When we discuss EU public affairs, we tend to gravitate towards the issues and the politics rather than the practice of public affairs itself. Fret not, this isn’t another post waxing lyrical about AI. It’s the result of a fun little exercise for a client that is reviewing its public affairs set-up and requested our view on top-line trends in several markets. I contributed to the EU one and was kindly given permission to share a redacted version here. If you note any glaring omissions, do let me know (I’ll pass it on to the client and confess that the internet knew more than me ).
Mastering the political and the technical
With ever more decisions being made in expert groups, public affairs professionals with a high degree of technical knowledge thrive as much as ever. Paradoxically, policymaking is also more political than ever. This is driven by the types of issues handled in Brussels, coupled with a political Commission, a relatively activist and engaged Parliament, and member states that are highly engaged at the EU level to respond to their publics. This shift represents a challenging new discipline for many professionals accustomed to a Brussels that was solely apolitical and technical: an environment beloved by policy boffins where deep expertise on legislative detail was the only currency.
Navigating capitals
As implied, with member states aggressive in the defence of their own positions, much power has shifted to national capitals, especially in larger countries. EU public affairs professionals must now navigate a complex world of party politics, public sentiment, and national media. But it’s not all political at the national level: the prevalence of comitology means delegates flown in from member states are usually key players in the policymaking process, rather than Brussels-based diplomats. So, the boffins still get to practice their craft in capitals too.
A focus on value creation
While still largely a defensive shield to protect business from regulatory threats, public affairs professionals are increasingly being judged on how far they can help the business grow. Given the proliferation of EU funding schemes and the (relative) easing off of large-scale regulation packages, value creation is arguably more important than value protection for many corporate public affairs operators in the EU.
Changing media landscape
Some media players have figured out sustainable business models, allowing them to have more journalists on the ground in Brussels covering more issues. For public affairs professionals, this invariably means more opportunities for media relations. While it’s probably easier to get some form of coverage, the balance between high-quality and sensationalist coverage has changed. It may be easier to garner attention, but it’s harder to generate high-quality coverage that confers greater legitimacy.
Fewer siloes
It is increasingly rare to see a brief asking for just public affairs or policy communications. The two are now usually integrated, giving rise to a channel-agnostic approach. Most organisations have (thankfully) stopped obsessing over specific channels and instead think in terms of objective, people and message, underpinned by a clear strategy (not all, by any means).
A seat at the table
As politics and policy represent an ever-greater existential threat and opportunity to business, we see a shift in where public affairs sits within corporate structures. While by no means ubiquitous, the most common model is public affairs being part of a corporate affairs function that is C-level or one level removed from it. We are also seeing fewer public affairs functions sitting under legal, even in heavily regulated industries.
Process professionalisation
I will not mention AI given the deluge of far better-informed opinion out there, but rather, highlight the digital transformation we are seeing around processes. The widespread uptake of digital platforms to manage public affairs programs (like Quorum, Fiscal Note, and Ulobby) is driving a major improvement in how professionals operate. Managing data, activities, and intelligence gathering in a single, integrated system leads to greater efficiencies.
The evolving role of the consultant
With in-house teams growing and technology commoditising several activities, the role of the consultant is evolving. While they still provide a scale that in-house teams can not always muster, their most valuable contribution often involves advising on complex horizontal issues (like trade or tax) that cut across many sectors, where in-house professionals may lack the requisite experience. Their experience across various organisations also allows them to advise on the management and improvement of the public affairs function itself: management consulting for public affairs, if you will. Several of the briefs I receive certainly involve elements of this, far more so than in the past. And to the point about member states, consultancies that cover several European markets are able to provide the scale required to manage complex programs that in-house PA teams cannot handle alone.
As ever, if I’m missing anything, let me know and I’ll gladly add.
Steffen Moller 