Repositioning: the key to building community support - for recreation programs

The single most important task in securing additional resources for park and recreation services is to develop and nurture a broader constituency. In many communities, it is clear that resources will only be forthcoming when support for the field goes beyond existing users, visitors or participants who directly benefit from the services delivered. These groups have been the dominant focus of agencies' efforts in recent years, but while servicing them is a central element of the mission, in many jurisdictions they have proved to be too narrow a constituency for sustaining or securing additional public resources.

User satisfaction, while necessary, is not an adequate indicator of the success of park and recreation agencies. Most taxpayers are not frequent users of our services and, therefore, many of them have difficulty in understanding why these services should be supported. The prevailing sentiment is often, "If only some segments of our community use them, then why should the rest of us have to pay for them?" Additional support is dependent upon building awareness not only of the "on-site" benefits that accrue to users, but also of the "off-site" benefits that accrue to non-users in communities.

The key to building this wider community support is a concept called "positioning." Positioning refers to the place that parks and recreation occupies in the minds of elected officials and the general public, relative to their perception of other services that are the field's competitors for public tax dollars (and sometimes for foundation and other private source funding). The term "position" differs from the term "image" in that it implies a frame of reference; that is, perceptions of the field are compared to those of other public services in which elected officials may invest. When seeking additional resources, the position of a park and recreation agency in stakeholders' minds is likely to be more important than the reality of what they do in the community.

It has been noted that the provision of park and recreation opportunities for its own sake still lacks political clout. Park and recreation services have to be shown to solve community problems before politicians see them as being worthy of funding, especially if funding is to be directed from another city function or new money is to be allocated. The present position of park and recreation services that has existed in the minds of stakeholders for several decades is that they are relatively discretionary, nonessential services; they are nice to have if they can be afforded after the important, essential services have been funded. Driver and Bruns, in a recent paper, observe:

Elected officials in the United States and Canada tend to hold the erroneous belief that most to all of the benefits of leisure accrue to the individuals who use leisure services and that there are few to any spin-off benefits from this use to society in general. This contrasts with their views about the social merits of other social services (e.g., education, health services, police and fire protection, transportation) for which these elected officials acknowledge large benefits to society beyond those that accrue to the direct users of those services. Therefore, these officials have improperly adopted for leisure services the principle of public finance which dictates that limited public funds should be allocated to a social service which does not promote the general welfare.

The sine qua non for a profession is that it performs a necessary service for the public at large. Thus, the key to new vitality and securing additional resources for park and recreation services is to reposition them, so they are perceived as contributing to alleviating problems that constitute the prevailing political concerns of policy makers who are responsible for allocating tax funds. Only when they are so repositioned will park and recreation services be perceived positively as part of the solution to a jurisdiction's problems, rather than without impact or as a drain on its tax resources.

There is an adage that holds that people support only those programs and services that touch them directly or from which they can see some benefits. Repositioning is an attempt to respond to this tendency. However, it is a difficult task, because it involves shifting a widely held, long-established attitude toward the field. Hence, it is likely to take many years of effort.

The Set of Repositioning Strategies

There are three strategies agencies can pursue to achieve this repositioning. These strategies are not mutually exclusive; instead, all three should be embraced simultaneously. The first strategy is real repositioning, in which an agency changes what it does. This may involve not only changing its program offerings, but also changing the types of alliances and partnerships the agency forms and the community forums in which it becomes involved. Second, is competitive repositioning, which means altering stakeholders' beliefs about what an agency's competitors do.

Psychological repositioning is the third strategy. This means altering stakeholders' beliefs about what an agency currently does. It has been suggested that parks and recreation has a labeling problem. Agencies are labeled based on the means used -- recreation -- rather than, on the ends they aspire to achieve -- contributing to alleviation of economic and social problems. Over the past two decades, emphasis was on providing the means, while the ends were forgotten. Psychological repositioning involves bringing outcomes to the forefront so that when the words recreation and parks are mentioned, people immediately think of them as wanted outcomes or benefits. This is effectively illustrated in the area of tourism, since public expenditures made on promoting tourism or developing new tourism opportunities are associated in people's minds with economic development, a highly desirable outcome.

