Why political parties don’t work (and need VRM)

Recently I’ve applied for a GroenLinks membership – a Dutch green left-wing political party. Why? Because they asked relevant and very to-the-point questions in parliament about the Buma/Stemra fee for embedding online content (the plan was canceled mostly by the Buma/Stemra quite soon after)

@groenlinks (their official Twitter account) twittered about their questions and I decided (together with my general idea of the party) that was a good reason to sign up. They even retweeted my decision to sign up.

But now I’m having second thoughts.

Why? Let me explain. Most of my involvement with the party is online (I follow their Twitter account and that of some of their politicians). I focus on some of their issues (free standards, green deal, better social structures), rather than the party as a whole. But it’s still a party organisation and that’s a problem.

I signed up online, because of online issues (Buma/Stemra). And what do I get? Paper. Loads of it.

I’ve gotten flyers, brochures, party programs. The lot. And I’ve never asked for any. If would want to read those I would go online and download them. But what’s more: I’m interested in specific topics: online rights, new deal, social structures – what about those?

There’s no personalization. But the paper forms do ask me for a lot of other things: help them campaign, spread flyers etctera. I feel that with signing up I seemed to have gained the status someone-we-can-use-as-free-campaigner.

I know I signed up for your organisation. But what I’m interested is in your people, your specific issues. The issues I can sympathize with. Just like with the Buma/Stemra one.

I’m an online person. I don’t like paper. Others might. I don’t. So, where is your Twitter? Facebook? Online forms? Google Docs? Live stream?

Political parties need VRM – Vendor Relationship Management. It’s not about them pushing all their party issues on to me. It’s knowing who I am and linking their issues to my person. That’s personalization – that’s the new campaigning.

I’m ditching all the papers and I’ll wait for a response that fits my way of working (I’m @mdbraber).

erwin blom

En ik vind het dan weer vreemd om een Nederlandse partij in het Engels aan te spreken / toe te spreken. Zo gaan jullie elkaar natuurlijk nooit verstaan en begrijpen ;-)

Maarten den Braber

Ik zal eens even mijn kennis van het Turks ophalen - dat schijnt tegenwoordig de taal te zijn die veel partijen spreken :-) Maareh, point taken. Da's het punt met een NL blog. Misschien toch eens ook posts in het NL doen...

Huub

I agree with you that that it is necessary to change politcal parties, but it's too easy to say political parties are dead. :)

It is quite a challenge for political parties, because they are organised around members and around existing political structures (municipal councils, provinces, national parliament, European parliament). At GroenLinks, we are trying to move forward and to make our organisation more equipped to face modern difficulties and opportunities. But it isn't easy. Also because al kinds of 'NGO"s, lik eAIAmsterdam don't want to have a political party involved, beause they are afraid it lessens their general appeal. Because you may think about politics as theme centered, a lot of people don't and just see "a party"

Maarten den Braber

The interesting story is that AiAmsterdam has seriously considered the idea of starting a political party btw :-)

Regarding your last comment, in my view that is the problem. It's like with Ford and automobiles. If he had asked people what they wanted they would have said "faster horses". If people see just "a party" should stick with notion simply because it's the general feeling - or innovate and head up the troops?

I think I can agree with your statement that it is quite a challenge (I know from trying to change religious structures with an event like Social Sunday). But I think there are clear signs that there is room and value in new political structures - take the Pirate Party in Denmark. I wouldn't argue that one-issue parties are a good solution, but being more clear about your important issues certainly helps.

Huub

BTW, I work @groenlinks :)

Huub

Hi Maarten, I understand your complaints. That is something we are working on. The problem is that we also want to inform people about what we do, that not everybody is as digital as you (and I) are and that at this moment we don't have the software available to personalise our contacts with members . But, like I said, we are working on new ways to approach (new) members, a new CRM is on his way. Please have some patience.

Maarten den Braber

Hi Huub, thanks for your comement! Good to hear that GroenLinks is listening in! :-)

Don't take my comments too much as a complaint - it's something else. It's not about whether your have a good functioning CRM. t's about why I should support a political *party* and what it does for me. I'm interested in issues, people, connections.

Political parties are dead - I don't have anything specific with Groenlinks as a *party*. But I want to support (some of) their causes. If you run a campaign for digital rights I'll support it - just as I would with probably any other party that would run such a campaign.

Take the AiAmsterdam campagin. If that would have been organised by GroenLinks that would have meant great Whuffie for you guys - more than all the nice flyers etctera that I get now. It's more about the issues than the structure. Being member of a political party is just a "headfake" - it's not what it's really about.

I'm interested in seeing what will happen to the political parties if they start to graps that.