Mapping of audiences for academic web archiving initiatives

Abstract

This study presents the potential network of strategic audiences of the Federal University of Rio Grande do Sul, aiming to promote web archiving initiatives in the academic field. It considered the relational environment projected from the Higher Administrative Bodies and the Graduate Program in Communication of the Faculty of Library Science and Communication of this University. As a reference, we have observed the initiatives implemented and the organizational structures of Columbia University and Harvard University. The methodology encompassed bibliographical, documentary and content research. The understanding about audiences came from the approaches of logical conceptualization, power and communication. The study concluded that organizational actors influence at different levels within institutional structures, each according to their responsibilities. The larger the number of archived collections, the greater the network of audiences involved, of their different subjects depend financial, infrastructure, technological, legal and other support.

Keywords
Web archiving; Web archive; Mapping audiences; Public Relations; Public profile

Resumo

O estudo apresenta a potencial rede de públicos estratégicos da Universidade Federal do Rio Grande do Sul, visando promover iniciativas de arquivamento da web no âmbito acadêmico. Levou em conta o ambiente relacional projetado a partir dos Órgãos da Administração Superior e do Programa de Pós-Graduação em Comunicação, da Faculdade de Biblioteconomia e Comunicação da Universidade. Como referência, se observou as iniciativas implantadas e as estruturas organizacionais da Universidade de Columbia e da Universidade de Harvard. A metodologia englobou pesquisas bibliográfica, documental e de conteúdo. O entendimento sobre públicos ocorreu a partir dos enfoques da conceituação lógica, do poder e da comunicação. O estudo concluiu que os atores organizacionais exercem influência em diferentes níveis, cada um conforme suas responsabilidades. Quanto maior a quantidade de coleções arquivadas, mais complexas as redes de públicos envolvidos, de seus diferentes sujeitos dependem apoio financeiro, de infraestrutura, tecnológico, jurídico etc.

Palavras-chave
Arquivamento da web; Arquivo web; Mapeamento de públicos; Relações Públicas; Perfil de públicos

Resumen

Este estudio presenta la potencial red de audiencias estratégicas de la Universidade Federal de Rio Grande do Sul, con el objetivo de promover iniciativas de archivo de la web en el campo académico. Consideró el entorno relacional proyectado desde los Órganos Administrativos Superiores y el Programa de Posgrado en Comunicación de la Facultad de Bibliotecología y el Curso de Pregrado en Comunicación de esta Universidad. Como referencia, hemos observado las iniciativas implementadas y las estructuras organizativas de la Columbia University y la Harvard University. La metodología abarcó las investigaciones bibliográfica, documental y de contenido. La comprensión de las audiencias provino de los enfoques de conceptualización lógica, poder y comunicación. El estudio concluyó que los actores organizacionales influyen en diferentes niveles dentro de las estructuras institucionales, cada uno de acuerdo con sus responsabilidades. Cuanto mayor sea el número de colecciones archivadas, mayor será la red de públicos involucrados, de sus diferentes temas depende el apoyo financiero, de infraestructura, tecnológico, legal y de otro tipo.

Palabras clave
Archivado de la web; Archivamento web; Mapeo de públicos; Relaciones Públicas; Perfil de públicos

Introduction

The study presents concepts about types of audiences based on the field of Public Relations. From a descriptive exploratory research, it discusses how these groups can influence, positively or negatively, the actions promoted by the university organizations under observation.

Society, which is increasingly technological, produces information faster and creates the sense of forgetting that information (ROCKEMBACH; PAVÃO, 2018). This reality has led different organizations worldwide to come together to implement web preservation initiatives (CONSÓRCIO INTERNACIONAL DE PRESERVAÇÃO DA INTERNET, 2018).

Web archiving is a process that identifies information on the World Wide Web (WWW), captures and preserves it, while keeping its content true to the original. Capturing can be extensive, archiving more websites at a superficial level, or intensive, capturing at a smaller scale but at a deeper browsing depth (MASANÈS, 2006). The content profile is classified according to the length of each URL¹ and can be grouped into spheres, such as academic-scientific, institutional, national, by regions/continents, by facts, among others.

