia

Keywords: Internal Communication, Organizational Culture, Organizational Branding.

Abstract: The nightmare of a government institutions is losing the trust of the public. At present, government institutions

are still identical with the bureaucracy, rigid, and slow performance, so that the public still has a negative

perception of the government. Building public trust and reputation should be done and can be started from

the internal of the institution. Internal communication and organizational culture are two things that can help

branding government institution known for their good performance. This research aims to examine

theoretically how internal communication can build an organizational culture and ultimately build government

institutions branding. The literature study method is used to answer research problems. The results of the

study show that internal communication contributes to the formation of organizational culture and

organizational culture can help manage the branding of government institutions. However, branding efforts

only are not enough if not helped by improving the quality of performance. Therefore, strengthening

organizational culture will be very significant towards improving individual performance in government

institutions. Internal communication influences organizational culture, and it will play a role in a company’s

reputation. So that, in the end, it will have an impact on the branding of positive government institutions.

1 INTRODUCTION

An organization, as well as an individual, has many

reasons for the communication process. To achieve

the organization's vision and mission, an interaction

process is needed, which is sometimes formulated in

a communication strategy. Facing the era of global

competition, of course, communication problems are

increasingly complex. Facing this challenge, all

organizations -including government institution-

need to build strong internal communication before

communicating with the external public.

In the government, the main focus is service, and

its role is greater because it involves public interest.

Public services can be defined as all forms of

services, both in the form of public goods and public

services which in principle are the responsibility and

carried out by government institution at the central,

regional, and within the State-Owned Enterprises or

Regionally-Owned Business Entities, in order to meet

the needs of the community and in the context of

implementing the provisions of the legislation

(Wibawa, 2010).

However, it turns out that the rights of the

community or individuals to obtain services from the

government apparatus are felt not to meet the

expectations. Even we still can hear the complaints or

critics for the government’s services. Inevitably, a

government institution’s nightmare is losing the

public’s trust. How the public will trust the

government if corruption, collusion, and nepotism

practices to bureaucratic mentality still exist?

On the other hand, according to The Global

Competitiveness Report 2018 conducted by the

World Economic Forum, Indonesia has experienced

an increase. Overall, Indonesia's Global

Competitiveness Index ranks 45th out of 140

countries, at 2017, Indonesia ranked 47th out of 135

countries. Some of benchmarking is based on

government institution. The ranking of Public Sector

Performance on 38th, the corruption perception index

ranks 80th, and corporate governance ranks 47th,

where each sector experiences a score increase

compared to 2017.

One of the benchmarks of assessment of the

Global Competitiveness Index is the ability of the

public bureaucracy to carry out its duties and

functions. The increasing of Indonesia was also due

to the large level of public trust in the government and

the improvement of public services. This public trust

506

Wardhani, S. and Kartikawangi, D.

Internal Communication in Building Organizational Culture and Organizational Branding of Government Institution.

DOI: 10.5220/0008433005060514

In Proceedings of the 2nd International Conference on Inclusive Business in the Changing World (ICIB 2019), pages 506-514

ISBN: 978-989-758-408-4

should be managed because until now, there are still

people who are complaining about poor public

services. This public trust will form an impression or

image for the government institution itself, which will

later become a reputation. It is the government's

public relations duty to build public trust and the good

reputation of institutions / organizations because

these government institutions are the face of a

country.

So, what does government institution need to do?

Government institution needs an effort to create a

government’s good reputation to garner public trust

and positive public perceptions of a government

institution. For example, public perceptions that

always consider hard to get to manage licensing,

complicated bureaucracy, and always asking for

money, need to branding the service becomes easy,

cheap, and fast so that it seeks to make a clean

government and good governance.

That branding won’t work if the government

didn't improve their performance. What the public

can see/feel is how government works and the public

will judge easily. So, the foundation of branding is

how you manage your internal institution. Changing

the public's perception of government takes times.

Bad culture of government needs changing, and the

organizational culture takes part in this.

