doi.org/10.4185/rlcs-2020-1461
Article

Public communication management model of heritage: a systemic alternative for the offices of the conservator and historian in Cuba. Proposal based on a case study
Modelo de gestión de comunicación pública del patrimonio: alternativa sistémica para las oficinas del conservador y del historiador en Cuba. Propuesta a partir de un estudio de caso

Marianela Dávila-Lorenzo¹
Hilda-María Saladrigas-Medina²

¹University of Cienfuegos. Cuba.
²University of La Havana. Cuba.

Abstract
Although academic initiatives are revealed around the communication of the cultural and natural heritage of the peoples, there are still no strategies capable of integrating its management in the different social spaces in which it is revealed: institutional, community and media. The study of the communication processes of the Office of the Conservator of the City of Cienfuegos in Cuba has allowed basing a communication management model with a strategic, systemic, applied and participatory approach. This model plans to articulate the actors of the organization, the government, decision-makers and citizens, for the sake of a reinforcement of identity, culture, work climate, public image and their social projection towards a sustainable and prosperous development of local space, tourism and culture. The Public Communication Management Model of Heritage has been validated as a theoretical-methodological proposal based on the criteria offered by local, national and international experts.

Keywords: public communication management, cultural and natural heritage, institutional communication, community communication, media communication, model.

Resumen
Aunque se revelan iniciativas académicas en torno a la comunicación del patrimonio cultural y natural de los pueblos, aún se carecen de estrategias capaces de integrar su gestión en los disímiles espacios sociales en que se revela: institucional, comunitario y mediático. El estudio de los procesos de comunicación de la Oficina del Conservador de la Ciudad de Cienfuegos en Cuba ha permitido fundamentar un modelo de gestión de comunicación con enfoque estratégico, sistémico, aplicado y participativo que prevé articular los actores de la organización, los gubernamentales, decisores y la ciudadanía, en aras de un reforzamiento de la identidad, la cultura, el clima de trabajo, la imagen pública y su proyección social hacia un desarrollo sostenible y próspero del espacio local, el turismo y la cultura. El Modelo de gestión de comunicación pública del patrimonio ha sido validado como propuesta teórico-metodológica a partir del criterio ofrecido por expertos locales, nacionales e internacionales.

Palabras clave: gestión de comunicación pública, patrimonio cultural y natural, comunicación institucional, comunicación comunitaria, comunicación mediática, modelo.

Contents
1. Introduction. 2. Methodological coordinates. 3. Results. 3.1. Foundation of a public communication management model of heritage. 3.1.1. Theoretical bases. 3.2. Internal elements of the public communication management model of heritage. 3.2.1. Guiding principles of the model. 3.2.2. Purpose of the study. 3.2.3. Goals. 3.3. Methodological elements. 3.3.1. Stage 1 - Presentation of the proposed model. 3.3.2. Stage 2 - Implementation of the public communication management model of heritage. 4. Validation at expert and specialist level. 5. Conclusions. 6. Bibliography.

Correspondence
Marianela Dávila-Lorenzo. University of Cienfuegos. Cuba. mdavila@ucf.edu.cu
Hilda-María Saladrigas-Medina. University of La Havana. Cuba. saladrigas@fcom.uh.cu

Received: 22/10/2019.
Accepted: 14/04/2020.
Published: 31/07/2020.

How to cite this article / Standard reference
Dávila-Lorenzo, M., & Saladrigas-Medina, H. M. (2020). Public communication management model of heritage: a systemic alternative for the offices of the conservator and historian in Cuba. Proposal based on a case study. Revista Latina de Comunicación Social, (77), 329-356. https://www.doi.org/10.4185/RLCS-2020-1461

It is a Doctoral Thesis research carried out by the University of the Habana, Faculty of Communication. Its results were validated by experts and specialists in the subject in order to introduce them in the improvement of the institutional communication professional practice of the different offices of the historian and the conservator in Cuba. Likewise, it is a research developed as part of the National Project: Academic training in integral management of Cultural Historical and Natural Heritage for social and articulating actors of local development in Cienfuegos.

Translation by Carlos Javier Rivas Quintero (University of the Andes, Mérida, Venezuela).

1. Introduction

The concern about the safeguarding, conservation and restoration of heritage has been considered a process necessarily conducted through leadership by specialized authorities. An element that has been pointed out for several decades by international experts and has been reiterated in numerous guiding documents (Alomá, 2012).
In this sense, with strong emphasis, institutions and/or organizations such as The United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO), the International Council of Monuments and Sites (ICOMOS), the International Council of Museums (ICOM) and The International Center of the Study of the Preservation and Restoration of Cultural Property (ICCROM) stand out. They ensure the conservation, restoration and promotion of heritage values of a city, town or nation with the purpose of transmitting its richness and worth to future generations. In order to do that, they invoke the signing of conventions, recommendations and declarations, the quotation and bonuses in the economic field, and projects for local development that involve countries from the five continents.
Similarly, the protection of heritage has been a main concern in Cuba that, from a legal ambit, is framed in the Constitution of the Republic, the Protection of the Cultural Heritage Law, decree No. 118 of the Council of Ministers of November 3th of 1983 and the National Monuments Law, which are considered mechanisms for conservation. Although the main responsibility rests on the Assemblies (National, provincial and municipal) and the institutions system of the Ministry of Culture, headed by the National Council of Cultural Heritage, to which the National Center of Conservation, Restoration and Museology (CENCREM), the National Register of Cultural Property, the museums and an affiliated entity: The National Monuments Commission, are subordinated.
At the same time, institutions known as Offices of the Historian and the Conservator began to exist on the island some decades ago, with the purpose of directing the five-year plans of restoration subsidized as a patronage of the Cuban State in its commitment to rescuing the cultural heritage of the nation. This experience, which started in the capital city of Cuba, would soon extend to other historic centers of the country: Camagüey, Santiago de Cuba, Sancti Spíritus, Matanzas, Trinidad and Cienfuegos.
Institutions of this nature, not only in Cuba but also in the international ambit, have required the implementation of effective and efficient communicative processes that allow them to achieve the organizational objectives, especially the ones of procedure that in a theoretical and methodological sense enable the development of strategies of collective communication, adjusted to the particularities of each context and capable of involving the actors and political decision-makers in its maintenance and preservation. To all that, we need to add the urgency of a communicative management by the media that promotes the compliance of the social role when safeguarding it and considers communities; contexts in which the social appropriation of the richness of the global and local heritage performed by citizens emerges vigorously (Martín, 2012; Monjas, 2012; Endere and Conforti, 2012; Meneses, 2011; Resik, 2010, 2017; Man�uch, 2009; Galindo, 2008; Castellanos, 1998; Dávila, 2017, 2018, 2019).
The results of this research presented in this article are focused on the Office of the Conservator of the City of Cienfuegos [ES: Oficina del Conservador de la Ciudad de Cienfuegos (OCCC)], as a subject of study due to its notable communicative labor, by which a close relation with the community is established; the use of the media of the territory, its very own and the interchange with local, national and international institutions. Even if a favorable development is achieved from this perspective, we identified a fragmentation of the communicative speech that articulates in favor of heritage in different contexts; unawareness of the perception and impact of the messages, and actions it develops with its audiences; and a lack of coherence in the communication practices among the ambits in which it takes places. This entails the need of reframing the organizational/institutional communication management, since heritage requires it to guarantee the maintenance and conservation of that that could be lost.
Based upon the aforementioned, the following question was posed as a research problem:
How to contribute to the public communication management of heritage from the Office of the Conservator of the City of Cienfuegos?
As a general objective: to provide bases for a public communication management model of heritage for the Office of the Conservator of the City of Cienfuegos
For the sake of achieving the objective proposed, the theoretical-methodological foundations of said model are going to be developed throughout this article in accordance with the most contemporary trends of this practice, as well as the validation of this proposal at the level of experts.
Among the theoretical contributions of the study, a novel conceptual and operative integration with an interdisciplinary, multidisciplinary and transdisciplinary perspective is shown, being essential in the public communication management of the heritage item, contextualized to the possibilities in the field of Communication Sciences, in general, and to heritage Communication, in particular. In this sense, an original exemplary design is noted by revealing a systemic, applied, strategic and participative approach of public communication of heritage that relates the speeches, actions, knowledge, and projection ambits: the institutional, communal and media one, expressed in said social practice. These aspects have been controlled in a fragmented and disciplinary form in the investigative, academic and professional ambits. 
From a practical point of view, for the offices of the conservator and the historian in Cuba and particularly for the one in Cienfuegos, this represents a tool that would allow the diagnosis, strategic planning, organization and evaluation-control of the communicative processes, hence contributing to the consolidation of its organizational culture, the strengthening of identity, public image and the social positioning of a fundamental institution in the current strategy of local, touristic and cultural development.
Due to the relevance of the subject in the local ambit and the novelty of a dialog between organizational communication and heritage, there is coherence in the management of public communication of property culture with the proposition of the Model, a scheme susceptible of being adjusted to the requirements of other territories and to the institutional needs in the country, in a national context that privileges the heritage management as one of the pillar processes of the Cultural Policies of the Cuban State in its widest meaning: social, economic and environmental.

