Seminar Held In Person

Learning objectives

Objectives 8: Use communication tactics from story telling and marketing to entice people to join your K2A initiative, and act on your theory of change. Specifically, you will learn to

B. Create a sense of personal connection with your audience by sharing aspects of your own life as it relates to the K2A theory of change (i.e. Ganz’s story of self).

C. Create a sense of belonging in a constituency of like-minded people for your audience (i.e. Ganz’s story of us).

D. Create a sense of urgency for your audience by inviting them to take a specific action now to advance the theory of change (i.e. Ganz’s story of now) by drawing on research evidence to paint a picture of the “nightmare” that might happen if there is inaction, and the “dream” we can achieve if action is taken.

Field Guide Tool on which we are focusing: Ganz et al.’s Public Narrative Tool

CLASS SLIDES

Readings

Ganz, Marshall, et al. "Organizing: People, Power & Change. Participant Guide." Dogwood Initiative, Stonehouse Institute, Desmog Canada, Leading Change Network. Pages 60 – 92.

Ganz, Marshall. 2011. "Public Narrative, Collective Action and Power." In Accountability through Public Opinion: From Inertia to Public Action, edited by Sina Odugbemi and Takeu Lee, Washington, D.C.: The World Bank, pp. 273-290. Available at: https://openknowledge.worldbank.org/bitstream/handle/10986/2296/616390PUB0Acco1351B0Extop0ID0185050.pdf?sequence=1 Links to an external site. Accessed August 22, 2018.

Greenhalgh, T. and J. Russell (2006). "Reframing Evidence Synthesis As Rhetorical Action in the Policy Making Drama." Healthcare Policy 1(2): 34-42.

Lesson Plan

Students come prepared to discuss readings
- Key questions
  - Ganz talks about Strategy, Narrative and Action in regards to Head, Heart and Action. How do these concepts relate?
  - Ganz discusses the difference between “Knowing Why” and “Knowing How.” How does these concepts relate to his emphasis on designing a Theory of Change and a Public Narrative?
  - Greenhalgh and Russel conclude: “… equally important is the task of disabusing the healthcare community of the misconception that policy making is, or ever could be, “evidence-based” in the way this term is conventionally construed… A more fruitful, and certainly more original, use of research funding would be to promote and evaluate the training of policy making teams in the art of rhetoric… designed to ensure that the players in the policy making drama acknowledge and take account of their respective points of departure. Making explicit the values and premises on which each side has built its case will not only highlight “evidence gaps” more systematically but will also generate light rather than heat at the policy making table.” What do you make of their conclusion?

I do: PK shares examples of story of self from his Gen Squeeze work:
We do: Revisit the padded knickers case. In pairs, repackage this case as a public narrative to convince policy makers to act on the evidence that hip protectors reduce injury, and to disarm critique that such equipment is little more than padded knickers.
You do: Submit an Online Discussion post. What element(s) of Ganz et al.s’ Public Narrative do you think are most useful for public health campaigns that you care about? Why?
- Or, how might you use Public Narrative to shape communications about a public health issue that you care about?

(Pass/Fail. 1/5 of 15% Online Discussion Grade). Marked by TA.