Blog courtesy of Bridge Global Strategies

Last week The New York Times published an in-depth expose on the recent lobbying activities of two healthcare companies, DaVita Healthcare Partners and Fresenius, to influence the government’s reimbursement policy for dialysis treatment. The article provides a scathing portrayal of the companies’ coalition building efforts, aimed at galvanizing patients, advocacy groups, healthcare providers and other influencers to thwart planned cuts in Medicare’s reimbursement rate for dialysis.

Regardless of where one stands regarding the ethical questions presented in the story, the two companies’ overwhelming success in generating support for their cause provides some valuable lessons for other businesses undertaking public affairs initiatives.

Here are a few strategies that DaVita and Fresenius have leveraged to have their collective voices heard:

Partnering with Nonprofit Advocacy Groups: Companies seeking to influence healthcare policy know that their strongest non-political allies are those who are directly impacted by policy decision: patients and healthcare providers. The previously mentioned New York Times article suggests that DaVita and Fresenius are orchestrating their public policy campaigns in coordination with some of the most prominent patient advocacy and physician groups in the kidney dialysis space. The article doesn’t identify the groups by name, but one would assume that the coalition would include organizations that DaVita and Fresenius have partnered with in the past, such as Kidney Care Partners, the National Kidney Foundation, the American Kidney Fund, Dialysis Patient Citizens (founded by DaVita) and Renal Physicians Association—all of these groups have been very vocal in the policy debate and have jointly participated in a rally on Capitol Hill to meet policy makers. They were joined by former NBA star Alonzo Mourning, who has also worked on past awareness-building initiatives with DaVita, which brings us to the next point.

Putting a Famous Face on the Cause: Alonzo Mourning’s indelible legacy on the basketball court has been matched more recently by his reputation as a champion for improving treatment of kidney disease—he had been diagnosed with kidney disease in 2000 and received a successful kidney transplant in 2003. During his battle with the condition, he launched his own nonprofit group for kidney disease called Zo’s Fund for Life, and he has worked with a number of other organizations over the years to drive awareness. If any one person in America has the potential to galvanize the masses around the touchy issue of dialysis funding, it is him.

Building Media Exposure: DaVita and Fresenius have executed exemplary media relations programs that have advanced their positions in the dialysis funding debate. There has been a flood of news articles interviewing dialysis patients and healthcare professionals lamenting the proposed cuts. In one poignant example, an article in the Idaho Statesman featured comments from a dialysis patient shortly before his death about his anxiety over how the cuts could affect his care; it also included comments from a nurse at the dialysis clinic where the patient was treated, which is owned by Fresenius. Similar stories appeared in the Denver Post, The Gainesville Sun, FOX 6 (Birmingham, AL), Zanesville Times Recorder and numerous other outlets. On top of that, Op-Ed articles written by dialysis clinic employees and patients have appeared in dozens of outlets around the country, seeking to spur more opposition to the cuts.

Campaigning on Social Media: Any organization seeking to shape public policy in 2013 knows that the news media is no longer the sole magistrate in the “court of public opinion.” Social media channels are also powerful tools that enable companies to frame issues and influence opinions. While Fresenius doesn’t appear to be seriously leveraging these tools, DaVita has launched an all-out social media blitz on Facebook, Twitter and Instagram. The company has sparked patient engagement through a campaign called “Operation stopESRDcuts.” The campaign website provides patients with a sign that reads, “To Me, Access To Dialysis Care Means…” The patient completes the phrase, then snaps a photo of themselves holding the sign and posts it to Instagram for the world to see. The company has promoted this campaign across all of its social media sites and its corporate website, and it seems like quite a few patients have participated.

It’s still too early to gauge the success of DaVita and Fresenius in their public affairs efforts, as there won’t be a final ruling on the planned cuts until Nov. 1. There is one strong indicator, however, that the winds are blowing in their favor: more than 200 members of the House of Representatives have signed a letter to the nation’s top Medicare official, expressing concern over the cuts. According to the New York Times article, half of those representatives had initially voted in favor of the planned cuts.

Regardless of the final outcome, the strategies that these companies are using to frame the debate provide a textbook example of an integrated public affairs campaign that leverages diverse channels to engage multiple stakeholders—patients, providers and political leaders. It’ll certainly be intriguing to see how this plays out in the coming months.

What do you think is the most effective strategy to get your voice heard? Does one strategy stand above the rest? Tell us what you think in the comments section below.

If you’re in healthcare, insurance, technology or other professional services industries, and need help with a public relations or marketing campaign, contact Scott Public Relations.

Like what you’ve read? Follow Scott Public Relations on Facebook , Twitter, Pinterest, LinkedIn and Google+. For convenient blog updates, sign up for the Einsight RSS feed!