Also, the basic thing is to equate perceptions

about the goals, vision, and mission of the

organization. Equating this perception can be done

through internal communication in the institution, the

processes of exchanging information or messages that

are sustainable can build an understanding of

institution members about the goals, vision, and

mission. Internal communication is not limited to

sharing information, but there is an element of

instilling cultural values (Sari, 2015). Internal

communication is the key to instilling an

organizational culture that will lead to the realization

of better government institution branding.

Internal communication is needed to form the

engagement of individuals in the organization that is

needed to create a shared relationship that manifests

itself in organizational culture. Organizational culture

also needs to be developed by the government in

order to build and maintain the existence of the

organization, as well as determinants of the image of

a government that can be a binder, pride, and rules to

behave, and also as the tools of improving

performance (Rajagopal, 2013). Therefore, a

government institution will be ready to provide their

services.

Also, a consistent organizational culture can

create good government branding. Based on the

above, this study was conducted with the aim of

knowing how the internal communication links with

an organizational culture so that it can help

government institution branding.

2 LITERATURE REVIEW

2.1 Internal Communication

In order to carry out their role and functions, each

section of an institution/organization need to

communicate. To get the work done, there are efforts

to deliver the task, express ideas, object ideas, ask

questions, and so on, which is done between the

employee horizontally or vertically. Communication

which exists between the sections within the

institution is what internal communication is that

involves internal parts of the institution (Setiyowati &

Salamah, 2017).

Kalla (2005) delivered that internal

communication is all integrated communication

activities, both formal and non-formal that occur at all

levels of the organization. While Deetz (2010)

explains that internal communication is the way or

process of employees in sharing information, building

relationships, and building value so that it becomes a

corporate culture. This process is a combination of

humans, processes, messages, practices, and goals.

Welch & Jackson (2007) explain that internal

communication in organizations has a purpose, as

follows:

1. Building relationships and internal commitment

between employees,

2. Provide information as clear and complete as

possible about the organization,

3. Creating awareness of organizational members

regarding the role of organizations in society,

4. Providing a means for feedback to its members.

From the internal communication objectives

above, it is clear that internal communication has a

role in mutual understanding between employees,

building the character and organizational culture, and

solidity of organizational members. The strong

internal communication will be a good step to reach a

better reputation. What government institution needs

are strengthened internal communication to

understand each job or responsibility to give excellent

services.

2.2 Organizational Culture

Organizational culture is an element that acts as a

frame of reference in work (Browaeys & Price, 2015).

Internal Communication in Building Organizational Culture and Organizational Branding of Government Institution

507

Establishment of organizational culture is important

because according to Susanto (1997), corporate

culture as values that guide human resources to deal

with external problems and efforts to adjust

integration into the company so that each member of

the organization must understand the existing values

and how they must act or behave.

Edgar H. Schein (1992) in his book

"Organizational Culture and Leadership" states that

culture is a pattern of basic assumptions that are

created, discovered, or developed by certain groups

as learning to overcome the external adaptation

problem and official internal integration that is

carried out and therefore taught to new members as

the right way to understand, think, and feel related to

these problems.

Culture is a combination of beliefs and behaviors

that guide how a company’s employees behave. A

company's culture is often reflected in its dress code,

business hours, office setup, employee benefits,

turnover, hiring decisions, evaluation process, client

service, client satisfaction and every other aspect of

operations.

There’s a strong relationship between

organizational culture and organizational

performance (Kotter & Heskett, 1997), as described

as follows:

1. Corporate culture can have a significant impact

on long-term economic performance.

2. The corporate culture may be a factor that is

even more important in determining the success

or failure of a company in the coming decade.

3. The corporate culture that inhibits long-term

financial performance is quite a lot.

4. Although it is difficult to change, corporate

culture can be made to improve performance.

Robert Kreitner and Angelo Kinicki (2001) reveal

the functions of organizational culture as follows:

1. Giving members organizational identity,

making the company recognized as an

innovative company by developing new

products. Institutional identity shows a

characteristic that distinguishes from other

institutions that have different distinctive

characteristics.