It should be emphasized that providing a program and participating in it do not automatically lead to the desired outcomes. A prerequisite for psychological repositioning is that the services must be carefully designed and structured so they actually deliver the desired outcomes. If this prerequisite is being met, then implementing psychological repositioning will not require adjustments to existing service delivery. The task is to demonstrate and inform stakeholders of the benefits a community derives from these services. To do this, managers have to measure and then communicate the success of their existing programs in alleviating the problems that are of concern in a jurisdiction. Elected officials are likely to require convincing indicators of a pro gram's success before investing tax dollars in its continuation or expansion.

In 1991, Dr. Bev Driver introduced the notion of Benefits Based Management (BBM) to the field. It represented the managerial application of Dr. Driver's two decades of pioneering work in identifying and measuring the psychological outcomes resulting from individuals engaging in outdoor recreation activities. BBM has been embraced and advocated by the National Recreation and Park Association, which is committed to its dissemination through its "Benefits Are Endless....[TM]" campaign. BBM directs that designing a service should start by focusing on outcomes. Real repositioning occurs by structuring services in a way that will deliver those outcomes, and psychological repositioning occurs through communicating in outcome terms instead of in terms of the types and numbers of park and recreation services and opportunities

provided per se. Together these strategies constitute the essence of Benefits Based Management.

Align with Community Issues

A foundation of strong and widespread support will only be built if park and recreation agencies contribute to the achievement of central political and community goals. The most prominent political problems faced by decision makers will vary across jurisdictions. However, in almost every community, they are likely to include economic development and alleviation of social problems.

Economic development is viewed as a means of enlarging the tax base, which then provides more tax resources that governments can use either to improve the community's infrastructure, facilities and services or to reduce the level of taxes paid by existing residents. It is also seen as a source of jobs and income that enables residents to improve their quality of life. Park and recreation agencies can reposition by demonstrating their central role in economic development in six ways: attracting tourists, attracting businesses, attracting retirees, enhancing real estate values, expanding retail sales of equipment, and stimulating urban rejuvenation. In the context of social problems, an agency's repositioning may involve it focusing on such issues as alleviating youth crime, unemployment, nonchallenging employment, environmental stress, or lowering the cost of health care.

The selection of which of these issues an agency elects to focus upon will depend on the community's priorities and the agency's personnel and facility resources. A cardinal rule is that an agency should reposition by aligning with only one or two of these community issues. Establishing a position in residents' minds requires prolonged focus. Without a concentration of resources to support the selected repositioning strategy, it will not succeed. It may be tempting to align with multiple issues, but such efforts are unlikely to be successful. The probable outcome of diffusing resources in this way is that a fuzzy, confused position will emerge -- similar to that which currently exists.

For the purpose of illustrating how real, competitive and psychological repositioning strategies may be influenced, two issues have been selected for discussion: youth crime and attracting new businesses to a community. The youth crime context is developed in more detail, because it is the issue upon which the authors are currently focusing. The business relocation issue is included to illustrate that these repositioning strategies are generalizable to all of the other issues with which an agency may elect to align.

Respositioning by Addressing Youth Crime

There is a long tradition of using park and recreation programs to alleviate youth crime. Indeed, much public recreation provision at the turn of the twentieth century was stimulated by a desire to alleviate delinquent behavior. In 1910, the chief planner for the city of Chicago observed, "Police records show an extraordinary decrease of youthful crimes in the neighborhood of playground parks." In the mid-1990s, there are almost 1.6 million Americans incarcerated, which is three times more than in 1980. This is the highest per capita rate in the world by far, and is 10 times the rate of incarceration in Western Europe and Japan. The weekly net increase in those going to prison is 1,250 -- a substantial proportion of this population is young people. The cost to taxpayers for this increased reliance on incarceration is enormous. Spending on prisons exceeds $25 billion a year and is rising faster than all other state expenditures.

If this is a significant issue in a community, then a park and recreation agency may engage in real repositioning by redirecting some of its resources to develop a high-profile, substantive initiative of new or revamped services for at-risk youth. Services would be carefully designed and structured to provide positive alternatives for youth, who might otherwise engage in criminal activity. Critical elements in the structuring are likely to be social support from adult staff, leadership opportunities for youth, the opportunity to give intensive and individualized attention to participants, facilitating a sense of belonging to a group, youth input and decision making in programs, the provision of challenging and interesting activities, and opportunities for community service.

