Human nature is to wait for a crisis to actually occur before taking decisive action.

Unfortunately, that leaves you always behind the curve and playing catch-up. That’s not a recipe for success in life and often a formula for disaster in the legislative and regulatory process.

The longer you wait to engage on an issue by educating key allies and policymakers and working to influence the outcome, the more magnified your problem becomes. By sitting on the sidelines, you allow others to define the narrative, line up supporters, and undermine your position.

That makes it harder — and more expensive — to solve the problem. We have all heard the expression “an ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure,” and that couldn’t be more true when it comes to public policy.

In fact, it’s more true in public affairs where many advocacy groups have developed a permanent presence to press their views on issues that matter to them. For companies and organizations to stand idly by and wait for the end game to begin makes no sense. While you’re waiting and watching, the other side is laying the groundwork for victory.

With baseball season around the corner, think of it this way: If your entire team doesn’t work out in the off-season and skips spring training, what do you think the chances are that they win in October?

If you know it is only a matter of time before a public policy battle takes place that could have a significant impact on you or your organization, don’t wait for the end game to be defined before engaging. Begin to lay the groundwork now when you can have a greater impact with much less heartburn and far less expense. Dimes spent now will save you dollars — or tens of dollars — down the road.

So put on your policy hat, begin assembling your team, and start practicing and laying the groundwork for the legislative or regulatory season that you know is just around the corner.

Good consultants managed well can help bring success to a public affairs campaign. But when consultants go unmanaged, the results tend to be less positive and the costs can be substantial.

Most public affairs consultants mean well and want to help. But success comes from good ideas, organization, and execution; not merely talent and connections. It requires an “outside game” to complement the “inside game.”   And it matters that everyone understands the goals, works together on the same game plan, and remains accountable to each other.

It amazes me how often I see industries load up on high-profile consultants when a big battle looms. It’s almost as if they think that hiring more prominent consultants than the other side determines who wins.

But without a strong manager pulling all of the consultants together as a cohesive unit, the only certainty is that it will cost lots of money. In sports, a general manager can put together a great roster of superstars, but the manager who picks the lineup each day and demands accountability from each player plays a key role in the ultimate success or failure of the team.

In the consulting world, there are all different types of individuals and firms. There are workhorses and show horses. Divas and chorus singers.  All-stars and utility players. Big Thinkers and worker bees.  All can play a part in a successful campaign if used appropriately.

An organization with a public affairs challenge must first identify the goals and decide what resources may be needed to achieve them. From the very beginning there needs to be a strong manager to coordinate activities and demand accountability. The manager may be an internal resource or it could be one of the consultants themselves. The important thing is for it to be a strong individual with experience herding cats — or consultants.

Well-managed public affairs consultants deliver value. It’s not about the actual dollars paid. Plenty of money gets wasted on low-priced consultants and well-spent on more costly ones.  Expensive consultants may be expensive because they’re the best.  A good manager will make sure to get the most out of every consultant on a project to help achieve victory for the client.

In public affairs, knowing what you want often makes a key difference in the outcome of the debate. Too often I hear people say, “I don’t like this proposed policy. Stop it.”

“Just say no” worked for Nancy Reagan, but chances are it won’t work in your public affairs campaign. It’s usually better to be for something rather than against anything.

Clients who can tell us to stop something and then describe what they would like to see instead or how to improve on a current proposal consistently see more successful outcomes. By having an idea other than “no,” it creates a better public narrative and a more compelling engagement with policymakers.

Elected officials and appointed regulators generally take action because of a perceived problem. Legislation and regulation come about in the wake of a steady drumbeat created by those who seek change. Overcoming that march requires a careful assessment of the impact of a proposal on you and your organization and an understanding of what a better alternative might be. When handled well, it is even possible to turn a fight against bad policy into victory with good policy.

