Public Policy Competitive Intelligence

Public Policy Competitive Intelligence

Craig S. Fleisher Department of Government University of Sydney Sydney, NSW 2006 Australia

Published in: Competitive Intelligence Review, 1999, 10(2), pp. 22-36 by John Wiley & Sons.

Abstract The need to strategically manage public policy developments affecting business requires a broadened role for competitive intelligence. Public policy competitive intelligence (PPCI) can provide early warning of threats and opportunities that affect company strategy and allow decision makers to take appropriate action such as working to create, change or defeat legislation or regulation, or taking a public stance on key policy issues. In some cases, it also may be appropriate to respond to public policy developments by altering the company's mission, changing vendors/suppliers, and entering or exiting product or service lines. Public policy issues to monitor include those involving national and regional regulation, taxation, privatization, government expenditures, and actions affecting takeovers, among others. Companies also must monitor global, social, and political factors. Competitive intelligence professionals should collaborate with their colleagues in government relations, community relations, and corporate affairs. A comprehensive assessment of the company's public policy environment (PPE) should be performed. A framework is proposed for a continuous public policy strategy process. © 1999 John Wiley & Sons, Inc.

The general need for intelligence about how public policy affects business is not controversial. Many firms derive strategic, competitive advantages by decisions made in the public policy environment (PPE). For example, consider the competitive market implications of the following types of decisions made by public policy (PP) makers: 1. awarding licenses for specific companies to compete in newly-evolving sectors 2. establishing particular product, label or packaging standards 3. approving particular site locations for new manufacturing plants 4. granting certain groups of professionals an exclusive right to practice their craft 5. awarding large governmental contracts on a competitive-bid basis In the past, some firms were regularly able to effectively react to developments in the PPE. This reaction was accomplished through organizational activities such as routinized legal audits and reviews, responding to governmental inquiries as they were delivered to the firm, sending the senior executive to a capital to explain the organization's position, or by hiring highly paid lobbyists to "make the problems disappear." This situation rarely exists today. It has changed primarily because of the increasing sophistication of activist or pressure groups, the increasing diligence and professionalism of public officials, the internationalization of policy decision making, and improvements in communication and technology (Grefe and Linsky, 1995). The need to strategically manage public policy developments is arguably as great as any time in history. This state of affairs calls for new approaches and a broadened role for competitive intelligence. Even though many firms recognize the importance of public policy decisions, a varied range of attitudes and opinions exist about the importance of systematic intelligence efforts for actually gathering, analyzing and using public policy information. For many firms, these considerations have a major impact on performance. Some firms employ specialists to formally perform public policy intelligence work, others expect it to emerge as a routine part of staff members' jobs, some outsource the task to specialized public policy or government relations consulting agencies, while a small number react to matters brought to their attention by their legal agents. Nevertheless, the empirical evidence generated by broad-based surveys in the CI literature has not provided a strong indication of an active management of the organization-public policy interface (Prescott & Bhardwaj, 1995; Prescott & Fleisher, 1991; Prescott & Gibbons, 1991; Stanat, 1993). Only infrequently does one find more than passing mention to public policy issues in the mainstream strategy or CI literature as taught in universities or found in the texts on bookstore shelves (Goldsmith, 1996). This paper is an attempt to provide a foundation to discuss this interface. Broadly speaking, public policy competitive intelligence (PPCI) provides early warning of threats and opportunities emerging from the public policy environment that affects the achievement of a company's strategy. PPCI can be used in a variety of decision making areas, including corporate governance, government contracting, government relations, public affairs and relations, and virtually all the stakeholder relations and communication areas such as community, employee, investor, media, and public. This paper deals with PPCI fundamentals. It introduces a number of topics that are important for public policy understanding in business and provides important definitions. It outlines basic concepts and definitions for establishing PP strategy, and managing PPCI programs and activities. Next, attention is drawn to basic concerns such as PPCI objectives, types of user information needs, and applications of PPCI in companies.