2. Methodological coordinates

The study was carried out from a qualitative methodological perspective ( ) [1] and in alignment with the Modeling; a theoretical method of the scientific knowledge defined by Valle (2007) and cited in Herrera (2015) “the representation of those essential characteristics of the subject under research, that has a heuristic function since it allows describing and studying new relations and qualities of the subject of study with the aim of transforming reality” (p. 167).
For their part, Reyes Piña and Bringas Linares (2006) explain the modeling as a superior form of theoretical construction, since it requires a high abstraction capacity and the implementation of the dialectical logic principles. That is way it is considered a result of abstract thinking, but with the particularity of expressing the reality surrounding the subject under analysis and its theoretical content.
Similarly, other methods implemented were the analysis and synthesis present during the whole process of information gathering through basic tasks or operations: data reduction, data layout and transformation, obtaining results and verifying conclusions; the Historical-logical method as it is intended to construct the theoretical bases in a chronological and organic sequence, and to reconstruct the continuous evolution of the offices of the conservator and the historian, linked to the management and conservation of the historical centers. The Inductive-deductive method to achieve necessary generalizations and abstractions that reveal the particularities of the public communication process in the areas of activity of the OCCC, and simultaneously the construction of premises that influence over the management of communication to improve it from theoretical and methodological aspects.
As for empirical techniques there were the bibliographic-documentary examination that revealed the location and detection of the regulatory documents that currently govern the management and communication activity within the state company and Cuban budgeted entities ( ) [2], and on the other hand, institutional manuals of the OCCC.
The content qualitative analysis ( ) [3] was applied to Theses of Degree and Master’s Degree that offer a significant accumulation of relevant information about the communication process of the OCCC, whether it is from their transmission or reception instances to the systemic conception of public communication.
In addition to that, we used meta-analysis as a systemic examination of all the studies about the subject of interest to group, synthesize and combine its results following a predetermined method. Saladrigas (2005) calls it “analysis of analysis” and states that this type of study permits obtaining the trends or identifying particularities about the phenomenon under analysis.
The in-depth interview (semi-structured) was aimed at the performers of the communication of the OCCC in order to get their assessment of the process as a whole and their systemic conception, as well as it was aimed at other specialists in Cienfueguero local heritage and the dissemination of their values through local media or traditional spaces for socialization, this time, based on the elaboration of the model.
As aforementioned, the expertise criterion was taken into account to validate the proposal. Its implementation went through five stages that are considered as the definition of objectives, the election of experts, elaboration and administration of the questionnaires and analysis of the results. The opinions expressed and the suggestions offered reaffirmed the relevance and worth of the proposal, as well as they were taken into consideration for the reformulation of some of the elements, all providing results as readjustments and improvement.
The theoretical, methodological and data triangulation was carried out with the purpose of verifying, testing and achieving the unification of the required information about the resulting scientific category of the empirical and theoretical research, which is essentially the results corpus of the doctoral thesis.

[1] Certainly, this research embraces the Humanist-Interpretative paradigm, which supports the use of qualitative methods.

[2] Guideline of the new economic and social policy of the Communist Party of Cuba, articles 137 and 163, Law Decree No. 252 of the continuity and strengthening of the Cuban business direction and management system, Decree No. 281 Regulation for the implementation and consolidation of the State Business Management and Administration System, Resolution 297-2003 of Internal Control, and Resolution 60/11 of Rules of the Internal Control System.

[3] This technique has been implemented to theses carried out by Dávila Lorenzo for her Degree, Master’s Degree and the ones she has directed, such as the ones by Ojeda (2016), Sánchez (2015), Medina (2015), Manresa (2015), Arceluz (2014), and Quintana (2014) that have been the result of the Research Group “Communication and Cultural Heritage Studies” of the University of Cienfuegos and that are related as direct precedents of the Doctorate Thesis from which the main results in this article are presented.

3. Results

3.1. Foundation of a public communication management model for heritage

3.1.1. Theoretical bases

The systematization of theoretical-conceptual frameworks coming from communicology, the Theory of Heritage and Public Administration, have provided a reflection that permits establishing, from inside of each science or analyzed theory, linkages between institutional public communication, communication management, administration and heritage; useful for understanding and explaining the subject under study in an interdisciplinary manner, in addition to consolidating as theoretical bases of the Public Communication Management Model of Heritage for the Offices of the Conservator and the Historian in Cuba. In Graphic 1, the conceptual nodes that underpin the theoretical proposal are synthesized and explained hereunder.

Source: authors’ own creation.

Graphic 1. Theoretical-Conceptual foundations.

Communicational references

Within the communicology field, it bases on the postulates of the Communication Social Theory, by Manuel Martín Serrano (s.f., 1993, 2007). In this sense, the OCCC is considered to be of open systemic nature, as long as it maintains a continuous incorporation and elimination of matter and energy, which, as a result from the input, is the additional energetic resource produced by the interchange with the environment. Additionally, the organization becomes a social system based upon the roles and functions performed, the regulatory requirements of said functions and positions within the organization, and the objectives and values it assumes (Katz and Kahn, 1986).
In this sense, a systemic grounding is also attributed to communication, which is explained in the components of the process, as well as they represent the guiding basis in the production generating from it in the OCCC as institution, and the conversational linkages in the media and community settings. Said premises accentuate the communication process as a set or sequence of events and dynamic relations, in a constant evolution, that is expressed in a changing and continuous flow, with a lack of a beginning and an end and in constant movement.
In this research, the communication model by Manuel Martín Serrano was considered because it takes into account the broad processes that occur in society in its different ambits. In spite of the very author validating its applicability in the media in his text “La producción social de comunicación” [EN: The social production of communication] (1993) currently other experiences have been susceptible of being used for study in institutions or other social practices, such as Piñuel (1983, 1995, 1997, 2010) and Gaitán (1995). Additionally, it turns out in a shifting of communication from the side of addressers or addressees, reasonable from the perspective of this study, in order to observe the public communication process as a whole in the different contexts in the OCCC, although that does not evade the logical adaptations in a context with inherent particularities in it.
Another theoretical foundation, on which this proposal is based, is the Critical Political Economy of Communication and Culture (CPECC), considering especially the Latin-American perspectives provided by authors like Enrique Sánchez Ruiz (2006, 2011) and Rodrigo Gómez (2009, 2011), César Bolaño (2002), Guillermo Mastrini (2009, 2011, 2017), Martín Becerra (2006, 2009, 2011) and Luis Albornoz (2011), who were identified among the most systematic.
The Political Economy of Communication and Culture (PECC) has as main subject of study “the social relations” (particularly the relations of power) that represent the production, distribution and consumption of symbolic goods” (Bolaño and Mastrini, 2002, p. 43). In this sense, it promotes the relation that local media, recognized as cultural Industries according to this theoretical approach which act as mediators, establish with other organizations in the communication production of the OCCC as long as they arrange the heritage agenda.
The PECC is an effort to understand the economic dimension and its diverse mediating determinant factors in the interaction of the communication processes with the whole social spectrum, and this is defined as one of the core features of said critical theory: its holistic and systemic quality. Therefore, it is about understanding the social reality as the continuous interaction of several structures and processes that mutually form diverse relations between their different elements, meaning that, this perspective does not perceive social relations as a linear form that can be explained through the summation of its parts, rather they should be understood from the existing complex relation and interaction between them, as elements of a whole, and analyzed at different levels and scales, since they are chains of complex causality and multiple interactions (Gómez García and Sánchez Ruiz, 2011, p. 3).
This stance poses the need of having a wide and contextualized point of view of the communication activities and processes that has a mutual determinant factor in the interchange of the political processes, norms and regulations, and the economic activity in a social global system. However, the Latin-American productions of the PECC exhibit an effort to surpass the economic determinism by focusing on the analysis of communication public policies, but without losing sight of the material conditionings.
Another axiom that is assumed is the management of public communication with a strategic vision, providing elements considered as a valuable pillar to the Model. This foundation bases upon the systematizations of important figures such as the Argentineans Paul Capriotti (2013), Daniel Scheinsohn (2010) and Sandra Massoni (2009, 2013, 2017), the Brazilian Margarida Krohling Kunsch (2012), the Mexican María Antonieta Rebeil (2012, 2014) and Abraham Nosnik (2016); and from Spain, Joan Costa (2001, 2012, 2015) and the significant contributions by Rafael Alberto Pérez (2001, 2007, 2009, 2017), consolidated in the New Strategic Theory.
From this perspective, the first element to consider is the assumption of a new paradigm, the one of complexity, to approach better the objective of transformation, located in a multidimensional fluent and complex reality. “Strategy -as communication- involves thinking and action, action in a changing, ambiguous and sometimes chaotic reality; today, organizations management is, firstly, the management of what is complex” (Costa, 2009, p. 27).
Rafael Alberto Pérez (2006) explains:
the truth is that the majority of the communication operators think (and they think about their strategies) in a dual, fragmentary, one-dimensional, static, casual and linear form, linked to what is quantitative and -what is worse- in confrontational and antagonistic terms (…). The problem is that our leaders have been trained upon the old Cartesian-Newtonian paradigm and they lack the guidelines to act upon the new panorama, capable of integrating to the rhythm, sense and depth of the changes in the environment. (p. 1)
Based upon this logic another element emerges, the refounding of strategy from communication as a relational matrix, which implies moving from a historical consideration of strategy as the conflict science to conceive it for dialog, understanding, participation, negotiation and the cooperation in a systemic, innovative, connective, significant and, socially and environmentally responsible organization.
This reframes the work pattern with human beings (relational) and not with actors (rational), with a more consensual and cultural orientation. If reality is a plot, and we humans are part of it, strategy becomes a type of knitting and unraveling of that net in search for a more favorable configuration for our goals and ambitions. That way, improving our connectivity pattern becomes the main task of every strategy (Pérez, 2007, p. 7). Therefore, from this worldview, a plan to help choose a set of the best decisions is sustained, in order to achieve the future scenarios that have been envisioned and that are goals, knowing that other people, organizations, forces or systems may favor or complicate things (Pérez, 2012, p. 56).
On another note, strategic communicational management is understood as a process that transcends the ambits limited to public relations, marketing, advertising, human resources, etc. to be established within more general ambits, the hierarchical  structure, decisions and policies, and from there delineate a global strategy by which all the tactical level communications are articulated, as an integrating, synergic and coherent system.
Even if it is true that the assimilation of strategic communication management offers a solid system of concepts and tools for directive activity, its fundamental work vector focuses on the strategist or stratecomm, the professional or operator of the processes and management of complex environments. This approach displaces the traditional DirCom, Chief Communications Officer, etc. stated by Serrano, Pérez and Mendoza (2001), cited in Islas (2017):

