A friend asked me why his ask for public policy change was not landing.
I gave him this checklist below and asked him to tick off if he thought any could be met.
- Your message makes no sense. It is written in double Dutch.
- The messenger is unclear.
- The messenger displays some anti-social traits.
- Your messenger is not trusted.
- Your message can only be understood by a few people with Post-Docs from MIT who do their research in the area.
- A reasonably smart person has no idea what you are going on about after listening to your case.
- Your message is politically off the reservation.
- Your message is too complex.
- Your ask defies the law and you fail to mention this.
- You provide no evidence to support your message, let alone solutions to enable your public policy ask to be delivered.
- You turn up too late in the process; after the decision has been taken.
- Your message is based on a reality. An expert on the other side who decision-makers trust, who has doubts about your case, can’t rip it up in front of you.
- You don’t acknowledge that you are selling old wine in new bottles.
- Politically there is no appetite to go take up your asks.
- Your message is supported by those who out of principle the decision-maker will never support.
He came back with over half of the checklists ticked. When I listened and heard the message, I ticked off a few more boxes.
Ideally, if you do this checklist, you won’t be able to tick off a single box.
It can be done. You’ll have internal checks and balances that make sure what you put out in the public domain does not merit any tick. And, often someone not working in the weeds turning the gobbledygook into a message that will land well with the decision-makers that count, not your members
The practical challenge is that for many organisations, both for and not-for-profit, have never experienced the sweet nectar of public policy success. They think that their failing ways are the only way. Anything else is sacrilege. They can’t be helped until a higher power intervenes.