Defining Public Policy and the Public Policy Environment Public policy can be inherently difficult to define and generally entails a complex interplay of values, interests and resources. Most definitions of the term have similar characteristics and suggest public policy involves governmental decisions and their consequences, is structured and orderly, political in nature and dynamic (Bridgman and Davis, 1998). Public policy, as defined for the purposes of this article, is an action (or inaction) made by a governmental body about its intentions that is designed to attain specific results vis-à-vis private organizations. These actions can be in the form of specific proposals, investigative committees, governmental decisions, formal authorization in the forms of acts or statutes, programs in the form of a package of legislation, or even outputs in the form of what a government actually delivers (Hogwood and Gunn, 1990). Government can call upon public resources and legal coercion to achieve its aim, differentiating policy in the public context from that in the private. Public policy is critical for managers to understand because it is the filter between companies and their environment as both business and society influence one another through public policy (Goldsmith, 1996). Public policy decisions made by governments can be the source of the largest cost of doing business; consequently, corporations and business associations must manage the business-government relationship with uncommon skill and vigor (Mack, 1997). Public policy intervenes in organizational activity in four significant ways (Tolliday, 1991): 1. By regulations, ranging from legally binding laws to administrative circulars and statements 2. Financially, from tax modifications, premiums and tariffs to spending on infrastructure and subsidies 3. By economic behavior, ranging from how private goods are produced and consumed, procuring, producing and consuming public goods 4. Institutionally, by distributing power positions, taking care of special interests, and selecting social values for policymaking, etc. Baron (1995) notes that for managers, the challenge of understanding PPE or PP forces government, interest groups, activists and the public - is frequently more difficult than understanding the market environment. Along these lines, some recent scholarship has encouraged private organizations to better manage their public policy environment. Grefe and Linsky (1995) noted that the strategies for influencing public policies are undergoing fundamental change and proceeded to identify tactics that allow organizations to effectively compete in the public policy environment. Recent books by Heath (1997), Mack (1997), and Mahon and McGowan (1996) have attempted to provide systematic approaches by which a company or association could manage PPE challenges; nonetheless, few of these books are read by senior executives responsible for managing their organization's overall strategy. The PPE includes the interactions occurring within what is commonly referred to by business strategists as the STEEP sectors of the macroenvironment; social, technological, economic, ecological, and political. Preston and Post (1975) in their seminal work on principles of public responsibility suggest that firms must monitor everything between the literal text of established laws and regulations and the broad patterns of public action that may eventually impact the former. In a strategic context, management of the PPE requires an organization to manage four primary items: information, institutions, issues and stakeholders or as Baron (1995) calls them, interests. Issues are the currency of public policy debates and are defined here as gaps between an organization's actions and the expectations of those (i.e., stakeholders) who can impact its goals. Information is what stakeholders know about the relationship between actions and consequences

and about the capabilities, desires and resources of the issue players. Stakeholders are parties that either have or seek a stake in a particular PP issue. Institutions are those formally established establishments where public policy is debated and established. PPCI becomes most important from a strategic perspective because it allows organizations to gain early warning to opportunities and threats (O&T) in the PPE. These O&T in the PPE come in about half a dozen primary forms as the following examples suggest: 1) Regulation - threat: increase costs, opportunity: control competition; 2) Taxation - threat: reduce ROI, opportunity: gain temporary competitive advantage; 3) Expenditure - threat: temporary competitive disadvantage, opportunity: subsidies, grants, new customer; 4) Takeover - threat: potentially unfair and unpredictable competitor, opportunity: customers with deep pockets; 5) Privatization - threat: increased competition, opportunity: level playing field; 6) Consultation - threat: co-optation, opportunity: influence resultant policy. Why Intelligence on the Public Policy Environment (PPE) is Important Companies must monitor social and political factors. Ignoring these areas has cost some companies a good deal of money, to say nothing of good will, because they have been forced to respond to public pressure or burdensome government regulation (Buchholz, Evans, and Wagley, 1994). Baron (1995) suggests that beyond typical market considerations, success can depend on how effectively organizations deal with governments, interest groups, activists and the public. In other words, external impacts and public issues are important to management. Consider the following examples: 

 

National Rail (Australia) proposed in 1993 to construct a new Sydney freight terminal at Enfield in Sydney's southwestern suburbs. In 1996 and after having spent large sums, the proposal had to be withdrawn due to a local government's failure to deal with the application following community opposition to the proposal. AT&T routinely made donations to the Planned Parenthood Federation of America for over 25 years. It stopped this action in 1990 after having been drawn into the public battle between pro-life and abortion-rights groups. Numerous explanations failed to satisfy the groups. Microsoft faced numerous court cases the last few years as to its market practices. One of these cases led the company to remove its popular Internet Explorer software from the bundles it normally made available to large PC manufacturers in the retail sale of their machines. Browser rival Netscape breathes a temporary sigh of relief.

Not a day goes by where the global media does not cover important matters affecting business. Business, government and society are increasingly intertwined in democratic societies in an age where technology promotes communication faster and more effectively than ever before. This interaction has increased business' awareness of the importance of strategically managing the public policy environment as it seeks to pursue elusive competitive advantages. But how can public policy and the public policy environment be managed strategically and where does CI fit into this equation? Some observers have noted that the nature of what companies compete for has changed. Companies compete with hundred or thousands of other organized interests seeking attention, government support, funding, membership and credibility in the community. Few senior executives dispute that fierce competition exists within governments for funding, in the media for space and time, and among the general public for attention. Just as companies compete for