While a DirCom is the professional conceived to direct -from linearity- the strategic communications of big corporations during the Industrial Age; the stratecomm is the ideal strategist to develop strategic communication in all kinds of organizations, boosting the conversion of industries into “habitable organizations”, and increasing the efficiency level of the institution in order to respond in a more favorable way to the requirements in terms of uncertainty and complexity during the inevitable changeover of the Knowledge Economy to the Fourth Industrial Revolution. (p. 240)

In this sense, strategic communication is seeking to generate value in the aptitudes of the stratecomm (offering a concrete system of concepts and tools for directive activity) and in his/her attitudes (carrying out a job with the mental models and personal development). Although, in order to develop the best strategies, having the best theoretical knowledge and the most effective management tools is not enough; they are absolutely necessary factors, but they are not enough. It turns out that knowledge and tools are operated by people who must decide the appropriate instruments and knowledge when they are being implemented, choosing the right moments, recognize the actors involved, understand the political circumstances, among many other factors, which are going to be addressed with greater or lower success according to the personal competencies of the communication strategist (Scheison, 2010, pp. 19-20).
Framing the public communication management of heritage with a strategic approach in this study represents, more than a mode of action, a philosophy, and that is endorsed by the criteria of Latin-American experts who recognize a strategic space in communication in the socio-cultural dynamic, from which society can be framed and meanings can be designed (Pérez, 2017).
Another foundation when understanding the communication management is the Applied Communication5 because it is grounded in the practical intentionality of suggesting transformations to improve the situations groups, organizations, communities and society in general face. Therefore, its double purpose is notable: 1) to achieve objectivity in knowledge, in a way that it reflects, explains and illustrates what is real; 2) to connect that knowledge to change strategies of social reality.
That way, Applied Communication( ) seeks knowledge of the human communication process and the justification of decisions, actions and techniques in order to accomplish greater effectiveness in the purposes sought by communication (Rebeil et al., 2012). Due to this, far from dispensing with theory and the methodologically rigorous research, Applied Communication requires them as an essential condition for the detailed exploration of a problem or situation inherent in communication or the contribution of results applicable to any concrete social situation in a short or long term.

[4] The field of study of Applied Communication emerged during the second half of the twentieth century when researches and professionals of Communication in The United States began posing questions about the need of relating the theoretical approaches to its applicability in the solving of social problems (Rebeil et al., 2012, P. 6).

It is important to point out that this approach is grounded in the Practical Theory for communication in its four lines: 1) Practical Theory as the establishment of maps and courses of action; 2) Practical Theory for committed reflection; 3) Practical Theory as a transformative practice and, 4) Practical Theory as the praxis between research and action.
The different approaches of Practical Theory are based upon the assumption that there is the necessity of transforming an emerging problematic situation in a social, organizational, communal or group context (it can even be personal) and guide it so that it benefits from assumed change processes. Therefore, they assume the need of social agents, who use processes of research, mediation, participation, facilitation, commitment and contribution of suggestions in order to achieve the required changes into the groups of interest, community or society (Rebeil, 2014, p. 21). 
In the Applied Communication approach, a cross-process stands out in the participation process to achieve the communicational and management goals, objectives and purposes, an element considered for this study and that is grounded in the postulates of Popular Education by Paulo Freire, and in the practical and theoretical-methodological proposal of the communication Pedagogy by Mario Kaplún (2002).
The former author recognizes the need of articulating communicative processes not only aimed at expressing ideas, but at promoting genuine participation, which is the generator of consciousness, of power, of critical sense that enriches all the participants of the process.; likewise, with a tendency not to reproduce the historical mechanisms of denomination, but to subvert them. This logic becomes liberating in the communicative process since it tends to reinforce critical thinking, stimulate the emergence of new sensible subjective constructions and to erode hegemony.
The latter, referring to Kaplún, underpins dialog as an activating mechanism of critical reflection and action. Therefore, based upon the stance supported by this author, a model that transcends the idea of understanding participation just as the presence, the possibility of informing, or of being informed, is taken into consideration; it includes the capacity of exerting criterion grounded in definition, analysis, suggestions for solutions, the execution of actions, control, tracking and evaluation of the processes in which they are involved.
Therefore, it is recognized that feelings of belonging and commitment are generated and created at the broad levels of participation by the people involved, a vital aspect in development projects as well as in researches aimed at producing enduring changes in the attitudes, values and behavioral aspects of citizens around heritage.

Theory about heritage

To understand the ins and outs of heritage as a reference object of communication and management in the results of the research here presented, it has been necessary to draw on its study theories and the concepts developed from said disciplinary field such as management and heritage interpretation. The theoretical-methodological references are grounded in the proposal of Freeman Tilden (1957) and Aldridge (1974), recognized as founders in the subject, and some more recent others such as Jorge Morales (2004, 2008), S. Ham (2005, 2006), Mateos Rusillo (2011, 2013), and Marc Compte-Pujol (2016), who accomplished an integration with social communication in its widest sense.
As for heritage, it is recognized as a multidisciplinary concept, with different ambits for applicability, and a systematization of approximations to the term that allows defining it as

A changing, subjective and controversial social construction, inherited from the past or created in the present, capable of encompassing all types of natural and cultural, tangible and intangible elements, previously selected and activated by a hegemonic community, which attributes certain meanings and exceptionality principles to them, with the twofold purpose of preserving them for the future and use them in the present to benefit the community to which they belong. (p. 90)

Similarly, it is important to highlight the management of the heritage resource, and within that, its dissemination as a mediating process between heritage and society; since it acts as a determining factor for accessibility to its use and enjoyment and, on another note, as a knowledge transference activity (Martín Guglielmino, 2007). Although, the discipline that bases the transference of meanings of the heritage resource connected with the experiences and interests of visitors is the Interpretation of heritage, which is recognize as a communicative process since it formulates symbolic speeches that, as stated by Ham (2006), should be appealing, with the power of drawing attention, appropriate for the audience for its comprehensible messages that evoke clear meanings, organized in a script or logical conceptual scheme and with a thematic that expresses a defined idea.
It is even possible to add the fact that the Interpretation of heritage provides a wide range of methodological patterns and guidelines for communicating with the audience, for the presentation of heritage to that audience in situ, and to transmit a striking message that, to the extent possible, transcends the mere fact of the visit (Martín). In a similar way, it is recognized as an effective management instrument to reduce the negative impact and instill positive attitudes and behaviors towards heritage and social environment.
Likewise, an effectiveness of the link with society, through direct or indirect channels, is recognized, which contrast with the precepts assumed in the study. Direct channels, in particular, are notified through museums, historical centers, archaeological sites, archives, botanical gardens, libraries, protected natural spaces, reserves or zoological gardens, and all those other public cultural agents whose work includes the management of natural, cultural or mixed heritage. However, the indirect aspect occurs when dissemination is included in professional training and/or transmission plans or programs; in the relation with social media, in programs of cultural promotion and information at a general level and/or in touristic strategies. This way, the direct and indirect channels are recognized in the conformation of the Model as spaces for acknowledging heritage with a holistic approach.

