There was a time when we were content to simply elect politicians to run things and then stand back and let them get the job done.

The times however, they are changing. Politicians who have been in the business for many years need to understand that or they will be left scratching their heads and wondering what on earth happened. They may wonder who changed the rules without telling them.

The change that I am talking about is how citizens feel about their role in the political process. Not just at election time, but throughout the year. Gone are the days when they expected politicians to present them with finely crafted answers, policies and solutions, ready to be rubber stamped and approved. The public demands consultation.

Unfortunately, there seems to be a disconnection between what politicians or the government feels is appropriate consultation and what the public expects.

I have seen this disconnect happen when a government body puts together a draft proposal for something – lets say a new recreational facility – and they include a public consultation process. But when you talk to the public, they feel they didn’t get any input.

Why the disconnect? I believe part of the problem is the differing ideas of what consultation involves. The government body puts together a glossy report, produces professional diagrams and maybe even a 3D model. The public comes in for a consultation and feels as though the finished product has been presented to them. The work has been done, people are invested in the results and they appear to be awaiting the accolades. The public walks away wondering why they were even asked for an opinion.

There is a big difference between consultation and engagement. Old-style consultation says, “what do you think about what we have done?” whereas engagement says, “come and be part of the process”. More and more people are wanting and expecting engagement. They don’t want to have answers presented to them; they want to be part of the journey to the answers.

A good example of this was the priority funding policy that came before council. Although it took years of public pressure, Strathcona County Council finally decided to draft a priority funding policy.

The policy took several months to be drafted and during that time nothing was said about the direction it was taking and no information was released other than to say they were working on it. When the draft was finally presented, it was made available to the public on a Friday afternoon and at the Tuesday meeting, some members of Council expressed frustration that the policy wasn’t passed.

There seemed to be a lack of understanding that this is an issue that is of concern to many of their residents and that they want some input.

What if a little less time had been taken drafting the policy and more time was spent collecting ideas and suggestions from the public? What if a truly draft policy was made public first? A policy that all involved knew was a draft and would probably not be approved without changes? This could have saved Councillor frustration and ensured that citizens who wanted to provide feedback into the policy would feel heard.

Of course, involving the public in every little decision is not appropriate or at all efficient, but when it comes to issues that are important to citizens, are controversial or that have any perception of conflict of interest, these are prime opportunities for citizen engagement.

I was amazed when the Alberta Wildrose bus was unveiled and the online furor began, to hear people say they honestly felt the Wildrose had wrapped their bus that way on purpose. Some feel it was a publicity stunt.

Uh. Not likely. In fact, I would suggest that if it was done deliberately, they should fire their PR person.

You see, the old adage that any publicity is good publicity only works in one situation – if you want people to recognize your name (or your party, or your brand etc.) but you don’t care what they think about you. Any publicity is good if you simply want awareness. But that is rare for anyone. Most people and brands want you to think or feel SOMETHING about them. Maybe they want you to be impressed, they want you to view them as classy, or smart or edgy. Or maybe they want you to vote for them.

Everyone knows the name Enron but is that good for the company? If Enron was a political party, would you vote for them? Would you buy their products if they were selling something at your local store?

To intentionally wrap the Wildrose bus in the hopes of causing a media sensation would have been a very dangerous move. It was not possible to forecast how it would be perceived. Some people found the bus humorous and some said that it showed the party should not be trusted with running the government. Taking that kind of chance when you are running a competitive campaign simply doesn’t make sense.

Emails. Love them or hate them, they are a regular part of most of our lives.

For those of us with desk jobs, the sheer volume of emails we receive every day can at times be overwhelming. I’m sure we have also all had the experience of firing off an email, only to have it get lost in the recipients inbox.

How can you make sure that your email doesn’t become a casualty of the email war and go MIA? Make it as easy on the recipient as possible.

Subject line
Give an accurate description of the topic of the email. Ambiguous subject lines in emails are annoying and waste your readers time. So forget:

• Great News!
• Seriously
• Please Read
• Tuesday

Or any other such variations that tell the reader nothing. Make it a subject line that at a glance will let them know what the email is about. Some examples:

• Board Agenda Minutes for July
• Question on Payment Schedule for ACME Company
• Important Client Question on Invoice – Needs Quick Response

First Paragraph
Get to the point. Don’t spend half the email in background information and leading up to your point. If there are any action items, they shouldn’t be buried in the email or they will be missed.

Rather than this:

Hi Jane,

As you are probably well aware, ACME Company has been dragging their feet in supplying us with the paperwork we needed to progress on their account. I tried five times to get the information from them, first by email and then later on in the month, I tried phoning them.