When I used to work with candidates, I always preferred office seekers who could give a compelling answer when asked, “Why are you running for this office?”  Those who had gone through the difficult mental process of setting their own priorities and knowing what they wanted to accomplish always – without exception – proved to be better candidates.  They consistently outperformed individuals who were running simply for ego or because it was the next step on the elective ladder — a natural political progression from one office to the next.

Before you actively engage on your next public affairs program, be clear about your goals. Know what you want and what you can accept. Find an alternative to “no” and be for something instead.

More often than not, a victory in a campaign to stop something from happening merely delays the inevitable. In practice, it is more of a stalling tactic than one designed for long-term success. By taking proactive steps to achieve good policy, you’re more likely to end up with something you can live with or even benefit from.

If you know what you want, you’re much less likely to end up with an ugly sweater.

In reality, regulation and legislation share many similarities and stand to be influenced in much the same way. Agency officials want to be popular, just as much as elected politicians. They don’t want to be hauled up to Capitol Hill or before some state legislative committee and excoriated for implementing a dumb regulation.

Regulators value constituent input. Most of them became public servants to make a difference and do the right thing. By hearing from the individuals impacted by their rulemaking — both pro and con — they can make adjustments to improve the outcome.

For parties impacted by regulation, the path to influence may not be quite as clear as with legislation. We all were taught about “how a bill becomes a law” in civics class and know that to win a legislative battle we need to convince more members to vote for our position than against it.

But what about regulators? How do you influence the outcome of their decisions?

First, it is important to develop a good public narrative. In other words, tell your story and help others to understand your point of view. How issues are publicly framed is probably more important than any other element of the process. Use real-world examples and demonstrate the impact on average people of a particular regulation.

Your message should be communicated to regulators in a thoughtful, consistent, and compelling manner. Agency rule makers respond to important constituents just as legislators do. Encouraging elected officials to share their views can make a real difference, as can communications from academic experts, community leaders, significant employers, non-profit executives, and grassroots organizations.

Finally, the message is as important as the messengers. There can be an unfortunate tendency to act as if rule makers are the proverbial “nameless, faceless bureaucrats” and to resort to harsh rhetoric. Rarely, if ever, will a belligerent attack with a sledgehammer result in a positive outcome.

Regulators respond to smart, thoughtful arguments backed up by reason and evidence. They pay attention to official comments on proposed regulations, media reporting, and even well-argued editorials and op-eds.

When you find yourself with the need to influence the outcome of a regulatory process, borrow from what you have learned in your legislative advocacy campaigns. Remember that rule makers share many of the same motivations as elected policymakers and can be influenced by thoughtful, substantive arguments put forward by constituents.

Co-hosted by DCI Group and The American Legislative Exchange Council

Monday, October 3rd 12:45 — 2:00 pm At The “Freedom Zone” The Bridgewater Hall (Barbirolli Room) Moderated by The Spectator’s Alex Massie Alex Massie spent five years in Washington, D.C. as a correspondent for The Scotsman and the Daily Telegraph Panelists: Tim Carney Senior Political Columnist, Washington Examiner. Author of ‘Obamanomics’ and ‘The Big Ripoff’ Campbell Spencer Vice President, DCI Group, formerly President Obama’s Midwest Political Director Representative Linda Upmeyer Majority Leader, Iowa House

The survey of congressional staff by the Congressional Management Foundation (CMF) found that most members of Congress are using social media to “gauge public opinion, communicate with constituents, and reach new people.”

Click here to read the entire article.

Senior and social media managers in congressional offices said email newsletters and franked mass mailings are still more important than social media such as Facebook, YouTube and Twitter. Still, the importance of paper newsletters may be dropping, as it appears less important than other, more traditional forms of outreach and ranks below Facebook and YouTube in importance.

Click here to read the entire article.

The article is lengthy but worth reading.  It’s a good case study for a public affairs campaign, with analysis about the importance of using research to correctly frame an issue; the need for constituent mobilization; and the benefits of good coordination between the lobbying and “outside game” elements of a public policy fight.

DCI Group was proud to be part of that effort, and you can read more about it in the full article.

Click here to read the entire article.

Click here to watch the video.