The initiatives are developed by organizations with different structures, each with their own policies, goals and objectives (GOMES; MIRANDA; COSTA, 2011). In this research, we define Organization as a “social entity made up of people and resources, deliberately structured and oriented towards a common goal” (CHIAVENATO, 2003, p. 23). In turn, it requires support from different influential groups to achieve success in their projects. This relational body is configured as the audience – individuals, collectives or other organizations that have common interests, are affected and affect the actions of the organization (SIMÕES, 2001). The interest of each audience is a determining factor in the relationship, forming a social system that influences decision making (Steffen, 2008).

Web archiving

Web archiving is the process that involves the selection, collection, storage and retrieval of websites in order to preserve part of the digital content present in the WWW (ROCKEMBACH, 2018). The activity was taken on by some non-governmental, public and educational organizations abroad (FERREIRA; MARTINS; ROCKEMBACH, 2018). Initiatives aim at preservation, since 80% of web-disseminated content changes after one year of publication and 13% of online references disappear in just over two years (COSTA; GOMES; SILVA, 2017).

In 2018, 56 organizations were part of the International Internet Preservation Consortium and nine of them were universities (INTERNATIONAL INTERNET PRESERVATION CONSORTIUM, 2018). A survey conducted in 2010 by Gomes, Miranda & Costa (2011) found 42 initiatives with small teams, three of which from universities. Preservation scopes range from national, regional, audiovisual, institutional and literature interests. The projects are located in North America, Europe, Australia, Asia and Latin America (Chile).

According to Brügger (2005), establishing strategies for web archiving is fundamental to ensure the success of the initiatives. In this perspective, Figure 1 presents the Web Archiving Life Cycle Model, an organic example developed by the Archive-it service team, which demonstrates the phases of the strategic process for implementing web files in different organizational structures.

Figure 1
Web Archiving Life Cycle Model

The darker strip in Figure 1, marked with dotted lines, represents the high-level decisions an organization faces when setting up and managing its web archiving program. These include clarity of program objectives; review and planning of available resources (workflow, finance, personnel, employees and others) and risk management, linked to copyright of the collected data.

Audiences in Public Relations

The concepts used to refer to audiences in Public Relations (PR) are varied. For a long time, they depended on the geographical/spatial criterion of the object – the audience – in relation to the organization, and were subdivided into internal, mixed and external. This concept was considered limited and prompted a revision of the theoretical framework. This relationship is now perceived from the criteria of power and influence in a social system (FRANÇA, 2012, SIMÕES, 1995, STEFFEN, 2008).

Simões (1995) presented four categories for audiences: decision-making, behavior, opinion and consultation. The first identifies those which have the power to determine something about the organization’s existence and its initiatives judicially and legally. The second describes those that carry out the activities of the organization. The third mirrors those that have influence over the actions of the organization but are not necessarily part of its internal structure. Finally, there are those who interfere in some way with decision-making, because their opinions are considered important for it.

From a behavioral perspective, Hirschman (1970) pointed out other types of audiences: voice, exit and loyalty. The first are outspoken against organizational practices, influencing policies and outcomes. Exit audiences characterize those which are not present in the relational system. Loyal audiences seek to contribute to the achievement of the organization’s objectives without interfering with decision-making processes.

Steffen (2008) presents the communication and power approaches. In the first, the relationship between the organization and the audiences is guided by discourse and how it happens. In the second, it is linked to decision making. According to this view, the audience can react to any action of the organization – for or against it. Communication is linked to a decision-making process and demands that certain audience(s) exercise their power (STEFFEN, 2008). Simões (2001) restates the 1995 categories, adding that audiences vary according to the complexity, size and potential of power they can exercise. Still with focus on power, Freeman’s (2010) stakeholder theory considers that the audience reveals itself through expressions and the exercise of influence, based on its interests.

The social system is supported by a communication process that holds information as its raw material and is based on seven dimensions: a) cultural; b) economic; c) political: decision/power; d) ideological: idea-force; e) historical: everything occurs in a space and time; f) legal: if the conflict is not resolved, it becomes a controversy; and g) philosophical: ethical; when it fulfills its responsibility and aesthetic, if its actions and discourses are well thought out, planned and executed.