Although they kept saying they would supply us with the information, it wasn’t until Mike the General Manager contacted them that they finally got it for us.

Because it has taken so long, we are now in a real rush to get the income statement done up. Can you provide them for us as soon as possible?

Try this:

Hi Jane,

Can you provide me with the income statement for ACME Company as soon as possible? Although they didn’t provide us with the necessary paperwork on time, they are now in a hurry to get moving on things.

In the busy workplace most of us function in, Jane is scanning the first example and thinking to herself “get to the point already, what do you want from me? I wonder if I am going to get a chance to grab some lunch today? Did I leave the iron on?”

Urgent Status!!!
Oh yes, the good old red exclamation point. Bound to grab people’s attention and make them realize that this is an email they should give all their attention. Right? Uh-huh.

Much like exclamations in advertising copy, the little red one in emails have been overdone to the point of meaninglessness. If everything is urgent, which is most urgent?

My advice is to try and never use them unless it is truly urgent. If, after careful thought you realize that it is indeed urgent and worthy of the exclamation point, pick up the phone and call them instead.

CCs
CCs sort of go hand-in-hand with the urgent status. If you want people to pay attention to what you have to say in your email, then they need to know that if you send them one, it is worth reading. So stop ccing everyone and their dog on your emails. Yes, it is important to keep people in the loop, but we all have enough emails to deal with without being copied on emails that we have very little interest in.

A close relative to this issue is the “reply to all” button. If everyone needs to know your response, fine. But if you hit “reply to all” and send an email that says “Thanks” you will be at the mercy of the rabid email gods. And you will deserve all they can dish out.

These are some tips for making your emails as user friendly as possible. Do you have any others that have worked well for you?

Image: Salvatore Vuono / FreeDigitalPhotos.net

• How social media can change your business
• What makes you stand out in the social media crowd
• How to deal with negative customer feedback
• How to integrate social media into your overall marketing plan
• How to develop a successful social media strategy

Can you think of someone who would benefit from this type of conference? Maybe they have expressed a desire to get their business into social media but have no idea where to start, or perhaps they really aren’t convinced it is right for their business. Maybe its your business that would benefit from this type of conference.

This is where I come in. I have a ticket to give away (face value: $249) to the conference. All you have to do it tell me in the comment section why you think I should give you the ticket. On Nov. 18, 2011 I will choose the person who I feel is the most deserving. I get to choose, this is not a democracy and chocolate and wine are gladly accepted as bribes. And it should be noted that if you post this contest on your Facebook page, tweet or retweet it on twitter, I will notice and I will probably put an extra pretty tick mark next to your name on my marking sheet – I’m just sayin’

You can catch more flies with honey than with vinegar. Or can you? Depends. Are you a politician? Because apparently politicians feel vinegar is the only way to go.

Take the Wildrose Alliance party – before our new Premier was sworn in, and the day after she buried her mother, they came out swinging with attack ads questioning how she was running the province.

During last year’s municipal election in Strathcona County, Linda Osinchuk called the provincial government liars over their handling of the Sherwood Park hospital

“that’s just the way the game is played” is what I am told by many politicians. They claim it gets media coverage and wins them votes. I’m suggesting that maybe it’s the way to win the battle, but ultimately lose the war.

Don’t think I am suggesting that governments should be left to run unchecked, with no one questioning their moves. However, legitimate questions, intelligent feedback or even constructive criticism are rare these days.

When two politicians, whether they are municipal or provincial, engage in dirty politics, throwing accusations back and forth, there is only one loser. The taxpayer.

There are two ways the taxpayer loses. The first is financially. How much of our elected officials time is spent doing damage control? How much time do their communication teams spend reacting to this nonsense? We are paying each and every one of them for every moment they spend. I suspect our money could be put to much more productive use.

The second way the taxpayer loses is that democracy is threatened. Yes, you heard me right. Democracy is threatened when the populace becomes so weary, so cynical and so fed up with the constant attacking that goes on in the public forum, that they turn it off and tune out.

I have talked to so many people that are fed up and disillusioned because getting to the truth and making a voting decision is so difficult. It becomes a matter of who you think is the most trustworthy based on the media reports of he said/she said/they said. This results in comments like “What does it matter, they are all alike”.

If half as much energy went in to running the Government and the County as is spent trying to discredit others, I suspect we would have a whole lot fewer social problems. It is time to put the kids in separate corners and insist they stay there until they can play together nicely.

Lets face it, if politicians do in fact have the best interests of their constituents as a top priority, how about some collaboration? How about some constructive suggestions? How about an opposition party that just once acknowledges when something good happens?

