SPB Newsfeed: Interview with Paul McClure – Embedding Enhanced Writing in Strategic Communication

Strategic messages need to be clearly voiced and communicated, yet often they are not. Written communication remains the key communication channel to convey strategic messages to domestic audiences and international partners. Acknowledging the importance of effective written communication, we have been developing this area in cooperation with our associate fellow Paul McClure, Ph.D., a senior communications officer at the World Bank Group and leading expert in this field.

Since 2008 Paul has been teaching Written Communications to CEF member countries, and has also helped the CEF strengthen our internal capacities in this field. In late 2014, Paul visited the region again and delivered two workshops on Writing Strategic Documents, one at ReSPA in Montenegro as part of our Strategic Planning and Budgeting project*, the other at the Bank of Slovenia. We used the occasion to speak with him about what he has learned from helping government experts in South East Europe upgrade the effectiveness of their written communication.

Paul, to start, could you tell us a bit about your most recent courses?
Thank you for the opportunity. This past fall’s workshop on Writing Strategic Documents built on my earlier workshops on Written Communications. Both courses focus on strategies for making documents more direct, comprehensive, cohesive, and engaging, with the new workshop being designed primarily to serve writers and editors of strategic (macro-fiscal) documents in CEF countries.

In all my workshops, participants have the opportunity to work on real-life examples, as I incorporate participants’ own documents into the sessions. Applying the writing principles I cover to their actual work is one of the most valuable aspects of the course, according to participants. They also note often that they find these principles applicable to writing and editing in their own languages.

What are the main communication challenges you have observed while teaching in South East Europe?
My experience suggests that there is still not enough focus on conveying key messages to the reader. Participants definitely see how the workshops can improve the mechanics of their writing. However, I would like to place the technical aspect of writing in the context of the whole communication process. Rethinking the approach to these documents could give them a much more important role in a communications strategy, for institutions and the government as a whole.

Communication processes are often misunderstood or neglected, and many institutions do too little to convey strategic messages. As an example, press releases often focus only on the facts of a specific event, when they could also explicitly reinforce key themes or messages about the priorities of the ministry or government. Similarly, the documents and reports discussed in our workshops, many of which are major reports to the European Commission, tend to focus more on lists of activities than on explaining the larger objectives of reform. Valuable communication opportunities are missed.

Who should be in charge of communication?
There needs to be someone specifically tasked with meeting communications objectives. The creation of strategic documents usually involves a large number of contributors. Hence the main editors face a challenge to bring the fragments into a concise and uniform format, which often results in an unbalanced mix of detail and interrupted storylines.

In many cases, there is no clear ownership of a document’s overall messages. Contributors do not internalize the purpose of the final document when providing their pieces, which are often taken from existing documents. They usually work hard to ensure that the information they provide is complete and accurate, but see little need to make it persuasive or engaging.

Is there sufficient scope for editing?
Not usually. In general, main authors lack full authority to edit and reshape the contributions, or do not even see this as part of their job. Also, they are often constrained by an imposed structure or format for the document. For everyone involved, creation of the text can feel more like filling out a form or questionnaire than an exercise in strategic communication.

An underlying reason might be that few ministries and central banks in South East Europe have established a clear communications function. The region’s public sector attaches less importance to communications as a profession, by comparison with counterparts in the United States and Western European countries. Communications are typically seen as part of the work of the minister or governor, or other top management—people who tend to be experienced speakers and effective communicators at meetings and conferences. Documents that are not tied to their face-to-face communication do not receive the same attention.

Does communication fall short at the individual or institutional level?
Working in the region, I observed that typically there is a weak practice in written communication. Individuals who are aware of its importance and are skilled writers often drive the whole process. When such knowledge is concentrated among a few individuals, it may expose institutions to a larger risk, as it may be difficult to retain in cases of staff turnover. Strengthening institutional awareness and communications skills across a range of staff should thus be a priority.

How important is communication in English as opposed to local languages?
Important documents that communicate countries’ development, strategies and performance are usually drafted in the local language, and are only translated at the last minute into English. Often this is a legal requirement, when in fact the English version may actually be more critical for communication to the international community. However, short deadlines can mean that translated documents are minimally checked by their original authors and editors. I recommend engaging a lead English language editor to review major documents for consistency of messages.

What might be the next steps?
One key step could be to reassess how we approach very extensive documents, so that we look at them more holistically. I would recommend workshops that target a given institution or country, addressing written communication across the entire teams that work on major strategic documents. Convening a more diverse group, from various countries and addressing a wider range of documents, is more challenging. Yet, as we saw in the recent workshops, this format certainly helps promote awareness of potential improvements across beneficiaries, and this in turn provides the basis for more detailed follow-up interventions targeted at specific groups.

What is the main message you’d like to convey?
I would advocate more engagement with beneficiaries, in a deeper discussion on the value of communications as a practice and a profession within their institutions. Developing individuals’ writing capacity is an important building block. The long-term aim should be to develop capacities across an institution, to institutionalize communication processes, and to strengthen strategic communication.

Thank you! We are looking forward to working with you as we develop our activities further in this direction.

* The Strategic Planning and Budgeting (SPB) project is funded by the European Union. The overall objective of the project is to contribute to strengthening of beneficiary countries’ capacity to design and implement medium-term macro-fiscal policy.