Four Ways to Structure Public Affairs—and When Each Works Best

How should public affairs teams be positioned to be effective? What are the criteria for choosing the right approach? What capabilities are needed for success? I’ve been reflecting on these questions recently after considering the teams I’ve worked in and discussions I’ve had with public affairs leaders.

The quick answer is that there’s no one-size-fits-all solution. Different approaches work best in different contexts, depending on strategic objectives, resources, organisational capabilities, and factors like internal politics, changing business needs, and external pressures.

Despite this, I believe there are broad approaches that can work in specific circumstances. I’ve identified four distinct ways to organise and position public affairs teams. Each has its own strengths and challenges, and choosing the right one requires thoughtful evaluation.

Misalignment between a public affairs team’s structure, positioning, and an organisation’s strategy can cause significant challenges. Teams positioned too far from decision-makers may struggle to influence key stakeholders, while overly complex reporting lines can dilute focus and make it difficult to measure impact. Siloed teams risk losing their ability to connect with the wider organisation, reducing their overall effectiveness.

The consequences of misalignment include missed opportunities to shape policy, disengaged team members, and failed strategies. Organisations must regularly assess whether their public affairs function is positioned to adapt to evolving business and stakeholder needs. This should be an open and engaging process, partly built on transparent measures and key performance indicators (KPIs) developed collaboratively.

Public affairs thrives in organisations with flatter hierarchies, where roles and responsibilities are clearly defined. Its collaborative nature—requiring alignment across departments and functions—makes integration into the broader corporate framework essential. When done right, clear accountability and alignment can help public affairs teams deliver real value.

Choosing the Right Model for Public Affairs

Getting the most out of a public affairs function depends on how well its structure and positioning align with an organisation’s strategic goals, available resources, and adaptability. Different models offer unique advantages and challenges, making it essential to select one that fits the organisation's needs.

Whether your organisation operates globally, faces diverse regulatory environments, or aims to integrate public affairs into broader corporate initiatives, the right model can enhance collaboration, drive impact, and ensure your efforts are aligned with the organisation’s priorities.

I’ve outlined four distinct models, each suited to specific contexts, with actionable steps to make them effective. While none of these models is perfect, I hope they encourage you to reflect on how best to structure and position your public affairs team.

Criteria for Selecting the Right Model

Before deciding on a model, evaluate the following criteria:

1. Strategic Fit:?Does the model support the organisation’s overall strategy and goals, such as influencing global policy or tailoring local solutions?
2. Policy, Political, and Regulatory Environments:?Are your operations in stable environments or diverse regions requiring local flexibility?
3. Resources, Capabilities, and Agility:?Do you have the leadership, adaptability, technology, and expertise to implement the model effectively?
4. Operational Complexity:?Can the organisation manage governance structures, reporting lines, and cross-functional collaboration if required?
5. Stakeholder Needs:?Does the model enable effective engagement with internal and external stakeholders?

These criteria help align the model with organisational priorities, avoiding pitfalls like misalignment, inefficiencies, or missed opportunities.

Four Models for Structuring Public Affairs

1. Centralised Model Scenario:?A multinational corporation seeks a unified public affairs strategy to align messaging across markets with minimal regulatory variation. For example, a company addressing global sustainability goals needs consistent advocacy while leveraging centralised resources.

• Advantages:?Ensures efficiency, consistency, and easier alignment on global priorities.
• Challenges:?Risks being slow to respond to local issues and alienating regional teams.
• Actionable Advice:?Develop clear global policies and invest in centralised communication tools. Equip the team with leaders skilled in global strategy and policy. Ensure regular touchpoints to gather insights from local teams and maintain relevance.

2. Locally Empowered Network Model Scenario:?A company operating in diverse regulatory landscapes needs flexibility to respond to local political dynamics. For instance, a pharmaceutical company engaging with policymakers across Europe might benefit from locally tailored strategies.

• Advantages:?Faster decision-making and strategies tailored to local needs.
• Challenges:?Potential for inconsistent messaging and higher resource demands.
• Actionable Advice:?Empower regional teams with decision-making authority and provide resources for local strategy execution. Build strong coordination mechanisms and assign regional leaders with deep local expertise and networks.

3. Hybrid Model Scenario:?An organisation balancing global objectives and local needs, such as an energy company navigating international regulations while addressing region-specific climate policies.

• Advantages:?Combines global consistency with regional flexibility, fostering best practice sharing.
• Challenges:?Requires robust coordination and governance, risking inefficiencies if not managed well.
• Actionable Advice:?Appoint a global head with regional leads to maintain alignment. Establish knowledge hubs for collaboration and set metrics to evaluate both global and regional outcomes.

4. Matrix Structure Scenario:?A company embedding public affairs into broader initiatives, such as sustainability or corporate social responsibility. For example, a retailer integrating public affairs with its ESG strategy to advocate for supply chain transparency.

• Advantages:?Encourages cross-functional collaboration and alignment with corporate strategies.
• Challenges:?Risks role ambiguity and conflicts in decision-making.
• Actionable Advice:?Use project-based teams and dual reporting lines to connect public affairs with other functions. Foster a culture of agility and collaboration, supported by skilled multidisciplinary leaders and robust governance structures.

Choosing the right structure for your public affairs function isn’t just a theoretical exercise—it’s a critical step to ensuring your public affairs team can deliver real impact.

I’d love to hear your thoughts: How is your public affairs function structured? Have you faced challenges with its positioning or alignment? Perhaps you’ve discovered unique approaches that have worked for your organisation.

#PublicAffairs #PublicAffairsWorkflow #StrategicAlignment