Should we split the solution into the molecular level functionality on the one hand and the perceptually attainable level on the surface? Should our language be precise or accessible? 

People on the 'outside' look at solutions offered by governments, multilaterals and academics and consider them disconnected from reality. Inversely, the great thinkers look at the base and sees a muddle of sheep that should just be led towards the light at the end of the tunnel regardless of their degree of comprehension.

Or should there be a median? Should we look for ideas and speak a language of change that satisfies the model and the comprehension of said model?

I vote clearly in favor of the former. I do not want a neurosurgeon operating at median level. I also don't want a minister of finance coming out with an economic recovery plan that speaks to the masses but not to the root cause. I want solutions that are precise, thought through, sustainable and attainable. I want solutions that are debated and peer reviewed at the highest level. If radiation therapy is to take out a cancerous tumor, I don't want it to miss its mark, not even by a millimeter.

The masses? Understanding? Clarity? That's the job of the politician, the communicator, the public relations people. It's also the job of the academic or the bureaucrat. Nothing stops them from learning a language of simplicity to explain complex underpinnings. It may also be the job of those of us who are both communicators and opinion leaders to gently 'force' the solution upon others. Do not attack me yet. I'm not talking about dictatorial directives. I'm just implying that when there is proof that the system is right, the system must prevail. Who judges this? Clearly, peers do.

More abstruseness to come! Or not.

Some of those corners are visible. They are right there at the entrance of the kitchen. Granted, I only leave the hardest grime in there and so it's hardly noticeable but I leave it there nonetheless. But then there are the really really dirty, more hidden corners. I know they're dirty, but I also know that no one will see them. And truth be told, after hundreds of sweeps, I start to even forget that they are there. And my point is? 

Somalia, Haiti, DRC, Siberia… all these are forgotten corners of our global village. We just cannot seem to remember they are there. Sure, we occasionally hear about them in policy meetings, we read an oped, we might even see a report on an international television network and some social network group might send out an invite… but the truth is that we continue to 'forget'.

Why is that? Is it because we simply have too many dirty corners to clean? You would think that with modern vacuum cleaners, super brooms and other cleaning paraphernalia we could clean just about any grime no matter how hardened or hidden.

Here's my theory. The easiest way to keep a corner clean is to clean it regularly, don't neglect it. What we have done is let our global problems get out of hand. We've let the grime accumulate and now it's either too tough to clean or hidden enough to forget. Oh, and here's a thought. What if we reduce the source of the dust in the first place? It's called the 'cause' of the problem, if you were wondering. That means addressing the root causes before they even get to the corner. I am constantly amazed by the expenditures made after the fact to resolve the problem that would have cost a quarter of the amount in anticipation. After all, how many readers of this blog do not have house or car insurance? If you have a car without insurance, please comment on this blog and tell us how you manage that. I think it's actually illegal in all countries, isn't it? Or if you don't like the insurance paradigm, how about the savings paradigm? Or how about the eating right paradigm or keeping fit? We do know how to prevent. We do know how to address root causes. We're just not doing it enough.

I think we are, with caveats. I think that we are based on the resources we allocate, the time we take and the language we use. Let me expand.

Public interest organizations cannot compete with private sector messages, general news and entertainment with meager resources. Until further notice, the mass media are under a money-driven spell. Similarly, when targeting policy makers, resources also matter; both human and financial resources. You cannot undercapitalize a communications activity and expect it to deliver full impact. It takes time and money to produce the level of impact that most organizations hope for. Sure, an occasional shortcut works. Sometimes the cheapest campaign makes it big. But if you do the math, we have, you will quickly realize that without sufficient support, a campaign fizzles, often right from the starting blocks.

Time is also a building block of campaign success. Again, exceptions do happen, but it is unrealistic to start campaign preparations a 'few weeks' before. We are asked to do this all the time. And yes, we do pull it off. But do we? We deliver the work, but there is always that after taste of: "will it matter?" Will our work make the difference or did we just do our job? Creativity, market intelligence, target testing and actual production requires time to work. Just look at the private sector. Believe me, most advertising campaigns take six months to a year to plan and produce. We often turn out a strategy and materials in under six weeks. 

Lastly, I'd like to talk about language. The type of language we use — the tone — matters. Yes, we need policy driven statements, but not for the impact portion of the effort. We need that language for the convincing or substantiating part, but not for the first wave of dissemination. The language needs to be more aggressive. We cannot move climate change, biodiversity, human rights, conflict resolution and dozens of other issues forward using disculpatory language. Our tone needs to be less forgiving of those who ignore data-driven fundamentals.

In short, I'm writing this today because I want us all to have more impact. I want us to be better, but I also want our clients and partners to take this part of their mission more seriously. Call me old fashioned, but I just don't think it's worth doing something if you know you will probably not succeed especially if there are ways of succeeding.

Do I have solutions? Sure I do. I have some that I keep telling our clients when my staff bring me out of the dungeon and I'm saving some strong language for my upcoming book. Stay tuned.