customers and market share in the market place, companies also compete for stakeholders and share of mind or attention in the PPE environment. In what forms does some of this PPE competition take place? Many companies have developed "road shows" to explain to potential investors or investment analysts why they are blue chip investment prospects or are being undervalued. Many other companies have sent their executives on speaking tours to convince various influential publics of the need to make public policy changes. Others battle it out in the news media in attempts to convince relevant publics whether they should tender their shares in merger proposals. Finally, companies often spend considerable sums to convince local communities on the merits of a project in order to get the community's backing to make some change If a company does not compete with its products in the marketplace, it soon ceases to exist in that market. Similarly, if a company does not compete in the PPE, it and its point of view will soon cease to exist for key stakeholders. Companies without active PPE strategies will find themselves threatened by agitated groups, ignored by the media and the general public, and faced with economic, political and social neglect. Because of this need, developing an active PPE strategy is a vital part of strategic management and one in which CI can play a prominent role. Developing PPE Strategy Competition in the PPE requires management decision-makers to develop PP strategies (Mahon and McGowan, 1996). Because most managers are involved in PPE issues on an episodic as opposed to continual basis, they should have a parsimonious framework for formulating good strategies; unfortunately, few frameworks exist for this task (Baron, 1995). The author has developed one that has been benchmarked from a number of leading organizations over the last decade on several continents. The framework suggests that the process of developing strategy for the PPE is a sequenced compilation of issues and stakeholder (PPE) management practices (see Table 1). ----- Insert Table 1 About Here ----The process outlined in Table 1 is supposed to be performed in an ongoing fashion and requires the active support of CI resources in order to improve both the quality and quantity of inputs for intelligence processes. It can be applied in doing a one-time assessment of an organization's PPE, recognizing that the assessor will sacrifice a degree of comprehensiveness. An assessor using this process will be able to do a comprehensive assessment of an organization's PPE. Each step is important in the process and the assessor should be sure that each one is adequately done. Items listed under each step are in no particular order and every item listed may not be relevant or essential to a particular assessment. Basic Public Policy Competitive Intelligence Activities A particular type of competitive intelligence, public policy competitive intelligence (PPCI) refers the development of actionable information through legal and ethical means about the public policy environment that could affect a company's competitive position. Actionable information means explicit recommendations as to how an organization should respond to analyses, observations and conclusions generated about public policy opportunities and threats. PPCI emphasizes the development of intelligence on institutions, stakeholders and issues that affect an organization's competitiveness. PPCI professionals are responsible for providing this intelligence to executives, but it is the executives that must make the judgements as to the PPCI's value.

As in most areas of CI, most organizations usually need far more information than can be obtained with available intelligence resources. PPCI activities can generally be organized using the traditional CI wheel involving planning, data collection, analysis and evaluation/control (Prescott, 1987). This particular section will particularly focus on the use of the wheel in PPCI. Planning The planning effort generally begins with an effort to identify PP information needs, establishing PPCI objectives, defining actions, and identifying and deploying resources to address user needs. Among the most critical tasks for those organizing a PPCI effort is to define the business issues the effort will address. This definition is usually constructed by surveying senior decision-makers as to their priorities and by carefully reviewing the organization's strategic plan and strategy. Questions to be asked here include the following: what kind of intelligence is expected and for whom? How will these individuals utilize the PPCI? When do they need it? In what form can they best use it? Setting objectives is also an integral activity performed during the planning stage. Robert Galvin (1992), head of Motorola, addresses the use of PPCI in shaping Motorola's market environment as "writing the rules of the game." He stated: "The first step in any defined strategy is writing the rules of the game honorably and fairly in a manner that gives everyone a chance with predictable rules. Our company has started industries. We have helped write standards. We have helped write trade rules. We have helped influence policies. We have helped write national laws of countries where we have engaged, always in a respectful way. We have never taken for granted that the rules of the game would just evolve in a fashion that would make for the greatest opportunity. With the right rules of the game, one's opportunity for success is enhanced." The first and arguably most critical question that should be asked of any PPCI effort is what is it that the organization hopes to achieve vis-a-vis the PPE? There are several objectives that form the basic justification for PPCI activities in business, including:    

To identify new product and market opportunities that may be available in the PP environment. To provide early warning of external public policy issue developments or stakeholder activities that represent potential business threats or opportunities. To evaluate issue prospects created within PP institutions in time to permit appropriate, enlightened and realistic organizational responses. To anticipate and understand PP-related shifts or trends as preparation for organizational planning and strategy development.

Others in use by organizations that could readily be added include:  to promote "sustainable development"  to successfully impact the outcome of issues that have the greatest impact on customer satisfaction, employee motivation and satisfaction, market share and ROA at the international, federal, and provincial governmental levels  to make use of all available government assistance  to be perceived as a "good corporate citizen"  to give the highest corporate priority to environmental and public concerns

