I know people who can hear an idea and immediately jump into action. In fact, I work for one and I'm married to another one. Despite the fact that it often drives them crazy, I'm not one of those people. For me there is a middle "thinking" stage - which can last as long as, well, years sometimes. So a lot of the changes percolating for me since Advocacy Camp have to do with changes in thinking (although I have also taken some actions that I'll get to in another post).
Bouncing around in my head lately is this question: What is
the nature of the connection between policy and advocacy? After Advocacy Camp I
have a much better sense of what advocacy is and how to do it. But doesn’t
effective advocacy presuppose some understanding of policy, or at least of how
policy gets made? About policy, a web dictionary gives us: “A plan or course of
action, as of a government, political party, or business, intended to influence
and determine decisions, actions, and other matters.” It also says, “Prudence,
shrewdness, or sagacity in practical matters.” Hm. Does this mean that policy
by definition is effective or smart? I wonder.
Roget’s web thesaurus suggests that other words for policy include: action, administration, approach, arrangement, behavior, channels, code, course, custom, design, guideline, line, management, method, order, organization, plan, polity, practice, procedure, program, protocol, red tape, rule, scheme, stratagem, strategy, tenet, the book, the numbers, theory. Is it like pornography – we’re not sure how to define it but we know it when we see it?
My friend and colleague Susan says that we don’t advocate to change policy. We advocate for money. I would say that at my organization, advocacy is not enough. We want to be at the table when child care policy is made. Of course, that's also the best place to be when they're giving out the money.
What do you think? Are policy and advocacy connected, independent, or is there another way to describe it?
Recent Comments