Developing advocacy positions is a very delicate art requiring lots of diplomacy, time, energy and a representative mandate. In my trade association, positions are adopted by our Council, which is kind of like a parliament. But they are elaborated by standing committees (one covering technology issues, one economic issues and one issues linked to product use). Every member company has the right to be represented on those committees and to potentially contribute to the elaboration of positions. It takes a minimum of a year for us to put together a position.

I don’t think IABC has a structure that is suitable for developing such positions. Personally I currently vote for the International Executive Board to run IABC, not to adopt position papers. (Understanding that they will voice their opinions as members of the board when interviewed, etc.) And I certainly don’t think that IABC’s current committee structure (appointed, non-transparent, reporting to the IEB but largely invisible to members on an ongoing basis) is well-suited to developing positions.

Yet I think that the advocacy initiative is a good idea. I think it should be about enabling communicators’s voices (Hey! Be Heard! (TM)). What about developing the press room to be more dynamic and including a List Serve or blog on current issues so that members can pitch in with pithy quotes that can be used by journalists, PROVIDED THAT THEY ARE CITED AS John Doe, Dircom XYZ Corp. and member of the International Association of Business Communicators (IABC).

To be credible, IABC needs to strengthen its brand, which takes us back to both the branding initiative and marketing. We listen to CEOs of major corporations because their brands have some importance in the world and some meaning, not because they put out a pretty brochure. We need to increase the appreciation of our value proposition, especially outside of North America, where our organization is growing fastest.

And we need to improve our communications, both internally and externally. We talk about chapters going for Gold Quills, but I would love to see IABC HQ’s own communications being held to this standard. It would help us evaluate the job staff are doing for members, it would add credibility to GQ (do as I do, not as I say)and it would be good advocacy for members’ also using Gold Quill as their measure.

That’s just some thinking out loud…

Mike

I think creating “more total opportunities for business communicators” is a viable outcome from a more overarching advocacy effort that makes an economic, operational, and perhaps even moral case for organizations raising their game in the communication arena. I’m not saying it should be the focus–but it certainly could be one of those measurable outcomes we measurement fans love to measure.

Why not an ABC today? I’m seeking to re-establish my own “brand” in the marketplace (as an “advocate” for more strategic and interactive approaches to internal communication), move from a consulting to an in-house role, and perhaps move city and/or country again. Once I get my bags unpack from the current transition, an ABC would make sense for me.

My US $.02

I also don’t believe the ABC should be something that promotes elitism. Ever. It should never become “gold member” status.

But I am curious as to why the ABC is “something (you) want to pursue within the next few years.”

I say there’s no time like the present!

1) Bigger pie/share of pie: Naturally, ABC-holders want to a higher percentage of “ABC-Preference” job postings in the range of industries we inhabit. This not necessarily a bad thing–but ABCs and non-ABCs alike may be much better off if there were more total opportunities available to business communicators as a result of outstanding advocacy work by members and by the Association. Do we want a bigger pie–or merely to give a larger share of the pie to those who can make a case that they are more deserving?

2) Elitism: ABC is a great credential–it’s indeed something I want to pursue within the next few years. But do we want to take what is essentially a certification of professional skills and aplomb to present to the marketplace and convert it into a “gold member” status within IABC? And if we do so, do we run the risk of turning IABC into an accreditation shop/club instead of a broadbased network and advocacy group making a compelling case for strategic communication in enterprises around the world?

Great conversation! And…GO BEARS!!!!!

As I read through the previous postings, I see some great discussion about IABC building visibility of the communications profession and its value to business – now, that’s member service!

To me, the ABC is a validation of IABC’s expertise in the field. The ABC is the only global certification program for communicators. When I see “ABC,” be it attached to the name of an American, a Canadian, Brazilian or Belgian – I know that these individuals have reached a superior level of experience and strategic competence in the field of communications. I know the criteria under which they have been thoroughly tested on their ability to analyze an opportunity or need, develop and execute a sound response, and measure the results in a viable, meaningful way. That their approach to media relations (my field) is not “more earned media” but rather “more earned media that will accomplish X, Y and Z objectives.” That I can hire that person. In other words, I believe the ABC is a source of credibility and value for the association, and for those communicators who hold it.

Christine Nyirjesy Bragale, ABC

My apologies if I misspoke. There are undoubtedly many, many non-accreedited communicators out there who are highly regarded by their CEOs and their management teams and “have their ears”, so to speak.

The point I was trying to make was that ABCs are probably better equipped to propose hiring policies favoring accredited professionals in filling future job openings. As living examples of such a campaign, their advocacy might gather momentum faster than similar recommendations from non-ABCs.

I especially agree that we’d be making real progress if more job openings included “ABC preferred.”

But I’m curious about your statement that “ABCs are already embedded in the structure of hundreds of organizations around the world and close to the ears of their leaders.” In many cases, that’s true — but don’t you think many non-accredited communicators have also advanced to that point?

Still, I think you’re spot-on that raising communicators’ visibility and status will ultimately help non-communicators understand the value we add as well as encourage more communicators (myself included) to seek accreditation.

I’d like to explore other roles that our Accredited colleagues could fill in an Advocacy initiative. Ideas, anyone?

But unless IABC wishes to rebrand itself as the “Institute of ABCs” and solely focus its efforts on accreditation and serving the needs of the Accredited, the range of activities will need to be much broader, much deeper, much more inclusive and at least somewhat more devolved than this idea or the current approach.

- Raise the profile of the communications profession(al) for business, HR and other publics. Promote greater understanding of effective communication as a critical business tool; highlight its benefits and the results it can achieve.
————-

IABC should leverage its huge corps of Accredited Professionals to pursue this objective. Use as a foundation the fact that ABCs are already embedded in the structure of hundreds of organizations around the world and close to the ears of their leaders.

Specifically, IABC should equip and, if necessary, train, its ABCs to open a dialogue with their respective HR departments and managements to fill future communication positions in their organizations with accredited professionals.

With appropriate preparation, future job descriptions and announcements of job openings in this field will contain the words, “ABC certification required” or “Accredited professionals preferred.”

Not only will this raise the visiblity and status of professional communicators and provide opportunities for ABCs (and IABC) to educate HR specialists and management as to their value, it will also act as a powerful incentive for individuals not yet certified to become so.

Such a plan will jumpstart a bottom-up effort as suggested in a previous comment and provide tangible and immediate traction for this bold move forward.