As always, there are a number key implementation issues that need to be considered during the planning or design stage. Prescott (1989) offers seven key success factors to consider including, nurturing the clients by ensuring their support and understanding their intelligence needs, integrating the PPCI program with other units to leverage the existing infrastructure and resources, keeping the program lean and focused, ensuring that the program is self-funded if possible, delivering tangible products that provide value to clients, obtaining feedback from clients and making ongoing corrections, and maintaining visibility and credibility by ensuring senior executives' support. Fuld (1991) suggests that many CI programs fail because senior management does not recognize three basic principles: 1) reality - successful CI programs are built on the organization's existing information resources and not textbook models; 2) time successful CI programs need time to mature and improve; and 3) knowledge - management should facilitate ongoing and effusive information diffusion about CI around organizational employees. Data Collection At this stage, the PPCI analyst needs to determine: (1) "What are the available methods of data collection?" and (2) "How do I choose the methods given the assignment?" Data collection involves legal and ethical activities to gather, screen, and organize raw data and processed information relevant to the needs being addressed or to overall organizational interests. The ethical component of PPCI is critically important because its continuance in most advanced countries is predicated on the protection and maintenance of democratic principles; therefore, the public policy area is one that receives particularly thorough decision-making scrutiny and regulation. Data collection tends to take on one of two primary formats: ongoing as is often the case with PP monitoring programs or is targeted to acquire specific data. PPE collection mechanisms typically involve technical and human methods. Technology collection involves the use of digitized database systems such as those provided through computer search and storage mechanisms. Many of the traditional on-line CI databases such as LEXIS-NEXIS, Dialog and Dow-Jones can be used for aspects of PPCI. There are also specific on-line sources used specifically for PPCI such as those provided by Washington Alert and Washington On-line. Human sources and methods (HUM-INT) are the primary currency of public or government affairs staff members. They involve networking with stakeholders and organizational colleagues, attending legislative committee meetings and hearings, and interviewing issue and PP experts among other related activities. Most frequently, data collection will occur through the connections established between the organization's (either corporation or association) public or government affairs staff members and the individuals built up in personal networks. This can be especially helpful as many organizational members come from recent political or governmental positions and know the key players and pathways involved in navigating policy through the public decision making machinery. Table 2 (see below) lists some of the best sources for collecting data with respect to the public policy environment. This table has been further categorized into sources used in different geographical regions. Due to the dynamic nature of the PPE and this journal's space constraints, Table 2 does not list specific government decision-makers, agencies or departments although these are obviously of critical importance and must be actively integrated in any effective PPCI data collection effort.

----- Insert Table 2 About Here ----Analysis Analysis, where the analyst attempts to draw conclusions from the collected data, is generally viewed to be the most difficult and potentially the highest value-adding CI process stage. It is accomplished by applying known methods and concepts to the data and sorting through what was collected for relevance. The area of public policy analysis for managerial purposes is one that is generally deficient in terms of tool availability. Some of the tools that are used in this stage are used specifically in PPCI while others used in PPCI are borrowed and extrapolated from several of the more traditional CI analytic tools set. An attempt has been made to classify the techniques according to the issues, stakeholder, and institutional approach previously described. The approaches are classified by whether they are primarily focussed on stakeholder data, issue data, institutional data or a combination of two and three of these items. Each of these approaches utilizes the data collected and attempts to deliver information and intelligence as an output. A comprehensive list of tools used in PPCI is provided in Table 3 (see below). ----- Insert Table 3 About Here ----Communicating PPCI results and findings closes the loop between those who collect and analyze competitive information and those who use it to make decisions. Analyzed information must be disseminated via the appropriate means to the appropriate parties that can use it in decision making and then act upon these decisions. This is the point at which information begins to take the form of intelligence since it provides direction to the organization to help it compete more effectively. Successful PPCI is applied to critical, strategic management decisions because it provides senior executives with implications and strategic alternatives that can be effectively integrated into the strategic management process. Evaluation/Control Last but not least, the entire program or effort must be assessed. There are three broad approaches to evaluating PPCI, including the 1) audit, 2) analytic and 3) utility approaches. The audit approach focuses on a systematic review of the outcomes of each PPCI process stage and is conducted using a) key indicator/indices, b) service-oriented user reaction measures or, c) a comprehensive Baldrige-like instrument. The analytic approach attempts to apply the scientific method to PPCI assessment either experimental design whereby the examiner assesses the effects of PPCI "treatments" or recommendations on organizational outcomes. The objective of these approaches is to determine whether or not the introduction of PPCI has the desired effects on relevant organizational outcomes. The last approach attempts to evaluate the dollar value of outcomes against the cost of producing them. A variant of this approach, the dollar criterion method, tries to estimate the financial impact of things such as improved reputation, decreased stakeholder pressure, and legislative victories. Implementing a PPCI effort takes considerable effort and time, especially for organizations that lack institutional memory in the various stakeholder affairs areas. Nevertheless, there are several key steps that are almost always associated with implementing success programs, including: establishing context, ensuring senior executive support, selecting a team and champion, conducting needs assessment, establishing a structure, involving key users, educating and involving employees, establishing a storage and retrieval system, and evaluating the process.

PPCI and Its Link to Key Organizational Processes One of the most difficult connections to make is that between CI and organizational outcomes (Herring, 1996; Jaworski and Wee, 1993). It can also be difficult to establish a clear association between PP activities and the bottom line (Fleisher, 1997). These two factors suggest that making the connection between PPCI and organizational outcomes may be difficult; however, there are a number of reasonably tight connections that can be drawn through carefully planned and implemented research of the effect PPCI may have on critical organizational processes. For example, it is reasonable to suggest that the effective performance of PPCI should impact the following organizational processes:       

Social Performance - through research into stakeholder positions vis-à-vis issues, PPCI can help to "create reputation," and enhance economic success through earning trust of key stakeholders that can influence the market Change Agentry - through effective PPCI, organizational and environmental change can be eased, smooth transitions promoted, and affected stakeholders reassured Decision Makers' Awareness - through PPCI, senior decision makers are counseled, using research and analyses, about what's happening in the PP environment, allowing them to make more informed decisions Opportunity and Threat Detection - through regular stakeholder interaction in generating PPCI, new markets, products, allies, and positive issues can be uncovered and sociopolitical barriers removed Stakeholder and Institutional Awareness - through stakeholder and institutional targeting, PPCI can pave the way for sales, fundraising, stock offerings, etc Issue Anticipation - through research and stakeholder liaison, PPCI can provide distant early warning of social and political change and trends. Crisis Avoidance - through study or issues and stakeholder positions, PPCI can protect a favorable organizational position, minimize the erosion of a favorable position, retain allied stakeholders, and maintain normalized operations in difficult times.

