David Ocamb

As, I’ve previously stated, a strong political brand is priceless for candidates running for elected office.  The same techniques for creating a brand, however, also apply to public affairs campaigns for both issue advocacy groups and corporations.  When employed properly, this political brand can help an issue advocacy group bring in more money in donations, expand its volunteer base, gain credibility in the eyes of legislators and decision makers, make political alliances and even boost earned media exposure.  For a corporation, this brand directly impacts how the public will react during a crisis and will significantly aid their crisis communications.

Issue Advocacy Groups

Issue advocacy groups are organizations that are established to advance a particular cause or issue.  Some of the largest examples of issue advocacy groups include: NRA  (gun owner’s rights), National Right to Life  (opposition to abortion), Planned Parenthood  (support of abortion), Focus on the Family (opposition to abortion, gay marriage and promotion of a “Christian agenda”), Sierra Club (environmental issues), Susan G. Komen for the Cure (breast cancer awareness), American Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals (pet rescue), American Civil Liberties Union (Libertarian social issues), and literally thousands of others. 

A key difference between issue advocacy groups and political campaigns is their target audience.  In a political campaign, one needs to win a plurality (and usually a majority) of voters.  In a competitive district, the audience the brand ought to focus on is swing voters, who by definition tend to be less politically informed.  A successful issue advocacy group, in contrast, needs to focus on a far smaller group of people—those people most likely to be receptive to their message.  Furthermore, an issue advocacy group needs to create an intensity level far higher than a political campaign, since the ultimate goal is to create donors and volunteers and not merely to convince someone to vote for your candidate.

Thus, in building a brand, a successful issue advocacy group needs to avoid moderation at all costs.  It’s not enough for the public to merely agree with the organization’s goals.  It must find a way to make donating/volunteering an absolute imperative.  The three components of a successful brand come into play in achieving this goal.

Experience:

An organization’s experience lies in the story why the founders created the organization, the organization’s success in enacting change thus far, stories involving the issue and membership, third party validation (celebrity endorsements), and anything else that can be used to help give the organization a “life of its own.”  This is a very broad category for issue advocacy groups and varies significantly based upon the issue and group involved. 

Values:

For many groups, there is already a pre-existing values framework to tie into.  Right to life groups can tie into the Christian values framework.  Gun owner’s rights groups can tie into the libertarian values framework.  Environmental groups have created their own values framework.  For others, without a pre-existing framework, they need to tie into a societal value like justice, patriotism, or compassion. The key here is simple; the change the organization is advocating for is a moral imperative.

Policy:

Issue advocacy groups are primarily established with a policy goal in mind.  Thus, creating the policy for these sorts of groups normally comes first.  With that in mind, the organization should always focus their policy initiatives on the hard core donor/volunteer base and should not attempt to moderate it for public consumption.

Ultimately, issue advocacy groups accomplish their goals primarily by their perceived power.  This power comes from the amount of money they have (through fundraising) and the amount of volunteers they can employee to lobby legislators.  Issue advocacy groups should reject the impulse to become a part of the establishment and instead should cater to their core audience.  Ultimately, having a group of extremely intense supporters representing 10% of the population is far more powerful than having far less engaged supporters representing 50% of the population.

Corporations and Trade Associations

Corporations and trade associations established by corporations are completely different animals.  Many corporations spend millions of dollars a year on promoting their consumer brand to customers.  Most publically traded companies have teams who protect the company’s investment brand to help aid the share price.  The smartest companies also have teams who focus solely on public affairs and attempt to build a public affairs brand for the company. 

The primary objective of a public affairs brand is to help inoculate the company and industry from outside public relations attacks.  Secondary objectives can include helping preserve the stock price in times of crisis, increasing consumption (especially through “cause” based marketing), and even engaging other corporations/trade associations in public affairs wars over impending legislation and regulatory agency hearings.  Since they are funded by the corporation and/or corporate interests composing the trade association, they do not have to engage donors and can afford to hire field operatives to create the appearance of a grassroots campaign (Astroturfing).  

Thus, the audience for a corporate/trade association branding campaign is by its very nature the public as a whole.  It is the polar opposite of an issue advocacy campaign that caters to a small audience and is even far broader than a political campaign, which focuses on swing voters.  However most smart campaigns realize their greatest return on investment comes by winning over the influentials: the media, legislators, politically engaged citizens, and key leading figures in the industry the corporation/trade association does business.  These opinion leaders will be the people most involved in framing any crisis that unfolds for the industry/company and will be the people most involved or even aware of the legislative/regulatory processes the company/industry would like to influence.

Some companies/industries are by their very nature controversial.  Energy companies, tobacco, Wal-Mart, defense contractors, and countless others are constantly under attack from issue advocacy groups established to destroy them.  Yet, as recent history has shown us with mortgage companies and banks, events can quickly turn against any company and industry.  That is why it’s so important for every company to preemptively engage in positive branding to help inoculate against the attacks and aid the crisis communications.  Every corporation/trade association must remember that the public has a preexisting frame that corporations/big business is bad and this frame must be overcome through an effective brand that positions that company/industry as something “different.”

The components in a corporate/trade association public affairs brand are the same three I have discussed at length before. 

 Experience:

Experience starts with the company’s founders.  The story of how the company began and what it was like as a small business and how it “overcame the odds” to become what it is today is a powerful narrative.  Additionally, experience includes how it treats its employees, any philanthropic missions the company undertakes, how the company treats its customers, and in general anything in the company’s past or present that portrays the company in a favorable light. 

Values:

A successful brand ties the company/industry into a higher purpose for existing beyond merely making profits for the shareholders.  Progress, saving consumers money, decreasing dependence on foreign oil, saving lives, feeding the world, defending individual’s liberties… the options for values are limitless and no corporation/industry trade association should feel their company/industry is too “evil” to discuss values.  Even Larry Flynt was able to turn his pornographic empire into a defender of the First Amendment! 

Policy:

For the most part, corporations and industry groups should be very careful in articulating specific policies, since most of them will include items that divide their very broad audience.  However, examples like the Pickens Plan from the natural gas industry show it can be useful to actually articulate an overarching plan for the future.  Furthermore, if you are a very controversial corporation/industry, it can be very effective to introduce a plan that co-opts your opponent’s goals and makes the public believe you have a plan to solve their problem.  One example of this is Exxon Mobil’s current advertising:

Far too often, corporations engage in messaging only once they have come under attack.  The fundamental key to crisis communications is to have already established a brand.  This brand will not inoculate the company from attack nor will it replace effective crisis communications, but it will give the company credibility in their response communications.