This process is set up as a fine line of cooperation and conflict between the parties, and occurs non-linearly with the following characteristics: a) satisfaction: audiences that are aware, or not, cooperate or do not hinder the organization’s achievements; b) dissatisfaction: the audience does not agree but does not react against it; c) rumor: the uninformed audience disseminates stories detrimental to the credibility of the organization; d) coalitions: audiences, without information and care, seek support from other segments – e.g. the media, associations; e) pressure: the audiences get organized and pressure the organization to change policies, also calling for government interference in their favor; f) conflict: the organization continues its policies without justification to the audience, generating conflict and impasse; g) crisis: deepening of the conflict that can lead to the rupture of the organization-audience system; h) arbitration: there is no understanding, one party appeals to the legal system, the government once again intervenes; and i) social upheaval: the situation gets out of control and is led by radical factions (SIMÕES, 2001, STEFFEN, 2008).

França (2003, 2009, 2012) conceptualizes the audiences logically from three relational criteria. The first is the degree of legal or situational dependence of the organization on its audiences in order to enable its constitution, existence and permanence, maintaining its productivity. The second is the greater or lesser degree of audience participation in the organization’s businesses, in defending its interests and in its institutional promotion. The third is the degree of interference that a specific audience can have on the organization. These are external groups that do not constitute nor maintain these organization, but can pressure their interests, objectives and goals.

From the logical conceptualization it is possible to form specific relational networks. Core audiences (Category 1) are legally linked to the organization through long-term priority relationships. Dependency is situational and varies depending on the organization. This Category is segmented into Constitutive audiences – which provide resources to constitute the organization and undertake it, and Non-Constitutive or Sustainable audiences – which enable the existence of the organization, maintaining productivity and contributing to the main activities. The latter are divided into Primary (direct collaborators and users/clients that enable initiative from a higher level of dependence) and Secondary (lower level of dependence).

Category 2 comprises the Non-essential audiences, which have a higher or lower level of participation in the organization. They perform support activities, providing external services. Category 3 is composed of the Interference Network audiences: congener entities that act with the same objectives and characteristics; mass media vehicles (print, electronic and digital) that can interfere with public opinion and have high relational risk, and nationally and internationally structured activist and ideological groups that affect the public opinion in defense of different causes.

Organizational Structural Configurations of Federal Universities in Brazil

The way an institution is organized influences its results. If poorly structured, it can cause friction, deepen unimportant disputes and highlight management deficits (DRUCKER, 1977). It is the organizational structure that defines the interconnection of specialized groups and can be defined as a result of the process of distribution of authority exercised by their actors (the audience). The communication system runs through the entire structure of the organization; it is through it that power is exercised for making decisions (MAXIMIANO, 1985, VASCONCELLOS; HEMSLEY, 1986).

Machado (1998) emphasizes strategic models for university organizational structures; among them is the traditional committee and collegiate model, which adopts a plural administration for decision-making. These committees and collegiate groups are made up of internal members of the organization from different segments, departments and professions (CURY, 1988). In the case of federal higher education universities, this type of structure is implemented through the university, curators, teaching, research and extension councils (UNIVERSIDADE FEDERAL DO RIO GRANDE DO SUL, 1995-1996). The complex organizational structure of the traditional model, exercised through committees and collegiate groups, portrays this plural administration, but demands articulation between the various actors.

Methodology

The exploratory-descriptive research was carried out in three stages. First there was a bibliographic survey (STUMPF, 2008) to get to know the context of web archiving. A search was conducted on Scopus, Web of Science, Google Scholar and SciELO Citation Index for articles published between 2010 and 2017 – associating the themes: web archiving, audiences and organizational structures.

The second step consisted of collecting data about universities and their web archiving platforms. The sources – bylaws, regiments, organizational charts, communications and website messages – were chosen according to the rule of pertinence and corresponded to the study objectives, period and analysis procedures (BARDIN, 2004, FONSECA JÚNIOR, 2008). The data categories on university organizations were classification, mission, vision, governance and structure. On web archiving platforms: collections, description, copyright, archiving time, subjects, who collects content, URL category.

From categorization, tables were elaborated identifying the audiences and their respective functions in the organizational structure. This allowed the measurement of the influence of these actors at different levels, and the creation of hierarchical graphs. The audiences were recognized from the “Identification and Mapping of Audiences” (IMP) by França (2012), and the views by Simões (2001) and Steffen (2008). For this, the audiences related to the initiatives and those that were part of the organizational structure according to the governance rules were listed; the types of relationship established were determined; the purpose of these relationships was defined based on their responsibilities in the structure; the level of involvement was indicated from the degrees of dependence, participation and interference; and thus the audiences was categorized into: essential, non-essential and interference networks.