Every time a politician takes a potshot, somewhere in Alberta is another voter has one more excuse not to get involved.

Photo by Stuart Miles

The week was spent listening to very interesting speakers talk about collaborating at the community level to solve problems like poverty and homelessness. Although I found the conference was very strong on academic, theoretical information, I came away inspired to see what I could do within my own community.

Part of the week also included a walking tour of a neighbourhood in Calgary. Our group was privileged to have the Alderman of the Inglewood area give us our guided tour. Gian-Carlo Carra, who is an urban design professional, as well as Alderman, gave a passionate talk on the history of the area and plans for the future.

He made me think about how different the area I live is from Inglewood. He also made me realize how much we’ve lost as we drift, or rather – careen unthinkingly – toward the Canadian dream of suburbia.

You see, when I walk, or drive, around the area where I live, I realize I have streets surrounding me, those streets belong in a subdivision, the subdivision belongs in a ward, the ward in Sherwood Park and the Park in Strathcona County. But what I miss is having a neighbourhood.

When I grew up, in a sleepy little town about 40 minutes northeast of Edmonton, we had back alleys. No one had a large garage dominating the front of their home. I knew my neighbours and I knew if they caught me smoking out behind the red shed on the baseball grounds, there would be hell to pay because my parents would find out before I got home.

My mother had perogy making parties with the lady next door. I had a crush on the boy who lived in the house behind ours. When we couldn’t face one more boring summer day, we packed up a picnic lunch and went for a hike down the railway tracks. We walked home from school every day, and if the weather got too cold during the winter, someone was bound to offer a warm ride home.

Was it an idyllic, Leave it to Beaver kind of existence? Hardly. The bullying that occurred at school was atrocious. After 25 years of marriage, one neighbour left his wife for her best friend, there was a drug-related murder and everyone knew the mayor was a bit of a lush.

But there was no denying the sense of belonging to the neighbourhood. Or in this case, the town. There was no denying that, good or bad, we had community.

As I look around me today, I see so many issues in society that tell me people miss community. People miss that sense of attachment and belonging – specially in the suburbs.

These days the suburbs are created by developers. They are required to include a certain amount of space for parks and schools. But where are our halls? Community leagues? Places to gather?

If I want to find out about my area, where do I go? I can look in the local paper, but the information is specific to the entire County. That is a very large area. There are no central areas where people congregate, especially if you don’t have young children. Right now, the only areas that fit that bill are parks. There at least, young parents have an opportunity to connect with others in their geographical location.

Where do I learn that the work going on in the park across the street is to rebuild the trails? How do I let it be known that I don’t want a sidewalk bylaw?

In an attempt to get to know our neighbours, my husband and I took our barbeque out to the driveway, cooked up some hot dogs and threw out some “Free hotdog” signs. People drove by. People walked by and avoided eye contact. Kids pointed. The people who stopped were almost exclusively the youth. Two very nice young men, about 16-18 years old pulled up in a truck and spent time chatting and chowing down. A Nana and her three granddaughters stopped by on their way to the park, and one of our neighbours came by with his wife and kids. It’s a start, but I’m at a loss as to how to encourage community in an area that is so unconducive to human interactions.

As society moves forward, I think we are at risk of losing something very important if we don’t figure out a way to feed and grow our need for each other.

Suggestions? Thoughts? What has worked for you?

Having said that, you probably don’t need to devote hours and hours a day to it either. Generally speaking, once you have a basic social media strategy in place, you can keep up with the day-to-day maintenance with as little as half an hour to an hour a day.

2. You Don’t Know Nuttin’
Each social media platform has its own unspoken rules and etiquette. Jumping into a conversation without taking the time to learn what is expected serves only to annoy and alienate people.

Finding out the best use for a social media platform is as easy as quick google search. The web is full of helpful information such as 15 Twitter Netiquette Rules You Must Know or 32 Ways to Use Facebook for Business.

3. You’re Trying to Keep Up With the Jones’
Starting up a social media account of any kind just because everyone else is doing it is stupid. Period. If social media doesn’t make sense for your business, your goals or financial or human resources then don’t bother.

One of the worst things you can do is to get into the social media world just because you think you should and then find out you have nothing to say and nothing to contribute. Or, numbers one and two above apply but you think number three is a good enough reason and after a couple weeks you leave your account dormant.

Appearing to be involved in social media but not responding makes people think you are ignoring them.

