Factory, it's what I've been saying. It's a fundamentally flawed approach to build a marketing message by committee or by consensus. Even when movements pick up steam it's because they're following some
one. That's why I said this:
"Forget about collectivist approaches. Pick just one area to focus on, and you as the individual become the expert in that area. And just build."
This is what makes leaders: individual people acting. But if people aren't following your lead, it might be because they haven't been given a clear "ask." Glenn Sacks is really good at this. He writes a column, states the facts, provides his commentary, and so builds legitimacy behind his position. He then says what he has decided to do. Then he gives a button for people to click. Simple! That button generates a fax message with a canned letter, and that fax gets sent to whatever organization Glenn is targeting. Other times, Glenn simply asks for money. He does that a lot, right up front. He points to a legislative victory of his group, Fathers and Families, and immediately reminds people that "these victories cost money.
Please donate now." When Glenn can't be effective by getting people to submit auto-faxes or by raising money, i.e. when he requires detailed letters from people, he asks specifically for that. He gives the e-mail and snail mail address where they can send a letter and then continually reminds people to keep up the pressure in the campaign. The pattern is simple: one leader drives the action. He doesn't ask for people to reach thought consensus. He asks them to coale
sce around his view, and also asks them to do specific X, Y and Z actions. Never does he ask people to agree on a marketing message. Even with a dedicated and well-intentioned group of supporters, there is such variety of opinion, attitude and skill that nothing substantial would likely ever result. Usually, the only time that the "team approach" works (such as in a marketing firm) is with the existence of authority and/or competence-based leadership.
The point that I made about effectiveness resulting from solo efforts is NOT negative. Rather, it is negative to refer to the recognition of that fact as itself the
cause of ineffectiveness. If you don't see it that way -- or if you just flat-out disagree -- then proceed as you have been. Reality is a cruel taskmaster.