The tables also included the following indicators: Type of relationship: administrative, classist, institutional, legal, business, operational, total partnership, political, professional, social; Level of involvement: frequent, permanent, occasional and seasonal; Relationship criteria: 1. degree of legal or situational dependency; 2. higher or lower degree of audience participation in the actions; and III. degree of interference that a specific audience may have on the organization and its business.

The third stage discussed UFRGS’ structure, using the ‘University Statute and General Rules (1995-1996)’ as a subsidy, as well as the contents available on the website, with their respective extensions of the domain ‘ufrgs.br’. Based on the identification of governance and structure, the audiences were delineated according to the steps mentioned in the IMP.

With information about each object, the chosen categories were divided into lines of focus. The influence of the actors at the different levels was observed based on the description of their roles and attributions within the organizational structure of the University, based on the documentary and content analysis performed (BARDIN, 2004, MOREIRA, 2008).

Results

This section presents the audience networks mapped hierarchically.

Harvard University’s Web Archiving Initiative

The initiative is made possible through technology provided by Archive-it, the web archiving service offered by the Internet Archive organization. This enables the University to manage its collections itself, by collecting, creating and preserving digital content of interest to its audiences (ARCHIVE-IT.ORG, 2014).

Over the research period, nine collecting organizations were part of the initiative, with 69 collections, composed of the capture of 17,083 URLs inside and outside the University’s digital environment. Of these, 42 collections belonged to the Harvard Business School (HBS) collecting organization and preserved a business history of companies, industries, individuals, local movements, and HBS’s institutional history. Key components of the captures included teaching files and faculty research papers, as well as the official records of all administrative departments. Among the contents were text, images and other multimedia formats, linked web pages, newsletters and blogs. The collection strategies and policies of the nine organizations converged to the same end, researching, teaching and preserving the institutional history of the University.

This initiative is supported by a network of 23 audience profiles and their respective subgroups, shown in Figure 2.

Figure 2
Hierarchical chart of the audiences of Harvard University’s initiative

The mapped audiences are part not only of the initiative, but also of the University’s governance and structure. This university organization is administered by two main boards. The first is the Harvard Corporation, made up of the president and members of Harvard College (Fellows), and the second is the Council of Superintendents or Supervisors (Board of Overseers). However, documentary research has also identified other departments and offices that are part of the organizational structure, which may influence decision-making processes due to the administrative, legal and financial responsibilities they have at the University.

Columbia University’s Web Archiving Initiative

Also made possible by the Archive-it technology, this initiative has the help of some audiences to create their web archive collections. These include staff, researchers, alumni, and student organizations.

Three collecting organizations are responsible for 12 collections, consisting of the capture of 2,841 URLs inside and outside the University’s digital environment. The collections preserve text, images, linked web pages, newsgroups, bulletins, newsletters, student publications, and blogs. Most of them are characterized by their institutional profile, but some scopes include international content.

The general governance of the University is in the hands of the University Senate and occurs through democratic means. Trustees oversee administrative positions, monitor the budget and protect property. This Senate is made up of representatives from different sectors, including administrative, colleges, students, affiliated institutions, professional library staff, research, and alumni. Like Harvard University, Columbia is also subdivided into several campuses, with a total of 16 colleges and schools (COLUMBIA UNIVERSITY, 1959).

The research also identified other departments and offices linked to Columbia University Libraries, which may influence decision-making processes regarding the initiative, since the library promotes the project. In view of this, Figure 3 shows the network with 10 audience profiles.

Figure 3
Hierarchical chart of the audiences of Columbia University’s initiative

The audiences, even though they are in one category, can have subcomponents of another. For example, a primary non-constitutive core audience may be linked to a constitutive core one in detriment of a decision or policy related to data collection. Similarly, the same audience can fit into different classifications due to specific characteristics of type of relationships.

UFRGS’s organizational structure and potential audience networks

Headquartered in Porto Alegre, the Universidade Federal do Rio Grande do Sul (UFRGS) offers courses in different areas, from elementary school to graduate school. It holds more than 700 undergraduate and graduate research groups, laboratory technicians, teachers and visitors, with an approximately 14 thousand people (UNIVERSIDADE FEDERAL DO RIO GRANDE DO SUL, Pesquisa e Inovação 2018).