For those who aren’t aware of how the process works, it goes something like this:

1. Someone decides they want to run for a provincial party, so they put their name forward as a nominee in their constituency (there are currently 87 in Alberta, but that may change in October when the boundaries are modified).
2. Members who live in that constituency and hold a membership in that party get to vote on which nominee they want to represent their constituency and that party.
3. Whoever wins the nomination becomes the candidate for that Provincial party, in that constituency.
4. When the provincial election is called (also referred to as “dropping the writ”), the candidate begins their campaign.
5. If they win the election in their constituency, they become an MLA (Member of the Legislative Assembly).

It is at the first stage that I start to have questions. You see, typically, there are ‘stepping stones’ in politics.  Although it doesn’t have to be this way, people often begin their political careers at the local level – either municipal government or school board trustee. From there, some decide to run for Mayor or go on to Provincial or Federal politics.

So what happens when a politician holds one position while “trying out” for another? If you are a municipal councillor and you decide to run for Mayor, are you making the best decisions for your individual ward while having your eye on another position? If you are a municipal councillor running for provincial office, is it right that you continue to hold your position while it obviously doesn’t have your undivided attention?

This has come up a lot recently. For example, Glenn Taylor, the Mayor of Hinton has taken some flack for not resigning when he was elected the Alberta Party Leader. Eyebrows were raised when Strathcona Mayor Linda Osinchuk declared her intention to run as Mayor several months (possibly a year) prior to the 2010 municipal election, while she was a Councillor.

I have a friend who is a municipal councillor and is also a candidate for the Alberta Party.  Should she be expected to resign her Councillor position, even though the Alberta Party certainly can’t afford to pay her as a candidate?

One Strathcona County councillor, Jason Gariepy, has put his name forward as a nominee for the Wild Rose Alliance in the Sherwood Park-Strathcona County constituency. As a resident in Ward 8 – Mr. Gariepy’s ward – should I wonder if the ward will have adequate representation? Should I wonder how much of Mr. Gariepy’s time and attention will be taken away from his taxpayer-paid job?

To complicate matters even more, there is an open rumour of at least one other Councillor running for Provincial politics. Image if an election is called for the fall of 2012. The next municipal election is in 2013. What happens if other Councillors decide to run for the position of Mayor?

We have the potential of having a period of months where more than one third of Council is NOT giving their undivided attention to a job that they have not only been elected to do, but a job they will be collecting a pay cheque for.

On the flip side, should we really expect politicians to give up paying jobs and support themselves on their own dime until they are elected?  Do we want only the rich and independently wealthy able to afford to run for political positions?

On one side are those who feel that Councillors communicating with their residents, whether it is during a council meeting or not, is fine. They feel Councillors shouldn’t be held back from letting people know what is going on during the meetings.

On the other side, there are those who feel that tweeting during council meetings is a distraction and keeps the Councillor from paying the kind of attention that is required.

This is a conversation that is happening all around the world. In fact, Council members in the UK found themselves in the midst of controversy when they were caught tweeting during a council meeting that was discussing Councillors allowances. Of course, elsewhere in the UK, the tweets of Councillors were winning praises.

With such a divide, what’s a Councillor to do? I put the question to local Councillors and the Mayor. The responses I got varied, with some choosing not to respond. I also received feedback from the twitter community. I have edited the responses for brevity when necessary.

Hmmm. Tough to answer in 140 characters or less. I don’t have a major issue with it if they’re paying attention, and not leaking info. – Brian Botterill – Ward 3 (@bb4ward3)

… a Tweet…it is a distraction and not appropriate behaviour when you are actively engaged in making decisions on behalf of your constituents. – Roxanne Carr, Ward 2 – @councillorcarr

Yes to tweets during breaks. It is a welcome change in focus during a long day-like a conversation instead of a performance. – Jacquie Fenske – Ward 5 (@jacquiefenske)

No we shouldn’t be. Only during breaks/recess. – Jason Gariepy, Ward 8 (@Jasongariepy)

Elected officials need to concentrate on the matters at hand during that meeting – no matter how boring or contentious. That means reducing distractions as much as reasonable… I don’t think politicians should tweet (or post facebook updates, blog entries, etc) during those meetings. Go ahead and tweet during breaks. – Ian McCormack (@Ian_mccor)

I like council meeting tweeting. I prefer tweeting to be done by third party, not someone paid by gov’t. – Mike Engbers (@mengbers)

Not sure the #yegcc (Edmonton City Council) folks have time to tweet and do council… but if they do, why not? – Gary (@commonsensesoc)

No. They need to focus on their job and not have tweeting as a distraction. After or before is fine. – Brittney Timperley (@BTimps)

YES! – Katy Plesuk (@KatyPlesuk)

So what advice would I give a councillor if I had one as a client? I would suggest that if they want to tweet to make sure they only tweet during breaks and make it very clear that they are not in an active council meeting. Although they might innocently tweet during a break, if their audience doesn’t realize that is what is going on, it won’t matter. Those who want to know their councillor is paying attention will assume they aren’t. Unfortunately, perception is reality in the political arena. This compromise allows the councillor to use social media to stay in contact with residents, provide useful, timely information and engage while still giving all their attention to the business at hand.

