10 Common Myths about Community Relations |
|
1 |
We won't need consent
or support from our local government officials or local community. |
2 |
We will be stirring up
trouble if we talk to the community. |
3 |
We can improve relations
with one-way communications efforts (without interaction with interested
parties). |
4 |
The community
cannot add anything meaningful to this process because it is too technically
complex. I am consistently amazed at the level of contribution communities have made to a number of very complex projects that we have been involved with. When given the opportunity and sufficient time to review technical information, it is amazing how much local residents can grasp and contribute to projects. Local involvement and buy-in on engineering projects may even reduce the liability of technical decisions in the future. |
5 |
Community leaders
will request the most unreasonable or costly solutions. We usually approach issues based on the way we define them. As a community relations firm, we often find that the way our clients define community relations issues and the way the community defines them is quite different. We can't truly know how people will react until we talk with them. We often find that community leaders are sympathetic to companies and facilities in terms of the cost associated with regulatory compliance and environmental cleanup and are much more practical (e.g. when it comes to cleanup levels, etc.) than one might imagine. |
6 |
We shouldn't
talk to the community until we have all the answers. Actually, you gain more credibility by being open enough to allow the community to be involved throughout the process. There is a comfort in knowing all the layers, steps, models, assumptions, and coordination that organizations are undertaking to develop and implement cleanup and other engineering projects. The more the community knows about this effort the more credible the information will be. |
7 |
Consulting
with elected officials is enough community relations. The old-fashioned public affairs approach focused on covering your bases with the media and with elected officials. The truth is that elected officials and the media usually tend to their constituents when issues stir up. Your efforts are better spent on improving relations with the local community. This is not to suggest that you shouldn't have relations with the local media and elected officials, but be careful of relying too heavily (or exclusively) on them when an issue escalates. |
8 |
If our relations
are currently strained, we will make relations worse by communicating
with the community now. The first step is to find out why relations are strained (which may require an independent reliable source to uncover). If your intentions are sound and mutually beneficial in some way, how can communication make relations worse? How can relationships get better if you don't communicate? |
9 |
It will be
easier to implement our project without community relations. Reactive communication efforts resulting from unexpected community concern or media interest always seems to cause more upheaval, require more time and money, and is more disruptive to my clients than planned communication efforts. |
10 |
We need to do a better
job communicating the technical issues. |