The Strategy Team, Ltd.
614.447.8844
3805 North High Street, Suite 202
Columbus, OH 43214
Polling, communications strategy, and Ohio Senate Bill 5
Governmental entities, nonprofit agencies, or their private-sector communication partners often want to learn 1) the psychological “hot buttons” that may generate a desired response (e.g., “Give time/money!” “Vote yes on Issue X!”) and 2) the psychological “red flags” that may generate an undesired response.
We find this type of research fascinating and oddly exciting. However, confidentiality agreements limit our ability to talk about most of the work we’ve conducted in this capacity.
Just last week, however, we became aware of survey results from the independent Quinnipiac University Polling Institute regarding a highly contentious issue in Ohio: Senate Bill 5. These results have the potential to guide communications strategy, and because we are a neutral party to the issue*, we are able to comment on it.
For those who may be unaware, Senate Bill 5 calls for major changes to Ohio’s labor laws. As may be expected, the passage and eventual signing of Senate Bill 5 led to a strong outcry from those who are most likely to be negatively affected by the legislation, including state and municipal employees and teachers. Over the past few months, hundreds of thousands of Ohioans have signed a petition with the intent to repeal this law, with a major political fight brewing for November 2011.
In Quinnipiac’s poll of registered voters, we noticed there were two questions asked of respondents that demonstrates how research has the potential to affect communications strategy.
Half of the 1,600+ respondents were randomly selected to hear the following question:
As you may know, there is a new law in Ohio that would limit collective bargaining for public employees. Do you support or oppose limiting collective bargaining for public employees?
The other half of the respondents were asked a slight variation of the same question:
As you may know, there is a new law in Ohio that would limit collective bargaining rights for public employees. Do you support or oppose limiting collective bargaining rights for public employees? (emphasis added)
How much difference can one word make? As shown in the chart below, including the word “rights” leads to changes in the percent of individuals who say they oppose this law – changes that approach statistical significance (meaning the difference is unlikely to have been caused by chance alone). This effect is strongest among registered Democrats, most of whom report a desire to oppose the legislation.
Although this pattern is small, it shows how quality research has the potential to influence communications strategy. In other words, if these polling patterns remain stable or become stronger through the rest of the summer, I would expect those groups that oppose Senate Bill 5 (and who favor its repeal) to position the repeal issue in terms of worker rights that are threatened. Time will tell.
* The Strategy Team, Ltd. has not been retained by individuals or groups on either side of this issue. Like the majority of Ohioans, we’re interested observers.
How neighbors stay informed about community issues
I recently happened upon a public opinion poll from the Pew Research Center that explored a topic that I’ve been curious about for some time. In this age of Facebook, Twitter, blogs, text messaging, and e-mail, how are Americans staying informed about what’s going on in the world closest to them – their neighborhoods, their communities? To what extent has “tech” entered this arena, and to what extent are Americans staying abreast of events the old-fashioned way, by talking face-to-face?
According to those surveyed, at some point in 2009…
- 46% of Americans talked face-to-face with neighbors about community issues.
- 22% of Americans signed up to receive alerts about local issues (such as traffic, school events, weather warnings or crime alerts) via email or text messaging
- 21% of Americans discussed community issues over the telephone.
- 20% of Americans used digital tools to talk to their neighbors and keep informed about community issues.
- 11% of Americans read a blog dealing with community issues.
- 9% of Americans exchanged emails with neighbors about community issues and 5% say they belong to a community email listserv.
- 4% of Americans communicated with neighbors by text messaging on cell phones.
- 4% of Americans joined a social network site group (e.g., Facebook) connected to community issues.
- 2% of Americans followed neighbors using Twitter.
[Note: Emphasis added. Because survey participants could respond affirmatively to more than one option, the sum of percentages is > 100%.]
One of the take-away messages from this report is that while high-tech communication modes have a place in how Americans stay connected to one another and to their community, use of these modes does not (yet) surpass good ol’ fashioned discussions over the backyard fence or across porches. If one’s marketing objective is to mobilize grassroots support, to build local awareness of an issue, or to mobilize a community to action, these data seem to suggest the best kind of “word-of-mouth” tactic may be the original kind – by encouraging people to literally talk with one another.
[Survey methods note: The survey was conducted via telephone (either landline or cellphone) with a random sample of 2,258 American adults. The full report can be downloaded here.]
The Psychology of Outlet Malls – Driving Far to Save Money
When I think of “outlet malls,” I think of making a long drive from an urban/suburban area to a shopping oasis in a rural area. Once there, one typically finds a jumbled pile of brands advertising high quality items at low cost (“Get the best brands at the lowest prices!”). For example, outside Columbus OH, there’s Prime Outlets – Jeffersonville – about an hour’s drive from Columbus, Cincinnati, and Dayton. Outside Philadelphia PA, there are the outlets in Reading and in Limerick, both of which are about an hour’s drive from Philly. And judging by this map showing the locations of Tanger Outlets throughout the US, the average drive time from any given Tanger Outlet to the nearest major municipality appears to be about an hour. Hmmm.
Assuming this is a real pattern, why are outlet malls located like this? Because the cost to develop such properties in low population-density areas is less than the cost to develop in high population-density areas? Possibly. Because locating an outlet mall between two (or more) major metropolitan areas allows an economy of scale when promoting itself and its brands? Perhaps. Because market research predicts an outlet mall can entice some percentage of the nearly-catatonic drivers moving between two (or more) major metropolitan areas? Maybe.
Another possible explanation for the success / popularity of outlet malls can be found in the social psychological literature: cognitive dissonance and one of its outcomes, attitude change via dissonance reduction. As hinted at in Ellen Shell’s recent book, Cheap: The High Cost of Discount Culture, the act of making a substantial effort (e.g., a two-hour round-trip to buy GAP jeans at an outlet mall) to purchase an item may be justified – either consciously or sub-consciously – by changing a dissonant or conflicting thought / emotion. Consider the following:
- I don’t like to drive an hour to go shopping
- I like to wear GAP jeans
- I like to buy GAP jeans for less than full retail price (i.e., $50 at the outlet)
Assuming there is tension – dissonance – amongst these thoughts and feelings, one way to reduce this tension is to reconsider how I feel about traveling to this location. In other words, because I don’t usually like to drive an hour just to go shopping, there MUST be a good reason for why I did so. Enter the psychological mechanism of dissonance reduction! I may feel more positive (or at least closer to neutral) about driving an hour to go shopping at this outlet mall if that’s where I think I can find great deals.
Even better (for the outlet mall, not necessarily my wallet), such dissonance reduction may lead to a positive feedback loop of sorts. That is, once I’ve rationalized how I feel about driving an hour to the outlet, SURELY the next time I go I’ll find fantastic deals there. Right?
As you make your next road trip and you come across an outlet mall surrounded by miles and miles of undeveloped, rural space, take a moment to consider: how much of the decision to shop there is driven by shoppers’ rational, savings-maximizing thought vs. outlet mall developers’ savvy location and marketing?