Budgets are under constant scrutiny. Outcomes need to be measured and delivered. But in the public sector there can be the added considerations of Parliamentary and political oversight.
When the Coalition first came into office, Eric Pickles issued a whole series of directions about what type of engagement local authorities could and could not do. He had a particular issue with council run newspapers, ‘propaganda on the rates’.
Now in the US, the Department of Labor is being investigated for ‘mismanagement and wasteful spending practices’ by the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee, which is Republican-led. Chairman of the Committee, Darrell Issa, has called the spending ‘frivolous’ and a ‘misuse of agency resources’. The nature of the spending though is on communications.
At the heart of the problem is whether the spending was focused on ‘a strategy to inform the public of the agency’s work and boost employee morale’ or, as the committee has suggested, to ‘promote’ the agency and its head of Public Affairs.
The Committee has asked for documents related to elevator posters, a book club, internal magazine, contests entered and awards attended. All these relate, for the large part, to internal communications activities.
According to the Washington Post, the Committee’s interest follows on from previous requests for information made by Senator Tom Coburn. These led to an ongoing audit of an agency contract by the Labor Department’s Inspector General.
So communications, and particularly internal communications, are being questioned. An excellent discussion on the Hobson & Holtz podcast, For Immediate Release, first alerted me to the issue and they explored why the internal communications were coming under scrutiny.
This was a situation that could well be replicated, rather than transplanted directly, to our own Select Committees. Whilst the powers and resources of US and UK Committees vary, making direct comparison difficult, UK Select Committees could start to drill down into the work of parts of the public sector and hold similar inquiries into communications campaigns.
WHAT CAN BE DONE TO OFFER PROTECTION FROM BEING CAUGHT UNAWARES?
Keep good records of all activity – from initial planning documents through to stakeholder lists. Collective memory can often be lost from organisations when people leave, but this cannot happen if there is even the merest chance of an inquiry at some point. A Select Committee will look very dimly upon such excuses. Proof is all and the ability to clearly demonstrate what actions were taken and why would be critical. It may also be useful to show what was rejected.
FINANCE
Demonstrate how costs were controlled and how the best deal was secured for any consultants used, proper procurement processes, management procedures and so on.
OUTCOMES
Consider the KPIs for success at the very start and track achievement over time. It should not be a binary succeed/fail but a more nuanced approach so that lessons can be learned.
ACCEPT FAILINGS
Not all campaigns will be successful all the time and part of good communications is also about being open and honest enough to learn the lessons. If a Committee sees total success all of the time then it will, rightly, question the campaigns.
THE COMMITTEE
If anyone finds themselves involved in a Select Committee inquiry then it is about responding but also putting points across in all types of evidence. This should include fully preparing anyone who is going to appear in person.
There may though be things that the Committee requests that you do not have to provide. There are risks associated with adopting that position but do not automatically assume that you will be sent to the Tower of London if you fail to comply. Fully reasoned arguments are though needed.
CONCLUSION
Being prepared is essential. If the UK Parliament is looking over to the US for inspiration they might want to do in the future then communications could be in the firing line. Preparation just became that much more important.