Public Administration

Heritage, as a public asset of a nation, is administered by the State and its institutions system. Therefore, the approach to Public Administration as a disciplinary field has provided sufficient references and elements that mediate, on the one hand, as a management object and, on the other hand, as object of preservation to avoid attacks against it, to remedy created situations or to intervene legally for its restoration or reconstitution. We have to bear in mind that Public Administration also requires the need of knowing all that that belongs to the State and it is of its interest in order to perform an effective management that generates new richness and increases public heritage enhancing it in all of its aspects. That is why the forms and procedures associated to the heritage management system, State policies, governmental programs, laws, current legal regulations and assigned budgets are taken into account as interventionists in the conservation and increasing the value of different sectors of economy and society.
Promoting civil patriotism, the one of active community feeling, by Local Administration, has its main referent in heritage. However, its case is more complex. Socialization, the unavoidable responsibility of public entities, goes beyond transferring its knowledge/appropriation; this is integrated as part of the global management of heritage performed by the Local Administration, which goes through a cycle: Programs Planning, Organization, Direction and Control, which are taken into account as methodological elements to provide bases to the Model.
Similarly, it is necessary to point out the need of forming local autonomy in the management of heritage with financial self-sufficiency. The international, national and regional subsidies and aids must not cover the total amount of the preserved budgets, although they constitute the fundamental basis to start the project, especially in locations with limited resources. Neither these support programs can be extended indefinitely nor the subsidies meant for integral improvements and the heritage conservation and restoration have to be granted forever, which is why sustainable economic self-management forms have to be designed.
By considering Public Administration and its logics around heritage management, it would seem as a reversion to the authoritarian/totalitarian vision that deems heritage only that that is administered by the State. However, the approach here supported considers it to be the purpose of providing basis to a more integral worldview of the phenomenon. At this point, it is valid to reaffirm the critical stance assumed about heritage as it is a social construction grounded in the reference of minorities, people as individuals in their daily practices, in different contexts and, who of course, are mediated by relations of power that many times go unnoticed in the heritage management of the State (Heinich, 2014).

3.2. Internal elements of the public communication management model of heritage

3.2.1. Guiding principles of the model

• Correspondence between institutional communication management and Cultural Policy, and State Communication and the Cuban Government, and the economic, political and social management system of Public Administration.
• Expression of heritage as historic memory, legacy to the future, very expressive or representative of the cultural identity, and a reference point to social and economic development.
• Culture, identity and local heritage as central elements of the communicative speech and institutional operations.
• Systemic, applied and participative approach of the public communication management of heritage closely connected to institutional management.
• Integrated feature of the public communication management of heritage from and for three scenarios: institutional, communal and media.

3.2.2. Purpose of the study

To articulate the organizational project of the Office of the Conservator of the City of Cienfuegos with its audiences of interest through a consolidated Public Communication System; all of this for the sake of reinforcing the identity, culture, working environment, public image and its social projection towards a sustainable and successful development of the local space, tourism and culture.

3.2.3. Goals

• To equip the Office of the Conservator of the City of Cienfuegos with a public communication management Model of heritage.
• To create the bases of integration, substantive implication and responsible attitude of the actors of the OCCC, the governmental ones, the decision-makers and citizens, to act in favor of safeguarding, protecting and conserving the Cienfueguero local heritage

Source: authors’ own creation.

Graphic 2. Diagram of the Public Communication Management Model of Heritage.

The layout of the Model comprises a Social System (SS), formed by the political, economic, cultural and social institutions and organizations, the local actors, citizens and the OCCC. In particular, we try to exhibit the required dialog between the Office of the Conservator of the City of Cienfuegos and the Provincial Assembly of People’s Power, as an instance to which it subordinates, and with the local institutions group that arrange the heritage agenda: Ministry of Culture (House of Culture, museums), Ministry of Education, Provincial Center of Heritage and Ministry of Tourism (travel agencies, tour operators, tour guides).
The Communicative System (CS) is formed by both the emergent and traditional communication and media institutions (Radio Ciudad del Mar, 5 de Septiembre Editorial and Telecentro Perlavisión), and the very communication structure of the OCCC. As for the communication management of the OCCC, its cycle is described from the diagnosis phase, followed by planning, then organization and ending with the evaluation process. For its part, the Referential System is formed by the very purpose of communication; cultural and natural heritage.
As presented in the graphic, the SS, CS and RS are formed as open systems that dynamically interchange between them and with the context of development or environment, but preserving their autonomy. They possess cognitive, organizational and material elements within them that, on their classical denomination, correspond to a superstructure, structure and infrastructure that in each one of the systems assume different characteristics and they mutually affect each other.
As integral components of the public communication management Model there are: the structural or organizational ones, providing order, functioning and a material basis to the Communication System at a global level; the procedural ones, which differentiate the communicative process, with specific positions and functions; the situational ones, which are grounded in general ambits or the management scope of action and the performance component, determined by the areas in which the actors are specialized in the exercise and control of social and professional communication practices within the institutional framework.

3.3. Methodological elements

According to the purpose, the objectives posed and once we had the components identified, the general guidelines for the implementation of the public communication management model of heritage here proposed were established. This is based upon the conceptual theoretical references previously explained and that also develop a methodological perspective capable of articulating the elements when understanding the very subject of study.
In this sense, an integration of the Organizational Communication Strategic Model proposed by Rafael Alberto Pérez (2001), the Administration Management Model by Deming (1989), the Global Communication of Heritage proposition by Mateos Rusillo (2008) and, from a national context, the theoretical-methodological bases for a Communication Management Model with a systemic-cultural approach by Irene Trelles (2002) give a systemic, participative, strategic and applied characteristic to the public communication management of heritage consistent with the characteristics of the Cuban context, the conceptual references here presented and the context under analysis, the OCCC.
Among the methodological observations of interest to the Model, there is the identification or creation of an organizational structure that mediates and advises the communication processes and that it is specialized in its management, but with an organizational culture aiming at enhancing them at an individual level. Likewise, we noticed an emphasis in the normative aspects and communication policies as regulation mechanisms, since they offer a guideline capable of integrating to the global policies of the organization and to the ones established by the Public Administration entities which manage the local heritage of a state or nation. Simultaneously, its establishment adopts the references of the Cultural Policy and Cuban communication, and the guidelines of the economic policy and of the State.
Revisiting the implementation of the Model, its actions and tasks are identified, which move, based upon the assumption of the management global procedure of organizations, in two stages: 1) Presentation of the model proposed in the OCCC; 2) Implementation. This second stage is structured in phases (diagnosis, planning, organization and evaluation-control). An observation to the flexible feature of the phases or stages of this management alludes to its possibility of developing simultaneously and harmonizing with inherent functions in it, since they are continuous processes that occur in the praxis of communication and its management in institutional contexts.

3.3.1. Stage 1 - Presentation of the proposed model

As a first step of the corresponding stage, we propose the presentation of the Model designed to all the structures and departments of the OCCC for the analysis of its appropriateness and potential implementation. This is based upon the criteria that communication management and its conception are not only aspects agreed by those actors who determine and execute communicative actions, but that involves all the members on the institution, since it is a basic tool to achieve understanding and daily work upon the grounds of assertiveness and participation. In this sense, first, we propose its discussion with the members of the Directorate and the Sub-Directorate of Communication of the OCCC and, secondly, with the personnel of the different departments. This analysis and discussion practice will allow involving all the levels of the organization and underpin a consensus in the development of the foreseen phases and actions.
The process of presenting the public communication management Model must consider as a second step sharing it with the decision maker entities and institutions with which the OCCC interacts, but that additionally define its relations with the environment( ), mediate the very production of public communication and, in other cases, act as disseminators of the heritage agenda, among them: the Municipal and Provincial Assemblies of People’s Power, Provincial Department of Culture, Provincial and Municipal Department of Education, elementary, high and pre-university schools, Health Directorate, the Young Communists League, Ministry of Tourism, travel agencies, Palmares Business Group, the Cultural Assets Fund, the Cuban Association of Artist Artisans, Artex, the Taller de la Gráfica, the Commerce Business Group, and the media of the province: Radio Ciudad del Mar, 5 de Septiembre editorial, and Telecentro Perlavisión.
As a third step, there is its presentation to teachers and researchers of the Communication Department of the University of Cienfuegos (UCF) and to those professionals in communication members of the Social Communicators Association [ES: ACCS], which can propose improvements for its implementation and assist in the actions of training planned for the following stage.
The fourth and last step corresponds to citizen consultation through meetings held by the CDR [EN: Committees for the Defense of Revolution], People’s Power, FMC [EN: Federation of Cuban Women] or through spaces created by the group implementing the Model. The interchanges aimed at the participation of the trained actors and citizens result in an indispensable process that requires motivation and enables the collective construction of arguments and ideas. Additionally, it enhances transforming and unifying potentialities.
Each one of the meetings aimed at the presentation of the Model should be held as a workshop and with the aid of participative techniques to promote debate, dialog and the critical valuing of the performance. Additionally, the creation of a report with the observations, suggestions, recommendations or disagreements made would be necessary in order to consider its impact in its implementation or the incorporation of possible changes. 

