Türkiye’de Stratejik İletişim Alanındaki Akademik Çalışmaların Sistematik İncelemesi: Kavramsal ve Yöntemsel Eğilimler

Öz

Stratejik iletişim yaklaşımı, temelleri 2005 yılındaki ICA paneline dayanan ve 2007 yılında International Journal of Strategic Communication'ın kurulmasıyla somutlaşan süreçte, iletişim bilimlerinde yeni bir paradigmatik dönüşümün öncüsü olmuştur. Çalışma, Türkiye'de stratejik iletişim alanında yürütülen araştırmaların hangi yöntemsel yaklaşımlarla ele alındığını ve alandaki hangi araştırma eğilimlerinin öne çıktığını ortaya koymayı amaçlanmaktadır. 2015-2025 yılları arasında yayımlanan 95 akademik çalışma yarı-sistematik literatür incelemesi yöntemiyle analiz edilmiştir. PRISMA ilkeleri doğrultusunda seçilen veriler SPSS programında içerik analizi yöntemi ile analiz edilmiştir. Araştırma, stratejik iletişim konusundaki yayınların son yıllarda artış gösterdiğini fakat on yıllık dönemde dalgalı bir seyir izlediğini ortaya koymaktadır. Yayınlarda nitel araştırma yöntemlerinin ağırlıkta olduğu, nicel araştırmaların ise çok az olduğu dikkat çekmektedir. Ayrıca çalışmaların büyük çoğunluğunun (%81,1) Türkçe olması, uluslararası görünürlüğü azaltarak, atıf potansiyelini olumsuz bir şekilde etkilemektedir. Uluslararası literatürdeki ortak birikim, stratejik iletişimin disiplinleşme sürecinde bir paradigma olarak şekillendiğini ortaya koyarken, Türkiye'deki çalışmaların bu tartışma gündeminde yeterince yer almadığı görülmektedir. Türkiye'de stratejik iletişim farklı iletişim disiplinlerinin geleneksel ortak bir fonksiyonu olarak anlaşılmakta ve ayrı bir disiplin olma potansiyeli yeterince tartışılmamaktadır. Sonuç olarak, alanın Türk akademisinde kurumsallaşması için uluslararası görünürlüğün artırılması, yöntemsel çeşitliliğin sağlanması ve özgün kuramsal katkıların geliştirilmesi gerekmektedir.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Stratejik iletişim
• strateji
• yarı-sistematik literatür incelemesi
• disiplinleşme
• Türkiye

A Systematic Review of Academic Studies on Strategic Communication in Türkiye: Conceptual and Methodological Trends

Öz

The strategic communication approach, rooted in the 2005 ICA panel and formalized with the establishment of the International Journal of Strategic Communication in 2007, has pioneered a novel paradigmatic shift in communication sciences. This study aims to identify the methodological approaches and prominent research trends in strategic communication scholarship in Türkiye. Utilizing a semi-systematic literature review, the study analyzed 95 academic publications published between 2015 and 2025. Data retrieved in accordance with PRISMA guidelines were examined via content analysis using SPSS. The findings indicate that while publications on strategic communication have increased in recent years, they have exhibited a fluctuating pattern across the ten-year period. Notably, qualitative methodologies dominate the literature, whereas quantitative studies remain scarce. Furthermore, the predominance of Turkish-language publications (81.1%) limits international visibility and adversely impacts citation potential. While international literature frames strategic communication as an autonomous paradigm, scholarship in Türkiye predominantly construes it as a traditional cross-disciplinary function, leaving its potential as a distinct discipline underexplored. Consequently, fostering international visibility, enhancing methodological diversity, and developing original theoretical contributions are essential for the institutionalization of the field within Turkish academia.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Strategic communication
• strategy
• semi- systematic literature review
• disciplinary development
• Türkiye

