Strategic storytelling for place branding

object(WP_Post)#8592 (24) {
[“ID”]=>
int(41107)
[“post_author”]=>
string(2) “36”
[“post_date”]=>
string(19) “2025-08-07 00:11:43”
[“post_date_gmt”]=>
string(19) “2025-08-07 00:11:43”
[“post_content”]=>
string(6626) “

A important blind spot has emerged in Australia’s housing debate. An evaluation of stories protection in comparison with social dialogue reveals that the dialog occurring within the information media, a relaxed, ‘top-down’ dialogue of economic technique for current householders, is dangerously disconnected from the uncooked, emotional actuality unfolding on social media. 

Whereas information shops concentrate on rates of interest and mortgage recommendation, the general public dialog is a risky, ‘bottom-up’ outcry over the lived expertise of unaffordability and political frustration. This hole between the monetary narrative and the general public’s emotional actuality represents a big strategic threat for any organisation speaking on this house.

 In stark distinction, social media is having a “bottom-up” dialog, specializing in the non-public ache factors of value, blame, and political frustration. It speaks from inside the economic system. At its coronary heart, this dialog is pushed by the uncooked, private impression of an unaffordable market; customers aren’t debating summary forecasts, they’re lamenting the “exorbitant” value of “multimillion greenback postage stamp sized tenancies.” This private frustration then rapidly seeks a goal, splintering into direct political blame over particular tax insurance policies and a deep-seated criticism of the planning forms, which is seen as a basic roadblock.

The core theme is the lived expertise of exorbitant actual property costs, with customers instantly linking excessive property values to the unaffordability of on a regular basis life and enterprise. There’s a robust undercurrent of blame directed at planners, councils, and perceived bureaucratic inefficiency as a main driver of the housing scarcity. The housing dialogue is regularly and explicitly politicised, with customers tying the disaster to taxation or financial insurance policies.

Evaluation reveals a public perception that the federal government is prioritising personal builders over weak residents. The revelation of stakeholder conferences behind closed doorways to debate ‘funding fashions’ for public housing towers for instance has solidified a story of privatisation by stealth. The decision for public housing is a direct demand for the federal government to re-assert its position as a protector of residents, not a facilitator for personal revenue. Underpinning all of those options is a palpable sense of ethical urgency, pushed by the seen ‘human value’ of the disaster. However this frustration just isn’t passive. With requires avenue resistance and building unions to refuse demolition work, the message is obvious: if these concrete actions are usually not taken, the dialog will transfer from on-line boards to the streets and worksites.

Monitoring and figuring out these distinct ideological fault strains is essential. It permits a communications group to know the particular arguments and set off phrases of every camp. Any authorities announcement is not going to be obtained by a single public, however will land on this fractured group and be interpreted by way of these pre-existing lenses.

”
[“post_title”]=>
string(32) “Contained in the disconnect on housing”
[“post_excerpt”]=>
string(0) “”
[“post_status”]=>
string(7) “publish”
[“comment_status”]=>
string(4) “open”
[“ping_status”]=>
string(4) “open”
[“post_password”]=>
string(0) “”
[“post_name”]=>
string(32) “inside-the-disconnect-on-housing”
[“to_ping”]=>
string(0) “”
[“pinged”]=>
string(0) “”
[“post_modified”]=>
string(19) “2025-08-07 00:11:48”
[“post_modified_gmt”]=>
string(19) “2025-08-07 00:11:48”
[“post_content_filtered”]=>
string(0) “”
[“post_parent”]=>
int(0)
[“guid”]=>
string(32) “https://www.isentia.com/?p=41107”
[“menu_order”]=>
int(0)
[“post_type”]=>
string(4) “put up”
[“post_mime_type”]=>
string(0) “”
[“comment_count”]=>
string(1) “0”
[“filter”]=>
string(3) “uncooked”
}

object(WP_Post)#11099 (24) {
[“ID”]=>
int(40160)
[“post_author”]=>
string(2) “36”
[“post_date”]=>
string(19) “2025-05-26 02:54:37”
[“post_date_gmt”]=>
string(19) “2025-05-26 02:54:37”
[“post_content”]=>
string(3706) “

Throughout the communications panorama, groups are being requested to do extra with much less, whereas staying aligned, responsive and compliant within the face of complicated and sometimes shifting stakeholder calls for. In that atmosphere, how we observe, report and handle {our relationships} actually issues.

In too many organisations, relationship administration continues to be constructed round instruments designed for buyer gross sales. CRM techniques, constructed for structured pipelines and linear consumer journeys, have lengthy been the default for managing contact databases. They work properly for gross sales and customer support features. However for communications professionals managing journalists, political places of work, inside leaders and exterior advocates, these instruments typically fall brief.

Stakeholder relationships don’t comply with a straight line. They alter relying on context, formed by coverage shifts, public sentiment, media narratives or disaster response. A stakeholder could also be supportive one week and important the following. They typically maintain multiple position, and their affect doesn’t match neatly right into a funnel or metric.

Managing these relationships requires greater than contact administration. It requires context. The power to see not simply who you spoke to, however why, and what occurred subsequent. Communications groups want shared visibility throughout points and departments. As reporting expectations develop, that info should be searchable, safe and aligned with wider organisational targets.

What’s typically lacking is infrastructure. With out the fitting techniques, strategic relationship administration turns into fragmented or reactive. Generally it turns into invisible altogether.

That is the place Stakeholder Relationship Administration (SRM) enters the dialog. Not as a brand new acronym, however as a special mind-set about affect.

At Isentia, we’ve seen how a purpose-built SRM platform will help communications groups navigate complexity extra confidently. Ours provides a safe, centralised house to log and observe each interplay, whether or not it’s a media enquiry, a ministerial assembly, or a group replace, and hyperlink it to your group’s broader communications exercise.

The purpose isn’t to automate relationships. It’s to make them simpler to handle, measure and keep. It’s about creating inside coordination earlier than the exterior message goes out.

As a result of in at this time’s communications atmosphere, stakeholder engagement is not only a assist perform. It’s a strategic functionality.

Excited by how different groups are managing their stakeholder relationships? Get in contact at nbt@isentia.com or submit an enquiry.

”
[“post_title”]=>
string(52) “SRM vs CRM: which is correct for PR & Comms groups?”
[“post_excerpt”]=>
string(0) “”
[“post_status”]=>
string(7) “publish”
[“comment_status”]=>
string(4) “open”
[“ping_status”]=>
string(4) “open”
[“post_password”]=>
string(0) “”
[“post_name”]=>
string(44) “srm-vs-crm-which-is-right-for-pr-comms-teams”
[“to_ping”]=>
string(0) “”
[“pinged”]=>
string(0) “”
[“post_modified”]=>
string(19) “2025-08-11 04:09:29”
[“post_modified_gmt”]=>
string(19) “2025-08-11 04:09:29”
[“post_content_filtered”]=>
string(0) “”
[“post_parent”]=>
int(0)
[“guid”]=>
string(32) “https://www.isentia.com/?p=40160”
[“menu_order”]=>
int(0)
[“post_type”]=>
string(4) “put up”
[“post_mime_type”]=>
string(0) “”
[“comment_count”]=>
string(1) “0”
[“filter”]=>
string(3) “uncooked”
}