Tag Archive: government relations


In case you’ve not noticed, it’s been a while since I posted here… Another dead ‘un in the great blogosphere graveyard. Fear not however, there is a second coming.  The reason for my silence is in Spring I left the Beltway and reentered the Brussels Bubble due to needs in our Brussels office. The other reason for the silence is a small bundle of joy (our third) that arrived recently and transatlantic relocation.

Given there is no distinction between private and professional in my world – my hobbies being mainly reading political biographies, political history and despairing at the state of Europe – you’ll find me back on the FH Brussels communal blog writing in the same vein. Given my struggle to maintain this blog in the last year or so, it seems only easier to just go back to the other one I founded years ago.

Here’s some recent posts from me to get you going:

http://publicaffairs2point0.eu/2011/04/14/a-tale-of-two-cities/

http://publicaffairs2point0.eu/2011/06/08/its-not-normal-that-europeans-go-looking-for-serious-debate-and-see-meps-cucumber/

http://publicaffairs2point0.eu/2011/06/09/time-to-throw-away-the-trusty-old-position-paper/

http://publicaffairs2point0.eu/2011/06/07/why-successful-public-affairs-should-be-a-bit-like-a-tom-cruise-film/

http://publicaffairs2point0.eu/2011/04/08/the-same-broom-for-the-last-twenty-years/

Come on over, the Bubble aint half bad.

James

Behold the iPad in All Its Glory
One shiny new toy I am completely carried away by.
Image via Wikipedia

An interesting blog post by Mathew Lowry on the European Commission’s fascination with all things social media over on the blogactiv platform, along with commentary from members of the Brussels bubble blogorati (Ron, Simon and Joe). The discussion centers around the need to ensure that the ‘shiny new toy’ of social media should not lead to the neglect of all other communications tools.

The commentary led me to think about feedback I’d received following a recent successful pitch to a new client. Apparently in comparison with our main competitor our new client liked the fact that we didn’t major on social media but that it was a full and integrated part of the campaign approached proposed, along with other stuff like  one on one meetings, events like policy luncheons, creation of newsletters, earned and paid media (both online and off) and third party mobilization. It made sense to include it in this case, but it didn’t suddenly make more traditional outreach redundant. Perhaps this surprised them, as compared with our competitors I’d humbly suggest we’ve made greater play in that market (Brussels) of our digital credentials.

Our approach I think reflects a learning that I and others have developed since we launched the Public Affairs 2.0. blog for Fleishman-Hillard in Brussels way back when. We’ve moved from talking about ‘digital public affairs’ to the use of ‘digital tools’ in public affairs. It’s a recognition that a natural attraction to shiny new toys leads to strategy being led by a predeliction to a certain tactic and not the other way around.

The way to surmount this tendency is of course to focus on the audience, the story you’re going to tell to move them and the making choices about the most effective channels to do so. (apologies, my audience centric rant again). Hopefully, the people we work with want someone who can help them understand the audience and of course the full range of tactical choices that they can use to reach them. At least I am hoping that’s why people turn to the kind of consultancy that I feel privileged to be a part of.

James

btw – Merry Christmas! I shall be seeking sun and warmth in Southern California so expect this blog to be even quieter than it normally is (or not, as I will have the dreaded-by-my-missus iPad).

Enhanced by Zemanta

Two lessons worth repeating

I was back in Brussels last week for the second time in two weeks.  As ever there was a lot going on in our busy and rapidly expanding FH Brussels universe. It seems that we ran out of desks some time ago as I ended up in the playpen with our great body of undergrad interns*.

During my visit I was reminded of two very important points for reaching your public affairs objectives in the E.U. whether you are a corporate, trade association or indeed NGO. These points may seem obvious (especially to any visiting U.S. readers of this blog), but it would appear they still need repeating.

1. Be as strong outside the Bubble as you are within it

Having a crack team in Brussels is all well and good (FH can help here), but if you’re really going to shape what’s happening in the E.U. processes you will need strong teams in key Member States (happily we can help here too) working in a coordinated fashion on E.U. policy. After all, one half of our legislature is based in Member State capitals (the perm reps are important, but decisions are still taken back home in many cases) and as our MEP survey last year showed, many of our Members of the European Parliament look homeward (media, influencers) for inspiration.

This is of course easy to say, hard to do. Lack of resources and rigidity of your organisation’s structure may make it difficult. Your national level teams may well report to business units focused on the market rather than the ever ephemeral Europe, if of course they exist at all. You are not alone if your organization relies on business managers at a market level to do public affairs as an evening job. Even if there is a dotted line between Brussels and the national capitals, when push comes to shove national priorities still are likely to take priority over European legislation. It’s only natural. There is also a tendency in Brussels to, well, think only about Brussels.

My advice; seek ‘owned’ teams in markets where you are strong (home market, key markets – normally the big five) and plug and play with trade bodies and consultants elsewhere as needed.