3.3.2. Stage 2 - Implementation of the public communication management model of heritage

The stage corresponding to the implementation comprises a set of phases and actions for the sake of generating positive transformations around the public communication production of the OCCC, as well as the substantive commitment in this endeavor from the actors of the institution who work at the different key departments and areas, the external entities and citizens in general. The estimated implementation time of the Model is expected to be two years long, although the flexible character that underpins its implementations entails adjustments whenever deemed necessary.

Diagnosis Stage

Once the presentation, discussion and analysis of the Model are finished, we are going to proceed to form a managing group or team work, which is going to focus on the operative aspects of the process. Said group will work inside the structure (Communication Directorate) with the support of external advisers trained for these matters. Additionally, members of the Sub-Directorate of Cultural Promotion Management and Public Relations, their different departments, representatives of the Government (Municipal Assembly of People’s Power, Provincial Assembly of People’s Power, People’s Councils), formal and informal leaders of the communities who are within the range of activities of the OCCC, professors and/or researchers of the Social Communication Department of the UCF and the Cuban Association of Social Communicators, the provincial and local media, and other institutions that, based on their social purpose, arrange the heritage media, must be included. In this sense, it is necessary to aim at achieving stability and the commitment of the actors who form the group as a guarantee of the right implementation and the continuity of its success.
The idea of considering the leading of the process in the hands of the Communication Directorate may seem as an aggravating factor due to its impact on the increase in the creation flows, tasks, responsibilities and the scarce availability of subjects; but they are the ones who know best the internal dynamics and can act when determining the methods. In this sense, we propose an implementation of the Model in a progressive way, by which the required transformations are adopted and with a rigorous planning. Additionally, concrete actions must be delegated to the external advisers and other members of the managing group in order to, far from hindering its execution, facilitate its implementation.
Regarding the forming of the managing group, we suggest a previous period of training and coaching for the actors who will guide the implementation process of the management Model. Among the contents that are going to be addressed, we identified organizational and heritage communication, their indicators and stages; the methodological tools for the construction of research instruments and the selection of samples, among other worthy emerging aspects.
The implementation of the diagnosis by the managing group must be aimed at the determination of the elements that categorize and describe the trends of the environment and have an impact on the process of communication of the OCCC, as well as of the particularities of said processes within the internal framework. Among the aspects addressed within the Inter-Organizational and Social framework, there are the demographic, political, legal, economic, cultural, technological and communicative ones, which mediate the communication processes of the institution under analysis.
In the Inter-Organizational ambit, the aim is the categorization of the general elements of the OCCC (the history of the organization, mission, vision, regulations, values, objectives, positioning, competitors, financial statement, and human resources), culture and organizational climate, identity and image, the human and institutional relations system, its actors, and the communicative and management process of the OCCC. Also, in the diagnosis stage, an inventory and/or an update on the existing one with the characteristics of the tangible sites, object, person or occurrence intended for the alter-actors to appreciate and/or respect must be made. Additionally, an analysis of all the possible information concerning the heritage resources of the locality, even those which possess more interpretative potential and those which do not, must be included.
For the diagnosis it is also essential a SWOT analysis, which, as a methodological instrument, is going to allow us to approach not only the weaknesses and threads, but instead, from a positive appreciation of the strengths, it will facilitate visualizing what can be done with innovation on what already exists. This diagnosis settles the bases in order to establish an appropriate objective of communication that contributes to the mission of the institution and its results areas. 
In summary, among the main functions of the managing group during the implementation of the diagnosis there are:

• To design information collection tools together with the coordinator of the process and the advisers.
• The implementation of the information collection tools.
• Analysis of the data obtained during the research.
• To participate in the creation of the final report for the decision-making process.

Planning Phase

Planning is the phase of projective work that materializes in the organizational ambit of the OCCC based upon the references provided by the diagnosis. In this phase, the establishment of essential linkages with other programs, local strategies, governmental actors and citizens are conceived, as well as the proposition of actions to be taken, inherent in the implementation process of the management Model within the OCCC, which are established in a timeline and are realized in work plans.

Among the actions there are:

• Establishment of the communication objectives in agreement with the organizational ones and their key results areas.
• Defining the organizational communication policy according to the national and international normative documents that establish regulatory principles of the communication of heritage.
• (Re-) identification and segmentation of the actors of the public communication of the OCCC. As for the case of alter-actors, to determine their real and potential implication: what types of actors recognize the heritage values or could be interested in it.
• (Re-) defining of the thematic lines and formats, as well as the communication tools ideal for each ambit (institutional, communal and media) based upon the determination of the interests of the alter-actors. This is understood as a guarantee in the emotional and intellectual connection and the internalization of the universal heritage meanings. At this point, the design of messages with a central idea and in an attractive, brief, clear and direct way must be taken into account.
• (Re-) designing of the actions and programs from the different ambits of the OCCC. To create opportunities for collaborations, for letters of readers or other forms of participation. To formulate a cycle that takes into consideration the climates of opinion and criteria of the actors who carry out the communication process with the purpose of improving.
• To design the organizational communication strategy and campaigns for the cases deemed appropriate or suitable. To decide on the tools of the promotional mix.
• To elaborate the Communication Management Manual, the Corporate Identity Manual, the one for Risks Management (Changes or Crisis), as well as the Protocol and Ceremonial Manual.

Participation is an element that must be enhanced and managed when implementing the Model and that is consolidated in the methods, procedures and actions. Especially in this study, we intend to place the actors of communication in a narrow space for agreement, in which their interests, needs and aspirations are recognized.
In this sense, the expressions generated in the different ambits (institutional, communal and/or media) must be based upon the fact of considering the criteria of the addressees, incentivize dialog, debate, and thinking. In addition, it must favor participation and be spoken in a language that is in tune with the fondness and traditions of citizens.
Similarly, the greatest amount of people possible representing the different segments of the population must participate in the making of strategies and plans. It is necessary to allow different points of view, motivate people to express, offer arguments and be prepared to listen to their reaction. In fact, participation acquires especial relevance during the planning stage since it allows deciding how to route communication in order for it to effectively contribute in the active engagement of the ego and alter actors in the conservation, maintenance and protection of heritage process.
Concretely, a process of consultation to the social actors, families and citizens is proposed from the Sub-Directorate of Cultural Promotion Management and Public Relations, with the purpose of considering the model based upon their logics and capable of being included in their daily activities and the references of the environment.

Organization Phase

During this phase, the elements that offer structural, functional and financial organization for the articulation of the public communication management Model are developed. In addition, it considers the development of the previous actions during the planning phase; therefore, it is one of the longest stages.
First of all, we proceed to the creation of the Communication Directorate and to determine the functions, faculties and responsibilities of its directors and members, who ought to take into consideration the specialization of the production of public communication within the designed fields of activity: institutional, communal and media. Although the managing group and directors of the OCCC adopt these functions completely, these should consider a subordinating group in the structure, directly below the Directorate-General of the OCCC, and the indispensable articulation and management of the communication processes at their different levels: Intra-Organizational, Inter-Organizational and social.
Another fundamental aspect under discussion in this stage is the economic budget and the technological infrastructure, by which the needs for optimizing the development of the communicative processes, the different development programs, the actions, strategies and campaigns are identified. Even if the absence of an institutional budget for the communication activity has been a recurring issue, we must resort to its consideration and allocation by the institutional directors and decision-makers. However, the strengthening and use of subsidies, communal local projects management with and through development agencies, and the introduction of the provision of services (cultural, informative, communicative, training and advising) are suggested as ways for self-financing.
On another note, the need of developing and consolidating a digital media system for the dissemination of local heritage contents stands out. This defines the emergence of a web page, the creation of institutional profiles on social media or on mobile platforms for the sake of contributing to the dissemination of the communicative productions by which, the interested actors, among them, citizens, can have access to at any time as a constant and unobstructed interaction space. With the use of these mediums, topics and approaches can arise, and offer continuity to the issues being addressed. Concretely, the creation of a digital platform aims at ensuring contact and enhancing the reach of the population.
As a part of the organization phase, the profile of the communicator of heritage must be defined, since he/she executes the management processes in different contexts and works according to the needs and interests of different age groups.

