From persuasion to public good in healthcare communication
Strategic communication should be viewed not simply as a means of persuasion, but as an ethical practice that advances the public good. My graduate research and professional experience in healthcare and nonprofit settings have guided my perspective—persuasion is a responsibility, not simply an outcome.
My research focuses on health equity, stakeholder engagement, and ethical communication, especially for groups such as dual-eligible Medicare and Medicaid members (D-SNPs). These vulnerable audiences often face fragmented systems, structural barriers, and information overload. In this setting, communication should be intentional, transparent, and built on trust.
Rethinking persuasion through ethics
One of the core frameworks I’ve engaged with is Robert Cialdini’s principles of persuasion. While widely used across marketing and public relations, these principles take on new meaning when applied in healthcare and nonprofit settings. Thinking about Cialdini’s work, I realized the principles themselves are not the issue. How they are used is what shapes their ethical impact. For example:
Liking can support inclusion and psychological safety—but only when grounded in authenticity.
Reciprocity can build community—but risks manipulation when it creates obligation.
Social proof can reduce uncertainty—but must reflect real experiences, not manufactured consensus.
Authority can establish credibility—but should not silence dialogue.
Scarcity can motivate action—but can also create unnecessary pressure if artificially constructed.
In my research reflection, I concluded that persuasion should empower rather than control. The key takeaway: prioritize transparency and shared respect over influence tactics.
From audiences to attitudinal publics
Beyond persuasion, my research also explores stakeholder theory, particularly Elina Luoma-aho’s concept of attitudinal publics (faith-holders, hate-holders, and fake-holders). This approach confronts traditional segmentation by focusing on relationships and perceptions rather than demographics alone.
This reframing process is critical in healthcare communication.
For example, in my work analyzing engagement strategies for nonprofit and healthcare organizations, I’ve seen how:
“Faith-holders” (supportive stakeholders) can become advocates when meaningfully engaged.
“Hate-holders” (critical stakeholders) often provide the most important insights for improving systems.
“Fake-holders” (disengaged stakeholders) represent missed chances for engagement.
Strategic communication, then, becomes about establishing relationships and creating dialogue, rather than just sending messages.
To deepen my approach, my research goes past traditional communication models by including social determinants of health (SDOH) and environmental communication theory. Inspired by scholars such as Robert Cox and Donna Haraway, I examine how communication both reflects and shapes larger systems.
In healthcare, this means recognizing that:
Access to information is shaped by socioeconomic conditions.
Trust is impacted by historical inequities and institutional behavior.
“Choice” is frequently constrained by structural realities.
A main takeaway: this approach turns communication from a transaction into a system-level intervention.
Applying research in practice
As a creative and communication leader in healthcare, I put these frameworks into practice in real ways:
Designing campaigns which focus on clarity and accessibility (including 508 compliance)
Using real patient and member insights to inform messaging (ethical social proof)
Building workflows that enable cross-team collaboration and transparency
Developing communication tactics that acknowledge complex lived experiences, not just personas
In practice, I avoid oversimplifying or optimizing messages solely for performance metrics. My focus remains on making communication accurate, human-centered, and accountable.
Toward a more responsible practice
Strategic communication can shape decisions, behaviors, and systems. With that influence comes responsibility.
Through my research and practice, I advocate for a shift:
From persuasion to participation
From messaging to meaning-making
From audience targeting to stakeholder engagement
From short-term outcomes to long-term trust
In fields like healthcare and nonprofit work, where communication directly affects people’s well-being, this shift is not optional. It is essential.