<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	>

<channel>
	<title> &#187; influence</title>
	<atom:link href="http://showaltergroup.com/blog/tag/influence/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://showaltergroup.com/blog</link>
	<description></description>
	<lastBuildDate>Fri, 27 Jan 2012 15:00:02 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	
	<language>en</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
			<item>
		<title>Single Voice (On Steroids) Sinks Coast Guard Rule</title>
		<link>http://showaltergroup.com/blog/2011/09/30/single-voice-on-steroids-sinks-coast-guard-rule/</link>
		<comments>http://showaltergroup.com/blog/2011/09/30/single-voice-on-steroids-sinks-coast-guard-rule/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 30 Sep 2011 18:40:25 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Amy Showalter</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Underdog Edge]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Underdog Influence]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[influence]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://showaltergroup.com/blog/?p=1068</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[I read a recent article in <em>Roll Call</em> entitled <a href="http://www.rollcall.com/issues/57_33/Single-Voice-Sinks-Coast-Guard-Rule-208928-1.html" target="_blank">“Single Voice Sinks Coast Guard Rule.”</a> It told the story of Susan Balistrei who  “single- handily” caused the Coast Guard to rescind a regulation relative to life jacket design. The article was also featured in the September 27 edition of the K Street Cafe blog: <a href="http://" target="_blank">http://www.kstreetcafe.com/</a>

The Coast Guard issued a new rule regarding life jacket design without providing for public comment because it “considered this rule to be noncontroversial and did not expect any adverse comment.”   Balistreri wrote to the Coast Guard that aspects of the regulation could enable currently approved inflatable products to be marketed to teens, and that these life jackets weren’t safe for teenagers. ...]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://showaltergroup.com/blog/2011/09/30/single-voice-on-steroids-sinks-coast-guard-rule/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>How to Spend Money on Surveys that Don’t Get Results Part 2</title>
		<link>http://showaltergroup.com/blog/2011/06/15/how-to-spend-money-on-surveys-that-don%e2%80%99t-get-results-part-2/</link>
		<comments>http://showaltergroup.com/blog/2011/06/15/how-to-spend-money-on-surveys-that-don%e2%80%99t-get-results-part-2/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 15 Jun 2011 15:00:24 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Amy Showalter</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Research Commentary]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[influence]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://showaltergroup.com/blog/?p=1041</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Here's how to really determine if ads are effective: advertise some products, and don't advertise others. Then see which sells. All those "advertisements that don't work" will sell the product. Those that are unadvertised will sit on the shelf. When you ask people why they bought the advertised product, they will mention positive product attributes, but seldom advertising.

No matter if you are selling a message, a request for action, or a PAC contribution, the lesson for government relations professionals is this: unsophisticated "merely asking" type of research won't give you the insight needed to create compelling lines of persuasion.

So, that’s a long explanation of the number-one way to spend money on research that doesn’t get results: incorrect methodology. Here are...]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://showaltergroup.com/blog/2011/06/15/how-to-spend-money-on-surveys-that-don%e2%80%99t-get-results-part-2/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>How to Spend Money on Surveys that Don’t Get Results Part 1</title>
		<link>http://showaltergroup.com/blog/2011/06/13/how-to-spend-money-on-surveys-that-don%e2%80%99t-get-results-part-1/</link>
		<comments>http://showaltergroup.com/blog/2011/06/13/how-to-spend-money-on-surveys-that-don%e2%80%99t-get-results-part-1/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 13 Jun 2011 15:00:34 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Amy Showalter</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Research Commentary]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[influence]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://showaltergroup.com/blog/?p=1038</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[No, that’s not a typo. Although many organizations have the best intentions when it comes to conducting influence campaign research, I’ve seen some rival the “burn rate” of a circa 2000 internet start-up company without persuading their audiences. That results in wasted resources and a credibility hit for the government relations professionals at the scene of the crime.

