Chapter 10Issues Management

Origins in Policy MakingDefinition and Development

Perspectives on Issues ManagementPotential Abuses

Origins

• 1970s corporations face new regulations.• Policies driven by environmental activists.• New regulations are expensive.• Lobbying was failing.• Corporate policy dominance was eroding.

New Practice

• Corporations adopted strategies from activists.

• Coalitions, grassroots organizing, and publicity used to influence policy decisions.

• New practice called issues management.

Howard Chase Founder

• Howard Chase, an insurance executive, was founder.

• Chase coined the phrase and created the first model.

• Objective was to increase corporate influence in policy making.

Definitions

• Issues are basically problems ready for some resolution.

• Issues management began as a process by which an organization can act upon public policy issues that might impinge upon the organization's ability to operate.

• Issues managers find potential issues and attempt to influence their resolution.

Policy Making Process

1. Agenda setting2. Policy formation3. Implementation4. Policy evaluation

Agendas

• Issues compete for attention of politicians—the policy agenda.

• Agenda setting seeks to place an issue on the policy agenda.

• Simple view: issue moves from media agenda to public agenda to policy agenda.

• Focal point of policy making for issues management.

Simple View of Agenda Setting

Not One-way

• Issues manager investigates why corporate behaviors and constituent expectations are misaligned.

• Corporation has two options:– Change expectations– Change behaviors to meet expectations

Moving Beyond Policy

• Another way to define an issue as a problem that is being publically discussed.

• Issues arise when there is a gap between how organizations behave and how constituencies expect them to behave—legitimacy gaps.

• Can address issues before they go public and no policy concerns are involved.

More Recent Definition of Issues Management

• “a strategic set of functions used to reduce friction and increase harmony between organizations and their publics in the public policy arena” (Heath, 2005, p. 460).

• Issues management is not the unbridled pursuit of self-interest.

Values and Issues

• Two groups can disagree because their values lead them to different evaluations of the issue.

• Managing values-based issues is often a matter of adjusting organizational policies voluntarily rather than through public policy.

Perspectives on Issues Management

• Systems• Strategic• Rhetorical• Engagement

Systems

• Seek to minimize surprises from environment.• Consider how environment affects

organizational behavior.• Emphasize process of issues management.• Communication is simply a tactic to be

employed by issues managers.

Jones and Chase Systems Model• Issues were “unsettled matters which are

ready for decision” that influenced the organization’s operating environment (Jones & Chase, 1979, p. 11).

• Model has five steps: 1. issue identification 2.issue analysis 3. issue change strategy options 4. issue action program 5.evaluation of results.

Issue Identification

• Scanning is key.• Search for emerging or existing issues.• Identifies a list of potential issues.• Preliminary prioritization of issues.

Issue Analysis

• Research the issues.• Understand how issue might impact the

organization.• Issues can be opportunities or threats.• Final prioritization.• Can only manage a few issues so need

prioritization.

Issue Change Strategy Option

• Choose one of three issue change strategy options.

• Reactive change strategy option involves simply preparing for the effects of the issue.

• Adaptive strategy change option is accommodative and has issues managers offering alternative courses of action.

• Dynamic change strategy option is the most proactive as the issues manager anticipates the issue and is the first to propose a policy proposal.

Issue Action Program

• Communicate the organization’s position on the issue to the relevant constituencies.

• The policy option guides the communication.• Goals and objectives are set.• Communication tactics selected and executed

including grassroots lobbying and advocacy/issue advertising.

Evaluation

• Compare actual outcome to the desired outcome.

• “No action” is a viable policy outcome.• Industries often use self-regulation to prevent

government regulation.

Strategic Approach

• From management under the heading of strategic issues management.

• Strategic issues management seeks a way to improve an organization’s ability to survive by becoming more adaptable.

• Connects issues management with business strategy development.

Strategic Approach

• Strategic issues management model: 1. Issues are detected2. Issues are prioritized3. Strategies are created and implemented4. Feedback from the strategies is collected

Rhetorical Approach

• Conceives of issues and communication rather differently than the systems or strategic approaches.

• Issues are “created” whenever people attach significance to a situation or a problem.