To achieve its objectives, the University is structured into higher management bodies; 29 university units²; among others³. The upper management bodies are the Council of Trustees (CONCUR); the University Council (CONSUN); the Teaching, Research and Extension Council (CEPE) and the Deanship. These councils are managed democratically and made up of different representatives – teachers, students, alumni, service providers, representatives of workers’ unions, from the cultural as well as science and technology sectors, as well as external members, appointed by the Ministry of Education, for example. The first two councils are the highest bodies at UFRGS, having power over various instances and decisions in the organizational structure.

Each of the university units, as well as most research groups, have their own websites. The contents are managed by each team, according to the interests of their audiences (UNIVERSIDADE FEDERAL DO RIO GRANDE DO SUL, Unidades Regionais e Acadêmicas, 2018). Figure 4 represents the network composed of 16 strategic audiences linked to UFRGS Senior Administration.

Figure 4
Hierarchical chart of the senior administrative bodies at UFRGS

The same audience can fit into different classifications due to specific characteristics of type of relationships. The image shows the possible influences of the audiences, which may act as partners of the initiative or not. These groups vary according to the complexity, size, and potential power they may exercise in the areas of consultation, decision-making, behavior, and opinion.

Connected to the Deanship there are different Offices of the vice-dean, such as PROGESP⁴, PROPLAN⁵ and SEDETEC⁶. These offices may influence the implementation of a web archiving project at UFRGS in different ways, since from their actions and responsibilities they can: a) get technical and administrative support for the operation and implementation of the initiative, if it is necessary to allocate service providers to perform and maintain web archiving activities; b) seek assistance from this audience for the initiative’s activities with regard to budgets, conclusion and monitoring of contracts and agreements, procurement of goods and services, importing equipment and services to support research and c) promote the initiative to find partnerships and collaborations to seek technological development for the archiving activity.

From the perspective of university units, there is the School of Library Science and Communications (FABICO), which offers six undergraduate and three postgraduate programs⁷ - one in Communications (PPGCOM), one in Museology and Heritage (PPGMUSPA) and one in Information Sciences (PPGCIN). The school has its own URL with specific extensions for each undergraduate degree. The postgraduate programs have, in addition to their own extensions, their private addresses for communicating information (enrollment, subjects, faculty, publications, research lines, projects and research groups, documents, forms, among others) with their audiences (UNIVERSIDADE FEDERAL DO RIO GRANDE DO SUL, Fabico, 2018).

Each of the Stricto Sensu courses has a council, coordinated by a postgraduate committee managed democratically by teachers and students, according to articles 49 and 50 of the university’s Statute and General Rules (UNIVERSIDADE FEDERAL DO RIO GRANDE DO SUL, 1995-1996). PPGCOM alone has 15 research groups duly registered with the National Council for Scientific and Technological Development (CNPq). Figure 5 represents the second relationship network elaborated from the observation of the organizational structure of one of UFRGS units.

Figure 5
Hierarchical chart for FABICO – UFRGS

The figure presents the mapping of the 15 audiences of the potential network formed at FABICO (PPGCOM). They exert different levels of influence according to their functions, such as the creation, extinction or restructuring of departments; approval of action plans, preparation of budget proposals; it also merges and creates commissions, advisory services or mechanisms necessary to fulfill the unit’s duties. From the dismemberment of each sphere of the graph, we can reach a larger relational amplitude, even from a micro-organizational perspective.

Final considerations

The profiles of organizations promoting web archiving internationally are diverse. The initiatives have different collection scopes, according to the policies and strategies established by the organizations.

Educational institutions are physically and organizationally composed of several university campuses. Their structures are interconnected by specialized groups and can be defined as a result of the process of authority distribution exercised by their actors (audiences). It is understood that the communication system permeates the structures, since the administration of the universities occurs in a plural way through commissions, collegiate and councils, and so power is exercised in the different levels and in different degrees.

Web archiving initiatives implemented abroad feature collections that constitute a kind of web memory for their entities, with scopes that cover organizational, institutional, factual, and specific content. These collections are conceived by various collecting organizations, which are only the macro-promotor entities of the initiatives, and some audiences act directly in their formation. Some of the collecting organizations are part of the organizational structures of universities and, regardless of their connection, sometimes monitor and capture URLs beyond the domains ‘columbia.edu’ and ‘harvard.edu’.

