Public Opinion and Impression Management in the Communication of Performance During the Second Iraq War

Although studies show that organizations engaged in controversial actions often aim to minimize the release of threatening information, scholars know relatively little about what may prompt organizations to increase transparency in these situations. In this study, we focus on support from public opinion as a condition that may influence the disclosure of sensitive performance information to the public. Using the second Iraq War as an empirical context, we focus on the extent to which public officials—Pentagon spokespersons—release and frame information about war performance. This outcome is critical because the way in which organizations communicate their performance to outsiders has often been regarded as a key defensive impression management tactic. We hypothesize that high public support for the war will increase the likelihood that Pentagon officials release information about sensitive combat performance indicators in their press briefings and identify contingencies, such as adversity and organizational spokespersons’ power, that moderate this relationship. We also explore whether high public support decreases the strategic use of alternate performance frames that emphasize metrics that signal progress toward a desirable end state. Using a unique data set based on the coding of press briefings, public opinion data, and other public sources, we find support for several of our hypotheses. We discuss implications for understanding the relationship between public opinion and impression management and highlight the importance of extending this research to nongovernmental organizations.