K Street Cafe

Cross-posted from the Congressional Management Foundation blog

In 1998, the Congressional Management Foundation (CMF) embarked on a ground-breaking research project: to study best practices in congressional websites with the goal of providing Congress with guidance on how to use this emerging technology to improve constituents’ communication with, and understanding of, the institution. Three years later the initiative was boosted by a two-year grant from The Pew Charitable Trusts to create the Congress Online Project, in association with The George Washington University’s Graduate School of Political Management.

The project had an ambitious goal: develop a methodology for evaluating more than 600 congressional personal office, committee and leadership websites. CMF spent a year conducting focus groups with citizens, examining private sector research, and even polling reporters on their expectations when interacting with congressional websites. We then engaged in a thorough assessment process, assigning grades to every website on Capitol Hill. The strategy was: by highlighting the best practices, and playing to politicians’ natural competitiveness with a grading system, Congress would better utilize online communications tools, thereby better serving citizens. (more…)

Cross-posted from Congressional Management Foundation

Congressional offices are receiving between 200 to 1,000 percent more constituent communications than they were ten years ago. Despite the increase, a survey of congressional staff indicates that 90 percent believe constituent communications remains a “high priority” for the office. But sizable percentages of staff report that their offices are shifting resources to manage the increased demand.

The findings are part of a new report released today by the Congressional Management Foundation (CMF), How Citizen Advocacy Is Changing Mail Operations on Capitol Hill. The report is based on a survey of 260 congressional staff on how email and the Internet are affecting office procedures. CMF researchers also collected mail volume data from ten House and Senate offices.

Read the report here.

“Congress is working hard to adapt to and understand this new environment,” the report states. “But are most Members and staff of the Congress fundamentally rethinking what they do, or simply trying to apply a 20th century paradigm, workflow, and communications process to a 21st century challenge?”

(more…)

by Patrick Hynes

Cross-posted from The Daily Caller

Despite the successful and headline-grabbing launch of Google+, only 13 members of the U.S. Senate and 15 members of the U.S. House of Representatives have established profiles on the new social networking site, far fewer than the number from each chamber who are active on Facebook and Twitter.

Google+ launched in July to much fanfare and within three weeks had attracted 20 million users in the U.S. Some technology pundits have labeled it a “Facebook killer.”

Congress’s slow adoption of Google+ comes as a surprise because the new social networking platform contains at least one unique function the others do not: It allows users to segregate relationships into “Circles,” meaning members of Congress can isolate constituents from other followers. Heavy social networking “spam” from non-constituents is a significant frustration for members and their social media staffs.

“Just the other day, someone posted on our Facebook wall that she wished my boss was her senator,” a Hill press secretary told me.

A recent study by the Congressional Management Foundation reports that members of Congress and key staff have embraced social media as a tool to communicate with constituents. But privately, many also complain they receive too much pre-packaged “Astroturf” in the form of canned Tweets and Facebook wall postings. In many cases, these communications come from people far away from the members’ districts or from undetermined locations. Google+ Circles allow members of Congress to target their communications directly to people in the states or districts they represent, while ignoring communications directed at them from people outside their states or districts. (more…)

Cross-posted from the Public Affairs Council.

The Congressional Management Foundation’s newest report on Capitol Hill’s use of social media is out. But what does that mean for advocacy professionals?

Join the Public Affairs Council on August 4 or August 10 for insights on what the data tells us about communicating with Congress.

There’s no doubt – social media has gained a foothold in congressional offices. The Congressional Management Foundation has published a unique report that surveys congressional staff on their attitudes and practices with social media. The results will help you understand how members of Congress use social media, who is responsible for strategy and what congressional staff see as the benefits and drawbacks of Facebook, Twitter and other platforms.

Be the first to hear what the survey’s findings mean for advocacy and communicating with Congress when Brad Fitch, president and CEO of the Congressional Management Foundation, shares the data and his insights on:

* How Congress is using social media to express legislators’ views and understand public opinion.

* How new media strategies compare to traditional media strategies for communicating with constituents.

* Congressional staff opinions about the value of social media.

* Staff views on the benefits and risks of using social media in a congressional office.

* How perceptions of social media differ between offices and between senior and junior staff.

Presented in partnership with the Congressional Management Foundation.

Follow the conversation on Twitter: #SocialCongress

The Congressional Management Foundation (CMF) today released the first study of congressional staff views of social media, and how it is being used by Congressional Offices. #SocialCongress:  Perceptions and Use of Social Media on Capitol Hill shows that most Members of Congress have thoroughly integrated social media into their communications operations, and are using new media tools to gauge public opinion, communicate with constituents, and reach new people. 

Click here to read the report.  

Among the key findings:

       *Nearly two-thirds (64%) of the senior managers and social media managers surveyed think Facebook is a somewhat or very important tool for understanding constituents’ views and opinions, 42% say Twitter is somewhat or very important, and 34% say YouTube is a somewhat or very important tool for understanding constituents’ views and opinions.

       *Nearly three-quarters (74%) of the senior managers and social media managers we surveyed think Facebook is somewhat or very important for communicating their Members’ views. YouTube is viewed by nearly three-quarters of staffers surveyed (72%) as somewhat or very important for communicating their Members’ views.  More than half (51%) of the staffers surveyed say Twitter is a somewhat or very important vehicle for their Members’ communications.

