· how to win campaigns ·
Photo: Cover of "how to win campaigns".
Although I've occasionally dipped into the book How to win campaigns: 100 steps to success (by Chris Rose), I'd not read the book cover-to-cover. Until now.
This is an excellent resource for all campaigners. Here's a taster of some of the many gems I took from it:
- Campaigning is the art of the impossible.
- Effective campaign planners ... spend much more time thinking through the dynamics - the buck-passing and interests at play.
- Ask who's responsible for not implementing the solution, rather than just who's responsible for causing the problem. Whether it's through suppressing a solution or denying a problem, any party with the power to solve this is the problem-holder or problem-owner.
- ... you cannot campaign 'on an issue' or 'about an issue', only to change the issue.
- Don't assume we need to change minds.
There's also an excellent section on understanding support. The example given is Greenpeace UK: 0.5% joined Greenpeace, 5% said they would take action in a campaign, 30% said they took personal action in their [daily] lives, but 60% said they supported Greenpeace's aims and objectives. There's a lesson there for all of us ... how do we engage those that "support" us but don't join or donate or take action?
There's also a brief section on new media. The book was published in 2005 ... I suspect that if the author published this book today this section would be much larger.
Go get this book. I promise you will underline text and fold corners all the way through.
What do you reckon? Leave a comment »
Friday June 20, 2008
Categories: Book-Review Campaigning
· strong leaders ·
I've just finished reading the current Quarterly Essay - "Exit Right - The Unravelling of John Howard" by Judith Brett. A friend suggested I might enjoy it (hi Jeremy!).
Judith makes some interesting comments about leadership in her essay:
We might choose our leaders through hard-fought verbal conflict, but the capacity to defeat an opponent is not all we want from a leader. We also want good policy, solutions to urgent problems, and the foresight to prevent future ones. And we want compassion, and the capacity to resolve conflicts rather than escalate them. The personal qualities for such tasks are very different from those required to win an election and sometimes the desire to win can overwhelm the other things a leader might do.
Judith also notes in her essay that John Howard's style of leadership was the "Strong Leader" (as opposed to the "Group Leader" or the "Inspiring Leader"). This leadership style meant that it was difficult for John Howard to adapt to situations, and that made it difficult for him to work towards solving some of our most pressing issues:
The issue of global warming calls, above all, for co-operation, an open inquiring mind and new ideas. It does not lend itself to Strong Leadership's politics of conviction and control ... Strong Leaders limit the policy options and prevent solutions.
Ian McAuley has written an excellent review of the essay for the Centre for Policy Development. He notes that the essay uses John Howard as a case study for how a "Strong Leader" might lead, and that this style is not ideal for social issues such as climate change, reconciliation and health care. He says:
... a process which engages with the community, which explains the difficult tradeoffs facing the people, and which acknowledges the possibility of pain, is more likely to result in enduring change.
So ... it seems using a conciliatory, dialogue-based approach rather than a radical, closed-minded one is more effective if you really want to change the world. This is the same approach that the Sydney Leadership program teaches ... it's going to be a very interesting year :)
What do you reckon? Leave a comment » [1]
Wednesday February 27, 2008
Categories: Book-Review Leadership
· Giving: how each of us can change the world ·
I recently read a copy of Bill Clinton's book Giving. He covers the act of giving thoroughly: the ways in which people can give, successful programs that have attracted donations, and generous givers.
"Bill" (can I call him that? it feels a bit disrespectful) intersperses examples of giving with his own experiences. One little anecdote he tells is that he and his wife give their nephews some money each month, providing they donate 25% of it to good causes and then update Bill and Hillary on how they've spent their donation. I found this little tale fascinating (and of course Bill tells it much better than I do) :)
One of the most powerful chapters in the book is the final one ("How much you should give and why?") where Bill suggests that together we could change the world if each of us was to give what we can. While few people have the spending power of Warren Buffett (famous for his investment successes) who intends to give away over 95% of his fortune, if each of us donated 1% of our annual income we could seriously change the world. For a person on the average Australian wage, say $50,000 to make the maths easy, this is only $500 a year. A not-for-profit organisation could achieve a lot with $500 :)
Another point Bill makes that I find interesting are his suggestions for why people don't give:
They don't believe what they could do would make a difference, either because their resources are limited or they're convinced efforts to change other people's lives and conditions are futile. They don't feel morally obligated to give. No one has ever asked them to do so. And they believe they'll enjoy life more if they keep their money and time for themselves and their families.
Given my recent posts on engagement and participation, I think this deserves more thought [puts thinking cap on].
Regardless of what you think about Bill Clinton, I suggest you read this book as I found it both inspiring and useful.
What do you reckon? Leave a comment »
Monday January 7, 2008
Categories: Book-Review
· The Myths of Innovation ·
I recently read Scott Berkun's book "The Myths of Innovation
I was curious about this book, having read Scott's blog and seen his really interesting presentation at this year's Web Directions conference.
Now for somebody who didn't do science in senior high school because "it is boring" I found this book filled with little anecdotes from scientific history fascinating. Scott manages to explain the history of innovation simply and gives insight into what innovation is and how innovative people work (hint: they don't set out to be "innovative").
Go get yourself a copy of the book, it will make you think. You might have trouble buying it from bookstores ... dez tells me Dymocks in Melbourne hasn't even heard of it but he found a copy while in Sydney. Amazon has plenty of copies and, you know, the exchange rate is good value at the moment. Also, the book is thin enough to fit nicely into a handbag ;)
What do you reckon? Leave a comment » [1]
Friday October 26, 2007
Categories: Book-Review
· Book Review: Momentum ·
I'm just back from a week's holiday ... lucky me :) Finally I had some time to catch up on some reading and finish Momentum: igniting social change in the connected age by Allison H Fine.
The book's not bad and I've earmarked quite a few pages. However I don't think those of us who are online practitioners are the intended target market (and Karina, who's the online campaigner at Oxfam GB agrees with me). However I would suggest you read it anyway ... highlight all the important bits, and then give it to your communications manager, campaigns manager and/or marketing manager to read, particularly if they are not yet converted to our way of thinking (i.e. e-communications is essential in creating positive social change).
The book does have some interesting points for online practitioners (I mean, you know, we don't know everything!). Here's some excellent lines from the book that you could use in your next presentation to the board / management / funders as part of your strategy to convince them that online communications are essential:
- Activists who do not listen to the concerns of residents, who are mainly interested in pushing out their own strategies, are not going to be successful.
- People working in activist organizations need to understand that a large part of their job is having real conversations with people and that these conversations will increase their understanding of problems and will lead ultimately to a decrease in complaints.
- Asking for input but not listening to it is worse than not asking at all.
- [The Excalibur Effect] requires shifting the focus away from "How can we get credit for this effort in order to boost fundraising?" to "What can we do to engage more people in the cause?"
- "Experts" should remember that their job is not always to do the work but to support and educate the network of activists ... few areas of technical expertise cannot be spread out and augmented by individual activists.
- Good leaders find ways to leverage their reach and effectiveness by working in good faith with other organizations.
There's a website for the book if you want to find out more: www.momentumthebook.com.
What do you reckon? Leave a comment »
Sunday August 19, 2007
Categories: Book-Review