Why great policy isn’t enough

One of the most frustrating experiences in the public policy world is knowing that you have a fantastic policy concept, and then realizing that particular effort is going absolutely nowhere.

Just about a year ago, I thought I had one of those really great ideas. It was simple but could have had a major impact. My proposal incentivized action through voluntary behavior, it had a limited cost, and before I started socializing the idea, it seemed like it could have actually been achievable.  Boy was I wrong.

As soon as I left the theoretical to start putting meat on the bones, it quickly fell apart. Not because of any specific shortcoming of the idea – but because I could tell I would have few, if any, allies in the effort. The key folks I would need in my corner just weren’t interested in that particular effort at that particular time.

And though I already knew this was the reality, it was a great reminder that policy advancements don’t occur in a vacuum.

The most apt description of the legislative process I’ve heard, is that of a three-legged stool.  That stool, or successful advocacy, depends on a balance between the three P’s: Policy, Process, and Politics. Ignore any of the three and your initiative falls apart at the seams. As I was looking at my own proposal, I realized I had a stool with one glaringly short leg: politics.

When advancing a policy, one of the first hurdles to overcome is finding a champion within the requisite decision-making body. At the state level, you need buy-in not only from a legislator but also the agency or agencies impacted by the proposal. Especially in a state with term limits, like Ohio, those bureaucratic champions can play an outsized role because they remain the repository of institutional knowledge. Those same folks will help shepherd your proposal through the twists, turns and procedural hurdles that will absolutely come your way.

Contrary to popular conception, those procedural hurdles don’t exist to stymie progress. Enacting new policies that impact countless people must not be taken lightly. Process plays a key role in ensuring decision-makers mitigate their own blind spots. The committee process, in particular, can make or break your proposal. In order to make it, you have to assist your champions in navigating the calendar, majority vs minority interests, and the pitfalls of parliamentary procedure.

Granted – your policy has to stand on its own merits. You’ll be hard-pressed to find a legislator who will put their name to some cockamamie scheme. But as you’re developing a political action plan for that specific agenda item, double check yourself.

1. Have you evaluated the political climate?  Who is in charge of the decision points? Does your proposal align with their priorities? Who will oppose you?

2. Do you understand the process? What is the workflow between decision-making entities? Who can help you navigate between agencies?

3. Does your policy address a salient need recognized by the majority, and are they talking about that need right now?

Regardless of who they are, your effort will be out of balance if you fail to make an early assessment of the political climate and your champions. Those champions, as well as your trained advocates, must also understand the process(es) which will bring your issue to the forefront and encourage adoption. And you, the policy leader, will need to establish internal mechanisms that allow your team to continually refine your proposals as the environment changes.

Policy, Process and Politics. Constantly check your balance. When the moment of saliency arises, your advocates and champions will have a limited window of opportunity – and often, the ones who come out on top in a crisis are those who already have champions primed with sound, ready-made proposals.