Inside C4C’s Process part 1: How research shapes the way for our work

C4C is a consulting firm that focuses on research-to-messaging in advancing social causes in Indonesia and strengthening civil society. At Communication for Change (C4C), we specialize in research-to-messaging services. Our work with partners always aims to craft the most effective communication tools and products, messages, campaigns, and narratives that are rooted in solid evidence and data.

However, for many organizations, the term “research-to-messaging” can sound a bit abstract. It’s not immediately clear what it means or what kind of support we can actually provide. That’s why, through this article, we want to unpack the concept and show what it looks like in practice, starting with the research side of our work.

At its core, research-to-messaging means turning insights into impact. It’s about understanding audiences deeply, identifying what drives their behavior or perception, and then translating those insights into messages that can move people, whether to learn, care, or take action.

In this first part, we’ll explore how our research process works, the types of studies we conduct, and how each step is designed to lay the foundation for a more strategic communication.

At the most fundamental level, communication, especially messaging, is about identifying the right stimuli to elicit the desired responses. Every word, image, and tone we choose has the potential to trigger certain thoughts, feelings, or actions in our audience.
One of the central principles we hold at C4C is simple but powerful: “meet people where they are.”

Effective messaging doesn’t start with what we want to say, it starts with understanding what the audience already thinks, feels, and values. Only by acknowledging their starting point can we design messages that genuinely resonate and move them toward change.

This principle guides all our research and creative processes. Whether we’re designing a public campaign or developing communication tools for partners, we begin by mapping how people currently see an issue, what barriers shape their perception, and what motivations can help bridge the gap between awareness and action.

We begin by examining the current attitudes and behaviors of the people we want to reach. This means looking beyond surface-level opinions to understand the deeper narratives, values, and experiences that shape how they see an issue.

Our research often involves identifying the dominant narrative and social norms that influence how people think, feel, and act. These narratives can reinforce certain beliefs or behaviors, and understanding them helps us see both the opportunities and obstacles for change.

Once we know where our audience stands, research also helps us define where we want them to go. It clarifies the kind of change we aim to inspire, whether it’s a shift in perception, a new habit, or a stronger sense of agency, and informs how our messaging can help move them in that direction.

At C4C, one of our guiding philosophies is to “always begin with the end in mind.” The end goal of every project we do is impact, usually through a campaign. Sometimes we lead these campaigns ourselves, other times, our partners take the lead using the evidence-based messaging tools we’ve developed together.

That’s why, at the very beginning of any research-to-messaging journey, we focus on determining who we want to influence and what and who currently influences them. Understanding these two elements is crucial because they shape the entire design of the project, from the research questions we ask to the form our communication products eventually take.

This process involves mapping the landscape of influence, what we often call the “battlefield.” Here, we identify the key narratives, opinion leaders, institutions, and media channels that hold sway over public understanding of an issue. By doing so, we can spot both the allies and the competing forces in the communication ecosystem.

Ultimately, this mapping allows us to design strategies that don’t just add more noise, but intervene meaningfully in the flow of ideas, shifting conversations, reframing issues, and helping our partners move audiences in the direction of positive change.

For the baseline study, we typically conducted Audience research, sometimes referred to as public opinion research, aimed to understand the dominant narratives shaping how people think and behave. It helps identify not just what people believe, but why they believe it.

Depending on the project’s scope and available data, audience research can draw on primary data (qualitative and quantitative) or secondary data (existing studies and surveys).

We typically begin with a qualitative study to uncover early insights into how people make sense of an issue. These insights can later be tested through a larger quantitative survey, though a well-designed qualitative study can also stand on its own.

Qualitative methods offer depth and nuance that numbers alone cannot capture, though they are naturally limited in generalizability. We commonly use focus group discussions (FGDs), in-depth interviews (IDIs), and Q-methodology to explore people’s narratives and subjective viewpoints.

Q-methodology, a hybrid of qualitative and quantitative approaches, uses statistical grouping to identify clusters of opinions, which are then interpreted qualitatively to build clear narrative themes. In addition, Delphi discussions can be used to synthesize perspectives from multiple experts, helping to refine hypotheses or interpret findings.

Quantitative studies, such as nationally representative surveys, help test whether qualitative insights hold true across a wider population or target group. Surveys can be conducted in person or online (via web panels). While online surveys are faster and cheaper, they often have limited representativeness due to uneven internet access.

