We spend much of our time trying to persuade officials and politicians by communicating with them.
I have a preference for civil and clear communication, either in writing or by speaking and listening to them. I do so for one simple reason. I find it the most effective means to persuade officials and politicians.
I realise this is not popular idea. I’ve found most public policy communication in writing is too long, complex, and data and evidence poor. In some cultures, passive-aggressive or just plain-aggressive threats oozing intimidation comes through in the spoken and written word.
Over twenty-plus years I’ve seen passive-aggressive, complex, evidence-free, language used in meetings, letters and memos. My only challenge is that I’ve never seen this style have the desired effect – to persuade an official or politician to back their case. In all cases, the opposite happens.
1.Written Communication
I’ve written about position papers here, using data here,
My standard refrain is “1-2 pages, use annexes, use visuals, data and evidence, and use plain English.”.
For me, all written communication has one simple goal. It is to deliver your message in a way that the official/politician takes action in your favour.
If your extenal public policy writting is about anything else, such as stating doctrinal beliefs, internal ego management, it is unlikely going to be about the prime objective – persuade the reader to take action in your favour.
If you produce that inner-directed, belly button gazing, writing, don’t use it externally, or publish it on the dark web. It won’t persuade the right people to act in your favour, and will likely lead them to do the opposite.
An aside about Social Media?
I’m yet to be persuaded the social media, as practicised in Brussels, has much of a direct impact on public policy decisions. Done well, it engineers interest at the constituency level, that leads to voter engagement with MEPs or officials. The best example I’ve seens is the campaign against the farming lobby’s attempt to ban the term veggie sausages and soya milk.
2. Seal the deal – Face to Face Meetings
The case for face to face meetings
I find a face to face meeting useful for 3 reasons.
First, you can see if you case lands well. There is something basic about being to look into the eyes of someone and see if they believe your case or not. If you are experienced, you’ll pick up the tell tale signs of support or opposition.
Second, it gives you the chance to clarify.
Third, and, importantly, it gives you an ealy indication if your case is landing.
If it is not, you can either
- Improve your explanation
- Adapat your position
- Realise early on that you are going to fail, and inform your colleaugues/clients
Of course, if you hear people “I hear what you say”, “that’s an interesting point”, “I’ll take your view into account”.
The only thing you want to hear is “I will table your amendment” “vote for you”, ” support you”.
How to Prepare For Face Meetings
I’ve been influenced by the ideas in “Organize Tomorrow Today” by Jason Selk, Tom Bartow, and Matthew Rudy
They highlight the fundamental problem of channel capacity. Humans can only process up to seven simple concepts at any opne time. Saturating people with information paralyses action.
They recommend a series of steps for meetings. I realised that these are similar steps to the few lobbyists I knew who were effective at meetings.
Stage 1:
Step 1: Preprataion
- Send a one pager briefing in advance. For a desk officer, no later than a week before and for a higher up further in advance. It gives them time to preparre for the meeting.
- Be clear about why you want a meeting. If it is about point scoring, skip the meeting.
- You are going to the meeting to get their infiormed view and for a Commissioner etc. their decision.
- You can’t expect to offer people half a dozen pieces of information and expect them to somehow synthesize it on the spot and make a well-informed decision about it.
Step 2 – Write a Script
- You need to write it down. You can’t do this in your head.
- Identify only the most important information that needs to be communicated, and get rid of everything else.
- Write it down in a script.
- Edit and delete. Repeat as necessary.
- Script your beiging and end.
- Script it as if you only had one minute to make your case.
- Have one main point and three sub points.
- The more you say, the harder it is to undertsand you, and the less believeable you become.
- Practice the one minute version of your talk.
- Practice so you don’t need notes.
- Know your core material.
- For each of your core points and subpoints, bring them to life with stories and anecodates and matephors.
- Make sure those stories, anacodates, and metarphors are relevant to and speak to your audience, rather than jsut speaking to you.
Step 3 – Rehearse
Learn how to deliver your case.
- Slow down. Use pauses.
- Use voice energy
- Record yourself on your IPhone, or have a friend who’ll provide brutal feedback watch you.
- Review and improve. Get rid of your delays, complex words, mannermisms .
Step 4 – Triangle it
- Selk recommends “for the three days before your big presentation or meeting, spend three separate three-minute segments per day mentally rehearsing what you want to say and how you want to say it. We advise people to ritualize the triangle training by spending the three minutes each day just prior to each meal—breakfast, lunch, and dinner.
- When you visualize the actual situation you’ll be in, and rehearse the exact words you’re going to say—and how you want to feel when you’re doing it—you’re preparing yourself for game day. You’ll be ready for any surprises.
- Remember this. You are having a conversation. That’s not you speaking loudly and quickly at someone.
Stage 2: Meet
Step 5: Preparation
- Have your passes for the meeting – paper.
- Have a phone number to call if there is a delay.
- Check 48 hours in advance that the meeting is on.
- Know who is coming to the meeting in advance.
- Turn up early.
- Breathe before hand.
- Have ccopies of leave behind and material you have sent in advance (1 week or more).
Step 6. Listen
- Roughly 20 percent of communicating is speaking, while 65 percent is listening.
- So, listen more, speak less.
- Observe the audience. Are they focused and open, or are they reading their phone, looking at the cieling with their arms folded?
- Don’t interrput.
- Breathe.
- Slow down.
- Present present meaningful content.
- Leave openings for thoughtful responses.
- Don’t cram other people full of information.
- List agreed follow ups in the meeting
- Follow up on time. No-better way to establish or lose trust.
- Jot a note of meeting: sentiment, agreed next actions, their position (supportive/oppossition)
- It’s important that your reading of the meeting is accurate. If you misread support, and the official/politician, is against you, you will be in for unpleasant surprise soon enough.
When You Should Not Have Meetings
Now, there are good reasons not to use clear communication and not meet people. These are common ones:
- What you are saying is politicially insane.
- You don’t want your position in the public domain.
- Your position will leave you the subject of riddicule or embarassessment.
- The data and evidence you are using to support your position will be torn apart in nano-seconds.
- What you want is self-serving, e.g. “Do this so I can continue to make a lot of profit, and ignore the externalities”.
- You don’t have anyone who can deliver your message.
- You’ve stepped in too late. The decisions have already been taken.
- You skip steps 1-5.