Many communication teams fail in the transition of the communications operation and make the first big mistake that is often irreversible.
The first challenge facing the communications team of a candidate who won the election is to understand and land the model and the operation of communications in the field of action of his new job. Although winning the victory is the most significant possible result, the new position or administration would not exist without it; coming is even more critical. Starting because this will be a task with years and not weeks or months as the campaign was. The new objective is to move weighty and, simultaneously, very delicate machinery that day by day due to the hard work will suffer fatigue, breakdowns, and damage during difficulties and crises. It is not a fatalistic vision but a reality that only those who have experienced it understand. Campaign and office communication have their dynamics. If we know them, we can successfully apply the conversion and achieve more remarkable achievements.
The campaign’s communication work determines by disseminating three elements: the government plan, gaining public opinion, and showing suitability for the position. These elements seem to be framed by four challenges: communication, recognition, favorability, and solidarity behind which will be the public, citizens, supporters, or casual voters as they want to see but who ultimately will say which candidate met the highest percentage around his name. All these elements interact with two multiplying factors that are intensity and repetition. Mixing all in the right proportions will result in victory over his opponents.
In other words, the candidate who best shows his government plan better captures public attention and offers the most outstanding suitability for the position will have known how to communicate, will receive recognition. He will obtain the favorability and solidarity of the electors, using the intensity and repetition of their messages. There are usually excellent candidates in the elections who fail to balance these elements, challenges, and factors and lose to the public’s surprise that gave them as chosen insurance. Some candidates cannot understand this dynamic and lose out loud no matter how hard they try.
Someone will say that political complements such as support, parties, and political leaders accompanying each candidate should also be significant. The answer is if, to the extent that they help enhance the three elements, they boost the challenges and extend the radius of action of the factors. If not, we would say they bring more harm than benefit, so it is not positive. Those political supports, in some way, will intervene in the equation for their dynamic reason. Let’s look at the dynamics expressed in the following figure.
Let’s go back to campaign communication. The candidate and the communications team that best did the job combining these elements, challenges, and factors were the winners. They should then evaluate to review what was well and what is not. This evaluation cannot be more than that because building government communication will begin with a different plan and fundamentals. Here is the first big mistake: to believe that what was successful in the campaign will be in the administration of the position and is not so.
The elements, challenges, and factors will also appear in the administration of a position or the government communication. Still, they are distributing differently and with other objectives and another sense to that of the campaign. The new elements will also be three: socialization of the political agenda, alignment with public opinion, and governance communication. The challenges will be five: positioning, reputation, plan, management, and solidarity, all known as the PRAMS model I developed and implemented over several years of exercise. The factors that will multiply this whole formula will be four: repetition, prudence, inclusion, and opportunity. Around the entire execution will be citizens, as the classification of supporters or voters disappears. Let’s look at the dynamics in the following figure.
Seeing each of the communications operation models for the campaign and the government allows us to know the difference: first, in terms of simplicity of one face the other and second, the complexity of running the government regarding the campaign. Implementing the government’s communication program will be a delicate task, which will require strategic strength, a variety of tactical actions, and, above all, precision in detail. The achievement of the PRAMS model’s challenges will allow the historical recognition of efficiency and effectiveness with which every official wishes to remember but above all the tranquility and confidence with which each citizen wants to see their vote rewarded and remember their rulers. To learn more about marketing or government communication against the one executed in the campaign, write to me at email@example.com, tell me the project or need, and I can surely help.