2. Facilitating collective commitment, the

company can make its employees proud to be a

part of it.

3. Increasing social system stability so that the

work environment is perceived as positive and

reinforced, conflict and change can be managed

effectively.

4. Establish behavior by helping members realize

their environment.

So with this explanation, it is clear that

organizational culture contributes to the

organization's brand.

2.3 Organizational/Corporate Branding

According to Riel and Balmer (Harris & Chernatony,

2001), corporate branding in brand management

(brand management) requires a holistic approach, so

that all members of the organization behave in

accordance with the brand identity (brand identity).

To integrate these variables, Hatch & Schultz (2001)

associate corporate branding with VCI models,

namely strategic vision, organizational culture, and

corporate image. Hatch & Schultz (2001) say that a

corporate brand is a combination of these three things.

Corporate brands are defined by Knox and

Bickerton (2003) as "the visual, verbal, and

behavioral expression of an organization's unique

business model". According to Hatch and Schultz

(2001), branding does not only contribute to shaping

the image of the organization in the eyes of

consumers, but also all stakeholders. In addition to

managing it differently from product brands,

managing corporate brands should align the strategic

vision, culture, and image of the company (Hatch &

Schultz, 2008).

Corporate brands need to be managed about the

interplay between vision, culture, and image.

Achieving this requires effective dialogue between

top management, external stakeholders, and members

of the organizational culture. Effective corporate

branding will come with dedication to honest self-

assessment, responsive attitudes toward stakeholders,

and respect for the values that attract all parties to the

corporation (Hatch & Schultz, 2001).

3 RESEARCH METHODOLOGY

This research uses qualitative research approach. The

author uses a type of literature study by exploring

previous studies and concepts that are relevant to the

problems that must be answered in this study.

Through the study of literature, the authors describe

the concepts of internal communication,

organizational culture, and organizational branding

separately. After that, the authors explain the

relevance of each concept such as; the relationship

between internal communication with organizational

culture, organizational culture with organizational

branding, organizational branding with internal

communication, to the relevance of the whole

concept. The correlation between these concepts is

ICIB 2019 - The 2nd International Conference on Inclusive Business in the Changing World

508

based on the search results of various literature such

as journals, books, internet, and other articles. As a

final step, the author connects attributes that are

derived theoretically to be applied in a government

institution.

4 RESULT

This study aims to explain how internal

communication can build an organizational culture

and realize organizational branding. The limited

research that discusses the three topics in one study

makes researchers need to break down one by one the

topic and correlate the topics. To get a complete

picture of the correlation between internal

communication, organizational culture, and

organizational branding, the authors trace previous

research that links these problems one by one.

4.1 Relationship between Internal

Communication and

Organizational Culture

The organizational culture was initiated by the leader

of the organization. Managers or senior members of

organizational groups communicate their core values

continuously in daily conversation or through special

rituals. This communication process encourages new

members to take over the core values of the

organizational culture to be applied later in behavior

(Tika, 2006).

Internal communication plays a role in building

organizational culture as well as the process of

forming an organizational culture in this diagram.

The diagram below explains that the founder's

philosophy, which is the values of top management,

must be socialized within the organization so that it

becomes an organizational culture. Top management

actions have a big impact on organizational culture.

Their speech and behavior in carrying out norms are

very influential on members of the organization

(Tika, 2006). The socialization process requires

effective internal communication to obtain the same

understanding by members of the organization. This

socialization is intended so that employees can adjust

to organizational culture.

Figure 1: How internal communication plays a role in

building organizational culture, Robbins (2005).

Research by Dian Puspita Sari (2015) with her

thesis titled Internal Communication in Building

Organizational Culture to Create Employee

Engagement states that internal communication has

an important role in building organizational culture

through the organization's vision and mission,

strategic direction, sharing values, and empowerment

within the organization. This is reinforced by Smith

(2008) which states that internal communication has

an important role in directing and shaping the

behavior of members of the organization so that

compact teamwork can be formed and can be directed

to efficient organizational objectives, with internal

communication strategies organization goals.

