I was asked the other day, how counter intuitive should a government agency be in trying to relate to a confused, hostile or indifferent public?
So what was my view?
Personally government should always seek to establish a relevant relationship with citizens, which is focused away from ‘big government’, the nanny state and popular perceptions of having to achieve ‘quota’s’ to govern ‘politically correct’ policy. When government is seen in this light it does little to motivate citizens or small and medium sized enterprises, all ready struggling with the issues of a shrinking economy.
This requires government agencies to focus on compelling reasons why a change in, or reinforcement of, citizen behaviour is needed. This means developing real insight to insure that the messages delivered are relevant and compelling enough to instigate the change. It must be remembered that the majority of transactions citizens have are with commercial organizations that entirely rely on using insight in this way to create intuitive connections to audiences. You are not told to buy a plasma TV nor a new set of trainers. You are motivated, even compelled to buy through active communication of the benefits (a better picture, fewer injuries, etc.). Citizens are therefore, conditioned to be influenced in this way.
This sounds easy and like all things in life about applying common sense, but it isn’t. Government agencies usually have a knack of undermining compelling thinking by seeking to be inclusive of everyone. This weakens communication, falling back into the cycle of perceived political correctness, big government, etc. You simply become all things to all people achieving little and reinforcing existing prejudice.
This helps no-one.
