With a little help from your friends...
October 2009
Author and philosopher Ayn Rand called it: “the tyranny of the victim.”
Activism has taken on a new and unsettling dimension and with it, added a layer of complexity to stakeholder management.
Rarely do activists base their arguments on well-document facts; nor do they affect political change by making a compelling case based on broad public support. These days, they are more likely to be a handful of vocal agitators claiming to represent a broad constituency and insisting that they are entitled to whatever they want, whether it be privately-held property or riding roughshod over the rights of others.
A case in point is a heritage observatory located on the outskirts of a large metropolitan area. Encroaching urban light pollution had diminished the observatory’s usefulness as a research facility, leading to the sale of the property to a development company.
The resulting hue and cry by several small local groups left most observers convinced that the observatory was about to be bulldozed and a phalanx of high-rises erected on a once-forested public park.
Activists effectively spread this message through the media, on websites and blogs and in meetings with elected officials. They claimed massive membership numbers, which were never substantiated. They pointed to the hundreds – no, thousands – no, millions of dollars in equivalent volunteer hours invested in their cause.
Problem is, none of it was true.
The property had never been a public park. The public had been allowed to walk the grounds as a courtesy – a practice the new owner had continued. Activists claimed that courtesy was now their right.
From the moment the sale was announced, the development company had publicly stated that it was looking for a qualified partner to continue to operate the observatory. That partner was found in Canada’s amateur astronomical community.
And those millions of dollars worth of volunteer hours? The facts – and the math – suggest that claim is a physical impossibility.
On this type of battleground, it’s the so-called ‘little guy’ who has the upper hand. The natural inclination of most media is to side with the underdog, with little attention paid to the accuracy of their claims. The inclination of politicians is to give in, mostly to make the noise go away.
It’s a battle that a large company cannot win and the developers wisely decided not to wage their campaign on such an uneven playing field.
Instead, they took a different approach. They did not engage in public debates with the local activists. They encouraged third-party support among groups and individuals that were pleased to see the Observatory back in operation. They also provided expert analysis and fact-based research in non-confrontational settings. They were always available for meetings and information sessions, but chose not to be a public whipping boy.
Third party stakeholders – who had different, yet complimentary interests, were better positioned to speak out in public. Their comments went a long way toward leveling the public relations playing field.
The company made the right decisions – decisions that Communicor recommends in today’s information marketplace.
- When an adversary has an overwhelming advantage on a particular playing field, change the field and play where you’re strongest. If hockey’s your game, don’t lace on your skates and slog your way onto a football field. Stay on the ice and power skate to ultimate victory.
- Find some friends. Third-party stakeholders that are supportive of your work and have complimentary interests are invaluable allies. If you don’t know how to develop stakeholder relationships, Communicor has extensive experience in building and maintaining stakeholder alliances.
- Actively seek out non-confrontational methods of getting your message out. In a world where passion rules over fact, Communicor can help you find the right forum and audience for your message.
At the end of the day, your goal is to win the communication game, wherever it’s played.
The Communicor Group