Effective communication encourages a positive

culture and is essential to the way employees work.

Ineffective communication, employees can be guided

to match steps with the corporate culture.

4.2 Relationship between

Organizational Culture and

Organizational Branding

The formed organizational culture has an important

role in the organization to ensure that all members of

the organization have the same understanding of the

vision and mission. This organizational culture is

about to shape the character of an organization that

can be differentiated from one organization to

another. This can also be the "weapon" of the

organization in highlighting its superiority among

other organizations. Aaker (Hatch & Schultz, 2003)

argues that when brand-values are consistent with

organizational culture and organizational values, all

of them can create credibility in the eyes of

stakeholders.

Ruth Kismie's Thesis on the Implementation of

the Corporate Branding Strategy (Analysis of the

Vision, Culture, Image) Model of the Pertamina

Transformation Program 2006-2016 illustrates the

relationship between corporate culture and corporate

brand PT Pertamina (Persero) qualitatively. As the

triangle VCI Hatch & Schultz (2001) which explains

that corporate branding is a link between strategic

vision, organizational culture, and corporate image.

Internal Communication in Building Organizational Culture and Organizational Branding of Government Institution

509

These three elements form the basis of

organizational branding and are defined as: (1)

Strategic vision - the central idea behind the company

that embodies and expresses the aspirations of top

management for what the company will achieve in the

future. (2) Organizational culture - internal values,

beliefs and basic assumptions that embody the

company's heritage and communicate its meaning to

its members; culture manifests itself in the way

employees feel at all levels about the company they

work for. (3) Company image - the view of the

organization developed by its stakeholders; the

overall impression of the company in the outside

world includes the views of customers, shareholders,

the media, the general public, and so on. Thus,

organizational culture is one of the factors that

influence organizational branding.

To support organizational branding, good

performance of the organization is needed. There are

many studies that state that organizational culture

influences organizational performance too. One of

them is research by Kim Jean Lee, S., & Yu, K.

(2004). They stated that the cultural strength of

organizations was related to organizational

performance in some cases. Also, the cultural

elements which distinguish companies from each

other were also found to be related to performance.

4.3 Relationship between Internal

Communication and

Organizational Branding

In Yani Sikartika's Thesis (2005), titled

Implementation of Internal Communication Strategy

in Corporate Branding, it is explained that the name

of an institution/company/organization must be

known to the public. However, it would be better if it

was known by employees or internal parties first, so

that communicating to the external would be stronger.

The firm culture that is closely related to management

policies in public, the quality of goods and or services

and employees is a factor that influences the

company's image. This explains that employees hold

an important role in the company's image. In this case,

management needs to plan consistent communication

so that the name and corporate image can be

understood internally by using messages, logos, and

objectives of communication, then communicating

the brand value to the company internally (Caywood,

1997).

Internal communication refers to the way

founders help their employees to achieve individual

and organizational goals, but also how to respond to

organizational changes, coordinate organizational

activities and engage in almost all relevant

organizational behavior (Matteson, 1999). Internal

communication takes place in various channels,

including formal and informal, written or oral, or

verbal and non-verbal communication.

In essence, internal communication plays an

important role in the transfer and sharing of

information in the organization. Decisions about

organizational culture or the implementation of

branding will not work if it is not supported by

effective internal communication.

4.4 Relationship between Internal

Communication, Organizational

Culture, and Organizational

Branding

The definition of corporate branding is not much

different from the branding of government

institutions, so on several occasions, this research the

author considers corporate branding to be the

branding of government institutions. Biraghi &

Gambetti Research (2015) under the title Corporate

Branding: Where are we? A systematic

communication-based inquiry aims to explore

significant relationships between important themes

related to Corporate Branding by adopting a

communication perspective.

Figure 2: The conceptual framework at the basis of

corporate branding literature systematic content analysis.

According to the picture above, communication

appears as an integrative agent, which builds

semantic relationships between the company's

intangible assets such as identity, image, culture, and

reputation. Communication represents the central

dimension of corporate branding strategies that must

be understood as holistic, dialogical, and interactive.

