From Structure to Strategy: Reflections on a Workshop with a Public Affairs Team

Paul Shotton, PhD

Co-Founder Advocacy Academy, Advocacy Strategy and Owner at Paul Shotton Consulting

April 29, 2025

Last week, I had the opportunity to run a three-and-a-half-hour workshop with the policy and public affairs team of a large and experienced trade association.

This was a team with substantial expertise and well-developed internal processes — a team that, at first glance, might not have felt they needed to reflect too much on how they work.

And yet, as the session unfolded, what became clear — and what I think resonated most — was the value of taking a step back. Not to replace what they already do well, but to look at their practice through a structured lens, to challenge assumptions, and to explore how their already strong work could be made even stronger.

A Framework for Reflection

This was the aim of the session: to introduce our 7-step advocacy methodology as a tool for reflection.

Not to present a one-size-fits-all solution, and certainly not to suggest that there’s only one way to do public affairs — but rather to offer a framework that encourages structured thinking, better alignment, and ultimately, stronger campaigns.

Of course, in a 3.5-hour session, we could only scratch the surface. Each of the seven steps could easily merit its own dedicated workshop.

So the real objective was to provide an overview — to introduce a mindset and a process that teams can apply incrementally. A sort of light audit of current practice, and a chance to take stock of where there’s clarity, where there are gaps, and where things could be strengthened or rethought.

Prioritisation as the Foundation

While we walked through the entire methodology, the step that generated the most traction — and arguably the biggest “aha” moment — was structured, consultative prioritisation.

We explored how prioritisation isn’t just about choosing what to focus on — it’s the foundation for everything that follows.

When done well, in dialogue with members, prioritisation becomes a process of alignment. It allows teams to cascade clarity across their work:

• It gives direction to monitoring

• It shapes internal reporting

• It determines the scope of campaign plans

• It structures how information is managed and shared

• It makes KPIs more relevant — and actionable

The team quickly recognised this as something tangible they could apply — a step that builds consensus, improves efficiency, and creates the space for more proactive work.

Tools: From Practical to Powerful

We also talked about tools — and the importance of balancing ambition with usability.

I encouraged the team to start simple: Excel-based prioritisation grids or stakeholder maps are excellent for building the habit of structured thinking. They’re easy to adopt and surprisingly powerful when used consistently.

As the team matures, platforms like Airtable or Smartsheet offer more flexibility, integration, and dashboards tailored to different roles.

The key takeaway: Build the habit first. Scale the tools later.

AI as a Supporting Player

Another lively discussion was around the role of AI — particularly large language models like ChatGPT.

We talked about how AI can support public affairs in small but meaningful ways:

• Drafting SMART objectives

• Structuring agendas

• Translating or proofreading documents

• Summarising or drafting first-pass materials

I described it as “having a team of fast interns” — they work fast, but they still need your judgement. They're assistants, not strategists.

We also touched on more advanced tools, like predictive analytics, which hold promise — but require experience, data discipline, and clear use cases to succeed.

The Human Side: Ownership and Change

A big part of the conversation was about ownership.

Do you have someone responsible for:

• Maintaining your method?

• Developing and updating templates?

• Holding the structure together?

Because without ownership, change doesn’t stick. And without change, there’s no improvement.

We also talked about time — the ever-present challenge. Teams often feel there’s no time to adopt new systems. But the point I tried to reinforce was this:

Structure doesn’t steal time — it saves it.

You don’t need to change everything at once. You just need to show value step-by-step — and recognise that not everyone will be on board at the same pace. That’s normal. That’s leadership.

Strategy as Iteration

One of the final themes was this: strategy isn’t a static document. It’s a living process.

Your stakeholder map, message house, objectives — these are all tools to:

• Communicate strategy

• Guide action

• Measure and communicate progress

They should evolve over time. They should support both action and reflection. And they should be updated regularly — because good strategy is responsive.

We also acknowledged that leadership often wants measurable outcomes — ROI, policy wins, cost avoidance. Those matter. But so does your ability to explain what’s working, how you’re adapting, and where you're investing energy for impact.

A Final Word

What I hope the team took away — and what I’d share with anyone in a similar role — is that good public affairs isn’t just about the issues or the tactics.

It’s about how you work.

• Having a method.

• Having a plan.

• Having tools and templates.

• And having people who take ownership.

These are the building blocks of a strong, focused, adaptable team.

If you're leading a team and you’re thinking about how to improve your structure, strengthen your campaigns, or carve out time for strategic reflection — I’d be happy to talk.

This kind of workshop can be adapted to your context, and can lead into deeper support, audits, or coaching depending on what your organisation needs.

Thanks for reading — and if this resonates, let’s connect.