Is grasstops advocacy a form of lobbying?

Often, depending on the jurisdiction and on who organizes and pays for the outreach. The EU's mandatory transparency register covers grassroots initiatives among its listed activities, and Canada's federal Lobbying Act requires registrants to disclose grass-roots communication. Rules differ widely elsewhere. A company that organizes outreach to officials should check the registration and disclosure rules in each jurisdiction before it starts, and plan as if its role will become public.

Can a company's own executives act as grasstops voices?

Yes, where they have standing on the question. A plant manager speaking to the mayor of the town that hosts the plant, or a regional director speaking to a provincial government about local jobs, can be highly credible. A senior executive speaking on behalf of the whole company is usually heard as the company itself. That is legitimate advocacy, but it is not grasstops, and it rarely carries the same weight as an independent voice.

How do you measure a grasstops program?

Not by message counts. Useful measures are whether the people on the map understand the issue, whether the decision-maker heard from the voices that matter before the decision rather than after it, whether those relationships last beyond a single fight, and, in the end, whether the outcome moved. A short list of the right conversations is worth more than a long log of activity.

How long does it take to build grasstops relationships?

Longer than most companies plan for. A credible voice cannot be recruited the week before a vote or a consultation closes. The relationships that hold are built over months and years, through steady contact on matters of shared interest, often well before any specific decision is on the table. Companies that treat this as standing work, not a campaign tactic, find the voices are there when they need them.

Perspectives

Grasstops Advocacy for Companies

When a few voices outweigh many.

By Dan Centinello, Principal, EMEA

Grasstops advocacy means making sure the few people a decision-maker already trusts understand what a decision will do: employers, civic and community leaders, heads of universities and hospitals, former officials. For a company or an institution, it is how a case reaches the person who decides through voices that person knows and respects. It works only when those voices are real, speak for themselves and have a genuine stake in the outcome.

For the side-by-side with grassroots, including a plain definition of each and when to use which, see Grassroots vs Grasstops: What's the Difference?.

What does grasstops advocacy mean for a company?

It means starting from the decision, not from the company's contact list. Grassroots work shows that support is broad. Grasstops work answers a narrower question: on this decision, whose judgment will this minister, regulator or legislator take seriously, and why? The answer usually sits outside the company. It might be the mayor of a town where the company is the largest employer, a supplier whose business depends on a plant staying open, a university that runs a joint research program, or a hospital director who uses a product every day. Each of them knows something the decision-maker needs to hear, and each has standing the company cannot borrow. Lincoln Strategy Group runs this work alongside government relations and grassroots programs for organizations in 19 industries and 73 countries. The first step is always the same: name the decision, the people who will make it, and the date it will be made.

Why do a few voices outweigh many?

Because decision-makers weigh what they hear by who it comes from and whether it tells them something new. The best evidence comes from the people who sort the mail. In a 2015 survey by the Congressional Management Foundation, 94 percent of congressional staff said in-person visits from constituents would have some or a lot of influence on a lawmaker who had not yet decided, and 92 percent said the same of individually written emails. The same research found that staff value constituents who have built relationships with the office over time, and that politicians turn to trusted local people who understand an issue first hand. That study measured constituents, not grasstops programs, but the lesson carries. A considered view from someone whose stake and standing are visible gives an official local knowledge, a reputational signal and a person to call back. Identical messages in volume give them a count.

Who counts as a grasstops voice?

Someone who passes four tests. The first is stake: the decision affects them, or the people they answer for. The second is standing: the decision-maker has reason to respect their judgment on this question in particular, not on public life in general. The third is independence: the view is their own, and they would hold it whether or not the company asked. The fourth is proximity: they already have, or can credibly build, a working relationship with the decision-maker or their staff. A well-known name often fails the second test. A company's own chief executive passes the first but can fail the third in an official's eyes, which is why third voices matter. Employees can pass all four where they have local standing, such as a plant manager in the town that hosts the plant. One warning sign is reliable. If someone has to be persuaded that the issue affects them, they are not a grasstops voice on it.

How does grasstops advocacy work outside the United States?

The word is American. The practice is not. In Brussels, the European Commission and Parliament listen closely to national industry federations, regional governments, research institutions and employers in member states, and the EU's mandatory transparency register lists organizing communication campaigns, networks and grassroots initiatives among the activities it covers. In Canada, the federal Lobbying Act requires registered lobbyists to disclose appeals that ask members of the public to contact officials, which it calls grass-roots communication. In the Gulf and in much of Asia, decisions often rest with a small circle, and standing comes from institutional seniority, chambers of commerce, business councils and long-standing national partners. In Africa, provincial authorities, traditional leaders and local business associations near a project can carry real weight with national ministries. Across Latin America, governors, mayors and industry chambers play a similar part. Every problem is its own problem, and the map of trusted voices in one capital is no guide to the next. The question to ask stays the same: on this decision, in this place, who does the decision-maker trust?

How should a company build a grasstops program?

As a sequence, kept up between decisions rather than assembled in a hurry. First, define the decision, the decision-makers and the timetable. Second, map who each decision-maker listens to on this subject, drawing on public records, past consultations, local press and people who know the institution. Third, test every name against the four tests of stake, standing, independence and proximity, and drop those who fail. Fourth, inform openly: share the facts, the company's position and its reasons, and let each person decide whether to engage and what to say, in their own words. Fifth, register and disclose wherever the rules require it, and assume the company's role will become public. Sixth, keep the relationships going after the decision, because the same people will matter when the rule is implemented, reviewed or challenged. The work is slower than a mass campaign. It is also harder to dismiss.

Where is the line between grasstops and manufactured support?

The line is authenticity and disclosure, and it is not a fine one. A grasstops voice is credible because it is what it appears to be: a real person with a real stake, speaking for themselves. Credibility collapses when a voice turns out to be borrowed, whether because the person was paid without disclosure, did not know what was sent in their name, or spoke on something they do not understand. Officials notice. In the Congressional Management Foundation's research, close to half of congressional staff believed most campaigns of identical form messages are sent without the constituent's knowledge or approval. That suspicion does not stay with one campaign; it attaches to the company and to every genuine supporter it has. The safeguards are simple to state. Work only with people who already hold the view. Never put words in anyone's mouth. Be open about the company's interest when anyone asks.

Common questions

Is grasstops advocacy a form of lobbying?: Often, depending on the jurisdiction and on who organizes and pays for the outreach. The EU's mandatory transparency register covers grassroots initiatives among its listed activities, and Canada's federal Lobbying Act requires registrants to disclose grass-roots communication. Rules differ widely elsewhere. A company that organizes outreach to officials should check the registration and disclosure rules in each jurisdiction before it starts, and plan as if its role will become public.
Can a company's own executives act as grasstops voices?: Yes, where they have standing on the question. A plant manager speaking to the mayor of the town that hosts the plant, or a regional director speaking to a provincial government about local jobs, can be highly credible. A senior executive speaking on behalf of the whole company is usually heard as the company itself. That is legitimate advocacy, but it is not grasstops, and it rarely carries the same weight as an independent voice.
How do you measure a grasstops program?: Not by message counts. Useful measures are whether the people on the map understand the issue, whether the decision-maker heard from the voices that matter before the decision rather than after it, whether those relationships last beyond a single fight, and, in the end, whether the outcome moved. A short list of the right conversations is worth more than a long log of activity.
How long does it take to build grasstops relationships?: Longer than most companies plan for. A credible voice cannot be recruited the week before a vote or a consultation closes. The relationships that hold are built over months and years, through steady contact on matters of shared interest, often well before any specific decision is on the table. Companies that treat this as standing work, not a campaign tactic, find the voices are there when they need them.

Sources

Related practice areas

Trusted by more than a thousand organizations since 2003.

Begin a conversation