THE GR INDUSTRY NEEDS TO BAND TOGETHER

Corporate and non-governmental organizations exert a growing influence over public policy formulation at local, national and international levels. Many see this as a legitimate and necessary means of promoting and defending the interests of organisations and their stakeholders. US style professional lobbying has proliferated, first in Europe and then in the developing world. Many organizations are vociferous and effective advocates in shaping public policy, in ways that now go well beyond the narrow short-term defence of their own interests. Policy makers increasingly accept and often actively solicit the views of business and NGOs in shaping public policy on major economic, social, environmental and ethical challenges worldwide.

At the same time, GR has never been more controversial. Even those who accept the value of GR believe that many organisations now exert disproportionate or ‘improper’ influence. Regulation is widely promoted as a solution, and there are strong calls for North American style registers of GR Practitioners in Europe and elsewhere. As a result of both regulation and voluntary reporting, GR is increasingly transparent. However, there can be a trade-off between effectiveness and transparency when it comes to GR tactics. Transparency can highlight issues of consistency between stated commitments,on-the-ground influencing activity and corporate strategy. But the issue of GR transparency is seldom straightforward. Critics have a tendency to accuse organizations of ‘irresponsible GR’ when in fact they disagree with the public position taken.

Organisations seeking to manage and explain their role in shaping the policy environment face two obstacles. The first is the often conflicting views of consultant GR, in-house public affairs staff, trade associations, policy-makers and civil society observers on what responsible GR means. The second is the difficulty of putting a vision of responsible GR into practice.  

While views on responsible GR vary around the world, there is in fact broad acceptance that transparency is a necessary – but not sufficient – component. There are also conflicting views about the areas of public policy development that it is appropriate for private and non-profit groups to influence. However, most people accept that GR  is here to stay and many believe that responsible GR can and should be part of the solution in tackling many global, national and local challenges. Organisations involved in GR can begin to resolve these tensions by ensuring and demonstrating that their GR activities are consistent with their stated policies, commitments, and core strategy and actions. For companies and non-business organisations this means understanding that their relationship with government not only concerns influencing particular policies; it also involves help developing the capacity of governments to deliver these policies. This requires them to: (i) work with countries to formulate policy, by for example lobbying for better regulation; (ii) push governments to fulfil aid and other commitments; (iii) build the capacity of public institutions to implement policy; and (iv) encourage governments to nurture enterprise development and capacity

In view of the above, it is time for the GR industry to reassess our approach to each other and the wider world if we are to make the most of our opportunities. Highlighting GR as part of the solution for upcoming changes will give us access to a new window for growth. So how do we achieve this? The answer is simple: we need to work together.

The GR industry needs to band together and work toward common goals. While we all represent our own firms, our relationships with each other should be mutually beneficial, even if it means sometimes turning competitors into partners. In many ways, our industry is too small, too fragile and has too many detractors for us to be spending scarce resources fighting each other. We need to find ways to combine our strengths and overcome our weaknesses to create better value for our services.

We need to speak with a common voice to promote GR as an essential element of strategic communications. If we advance as one cohesive unit, we can become a formidable force in the face of change.

The best way to improve confidence in our industry is through frank and transparent communication. By using our common voice to explain the positive qualities of GR, we move closer to gaining wider acceptance.

Working together to innovate every aspect of our industry is imperative to lower costs and deliver greater returns. More collaboration between key partners will allow us to share expertise. This knowledge sharing will help our industry pioneer innovative strategies. If we choose to act together now, we need to think collaboratively, differently and creatively about how we can better service our clients. Let's not wait and let things happen - let's make a collective and proactive choice to make things happen, together.

A number of key drivers are now creating pressure for more innovative and constructive proposals on managing and accounting for public policy influence:

(a) Recognition that GR offers a significant opportunity for enhancing an organisation’s positive impact on society. GR is undergoing a dramatic change, from elite influence to the proactive support of grassroots campaigns. Public influence increasingly forms an important part of an organisation’s wider impacts and should therefore be managed and reported as part of its overall commitment to sustainable development.

(b) There is an opportunity for business and NGOs to go beyond the issues and help strengthen the capacity of governments to deliver public policy. We have an important role to play in supporting governments’ ability to deliver public policy. This involves being more collaborative with and supportive of government in the process of policy making itself.

(c) Need to ensure GR is effective and aligned to corporate strategic direction. GR Practitioners deeply involved in the policymaking ‘bubble’ are often criticised for being isolated from corporate headquarters, setting unrealistic performance targets.

(d) For global companies, the difficulties are magnified by the problem of aligning regional in-house and consultant lobbyists working in very different cultures.

(d) Emergence of new challenges and risks associated with lobbying in emerging markets.  

(e) There are differing cultural, legal and public policy norms but there are few ‘rules of engagement’ in many countries. This uncertainty brings risks to business as well as government and civil society.