1. CREW Messaging Plan: An Initial Scoping Shelby Wood Presentation to the Cascadia Region Earthquake Workgroup April 26, 2012

2.  CREW desire for outreach plan to target audiences  Review materials from CREW, etc.  Interviews with Messaging Plan task group members  Messaging = Marketing  FEMA prefers “messaging” but terms mean same thing  Abundant guidance in strategic planning literature Project impetus

3.  CREW has not clearly defined its audience  Board members have wide-ranging, and in some cases, conflicting ideas about who CREW is trying to reach and for what purpose.  Why does this matter?  Without a clear purpose and well-defined audience, CREW cannot capitalize on its limited operating funds and pro bono time provided by volunteer members. Key finding

4.  Provide background and interview results  Offer assessment of “two paths” CREW is currently on  Provide questions to help CREW clarify its primary path  Describe potential next steps toward a full-blown marketing plan that supports CREW’s mission This presentation will:

5.  Mission statement  Clear goals  Description of target customer  Assessment of market What does a successful marketing plan require? An organization must define its audience before it can choose the most effective means for reaching them

6.  Clear mission The Cascadia Region Earthquake Workgroup (CREW) is a not-for-profit corporation of private and public representatives working together to improve the ability of Cascadia Region communities to reduce the effects of earthquake events.  Clear goals  Foster productive linkages between scientists, critical infrastructure providers, businesses and governmental agencies on topics of community resilience  Promote economic resilience and viability of communities  Promote transfer of scientific data on earthquake hazards to decision makers  Leverage organization resources and develop sustainable resources CREW has 2 of the 4 requirements

7.  Who: Messaging Plan Task Group  Cale Ash, CREW President  John Schelling, CREW Vice President  Kathryn Forge, CREW Chair, Education & Outreach subcommittee  Bill Steele, CREW Website working group  Rocky Lopes, Education consultant, formerly with American Red Cross and NTHMP  What they were asked  What should CREW be doing?  Who is CREW trying to reach (i.e., target audiences)?  Which audiences are most important? Interviews

8.  Sample of responses  Provides unique forum for collaboration/coordination and multidisciplinary products and events  Reaches out directly to key groups, especially businesses, to educate them about mitigation  Produces and disseminates news and other products related to mitigation  Hosts regular forums aimed at the general public on earthquake/hazard topics Interview results – What should CREW be doing?

9.  All over the map—no clear consensus  Different perceptions of target audiences  Business  Emergency managers, general public, healthcare industry, elected officials  Conflicting perceptions of audience  Media Interview results – Who is CREW trying to reach?

10.  The Broker:  A unique organization that connects other groups in the earthquake hazard arena. It is a facilitator.  Analogy: Business-to-Business marketing  The Actor:  An organization (among others) engaged in earthquake mitigation and education. It is an educator.  Analogy: Retail/Consumer marketing CREW is trying to pursue two different paths Broker and Actor

11. Goal 2: Promote economic resilience and viability of communities Broker approach  Supports other actors that engage businesses (e.g., distributes QuakeSmart ToolKit) Actor approach  Produce original CREW materials and web content for business owners Content Process  Host conference to connect businesses with key “actors”  Engage elected officials to champion mitigation messages in business circles  Direct market education/mitigation messages via materials and events to business owners

12.  Role:  Builds networks + crosses boundaries  Develops multidisciplinary products and forums that otherwise would not exist  Audience: Decision makers, influencers, practitioners  Emergency managers, agency officials  Scientists + researchers from academia, government  Elected officials  Business-related groups (chambers of commerce, etc.)  Actions: Examples, new and ongoing  Host annual conference that features newest EQ science/mitigation  Pursue co-branding opportunities with national/regional initiatives  Present forums for target audiences CREW as a Broker

13. CREW as a Broker: Opportunities and Challenges Opportunities  Fills void in Cascadia region  Does not duplicate other efforts  CREW already a broker  Doesn’t require extensive media outreach Challenges  May not fulfill FEMA’s goal for CREW to directly engage business owners; may jeopardize funding  Doesn’t align with “open to everyone” approach  Risk of talking “only to ourselves”

14.  Role: Education and outreach  Audiences: Limited funding/time + FEMA preference require narrow focus  Business owners + industry groups that support them  Business-related media  Actions: Examples, new and ongoing  Business Roundtables, designed to respond to results of gap analysis  Outreach to business media  Workshop in a “tools for business” format  Develop + distribute new products tailored to business owners CREW as an Actor

15. CREW as actor: Opportunities and Challenges Opportunities  Aligns with CREW and FEMA goals to engage businesses  Targets audience critical to community resiliency  Potential funding base if target audience can be better engaged Challenges  Duplicates efforts of other agencies and organizations  Requires media contact with which CREW is unfamiliar or uncomfortable  Current lack of business participation foreshadows future challenges

16.  Multiple factors require CREW to choose a path  Limited funding  Limited time/capacity  To avoid duplication with other groups/actors doing EQ work  Path can be a hybrid of broker and actor, but…  Need to be explicit on boundaries and audience for each  Otherwise, mission creep for both threatens effectiveness of both  To choose path, start by achieving consensus on key questions Choosing a Path Forward

17.  What is the evidence that CREW’s potential audiences want what CREW offers?  Is CREW willing to give up certain audiences to reach others more effectively?  What does CREW want its target audience(s) to learn and/or do?  Does CREW want to communicate messages or broker relationships?  Does CREW want to operate behind the scenes or have visible public role?  What engagement does CREW want to have with the media? Critical Questions as CREW Chooses a Path Forward

18.  CREW has  clear mission  clear goals  motivated leadership  CREW needs  To choose a path: Broker, actor, or a third way?  To define target audience(s)  Future work  Path and audience will shape a central message  Choose outreach strategies best suited to path/audience/message, within funding/time limits Conclusions