       *A strong majority of staffers (72%) believe that social media allows their Members to reach people they had previously not communicated with.  A majority of the staffers (55%) feel social media offers their offices more benefits than risks.

The report is part of CMF’s initiative, the Partnership for a More Perfect Union.  The Partnership seeks to enrich the relationship between citizens and Congress through education, building trust, and providing innovative yet pragmatic tools to facilitate purposeful two-way communication.

Cross-posted from The Partnership for a More Perfect Union

I recently made an historic discovery regarding what is probably the first system to track relationships between Members of Congress and organizations that seek to influence them. Any grassroots or government relations professional knows that it is essential to have an understanding of Congress, and one of the best ways to do this is to set up a customer relationship management (CRM) system to track relationships between supporters and legislators. The tools also are used to note important characteristics or interests of the legislator that may either connect him to your cause, track meeting discussions, and note follow-up actions.

But one does not need to be a masterful 21st century practitioner of CRM software best practices to create this kind of system. In fact, I believe I recently stumbled onto the first CRM of Congress. The group had a vital issue pending before the Congress; they had a motivated and well-organized grassroots base; and they created a system for tracking every detail of their interaction with legislators as well as the interests of congressmen (and they were all men). The time was 1900. The issue: whether women should have the right to vote.

(more…)

When communicating with congressional offices, the most pressing question used to be: are email or postal messages more effective? While each has its advantages, congressional staff view them equally. The more important question is: are the messages personalized?

In our recent survey of staff we asked, “If your Member/Senator has not already arrived at a firm decision on an issue, how much influence might the following advocacy strategies directed to the Washington office have on his/her decision?” Among the possible answers were advocacy tactics like faxes, visits from lobbyists, social media site comments, phone calls, as well as “Individualized Postal Letters,” Individualized Email Messages,” “Form Postal Letters,” and “Form Email Messages.”

Not surprisingly, “In-Person Visits from Constituents” ranked the highest. However, we all know how impractical it is for every citizen or advocacy organization to arrange face-to-face meetings with their corresponding Representatives and Senators. That being the case, written communication (emails and postal letters) are a much more practical form of communication.

So which of the two is going to have the greatest impact?

(more…)

Written by Kate Kaye, ClickZ Politics & Advocacy

E-mails to congressional representatives are the common currency of online advocacy campaigns, but a new study shows all advocacy e-mails are not created alike. In a report published earlier this month, the Congressional Management Foundation aimed to determine how much influence e-mail, social media channels, and traditional media channels have on U.S. House Members and Senators.

The CMF survey of more than 250 congressional staffers showed that e-mails with individualized messages are far better received than form e-mails, which are often automated through advocacy campaign websites. Nineteen percent of respondents said e-mails including more personalized messages had “a lot of positive influence” on office holders who had yet to firmly decide on an issue, and 69 percent said they had some influence.

“What matters most is the content, not the vehicle,” suggested the “Communicating with Congress” report, which showed that postal mail featuring personalized messages is seen as almost equally influential to personalized e-mails. Twenty percent said they had “a lot of positive influence” and 70 percent said they had some.

Form e-mails, on the other hand, were seen as having “a lot of positive influence” by just 1 percent of participants and “some influence” by 50 percent. Social media site comments were also attributed less value. Just 1 percent said social site comments had “a lot of positive influence,” and 41 percent said they had “some influence.”

To read the entire article on ClickZ, click here.

Cross-posted from the Public Affairs Council blog

Average citizens can have more influence on congressional policy than they think, says a new study from the Congressional Management Foundation (CMF). In fact, in many cases they have more influence than lobbyists or editorial page editors.

The report, Communicating with Congress: Perceptions of Citizen Advocacy on Capitol Hill, was released this week at the Public Affairs Council’s National Grassroots Conference. It is based on a survey conducted late last year of 260 Senate and House staffers.

“The most influential advocacy strategies for swaying an undecided Member of Congress depend on personal communications from constituents,” says the study. “Whether individuals make contact face-to-face, by phone, or through personalized email or postal mail, Senators and Representatives are influenced by their constituents’ own views about the public policy issues before them.”

The key word here is “personal.” In an age when technology allows an issue group to shut down Capitol Hill servers with thousands of identical emails, it’s refreshing to hear that taking the time to visit a congressional office in person is worth the effort.

(more…)

Today at the Public Affairs Council’s National Grassroots Conference in Key West, Florida, the Congressional Management Foundation released the latest report from its “Communicating With Congress” project.  Brad Fitch, the Executive Director of CMF and a fellow contributor at K Street Café, will give attendees a run-down of the report’s most important findings at the conference’s keynote address.  (Disclaimer: My firm, Adfero Group, is a sponsor of the Communicating With Congress report.)

For nearly a decade, the Communicating with Congress project has worked to improve communications between the public and Members of Congress.  This post provides a roadmap for both advocacy organizations and Members on how to use the information from the project’s latest report.

Recommendations for Advocacy Organizations

There are five key points that advocacy organizations should take away from the CMF’s latest report as they plan their grassroots strategies.

(more…)