• An issue becomes more than a problem; it becomes a set of arguments to resolve demands for scare resources (Crable & Vibbert, 1985).

Rhetorical Approach and Communication

• Communication becomes the focal point of issues management because communication is the mechanism by which an issue is managed.

• Communication is used to move an issue through its life cycle.

Issues Life Cycle or Catalytic Model

• Potential• Imminent• Current• Critical• Dormant

Potential

• When a person or persons deem a situation as significant.

• The communicative strategy at the potential status is definition.

• Issues managers must define their issues.• Definitions provide boundaries for the future

discussion of the issue

Imminent

• When other people begin to accept that the issue is justified—worthy of their time and attention.

• Legitimacy is the key communicative strategy for the imminent status and helps to establish the issue as a public concern.

• An issue has legitimacy when people accept that it is worthy of their attention and appreciate the connection between themselves and the issue.

Current

• When a wide number of people are aware of and concerned about the issue.

• Knowledge and understanding of an issue are spread to more and more remote constituents.

• Common channels for reaching the current status include mass media coverage and online discussions of the issue.

Current

• Polarization is the key communicative strategy for the current status.

• The idea is to force people to take sides. Issues and policy options are presented as dichotomization.

• In other words, there are sides and people must choose a side.

Critical

• When there is pressure for a decision. • People feel a need for the issue to be resolved

in some way. • Identification is the key communicative

strategy for the critical status.• When people realize they have common

interests or simply perceive they have common interests, identification can occur.

Critical

• Through identification, people are persuaded to support a particular side of the issue.

• Issues managers use communication to convince constituents that their side of the issue best captures the constituents’ values and concerns.

Dormant

• Once a decision is made, an issue is considered resolved and moves to the dormant status.

• However, issues can be revived at any time.• An issue management effort could end at any

status level due to (1) resolution or (2) lack of interest.

• An issue can be resolved at any status level if the parties involved agree on a resolution.

Why Catalytic

• Being proactive.• Issues managers can create issues, not just

react to them.

Issue Attention Cycle

• Over time the news media and public lose interest in issues and they fade from public view and consciousness.

Issue Attention Cycle Steps

• Pre-problem: undesirable condition exists.• Alarmed discovery and euphoric enthusiasm:

social condition is recognized and the media is keen to cover an issue.

• Realizing the cost of significant progress: realize the cost of solving the problem is high.

• Gradual decline of public interest.• Post-problem stage: social concern is

replaced by something else in the media.

Engagement Approach

• Engagement seeks to use a dialogue between an organization and its publics to manage an issue.

• An issue can create competition and conflict that could adversely affect the organization-public relationships.

• Effective issue management always considers the implications of the issue’s resolution on those relationships.

Three Principles

1. Organizations do attempt to maximize their outcomes.

2. Publics are a resource vital to the success of an organization.

3. A favorable relationship between an organization and its publics is highly valued.

Abuses of Issues Management

• Front groups• Astroturf• SLAPPs

Front Groups• Front groups “are created to pursue public policy

objectives for organizations that disguise their connection (e.g., financial support) with the effort while attempting to appear independent” (Fitzpatrick & Palenchar, 2006, p. 203).

• Front groups are deployed because corporations and industries often lack the credibility of the public interest activist groups that may oppose them on an issue.

• A front group creates a false impression of impartiality from concerned people.

Astroturf

• Astroturf is when a group artificially generates grassroots support for an issue.

• With astroturFing, people are hired to generate citizen support for an issue.

• People are contacted, typically by phone or e-mail, and asked to support the issue.

• The reason this is “fake” is that the people would not have contacted the government if they had not been prompted by the astroturfers.

SLAPP

• A strategic lawsuit against public participation (SLAPP) is a term referring to any effort designed to prevent an individual or organization from expressing opinions to the government on public issues.

• Even the threat of a SLAPP can serve to silence people for a time or to chill discussion because others fear lawsuits if they speak out.

Reflection Points

• Why is it important to consider the oppositional nature of issues management?

• How do “deep pockets” affect issues management?

• Are there other power concerns with issues management?

Reflection Points

• What does it mean to have a symbolic issue resolution?

• Are there any dangers with preventing regulation?

• What danger can emotions present to issues management?