It is clear that audiences can facilitate decision-making processes, especially with regard to the high-level deliberations of the Web Archiving Life Cycle Model. The more archived collections, the larger the audiences network involved. In the case of UFRGS, it can be said that the relationship network also configures itself in a complex way. This is due to the governance feature, multi-campus structure and the subgroups that also have a voice in decision-making processes. Finally, audiences are key agents in the process of improving the results of initiatives and optimizing investment costs, since they influence the actions of organizations, establishing different types of relationships, communication and power.

• 1
  Uniform Resource Locator – domains of interest that must be captured and preserved in web archives.
• 2
  Central institutes, colleges or schools with their auxiliary bodies.
• 3
  University hospital; specialized institutes and interdisciplinary study centers.
• 4
  Office of the vice-dean for personnel affairs.
• 5
  Office of the vice-dean for planning.
• 6
  Office of Technological Development.
• 7
  Stricto Sensu.

Referências

• ARCHIVE-IT.ORG. Website [on-line], 2014. Disponível em: https://archive-it.org/ Acesso em: 23 out. 2018.
  » https://archive-it.org/
• BARDIN, L. Análise de conteúdo 3ª. ed. Lisboa: Edições 70, 2004.
• BRAGG, M.; HANNA, K. The Web Archiving Life Cycle Model, March 2013. Disponível em: http://ait.blog.archive.org/files/2014/04/archiveit_life_cycle_model.pdf Acesso em: 16 abr. 2019.
  » http://ait.blog.archive.org/files/2014/04/archiveit_life_cycle_model.pdf
• BRÜGGER, N. Archiving Websites: General Considerations and Strategies. Århus: The Centre for Internet Research, 2005.
• CHIAVENATO, I. Introdução à teoria geral da administração 7ª ed. Rio de Janeiro: Elsevier, 2003.
• COLUMBIA UNIVERSITY, in the City of New York. Charters and Statutes Edition of April 6, 1959. Disponível em: https://secretary.columbia.edu/files/secretary/university_charters_ and_ statutes/UniversityStatues_December2017.pdf Acesso em: 25 out. 2018.
  » https://secretary.columbia.edu/files/secretary/university_charters_ and_ statutes/UniversityStatues_December2017.pdf
• CONSÓRCIO INTERNACIONAL DE PRESERVAÇÃO DA INTERNET. Website [on-line]. Disponível em: http://netpreserve.org Acesso em: 24 abr. 2018.
  » http://netpreserve.org
• COSTA, M.; GOMES, D.; SILVA, M. J. The evolution of web archiving. International Journal on Digital Libraries, 1-15. DOI: 10.1007%2Fs00799-016-0171-9, 2017.
  » https://doi.org/10.1007%2Fs00799-016-0171-9
• CURY, A. Organização e métodos: perspectiva comportamental e abordagem contingencial. 4. ed. São Paulo: Atlas, 1988.
• DRUCKER, P. Introdução à administração São Paulo: Pioneira, 1977.
• FERREIRA, L.; MARTINS, M. R.; ROCKEMBACH, M. Usos do arquivamento da web na comunicação científica, 2018. DOI 10.21747/16463153. Disponível em: http://ojs.letras.up.pt/index.php/prismacom/article/view/3927 Acesso em: 28 maio 2018.
  » https://doi.org/10.21747/16463153» http://ojs.letras.up.pt/index.php/prismacom/article/view/3927
• FONSECA JÚNIOR, W. C. Análise de conteúdo. In: DUARTE, J.; BARROS, A. (Orgs.) Métodos e técnicas de pesquisa em comunicação 2ª. ed. São Paulo: Atlas, 2008. p. 280-303.