On a somewhat related note, it reminds me of a comment (and I’m not making this up) at a recent conference where someone who was the victim of an “influence in a box” product pushed at them by an outside vendor, exclaimed: “We spent $400,000.00 (again, unfortunately not a typo) on a grassroots influence campaign and all we got was a lousy web...]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://showaltergroup.com/blog/2011/06/13/how-to-spend-money-on-surveys-that-don%e2%80%99t-get-results-part-1/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>The Bailout and Persuasion Tactics. . . .or, “If I&#8217;ve Learned One Thing, It&#8217;s Never One Thing” Part 2</title>
		<link>http://showaltergroup.com/blog/2011/06/08/the-bailout-and-persuasion-tactics-or-%e2%80%9cif-ive-learned-one-thing-its-never-one-thing%e2%80%9d-part-2/</link>
		<comments>http://showaltergroup.com/blog/2011/06/08/the-bailout-and-persuasion-tactics-or-%e2%80%9cif-ive-learned-one-thing-its-never-one-thing%e2%80%9d-part-2/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 08 Jun 2011 15:00:11 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Amy Showalter</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Influencing Legislators & Politicians]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[influence]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[persuasion]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://showaltergroup.com/blog/?p=1033</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Key Influentials and Mind-Changers

It gets even more interesting when you look at the lawmakers who did change their minds and their reasons why.

Our survey showed that undecided lawmakers are more likely to change their minds if they hear from people they trust. We call those people “key influentials;” personal friends, local elected officials and opinion leaders in the legislator’s district.

At least 10 of the lawmakers who changed their mind and voted “yes” on the second vote said they were influenced by phone calls or other communication from constituents or opinion leaders all of whom could be defined as “key influentials.” Several of those lawmakers said they changed their minds after talking to presidential candidates Barack Obama or John McCain, certainly...]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://showaltergroup.com/blog/2011/06/08/the-bailout-and-persuasion-tactics-or-%e2%80%9cif-ive-learned-one-thing-its-never-one-thing%e2%80%9d-part-2/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>The Bailout and Persuasion Tactics. . . .or, “If I&#8217;ve Learned One Thing, It&#8217;s Never One Thing” Part 1</title>
		<link>http://showaltergroup.com/blog/2011/06/06/the-bailout-and-persuasion-tactics-or-%e2%80%9cif-ive-learned-one-thing-its-never-one-thing%e2%80%9d-part-1/</link>
		<comments>http://showaltergroup.com/blog/2011/06/06/the-bailout-and-persuasion-tactics-or-%e2%80%9cif-ive-learned-one-thing-its-never-one-thing%e2%80%9d-part-1/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 06 Jun 2011 15:00:08 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Amy Showalter</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Influencing Legislators & Politicians]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[influence]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://showaltergroup.com/blog/?p=1031</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[I read with interest some blog postings and news accounts of the votes by the U.S. House of Representatives on the $700 billion Wall Street rescue plan. Some were straight news accounts, other heralded that the vote results were directly correlated to citizen grassroots input and nothing else. As one who promotes the grassroots persuasion “lifestyle,” you’d think I’d be doing a victory dance at these “insights.” Au contraire, it reminded me how attributing influence success to one tactic is a faulty way to evaluate success (or failure). It leads to flawed influence strategy. If I’ve learned one thing, it’s never one thing that leads to influence success. You have to have lots of tools in the toolbox, and leverage...]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://showaltergroup.com/blog/2011/06/06/the-bailout-and-persuasion-tactics-or-%e2%80%9cif-ive-learned-one-thing-its-never-one-thing%e2%80%9d-part-1/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>&#8220;May I Help You?&#8221;</title>
		<link>http://showaltergroup.com/blog/2011/02/14/may-i-help-you/</link>
		<comments>http://showaltergroup.com/blog/2011/02/14/may-i-help-you/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 14 Feb 2011 16:30:25 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Amy Showalter</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Underdog Influence]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[building relationships]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[influence]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://showaltergroup.com/blog/?p=85</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[<strong>One technique for building relationships is to find ways to help the “big dog” you want to influence.</strong> Joel Ulland, who represents the Minnesota Chapter of the Multiple Sclerosis Society before the Minnesota state legislature, built a relationship with an unlikely person of power long before he needed the relationship.

Ulland is a member of several coalitions for Minnesotans with disabilities. In the spring of 2005, Minnesota was reeling through three years of budget cuts. Ulland knew this meant tough times for people with disabilities.

