Ts to identify additional precise search terms. We identified 200 Philip Morris documents, most from 1999 to 2002. Much more detailed information and facts on Web sites and search tactics has been previously published.13,15,16 We analyzed documents via an interpretive method,L 663536 17—20 a kind of historical analysis that focuses on meaning by drawing out “`taken for granted’ assumptions and viewpoints on the author[s]” of documents.21(p151) Consistent with this analytic tradition, we relied on no preanalytic conceptual schema.22—24 To create this interpretive account, the first author reviewed all documents and took detailed notes, and each authors reviewed chosen essential documents. Iterative reviews and discussions of documents and notes were employed to recognize prevalent themes and “clusters of meaning.”21 Our study has limitations. The sheer size from the document databases means that we might not have retrieved just about every relevant document. Some may have been destroyed or concealedby tobacco companies25; other individuals may have under no circumstances been obtained inside the legal discovery procedure.RESULTSIn the early and mid-1990s, PMC’s corporate “story” focused exclusively around the company’s monetary and litigation strengths. PMC executives emphasized the company’s position as industry leader26 and its capacity to win legal battles since, based on then-CEO Geoff Bible, “If you are ideal, and you fight, you win!”27—29 PMC’s stated mission was “to be the most productive customer packaged goods firm in the world.”30 It operationalized this mission by getting “unyielding” in its efforts to sell its goods.31 However, in 1996, inside the midst of growing litigation from several states and sinking public opinion, PMC started discussing the want to reposition the organization as accountable.32—35 Undertaking so was deemed vital to ensure continued profitability and regain publice68 Tobacco Control Peer Reviewed McDaniel and MaloneAmerican Journal of Public Wellness October PubMed ID:http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21323909 2015, Vol 105, No.Research AND PRACTICEcredibility.32—34,36 Employees had been regarded as a “critical” audience for repositioning efforts, with Corporate Affairs Senior Vice President Steve Parrish noting that “[i]f we’re going to communicate credibly a message of alter and adaptation to societal expectations, we’ve to communicate [sic] and motivate our personal internal audience.”37 If workers didn’t accept repositioning messages, neither would the public, and good results hinged on “reengag[ing]” personnel.38 PMC wanted personnel, the public, the media, and elected officials to see the firm as ethical, honest, and socially accountable.39 To assist inform repositioning efforts, PMC hired consultants to assess employees’ “internal attitude.”40 Initially focus groups and individual interviews with 401 operating corporation employees have been held,41 exploring perceptions of PMC’s values, leadership, and image.42 A summary of findings indicated that although staff respected CEO Geoff Bible, they gave low ratings to senior management’s trustworthiness and credibility.41 Furthermore, things that employees rated as critical but not especially descriptive of PMC included honesty, trustworthiness, social responsibility, caring about customers, integrity, 
and ethics.39,41 Concentrate groups have been followed by a survey assessing employees’ views of every single operating enterprise.43 In contrast to concentrate group participants, who integrated non—tobacco firm staff, surveyed PM USA employees deemed the organization sturdy with regards to social duty,.