07 Mar Organizing in a Time of Approaching Pandemic: Campaigns and Contingency Planning Amid the Effects and Fear of Coronavirus

To view or print in PDF format click here

By Larry Kleinman, CAPACES Leadership Institute, Woodburn, Oregon; March 7, 2020  

Organizing in a Time of Approaching Pandemic:  Campaigns and Contingency Planning Amid the Effects and Fear of Coronavirus  

Coronavirus is on everyone’s mind. It’s emerging as a presence in more states every day. The  media is flush with reports of quarantines, travel restrictions, public event cancellations and  predictions of economic recession. How seriously should be we take the threat? Should our  organizations change plans or tactics? Should we make contingency plans?  

Coronavirus could become a full-blown pandemic with massive impacts and disruptions. It  could also taper off and/or be well-controlled by vaccination and quick isolation of the most  directly affected.  

As of this writing—first days of March—it’s early days in the arc of developments. There is  ample evidence that institutions—in government, health care, education, and financial markets— are deeply concerned and anticipating major impact. Major conferences have been cancelled.  Trump has downplayed the threat and his Administration has responded anemically. The stock  markets dropped nearly 15% the last week of February, then partially recovered, then attempted  to rally further (when the Federal Reserve cut interest rates .5%), but immediately reversed  course and lost ground again. The only certainty seems to be uncertainty and volatility.  

When and how to plan  

The planning challenge is complex and multi-faceted. It involves the short, medium and long term and lots of “what ifs.” In the end, there’s much guess work and balancing. But there’s also  important value in reviewing assumptions, identifying alternatives and setting and sharing out  deadlines for decision (e.g., to change/cancel a planned activity).  

Here are key themes and questions that can guide our thinking:  

 How to think about “risk” generally  

o A quest for precise calculation will likely be futile.  

o Instead, consider estimating whether risk is “low”, “medium” or “high”.  o As much as practical, visualize how the risk would manifest. For example, a  “low” risk might signify that a drop-off in participation is estimated to be limited. o At this stage, usefully estimating risks more than a month away is probably too  speculative. Instead, set a date for a check-in with key decision-makers. 

 Is a planned action or gathering still viable and worthwhile?  

o Do most participants feel comfortable gathering (and traveling)?  

o If an action’s success depends on media attention, is the target media preoccupied  with coronavirus reporting (e.g., local quarantines, school or business closures,  travel restrictions, etc.)?  

o If public officials are key participants, are they preoccupied with health and  public message response? 

By Larry Kleinman, CAPACES Leadership Institute, Woodburn, Oregon; March 7, 2020  

o Would the action (still) have worthwhile impact if conducted virtually or if  postponed?  

o If there is planning lead time (e.g., the activity is weeks or months away), what is  the key deadline for deciding whether to proceed? Travel costs/commitments  and staff time on event stand-up are major elements of this calculation.  

o In case of postponement or cancellation, is there a message fashioned so as not to  add alarm?  

o Is there a “rapid response” plan in case the action is preempted or disrupted last  minute?  

 Must-do activities: Census and voting  

o For elections:  

 In-person contact can be reduced by encouraging voters to request  

absentee ballots rather than planning to vote in-person. This could  

require a concerted outreach campaign (though some states, like Oregon,  are already entirely “vote-by-mail”.)  

 Early voting could feel safer than Election Day voting in that voters  

would likely encounter smaller crowds and shorter waits  

 Though it might sound outlandish, imagine canvassing that includes  

handing out “branded” hand sanitizer mini-dispensers (and using them in  each interaction.  

o For the Census. On-line participation is already being widely promoted.  Preserving public and personal health is a newly-relevant message to encourage  that mode, eliminating the need for a Census worker to pay a personal visit.  

o Stress the “Must Do’s” message. We must reinforce the notion that it’s about  “how”, not “if” one will participate. The stakes are simply too high to think or  act otherwise.  

 The economy and its impacts on use of resources  

o Re-consider organizational expenditures. If the crisis becomes acute or long lasting, the economy is more likely to enter a recession. This would likely  accelerate a dynamic of pull-back in spending and possibly in foundation funding  (due to losses in investments). It’s another consideration in whether to proceed  with previously planned activities. If not “Must-Do”, better, perhaps, to re-tool  (see below) or postpone in order to conserve resources. 

o Monitor economic effects in the community.  

 In other countries and limitedly in the U.S., we’ve already seen lay-offs  and furloughs, closures, runs on basic supplies, and higher/unplanned  

medical costs.  

 We’ll most likely see scams, price gouging, racially-based targeting of  workers and the like.  

 A contingency plan for responding, including requests/demands, such as  paid leave, seems important.

By Larry Kleinman, CAPACES Leadership Institute, Woodburn, Oregon; March 7, 2020  

 What are leading indicators? Seattle has the misfortune of being in the  vanguard of most-affected localities. For the rest of us, it serves as a  

“preview” of concentrated impact and response. Other salient indicators  

would be a possible pull back in Spring Break travel and possible  

cancellations of commencement and graduation gatherings. Either or  

both could quickly have a cascading effect. 

 Activities and messages that “meet the moment” and affirm our communities o Re-voice our agenda to speak to what’s on folks’ minds. Re-frame “support  immigrant rights” or “don’t discriminate/scapegoat immigrants” as “All of us are  safer when all of us are involved and protected.”  

o “Caring for those doing the ‘caring’”. Health care workers—including home  care—are on the front lines, as are their unions, local health officials, first  responders, teachers, mayors, and more. We should lift up messages of  

appreciation, cooperation, validation (of their requests and directives), and stories  of successes.  

o “Health safety for everyone” activities. If our previously planned activities need  to be shelved or down-scaled—and even if not, we can create alternative paths  for continued community engagement under this banner. Such activities would  also serve as vehicles for keeping our high-priority messages visible and in  circulation (e.g., voting, Census participation).  

o Advocating big structural change becomes a heavier lift. Another casualty this  year may be the momentum generated by presidential candidates Bernie Sanders  and Elizabeth Warren for major re-structure of the economic and health care  systems. Fear of pandemic may sharply decrease receptivity to embracing these  causes as poorly timed.  

In summary, there are already enough indications that Coronavirus and the responses to it could  rival the 9/11 attacks or the 2008 financial crisis. Though the politics of our era have heaped  boundless stress and challenge on us, our defense of self, of organization and of community calls  upon us to pause and make a plan.  

As we say at the CAPACES Leadership Institute, Asi Se Puede—Thusly “We Can”. 

Download (DOCX, 23KB)