Communication is considered an important element

that maintains and harmonizes the four main assets of

ICIB 2019 - The 2nd International Conference on Inclusive Business in the Changing World

510

the corporate branding process (Biraghi & Gambetti,

2015).

The emergence of the term corporate branding can

be ascribed to the first shift in the perspective of

branding strategies from product-centric to the entire

organization, and For this reason, corporate brands

are defined as visual, verbal, and organizational

behavior based on communication efforts aimed at

protecting and supporting a plurality of product

brands. As soon as corporate branding concepts

emerge in the business strategy literature (Balmer

1995; de Chernatony 2001; Balmer et al. 2009), there

is a second shift that drives debate in a new direction:

management experts argue that corporate branding

should not be understood merely as an advanced

marketing perspective, rather, it must be considered a

model of corporate governance and managerial effort

that informs the company's entire corporate strategy

(Balmer 1995, 2005; Hatch and Schultz 2001),

organizational culture, mission, and vision, ultimately

redefining the company's business model (Gotsi and

Andriopoulos 2008; Balmer and Thomson 2009).

This perspective introduces new concepts into

corporate brand construction, which now encompass

strategic organizational dimensions such as corporate

values, mission, vision, and culture (Urde, 2003).

Recent research introduces the third shift from a

company-focused perspective to more focused on

stakeholders, highlighting that corporate branding

does not only originate from the organization; but

rather emerges from the meeting between the

organization and the expectations of its stakeholders

through ongoing dialogue about their vision, goals,

needs, and plans. All of these practices are intended

to support the collaborative production of a brand,

where strategic vision, organizational culture, and

company reputation are harmonized and linked

together to respond to stakeholder expectations,

especially in terms of good corporate citizenship

behavior (Biraghi & Gambetti, 2015).

Meanwhile, Rode and Vallaster (2005) in their

study "Corporate Branding for Start-ups: The Crucial

Role of Entrepreneurs" presented an analysis of the

development of corporate branding in the early phase

of start-ups involving corporate culture, corporate

behavior, corporate design, and corporate

communication.

From the picture below can be seen that to get to

corporate branding, several compositions are needed.

Corporate identity is conceptualized as a summary of

corporate culture, company design, corporate

behavior, and corporate communication. Corporate

culture is the core of corporate identity. In a corporate

culture, a mission statement is summarized, covering

the core values for a company and hence provides the

main guidelines for all activities and managerial

decisions. Corporate culture plays a role in

disseminating information about behavioral values in

the organization.

Figure 3: The conceptual framework at the basis of

corporate branding literature systematic content analysis.

The company's design covers all visual aspects of

the company's brand, for example, slogans, jingles,

and characters. Company design must be consistent

with the contents of the mission statement and with

all other dimensions of corporate identity to support

coherent corporate branding.

Lingenfelder and Spitzer (Rode & Christine,

2005) said that company behavior refers to how the

human resource process is managed along the lines of

corporate identity, including the process of recruiting,

empowering, and supporting employees. Company

behavior must be consistent with company values and

visual expression and internal communication.

Corporate communication may be the most

complex element of corporate identity. Its interactive

nature with all the other elements shown above, and

with the company's external audience makes clear

differentiation difficult (Hatch and Schultz, 1997).

Internal communication refers to the way founders

help their employees to achieve individual and

organizational goals, also how to respond to

organizational changes, coordinate organizational

activities, and engage in almost all relevant

organizational behavior. Internal communication

takes place in various channels, including formal and

informal, written or oral, or verbal and non-verbal

communication.

The corporate/organization’s image is built

through various ways of interacting with the

company's audience. This includes traditional tools

Internal Communication in Building Organizational Culture and Organizational Branding of Government Institution

511

such as external communication. Trust in reflected

content depends on the consistency and transparency

of corporate identity. Corporate brand as the number

of company identity and company image - refers to

the unique characteristics of the organization that are

reinforced at each point of contact with consumers or

other stakeholders (Aaker & Joachimsthaler, 2000).