Summary The main purpose of this article is to provide CI professionals a means for recognizing their ability to provide value to executives through their efforts as applied to the public policy environment. A secondary purpose is to give individuals already working on public policy environment (PPE) issues a sense of how their efforts can fit within the organization's CI and broader strategy processes. It is the author's view that this intersection remains mostly unexploited by companies and that the successful application and institutionalization of PPCI can help companies achieve new marketplace advantages. References Baron, D. (1995) "The PPE Strategy System," Sloan Management Review, Fall, pp. 73-85. Bridgman, P. and G. Davis (1998) Australian Policy Handbook, St. Leonards, N.S.W: Allen & Unwin. Buchholz, R., Evans, W. and R. Wagley (1994) Management Responses to Public Issues: Concepts and Cases in Strategy Formulation. 3rd edition, Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.

Fleisher, C. (1997) Assessing, Managing and Maximizing Public Affairs Performance. Washington, DC: Public Affairs Council. Galvin, R. (1992) "International Business and the Changing Nature of Global Competition," speech given in October at Miami University, Oxford, Ohio. Goldsmith, A. (1996) Business, Government, Society: The Global Political Economy. Chicago: Irwin. Grefe, E. and M. Linksy (1995) The New Corporate Activism. New York: McGraw Hill. Heath, R. (1997) Strategic Issues Management. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Herring, J. (1996) Measuring the Effectiveness of Competitive Intelligence: Assessing and Communicating CI's Value to Your Organization. Alexandria, VA: SCIP. Hogwood, B. and L. Gunn (1990) Policy Analysis for the Real World. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Jaworski, B. and Wee, L. (1993) Competitive Intelligence: Creating Value for the Organization, final report, Alexandria, VA: SCIP. Mack, C. (1997) Business, Politics and the Practice of Government. Westport, CT: Quorum. Mahon, J. and R. McGowan (1996) Industry as a Player in the Political and Social Arena: Defining the Competitive Environment. Westport, CT: Quorum. Prescott, J. (1987) "A Process for Applying Analytical Models in Competitive Analysis," Ch. 14 in King, W. and Cleland, D. [eds.], Strategic Planning and Management Handbook, Von Nostrand Reinhold. Prescott, J. (1989) "Competitive Intelligence: Its Role and Functions Within Organizations," pp. 1-14 in the author's edited volume Advances in Competitive Intelligence, Vienna, VA: SCIP. Prescott, J. and G. Bhardwaj (1995) "Competitive Intelligence Practices: A Survey," Competitive Intelligence Review, Summer, 2, pp. 4-14. Prescott, J. and C. Fleisher (1991) "SCIP: Who We Are, What We Do," Competitive Intelligence Review, Spring, 2(1), 22-26. Prescott, J. and P. Gibbons (1991) "Europe '92 Provides New Impetus for Competitive Intelligence," Journal of Business Strategy, November-December, pp. 20-26. Preston, L. and J. Post (1975) Private Management and Public Policy. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall. Stanat, R. (1993) "A Survey of Global CI Practices," Competitive Intelligence Review, Summer/Fall, 2(3), pp. 20-24. Tolliday, S. (1991) Government and Business, Elgar: Aldershot.

Table 1 - The Public Policy Strategy Process Preparatory Step - PPE Scanning and Monitoring a. Scan and monitor PPE information sources - objective is to identify potential, emerging or existing issues that could result in public policy action affecting the firm. 1. Internal stakeholder data - all employees, shareholders, retirees 2. External stakeholder data • Government at all levels • Interest groups, shadow constituencies, activists • Media - both news and new media channels • Other business players • Public b. Forecast PPE trends and events 1. Trends - descriptions of social, technological, environmental, economic, or political/legal/regulatory (STEEP) movements over time 2. Events - developments that change the future when they occur c. Define issues as controversies or disputes between the organization and stakeholders. The definition may only be an approximation (especially if issue is in an early stage of its life cycle) and redefinition may be necessary as the character of an issue evolves. d. Perform preliminary assessment 1. Review current set of PPE and market-related objectives 2. The objective is to determine which few of the many issues are or are likely to be relevant 3. The set of potentially important issues are eventually subjected to further tracking 4. This assessment is subject to be altered as more information is gathered and the issues shift; over time, it is usually necessary to change the set of issues being tracked e. Identify the set of most significant issues that require further analysis. f. Categorize and prioritize issues (use matrices) • Combination of previous criteria + weighting system Step 1 - Issue Definition and Categorization a. Write issue briefs for those issues prioritized as most significant - this includes a 2 page or less sized document summarizing the issue for management consideration. A useful issue brief will include a statement of the focus of the issue, a discussion of its background, description of the trends, driving forces, and stakeholders associated with the issue, and a short note on the interaction of issue with other issues on organization's issue agenda. b. Place issue briefs in storage and retrieval system Step 2 - Issue Attribute Assessments It is helpful to use multiple attribute classificatory techniques on each significant issue being considered.

