Three strategic approaches

There is no single right way to do advocacy. The approach you choose depends on your context: who you need to influence, whether you have access to them, and how much resistance you expect.

• Inside strategy. You work within existing structures: meetings with officials, participation in working groups, formal submissions to consultations, lobbying decision-makers directly. This works when you have access to the people who make decisions and when the political environment is open to dialogue. 
• Outside strategy. You build pressure from the public side: media coverage, social media campaigns, petitions, public events, coalition statements. This works when decision-makers are not listening, when you need to create political will, or when your issue needs public visibility before it can be taken seriously. 

Hybrid strategy. You combine both. You lobby in private while building public pressure. You attend working groups while running a media campaign. This is the approach we suggest for most RESM advocacy contexts, because the tensions the research has revealed are structural: you typically need both access and visible pressure to shift them.

When to use each approach

Factor	Inside	Outside	Hybrid
You have direct access to decision-makers	Strong fit	Not needed yet	Use both
Decision-makers are unresponsive	Unlikely to work alone	Strong fit	Use outside to create leverage for inside
Your issue is unknown to the public	Inside may be enough	Needed for awareness	Start outside, then move inside
You face active opposition	Risky alone	Can build counter-pressure	Essential
You have strong data (RESM evidence)	Use in direct briefs	Use in media and public materials	Use everywhere
Your organisation is small, resources limited	Lower cost, high trust needed	Can amplify voice beyond size	Pick carefully, sequence rather than parallel

Tactics by domain

Think of these as a menu, not a checklist. Pick the tactics that fit your strategy, your resources, and your context. You do not need to do everything. You need to do the right things consistently.

How would different organisations choose?

An organisation (the Boldklubben Skjold case) that wants better solidarity from its federation would likely start with an inside strategy: using its dual affiliation to raise the issue in federation meetings, backed by the 13% vs 2% data. If the federation does not respond, it would add outside pressure through media coverage of the solidarity gap.

An organisation (the NCAA Nice case) building health partnerships would use a hybrid approach from the start: inside work with the regional health agency (direct meetings, joint proposals) combined with public programmes that demonstrate impact and attract media attention.

An organisation (the Czech Sokol case) seeking municipal recognition would likely begin outside: building visibility through community events and media coverage of its 160-year track record and 160,000 members. Once the political environment is receptive, it would shift to inside tactics: formal proposals for inclusion in the municipal sport plan

Handbook reference: Note your strategic approach in Section C2 of your handbook, and your priority tactics in Section C3.