5 DISCUSSION

So far, many have thought that the success of the

company or organization is because the business is

running smoothly, organizational goals are achieved,

or even made a lot of profits. Officials or employees

have not been able to survive with this view because

there are other things that also greatly affect

organizational performance, which so far has

received little attention, namely organizational

culture. This applies to the government sector in

Indonesia.

Governance is essentially a service to the

community and creates conditions that allow each

member of the community to develop their abilities

and creativity to achieve common goals. The task

borne by this government is not easy, serving all

Indonesian people, as a regulator, but the

performance shown is not so good enough. The

bureaucratic system makes services by the

government have procedures that are convoluted,

slow, and money oriented. Indeed, not all government

institution is like that. At present, the governance

system in Indonesia has begun to improve, and there

is an increase in the ranking of The Global

Competitiveness Report 2018 in which the

government sector is an assessment variable.

However, the stigma of the community is still thick

with the bad habits of a government institution. Such

a government image causes demands on government

institution to be more effective, efficient, transparent,

responsive, and able to adapt.

To change the whole negative view of a

government institution, branding efforts are needed

for these government institution as explained earlier

that before bringing a brand to an external, there is a

need for a good, effective, and efficient internal

communication system. This internal communication

process can equalize the perceptions of members of

the institution regarding the institution's duties,

functions, vision, and mission so that a solid team can

be found.

This information exchange in internal

communication forms a shared knowledge, and the

creation of habits in an organization forms an

organizational culture. Most government institutions

are driven not by their vision and mission, but by

formal regulations. The same activities that are

carried out repeatedly can become routines that

receive support from all members and will change

into culture. This is why organizational culture plays

an important role in the image of government

institutions.

Organizational culture is not solely for the internal

interests of the organization, but also the main

concern for the government because of negative

public perceptions of bureaucratic culture.

Organizational culture can be an important element

for an organization to do branding. The organization's

branding will expose the organization and its

member's too much greater supervision. This means

that organizational behavior becomes visible, so the

organization becomes more transparent than before.

This is the importance of a healthy organizational

culture so that the impressions displayed about

government institution are good too.

Internal communication and mature

organizational culture will certainly have an impact

on individuals in the organization, given the

organizational culture guiding members to behave in

achieving their goals. If the organizational culture is

flexible and follows the development of the times,

members of these organizations usually participate in

being flexible, relaxed, but still good in performance

and tend to be open. Conversely, if the organizational

culture is too rigid, hierarchical, and bureaucratic, its

members will tend to be rigid, unfriendly, and closed.

Members of this organization can be a branding tool

for the organization. Every member of the

organization is the representative of the organization.

Bringing a brand to the public cannot be done if it

only relies on a communication approach, but also

needs to be supported by good organizational

performance. Keep in mind, support for

organizational culture as a determining factor in

improving organizational performance.

And now, the government is also increasingly

aware of the importance of communicating its

performance to the public, whether in the form of

achievement or clarification of an event. It is not

uncommon for government officials to have social

media channels to document and publish their

activities so that they are known to the public, this is

done based on transparency while communicating the

brand of government institutions to the public. In the

end, the public learned about the government's

performance and formed perceptions of government

institutions.

ICIB 2019 - The 2nd International Conference on Inclusive Business in the Changing World

512

For example, the Ministry of Stated Owned

Enterprises since 2018 has released the Spirit of

Millennials program. Spirit of Millennials is a

movement designed to invite millennial generations

working in state-owned enterprises to contribute to

building a better Indonesia, also more adaptive and

innovative during the rapid development of digital

technology. The reason is that SOEs have been

considered difficult to change and too bureaucratic in

facing business competition.

Spirit of Millennials also takes place on social

media platforms. Content and topics are things that

attract millennial interest as the core of the

movement. It was intended to build public brand

awareness of state-owned companies so that the

creation of a good image of state-owned companies,

while rejecting the impression that state-owned

companies move slowly. With this program, the

public will believe that SOEs are dynamic, able to

keep up with the movements of the times.

