The “No Kings” protests have gained significant traction, with activists increasingly focusing on the 3.5% rule, a concept introduced by Erica Chenoweth. This rule suggests that when a protest movement engages 3.5% of the population, it is likely to achieve its objectives within a year. As a result, many protestors have started to view reaching this threshold as their main goal. However, this approach raises concerns about the effectiveness of using such a measure as a target. When a measure becomes a target, it can lose its value as an indicator of success, potentially leading to misguided efforts and strategies. The emphasis on numbers might overshadow the broader goals and the quality of engagement within the movement, which are crucial for genuine change.
QUESTION: How might focusing solely on reaching a numerical target, like the 3.5% rule, impact the overall effectiveness and authenticity of a protest movement?
The Cobra Effect: why managing by metrics backfires
