Any advocacy professional with more than a month’s experience on the job knows that authentic lawmaker relationships accelerate legislative influence. They usually come to this realization after lamenting the need to “be heard” and “cut through the clutter.” This is often followed by a discussion of clever items to send lawmakers, ranging from painted coconuts mailed as postcards (yes, it’s been done) to cakes delivered with one piece missing to remind the lawmaker not to cut out a special interest in the current appropriations debate.

While these tactics are clever and may get the attention of lawmakers and legislative staff, they don't facilitate the development of a working relationship. If you goal is attention, goal achieved. If it's relationship development, there are other activities that will lead you to that result.  

Relationship influence presents a great advantage because it’s a stealth tactic. It lets you persuade without broadcasting your messages to your opponents, which is what happens when advocacy campaigns rely too heavily on social media networks.

Lawmaker relationships verify and amplify noise that you generate through your online presence and other direct lawmaker communications. Identical constituent communications and online noise can help create awareness, which is a step on the persuasion ladder, but awareness does not equal influence.

My research with constituents who changed the mind of an elected official—and who did not have preexisting lawmaker relationships—revealed that they consistently engaged in relationship-building activities as one of their priority persuasion tactics. As one former U.S. Senate chief of staff told me, “Amy, the moral of the story is that it’s all about personal relationships. We get 100 calls a day on different issues. We have to distinguish which ones to get involved in and become active with, and that’s when a personal relationship stands out.”

If relationships facilitate persuasion, why aren’t they emphasized more as an influence tactic? I believe it’s because relationship-building isn’t taught or rewarded by organizations, and so the advocate doesn’t see any value in the activity.

Advocates also don’t know the proper ways to build relationships. Filmmaker Woody Allen is credited with the oft-repeated saying, “80 percent of success is showing up.” Many advocates are advised that “showing up” by attending a fundraiser or town hall meeting equals a relationship. That’s wrong: Showing up creates awareness, but it does not create relationships. What is done, said, and followed through on from those interactions is what creates the relationship—not to mention the degree of authenticity that the advocate conveys to the lawmaker.

Showing up creates awareness, but it does not create relationships. What is done, said, and followed through on from those interactions is what creates the relationship.

In my research, persuasive advocates—those who actually changed the mind of an opposed or agnostic legislator—consistently practiced several specific relationship-building tactics. These can be considered the canons of constituent-lawmaker relationship development.

Dial down your passion. Based on my interviews with current and former members of Congress whose minds were changed by “ordinary” voters, they don’t respond well to hyper-passionate advocates, particularly during a first encounter.

Be vivid. For the purposes of relationship-building, being vivid is about proximity. Incipient relationships require connecting in person. Communicating electronically suffices once the relationship is established, but not when you are attempting to build a relationship with someone you don’t know.

Be seen often. Unless you are lacking rudimentary social skills and are bereft of any emotional intelligence, the more you are seen, the more you are liked, and liking leads to relationships.

Give before asking. Too many sincere, yet naive advocates think that a relationship is developed by asking a lawmaker to vote for or against legislation. Persuasive advocates give something to the lawmaker before asking for a vote. They offer valuable information, access to community leaders or new voters, positive publicity, or perhaps a campaign contribution. As one Michigan restaurant owner and advocate told me, “I would never go into a lawmaker’s office and just ask for things.”

Respect the paths. Be aware of the lawmaker’s vocation, as well as causes he or she supports. Find ways you can also support that cause or a common interest. Also know the member’s political path. As one advocate said, “I knew this lawmaker had a problem with a significant voting block that I had access to. I told him I could help him gain an audience with their leadership.” He provided that connection, and this U.S. senator agreed with the advocate’s request and facilitated future meetings with other important lawmakers.

We really don’t know if a relationship is authentic until it bears fruit: The legislator ultimately votes with your organization or behaves in a way that supports your cause. However, if you till the soil, plant the seeds, and tend to the crop, you will increase our prospects for success. It’s never too late to start.