Another example came from the Central Java

Provincial Government. The bad stigma of service to

the community must be eliminated by taking concrete

actions that can reform the bureaucracy. One of the

real steps is to force the entire ranks of the Central

Java Provincial Government to open all channels of

information and use social media to do public

services. This is a differential factor or differentiating

factor in branding services with only three words,

easy, cheap, fast. This easy, inexpensive, fast

branding is to be voiced to the district / city

governments in Central Java, so that services to the

community can be much better and most importantly,

people's perceptions that always take care of licensing

are difficult, the bureaucracy is complicated, and

always asks for money eliminated by making a clean

government and good governance.

Internal communication influences a company’s

corporate culture, which then, plays a role in a

company’s brand reputation. People develop their

perceptions of a company not simply from press

releases and ads. Employees who are the ‘face’ of a

business, are impacted by what they see and hear

coming through the organization, and certainly not

just in a formal way. Ultimately, they are the

individuals who paint the perception of the company.

Whether we realize it or not, the use of brands in a

product/service can have a large impact on the

progress of a project. More than that, branding a

government institution can maintain a greater social

impact, strengthen identity, and mobilize support so

that its vision and mission will continue.

6 CONCLUSION

Internal communication, organizational culture, and

organizational branding are a unity that influences

each other. Starting from internal communication in a

government institution that are effective and efficient

can build a shared understanding of the organization's

vision and mission. Internal communication has a

contribution in shaping the organizational culture that

will affect the branding of a government institution.

Actually, the branding of an organization is not only

shaped by organizational culture. There are other

factors that influence branding, such as the vision and

image of the organization itself. But in the context of

public services from a government institution,

organizational culture is very important because

organizational culture can influence performance,

especially in the service sector so that it can be easily

assessed by the community.

Public assessments need to be taken into account

and cannot be underestimated by the government.

The reputation of a bad government agency is one

reason that is still considered to hold a bad

bureaucratic culture. At least, by strengthening

organizational culture within each institution, it can

create good performance. Branding itself is an effort

to create a reputation, but the public is not going to

accept it even though the branding efforts have been

well implemented, but the performance of the

government institution themselves still has not

increased.

Government institution can be assessed by the

public because the services provided cover many

public interests. Even though there are those who are

not trying to make a profit, the agency needs to do

branding to achieve public trust and the existence of

the institution itself.

REFERENCES

Aaker, D., & Joachimsthaler, E. (2000). Brand Leadership.

New York: The Free Press.

Balmer, J. M. (1995). Corporate Branding and

Connoisseurship. Journal of General Management 21

(1), 24-26.

Balmer, J. M., & Thomson, I. (2009). The Shared

Management and Ownership of Corporate Brands.

Journal of General Management 34(4), 15-37.

Biraghi, S., & Gambetti, R. C. (2015). Corporate Branding:

Where Are We? A Systematic Communication-Based

Inquiry. Journal of Marketing Communications.

Browaeys, M.-J., & Price, R. (2015). Understanding Cross-

Cultural Management, Third Edition. Edinburgh Gate:

Pearson Education Limited.

Internal Communication in Building Organizational Culture and Organizational Branding of Government Institution

513

Caywood, C. L. (1997). The Handbook of Strategic Public

Relations & Integrated Communications. New York:

McGraw-Hill.

Gotsi, M., & Andriopoulos, C. (2008). Corporate

Rebranding: Is Cultural Alignment the Weakest Link?

Management Decision 46(1), 46-57.

Graham, J. R., Harvey, C. R., Popadak, J., & Rajgopal, S.

(2017). Corporate Culture: Evidence From The Field.

NBER Working Paper Series, 5-17.

Harris, F., & Chernatony, L. D. (2001). Corporate Branding

and Corporate Brand Performance. European Journal

of Marketing, 35.

Hatch, M. J., & Schultz, M. (2001). Bringing the

Corporation Into Corporate Branding. European

Journal of Marketing Vol. 37 No.7/8, 1041-1064.

