Dr. Ken Haycock Follett Chair, Dominican University, Chicago Senior Partner, Ken Haycock and Associates

Stephanie Hall Director of Public Library Planning for the

Province of Saskatchewan

Cheryl Stenstrom Library Consultant & instructor

San Jose State University

Public library funding and the political arena

New insights into decision-making about your budget

•  What makes a difference in decision-making? What really determines your budget?

•  For two years, the presenters having been looking at factors affecting these decisions, including advocacy and influence, networks and political ties, at the local and provincial/state levels to develop a set of guiding principles. Their preliminary results suggest that our advocacy efforts may be off-base…

Our Study

•  The Institution •  The Context •  The Research to Date •  The Provincial View •  The Municipal View •  A Different Approach •  A Different Context

Context: Funding is Attitudinal (OCLC)

•  Support is there, not commitment. •  There is a lot that people don’t know about libraries. •  Support is only marginally related to use. ☛ Don’t focus on users.

•  Perceptions of the librarian are highly relevant to support. “Passionate librarians” who are involved in the community make a difference.

Funding is Attitudinal

•  The library occupies a clear position as a provider of practical answers and information. This is a crowded space. Reposition.

•  Belief that the library is a transformational force in people’s lives is directly related to their level of funding support.

Funding is Attitudinal

•  Increasing support may not necessarily mean a trade-off with financial support for other public services.

•  Elected officials are supportive… but not committed to increased funding.

•  Identifying and engaging super supporters and probable supporters is critical.

Sadly…

•  Library leaders are seen positively but not perceived to work with politicians or other community leaders for community development or betterment.

Issues

•  Transformation not information. •  Infrastructure not institution. •  Necessity not nice to have. •  Future rather than past. •  Return on investment (for me) not altruism for

others.

Advocacy Defined

•  Wrong! •  a planned,

deliberate, sustained effort to develop understanding and support incrementally over time

The Means Not The End

What Do We Mean Here?

•  Public Relations (about us) •  Publicity (about us) •  Marketing (about them) •  Lobbying (about legislation) •  At the Table (about community development)

Advocacy Rules

•  Their reasons, not ours •  About respect •  Connect agendas •  Like banking—

make deposits before withdrawals

Marketing an Issue?

1.  Objective: clear, measurable

2.  Target Group: who is important

3.  Strategies: 4Ws, How? 4.  Communication Tools:

Step # 4! 5.  Evaluation: integral part

--Pat Cavill © Pat Cavill Consulting

Leadership Defined

•  Leadership is a process of social influence through which one person is able to enlist the aid and support of others in the accomplishment of a common task.

Chemers, 1997

Death by Opportunity

Applying What We Know

What Works: Prior Studies

•  National Culture •  Socio/Economic/Educational Context •  History

 Connecting with Changing Agendas  Legitimacy  Trust  Relationships  View of Colleagues

What Has Not Worked: Prior Studies

✖ Demand for Services ✖ Entreaties from Patrons/Customers ✖ Advocacy by Stakeholders ✖ Lobbying by Boards ✖ Effectiveness of Service ✖ Perceptions of Service

•  ? Lobbyists (mixed results)

The Values Pyramid

Universal Principles of Influence

•  Reciprocation (others feel obliged to return favors) •  Authority (look to experts to speak) •  Commitment/Consistency

(with prior commitments and personal/political values) •  Scarcity

(less available more we want it, unless free!) •  Liking

(more we like someone more we want to say yes) •  Social Proof

(what others/colleagues are doing) Cialdini, 2001

Trust is Critical

•  Character •  Competence •  Confidence •  Credibility •  Congruence

Mortensen, 2008

Yes! 50 Scientifically-Proven Ways…

•  When they think about persuasion, most people emphasize their own experiences too much, rather than depending on data or techniques.

•  Increase your persuasive power by understanding the core principles.

•  A small gift or favor will make you more persuasive. People will want to pay you back.

•  The public believes in authority, so enlist higher-ups on your side.

Yes!

•  People want to be consistent and committed, so show how your proposal aligns with their values.

•  The rarer something is, the more people want it. (note the problem of “free”)

•  Individuals want to be liked, so practice seeing the good in them.

