The strongest advocacy is not always from the biggest kids in the playground
Real advocacy success comes from staying engaged, building credibility and being ready when opportunities for reform emerge.
By Neil Pharaoh
The white paper Fragmentation to Influence included several case studies recounting real-life scenarios of advocacy program development and work.
The most powerful take-away from these examples was that they cut against the narrative that influence is only available to the loudest, richest or most politically connected organisations.
They show that advocacy success in Australia is not primarily a function of spend or scale, but of credibility, endurance and the ability to stay engaged until reform windows open.
This is important in an environment where civil society increasingly feels crowded out.
Australia’s advocacy ecosystem remains structurally imbalanced. A well-resourced influence industry spends heavily shaping public policy, before political donations are even counted. This fuels perceptions of elite or regulatory capture.
Against this backdrop, not-for-profits play a fundamentally different role. Their contribution to public debate and accountability strengthens democratic legitimacy rather than distorting it.
The risk is not that civil society speaks too loudly, but that it is increasingly crowded out in a system that rewards scale, persistence and technical power.
The Tanck–Perpetual survey shows this risk is already materialising. Funding instability, workforce constraints, rising demand and policy barriers force organisations into reactive, defensive engagement, indeed if they engage at all.
Government frequently underestimates sector expertise while demanding neat, short-term solutions to complex problems.
Although the Not-for-Profit Sector Development Blueprint acknowledges that charities are system experts embedded in community, regulatory and funding settings, too often leave no space for advocacy or voice.
International experience, particularly in the United States, shows where this trajectory can lead politicised attacks on not-for-profit advocacy, expanding gag clauses, declining transparency and a chilling effect on civic participation. These are not abstract risks, but warning signs of democratic erosion.
At the same time, some of the pressure on civil society is self-inflicted. Fragmentation driven by identity absolutism and the elevation of individual testimony over shared evidence has weakened collaboration, persuasion and trust.
Scholars across the progressive tradition have warned that treating personal perception as unchallengeable truth undermines scientific reasoning and democratic debate. Without shared facts, disagreement becomes irresolvable and coalition-building collapses.
Yet the lesson from Australia’s strongest advocacy successes is clear.
Rebuilding trust will not come from louder voices or narrower claims, but from stronger civic capability, shared evidence and a renewed focus on what Australians have in common.
This article was written as part of the development of Tanck's 2026 whitepaper together with Perpetual Wealth.
Tanck offers advisory services in government engagement, advocacy, stakeholder strategy, and communications.
We share our political expertise and government experience so you can achieve your funding and policy goals.