Hatch, M. J., & Schultz, M. (2003). Bringing the

corporation into corporate branding. European Journal

of Marketing, Vol. 37 Issue: 7/8, 1041-1064.

Hatch, M., & M, S. (1997). Relations between

organizational culture, identity, and image. European

Journal of Marketing, 35, 441-456.

Hatch, M., & Schultz, M. (2001). Are the Strategic Stars

Aligned for Your Corporate Brand? Harvard Business

Review 79(2), 128-134.

Hatch, M., & Schultz, M. (2008). Taking Brand Initiative:

How Companies Can Align Strategy, Culture, and

Identity through Corporate Branding? San Francisco:

Jossey-Bass.

Kalla, H. K. (2005). Integrated Internal Communications:

A Multidisciplinary Perspective. Corporate Commu

nications: An International Journal, Vol. 10 No.4.

Kh, H. J. (2018, August 21). Branding dengan Pembeda.

Retrieved January 30, 2019, from https://jaten

gprov.go.id/publik/branding-dengan-pembeda/

Kim Jean Lee, S., & Yu, K. (2004). Corporate culture and

organizational performance. Journal of Managerial

Psychology, 19(4), 340-359.

Kismie, R. (2016). Implementasi Strategi Corporate

Branding (Analisis Model Vision, Culture, Image pada

Program Transformasi PERTAMINA 2006-2016).

Jakarta: FISIP UI.

Kotter, J. P., & Heskett, J. L. (1997). Corporate Culture &

Performance (Benyamin Molan, Penerjemah). Jakarta:

Prenhallindo.

Kreitner, R., & Kinicki, A. (2001). Organizational

Behavior, Fifth Edition. Irwin McGraw-Hill.

Matteson, M. T. (1999). Organizational Behavior and

Management (5th Ed.). New York: McGraw Hill.

Rode, V., & Christine, V. (2005). Corporate Branding for

Start-ups: The Crucial Role of Entrepreneurs.

Corporate Reputation Review Vol.8 No.2, 121-135.

S., K., & D, B. (2003). The Six Conventions of Corporate

Branding. European Journal of Marketing, Volume 37,

numbers 7-8, 998-1016.

Sari, D. P. (2015). Komunikasi Internal Dalam Membangun

Budaya Organisasi Untuk Mewujudkan Employee

Engagement (Studi Kasus: PT Penjaminan Infrastruktur

Indonesia). Tesis UI.

Sari, D. P. (2015). Komunikasi Internal Dalam Membangun

Budaya Untuk Mewujudkan Employee Engagement

(Studi Kasus: PT Penjaminan Infrastruktur Indonesia).

Jakarta: FISIP UI.

Schein, E. H. (1992). Organizational Culture and

Leadership. San Fransisco: Jossey Bass.

Setiyowati, D., & Salamah, U. (2017). Internal

Organizational Communication in State-Owned

Enterprise. 1st Indo IGCC (pp. 923-938). Depok: Dept.

of Communication, UI.

Sikartika, Y. (2005). Implementasi Strategi Komunikasi

Internal dalam Corporate Branding. Jakarta: FISIP UI.

Susanto, A. (1997). Budaya Perusahaan: Seri Manajemen

dan Persaingan Bisnis, cetakan pertama. Jakarta: Elex

Media Komputindo.

Tika, P. (2006). Budaya Organisasi Dan Peningkatan

Kinerja Perusahaan. Jakarta: PT Bumi Aksara.

Urde, M. (2003). Core Value Based Corporate Brand

Building. European Journal of Marketing 37 (7/8),

1017-1040.

Welch, M., & Jackson, P. R. (2007). Rethinking Internal

Communication: Dimensions and Definitions.

Corporate Communications: An International Review,

vol. 12/2.

Wibawa, H. (2010). Pengawasan Ombudsman Terhadap

Penyelenggara Negara dan Pemerintahan (Studi

Perbandingan Dengan Pengawasan PERATUN).

Semarang: UNDIP.

ICIB 2019 - The 2nd International Conference on Inclusive Business in the Changing World

514