[Lnc-business] Thoughts on Strategic Consultants

[Arvin Vohra]

Hi all,

I have a few thoughts on the strategic plan proposal. Normally, I don't
discuss strategy on public lists, but the importance of this necessitates
it. I think we have major opportunities right now; however, I have
reservations about the approach of using a political consulting company.

*Strategies vs. Implementation*

Many of our current issues are implementation issues, not strategic ones.
In other words: we know what do do. We just need to do it.

We don't need outside consultants to tell us that marketing should use
relevant benefits for an audience, not features that appeal only to
insiders. This weekend, Larry Sharpe, Aaron Starr, Carla Howell, and others
specifically highlighted that fact. Imagine if all LP candidates were
skilled at that! That's not a new strategy; it's implementing common sense.
We have at least 2-3 great training programs that focus on that to varying
extent. Growing them is an implementation, not a strategic issue. Taking
resources away from implementation and putting them into strategic research
may not be advisable.

Similarly, having a platitudinous presidential campaign slogan is obviously
a bad idea. Having a vice presidential candidate indicate preference
between old party candidates is obviously a bad idea. That's not a
strategic insight. It's basic sense that needs to be implemented. For
example, before 2020, I intend to encourage each presidential candidate to
record a clear, unambiguous, and total rejection of all old party
candidates, for the LNC to use if/when appropriate.

Similarly, having people register Libertarian is an obvious strategy. The
brilliance of Mr. Somes's Re-Register campaign was not in the idea of
registration, but rather in the effective implementation.

*The Relevance of Long Term Strategy in Quickly Changing Markets*

Looking at opportunities strategically (with long term planning) rather
than tactically (with high situational awareness) is less relevant in a
very quickly changing marketplace.

For example: in 2014, most political strategy organizations would have told
us that focusing on withdrawing from NATO would be politically
preposterous. Now it's completely fair game, thanks to Trump's campaign.
Messaging rules are changing very quickly, and any strategy may have a very
short shelf life.


*Market Research and Messaging Research*

As any business owner knows, demographic market research is highly useful.
However, much of that takes place through trial and error. We have very
quick and easy way to do trial and error market research using social
media. We can target ads to very specific demographics and quickly measure
response rates. Much of this has already been done. We can base direct mail
campaigns off of these rates. A/B campaigns can help further refine
messaging. For example, our data tell us that legalizing marijuana does
well in social media advertising. We can follow that up with direct mail on
that topic, and test if a serious "End the War on Drugs" or a sarcastic
"Continue the War on Drugs" gets a higher response rate. This can be done
for a few thousand dollars right now. Even after talking to a political
consulting firm, that kind of testing would still cost a few thousand
dollars.

*Goals*

Strategies depend on goals. Our goal is to cut government to advance
individual freedom. Political consulting companies whose focus is election
victories will not have the right experience for that.

For example, right now we can focus on pressuring the GOP to eliminate the
Department of Education, withdraw from NATO, etc. Victory there massively
advances our goal. That goal may be enhanced by electoral successes, but is
not inherently contingent on them. There may be consulting companies with
expertise in that area, but they may not be the same as those with a purely
electoral focus.

*Using the Most Expensive Solution is not Always the Best*

Digital advertising, direct mail, etc. allow very precise demographic
targeting and experimentation at comparatively low financial risk. We can
see what messaging works with Hispanic women between ages 23 and 24 in
chicago with incomes between 50k and 51k a year. My own business does heavy
demographic experimentation like that. It's low risk, but when you find
something that works, the returns can be massive. Small test mailings can
easily be ramped up to nationwide campaigns.

*Old Party Expertise Does not Usually Translate*

Gary Johnson's campaign leadership had experience winning within the
duopoly. that experience was extremely useful in getting media coverage,
and other areas of overlap.

But it also lead to an overly timid campaign. Old party politics is often
personality politics; new party politics does not have that option due to
lower media coverage. Advertising like Governor Johnson's original ads
decades ago in NM (if you vote for me, you'll have more money) may have
been more effective than the campaigns more timid personality approach.


*Conflicts of Interest*

As some of you know, my personal business often focuses on getting people
to dominate their high schools and get into Ivy League colleges. If I have
a new student who wants to become the valedictorian in a school in which
one of my long term clients expects to be the valedictorian, he's going to
have to pay me a hell of a lot. It's not that I can't do it. It's that the
new client paying me $X is just not going to be a priority over the old
client who has paid me $1000X, and intends to pay me another $1000X.

I have no doubt that there are political consulting companies who know
specific strategic weaknesses in the GOP or Dem party. I doubt that they
would alienate those groups by telling us them. At most, they may bring up
strategic weaknesses that everyone knows. Realistically, they may be
legally unable to give the kind of insider knowledge that could be more
useful.

*Consultants Who Can Help*

I imagine that there are almost certainly consultants in the world who may
have insights that could be highly relevant. But they will almost certainly
not be found among regular political consulting firms.

My guess is that the strategic team we have, if we set our focus on
messaging strategy and experimentation, will outperform consulting firms
with primarily old party experience.

*Alternative Mechanisms*

I think that having a small group of volunteers from the LNC and state
leadership work on messaging experimentation right now, using direct mail,
online ads, etc. would be be faster and more responsive.

*Things to Look for if We Decide to Go with Consultants*

Any consultant we work for should be able to prove ability and ROI with a
small project. A firm that demands a huge up-front investment as the only
option should not be taken seriously. We're looking for a company that can
help do what others consider impossible. They should be able to prove
ability and ROI on something small first.

And before anyone says "McKinsey has a huge minimum....", I recommend
speaking with those who have actually hired them. What I've heard is a
tendency to arrogantly state the obvious and to be unaware of critical
nuances. This is exactly what we do not need.

I appreciate the work of Mr. Sharpe and Mr. Somes, and strongly respect
their insights so far. I would honestly much rather have them run this
directly, as both have a proven and relevant track record at this point.

In Liberty,

Arvin Vohra
Vice Chair
Libertarian National Committee




-- 
Arvin Vohra

www.VoteVohra.com
VoteVohra at gmail.com
(301) 320-3634
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://hq.lp.org/pipermail/lnc-business/attachments/20161211/70ce038f/attachment-0001.html>