a. Assess scope of issue 1. Institutional arena (-s) • Regulatory commissions/administrative agencies • Courts (at multiple levels) • Legislatures • Executive departments/branch 2. Evolutionary scope (uses issue life cycle concepts) • Formative stage/changing expectations • Political stage • Legislative/regulatory stage • Judicial/litigation stage 3. Geographic scope • Global, international, multinational, federal, provincial, regional, municipal, local, etc. b. Assess issue urgency [high low] • Responsibility [yes no] - does the organization have a responsibility to participate in issue resolution? • Manageability [high low] - can the organization influence the issue's evolution and/or resolution? (UniversalAdvocacy -Selective - Technical) • Visibility [high low] - is the issue and/or the organization's response highly visible? c. Re-assess criticality of issue [high low] • Current/estimated breadth of operations affected • Estimated financial implications • Estimated non-financial implications Step 3 - Stakeholder Identification and Prioritization (per issue) a. List the stakeholders and describe critical assumptions • Nature of interests (benefits/costs - moral & distributive - of issue to them) • Nature of power (resources, abilities, geographic distribution, etc.) b. Assess stakeholder attributes • Direction of source • Opinion • Degree of power/strength • Immediacy of effect • Scope of effect • Probability of resolution c. Prioritize stakeholders 1. Criteria 2. Weighting system Step 4 - Issue Alternative Plan Generation a. Review data b. Develop programmatic alternatives 1. Assess programs • Consider alternative stakeholder postures, organizational credibility

• Determine likely stakeholder reactions • Calculate resources and costs required for program implementation c. Evaluate potential performance impacts of alternative selected d. Establish/formulate strategy • Specify position being taken • Specify programmatic objectives • Contingency objectives Step 5 - Issue Implementation Considerations a. Timing • Proactive Inactive • Immediate L/T b. Techniques • Communication: advocacy advertising, annual report, press releases, media presentation, and video news releases • Participation: lobbying/government relations, involvement in business/industry associations, constituency building, grassroots, political contributions, coalition building, electoral support, and testimony • Compliance: negotiation, legal resistance, litigation, and other judicial strategies c. Vehicles • Company lobbyist, contracted lobbyist, senior officer, grassroots • Peak association, trade association, industry association, professional association, ad hoc coalition d. Style • Confront Conciliate • Resist Cessate e. Contingency possibilities

Table 2 - Key Sources for PPCI in 3 Countries Australia (Aust.)

Canada (Cdn.)

USA (Am. )

Almanacs and Directories (of government and officials)

Aust. Media Guide, Commonwealth Government Directory, Commonwealth of Aust. Gazette, Media People, Ministerial Directory, National Guide to Government

Canada Gazette, Government of Canada Blue Pages, Inside Ottawa Directory

Broad- Narrowcast News & Current Affairs

AAA, Aust. AP, ABC, Community Broadcasting Assn., Seven Network, Nine Network, Parliamentary News Network, Public Radio News, SBS, Ten Network Action for Aboriginal Rights, Aust. Conservation Fndatn., Aust. Consumers Assn., Aust. Republican Movement, Coalition for Gun Control, Community & Family Rights Council, Lyon's Forum, Sporting Shooters Assn., Natl. Women's Justice Coalition, Wilderness Preservation Soc.

Canada NewsWire, CBC, CP, CPAC, CTV, RCI, SRC

Almanac of the Un-Elected, Federal Directory, Federal Regulatory Directory, Government Printing Office publications, National Directory of Corporate Public Affairs, Staff Directories covering Congress, federal and judicial branches, Washington Representatives ABC, AP, CBS, CNN/TIME, Crossfire, C-SPAN, Evans & Novak, FOX, Inside Politics, MSN, NBC, NPR, Reliable Sources, Reuters, The Capital Gang, Think Tank (PBS), UPI ACLU, AARP, Christian Coalition, Common Cause, Consumer Federation of America, Environmental Defense Fund, Greenpeace, League of Women Voters, MADD, NAACP, NOW, NRA, NRDC, Natl. Taxpayers Union, Natl. Urban League, NWF, Public Citizen, Sierra Club, U.S. PIRG Legi-Slate, Newsday Washngton Update, StateNet, Washington Alert, Washington On-line, Yahoo!Reuters Political News, Group of 7, IADB, IAEA, ICC, ICFTU, IEA, ILO, IMF, IMO, ISO, ISU, OAS, OECD, NAFTA, NATO, UN and assoc. organizations, WHO, World Bank, WTO, WTrO

Citizens/Interest Groups (representative of a broad range of interests)