•  People tend to follow the majority. By establishing norms, you can get them to act as you wish.

•  Admit your errors. Demonstrating honesty increases your influence..

Common Tactics

•  Ingratiation (make them feel important) •  Assertiveness (make demands) •  Rationality (explain reasons) •  Sanctions (administrative means for compliance) •  Exchange of benefits (trade-offs) •  Upward influence (appeal to higher levels) •  Blocking (prevent target from achieving goal) •  Coalitions (enlist others to influence)

Newer Additions

•  Inspirational Appeals •  Consultation

•  Most common: rational and inspiration appeals and consultation

•  Least common: exchange, coalitions and pressure tactics (blocking and sanctions)

•  Least successful: controlling and power

Forces for Good: High-Impact Nonprofits

Presents six practices of high impact non-profits: •  offering advocacy efforts and service •  harnessing market forces and leveraging the power and

resources of business •  engaging individuals from outside the organization •  working with and through other organizations •  learning to adapt •  sharing leadership by empowering others

Advocacy Efforts

More likely— •  In larger organizations •  In older organizations •  In organizations with government funding •  Still only 30-50% devote time and money to advocacy •  Train stakeholders, find partners, maintain relationships

with media

What Works with Politicians

•  Coalitions •  Networks of groups and individuals •  Influential: personal values and beliefs and

measures of ideology; belief about the outcome. •  Motivation: satisfying constituents, gaining

influence, making good policy •  They know you and like you and trust you…

Stages of Advocacy

1.  Whether (what is the potential political cost) 2.  How (strategies to use: activities, collaboration,

grassroots, lobbying)

•  Determinant is often political allies •  More financial support for an organization usually

means less advocacy

Focus and Plan

•  On the Relationship (Networks!) •  On the Approach •  On the Context (for the Individual, the System, the

organization, the culture, the timing) •  On the Issues (determine arguments that support/

against; determine costs/benefits to the other; assess vested interests and needs; provide examples and benchmarks)

Barnes, (2007

Major Inhibitors

•  It is not my job •  Lack competence (or a plan) •  Talking is not influencing •  There are no silver bullets or quick fixes •  Do not try to influence everyone (focus on reports

and opinion leaders)

Lessons about tipping points

•  Concentrate resources on a few key areas…understand connectors, mavens, salespeople

•  Do not do what you think is right… •  test your intuitions

•  Recognize phases… •  Early adopters; early majority; late majority; laggards

The relationship is the message…

“Relationships cause people to want to be with you, but respect causes them to want to be empowered by you.”

“The reality is that difficulties seldom defeat people; lack of faith in themselves usually does it.”

So…

•  It is about advocacy and leadership, meaning… •  It is about relationships and influence, meaning… •  It is understanding the target – values, networks,

connections, promises, colleagues, context… •  It is understanding the tactics and strategies and

choosing appropriately and strategically… •  It is part of life in the organization and should be

funded, supported and measured…

Moving Forward: Why Our Study?

•  Minimal research on government decision-making and funding processes

•  Even less research on library funding •  Some assumptions are false •  Research base documents best practices for

affecting decisions but these are not used •  The issue is factors affecting decision-making, not

why libraries are or are not funded the way they are changing behaviors more than attitudes

Moving Forward: The Local View

•  Approximately 85% of funding from local government

•  For the source of core operating funding, understanding the local decision-making process is critical

•  Key players: elected politicians, city manager, city finance manager, library director, other municipal department heads plus…

From Our Interviews and Pilot Studies

•  Consistency and values are critical •  Relationships and messaging are important •  Collegial support and political context are important •  Locally, per capita varies; percentage of budget

does not (social proof; colleagues) •  Cialdini’s theory of influence appears to have utility

Conclusions…

•  there is no one right answer, as situations and contexts vary… but there is evidence about what works and it is generally not what we are doing now…

•  a critical new role dilemma is how to move advocacy based on evidence up the priority list in our organizations…

•  we need more action-based research projects... •  We need leaders who understand and exercise social

influence… •  The relationship is the message…

To your success!

•  Cheryl, Ken, Stephanie