Evaluation and Control Phase

It has a fundamental role by ensuring the compliance of the objectives of the communication management of the OCCC. To this end, the execution of the planned actions is critically evaluated, to detect errors, deficiencies and positive experiences that can be generalized within the communicative activity process. Therefore, the control is conceived as continuous and systematic, not separated as a final stage of the communication management process. Its implementation provides feedback for the decision making process of the Communication Director of the OCCC and the managing group, which will allow making the adjustments necessary to ensure the success and effectiveness of the actions.
All the evaluation and control process requires analysis and reflection based upon the systematic dialog with citizens, the examination of the participation levels of the latter ones in the actions and processes of the OCCC, the increase in the level of knowledge and information of the strategies and projects that are being developed, as well as the communication abilities that contribute to the enrichment of both actors and citizens, and the feasibility of the processes. This logic is grounded in two variants:

• Systematic evaluation: it starts at the planning stage and goes through all the phases of the process. It refers to the examination of the immediate results of daily activities.
• Impact evaluation: it focuses on the search for the positive balance of a heritage communication that influences on the behavior of citizens in favor of the maintenance and conservation of heritage, and consequently, of the reduction of the social indiscipline that damages it. Additionally, it intends to measure the transcendence of the strategies, campaigns, plans, programs or projects: the evaluation of the impact assesses the less immediate and more general effects, such as the level of satisfaction of the identified needs, the participation of the governmental actors, decision-makers and citizens.

Moreover, participative techniques and focus groups were included as differentiation elements for the evaluation process, as an incentive for the development of critical awareness, the generation of knowledge and the increase in the creation of change agents. Certainly, this could be combined with quantitative techniques such as interviews or surveys. In sum, the following aspects are considered as basic during the evaluation and control stage:

• To establish the evaluation standards
• To verify the compliance results
• To compare the results with the expected objectives
• [5] To take corrective measures whenever necessary

[5] Specific relations of: 1) subordination; 2) collaboration-maintenance; 3) others oriented to the activity of disseminating information.

4. Validation at expert and specialist level

The first step in the validation process was the selection of a committee of experts due to their capacity and experience in the Communication Sciences applied to heritage. At the starting stage 20 professionals were contacted, of whom 11 experts answered to the request.
Subsequently, we proceeded to value the quality of the panel through: (1) a self-evaluation of the level of competency based upon their familiarization extent with the research topic, and (2) the level of argumentation based upon the number of scientific studies carried out in the communication field, number of scientific publications, national and international experiences of professional or academic discussion exchange, knowledge about the current status of the issue in the national and international context, and their capacity for integral and critical assessments about the topic.
The collected data permitted calculating the individual competency coefficient (K) through the formula: K=0.5 (Kc+Ka) where Kc is the knowledge coefficient and Ka the argumentation coefficient. The former is calculated based upon the formula: Kc=n(0.1) where n is the level of familiarization with the topic (in a scale from 1 to 10) and the latter is Ka=∑ ni where ni corresponds to the number (high 3, medium 2 and low 1) of the assessment offered in each one of the argumentation sources. Once they were completed, we proceeded to tabulate the results based on an interpretation scale to verify the coefficient of expertise of all the subjects that were going to be included in the panel.
This way, the implementation of the professional selection instrument revealed that only three of the specialists have a coefficient within the medium scale and the rest in the high scale. This result confirms the selection of the 11 individuals as experts in the topic and that they can participate in the question rounds without the need of choosing other specialists.
In order to submit this proposal for evaluation, a questionnaire was created and administered together with a summary of the main distinctive elements of the Model. In said questionnaire, the experts were asked to express their judgments on: 1) the conceptual theoretical foundations of the formulated model, 2) the relevance of the principles, 3) the determination of its purpose and objectives, 4) its components, 5) its methodology, 6.1) its applicability, 6.2) its correspondence with the policy of our country, 6.3) its possibilities of articulating with the rest of the organizational processes, 7) the relevance of the actions proposed, 8) its utility for the development of the scientific-methodological labor, 9.1) its utility for institutions specialized in conservation, and finally, 9.2) its utility to enhance heritage, and the cultural and identity nuances as a development factor. These evaluations were assessed into a five levels scale: Very appropriate (VA), Quite Appropriate (QA), Appropriate (A), Slightly Appropriate (SA), and Inappropriate (I), which together with other observations and suggestions works as a guide for adjustments based on improvements.
Subsequently, for the statistical processing of the answers and the determination of the validity of the model suggested, we followed the Delphi method taking into consideration that it bases on the intuitive judgment of a group of experts to achieve an opinion consensus systematically.
During the implementation of the Delphi method, it was necessary the verification of the internal consistency of the questionnaire that, according to the calculated Cronbach’s Alpha, was 0.90, which explains the reliability of the survey designed to evaluate the validity of the Model proposed. Next, once the first round of the survey was administered and the results were obtained, we built the frequency tables of the evaluations given to each indicator and the cumulative relative frequencies were used to get to the table that contains the inverse of the standard normal distribution according to each indicator. Following this procedure, the cut-off points were calculated and the opinions of the experts were classified based upon the N – P; therefore the indicators 1, 2, 3 and 4 resulted as very appropriate and the rest as quite appropriate.

Table 1. Acceptance of the indicators according to the first round of the Delphi method.

Source: own elaboration.

Together with the positive evaluations we received some suggestions for improvements which were incorporated to the Model. Subsequently, we proceeded to the second round of validation by which the results showed the consistency and reliability of the instrument implemented according to the Cronbach’s Alpha of 0.93 and all the indicators were deemed very appropriate. This way, the validity of the Public Communication Management Model of Heritage for the Office of the Conservator of the City of Cienfuegos is confirmed based upon the positive approval and consensus of the experts in their assessments.

Table 2.Acceptance of the indicators according to the second round of the Delphi method.

Source: own elaboration.

5. Conclusions

• The theoretical-conceptual and methodological systematization used allowed a critical, multidisciplinary and integrated approximation of the subject of study. Likewise, a useful platform for the study of the public communication processes linked to heritage was established, with the objective of creating a management Model as an ideal typical representation.
• The foundation for the theoretical relations between the communication models (formulated from the Communication Social Theory) and the particular disciplines of analysis such as: organizational communication, media communication, communal communication, communication and culture, and heritage, confirmed the potentialities of the public communication management as a process capable of articulating the social actors and governmental decision-makers in the safeguarding of heritage richness. Additionally, it provided a proper theoretical framing and the definition of the category of analysis, as well as the clarification of its particularities.
• The study of the OCCC as a setting helped gaining clarity in the comprehension of the processes, systemic structure and communication management, as well as the confirmation of the starting premises. Meanwhile, we noticed empiricism, lack of systematicity and scarcity of policies capable of orientating internally and externally the public communication processes, and an absence of integration of the actors, inconsistency and imbalance in the communicative speech in favor of the cultural heritage of the city in its different fields of activity, at the expense of the optimization and effectiveness of the developed expressions and actions.
• The public communication management Model, in its nature of formal theoretical representation, is expressed as a contemplation of an ideal communicative reality. In this sense, the foundations of the current state of the public communication of the OCCC are identified at its different levels and the components of the systemic conception.
• Providing bases to a methodology for the implementation of the Model permits predicting the form in which it can be developed. As fundamental elements, voluntariness and consensus stand out in order to achieve participation from the internal actors and the maximum effect desired: to involve citizens in the restoration and conservation of local heritage.
• The principles defined in the model allow having a clear idea of which should the fundamental characteristics of the public communication management of the heritage item be. In this sense, we aspire to the consolidation of a communication system capable of articulating itself in a cross-disciplinary way to all the organizational processes, with a systemic, strategic, applied and participative nature.
• The criteria of experts, as a method for validating the public communication management Model, permitted, through discussion and analyses with professionals and specialized academics, outlining the proposal around its theoretical-conceptual and methodological foundations, its objectives and principles, its applicability, the strengthening of possibilities for articulating with the institutions of the Social System, which equally arrange the heritage agenda, enhancing the participation of local actors, decision-makers and citizens through their activity cycles, as well as an adequate correspondence with the economic, social and cultural policies that are implemented in the country. The aspects submitted for examination in the survey rounds obtained a consensus providing the predominant distinction of very appropriate during the evaluation, which is why we considered the proposal of the Public Communication Management Model of Heritage for the OCCC to be valid.

Referencias bibliográficas

1. Albornoz, L., Almirón, N., Reig, R., Castells, M., Hallin, D., y Mancini, P. (2011). Reseñas. CIC Cuadernos de Información y Comunicación, 16, 219-234.
2. Aldridge, D. (1974). Upgrading park interpretation and communication with the public. 2 Conferencia Mundial sobre Parques Nacionales, Yellowstone, Grand Teton, EUA.
   
