S is for SOURCE

There is a question I hear often from audiences when I'm speaking about advocacy communications:

“How do I tell my boss/CEO/President that they shouldn’t always be our spokesperson?”

To which I’ve said, “Bravo/a for asking that question!” and “I should write an article on that soon.” 

THIS. IS. THAT. ARTICLE.

The S in my R.E.S.U.L.T. approach to storytelling with a mission is for Source. I outline below the four factors to consider in changing beliefs and two elements to determine the most effective source of your advocacy message (and *spoiler alert* quite often that will not be your boss/CEO/President).

If as a teenager you lived with a parent, you likely experienced first-hand how the source of a message impacts the way you process the information. Your parent may have told you things that sounded overbearing, uninformed, or just plain ridiculous… but when you heard that same message from a friend, teacher, or celebrity? Suddenly it was gospel truth. (Or perhaps you’ve been the parent in this situation? Hang in there. Parents magically seem smarter as their kids get older.)

In his recent book, The College Dropout Scandal, David Kirp touches on how the same message from different sources lands differently in a conversation with researcher Claude Steele. Discussing his work on how beliefs about one’s intelligence impact performance, Steele shares why upperclassmen are often best suited to intervene when freshmen consider stopping out of higher education based on negative stereotypes:

“Having someone who’s a year or two older than you deliver this message makes an immense difference. The fundamental insight in the field is the power of narratives about ourselves and the circumstances we’re in. The researchers [have figured out] the value of relying on college students who’ve lived through the experience and come out the other side to deliver the message. That’s a plausible voice – if I said the same thing, nobody would listen.” (emphasis mine)

***Recognizing that we aren’t always the best messenger of our own organization's message is a wise – and humbling – insight… and one that more of us in working in advocacy should take to heart.***

By now, we all know that facts alone are not enough to persuade an audience.

(Sigh.) 

To persuade someone to change their mind, you need to consider four factors:

1)     Their current belief;

2)     Their confidence in that belief; 

3)     The new information you are sharing; and

4)     Their confidence in that new information. 

That final factor – confidence in the new information – relates to your source and the bigger the gap between factors #1 and #3, the more critical it is to pick a source A) to whom your audience will listen; and B) whom your audience will trust.

For example, I believe that the earth is round (factor #1) and I’m pretty darn certain of that (factor #2). I am unlikely to believe someone who tells me the earth is flat (factor #3) if that person is the host of a podcast in Denmark on fashion because A) I'm not listening to such podcasts (and don't speak Danish), and B) I have no reason to trust their opinion on scientific topics. I'm quite sure they will have absolutely no impact on my belief. But if we were to discover a manuscript from Stephen Hawking suggesting reason to believe the earth might indeed be less round than we’ve thought? Well, now you have my attention and I’m at least willing to listen.

That’s an extreme example. The story of how Mary Wortley Montagu relied on a princess to persuade people to pick open pustules in order to stay healthy more starkly illustrates how critical a role your source plays in the impact of your message.

In short, Ms. Montagu saw firsthand how people in Turkey inoculated themselves against severe cases of small pox by picking open sores and putting pus into scratches on other people's arms. (Yes, that's gross. But if it seems harder than convincing members of Congress to pass your bill, take heart and keep reading.) Ms. Montagu wanted to bring this practice, called variolation, to England but, no surprise, people thought she was cuckoo for cocoa puffs and wanted nothing to do with it (or her).

To overcome this resistance to resistance (<-- see what I did there?), Ms. Montagu found a source with clout to whom her audience would not only listen and trust, but also emulate. In the words of Cailin O’Connor, a mathematician and philosopher, Ms. Montagu “did something really smart, which took advantage of the ways that we use our social connections to ground our beliefs and our trust. [She convinced] Princess Caroline of Ansbach to variolate her own two small daughters and to do it in this kind of public way. [In other words,] she got one of the most influential people in the entire country to engage in this practice.”

To paraphrase O’Connor, Princess Caroline's involvement did two things: 1) it provided public evidence that the practice was safe, since Princess Caroline’s daughters stayed healthy; and 2) it made people more likely to engage in this practice in order to have more in common with a popular and influential person.

In short, Caroline was a bit like Gwyneth Paltrow (which is simply to cite a celebrity who uses her popularity as a platform for medical advice, not to comment on its (in)efficacy). As Hidden Brain host Shankar Vedantam notes, Ms. Montagu’s approach “wasn't, in some ways, a rational way to solve the problem. It wasn't saying, 'Look, there's really convincing evidence here.’” In fact, he calls Ms. Montagu's technique “pretty close to propaganda.”

If you are reading this, you likely aren’t someone who would consider invoking mindless propaganda in your next advocacy campaign. But odds are you might need a reminder not to rely solely on data to persuade your audience – or solely on your usual spokespersons.

At an Advocacy Summit last fall, Julie Verratti shared powerful examples of the importance of selecting your source in recounting work she’d done to win support for marriage equality (in the course of an inspiring path that most recently led to amazing beer). Take a moment to think about how the same message would be received in various offices on Capitol Hill coming from a 20-year-old who identifies as gay compared to:

• Her mother;
• His older brother who is a member of the military;
• A member of the clergy where they attend services;
• A best friend of that member of Congress;
• Your boss/CEO/President; or
• A professional lobbyist.

These are all legitimate options. Which is the most effective source depends - you guessed it - on your audience.

Believe me, I understand that your organization aims to maintain consistency in its brand and its message and that yes, your boss/CEO/President is an important part of your brand. But that does not mean they are always the best messenger for your message. 

Further, if you make decisions about your source by default instead of considering your audience, I can almost guarantee that your boss/CEO/President is often not the right choice.

Use the four factors and two elements above when you ask yourself:

“Who is my Princess Caroline?”

If she’s not your boss/CEO/President, try to find someone who is.

Next time you’re pressured to feature your boss/CEO/President, share this article – and let me know how it goes!

(Photo credits: Daniele Levis Pelusi; Markus Spiske; Jeremy Thomas; and Daniel McCullough on Unsplash; as well as to NASA, also on Unsplash - how handy is that?)

Have other questions about this or other R.E.S.U.L.T. elements? Drop me a line in the comments below: