National Academies Press: OpenBook

Communicating the Value of Research: Contractor's Final Report (2009)

Chapter: Chapter 5: Analysis of the Communications Process

« Previous: Chapter 4: In-Depth Case Study Analysis
Page 84
Suggested Citation:"Chapter 5: Analysis of the Communications Process." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2009. Communicating the Value of Research: Contractor's Final Report. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/23034.
×
Page 84
Page 85
Suggested Citation:"Chapter 5: Analysis of the Communications Process." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2009. Communicating the Value of Research: Contractor's Final Report. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/23034.
×
Page 85
Page 86
Suggested Citation:"Chapter 5: Analysis of the Communications Process." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2009. Communicating the Value of Research: Contractor's Final Report. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/23034.
×
Page 86
Page 87
Suggested Citation:"Chapter 5: Analysis of the Communications Process." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2009. Communicating the Value of Research: Contractor's Final Report. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/23034.
×
Page 87
Page 88
Suggested Citation:"Chapter 5: Analysis of the Communications Process." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2009. Communicating the Value of Research: Contractor's Final Report. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/23034.
×
Page 88
Page 89
Suggested Citation:"Chapter 5: Analysis of the Communications Process." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2009. Communicating the Value of Research: Contractor's Final Report. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/23034.
×
Page 89
Page 90
Suggested Citation:"Chapter 5: Analysis of the Communications Process." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2009. Communicating the Value of Research: Contractor's Final Report. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/23034.
×
Page 90
Page 91
Suggested Citation:"Chapter 5: Analysis of the Communications Process." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2009. Communicating the Value of Research: Contractor's Final Report. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/23034.
×
Page 91
Page 92
Suggested Citation:"Chapter 5: Analysis of the Communications Process." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2009. Communicating the Value of Research: Contractor's Final Report. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/23034.
×
Page 92
Page 93
Suggested Citation:"Chapter 5: Analysis of the Communications Process." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2009. Communicating the Value of Research: Contractor's Final Report. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/23034.
×
Page 93
Page 94
Suggested Citation:"Chapter 5: Analysis of the Communications Process." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2009. Communicating the Value of Research: Contractor's Final Report. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/23034.
×
Page 94
Page 95
Suggested Citation:"Chapter 5: Analysis of the Communications Process." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2009. Communicating the Value of Research: Contractor's Final Report. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/23034.
×
Page 95
Page 96
Suggested Citation:"Chapter 5: Analysis of the Communications Process." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2009. Communicating the Value of Research: Contractor's Final Report. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/23034.
×
Page 96

Below is the uncorrected machine-read text of this chapter, intended to provide our own search engines and external engines with highly rich, chapter-representative searchable text of each book. Because it is UNCORRECTED material, please consider the following text as a useful but insufficient proxy for the authoritative book pages.

NCHRP 20-78: Final Report Page 84 CHAPTER 5: ANALYSIS OF THE COMMUNICATIONS PROCESS Introduction The goal of Task 5 was to develop a strategic communications plan or process that describes the key elements for communicating and selling the value of transportation research In this chapter, we present our analysis of the communications process and the conclusions from which the guidebook on Communicating the Value of Transportation Research was developed. Advancing and Communicating Value Transportation research programs and projects can be a tough sell. In concept, everyone appreciates the value of information and innovation, but that appreciation does not lead directly to support for research or buy-in to apply newly proven technologies or policies for a number of reasons. The payoffs from transportation research are often in the long-term, while decision-making and budgetary cycles operate in shorter time frames. Sometimes communicating the benefits of research (as yet undone) is difficult since the linkage to improved safety, mobility, or decision-making might be indirect or ambiguous. Yet, in the interviews conducted in Tasks 1 and 2 and in the case studies completed in Task 4, we heard and found examples of advocates of transportation research programs and projects who were successful in communicating their value, and thus were able to influence decision makers. The word “value” was instrumental in their success. What does value mean? Dictionary definitions include words and phrases like “worthwhile,” “desirable,” and “a suitable equivalent for something else.” “Worthwhile” is the key word here. Like anything else, transportation research is considered valuable when its outcome is perceived to be worth an amount equal to or greater than the funds spent on it. This exchange process is a fundamental concept in communications. With strategies, messages, and other tools, communications affect the exchange process on many levels. Communicating value is more than providing numbers—the quantitative side of value—statistics and dollars measured in cost-benefit formulas. Decision makers assess value in terms of the perception of the importance and worthiness of the expected outcomes, and this perception is informed and influenced by a skillfully applied communication process. It is the invisible, intangible perceptions that people form and remember that can mean the difference between a transportation research program or project getting funded or dropped. Embarking on a program to influence perceptions and establish value requires careful planning, diligence, and patience. It is not a one-shot campaign, nor can it be executed at the last second—when funding decisions are about to be made. Above all, the effort does not focus on promotion alone; brochures, e-news-letters, and presentations are not the sole answers. Establishing and communicating value is a process that must purposefully consider five key elements—context, strategy, content, channels, and style. Communications Process Each of the case studies starts with the identification of an “issue to sell.” This is important because fundamentally this NCHRP project is about how transportation professionals communicate value (or sell value) to influence the perceptions of decision makers. Our case studies represent seven real-life examples of how this has been done. In reviewing the case studies one of the first things that will stand out is that “selling the value” was done slightly differently in each case. These case studies led us to a generic process for communicating the value of research, represented by the funnel diagram shown in Figure 5-1. This funnel represents the fact that communicating the value of research is a multi-layer challenge—the outer layers of context, strategy, and content are just as, or even more,

NCHRP 20-78: Final Report Page 85 important than the inner layers of communication channels and style. The paragraphs below explain each of the elements of the Figure 5-1 funnel. Figure 5-1: Generic Process for Communicating the Value of Research Context Strategy Content Channels Style Communicate Value Context—Situational Analyses The context in which communication takes place—including the problem to be addressed by the proposed research—influences the choices made as to strategy, content, channels, and style. Communication is frequently a response to a particular situation and is often related to a history of events and perhaps socio- (or cultural)-political considerations that need to be identified. For example, the case study about California’s Seismic Bridge Retrofit indicated that the catalyst that motivated the research and defined its value was the problem—earthquakes. Their occurrence and the threats to life and safety presented the need for and sparked interest in research. However, the research decision makers still had to be considered—they included top management from the California Department of Transportation (Caltrans), the Governor’s Department of Finance, the Legislative Analysts Office, individual Legislators and various research funding groups. These decision makers needed easy access to clear information; visuals rather than textual descriptions often made communications with them more efficient. The political situation in which communication takes place also needs to be considered. As another example, transportation research programs that have (or will have) their birth in legislation often raise issues about public visibility, tradeoffs against other, perhaps more popular programs, as well as particular format and language. Thus, learning what the audience deems as politically acceptable is part of the communication process. In the Oregon case study, a key element of the communication strategy was “transparency,” because the policy options would have very direct and visible effects on the public—as opposed to the earthquake research, the effects of which would be somewhat less direct. Because of the socio-political climate, the success of the mileage-based fee program was dependent upon building trust and demonstrating accountability. Strategy—How and What for Whom Strategies for communicating value depend upon understanding the audience (audience analysis and type of audience) and the purpose of the communication. Since the goal of communication is to influence value perceptions, strategy depends on developing a clear understanding of who must be

NCHRP 20-78: Final Report Page 86 influenced and what their values are – value profiles. The value profile identifies the criteria the audience will use to evaluate the exchange of information. The objective is to gain an in-depth understanding of how members of the target audience determine value, what comprises value for them, and how they express it. In the ACS-Lite case study, to encourage private industry collaboration, the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) research team offered an incentive (a “carrot”) to major industry players—this carrot was identified by understanding what comprised value for these major industry players. This incentive turned out to be a better product and low development cost—resulting from participating in the research with fellow competitors. When developing a communications strategy, it is important to think about the goals to be achieved and how various elements can contribute to those goals. In addition to any specific objectives related to the transportation research program or project, important communication goals include announcing, motivating, educating, informing, and supporting decision-making. In the Task 4 case studies, generally the main objectives of the communications were to inform and influence decision makers. This included attracting the attention of decision makers, convincing them to take action, or persuading them that a research program or project deserved funding. For example, external communications conducted by Virginia Transportation Research Council (VTRC) public affairs staff were as important as the interagency communication outlined in the fiber-reinforced polymer bridge deck case study that helped secure the Innovative Bridge Research and Construction (IBRC) grant dollars to fund the research. Their strategy for external communication focused on bringing the return on investment (ROI) of transportation research to the public’s and government’s attention to ensure that federal and state Legislators would continue to provide the research divisions and others the necessary resources to conduct more innovative research. Content—What to Include The content of the message does not stand alone, but depends on both the context and the strategy. Selecting accurate and appropriate content is critical. If content is inappropriate, the audience is likely to dismiss the communications, and if content is overly complex, the audience will disregard it completely. If content is inaccurate, communications lose all credibility. Determining the appropriateness of content involves considering the target audience and their values and the action to be advocated. While not overtly considered, the communications represented by the case studies followed the standard principles of rhetoric. Aristotle defined rhetoric as the art of "discovering all available means of persuasion in any given case" and classified these means of persuasion into three categories: (1) Ethos - persuading through personality; refers to the trustworthiness and credibility of the speaker, (2) Pathos - persuading by arousing the audience's emotions, or (3) Logos—persuading by the use of reasoning. For example, in the Northwestern University New Bridge Steel case study, researchers used scientific data on proof of performance (logos) and involved a well-respected figure —an emeritus researcher—to add credibility (ethos). Channels—Means of Communication We define communication as information transmission for a specific purpose. In this context communication channels can be understood simply as the modes or pathways through which two parties might communicate. As population grows and technology evolves accordingly, these channels of communication change as well. However, there are basically four types of channels: (1) printed or published materials; (2) oral channels (e.g., personal contacts); (3) broadcast media (e.g., radio, TV, videos), and (4) Internet and computer-based modes. The case studies illustrate that all of these types of channels can be used to communicate the value of transportation research. Some channels are especially well-suited for particular contexts. For example, in the case of the innovative bridge steel, the need to influence a small group of readily identified technical experts called for face-

NCHRP 20-78: Final Report Page 87 to-face communications. Personal channels were also integral to building Congressional support for the National Cooperative Freight Research Program (NCFRP). For example, American Association of State Highway and Transportation Official (AASHTO) spokespersons with solid domain knowledge played a critical role in securing the NCFRP mandate in SAFETEA-LU. Senior AASHTO representatives talked regularly to members of the House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee staff. They used hard-won credibility on the Hill to effectively advocate for NCFRP. “The relationship with the Congress is based on exchange. We’ve done stuff for them, given them information, answered questions.” On the other hand, it was effective use of broadcast media in the development of Oregon’s mileage fee concept and pilot program that facilitated the Task Force’s communication with the public and engendered its continuing support. The interviews requested by every mainstream media reporter were granted, and as much time was given during the interview as was desired by the media reporter. The idea was to communicate regularly and often – nothing was hidden from the public or other stakeholders. The Oregon case study also relied heavily on the Internet; it never published a print document on the program. The Task Force and Oregon DOT (ODOT) relied on an interactive Website as the primary vehicle for an exchange of information with the public, program supporters, and program detractors. Style—Look and Feel Style might be considered the packaging of the communications. With the word “packaging” most people think of the physical wrapping or features that distinguish one communications activity from another. As the most visible aspect of packaging, physical features (such as design, layout, color, and typeface for printed materials for example) do affect perception of value. Whether it is through the thickness of a report, the arrangement of images and text on a Website, or the folder used to house fact sheets, every encounter between a member of the audience and the transportation research advocate is immediately influenced by physical packaging. Complementing physical packaging are the less tangible attributes that speak directly to the value criteria of the target audience. Features such as timeliness, scope, insight, and analysis are also packaging attributes. Packaging can deliver other value messages, such as professionalism, pride in the research program and confidence that it will succeed. In the Virginia case study, VDOT and VTRC required IBRC funding from FHWA. When presenting their research findings to FHWA to secure that funding, the agencies focused on making clear and concise presentations. These were not necessarily simple presentations but presentations in a format where the important aspects of the research were highlighted and brought to the attention of the evaluators. Another example of effective use of style was their PowerPoint files, which outlined step-by-step explanations of the technology, the research, and tests conducted and how the technology would improve the transportation infrastructure. Style was an important consideration in the Missouri case study on median cable barriers. Selling the benefits of guard cable to MoDOT upper management was important for statewide implementation. MoDOT staff involved in this process understood that senior management may have only five minutes to spend on the topic so they focused on being clear and basic in words and graphics. In PowerPoint presentations, they acknowledged how much time their audience would give to them and used less than one slide per minute of time. The California case study illustrated how vital the guidelines of “simple and concise” are when attempting to influence decisions on technical issues by non-technical individuals. Illustrative examples from this case study included visual demonstrations of structure tests and other experiments and key graphics that created visual relationships between data and decisions. In the former example media and decision makers were invited to observe tests of structural elements; in the latter, graphics were specifically designed to “persuade” rather than just describe.

NCHRP 20-78: Final Report Page 88 Case Study Syntheses Table 5-1 presents a synthesis of the communication process elements related to the seven case studies conducted in Task 4 as well as to the passage of SAFETEA-LU (Task 2). Full case study documentation is included in Chapter 4. The SAFETEA-LU documentation was previously provided in Working Paper #1 (May 2007). The case studies are identified by number and title as noted below: 1. Adaptive Control Software (ACS) Lite 2. Northwestern University New Bridge Steel 3. California Seismic Bridge Retrofit Program 4. Virginia Fiber-Reinforced Polymer Bridge Deck 5. Missouri Statewide Installation of Median Cable Barriers 6. Oregon Mileage Fee Concept and Road User Fee Pilot Program 7. National Cooperative Freight Research Program (NCFRP) It is apparent from the information in Table 5-1 that the majority of the researchers and other transportation professionals involved in the SAFETEA-LU and Task 4 case studies did not focus as much on “style”—the final element in the communication process—as much as other elements. Almost in direct opposition to this finding are the results of our Task 6 analysis. In the analysis of communications in industries and disciplines outside of transportation, we found much more evidence of a focus on style. The difference may be explained by our effort to cast a broader net in our research by looking explicitly at matters of context and strategy. This resulted in the research catching bigger, and different fish. It is not that content and style are unimportant in advocating transportation research; instead, understanding the larger picture, and accepting the notion that all of the components of the communications process are necessary for success, are important to support transportation research decisions.

NCHRP 20-78: Final Report Page 89 Table 5-1: Case Study Synthesis Case Study Context Strategy Content Channels/Style SAFETEA-LU Issue to sell: The value of maximizing the transportation research component of SAFETEA- LU. SAFETEA-LU reauthorization debate took place over 2 years and 12 extensions – long enough for significant issues to percolate until time of action by Congress. Political and mathematical processes converged to shrink the level of funding for transportation research.  Present a grand vision  Build a coalition of partners and allies with shared voice and interest  Nurture a relationship with the audience  Link problems to solutions in a clear and simple way  Create a connection with audience with messages that “stick” and with illustrative success stories  Use content that is “fresh,” and timely  Address critical issues  Personal contact: Allies in the decision-making circle  Personal contact: Work from within—lobbyists, another legislator or elected official who can champion the issue  Personal contact: Face-to-face meetings  Print: Short, graphic-heavy, and crisply written “leave behind” documents 1-Adaptive Control Software (ACS) Lite Issue to sell: The value of building public – private partnerships to advance signal software development. Congestion in urban areas was worsening and becoming a political issue. Poor signal timing accounted for 5-30 percent of arterial congestion. Deployment costly.  Link problem to a single, viable solution for the good of the nation  Offer an attractive carrot (better product / lower development cost) to the major industry players to offset risk of participating with competitors.  Use “timing” to advantage  Advocate ACS-Lite as solution to congestion in small and mid-sized systems.  Inform public agencies of contribution of poor signal timing to congestion  Personal contact: Champion to speak to decision makers and technical researchers  Personal contact: Industry group: National Electronic Manufacturers Association  Internet: Website to announce results of technical implementation 2-Northwestern University New Bridge Steel Issue to sell: The value of previous research to convince implementers to use new technology. Bring new (however improved) steel to market – difficult challenge. Implementing results of research, changing the way something is built, requires collaboration and cooperation among numerous actors.  Show that application of new steel is feasible and desirable.  Strong advocate who is independent but has stake in implementation process.  Involve decision makers during product development, testing and certification.  Develop and utilize personal relationships with decision makers  Promote product attributes to secure first application in a real- world example  Share data on product tests and certification  Address feasibility and proof of performance  Personal contact: Champion in IDOT  Personal contact: Face-to-face communications with steel research, certification, supplier, and potential user communities  Personal contacts: Presentations at technical conferences  Printed materials: Scholarly papers and reports  Broadcast media: Press coverage

NCHRP 20-78: Final Report Page 90 Case Study Context Strategy Content Channels/Style 3-California Seismic Bridge Retrofit Program Issue to sell: The value in diverting funding from existing transportation programs to support new research on seismic retrofit treatments for bridges. Research-confirming events (earthquakes) that followed years of investigation, testing and deployment.  Frame issue around serious threat and significant shared concern  Build partnerships and coalitions with sponsors, researchers, agencies and utilities early in the process  Promote research program transparency through routine dissemination information  Ensure rapid implementation of research findings  Peer review of papers  Rapid reporting of research results  Push simple, concise information to non-technical decision makers, media, and public  Keep the message simple and focused  Made a virtue of uncertainty – precise data were not always available when early decisions to invest in research needed to be made; this fact was used to the advantage of the researchers in communicating with decision makers.  Personal contacts: Involve diverse experts from all audiences in problem solving  Personal contacts: Open meetings and tests  Broadcast and Computer-based: Key graphic displays (including video and slides showing the problems, test results and new designs)  Printed materials: Short summaries of projects  Personal contacts: Decision makers as “investment advisors” to sift through technical expert advice to inform funding decisions 4-Virginia Fiber-reinforced Polymer Bridge Deck Issue to sell: The value of funding polymer bridge technology and deploying it throughout the state. IBRC program provides direction and funding to state DOTS to develop and implement innovative technologies and materials in bridge repair. Aging infrastructure a critical issue in transportation. Hawthorne Bridge prime candidate for first deployment of fiber- reinforced polymer and new adhesive bonding technique.  Select relevant project (rehabilitate a historical structure).  Cast solution (technology) as an effective fix for a transportation deficiency  Build relationships with allies to bring issues to FHWA  VTRC as an independent research voice  Present research findings clearly and precisely to highlight lab reports and field tests  Measure and promote success  Communicate how technology will improve transportation infrastructure  Personal contact: Research and construction teams held frequent meetings  Broadcast: Media relations to increase public awareness  Printed materials: News releases  Computer-based: PowerPoint files outlining step-by-step explanation of technology, research, and tests, and benefits  Personal contact: Ribbon-cutting ceremony

NCHRP 20-78: Final Report Page 91 Case Study Context Strategy Content Channels/Style 5-Missouri Statewide Installation of Median Cable Barriers Issue to sell: The value of statewide installation of median cable barriers. MoDOT focus on a statewide solution to a specific crash type; new focus on safety  Frame issue as a statewide problem and new and noteworthy solution  Install at test sites that can be references of success  Continuous and unashamed advocacy  Target information to audience— keep it short and concise and use graphics  Promote early research findings and use test sites as success stories  Promote new installations to generate visibility, interest and demand  Allow time for questions to learn what is important to audience  Personal contact: New director, with a focus on “saving lives” (personal interest) as champion  Printed materials: Reports and technical materials  Personal contacts: Simply talking with others higher up in organization  Broadcast: Use media sources to keep products visible to public  Personal contacts: Papers and presentations at conferences 6-Oregon Mileage Fee Concept and Road User Fee Pilot Program Issue to sell: A mileage fee system that ensured a flow of revenue sufficient to maintain, preserve, and improve Oregon’s highway and road system and that was acceptable to the public. Chair of house committee on transportation concerned that fuel tax might become declining revenue source for Oregon’s road system. Passage of HB-3946 mandated task force to design a replacement revenue collection system  Focus on an innovative and experimental issue/program requiring high-intensity education  Advocate fearlessly to anyone who would listen and learn  Offer total accessibility to media, legislators and interactive Website  Prepare for interest beyond Oregon—national and international  Reassess continuously  Educate the public about why Oregon is pursuing this  Post all process documents and report all decisions on Website (i.e., transparency)  Note audience questions to continuously evolve presentations  Teach allies fundamentals of approach so they can be advocates  Interactive Website—reliance on Web over paper public documents  Personal contacts: Task Force Director served as key spokesperson and program champion  Personal contacts: Open meetings of the Task Force  Personal contacts: Geographically diverse public hearings  Broadcast: Media reports, news articles, editorials, radio interviews  Internet: 100 percent response to all emails 7-National Cooperative Freight Research Program (NCFRP) Issue to sell: The value of a national freight research program Congressional support sought to create a federally sponsored freight research program with SAFETEA-LU.  Confirm growing public interest and insufficiency in addressing them  Establish Freight Stakeholders Coalition as a credible advocacy group that embraces a multi- faceted industry viewpoint  Build relationships with audiences, providing, long-term interaction  Focus arguments on issues of broad national interest  Promote success stories  Use TCRP and NCHRP as models for success; focus on how NCFRP differs  Earn credibility through exchange of information  Personal contact: AASHTO as champion  Personal contact: FSC built long- term relationship with Congress

NCHRP 20-78: Final Report Page 92 Audience Information Needs and the Communication Process Findings from the case studies were consistent with the information that was developed in the Task 1 and Task 2 interviews. The interviews conducted in Task 1 were used to abstract the information needs (i.e., content preferences) and preferred channels for the audiences that need a better understanding of the value of transportation research. The findings from these interviews are synthesized in Table 5-2. Task 2 involved interviewing people responsible for justifying and explaining transportation research to determine the communication strategies and messaging strategies that have been used. Table 5-3 contains the variety of recommendations for content and channels strategies. In reviewing the information in the seven case studies, the SAFEETEA-LU case study, and the interviews with audience and program managers, several broad observations related to the communication process emerged, along with a number of common threads or attributes of effective communication practices. These broad observations for effective communication are summarized below.  The context o Recognize that context matters. o Define the relevant issue or need.  What is the issue affecting? And who?  Why is this the right time to tackle it or raise awareness of it? o Identify and understand the target audience. o Make a connection between the research and their interests, constituencies, or business goals.  The strategy o Establish the goal and define a “strategic space” for flexibility of action. o Understand the value profile: Communicate to influence value perceptions.  How do decision makers determine value?  What comprises value for them?  How do they express it? o Identify relevant benefits: Link the need/issue to the research outcomes.  Emphasize the “greater good” benefits.  Communicate the national value or grand vision of the research.  Present no hidden, self-serving agendas. o Build relationships with allies and champions of the issue / research.  Build broad coalitions of advocates for the research.  Identify potential, credible and effective allies and champion candidates, and enlist their support.  Where possible, work from within. o Build two-way relationships with decision makers.  Establish a basis for exchange or reciprocity: Successful communications are built on giving useful information as well as getting it.  Develop a communication strategy that is timely, frequent and keeps the issue fresh.

NCHRP 20-78: Final Report Page 93 o Promote interactive communications: Listen, observe, evaluate, and respond.  The content o Develop communication messages; tailor the messages to the audience and their technical levels.  Where appropriate and feasible, hire professional communicators or lobbyists. o Derive content naturally from context and strategies.  Use multiple messaging tactics – use all standard principles of rhetoric.  Provide research-based information.  Identify “sticky” messages, e.g., demonstrating benefits in terms of resolving problems, saving lives, increasing efficiency, etc.  Tailor the “ask” to the current mood and concerns of the audience and/or constituent interests.  Provide illustrative success stories; personalize when appropriate.  The channels o Select and use the most effective channels for communicating with each audience. o Consider audience needs, resources and abilities. o Tailor the message and the style to the channel. o Ensure that information is readily available to decision makers.  The styles o Packaging matters – consider design, layout, and color. o Err on the side of brevity. o Present information in straight-forward, easy-to-understand language. o Emphasize graphics over text. o Use dynamic presentations or visualizations, where appropriate. These processes are typically cyclical. Advocating support for even a single research project or program usually takes an extended period of time. In this process there are opportunities to learn, adapt, and improve the process. This calls for continuous reassessment of the context definition, and concomitantly of strategy, content, channels and style. All of the results of this analysis confirm the importance of these components of the communications process. While every context and problem is different, process requirements, and the communications keys to success are strongly similar: know the context, problem and audience; develop a logical and appropriate, and feasible communications strategy emphasizing relationships and effective advocacy; prepare content that respects the context and conveys the messages salient to the values of the audience; select the several communications channels that make it easy for the audience to get the message; and use styles that are accessible to and match the needs and abilities of the audience.

NCHRP 20-78: Final Report Page 94 Table 5-2: Summary of Audience Interviews (Task 1) Audience Content Channels Style Congressional Members  Research contributes to important problem being solved  Up-front benefits to the constituency of the decision makers.  What’s been accomplished in the research programs  What the research spending gets them (Congress)  Print: Written handouts or correspondence  Print: Newsletters  Personal: Face-to-Face meetings  Personal: Phone (not cold calls)  E-mail – once relationship is established.  Accessible  Short (one page)  Main points up front  Non-technical language Congressional Staffers  Come with a “request”  Definition of legitimate issues that have broad consensus  Up-front benefits to the constituency of the decision makers.  Personal: In-person meetings or gatherings  Personal: Testimony at hearings; events or symposiums aimed at building rapport and idea exchange  Personal: Source that can serve as an in- house resource on technical issues  Print: 1-2 page leave behind that is not quite a “white paper”  Short (one page)  Main points up front Media  Data or research that confirms or denies suppositions (e.g., studies that prove that more time in traffic is detrimental to productivity)  New elements or perspectives on an issue  Compelling, timely research results  Main point and why it matters to audience.  Source determines the value (inclined to look more closely at research from federal/state governments or from universities)  Print: Press releases  E-mails (with follow-up phone calls)  Broadcast: Wire service  Personal: Phone calls  Print: Copies of studies  Personal: Someone who can speak to the research—critical to television media  Executive summary  Short  Clear, non-jargon language State DOT Executive  Identification of best practices  International scans  Research that is directly supportive of business plan  Anecdotal success stories  Illustrations of user benefits or cost savings  Print: Reports and publications  Computer-based: PowerPoint presentations  Personal: TRB Presentations (primary sources for best practices)  None identified State DOT Public Information Officer (PIO)  How research is looking at innovative methods to save lives, conserve fuel, and increase efficiencies.  Demonstrate value of research no matter who conducts the research  Explain benefits  Information PIOs can use to educate local officials and/or develop liaison between researchers and decision makers  Print: Reports of research from other programs or transportation centers  Print: Brochures  Computer-based: PowerPoint presentations  Clear, to-the-point language  Important points up-front Implementers  Real need for behavioral (evaluative) research.  What is important about the research  Connections to legislative mandates  Print: Publications  Attractive publications.

NCHRP 20-78: Final Report Page 95 Table 5-3: Summary of Interviews with Transportation Research Program Managers (Task 2) Research Program Content Channels Cooperative Research Program  Showcase research results  Disseminate research impacts  Process driven by customer needs with established program input channels from state DOTs (particularly chief engineers)  Anecdotal success reports (case studies) http://www.tfhrc.gov/pubrds/marapr98/shrp.h tm TRB  Anecdotal success reports (case studies).  Dramatic powerful stories  Print: TR News bimonthly magazine, features timely articles on innovative and state-of-the-art research and practice in all modes of transportation  Print: Research Pays Off articles are periodically included in the Transportation Research News (TR News).  Computer-based: Research Pays Off articles are summarized on a CD that is distributed to Congressional Staffers. Federal Agency  Be visible, show results and success stories.  Show return-on-investment of research over time  Show research is tied directly to and adds value to the agency’s mission – build the business case for research  Internet: Website populated with benefits of research  Print: Every research project has a report that is published, put into the public docket  Personal: Publish or present technical papers at conferences to share information so the public knows and the manufacturers get an idea of the research activities  Broadcast: Press releases through the Public Affairs office.  Personal: Internal (to agency) briefings on research findings and conduct an annual review of research  Personal: Demonstrate first-hand to Congress members and staff new technologies in the field

NCHRP 20-78: Final Report Page 96 Research Program Content Channels Industry Association  Compelling statement with a champion to deliver it  Describe transportation research landscape, outline past accomplishments, what could be done, recommend funding levels  Tell a story to put the issue on the table—about the problem, needs, cost, and timeframe  Success stories; specific examples  The “value” (mainly cost savings) that have come from past research  Keep message simple—Use language people can understand  Push for a single, unified agenda. Look at national interests and trends  How research benefits the public—saves lives, saves time  Diversity of voices and lots of re-iteration of the message  Tell Congress – I’m a constituent. Make it clear what you are asking for  Work with university researchers to provide research-based information  Talk to a communications firm to get the best ways to convey your message.  Internet: Website. Use technologies (like pod casting and YouTube)  Face-to-face meetings with members of Congress or their staff face-to-face; provide information—there is no substitute for this.  Print: Newsletter to brief board, Congress, and constituents  Personal: Awards program at annual meeting—showcase success  Print: Lunch meetings with Capitol Hill staffers during annual meeting  Broadcast: Engage the media University Transportation Center  Need for the research, general economic benefit to be produced,  Activities and achievements in all dimensions (research, service, education), specific capabilities of center.  Links problems to solutions that are understandable and practical.  Success stories from the research-achievements, implementations, impacts and present them in layman’s language.  Innovative ideas; move at pace of business.  Print: Short progress report; part of regular stream of direct and indirect with Congress  Personal: Close relationship with congress member (will listen to someone from their state)  Print: Submit language to be included in bills  Internet: Communicate activities and achievements  Personal: Presentations on the Hill; invitation to conferences.  Personal: Use TRB to communicate.  Print: Newsletter and other regular updates.

Next: Chapter 6: Review of Best Practices from Other Fields and Results of Communications Research »
Communicating the Value of Research: Contractor's Final Report Get This Book
×
MyNAP members save 10% online.
Login or Register to save!
Download Free PDF

TRB’s NationalCooperative Highway Research Program (NCHRP) Web-Only Document 131: Communicating the Value of Transportation Research is the contractor’s final report on the research associated with NCHRP Report 610: Communicating the Value of Transportation Research.

  1. ×

    Welcome to OpenBook!

    You're looking at OpenBook, NAP.edu's online reading room since 1999. Based on feedback from you, our users, we've made some improvements that make it easier than ever to read thousands of publications on our website.

    Do you want to take a quick tour of the OpenBook's features?

    No Thanks Take a Tour »
  2. ×

    Show this book's table of contents, where you can jump to any chapter by name.

    « Back Next »
  3. ×

    ...or use these buttons to go back to the previous chapter or skip to the next one.

    « Back Next »
  4. ×

    Jump up to the previous page or down to the next one. Also, you can type in a page number and press Enter to go directly to that page in the book.

    « Back Next »
  5. ×

    To search the entire text of this book, type in your search term here and press Enter.

    « Back Next »
  6. ×

    Share a link to this book page on your preferred social network or via email.

    « Back Next »
  7. ×

    View our suggested citation for this chapter.

    « Back Next »
  8. ×

    Ready to take your reading offline? Click here to buy this book in print or download it as a free PDF, if available.

    « Back Next »
Stay Connected!