• FRANÇA, F. Públicos, como identificá-los em nova visão estratégica: business relationship. 3ª. ed. São Caetano do Sul, SP: Yendis, 2012.
• FRANÇA, F. Como construir relacionamentos corporativos eficazes. In: FRANÇA, F.; GRUNIG, J. E. (Orgs.). Relações Públicas: teoria, contexto e relacionamentos. São Caetano do Sul, SP: Difusão, 2009.
• FRANÇA, F. Conceituação lógica de públicos em relações públicas. Estudos de Jornalismo & Relações Públicas São Bernardo do Campo, SP, v.1, n.1, jun. 2003. p. 17-31.
• FREEMAN, E. et al. Stakeholder Theory: The State of the Art. Cambridge University Press. The Edinburgh Building, Cambridge CB2 8RU, UK, 2010.
• GOMES, D; MIRANDA, J.; COSTA, M. A survey on web archiving initiatives In: INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON THEORY AND PRACTICE OF DIGITAL LIBRARIES. Lisboa, POR: Springer Berlin Heidelberg, 2011. p. 408-420. Disponível em: https://link.springer.com/ content/pdf/10.1007%2F978-3-642-24469-8_41.pdf Acesso em: 6 out. 2017.
  » https://link.springer.com/ content/pdf/10.1007%2F978-3-642-24469-8_41.pdf
• INTERNET ARCHIVE. Website Disponível em: https://archive.org/. Acesso em: 24 abr. 2018.
  » https://archive.org/.
• MACHADO, N. S. Configurações estruturais em organizações universitárias: o caso a Universidade do Oeste de Santa Catarina. 1998. 236 f. Dissertação (Mestrado em Administração), Curso de Pós-Graduação em Administração, Universidade Federal de Santa Catarina.
• MASANÈS, J. Web Archiving Paris, FRA: Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg, 2006.
• MAXIMIANO, A. C. A. Introdução à administração 2ª. ed. São Paulo: Atlas, 1985.
• MOREIRA, S. Análise documental como método e como técnica. In: DUARTE, J.; BARROS, A. (Orgs.) Métodos e técnicas de pesquisa em comunicação 2ª. ed. São Paulo: Atlas, 2008. p. 269-279.
• ROCKEMBACH, M. Arquivamento da web: Estudos de caso internacionais e o caso Brasileiro. Revista Digital Biblioteconomia e Ciência da Informação, v. 16, n. 1, jan./abr. 2018. Disponível em: https://periodicos.sbu.unicamp.br/ojs/index.php/rdbci/article/view/8648747/pdf Acesso em: 18 ago. 2018.
  » https://periodicos.sbu.unicamp.br/ojs/index.php/rdbci/article/view/8648747/pdf
• ROCKEMBACH, M.; PAVÃO, C. M. G. Políticas e tecnologias de preservação digital no arquivamento da Web v. 11, n. 1, 2018. DOI: https://doi.org/10.26512/rici.v11.n1.2018.8473. Disponível em: http://periodicos.unb.br/ojs311/index.php/RICI/article/view/8473. Acesso em: 18 out. 2018.
  » https://doi.org/10.26512/rici.v11.n1.2018.8473» http://periodicos.unb.br/ojs311/index.php/RICI/article/view/8473.
• SIMÕES, R. P. Relações públicas e micropolítica São Paulo: Summus, 2001.
• SIMÕES, R. P. Relações públicas: função política. São Paulo: Summus, 1995.
• STEFFEN, A. M. O conceito de público em relações públicas Porto Alegre: Cidadela, 2008.
• STUMPF, I. R. C. Pesquisa bibliográfica. In: DUARTE, J.; BARROS, A. (Orgs.) Métodos e técnicas de pesquisa em comunicação 2ª. ed. São Paulo: Atlas, 2008. p. 51-61.
• UNIVERSIDADE FEDERAL DO RIO GRANDE DO SUL. Estatuto e regimento geral da Universidade Federal do Rio Grande do Sul 1995-1996. Disponível em: https://www.ufrgs.br/institutodeartes/wp-content/uploads/2018/03/Estatuto-e-Regimento-Geral-da-UFRGS.pdf. Acesso em: 17 set. 2018.
  » https://www.ufrgs.br/institutodeartes/wp-content/uploads/2018/03/Estatuto-e-Regimento-Geral-da-UFRGS.pdf.