Kaynakça

1. Aggerholm, H. K. (2018). Strategic management. In R. L. Heath & W. Johansen (Eds.), The international encyclopedia of strategic communication (pp. 1–9). Wiley. https://doi.org/10.1002/9781119010722.iesc0176
2. Akad, M. T. (2003). Strateji üzerine. Kastas Yayınları.
3. Aktaş, M. (2021). Stratejik iletişim araştırmalarında yeni yönelimler: Uluslararası literatürdeki tartışmalar üzerine bir analiz. Selçuk İletişim, 14(1), 363–382.
4. Altıntop, M., & Bak, G. (2024). Wos verilerine göre stratejik iletişim konulu akademik çalışmaların bibliyometrik analizi (1980-2024). Scientific Journal of Innovation and Social Sciences Research, 4(2), 175–201.
5. Falkheimer, J., & Heide, M. (2022). Introduction: The emergent field of strategic communication. In J. Falkheimer & M. Heide (Eds.), Research handbook on strategic communication (pp. 1–12). Edward Elgar Publishing.
6. Frandsen, F., & Johansen, W. (2022). Strategic communication: A discipline in the making? In J. Falkheimer & M. Heide (Eds.), Research handbook on strategic communication (pp. 14–32). Edward Elgar Publishing.
7. Göksun, Y. (2023). Strategic communication and policies of Türkiye. Insight Turkey, 25(1), 29–46.
8. Grunig, J. E. (2018). Strategic behavioral paradigm. In R. L. Heath & W. Johansen (Eds.), The international encyclopedia of strategic communication (pp. 1–6). Wiley. https://doi.org/10.1002/9781119010722.iesc0171

