Superannuation and dog racing: policy back-flip or ‘responding to stakeholders’?
In this guest post Tony Jaques uses two recent government policy decisions to compare successful and unsuccessful issue management, to showcase why handling public perception is critical to protecting your brand.
One of the challenges for policy-makers and managers everywhere is how best to communicate a major change of mind. Will it be negatively perceived as a back-flip by a weak leader or recognised as a positive outcome resulting from flexible consultation with stakeholders?
This issue management conundrum was highlighted by two recent high-profile developments in Australia.
In the first case, Federal Treasurer Scott Morrison had to explain why the Government had backed down from some unpopular changes to the national superannuation system. His communication strategy was clear and unapologetic. The Minister told reporters he had listened and then made the right decision – and the story pretty quickly went away.
Contrast this with the issue management debacle surrounding greyhound racing. Reacting to a television exposé of cruel practices in the sport, New South Wales Premier Mike Baird announced a total ban on greyhound racing in the State.
Predictably, animal welfare groups praised it as trend-setting and courageous, while the greyhound industry, along with their allies in politics and the media, were outraged and angry.