• UNIVERSIDADE FEDERAL DO RIO GRANDE DO SUL. Website [on-line]. Disponível em: http://www.ufrgs.br/ufrgs/inicial. Acesso em: 19 nov. 2018.
  » http://www.ufrgs.br/ufrgs/inicial.
• UNIVERSIDADE FEDERAL DO RIO GRANDE DO SUL. a-ufrgs Organograma, [on-line]. Disponível em: http://www.ufrgs.br/ufrgs/a-ufrgs/organograma. Acesso em: 19 nov. 2018.
  » http://www.ufrgs.br/ufrgs/a-ufrgs/organograma.
• UNIVERSIDADE FEDERAL DO RIO GRANDE DO SUL. Biblioteca Central, [on-line]. Disponível em: https://www.ufrgs.br/bibliotecacentral/ Acesso em: 23 nov. 2018.
  » https://www.ufrgs.br/bibliotecacentral/
• UNIVERSIDADE FEDERAL DO RIO GRANDE DO SUL. Ensino, [on-line]. Disponível em: http://www.ufrgs.br/ufrgs/ensino Acesso em: 23 nov. 2018.
  » http://www.ufrgs.br/ufrgs/ensino
• UNIVERSIDADE FEDERAL DO RIO GRANDE DO SUL. Fabico, [on-line]. Disponível em: http://www.ufrgs.br/fabico Acesso em: 22 nov. 2018.
  » http://www.ufrgs.br/fabico
• UNIVERSIDADE FEDERAL DO RIO GRANDE DO SUL. Grupos de Pesquisa, [on-line]. Disponível em: http://www.ufrgs.br/ppgcom/pesquisa/grupos_de_pesquisa. Acesso em: 19 nov. 2018.
  » http://www.ufrgs.br/ppgcom/pesquisa/grupos_de_pesquisa.
• UNIVERSIDADE FEDERAL DO RIO GRANDE DO SUL. Pesquisa e Inovação, [on-line]. Disponível em: http://www.ufrgs.br/ufrgs/pesquisa-e-inovacao/apresentacao . Acesso em: 19 nov. 2018.
  » http://www.ufrgs.br/ufrgs/pesquisa-e-inovacao/apresentacao
• UNIVERSIDADE FEDERAL DO RIO GRANDE DO SUL. Portal da Pesquisa, [on-line]. Disponível em: http://www.ufrgs.br/portaldapesquisa/ Acesso em: 23 nov. 2018.
  » http://www.ufrgs.br/portaldapesquisa/
• UNIVERSIDADE FEDERAL DO RIO GRANDE DO SUL. Progesp, [on-line]. Disponível em: http://www.ufrgs.br/progesp/progesp-1 Acesso em: 20 nov. 2018.
  » http://www.ufrgs.br/progesp/progesp-1
• UNIVERSIDADE FEDERAL DO RIO GRANDE DO SUL. Propesq. CT-INFRA, [on-line]. Disponível em: http://www.ufrgs.br/propesq1/ctinfra/ Acesso em: 20 nov. 2018.
  » http://www.ufrgs.br/propesq1/ctinfra/
• UNIVERSIDADE FEDERAL DO RIO GRANDE DO SUL. Proplan, [on-line]. Disponível em: https://www.ufrgs.br/proplan/quem-somos/apresentacao/ Acesso em: 21 nov. 2018.
  » https://www.ufrgs.br/proplan/quem-somos/apresentacao/
• UNIVERSIDADE FEDERAL DO RIO GRANDE DO SUL. Relinter, [on-line]. Disponível em: http://www.ufrgs.br/relinter/portugues/menurelinter/a-relinter Acesso em: 22 nov. 2018.
  » http://www.ufrgs.br/relinter/portugues/menurelinter/a-relinter
• UNIVERSIDADE FEDERAL DO RIO GRANDE DO SUL. Secom, [on-line]. Disponível em: http://www.ufrgs.br/secom/ Acesso em: 21 nov. 2018.
  » http://www.ufrgs.br/secom/
• UNIVERSIDADE FEDERAL DO RIO GRANDE DO SUL. Sedetec, [on-line]. Disponível em: https://www.ufrgs.br/sedetec/ Acesso em: 22 nov. 2018.
  » https://www.ufrgs.br/sedetec/
• UNIVERSIDADE FEDERAL DO RIO GRANDE DO SUL. Unidades Regionais e Acadêmicas, [on-line]. Disponível em: http://www.ufrgs.br/ufrgs/a-ufrgs/unidades-academicas Acesso em: 22 nov. 2018.
  » http://www.ufrgs.br/ufrgs/a-ufrgs/unidades-academicas
• VASCONCELLOS, E.; HEMSLEY, J. R. Estrutura das organizações: estruturas tradicionais, estruturas para inovação, estrutura matricial. São Paulo: Pioneira, 1986.

Publication Dates

• Publication in this collection
  27 Apr 2020
• Date of issue
  Jan-Apr 2020

History

• Received
  15 Mar 2019
• Accepted
  09 Sept 2019