Another approach to real positioning is to identify agencies and organizations in the community that are currently perceived as being effective contributors to resolving a selected issue, and to align the park and recreation agency more closely with them. Thus, in the at-risk youth context, the effective prevention work of the Boys and Girls Clubs is widely acknowledged by elected officials at both local and national levels. By cooperating and aligning closely with this organization, park and recreation agencies may acquire some of these positive perceptions by association and use them to enhance their own position in decision makers' minds.

Real positioning is the foundation upon which all other actions rest. An agency must not try to be something it is not. If it aligns with an issue, then an agency must structure its services and engage in cooperative partnerships that are compatible with its alignment promises.

Competitive repositioning means altering stakeholders' beliefs about what an agency's competitors do. In the context of at-risk youth, an agency's primary competitor for public funds is most frequently the police department. A competitive repositioning strategy could involve subtly and sensitively pointing out the fallacies inherent in the public and conventional political perception that more vigorous law enforcement, more police, and more prisons are the best solutions to the juvenile crime problem.

Over the past 10 years, the clearance rates reported annually by law enforcement agencies for major offenses by juveniles under 18 years of age have been remarkably stable at 20-21 percent. An offense is cleared or solved when at least one person is arrested and charged with its commission. The major crimes to which these statistics relate are murder and non-negligent manslaughter, forcible rape, robbery, aggravated assault, burglary, larceny-theft, motor vehicle theft, and arson.

The 20-21 percent clearance rate overestimates the proportion of crimes cleared, because the Federal Bureau of Investigation indicates that many major crimes are not reported to the police. The level of underreporting includes 50 percent of all violent crimes, 30 percent of personal thefts, 41 percent of household crimes, and 75 percent of motor vehicle thefts. For the purposes of this discussion, it has been assumed that 14 percent of youth crimes are solved, rather than 20-21 percent. Of these, approximately one-third are acquitted or dismissed. Of the nine-10 percent who are convicted, approximately one-half receive sentences that do not involve incarceration.

Obviously, incarceration is an essential component in alleviating juvenile crime. However, if only five percent of those committing crimes are incarcerated, while 95 percent remain at large and available to engage in more crime, then a strategy focused predominantly on incarceration cannot solve the problem. Prevention efforts based on youth-development principles are also far less costly. If this is pointed out and repeatedly reiterated to stakeholders, especially elected officials, then there is likely to be a realization that for major progress to be made, resources have to be allocated to prevention programs that target the overwhelming majority who are not arrested and incarcerated. Further, it should be emphasized the evidence clearly indicates that early and consistent prevention efforts have the best chance of diminishing the need for more costly measures later on.

Competitive repositioning may be reinforced by citing findings that show citizen support for prevention programs. For example, the data in Table 1 indicate far more support for investing funds in youth prevention programs than for using these resources to put an additional 100,000 police officers on the streets.

Table 1. Which Proposal would be Most Effective
in Predicting Crime in this Country?

Adding 100,000 more police officers nationwide                  13%
More money for drug treatment programs for criminals             6%
Mandatory life sentences for three-time violent felons          22%
Expanding the death penalty for more crimes                     17%
Trying 13 and 14 year olds accused of serious crimes as adults   9%
Money for more state prisons                                     3%
Banning some types of assault weapons                            7%
More money for youth-recreation and job-training programs       21%

Table 2. Change in the Number of Serious Gang-Related Offenses
Committed in Forth Worth, Texas, Between 1994 and 1996

Category                      1994    1996    % of Change
Capital Murder/Murder           37       7      (81.09)%
Aggravated Sexual Assault        3       5         66.6%
Robbery/Aggravated Robbery     116      91      (21.56)%
Criminal Attempted Murder/     421     294      (30.17)%
Aggravated Assault
Burglary                        43      42       (2.33)%
Theft                           35      37         5.71%
Auto Theft                      25      24       (0.40)%
TOTALS                         680     500      (26.48)%

COPYRIGHT 1997 National Recreation and Park Association
COPYRIGHT 2004 Gale Group