A possible example of the implementation process
Let’s imagine that in country X the Association of Public Relations, or the leader of a consultancy, or an educator, a student, or a public relations manager, or a solo consultant decide to become an Actor.
These actors select one or more of the six themes to develop an advocacy campaign over the next two years, as well as one or more stakeholder groups with whom to do this with.
The association might decide to select the governance and/or the management theme; the consultancy might decide to select the alignment and/or the sustainability theme; the educator might opt for external communication; the manager the alignment and the solo consultant the internal communication…..
Then, the association might prefer to focus on its own members and on -say- the media; the consultancy instead might select its client and potential client base; the educator, in turn, might opt for colleagues or students; the manager might decide to advocate with department employees, as well as with middle and top management; the solo consultant its overall relationship and client network.
Of course no single actor has territorial exclusivity on a specific theme or stakeholder group. Clearly, if coherent, the more overlapping the better.
Each actor then decides on how to develop a zero base starting point by flexibly adopting the suggested evaluation program, and how to frame the two year program by developing appropriate contents, initiatives, events, documents and communication channels which appear to be effectively supporting the program objectives.
Each actor will want to send the plan to the hub where it will be accessible to other actors, and situationally report on changes, interim results and reactions received by the selected stakeholder group(s).