What if public relations started from the question, “what if”?

By Ana Adi and Thomas Stoeckle

Earlier this year, we asked Strategic readers to reconsider what PR should be and do. We argued then that ethical codes and role typologies have not kept pace with the complexity of our work. We suggested a shift: from organizational function to social function, from persuasion-as-service to persuasion-with-responsibility. We pointed to PR’s place in a superwicked world—one in which solutions often create new problems, and legacies matter more than outputs.

Now we return—not with answers, but with a framework.

Introducing the What if Framework

At the heart of our recently published model in the Public Relations Review lies a simple question with complex consequences: What if? What if PR practitioners asked this regularly—not rhetorically, but structurally, reflexively, and dialogically? What if impact was not something measured after-the-fact but designed into the communicative loops we build? What if, instead of following the deterministic managerial logic of ‘if then’, we apply the reflexive, contingent logic of ‘what if’? 

The What if framework offers a scaffold for navigating this complexity. It does not promise clarity. It promises coherence. It does not offer certainty. It invites adaptation.

Theory of Change in a Polycrisis

Jim Macnamara has long been advocating for PR communication planning to start at the end, with the change and impact desired. Our framework starts there, with change, but unlike Macnamara we don’t formulate it as the change we want to influence but rather with change we might and could contribute to – not to meet ROI and accountability requirements, satisfy funders or checkboxes, but to foreground intent. What change are we trying to make, for whom, and with whom? What assumptions do we hold about causality, desirability, and responsibility?

In our experience, few campaigns articulate this explicitly. Even fewer revisit it.

The What if framework makes this explicit. And then it asks: What if we’re wrong?

Dialogic Loops for Strategic Adaptation

Built into the model are also dialogic loops—opportunities to confront bias, surface blind spots, and test assumptions with those who will live with the consequences of our work. This is not just inclusive communication. It is communicative inclusion. For too long we critiqued two-way symmetry as an unrealistic demand on communication practitioners working in multi-stakeholder environments. For too long, we declared dialogue as impossible when its desirable outcome was already decided. There’s a difference between dialogue and dialogic, as Michael Kent long argued, so we’ve included the practical and realistic solution: dialogic loops.  

Dialogic loops are forms of communication between organizations and its publics (and/or stakeholders) grounded in inquiry, feedback, direct communication, open channels. These loops enable quicker strategic pivots, yes. But more importantly, they allow for ethical recalibration. Not all unintended consequences can be foreseen. But many can be surfaced—if we listen, early and often.

AI to think differently not to tell you what to do

Generative AI (genAI), in our view, has a critical role to play in making dialogic loops work in the interest and to the benefit of all involved parties. However, our concept of genAI in PR differs from the mainstream view where it is applied mainly to streamline workflows: to write, to code, to analyze at scale. 

We suggest it should be used to reflect instead. In our pilot proposal, AI-supported journaling is meant to help teams and individuals alike confront implicit assumptions embedded in their strategic logic. Thus the “What if” model proposes ways to integrate AI in the communication workflow to challenge and enable a more pluralistic and responsive interpretation of events and insight to surface. This doesn’t praise consensus as the thing to aim for at all times. Rather, it invites a consideration of perspectives and potentially of the full range of possibilities from coexistence to difference and dissensus.

The Logic of Care—and Its Limits

All of this is aligned with the turn towards the logic and ethics of care—toward humility, empathy, and co-creation. But because care too can be parochial and become a soft form paternalism that is blind to its own norms, we invite practitioners to recognize and respond to pluralism – not as a problem, but as a condition. This embeds Jonathan Haidt’s work on moral foundations and his reminder that what we see as good (care, liberty, loyalty, sanctity) may not be seen as good by others. 

You are needed: An Invitation to Test and Challenge

Our “What if” framework is not final. It is also not “the” answer. It is a provocation. It has been shaped by our global Delphi Future of PR/Comms and their Social Value study, peer dialogue, and critical testing. But now it needs real-world stress-testing.

That’s why we need you. 

We invite Strategic-HQ readers—practitioners, educators, advisors—to engage. Use the model. Break it. Improve it. Let us know what works, what fails, and what it brings into view that was previously unseen and most importantly get in touch with us to let us know your thoughts.

Let’s not just imagine better PR. Let’s practice, learn and improve toward it—with tools that reflect the complexity of our time, and the humility it demands.

Read our previous article for context: “PR Needs a Totally New Focus” (Strategic, March 2025)

+++

Dr. Ana Adi is a PR professor, strategic thinker, and global communicator who challenges assumptions to make PR more accountable, reflective, and future-ready. Passionate about culture, languages, and the intersection of ethics, strategy, and technology, she explores how communication shapes industries, societies, and the stories we tell—all fueled by curiosity and a strong cup of coffee.

Thomas Stoeckle is a recovering business executive in the communication intelligence and consultancy space. Forever curious, critical and sceptical, late-blooming academic. Deep interest in the history, present and future of public communication.

+++

Access the What if Claude preview framework and get in touch on LinkedIn.

Written by: Editor