I am working with a community-based advocacy group to develop their strategies of influence. The one hour session at their last meeting articulated their five principal objectives, and a set of strategic priorities for the next two years. This has left us with the question of actions, and measures. With the small working group formed to prepare for the next meeting, in relation to actions, I suggested that delegates prepare themselves in the following way ….

"Take a strategic priority you have a strong interest in, and identify a typical situation where you want to see things change. In that situation:

"What's driving change? What's holding it back?"
"What action do you recommend we take? "

This would build a picture of drivers and blockers, and allow a clear choice as to where to exert influence.

One of my colleagues on the working party responded by suggesting that it all needed to be kept simpler. He didn't think the extra analysis of things like 'drivers' and 'blockers' is where the group needed to go at this stage (later maybe). He suggested simply asking: "For each strategy, list down the things you think we should be doing?"

This allows for more flexibility in action – the first action might not be effective, but if you’re clear about the blocker or driver you want to influence, you can invent a next round of action. There is also more coherence of action across a team, because agreement in the group on where it wants to exert influence allows all members to use their own smarts to take action. Then, the organisation doesn't just rely on action by the person allocated responsibility on the “to do” list.