3. Alomá, P. R. (Ed.). (2012). Luces y simientes. Territorio y gestión en cinco centros históricos cubanos. Ediciones Boloña.
   
4. Arceluz Vives, D. (2014). Diagnóstico de comunicación interna de la oficina del conservador de la ciudad de Cienfuegos [tesis de licenciatura no publicada, Universidad de Cienfuegos].
   
5. Arribas, A., Herrera Echenique, R., y Pérez González, R. A. (Coords.). (2017). Nueva teoría estratégica: Repensando la estrategia desde la comunicación. Universidad de los Hemisferios.
   
6. Becerra, M., y Mastrini, G. (2006). Senderos de la economía de la comunicación: un enfoque latinoamericano. CIC Cuadernos de Información y Comunicación, 11, 111–128.
   
7. Becerra, M., y Mastrini, G. (2009). Los dueños de la palabra: acceso, estructura y concentración de los medios en la América Latina del s. XXI. Prometeo.
   
8. Becerra, M., y Mastrini, G. (2011). Estructura, concentración y transformaciones en los medios del cono sur latinoamericano. Comunicar, Revista científica de educomunicación, XVIII(36), 51-55.
   
9. Bolaño, C., y Mastrini, G. (2002). Economia política da comunicação: uma contribuicao marxista para a constituição do campo comunicacional. Matrizes comunicacionais latino-americanas: Marxismo e Cristianismo, 5, 43-62.
   
10. Castellanos, N. P. (1998). Los museos, como medios de comunicación: museos de ciencia y tecnología. Revista Latina de Comunicación Social, (7). http://www.revistalatinacs.org/a/71mus.htm
    
11. Capriotti, P., y Oliveira, A. (2013). Gestión estratégica de los públicos en museos. De la identificación a la comunicación. El profesional de la información, 22(3), 210-214.
    
12. Compte-Pujol, M. (2016). La estrategia de comunicación del patrimonio desde la comunicación corporativa y las relaciones públicas. Análisis de un caso: el patrimonio de la humanidad de la UNESCO en España [tesis de doctorado, Universidad Ramón Llull]. http://hdl.handle.net/10803/400386
    
13. Conforti, M. E., y Endere, M. L. (2012). La imagen de la arqueología y el patrimonio arqueológico en los medios de comunicación. Un análisis sobre la prensa gráfica local. Antípoda, Revista de Antropología y Arqueología, 14, 163-184. http://dx.doi.org/10.7440/antipoda14.2012.08
    
14. Costa, J. (2001). Imagen corporativa en el siglo XXI (1ra ed.). La Crujía Ediciones.
    
15. Costa, J. (2009). DirCom. Estratega de la complejidad. Nuevos paradigmas para la dirección de la comunicación. Universitat de Valencia.
    
16. Costa, J. (2012). Construcción y gestión estratégica de la marca: modelo Master Brand. Revista Luciérnaga, (8), 20-25. https://dialnet.unirioja.es/servlet/articulo?codigo=5529533
    
17. Costa, J. (2015). El paradigma DirCom. El nuevo mapa del mundo de la comunicación y el management estratégico global. Joan Costa Institute.
    
18. Dávila Lorenzo, M., González Martínez, G., y Preciado Martínez, M. (2018). La radio como medio de comunicación del patrimonio cultural. Fernandina Radio: un estudio de caso. Revista Universidad y Sociedad, 10(5), 416-423. http://rus.ucf.edu.cu/index.php/rus
    
19. Dávila Lorenzo, M., y Arceluz Vives, D. (2017). El proceso de comunicación interna en la oficina del conservador de la ciudad de Cienfuegos. Revista Conrado, 14(61), 133-140. http://conrado.ucf.edu.cu/index.php/conrado
    
20. Dávila Lorenzo, M., y Lorenzo Suárez, I. (2019). Estrategia de comunicación de la oficina del conservador de la ciudad de Cienfuegos para la educación del valor conservación del patrimonio cultural. Universidad y Sociedad, 11(3), 266-273. http://rus.ucf.edu.cu/index.php/rus
    
21. Deming, W. E. (1989). Calidad, productividad y competitividad: la salida de la crisis. Ediciones Díaz de Santos.
    
22. Galindo Cáceres, L. J. (2008). Comunicología, memética e ingeniería social del patrimonio cultural apuntes sobre visiones y posibilidades. Question, 1(20). https://www.perio.unlp.edu.ar/ojs/index.php/question/article/view/664
    
23. Galindo Cáceres, L. J. (2011). Reseña de “Estrategias de Comunicación” de Rafael Alberto Pérez. Razón y Palabra, 16(75). http://www.redalyc.org/articulo.oa?id=199518706016
    
24. Gómez García, R., y Sánchez Ruiz, E. E. (2011). La economía política de la comunicación y la cultura. Tradiciones y conceptos. Portal de la Comunicación InCom-UAB. https://incom.uab.cat/portalcom/wp-content/uploads/2020/01/62_esp.pdf
    
25. Gómez, R. (2009). Panorama internacional de los sistemas de radiodifusión de servicio público. Vectores del pluralismo democrático, la diversidad cultural y la producción cultural. Revista Mexicana de Ciencias Políticas y Sociales, 206, 157-175.
    
26. Ham, S. H. (2005). Audiencias cautivas y no-cautivas. Un relato de cómo llegué a esa idea y a qué me refiero con esto. Boletín de Interpretación, 13, 2-4.
    
27. Ham, S. H. (2006). La psicología cognitiva y la interpretación: síntesis y aplicación. Boletín de Interpretación, 15, 14-21.
    
28. Heinich, N. (2014). La fábrica del patrimonio. Apertura y extensión del corpus patrimonial: del gran monumento al objeto cotidiano. Apuntes, 27(2), 8-25. http://dx.doi.org/10.11144/Javeriana.apc27-2.fpae
    
29. Herrera Barreda, D. (2015). Televisión y desarrollo: articulaciones desde lo local. Propuesta de modelo de televisión local para el desarrollo de los municipios cubanos [tesis de doctorado no publicada, Universidad de La Habana].
    
30. Kaplún, M. (2002). Una pedagogía de la comunicación (el comunicador popular). Caminos.
    
31. Katz, D., y Kahn, R. (1986). Psicología de las organizaciones (5ta ed.). Trillas.
    
32. Krohling Kunsch, M. M. (2012, jul./dez.). As dimensões humana, instrumental e estratégica da comunicação organizacional: recorte de um estudo aplicado no segmento corporativo.  Intercom – RBCC, 35(2), 267-289.
    
33. Manresa Pérez, Y. (2015). Estrategia de comunicación del museo municipal de Palmira para el conocimiento de las construcciones conmemorativas del centro histórico urbano [tesis de licenciatura no publicada, Universidad de Cienfuegos].
    
34. Man�uch, Z. (2009, junio). Archives, libraries and museums as communicators of memory in the European Union projects. Information Research, 14(2). http://informationr.net/ir/14-1/paper400.html
    
35. Martín Cáceres, M. J. (2012). La educación y la comunicación patrimonial: una mirada desde el museo de Huelva [tesis de doctorado, Universidad de Huelva]. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781107415324.004
    
36. Martín Guglielmino, M. (2007). Interpretación del patrimonio: Una experiencia de conocimiento que revela significados. Erph__revista electrónica de patrimonio histórico, 1. https://revistadepatrimonio.es/index.php/erph/article/view/23/7
    
37. Martín Serrano, M. (1993). La producción social de comunicación (2da ed.). Alianza Editorial.
    
38. Martín Serrano, M. (2007). Teoría de la comunicación. La comunicación, la vida y la sociedad. Mc Graw Hill.
    
39. Martín Serrano, M. (2011). El colonialismo cultural se analiza investigando las relaciones entre acción y comunicación. Revista Latinoamericana de Comunicación Chasqui, 114-115, 191-192.
    
40. Martín Serrano, M. y Piñuel Raigada, J. L. (s.f.). Teoría de la comunicación. Epistemología y análisis de la referencia. (A. Corazón, ed.) Pablo de la Torriente.
    
41. Massoni, S. (2013). Metodologías de la comunicación estratégica. Del inventario al encuentro sociocultural. Ediciones Homo Sapiens.
    
42. Massoni, S., Piola, M., y Bussi, M. (2017). Un sistema de medición comunicacional más allá del control: indicadores comunicacionales en dimensiones múltiples. Nueva Teoría Estratégica. Repensando la estrategia desde la comunicación, (pp. 202-229). Universidad de los Hemisferios.
    
43. Mastrini, G. (2017). Economía política de la comunicación e industrias culturales: apuntes sobre su vigencia actual. Revista Internacional de Comunicación y Desarrollo, 5, 139–148. http://dx.doi.org/10.15304/ricd.2.5.3754
    
44. Mastrini, G., y Becerra, M. (2011). Estructura, concentración y transformaciones en los medios del cono sur latinoamericano. Comunicar, 18(36), 51-59.
    
