A good lobbyist will spend a lot of their time writing memos.
The spent here is a lot more useful than sitting on internal calls, meetings and brainstorms. There is something coldly objective about seeing a case written down. Your weaknesses and gaps glare up from the page. Puffery and weak thinking are amplified. This is a good thing. It’s better that your weaknesses and foolishness are exposed to a small group of allies before they are launched out, and then over night torn apart by others.
The memo gives you a great opportunity to make your case. In some cases, it is as, if not more, important than a face to face meeting.
Richard N. Haass provides helpful guidance about what be a memo to a boss in government should contain. I think the guidance is just as useful for a memo or policy briefing written by a lobbyist for clients, politicians and officials.
The advice is excellent. It is not easy to follow. Good clear policy writing is so rare because it is not easy. If you produce it, you’ll start to find your recommendations taken up and advice co-opted.
Most of the time, you are simply not going to be able to make your case in person to your client, donor, boss, politician or official. They are busy people. The memo allows your case to be read by the target audience when they have the chance to consider it.
After my 20 plus year experience in Brussels, I think you need receive or to send a memo in advance of any meeting. As a basic rule, a week in advance works well. It helps the politician or official understand your position, and seek any internal clarifications before meeting you.
If your memo is garbled and unclear on what you want, you are not only wasting your own time, but more importantly, wasting the reader’s time.
Yet, if you send a good memo or briefing in advance, you’ll get to the heart of the issue quickly, reach a conclusion on any decision you need, and not waste time.
A good memo will often mirror the internal briefing the Commission official or MEP has been provided with. You’ll either be looking at the issue from a similar perspective, or sometimes, your memo will have been used as the basis for their own briefing.
Golden Rules
I have listed the headings Haass gives and paraphrased his guidance with some personal examples.
1. Memos should be as short as possible.
Your memos will be concise. Supporting information, if needed, can be in an annex.
I have come to an age that one page – A4 , 12 font – works.
A lot of people like to use font 11. Don’t. It is hard to read.
2. The purpose of the memo should be clear from the outset.
You’ll not let the reader wonder what the memo is about. You’ll not waste their time. From the start, you’ll make clear if you asking a question or looking for a decision.
4. Anticipate what issues are of concern to the reader
You’ll address something that is of importance or interest to the reader. There is no point raising an issue that is not on the agenda or is seen as just wasting their time.
It’s not hard to anticipate what your reader want to know. Speak to them rather than foisting your own, or your client’s, concerns on them.
5. Figure out how much work a memo needs to accomplish.
Is your memo a door opener to a meeting, or is it the only chance you get to get a decision? The amount of time you put into to drafting the memo will vary depending on what you are looking for.
6. A memo is a not a novel.
Get to what matters most in the first paragraph. Most briefings leave the key point to the end. By then, most readers have lost interest, or shut off.
7. The analysis must be rigorous.
Weak, biased or lazy analysis will show through. You’ll use sound analysis, and not fake facts, so that even those who don’t agree with your recommendations, accept your analysis.
If you do this, you memos will be read and acted on. They’ll stand out as a blaring exception.
8. The real costs and benefits of each option should be assessed over a period of time that is relevant.
You’ll be honest about the baseline scenarios, you’ll not be afraid of any uncertainties involved in your assessment. Acknowledging the unfavourable points shows integrity.
Policy makers will want these answers. If you don’t want to give them, you do yourself and your interests, a disservice.
Exaggerating the costs and benefits will tarnish your case. Being clear about the ranges adds kudos to your case.
9. One of your options should be the status quo.
“Don’t just do something” can be good advice. When movement starts, it be backwards as well as forwards. The constant call for change hits a government machinery . Government is naturally reluctant to embark on radical new changes. If you want change, best craft it as evolutionary, incremental changes that can be resolved quietly within the existing structures.
10. Divorce politics and partisanship from analysis.
It’s best to keep your political views out of the memo. It shrouds the analysis. If there are political points you’d like to raise, whether within your organisation, or directly with the politician, do that face to face.
Being silent about your political preferences in your analysis will serve you well. Brussels officials are faintly apolitical. Whilst officials may be party members, the best officials I worked with kept their work and politics very much divided. You should too.
11. If there is relevant history, include it.
It helps if what you have tried has worked somewhere else. If what you are asking for has ben tried and failed, explain that.
During the CFP reform, using the examples of discard bans in Canada and Norway, helped MEPs, Ministers and officials, adopt it in the reform.
12. Include what will be necessary to implement your recommendation
As Haass notes “The best idea in the world is wasted if you cannot figure out how to get it done”.
On the discards ban in the CFP, the discards ban has in large part not be implemented. Greater work at the time on how to get it implemented was missed.
13. Make sure you include any weaknesses or risks in your own case.
You may as well as point out the weak points in the memo. Hiding them does not mean they are not going to go away. Instead, your opponents will highlight them more. If the opposition comes as a surprise to the reader, the chances that your proposal are killed off rise expeditiously.
14. Overcome an opposing argument or perspective by preempting it.
It’s best to address any opposing points up front. You need to do this is a fair and analytical way. If you don’t do so, you’ll have lost a good opportunity, and if you do so in a partisan manner, you’ll damage your own case.
15. Do not provide analysis without offering judgement about what is the best option.
You’ll outline your recommend course of actions. A lot of people like to disagree rather than put a concrete solution forward. , If you option to disagree, you have to come forward with a better way to go forward.
Your recommendations can’t be on the spur of the moment. They need to be considered. The well thought out recommendation is noticeable by its absence.
16. Make sure the options are real ones.
Don’t give false choices. Too often memos outline 3 options. The first and last options are so deliberately unpalatable or off the wall, and you force people into the middle option.
The reality is that you’ll be found out very soon, and the soundness of your overall case discredited.
You don’t need to be held to 3 options. You need to draw out the real choices and what each option needs to get implemented.
17. Be sure of your facts.
In an age when too many think facts are fake, there is no better way to discredit your case with sober forces than abusing facts.
It is better to be unfashionable. Make sure the facts you use are accurate.
Ignoring the facts that go against you weakens your case. Better address them.
18. Be explicit and careful about your assumptions and your methodology
Outline your reasoning. Don’t skip on this or use weak reasoning. If you do, your case will be weakened.
19. Be aware of appearances.
A sloppy memo gives the impression of sloppy thinking. That will detract from your sound advice and counsel.
I find the best way around this is two-fold. Draft the memo, and sleep on it. Your glaring errors jump out at you after a good night’s sleep. After refinement, ask a colleague to review it and provide brutal feedback.
20 Memos can take on a life of their own.
I simply presume that any memo I write gets leaked within 24 hours of being sent. It is sometimes frustrating to see your words in the press or memo laying on the desk of someone who it was not intended for.
Haas provides wise counsel “Before you send a memo, always ask yourself how it might look in a newspaper or help someone with a different agenda”.
Source: The Bureaucratic Entrepreneur. Richard N. Haass, pages 71-75 (link).