“The state was facing a deficit for the third straight year, and the Republican governor refused to raise taxes. The question became not if the state would make cuts in state programs, but where the cuts would...]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://showaltergroup.com/blog/2011/02/14/may-i-help-you/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Mixing Business and Politics</title>
		<link>http://showaltergroup.com/blog/2011/02/04/mixing-business-and-politics/</link>
		<comments>http://showaltergroup.com/blog/2011/02/04/mixing-business-and-politics/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 04 Feb 2011 14:40:29 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Amy Showalter</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Research Commentary]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[government]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[grassroots]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[influence]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[leadership]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[pac]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[pac reporting]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://showaltergroup.com/blog/?p=878</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[<p style="margin-top: 8px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 8px; margin-left: 0px; outline-width: 0px; outline-style: initial; outline-color: initial; font-size: 12px; vertical-align: baseline; background-image: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; background-color: transparent; background-position: initial initial; background-repeat: initial initial; padding: 0px; border: 0px initial initial;">You may have seen the recent research from the University of Tennessee, in which Russell Crook, David Woehr and Sean Lux have found that yes, indeed, mixing business and politics makes good financial sense. <span style="outline-width: 0px; outline-style: initial; outline-color: initial; font-size: 12px; vertical-align: baseline; background-image: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; background-color: transparent; background-position: initial initial; background-repeat: initial initial; padding: 0px; margin: 0px; border: 0px initial initial;"><em>If you would like a copy of the full academic report -...]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://showaltergroup.com/blog/2011/02/04/mixing-business-and-politics/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Invest in Political Careers</title>
		<link>http://showaltergroup.com/blog/2010/12/01/invest-in-political-careers/</link>
		<comments>http://showaltergroup.com/blog/2010/12/01/invest-in-political-careers/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 01 Dec 2010 16:00:03 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Amy Showalter</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Underdog Influence]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[building relationships]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[influence]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://showaltergroup.com/blog/?p=90</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Chip Thayer, a well-known antismoking advocate and volunteer for the American Cancer Society in Massachusetts, turned heads with his advocacy success.

Thayer persuaded a conservative Republican state legislator to vote for a bill that would ban smoking in the workplace in 2004. In fact, state Senator Scott Brown had voted against the smoking ban when he served in the Massachusetts House of Representatives. That gave Thayer the tough challenge of asking Brown to change his vote, a request reserved for only the most intrepid underdogs.

To make it even more difficult, Brown had run in a special election to become a state senator and won by a narrow margin. Lawmakers who narrowly win their seats are typically averse to controversy and intent...]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://showaltergroup.com/blog/2010/12/01/invest-in-political-careers/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>1</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Avoid the Issue</title>
		<link>http://showaltergroup.com/blog/2010/11/10/avoid-the-issue/</link>
		<comments>http://showaltergroup.com/blog/2010/11/10/avoid-the-issue/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 10 Nov 2010 15:58:04 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Amy Showalter</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Underdog Influence]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[building relationships]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[influence]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://showaltergroup.com/blog/?p=92</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[<strong>When they meet with the big dogs, smart underdogs don’t always talk about their causes.</strong> In July 2005, the Wisconsin Supreme Court overturned a 10-year cap on noneconomic damages in medical liability cases (also known as “pain-and-suffering” awards). The Wisconsin Hospital Association (WHA) began an intensive lobbying and grassroots campaign to get the cap restored.

Brad Neet, the chief operating officer of St. Michael’s Hospital in Stevens Point, Wisconsin, identified not one but two state lawmakers on record against WHA’s position: Senator Julie Lassa and Representative Louis Molepske. He describes how not talking about the issue directly with them worked for him. “It’s important to get to know these individuals as people before you talk issues, before you make any request....]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://showaltergroup.com/blog/2010/11/10/avoid-the-issue/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>The Influence Tactics of Fortune’s “Power 25”</title>
		<link>http://showaltergroup.com/blog/2010/08/09/the-influence-tactics-of-fortunes-power-25/</link>
		<comments>http://showaltergroup.com/blog/2010/08/09/the-influence-tactics-of-fortunes-power-25/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 09 Aug 2010 12:00:35 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Amy Showalter</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Influencing Legislators & Politicians]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Research Commentary]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[influence]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://showaltergroup.com/blog/?p=175</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[<strong>Background</strong>

It is our interest in excellent government relations programs and “best in class” organizations that inspired our second research project with Fortune magazine’s “Power 25.” The first project focused on how they recruit, retain, and motivate their most productive grassroots advocates.

This research seeks to answer a second vital question: “What influence tactics predict success when attempting to gain legislative support”? We believe the answers are vital, because there are competing mythologies about what works in the legislative influence arena.

For example, when a group wins a high-profile campaign, the campaign is usually dissected for strategies and tactics, disregarding the influence context or the influence target that helped those tactics succeed.

We were also intrigued that workshop audience members (government relations staff and...]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://showaltergroup.com/blog/2010/08/09/the-influence-tactics-of-fortunes-power-25/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>