When collecting new data is not feasible, we can use existing public datasets to complement or substitute primary research such as:

• World Values Survey
• Asian Barometer
• Pew Research Center
• Other published data from prior studies

We conduct narrative mapping when we need to uncover what key influencers or “whisperers” are saying to our campaign’s target audience
The type of influencers we identify determines the kind of data we need to collect.

• For example, in one of our projects, we found that the main influencers were the government and the media. We therefore analyzed government speeches and purchased archived articles from a popular mass media in Indonesia to understand their dominant narratives.
• In another project we also analyzed Tweets/X posts to capture how these narratives played out in the social media space. This process is commonly known as content analysis.

While some sources, such as speeches or Tweets, are publicly available online, a significant portion of the data useful for narrative mapping comes from “gated” secondary sources, datasets that are not freely accessible. These are often administrative data generated through routine operations rather than for research purposes, but they can still offer valuable insights when properly analyzed.

Once we understand the dominant narrative, the next step is to identify alternative or counternarratives that can shift public perception in the desired direction.

We typically begin by consulting experts to interpret and validate insights from our dominant narrative research. This process helps ensure that our proposed counternarratives are not only conceptually sound but also contextually relevant and strategically feasible.

Expert consultation can take two main forms:

1. Delphi Method, mentioned in previous parts of the article
2. Expert Discussions, a more streamlined and time-efficient version of Delphi. Here, the number of experts is smaller, and they provide individual feedback directly to the research team rather than responding to one another. This approach is particularly useful when resources or timelines are limited, while still ensuring that expert perspectives inform our narrative design.

The purpose of narrative testing is to evaluate the impact of the key idea underlying a proposed counternarrative. This process helps determine whether the narrative can effectively shift perceptions, attitudes, or intended behaviors.

The process typically involves three stages:

1. Developing stimuli: We begin by crafting several potential narrative stimuli that reflect the desired “From–To” shifts identified in earlier research. The From–To table outlines the shift a narrative seeks to create, from the audience’s current mindset or belief, to the desired one. It translates research insights into clear messaging goals, guiding how each narrative element should move people from where they are to where we want them to be.
2. Qualitative testing: These stimuli are then tested in a small-scale qualitative study to explore audience reactions, emotional resonance, and clarity of message.
3. Experimental validation: Finally, the most promising stimuli are subjected to rigorous testing in a randomized controlled trial (RCT) setting to measure their causal impact on specific outcomes.

Through this multi-stage process, we ensure that our narratives are not only creative and persuasive, but also empirically proven to work.

If the budget allows, we can conduct further testing of campaign materials, such as storyboards or prototypes, to strengthen the campaign’s empirical foundation and refine it during implementation. Using these materials as testing stimuli enables us to assess not only the core narrative idea but also additional elements such as visuals, tone, and framing that play a crucial role in shaping public opinion.

In short, this is our ideal research recipe for ensuring that every narrative or message we craft truly resonates with the broader public, not just within the echo chambers of activism or academia. By grounding our work in evidence and audience insight, we help bridge the gap between expert discourse and everyday understanding.

If you're interested in learning more about our research findings and the alternative narratives we've developed, we invite you to follow us on our social media channels. There, we’ll be sharing updates, insights, and the events that will follow up after that which is our data platform, named Lab Narasi, launch event in October 2025
Instagram: @c4c_id
LinkedIn: Communication for Change
Twitter: @C4C_ID

At Communication for Change (C4C), we help organizations craft and deliver strategic communication and messaging that are evidence-based, context-aware, and designed to resonate with their audiences. Our work spans from supporting institutions in shaping policy recommendations and public narratives, to developing and executing social campaigns that drive meaningful change, from building critical awareness to mobilizing civic participation.

Contact us to explore how we can help translate insights into strategic, impactful communication and action, whether by developing narratives and messaging from the ground up, testing and refining existing ideas, or designing comprehensive campaigns that advance your social goals.

C4C is the architect of narrative change, we bridge research and communication to craft compelling messages and narratives that drive change.

We translate data and insights into strategic storytelling, helping organizations in the social sector engage audiences, inspire action, and create meaningful change. Whether you are a nonprofit looking to refine your storytelling or seeking research-backed strategies to enhance your influence, C4C has the expertise to bring your vision to life.