Action Canada Network, Cdn. AIDS Society, Cdn. Assn. Of Retired Persons, Cdn. Council for Cdn. Unity, Cdn. Council of Christians & Jews, Cd. Taxpayers Assn., Consumers Assn. Of Canada, Council of Canadians, Democracy Watch, NACSW, National Antipoverty Assn., National Citizens Coalition Canada Gazette, Hansard

Electronic Govt. Relations, Issue Tracking & Pending Legislation Multi- and International Organizations

Hansard, Polbase

National Resource Organizations & Peak Assns./Confederations (Business & Labor) Political/Policy Newsletters and Periodicals (covering Federal & often state, local, municipal levels)

ACCI, ACM, ACOSS, ACTU, ASBA, BCA, MTIA, NFF

Committee Bulletin, Daily Legislative Bulletin, Directions in Government, Federal Issues Today, Weekly Legislative Bulletin

Alberta Report, ARC Publications, Frank Magazine, The Hill Times, Inside Ottawa, Lobby Digest, Lobby Monitor, The New Socialist, Politics Canada, This Week in Ottawa

Political Parties (main)

ALP, Democrats, Greens, Liberal, National ACNeilsen, AMR:Quantum

BQ, Liberal, NDP, PC, Reform ABM Research, Angus Reid

Public Opinion

APEC, ASEAN, Australia Group, BI, Colombo Plan, Commonwealth of Nations, ESCAP, IAEA, ICC, ICTFU, IEA, ILO, IMF, IMO, ISO, ISU, ITU, OECD, SPC, SPF, UN and Assoc. Organizations, WFTU, WHO, WIPO, WTrO

ACCT, APEC, Australia Group, BIS, Commonwealth of Nations, Group of 7, IADB, IAEA, IBRD, ICAO, ICC, ICFTU, ICRM, IDA, IEA, IFAD, IFC, IFRCS, ILO, IMF, IMO, ISO, NAFTA, NATO, OAS, OECD, UN and assoc. organizations, WFTU, WHO, WIPO, WTO, WTrO BCNI, CFIB, Cdn. Chamber of Commerce, CLC, CMA, CREA, CSAE, FCC,

AFL-CIO, ASAE, Business Council, Business Roundtable, CED, Chamber of Commerce, NAM, NFIB, NSBA The Am. Political Report, The Am. Prospect, The Am. Spectator, Campaigns & Elections, Congress Daily, The Cook Political Report, CQ Monitor, CQ Weekly Report, Governing, The Hill, Hotline, Inside the New Congress, In These Times, The Nation, National Journal, National Review, The New Republic, Policy Review, The Progressive, Roll Call, The Weekly Standard, White House Weekly Democrats, Republicans ACNeilsen, Am. Assn. For

Harris, ANOP, Aust. Community Research, Datacol, Morgan Gallup, Morgan Poll, Newspoll

Public Policy Think Tanks, Policy Institutes and Research Networks

Aust. Inst. Of Public Policy, Centre for Independent Studies, Centre for Policy Studies, Centre for Strategic Economic Studies, Committee for Econ. Dvlpt. Of Aust., CSIRO, Evatt Foundation, H.R. Nichols Society, Inst. of Public Administration, Inst. Of Public Affairs, Samuel Griffiths Society, Sydney Inst., Tasman Institute.

Published News and Current Affairs (major)

The Age, The Australian, Australian Financial Review, Canberra Times, Daily Telegraph, Sun-Herald, Sydney Morning Herald

Professional and Specialized PP-related Associations

ACCPA, AIPS, Australasian Political Science Association, IPA, IPAA, PRIA

Specialist PP Consultancies

Ausaccess, Burson Marsteller, Aust. Canberra Liaison, Capital Public Affairs, Deacon Graham & James, H&K Aust., GJ Mackey & Assocs., NAFCO Partners, Natl. PA Group, Political Solutions, The Rowland Company, Turnbull Porter Novelli, Eric Walsh Pty., Aust. Journal of Public Admin., Aust, Journal of Political Science , Public Affairs Research Centre (Sydney)

University-based & Academic Public Policy Research Sources

.

Group, Center for the Study of Public Opinion (Queen's), Compass, Comquest, CROP, Decima Research, Ekos, Inst. For Social Research (York), Leger & Leger, Pollara, Western Opinion Research Atlantic Inst. For Market Studies, CCMD, CD Howe, Caledon Inst., Canada West Fdn., Cdn. Ctr. For Policy Alternatives, Cdn. Council on Social Dvlpt., Cdn. Inst. For Env. Law & Politics, Cdn. Inst. For the Adv. Of Women, Cdn. Policy Res. Network, Ctr. For Research & Info on Canada, Economic Council of Canada, Fraser Inst., IRPP, PIAC, Public Policy Forum Canada Newswire, Financial Post, Globe and Mail, Le Journal de Montreal, Maclean's, Montreal Gazette, Southam National Newspapers, Sun papers, Thompson Newspapers, Toronto Star Cdn. Assn. Of Programs in Pub. Admin., CCPAA, CBOC, CPSA, CPRS, Govt. Relations Inst. Of Canada, IAPP, IPAC

