Skip to main content
All Services
05

Narrative Strategy

Deciding which fact, consequence or human story should lead, and who can make the stakes real. Then building an argument grounded in expertise, firsthand experience and community trust that withstands scrutiny and stays relevant as circumstances change.

Start a Conversation
A woman in a beaded floral vest speaks to a camera at a rally, beside a sign reading "Protect the Arctic Refuge"

Trusted by

  • American Rivers
  • Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC)
  • Earthjustice
  • National Wildlife Federation
  • E2 Environmental Entrepreneurs
  • National Geographic
  • League of Conservation Voters
  • Union of Concerned Scientists
  • American Federation of Government Employees (AFGE)
  • Physicians for Social Responsibility
  • The Wilderness Society
  • Defenders of Wildlife
  • Environment America
  • UNITED SIKHS
  • Center for Science in the Public Interest
  • Environmental Integrity Project
  • Population Connection
  • Taxpayers for Common Sense
  • American Lung Association
  • Hip Hop Caucus
  • Atlanta Housing
  • Town of Lee, Massachusetts
01

What narrative strategy is for

Facts do not enter public debate on a blank page. They arrive inside an existing story about what the problem is, who is responsible, who is credible and what should happen next. An organization can have strong evidence and still lose the public argument if the evidence is always being interpreted through somebody else's assumptions.

Narrative strategy is the discipline of deciding which supported truth should lead, which audience matters first, which messenger has standing with that audience, and what evidence should follow. It is most useful when an organization has been communicating competently for years but the issue is still being understood in a way that obscures the consequence, the responsibility or the decision in front of people.

This is not inventing a better story than the facts allow. The work has to survive reporting, opposition research, expert review and the second question. If the evidence is mixed, the frame has to accommodate that. If a claim cannot be supported, it cannot carry the narrative.

Narrative strategy does not change the facts. It changes which supported fact the audience encounters first, and who they hear explaining why it matters.
02

What you get

  1. An accurate picture of the story already being told

    We examine coverage, public language, competing arguments and stakeholder assumptions to establish how the issue is currently being explained, and where that explanation is incomplete or unsupported.

  2. A decision about who needs to understand what differently

    We identify the audiences that matter, what they already believe, and which change in understanding could affect a real decision or action.

  3. A lead the evidence can support

    We decide which fact, consequence or argument should come first, what evidence belongs behind it and what should not be asked to carry more weight than the record allows.

  4. Messengers chosen for credibility, not convenience

    The strongest spokesperson may be a scientist, community member, business leader, physician or outside expert rather than the organization's most senior executive. We choose according to who has standing with the audience that matters.

  5. Media work built around where the argument can move

    We pursue national, trade, regional or local coverage when the outlet, audience and timing create a genuine opportunity to change how the issue is understood.

  6. Research and data with a public argument behind them

    We identify what in a report, study or dataset matters beyond publication day, who needs to understand it and when the findings can enter a larger public conversation.

  7. Spokespeople who can carry the argument when the questions change

    We prepare messengers to understand the hierarchy of the evidence, not memorize a script, so they can answer unexpected questions without losing the underlying case.

  8. One argument that can travel

    For sustained or multi-market campaigns, we keep the core truth recognizable while changing the local evidence, messengers and moments that make it credible in different places.

  9. Core language

    Built to survive a hostile read.

Want to know how your issue is currently being framed?

Book a Call
03

How the work runs

  1. 01

    Establish the current frame

    Read the coverage, opposition language, audience research and the organization's own materials. The point is not to ask what the organization wishes people believed. It is to establish what people are being asked to believe now, and where that account is incomplete or unsupported.

  2. 02

    Choose the lead

    Of everything that is true, which fact or consequence should the audience encounter first? Choosing a lead means not leading with everything else. That discipline is especially important for coalitions and technical organizations, where every program can make a legitimate claim on the message.

  3. 03

    Build for scrutiny

    Test the language against skeptical questions, contrary evidence and the way a reporter is likely to compress it. Build the supporting evidence so the second and third questions have answers ready. Give different messengers room to use their own language while keeping the same underlying argument intact.

  4. 04

    Sustain and reassess

    Narratives rarely move through a single launch. They change through repeated credible evidence across news cycles, markets and decision moments. We watch what language is actually appearing, where the argument is still being misunderstood and when the frame needs to be refined rather than merely repeated.

04

What this looks like when it works

I Will Act on Climate campaign bus touring 30 states
Climate Action

"I Will" Act on Climate

The national "I Will" campaign took climate action into local markets across 30 states. Caplan helped translate the national case into locally credible arguments, identifying business owners, faith leaders, union members, health voices and other messengers who could connect climate policy to jobs, health and community consequences in their own markets. The national argument remained recognizable while the evidence and speakers changed from place to place.

Read the case study: "I Will" Act on Climate
Aerial view of oil spill aftermath from the Exxon Valdez disaster
Environmental Justice

Whole Truth Campaign

In 2008, as the U.S. Supreme Court considered Exxon Shipping Co. v. Baker, the Whole Truth Campaign challenged a recovery-and-closure narrative around the Exxon Valdez spill. Caplan helped amplify scientific evidence, community testimony and unresolved impacts so the public discussion included the continuing environmental and economic consequences of the disaster while accountability was still being litigated.

Read the case study: Whole Truth Campaign

Working on something like this?

Start a Conversation
05

Who makes the framing call

Most narrative engagements begin with a defined research and framing phase, followed by execution once there is a clear argument to carry. The opening work is not a workshop that ends with a word cloud. It should produce choices: what leads, what supports it, which audiences matter first and who should speak.

Aric Caplan leads that judgment directly and remains accountable for it through execution. On a long campaign, the person who chose the lead at the beginning should still be in the room when the evidence changes, a partner objects or the argument meets serious scrutiny months later.

06

How we know it worked

Narrative strategy is not measured by reach alone. We look for evidence that the public argument itself has changed.

Are consequences that were previously missing now appearing in coverage? Are reporters asking different questions? Can different credible messengers make the same underlying case without repeating identical language?

Reach still matters because an argument has to travel. But impressions do not prove that understanding has changed. The stronger test is whether the issue is being explained more accurately, and whether that explanation persists without having to be supplied anew in every press release.

07

Frequently asked questions

Is narrative strategy just messaging?

No. Messaging is the language an organization uses. Narrative strategy starts earlier: what the audience already believes, which fact, consequence or human story should lead, who can make the stakes real, and what sequence of evidence can change how the issue is understood. Messaging is one output of that work.

What if the evidence is mixed?

Most consequential issues are. The job is to choose the strongest supported lead without hiding material facts that would make the claim misleading. A frame that only works by omitting the record will fail under scrutiny.

How long does it take to shift a narrative?

It depends on how established the current account is and how often the issue creates real opportunities to introduce new evidence. A newly forming frame can move quickly. A story repeated for years requires sustained work. The first phase should establish which problem you actually have.

Can this work on a contested or unpopular issue?

Sometimes. Narrative strategy cannot manufacture public support or make evidence disappear. It can identify which supported facts, consequences or messengers are missing from the current account and test whether introducing them changes the quality of the discussion.

Bring us the issue and where it keeps going wrong.

Bring a handful of recent stories about your issue, including the ones that got it wrong. Most of the useful diagnosis is in those.

Start a ConversationBook a Call