Donor and program communications: Getting the balance right
By Lisa Ritchie, Communications Strategist and Founder of EngagingDev
In earlier issues of The Strategic Asset, I’ve written about why communications is a strategic asset for international development programs and how public diplomacy differs from a program’s strategic communications objectives.
Feedback and discussions with program teams and donor colleagues on this topic have highlighted a recurring theme: the difference between program and donor communications objectives is also often misunderstood.
Donors rightly have their own strategic communications and public diplomacy objectives. Programs have their own strategic communications objectives. Each serves a different purpose. The challenge is not choosing one over the other, but getting the balance between each right.
Program strategic communications
Program communications are embedded in delivery. They explain reforms, support uptake, align partners, and help manage sensitive change processes. Success is measured by contribution to program outcomes: stakeholder alignment, behaviour change, stronger partnerships and reforms that last.
Donor strategic communications
Donors need to tell a bigger story across countries and portfolios. Their strategic communications objectives go beyond any one program, demonstrating accountability, showing results from aid investments, and aligning with foreign policy priorities. Sometimes at a national level, sometimes regional, sometimes international – these objectives are geopolitical, contextual and driven by government priorities.
Programs should understand donor objectives and contribute where possible and appropriate, but not confuse them with program goals and the role of communications in delivering against these goals.
If a program’s communications resources are absorbed entirely into supporting donor narratives, there is a risk that the program work is sidelined.
Public diplomacy
Public diplomacy adds another layer. Donors use it to engage foreign and domestic publics, build goodwill and strengthen relationships. In the development space, this usually takes the form of launches, branded events, media coverage and visibility. It is important that programs contribute to their donor’s public diplomacy efforts, but it should not come at the expense of program communications needed to drive reform, facilitate behaviour change, engage and/or support partners.
Above: A development program’s communications objectives will differ from a donor’s, but a program can contribute to a donor’s strategic communications and public diplomacy efforts.
Getting the balance right
For program communications personnel and their leaders, the task is not to compete with donor objectives but to:
Map objectives early with your donor. Know the difference between program goals and your donor’s strategic communications and public diplomacy priorities. Agree to these with your donor when you develop your communications strategy and review regularly.
Be considered with your donor contributions. Programs can support donor objectives while still protecting the space for necessary program communications. Plan products and opportunities with your donor, limiting reactive responses and unutilised content.
Resource accordingly: Ensure program and donor communications demands are adequately resourced.
Leverage overlap. A joint launch or minister-led event can advance program goals, contribute to donor strategic communications, and deliver a public diplomacy win.
The takeaway
Programs and donors both have legitimate communications objectives. Programs that recognise and respect donor priorities while still protecting their own achieve the best balance. That balance strengthens program outcomes, supports donor accountability, and builds the trust and visibility that public diplomacy depends on.