Strategic Communications
Many of the concepts surrounding initiative management, such as evaluation, social marketing, cluster evaluation, and bringing projects to scale, have already been discussed. The concept of strategic communications, however, requires more explanation. As previously mentioned, foundations vary widely in their approach to communications. Some prefer to toil in anonymity; a few seek the klieg lights. Most staffed foundations have some sort of communications capacity, although often the professionals assigned to do the work are pretty much limited to writing an annual report and responding to criticisms appearing from time to time in the press. Many foundation leaders fear that communicating more aggressively than this could lead to either a flood of unwanted proposals or unwelcome scrutiny on the part of regulators or both. The concept of strategic communications takes just the opposite tack: that educating the public about a foundation's interests will result in fewer out-of-scope proposals and make it less likely to be scrutinized, for foundations that communicate strategically will appear to be less secretive.
At the heart of strategic communications is the belief that the lessons being learned by the foundation and its grantees should be shared—and shared vigorously—so as to magnify their impact. This requires more than an episodic or opportunistic effort every now and then; it requires an ongoing program strategically aimed at achieving the foundation's ends. Proponents also stress that it is far better for the foundation to proactively define itself to the public than to let others define the foundation to suit their agenda.
When the foundation is planning an initiative, strategic communications and social marketing are closely related but not synonymous. There must be a message before one can market anything, and a program of strategic communications helps craft that message. Policy efforts, too, can and should be preceded by solid communications programs. These efforts need not be managed on a day-to-day basis by a communications professional, but they do take time to do right, so they should be assigned as a primary responsibility to whomever takes the lead on them.
Like traditional dissemination efforts, traditional communications relied on broadcasting: news briefings, press releases, and general publications. Although each of these approaches has its uses in strategic communications, more recent narrowcasting approaches have been added to the mix, just as they have in social marketing. Targeting certain audiences through e-mail listservs, specialized publications, and other carefully selected media, and developing ongoing relationships with certain members of the media and policymakers, ensure that key people receive important messages at the right times.
The Communications Network, originally an affinity group of the Council on Foundations but now a freestanding 501(c)(3) organization, defines strategic communications as having four essential attributes: (1) informing potential grantseekers about foundation application and review processes and procedures, including what the foundation does and does not fund, and how and when to apply; (2) making foundation and grantee experiences widely accessible; (3) supporting community actions vital to furthering the missions of the foundation and its grantees; (4) making sure the foundation is appropriately accountable (Karel, 1999).
As conceptualized by the Communications Network, strategic communications become an essential part of the programming of the initiative. The third attribute, for example, helps build community capacity to successfully support the programmatic actions of the initiative. All four attributes cost money, of course, and you must remember to properly budget for strategic communications at the beginning of the initiative. Retrofitting the communications after an initiative has been planned is never as effective as planning for it from the outset.