The word “passion” is often used to refer to the energy and excitement people have for the ideas and causes most important to them. Is there a particular cause, organization or fundraising effort that ignites your passion these days?
It is natural and healthy to want to recruit others to join your cause. But our passion can cause problems, particularly in the way we talk to others about it. Many enthusiastic and well-intentioned people become bad messengers.
The ongoing conversation about climate change is a great example, one with lessons that apply to the private sector as well as to nonprofits or political issues.
The climate change debate has been raging for some time; the conversation appears to have hit a standoff in public opinion. In a recent commentary for The Wall Street Journal, Stewart Easterby observed that, despite the volume of messages coming from news sources and popular media over many years, climate activists have not been able to convince the majority of Americans to be seriously concerned.
Gallup has found three segments when it comes to beliefs about climate change: The largest group, “concerned believers,” describes 48% of U.S. adults (it was 50% in 2017). The “mixed middle” is at 32% of U.S. adults in 2018 (versus 31% in 2017), and the “cool skeptics” segment was unchanged at 19%. Americans’ overall opinions have been relatively steady for several years, although the divisions by segment are increasingly defined along partisan lines.
If Americans are becoming entrenched in their opinions, what can those on either side of the debate do? And what are the lessons for any group seeking to bring more people into their fold?
Find the Rallying Cry
Sometimes the core message itself gets in the way. Easterby points out that “swapping between ‘climate change’ and ‘global warming’ confuses the public.” I agree; people need a clear sense of what they are working toward.
That simple rallying cry is typically framed toward the positive. Heifer International is about “ending hunger and poverty.” Ambassadors of Compassion is about “equipping youth for life.” Sometimes an effective message is focused on alleviating a negative, as with the Wounded Warrior Project (“the greatest casualty is being forgotten”). In either case, the audience should feel that they can personally affect an improved outcome.
If the rallying cry is too alarmist or seems cataclysmic, then over time most of the audience will get desensitized. For example, annual surveys of high school students about the warning messages on alcoholic beverage containers consistently found that the students paid attention to those messages and remembered them — but the effects leveled off after about three and a half years. Every domain is a bit different, of course, but if your message is full of alarms (as is the case with climate activists) then over time much of the audience will tune you out.
Engage Your In-group
It is well-established that if you want to gain traction for your cause or idea, you should begin with a strong core group. Some might call this group a “community,” while others would call it a “tribe.” Seth Godin notes that the process of building a tribe involves leading and connecting people and ideas. Then there is the need to lead some behavior(s) that will grow the cause (e.g., donating money, offering time and expertise or recruiting others) and produce results.
The positive force that brings people into the group can, unfortunately, easily lead to a negative counterforce. We know from social psychology that those who identify themselves into a group (for them, the “in-group”) can easily denigrate those on the outside of the group (the “out-group”).
When the messaging loses its focus on the positive outcomes to be achieved and instead descends into comments on an out-group, then the cause itself can get stuck. That’s likely contributing to the Gallup results.
Don’t Push the Out-group Farther Out
Americans broadly support the idea of care for the environment. A 2017 survey from the Pew Research Center found that 74% of U.S. adults agree “the country should do whatever it takes to protect the environment.” But clearly not everyone embraces a causal relationship between human activity and climate change, or particularly the policy prescriptions offered to minimize the severe effects forecasted by some.
The messaging mistake by many climate activists is that they have publicly called out their opponents as “deniers.” Perhaps they are frustrated and want immediate action. Perhaps they are convinced that the weight of evidence is on their side, even though thoughtful and well-intentioned people can raise legitimate questions about measurements of surface temperatures. But if climate activists want to build a critical mass of public support, then they should consider the long game of persuasion. The cycle of “No, I’m not!” and “Yes, you are!” won’t lead anywhere.
People want to be connected to ideas larger than themselves. The written and spoken word contains great opportunity to inspire tribes with those ideas — not through force, shame or dictate.
Whether your passion is for the environment, your community, education, economic opportunity or anything else, the clear and positive discipline of your messaging will to a large degree determine your probability of success. The “mixed middle” is on the fence, listening to what both sides have to say and evaluating the tribes. Will your side’s message tend to attract them or chase them away?
About the Author | Jim Karrh
No hay comentarios:
Publicar un comentario