How any lobbyist can increase their output value by 1000% +

by
There are two tools I stumbled on  that I sort of get angry it took me to my early 50’s to know about.
I came across two idea,  from Atul Gawande’s ‘The Checklist Manifesto’,  and then Loom. I could not understand why lobbyists did not use them.
Those ideas  are (1) Standard Operating Procedures (SOPs) & Checklists and (2) screencast videos. Combining the two lets me do more high value work in a lot less time.
1. SOPs & Checklists – Increase your output by 1000%

This weekend, I’ve just tidied up my files to collect a series of SOPs, checklists, visual journey charts, and case studies for the limited areas I feel comfortable providing professional advice.
That comes down to the following:
1. General areas: Ordinary legislation, secondary legislation – Delegated Acts, Implement Acts, and RPS Measures
2. Area specific: CLH classifications, REACH Restrictions and some other chemical/product measures
3. Products/Output: Position papers, issue updates, lobby plans etc.

I used to work in other areas – fisheries, air quality, and waste – but I don’t have the current expertise in them.
For each procedure, I’ve prepared the SOPs (checklists, visual journey charts, and case studies) for each procedure. For each, I’ve often prepared this with the assistance of more experienced practitioners and real experts. I’ve often asked even more experienced expertrs to review the draft and give feedback. I tend to miss something that I thought obvious , that is not, or learn something new. At each step, the SOPs has been improved.
They are written so that a non-expert in the procedure can follow them and produce as good as/nearly as good a piece of advice that I could have done.
I have a large print on the back of my home office door for the OLP checklist. It fills the 3/4 of the door. It lists every step in the legislative journey, what you need to do for each step, what documents you need, and who you need to go and meet.
Over time – 27 years – I’ve discovered that the journey a legislative, regulatory or policy file follows is very similiar, indeed often identical. It is true the people involved, the politics around the issue, and the emotions are different.  But, the steps taken to get the idea into a policy, regulatory decision or law are, for about 99% of the time, are the same.
Most lobbyists tell me this would never work for them. It would make their work dull. It would stop the need to ‘shoot from the hip’. I agree. If you opt for this systemized approach your work is going to be less hectic, last minute rushes, by the seat of your pants – often euphemisms for creativity.
Why Not Systemise
When I read through any of the SOPs they are quite dull. You’ll not see any of the following standard solutions that are peddled around:
  1. A DIY Impact Assessment presented on the back of a fag packet.
  2. Prayer or other forms of spiritual intercession to save the day.
  3. A really important person steps in to save the day.
I don’t deny some of the above may work. I’ve even used option 3 and it worked, more than once.
Resorting to 3 all the time is a lot of hard work.
I’ve seen 1 and 2 tried a lot but never seen them work. I’m not denying they have worked, because they are so common, I presume they must work for many. I’m just saying I’ve never seen them work. If you have seen them work, please share.
If your follow the fundamentals right from the start the chances of you getting what you want are far higher and easier to secure. And, if you want to follow the fundamentals, there is no better way than following a SOP/Checklist.
There are good reasons not to do this.

1. You may realize that what you to do to achieve your goal  is politically, procedurally, legally impossible; or

2. it has been tried many times but never worked.
3. It may reveal you don’t have the material etc that is needed to get you what you want to secure.
There are other less spoken about reasons for not going down this pathway. These are the not-good reasons:
1. What you are been recommending for many years does not deliver what you promised it would.
2. You are not an expert in the area you are holding yourself out as. And, before systemizing good practice, you need to know what good practice is.
3. You don’t want to put in the time to master your craft. Expertise takes many thousands of hours of focused work.
Updates
Over time, the SOP/Checklists evolve. In my experience, this happens for the following main reasons:
  1. The law changes.
  2. European Court of Justice judgements changes your understanding of how the law/ procedures work.
  3. Practice changes when the new Commission takes up office, e.g. new working methods, lead Commission departments on the file.
  4. Ombudsman recommendations incoporated into Commission practice.
  5. Legislative practice: lead committees on a file, legislative practice outlined in the Rules of Procedure, practice.
  6. Political mood of the time.
So, I’ll come back to each SOP/Checklist and re-calibrate it, from time to time, based on any of the 6 factors. It tends to be incremental / evolutionary change.
ROI
It takes a lot of time to prepare the SOP, checklist, case study, and visual journey map. I’ve discovered that I’m a dreadful judge of how long I think it will take. It usually takes around twice as long as I thought it would.
Even so, the ROI is high. It helps me with the following:
  1. Produce accurate advice and recommendations on any of given limited areas I practice on. I don’t have to create anything afresh. I just turn to the relevant SOP/Checklist, case study and journey visualisation.
  2. I can’t remember what exactly to do over the many steps (90+) to adopt a law/policy/regulation. Instead of using my memory, I just turn to a piece of paper.
  3. It saves me a lot of time. I can produce a way better piece of advice in a lot less time.
And, you can share the SOPs/Checklists etc with colleagues. They can then usually produce as good as piece of advice as I can just by following the SOP/Checklist.
Cautiously, I think this can increase the output of a team by 1000% or more.
2. Screencasts – add in a 200% more 
If you add in asynchronous communication, which is just a way of giving direct feedback by way of screencast videos, (I use loom) rather than in person, you’ll increase output a few 100% more.
I find it powerful for the following reasons:
  1. It can limit interruptions. And breaking focus, especially if you are in flow, is a sure fire way of making your work day unproductive.
  2. It provides better feedback on text. If I am giving feedback to a colleague, I’ll just explain why I am making any changes to a document whilst I’m typing. The viewer can see what is on my screen. It is better than getting direct in person feedback. If one of the points is not clear, the viewer can re-wind and watch. I’m fortunate, most of what my colleagues send to me to review needs little to no updates. It is better than getting a lot of changed text with no explanation. That just annoys people.
  3. It saves a lot of time. It saves me hours a week.
Combing SOPs/Checklists and tools like loom makes my work life a lot easier.
I’ve found it the best way to finish at a reasonable hour, meet any professional commitments I have, and spend  my time on things  I enjoy.

Leave a comment