2. It’s the media stupid

U.S. readers will be shocked to hear this advice, but Brussels based actors need to keep reminding themselves that while media may not drive the agenda within the Bubble, it sure does at a national level.  As such, not only do those on the ground at Member State level need to be strong enough and motivated enough to liaise directly with government on E.U. issues, they also need the ability to drive and manage public policy issues in the other channels that influence the people we’re trying to persuade. Meeting the right folks at Member State level with solid facts and argumentation counts for close to zero if the media wind is blowing around your policy issue and against you. The policymaker may agree with you, but politically they just won’t be able to support you. Going to see them again will have little effect.

Again, this is a hard ask. Other channels of communications (earned and paid media, online, third parties) do not tend to be the remit of public affairs in organizations in Europe, nevermind the E.U. public affairs function out of Brussels! Nevertheless in terms of shaping the policy environment they’re an essential part of our toolkit. As such, public affairs functions need to start making a case that all communications functions (including public affairs) need to be audience centric, rather than tactic dependent. Either public affairs needs to have the specialists within it that can work all the aspects of communication towards policymakers or they need the access to others within the organization that can help and are directed to do so as part of their day jobs.

In summary, if you wish to be effective in Brussels (1) ensure that you have a strong national network to support your Brussels based activities and (2) ensure that your public affairs function is audience centric rather than tactic dependent.

All this will hopefully be common sense. But it surprises me how often it is not. Here’s the hoping that this little reminder has proved useful to some.

James

*Thanks to Rosalyn, Rosie, Irina, Freddie and Kamila for making me feel welcome in their space. Proud to see so many great undergrad interns now part of the program I put in place.

If you want to become an undergrad intern in at FH Brussels you need to get your course leader to contact our office in Brussels directly about the program. They should do so now. We only accept applications via partner universities.

Enhanced by Zemanta

Thoughts on global public affairs

Earlier this week saw me return home to Brussels for the first time since I moved out here in early May. I was lucky enough to be invited to come back to Europe to share my thoughts on global public affairs with a client in an interesting two hour long to and fro.

Much of my comments focused on the learning from my relatively short time here in D.C. about the differences between the two political systems and public affairs and based on this what this means for the future of public affairs around the world. A true consultant, my deck was as expansive as it was insightful. However, I thought I’d share two slides with the readers of this blog.

The first answers the question what is public affairs from my perspective. As I’ve mentioned before that term has a very different connotation here in D.C. compared to Brussels, Berlin or London. It is also true that government relations is very different in Brussels than it is in D.C. Both points still shock people I speak to on both sides of the Atlantic, despite the fact that due to the differences in political system it’s pretty obvious they will be difference in what we do. In any case, here’s my take on communications, public affairs and government relations.

 

My own view of public affairs and government relations

The second point thought I’d thought I’d share is based on where I think we should go (particularly in the Brussels market). In essence, I argued for a move from a tactic dependent government relations centric approach to a proactive public affairs centric model. The latter, as my diagram above shows, does not preclude the former. In fact, I would argue in order for public affairs to be successful, government relations is actually needed.

 

My suggestion for moving us forward

If you want to have the diagram explained in words, here’s something I wrote in a comment recently that does a decent job of it.

James

Enhanced by Zemanta

Quick summary of a slide from a presentation I gave last week here in DC that seemed to enlighten folks in the room.

Public affairs (Brussels) = Government relations (Washington D.C.)

Public affairs (Washington D.C.) = Communications (Brussels)

Here’s to helping us all speak the same language.

James

So. A start has been made. This is my new blog. As opposed to the old one. I have finally plucked up the courage to sit down at my shining new iMac. I have posted. Before the comments come in (you know who you are) I have to admit to not being very good at managing expectations, or indeed working out how much is on my plate. It turns out that moving one’s life and that of one’s family is not quite the hop, skip and jump one may hope it to be. Things just take longer than one expects. Those things tend to come in multiples of multiples.

So to this blog. The idea is that I am here in Washington D.C. for the next 24 months and I want to both keep a record of my experiences over that period as well as share them with others. If you’re reading this, my first post, at present you’re counted in others. If you’re interested in coming back, I intend to write about the difference between the US and Europe in terms of public affairs, politics and policy and of course observe life in another country in general. All of this with due regard to my employer, Fleishman-Hillard and its client base.

Before leaving Brussels, I picked the theme for the blog, bought the domain name and set everything up. Alas, all I missed was time and of course content. What the hell am I going to write about in this first post I thought to myself? It was then that I saw those three circles in the theme supplied by the good folks at WordPress. It reminded me of the three circles diagram I created post a global public affairs meeting. You can see it here.

My thinking in Brussels was that to become more effective in achieving our goals we need to expand beyond an automatic reflex of going meeting people directly (i.e. government relations) and harness the full range of tactics available to communicate to our audience, policymakers (i.e. public affairs).  Now I’m in D.C. What I hope to learn is whether the D.C. system, with its lobbying registration rules and increased public connection with decision-makers is something we can learn from in Brussels? Or perhaps, God forbid, D.C. can learn something from Brussels?

Let’s see.

James

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.