Comparisons

Grassroots vs Grasstops

Grassroots and grasstops both put real constituents in front of the people who decide a question. The difference is who. Grassroots activates the broad base of the affected. Grasstops engages the few whose voice carries outsized weight. Both are authentic; neither is manufactured.

Grassroots compared with grasstops
Grassroots Grasstops
Who is mobilized The broad base of affected constituents. A few uniquely influential voices.
Scale Many. Breadth is the point. Few. Selection is the point.
Source of influence Volume and authenticity. Standing and relationship.
Who carries it Constituents themselves. Leaders, executives, former officials.
What it signals Support is wide. Support is credible.
When it decides When breadth must be shown. When a trusted voice can reach the decision-maker.
How it is measured Contacts, signatures, turnout. The right voices engaged.

What grassroots is

Grassroots mobilization is the organizing of real people — voters, constituents, small businesses, whole industries — to be heard by decision-makers, from the ground up. Its force is breadth: the number of genuinely affected people who write, call, petition, or turn out. That number is the proof. It shows a position is not the preference of a few interests but the will of a constituency. The voices are real and the organizing is transparent. Manufactured support is a different thing entirely, and not what this is.

What grasstops is

Grasstops advocacy engages a small number of people whose voice carries outsized weight with a particular decision-maker: community leaders, executives, former officials, local electeds, respected figures. Where grassroots works through volume, grasstops works through standing. The messenger is known to the decision-maker, and trusted. One call from a credible local figure can land where a thousand identical letters do not. It is the same authentic constituent engagement, aimed at the few who open a door rather than the many who fill a room.

Two registers of one effort

Grassroots and grasstops are not rivals. They are two registers of the same work: organizing real, affected constituents to be heard, on the merits. Breadth proves a position is widely held. Trusted voices make it credible at the top. The strongest efforts run both — a base that demonstrates support, and the influential few who carry it into the room. Most firms advise on this. Lincoln also executes it: identifying and activating the base, fielding the operation, and engaging the leaders whose word matters, in all fifty states and on five continents.

Common questions

What is the difference between grassroots and grasstops?
Grassroots mobilizes the broad base of affected constituents so a position is heard in numbers. Grasstops engages a few uniquely influential people — leaders, executives, former officials — whose voice carries outsized weight with a decision-maker. One works through breadth; the other through standing. Both are authentic constituent engagement.
What is grasstops advocacy?
Grasstops advocacy is the engagement of a few highly influential individuals — community leaders, executives, former officials, local electeds — whose relationship with and credibility before a decision-maker give their voice outsized weight on a question.
Is grasstops more effective than grassroots?
Neither is inherently more effective. They do different work. Grassroots shows support is broad; grasstops brings a trusted voice directly to the decision-maker. The strongest efforts combine the two, and Lincoln runs both at scale.
When should you use grassroots, and when grasstops?
Grassroots fits when an outcome turns on the breadth of support — evidence that many people care. Grasstops fits when it turns on a few trusted voices reaching the decision-maker directly. Most questions call for both, in sequence, which is how Lincoln runs them.

Related

We help the unlikely become the inevitable.

Begin a conversation