Changes are the results an advocacy effort aims for with audiences to progress toward a
policy goal. The three points on this continuum differ in terms of how far an audience is
expected to engage on a policy issue. The continuum starts with basic awareness or
knowledge. Here the goal is to make the audience aware that a problem or potential
policy solution exists. The next point is will. The goal here is to raise an audience’s
willingness to take action on an issue. It goes beyond awareness and tries to convince the
audience that the issue is important enough to warrant action and that any actions taken
will in fact make a difference. The third point is action. Here, policy efforts actually support
or facilitate audience action on an issue. Again, advocacy strategies may pursue one
change with an audience or more than one simultaneously.
UNDERSTANDING “WILL”
Advocacy theories of change often are vague about the mysterious middle ground between
awareness and action. Yet we know from research that increased awareness about a problem or a
potential solution is rarely sufficient to trigger action. Public or political “will” describes the stage
between the two, where issue awareness is transformed into a sense of urgency and relevance
that is the precursor to an audience taking action once the opportunity arises. It is useful to
explore five components of “will” when building advocacy theories of change:
• Opinion is a person’s belief or judgement about an issue. People need to take a position
on an issue for will to be built. There is a whole range of issues about which people may
have knowledge but have no opinion at all.
• Intensity refers to the strength of a person’s opinion. People need to hold their
opinions strongly—either for or against an issue or a solution—before it rises to a level
worthy of their time and attention.
• Salience is how important and relevant an issue is to people. People may hold a strong
opinion about an issue, yet still not find that the issue is relevant enough to their lives
to make political choices based on the issue.
• Capacity to act is the know-how, skills, and confidence to take the desired action when
called upon. For example, citizens must know how to mobilize or engage with
policymakers to push a particular solution before they can be expected to do so.
• Willingness to act expresses the idea of a person’s willingness to take a particular
action despite the risks or tradeoffs that are associated with that action, which might
range from angering peers or constituents who disagree to arrest or violence as a
result of participating in public demonstrations.
For more information about “will,” see Willing and Able: A Broader Definition of Public Will by
Julia Coffman, available at www.evaluationinnovation.org.
3