There are two realities in DC – (1) there are a lot of advocacy campaigns, and (2) many of them are fairly unsophisticated. Like many things, advocacy is an art, not a science. It requires know-how, flexibility, analysis of metrics, and a comprehensive plan. Most advocacy plans fail before they even launch, especially those driven by newcomers to this space. It is largely because they are either approaching advocacy in manner that is too simple and linear, or they are just not viewing the ecosystem through the appropriate lens. Here are five things to know when entering the federal advocacy space:

DC has both theatrics and meaningful policy, but mostly theatrics:  Early-stage plans too often fall into the “theatrics trap” – confusing political theatrics with legitimate policy. Being able to tell the difference is really important, so you are not spending all of your time chasing something that is just theatrics. 

Resources are not the most important factor in advocacy: Some of the most well-funded advocacy campaigns face the toughest uphill climbs, and some of the least well-funded campaigns reach the finish line before others. Why? Because of the old idea that resourcefulness is more important than resources. A great advocacy campaign focuses on things like a sophisticated strategy, metrics, and aggressive implementation.  No advocacy campaign is free, but the substance of the campaign is more important than the investment in the campaign. 

Politics and policy are somewhat one and the same:  There is a field for politics (the campaign trail) and a field for policy (the Congress), but in reality, they are very intertwined because good policy is good politics and, obviously, bad policy is bad politics. Policymakers have a long list of objectives in office, but their entire existence depends on good policy (which is ultimately good politics). Those looking to find champions should only look to those policymakers where the policy translates to good politics…or your journey will be much longer and less productive than it should be. 

Message volume is more important than meeting volume:  At the end of the day, every successful advocacy campaign has been able to connect a winning message to policy issues that are then championed by a small group of policymakers who believe in the cause. Making sure your message reaches the right group of people is very important; having performative meetings with policymakers that do not have an interest in an issue or a position to impact it generally translates to lost time.  Advocacy campaigns should be thought of as messaging efforts with a narrow audience that is best-positioned to align with the issue or move the issue (or both).      

Campaigns should consider the entire ecosystem, not just the decisionmaker: There is a tendency to jump to the decisionmaker (committee chair, President, etc.) and ignore many influential opportunities along the way, which is a mistake. It is always important to understand the broader policy ecosystem and what within that ecosystem can be helpful in getting your issue across the finish line – maybe that is a think tank, a federal agency, a thought leader, or someone close the decisionmaker…it’s an important part of how policy moves, and ignoring it (or not exploring it) will reduce chances of a campaign’s success.