Public Opinion Research, Center for Assessment and Demographic Studies, Gallup, LA Times polls, PEW Research Center, Public Opinion Quarterly, Roper, Soc. Sci. Statistics Lab (Yale) Am. Enterprise Inst., Brookings, CATO, Carter Center, Center for Responsive Politics, Citizens for a Sound Economy, Competitive Enterprise Inst., Economic Policy Inst., Heartland Inst., Heritage Foundation, Hoover Inst., The Independent Inst., Progress & Freedom Foundation, Progressive Policy Inst., RAND, The Urban Inst. Atlanta Constitution, Boston Globe, Chicago Tribune, Christian Science Monitor, NY Times, Philadelphia Inquirer, USAToday, US News & World Report, Wall St. Journal, Washington Post, Washington Weekly ACA, Am. Society for Pub. Admin., APPAM, APSA, BIPAC, Conference Board, IABC, Natl. Acad. of Pub. Admin., Natl. Assn. Of Govt. Communicators, PAC

Assn. House, CAI Corp. Affairs, Cdn PA Cons. Grp., Earnscliffe Strategy Group, Fraser & Beatty, Govt. Bus. Consulting, GPC, H&K Canada, Hession Neville & Assocs., Humphreys PA Group, IGRG, National PR, Parallax, SAMCI, Strategico,

APCO Assoc., Arnold & Truitt, Bozell Sawyer Miller, Burson-Marsteller, Capitol Advantage, Democracy Data, GCI Group, Godard*Claussen, Issue Dynamics, Ogilvy PR Worldwide, PA Mgmt. Inc., Porter Novelli, The Rasky/Baerlein Group, Strategic Alliance Corp. Am. Jnl. Of PoliSci., Am. PolSci. Review, Ctr. for the Am. Woman & Politics (Rutgers), Georgetown PP Review, Inst. Of Public Policy (GMU), Harvard Political Review, HHH Institute of PA (Minn.), JFK School of Government (Harvard), LBJ School of PA (TX), Jnl. of Policy Analysis & Mgmt., Jnl. of Public Policy, Policy Sciences, Policy Studies Jnl., Policy Studies Review, PS: Political Research Quarterly, PoliSci. & Politics, Udall Ctr. For Studies in PP (AZ), Woodrow Wilson School of Public & Intl. Affairs (Princeton)

Cdn. Jnl. of Political Science, Cdn. Parliamentary Review, Cdn. Review of Social Policy, Center for Policy Research on Science & Technology (SFU), Center for Public Law Research (Montreal), Center for the Study of Democarcy (Queens), Intl. Jnl. Of Cdn. Studies, Inst. For Policy Analysis (UofT), Inst. For Social Research (York), McGill Inst. For the Study of Canada, National Center for Policy Analysis, Public Policy Web (Victoria), School of Policy Studies (Queens)

Table 3 - Classification of Analytical Tools Used in PPCI*

Issue-focus         

Comprehensive Impact Assessment Crisis Assessment and Simulation Critical Success Factors Issue Mapping & Analysis Political and Social Risk Analysis Policy Analysis Risk Analysis Sensitivity Analysis Simulations

Institutional-Focus    

Industry Evolution Analysis Industry Structure Analysis Institutional Evolution Analysis Institutional Structure Analysis

Stakeholder-focus             

*

Assumption Surfacing & Testing Audience Analysis Coalition/Alliance Mapping & Analysis Ethical Analysis Focus Groups Hierarchy of Effects Modeling Interest Group Capability & Resources Analysis Public Opinion Research Reputation & Social Performance Analysis Shadowing Social Network Mapping, Profiling & Analysis Stakeholder Mapping, Profiling & Analysis Value Analysis

Combination Focus    

 

     

Benchmarking Communications Mix Assessment Country Risk Assessment Cost/benefit Analysis (issue, regulatory, social, stakeholder) Futures Life-cycle Analysis (Policy Agenda, Product, Public Policy, Regulatory, Social Issue) Macro-environment (STEEP) Analysis Media Content Analysis Regulatory Analysis Rent Chain Analysis Scenario Mapping & Analysis Situation Analysis

- Some degree of overlap exists among a number/some of the tools listed above. Where the overlap among categories is heaviest or most frequent, the tools have been listed in the last column called combination focus. Otherwise, the tools are primarily focussed on either one of issues, institution, or stakeholder-based data.

Author's Note: The author thanks Canadian public affairs professionals Victoria Baird, Randall Pearce, AnneMarie Quinn, and Peter Wilkinson for their assistance in generating Table 2. About the author: Craig S. Fleisher is Professor, Corporate Affairs & Strategy in the School of Business & Economics, Wilfrid Laurier University. During 1998, he held a visiting professorial position in the Department of Government and PA at the University of Sydney, N.S.W. Australia. He received his Ph.D. from the University of Pittsburgh. He has taught graduate-level courses on Managing CI, conducts research and advises corporations around the globe on the application of CI to nonmarket strategy issues. One of SCIP’s original 200 members, he can be contacted at +61-2-9351-3748; Fax - +61-2-9351-3624; E-mail - [email protected].