The first encounter was with a fellow communications person. This person worked for a local organization and contacted me regarding some interactions I had online. They asked me if I could please delete one of my tweets. It was a tweet that was made two days prior. I explained to them that deleting the tweet would do little to no good as it was far down on my profile and that is the only place it would be deleted. She said she understood, but could I please delete it anyway, thanks!

Now, just to clarify a couple things. The tweet was not offensive and in fact, it was not even incorrect. I was trying to correct some misinformation that someone else had tweeted. But it wasn’t worded the way she thought it should be.  This tells me a couple things:

1. The person is going by old school style communications of trying to control the message.
2. This person does not understand the culture of twitter.
3. Because of #1 and #2, the organization this person works for has probably not done a great job training their staff.

I asked around a bit and discovered, much to my surprise, that I wasn’t the first one who had been asked by a communications person to delete tweets. The problem is, people who are involved with twitter know that asking someone to delete is equivalent to saying “shut up!” – it is considered a bit of an insult.

The second incident was much more disturbing. It happened while I was covering the Strathcona County Council meeting.

As I always do, I sat in the media section with the local media. I was sitting in one of three seats available to media. The only time I have covered a council meeting and not sat there was when the newspaper was training an intern and needed extra seats. That time, without anything needing to be said, I sat down in the public section to tweet.

This meeting was like many others and after chatting with the reporter and exchanging jibes about his choice in hockey teams, the Council meeting started.

I began tweeting the highlights of the meeting, including the motions before Council and who voted for and against them. I also tweeted my observance that the Mayor and one of her Councillors always voted the same way.

It is all speculation on my part that what happened next is connected to what I was tweeting, but I have no other explanation that makes sense to me.

A few minutes later a break was called. I heard that a couple of the councillors had been following my tweets on their smartphones during the meeting (we can deal with that in another post!) and chuckling about my commentary.

The Mayor came up to the media area and straight towards me. She asked me if I was media. I told her yes, social media. She said no, was I paid by a media outlet to cover the Council meeting. When I said no, she said that I needed to move out of the media area.

I explained to her that by moving out of the media area I would have no table to type on and would have to use my lap. That’s ok, she said, but we can’t have the public sitting here.

I collected my stuff and started to move. Before I moved I asked the reporter if he had a problem with my being there. He responded that no, he definitely didn’t, in fact he liked the company.

Now, please understand, there are no crushing crowds at these meetings and there are extra seats at the media table. There was absolutely no reason why I should have been kicked out of that area. That leaves me with only one answer to the question of why I was asked to leave. The Mayor didn’t like what I was tweeting. She decided to try and control the message, or at the very least, make it uncomfortable for the message to get out (ever tried to juggle an iPad, a Bluetooth keyboard, an iPhone and papers while sitting on a folding chair?)

The thing that is baffling to me is that this is the Mayor of a municipality that just spent several months coming up with a social media policy. A municipality that just opened multiple facebook pages, a twitter account, flickr stream etc. This is also the Mayor who used twitter to campaign and broadcast her election blog. This is a woman who should know better.

How does a municipality or any organization for that matter, stand a chance in the world of social media when the people who should know better…don’t? It is becoming apparent that having someone read a social media policy or showing them how to use the tools is not enough. Many people, including some of those who are on various social media sites, don’t get it.

Yes, it is a communication tool. But it is not just a tool, it is a completely different way of thinking. This is where things start to fall apart. It is easy to teach someone how to use a new tool, it is a lot harder to teach them a new way of thinking.

When I received my formal communications training about eleven years ago, we were taught all about controlling the message and developing key messages. Then social media came along and threw all of that out on its ear. It brought to light the fact that not only can we not control the message, but we never could. It was an illusion of control. Social media hasn’t taken control away from anyone, it has shown us we never had it.

Unfortunately, some people and some organizations are still grasping frantically, trying to grab hold of that illusion. Until they change their approach and begin to think about engaging people, interacting and exchanging thoughts and ideas, until they begin to realize that information, messaging and facts don’t belong to them, they will continue to run around trying to grab hold of any sliver of control they can find.

Am I out to lunch? Can the message be controlled? Am I a Polly-Anna to think organizations don’t need to have control if they are transparent, forthcoming and engaging in their dealings?