RNC Chair candidate Chip Saltsman has a blog post up on "rebuilding online". In it, he runs through his plan for addressing our online deficit, and pays brief attention to RebuildTheParty.com - he is one of the two candidates who have endorsed the plan.
Unfortunately, his plan is defective in a major way. He begins well enough with a true statement.
We need to break the mold when it comes to our tactics and strategy online.
I would actually drop the word 'online' from that sentence, however. I think we need to modernize not just our online operations, but our entire approach to campaigning. As an example of what I'm talking about, let me look at one suggestion Chip made.
I recommend that we reorganize the party structure by integrating e-Campaign staff into every department. In fact, the committee should consider making the e-Campaign director deputy chief of staff.
The first part of that, inserting an eCampaign specialist in each department, is something I believed in through the BC04 camapign and my tenure at the RNC. I discovered, however, that it actually doesn't work. While it sounds great on paper, it ends up creating a half dozen or so marginalized positions on the staff. Why? The simple answer is the division heads.
Rather than address this just to Chip's people, I thought I'd post it here so anyone can chime in, and all the candidates for Chairman can consider it.
Staff
I have worked with a lot of political professionals over the last 15 years. I have worked with some who really understand the potential of online campaigning, but don't understand the actual technology. I have worked with many who viewed it as a threat to what they understand to be "the way" to campaign. And I have worked with some who could have been truly transformative figures in a new era of campaigning.
Unfortunately, the division heads at the RNC don't fall into that latter category. Typically they fall into the second. The rare exception falls in the first.
You can put any eCampaign specialist into a department, but if the head of that department sees technology as a distraction or a fad (I've heard both words used to describe what we do), then that person will never be effective.
Instead of making a handful of staffers really unhappy, Saltsman should commit to hiring division heads who have demonstrated an understanding of online campaigns. There are plenty of people that could fit that bill.
Structure
The next chair should rethink the fundamental structure of the RNC and the job functions of each department. For instance, Communications is typically responsible for both the press and mass market appeals (like the web). Anyone who has worked in both roles knows that you don't talk to people via your website the way you talk to reporters (though traditional Comms tactics may help you work with bloggers).
Why not rethink the way we communicate to bring it more inline with what has been proven to work in corporate America.
Rarely do investor relations, media relations, and marketing rest in the same office. Typically sales and marketing share a common business line, as do media and investor communications.
In politics, we typically separate sales (Political) and Marketing (Strategy, eCampaign) into separate pieces. I would suggest the next RNC chair consider a realignment of these functions. Political and Mass Communications (web or TV or radio or mail) should be closely linked and completely separate from the guys talking to the LA Times (assuming it's still around in 2-4 years).
Specific Examples of the Type of People You Need
If I were the RNC Chair, I would hire someone like Jon Henke to be the Communications Director. He understands traditional media, but he also understands bloggers, how to read them, how to forecast them, and how to gauge what stories will move from new media to traditional media. You cannot underestimate the value of having someone who can see the future and know what the media will be talking about next week. Someone who reads the paper every morning and reacts is of little use anymore.
As Political Director, I'd look to someone like Brian Donahue. He was responsible for 72 hour programs at the RNC so he gets turnout and moving voters' feet. He also understands the implications of the web in getting that job done. He uderstands how volunteers can be brought in, groomed, and used to mobilize voters. More than that, given his current job, he also understands the media, and specifically the blend of traditional and new media.
I wouldn't have an eCampaign Director. I think the very idea of that job serves only to perpetuate the idea of "the online campaign" as somehow separate and distinct from the rest of the RNC. As the former eCampaign Director, I can say without reservation that the position simply creates a distinction that shouldn't exist.
You need someone who understands technology, databases, web/application development, list growth, etc, but that person is secondary to having someone who can drive the entire organization toward a philosophy that embraces these tactics.
I would look for a Chief of Staff who "gets it". The Chief of Staff needs to be fundamentally aligned with the RNC Chairman's vision, but they also need to understand how that vision can be empowered by technology. They need to have the requisite skills in budget management, personnel, etc, but the RNC will never be successful if the Chief of Staff isn't fully invested in the use of technology.
Baby Steps
I often talk with organizations or people who tell me they want to "take baby steps" online. I always tell them I think it's outstanding that they want to be that aggressive. The fact is, babies are exceptionally aggressive about learning to walk. Their steps may be small, but they are certainly not timid.
I would argue that all of these people, from the Chair to the lowest staffer, be prepared to push very hard. Thinking out of the box, and taking big chances will be the only way we can rebuild quickly. We won't reverse our fortunes by taking things slowly.
Update: I got a note suggesting that my position here may be contrary to the Rebuild The Party plan (which Chip endorsed) which states:
Reorganizing the RNC. In order to accomplish these goals, the RNC's organizational structure will need to change. It is not enough to have a dedicated eCampaign division if other departments fail to use the Internet to transform how they do business in this new environment. The Internet should pervade everything the RNC does, and leadership on this front must come directly from the Chairman's Office.
I don't think my suggestion is contrary to that at all. I agree that the RNC needs to be restructured. I agree that an eCampaign division is not enough, and I agree that leadership needs to come from the top. I just disagree that placing an eCampaign staffer in each department is what I would call "Reorganizing." That, to me, is simply paying lip service if those people don't have the authority to actually force change.
When the Bush Administration wants the agencies to do anything, they push the directive through OMB because those are the people that approve the budget. You either need executive leadership and budgetary authority to drive an organization - especially in a direction its not inclined to go on its own.