45. Mateos Rusillo, S. M. (2008). Hacia una comunicación global del patrimonio cultural, o cómo potenciar su uso fomentando su preservación. Trea.
    
46. Mateos Rusillo, S. M. (2011). ¿Sólo informar o también persuadir? Museos y publicidad en España. Pensar la Publicidad, 5(1), 203-222. http://dx.doi.org/10.5209/rev_PEPU.2011.v5.n1.369?0 
    
47. Mateos Rusillo, S. M. (2013). Museos y content marketing. Hacia un nuevo modelo de generación de contenidos culturales. Zer, 18(34), 13-28.
    
48. Medina Machado, A. (2015). El consumo cultural en el centro histórico urbano de Cienfuegos [tesis de licenciatura no publicada, Universidad de Cienfuegos].
    
49. Meneses Fernández, M. D. (2011). Periodismo, medias y patrimonio: De la curiosidad arqueológica y paleontológica a la ciencia y al desarrollo zonal. Estudios Sobre el Mensaje Periodístico, 17(2), 365-381. https://doi.org/10.5209/rev_ESMP.2011.v17.n2.38120
    
50. Monjas Eleta, M. (2012). El patrimonio cultural y su tratamiento periodístico. Un análisis de la Edición Regional de El Mundo de Castilla y León Y el Norte de Castilla [tesis de doctorado, Universidad de Valladolid]. https://doi.org/10.35376/10324/2640
    
51. Morales Miranda, J. (2004). La interpretación, en su acepción de comunicación atractiva in situ. Boletín Gestión Cultural, 8. http://www.gestioncultural.org/gc/boletin/pdf/Interpretacion/JMorales-Interpreta.pdf
    
52. Morales Miranda, J. (2008). El sentido y metodología de la interpretación del patrimonio, en S. M. Mateos Rusillo (Coord.), La comunicación global del patrimonio cultural (pp. 53.78). Trea.
    
53. Nosnik Ostrowiak, A. (2016). El análisis de sistemas de comunicación en las organizaciones: 10 años después. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/27389943
    
54. Ojeda Echevarría, R. (2016). El proceso de recepción de la comunicación pública en la oficina del conservador de la ciudad de Cienfuegos en contextos comunitarios. Un estudio de caso [tesis de licenciatura no publicada, Universidad de Cienfuegos].
    
55. Pérez González, R. A. (2006). Los 7 cambios de la nueva teoría estratégica. Tendencias21. https://www.tendencias21.net/estrategar/los-7-cambios-de-la-nueva-teoria-estrategica_a212.html
    
56. Pérez González, R. A. (2007). Los caminos que conducen hacia una nueva teoría de la estrategia. Aportación al homenaje a Manuel Martín Serrano. Mediaciones Sociales. Revista de Ciencias Sociales y de la Comunicación, 1, 45–73.
    
57. Pérez González, R. A., y Massoni, S. (2009). Hacia una teoría general de la estrategia: el cambio de paradigma en el comportamiento humano, la sociedad y las instituciones. Ariel.
    
58. Pérez, R. A (2012). Pensar la estrategia. La Crujía Ediciones.
    
59. Pérez, R. A. (2001). Estrategias de comunicación. Ariel Comunicación.
    
60. Piñuel Raigada, J. L. (1983). Producción, publicidad y consumo. Fundamentos.
    
61. Piñuel Raigada, J. L. (1997). Teoría de la comunicación y gestión de las organizaciones. Síntesis.
    
62. Piñuel Raigada, J. L. (2010). La noción de mediación comunicativa para el análisis y el diseño de la comunicación organizacional. Icono, 14(2), 125–152.
    
63. Piñuel Raigada, J. L., y Gaitán, J. A. (1995). Metodología general. Síntesis.
    
64. Quintana Ohallarans, G. (2014). Diagnóstico de comunicación externa de la oficina del conservador de la ciudad de Cienfuegos [tesis de licenciatura no publicada, Universidad de Cienfuegos].
    
65. Rebeil Corella, M. A. (2014). Para una comprensión de la teoría práctica de la comunicación. Razón y Palabra, 18(87). https://www.redalyc.org/pdf/1995/199531505002.pdf
    
66. Rebeil Corella, M. A., y Del Castillo Vega, M. (2015). Principios filosóficos y procesos internos como reflejo de la responsabilidad social organizacional. Casos Grupo Bimbo y La Costeña. Revista Mediterránea de Comunicación:Mediterranean Journal of Communication, 6(2), 109-120. https://dialnet.unirioja.es/servlet/articulo?codigo=5101142 
    
67. Rebeil Corella, M., Arévalo Martínez, R., Moreno Moreno, M. (2012). Comunicación aplicada: ciencia y aplicación al servicio de la sociedad. Diálogos de la Comunicación, 85, 1-30.
    
68. Resik Aguirre, M. (2010). Medios para comunicar el patrimonio: la experiencia de la oficina del historiador de la ciudad de La Habana [tesis de maestría no publicada, Universidad de Granada].
    
69. Resik Aguirre, M. (2017). Medios para comunicar el patrimonio: entramados comunicativos en la rehabilitación integral del centro histórico habanero [tesis de doctorado, Universidad de Granada]. http://hdl.handle.net/10481/48790
    
70. Reyes Piña, O. L., y Bringas Linares, J. A. (2006). La modelación teórica como método de la investigación científica. Varona, 42, 8-15.
    
71. Saladrigas Medina, H. (2005). Comunicación organizacional: Matrices teóricas y enfoques comunicativos. Revista Latina de Comunicación Social, (60). http://www.ull.es/publicaciones/latina/200540saladrigas.htm
    
72. Saladrigas Medina, H. (2005). Coordenadas cubanas para un fenómeno complejo: Fundamentos para un enfoque teórico- metodológico de la investigación de la comunicación organizacional [tesis de doctorado no publicada, Universidad de La Habana].
    
73. Sánchez Ruiz, E. E. (2006). Industrias culturales, diversidad y pluralismo en América Latina. CIC Cuadernos de Información y Comunicación, 11, 207-221.
    
74. Sánchez Torres, F. (2015). El proceso de recepción de la publicación digital “Bitácora de Jagua” de la oficina del conservador de la ciudad de Cienfuegos [tesis de licenciatura no publicada, Universidad de Cienfuegos].
    
75. Scheinsohn, D. (2010). Comunicación estratégica. Cuaderno 33, 17-22. https://www.academia.edu/40452703/Comunicaci%C3%B3n_Estrat%C3%A9gica
    
76. Tilden, F. (1957). Interpreting our Heritage. University of North Carolina Press.
    
77. Trelles Rodríguez, I. (2002). Bases teórico-metodológicas para una propuesta de modelo de gestión de comunicación en organizaciones [tesis de doctorado no publicada, Universidad de La Habana].

Authors

Marianela Dávila-Lorenzo
She has a PhD in Social Communication Sciences (2019). She has a Master’s Degree in Communication Sciences (2014), and a Degree in Social Communication, 2012. She is certified in: Communication of Heritage, Social Problems of Science and Technology and, Communicative English. She stands out as coordinator of the Research Group of Studies of Heritage Communication and Culture in which she has led a significant number of undergraduate and postgraduate studies. She has published scientific works and participated in national and international events. She has been awarded on several occasions by the Ministry of Science, Technology and Environment in her province and the University of Cienfuegos due to the results obtained from the line of research she works in. She is currently Head of the Social Communication Degree in the University of Cienfuegos.
mdavila@ucf.edu.cu
Orcid ID: https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5651-958X
Google Scholar: https://scholar.google.com/citations?hl=en&user=ADK_J6kAAAAJ

Hilda-María Saladrigas-Medina
She obtained her Degree in Marxist and Leninist Philosophy in 1988. She got a Master’s Degree in Social Communication Sciences in 2002, a PhD in Social Communication Sciences in 2005 and she is a Media and Public Opinion Researcher (1988-1995). She is currently Dean of the Faculty of Communication of University of La Havana, where she is also a professor and Titular Researcher. She is the president of the National Commission of the Social Communication Degree. She was president of the Academic Committee of the Master’s Degree in Communication Sciences for 10 years. She is vice-president and member of the member of the Permanent Court of Scientific Degrees in Information and Social Communication. She has been an invited professor to lecture courses in Mexican, Dominican, Haitian, Venezuelan, Angolan and Ecuadorian universities. She has published around 100 articles in national and international magazines. She has participated in numerous national and international events. She is co-author of nine books related to communication research and is author of one. She has won National and International Prizes for her researching labor and has obtained important institutional awards for her lecturing activity.
saladrigas@fcom.uh.cu
H- Index: 12.
Orcid ID: https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5601-8267
Google Scholar: https://scholar.google.com/citations?hl=en&user=u7mFNqwAAAAJ