As noted elsewhere in this topic area, election authorities will have a number of motivations in establishing contact and cultivating relationships with organizations active in voter education. These include accessing the resources that civil society organizations can provide, expanding the reach of the official voter education programme, and fostering democratic atmosphere in which elections take place.
For their part, educators working outside the ambit of the election authority to conduct voter education programmes, whatever their approach may be, will have to establish a liaison with the election authority.
Approaches to Voter Education
In the first place, organizations may be operating on the basis of a contractual obligation to the election authority. In such cases, the authority pays the organisation for its services. In the second, the election authority may make an arrangement that recognises and/or registers the organization to conduct all or part of an agreed programme at its own expense. Finally, organizations may conduct an independent programme with or without recognition from the election authority.
Each of these different arrangements requires some form of liaison with the election authority on a regular basis. While there is the possibility that the terms of this liaison will be established by the election authority itself, it may be necessary for the organisation to make some proposals and also offer their services in maintaining the liaison as the election authority may have a lack of educational programme management capacity.
Purpose of Liaison
In the first place, liaison is necessary for the giving and receiving information that will have an impact on the programme design and implementation; and on the progress of the election. Where the programme is entirely independent, this may be the only task of a liaison process. But it is also necessary to enable clarification of roles, assessment of effectiveness, and access to officials and information required for the successful completion of an agreed programme.
It is particularly important where the organisation has its own funding, but is attempting to work on behalf of, or in support of, an election authority. While a contractual obligation is likely to have outlined explicitly the reporting and accountability relationships, the ownership of products, the use of official logos and other materials, the sharing of costs and use of resources, and so on, the more voluntary relationships that are entered into may not be enumerated Yet all
the same questions arise, and there needs to be a simple and regular mechanism for discussing these.
Absence of a Liaison Mechanism
In the absence of a liaison mechanism, meetings get called only when things go wrong; and everybody knows this, making such meetings invariably tense and formal. Information goes awry, with organisations sitting on a great deal of feedback about the election, and election authorities sitting on information that is required to ensure that the voter education is accurate.
Possible Liaison Mechanisms
Regularity and continuity are the prerequisites for a liaison mechanism. These are best achieved by identifying, at an early stage, a small group of people in the organisation and in the election authority who will be responsible for the liaison. By identifying not one person but a group, it is possible to avoid some of the pitfalls of personal contact and communication. Amongst these pitfalls are the possible breakdown of communication as a result of illness or absence, leaving the organisation, or interpersonal conflict. There have been cases when those conducting the liaison processes have either impressed the election authority, on one hand, or the organisation, on the other, so much they have been enticed away or have chosen to change sides of their own accord. While this may improve relationships over time, it usually results in some dysfunction
and time delays as new people have to be put in place.
Once a team of people is responsible for the liaison, they will set up a variety of different mechanisms, ranging from routine, joint meetings, de-briefings, attendance at meetings of the governing bodies of the two organisations, and occasional planning conferences and retreats.
Such meetings will invariably have two agendas, and those responsible for liaison outside of the election authority will want to ensure that they continue to have two agendas--the items of both bodies. If one or the other side feels that the meetings have no purpose or benefit for them they are likely to become disillusioned and to beg off in favour of other demands on their time.
As the organisation outside the election authority is likely to be the one that most needs information and contact in order to do its job properly, and is the one likely to have most questions and be wanting to make most demands and inputs, it tends to be the election authority that takes the meetings for granted and limits its participation to more junior staff.
While this is understandable from their viewpoint, it is not helpful from the point of view of those providing a service. As a result, it may be necessary to establish a routine for establishing a range of different level meetings--the more regular and procedural as opposed to the less regular for policy review.
It may also be possible to establish other forms of communication such as the circulation of minutes, fact and briefing sheets, and lists of contacts who can be approached on specific matters.
Contact Lists
A contact list is a very useful liaison tool, especially if it is accurate and includes brief information about the areas of competence of each person. It is best if it is specially prepared for the task rather than a general list that just happens to be available, or a circulation list of all committees. Where a list of contacts is provided, both bodies will want to brief these people and ensure that they know who is likely to contact them and about what they may be expected to give information. There are examples of lists being given on the assumption that those listed will be of assistance. Organisations subsequently find that the person has no knowledge of them and is not inclined to give out information without referring to a more senior person--something that results in all queries being centralised. This is exactly what a contact list is designed to
avoid.
Liaison activities should not be overly complicated. Often regular 'corridor' contact is all that is required. At the same time, liaison that relies entirely on such contact is likely to result in the two bodies drifting apart when they actually need to be working closely. Scheduled meetings can ensure that this is avoided.
Election Day
Liaison often falls apart on election day or in the last few days before elections. By this time an election authority is concentrating on the job at hand, and voter education programmes are over. Those who do voter education, however, develop a relationship with voters, and they are still involved, and may even be more involved than ever. As a result, such organisations end up with complaints, observations, requests for assistance, and so on. In some cases, voters find it hard to
see the difference between the organisation and the authority. And because getting through to the authority at the last minute can be difficult for voters but relatively easy for the educator, education organisations are assumed to be conduits for citizen reactions to the elections.
Sometimes little can or needs to be done other than to listen to the complaint. At other times, the information can be crucial. As a result, there should be some way in which information can be telephoned in to the election authority, and some way in which the election authority can call out. This may best be done by placing an educator who understands this process, and is not involved in other operational issues, in the election authority control centre, and having that person take calls from education organisations outside. At other times, it might be done by providing these organisations with contact lists for the range of responsive services that the electoral authority is fielding, such as security, logistics task groups, monitors, and so forth.