9. Gulbrandsen, I. T., & Just, S. N. (2022). From strategy to strategizing. In J. Falkheimer & M. Heide (Eds.), Research handbook on strategic communication (pp. 99–117). Edward Elgar Publishing.
10. Ha, J. H., & Boynton, L. (2014). Has crisis communication been studied using an interdisciplinary approach? A 20-year content analysis of communication journals. International Journal of Strategic Communication, 8(1), 29–44. https://doi.org/10.1080/1553118X.2013.850694
11. Hallahan, K., Holtzhausen, D., Van Ruler, B., Verčič, D., & Sriramesh, K. (2007). Defining strategic communication. International Journal of Strategic Communication, 1(1), 3–35. https://doi.org/10.1080/15531180701285244
12. Heath, R. L., & Frandsen, F. (2018). Strategy and strategizing. In R. L. Heath & W. Johansen (Eds.), The international encyclopedia of strategic communication (pp. 1–19). Wiley. https://doi.org/10.1002/9781119010722.iesc0182
13. Heath, R. L., Johansen, W., Hallahan, K., Steyn, B., Falkheimer, J., & Raupp, J. J. C. (2018). Strategic communication. In R. L. Heath & W. Johansen (Eds.), The international encyclopedia of strategic communication (pp. 1–24). Wiley. https://doi.org/10.1002/9781119010722.iesc0172
14. Heide, M., Von Platen, S., Simonsson, C., & Falkheimer, J. (2018). Expanding the scope of strategic communication: Towards a holistic understanding of organizational complexity. International Journal of Strategic Communication, 12(4), 452–468. https://doi.org/10.1080/1553118X.2018.1456434
15. Kim, S.-Y., Choi, M.-I., Reber, B. H., & Kim, D. (2014). Tracking public relations scholarship trends: Using semantic network analysis on PR Journals from 1975 to 2011. Public Relations Review, 40(1), 116–118. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pubrev.2013.11.017
16. King, C. L. (2009). Emergent communication strategies. International Journal of Strategic Communication, 4(1), 19–38. https://doi.org/10.1080/15531180903415814
17. Macnamara, J., & Gregory, A. (2018). Expanding evaluation to progress strategic communication: Beyond message tracking to open listening. International Journal of Strategic Communication, 12(4), 469–486. https://doi.org/10.1080/1553118X.2018.1450255
18. Macnamara, J., & Gregory, A. (2020). Expanding evaluation to progress strategic communication: Beyond message tracking to open listening. In Future directions of strategic communication (pp. 141–158). Routledge.
19. Marin-Rodriguez, W., Andrade-Girón, D., Lioo-Jordán, F., Zúñiga-Rojas, M., & Susanibar-Ramírez, E. (2025). Strategic communication: Analysis of its research trends. Iberoamerican Journal of Science Measurement and Communication, 5(4), 1–12.
20. Moher, D., Liberati, A., Tetzlaff, J., & Altman, D. G. (2009). Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: The PRISMA statement. BMJ, 339, Article b2535. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.b2535
21. Nothhaft, H., & Nothhaft, C. (2022). Public sphere. In J. Falkheimer & M. Heide (Eds.), Research handbook on strategic communication (pp. 133–149). Edward Elgar Publishing.
22. Nothhaft, H., Werder, K. P., Verčič, D., & Zerfass, A. (2018). Strategic communication: Reflections on an elusive concept. International Journal of Strategic Communication, 12(4), 352–366. https://doi.org/10.1080/1553118X.2018.1492412
23. Pearson, R. (1990). Ethical values or strategic values? The two faces of systems theory in public relations. Public Relations Research Annual, 2(1–4), 219–234. https://doi.org/10.1207/s1532754xjprr0201-4_10
24. Robles, J. T. (2021). Systematic review of recent literature on strategic communication: Analysis of the scientific production in Web of Science (2011–2020). In Strategic communication in context: Theoretical debates and applied research (pp. 45–66).
25. Shneider, A. M. (2009). Four stages of a scientific discipline; four types of scientist. Trends in Biochemical Sciences, 34(5), 217–223. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tibs.2009.02.002
26. Snyder, H. (2019). Literature review as a research methodology: An overview and guidelines. Journal of Business Research, 104, 333–339. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2019.07.039
27. Steyn, B. (2004). From strategy to corporate communication strategy: A conceptualisation. Journal of Communication Management, 8(2), 168–183. https://doi.org/10.1108/13632540410807637
28. Taşdemir, E., & Aslan, E. (2018). Strategic communication management in Turkey. In Practice fields in public relations: The panorama of Turkey. Gümüşhane Üniversitesi Açık Erişim. http://acikerisim.gumushane.edu.tr/xmlui/handle/20.500.12440/2870
29. Tench, R., Verhoeven, P., & Zerfass, A. (2009). Institutionalizing strategic communication in Europe – An ideal home or a mad house? Evidence from a survey in 37 countries. International Journal of Strategic Communication, 3(2), 147–164. https://doi.org/10.1080/15531180902806237
30. Tindall, N. T. J., & Holtzhausen, D. R. (2011). Toward a roles theory for strategic communication: The case of South Africa. International Journal of Strategic Communication, 5(2), 74–94. https://doi.org/10.1080/1553118X.2011.561075
31. Van Ruler, B. (2018). Communication theory: An underrated pillar on which strategic communication rests. International Journal of Strategic Communication, 12(4), 367–381. https://doi.org/10.1080/1553118X.2018.1452240
32. Verhoeven, P., Zerfass, A., & Tench, R. (2011). Strategic orientation of communication professionals in Europe. International Journal of Strategic Communication, 5(2), 95–117. https://doi.org/10.1080/1553118X.2011.561080
33. Volk, S. C. (2017). Towards comparative research in strategic communication: A systematic analysis of cross-national studies and future directions. International Journal of Strategic Communication, 11(5), 434–453. https://doi.org/10.1080/1553118X.2017.1360891
34. Volk, S. C., & Zerfass, A. (2018). Alignment: Explicating a key concept in strategic communication. International Journal of Strategic Communication, 12(4), 433–451. https://doi.org/10.1080/1553118X.2018.1452742
35. Werder, K. P., & Holtzhausen, D. (2011). Organizational structures and their relationship with communication management practices: A public relations perspective from the United States. International Journal of Strategic Communication, 5(2), 118–142. https://doi.org/10.1080/1553118X.2011.561074
36. Werder, K. P., Nothhaft, H., Verčič, D., & Zerfass, A. (2018). Strategic communication as an emerging interdisciplinary paradigm. International Journal of Strategic Communication, 12(4), 333–351. https://doi.org/10.1080/1553118X.2018.1494181
37. Yazar, F. (2023). Strateji inşasına disiplinlerarası bir yaklaşım: Kamu diplomasisi. In A. M. Zengin & F. Yazar (Eds.), İletişimde stratejik yaklaşımla (ss. 79–102). NEÜ Press.
38. Zerfass, A., Verčič, D., Nothhaft, H., & Werder, K. P. (2018). Strategic communication: Defining the field and its contribution to research and practice. International Journal of Strategic Communication, 12(4), 487–505. https://doi.org/10.1080/1553118X.2018.1493485