GITNUXSOFTWARE REVIEW
Policy Government MattersTop 10 Best Public Affairs Services of 2026
Review public affairs services for agency and in-house teams, comparing Holland & Knight, Brunswick Group, and Grayling by fit and tradeoffs.
How we ranked these tools
Vendors set the topic, but our editors set the inclusion criteria and the evaluation framework before research starts.
Search agents gather the source set and the review record, including transcriptions of video reviews and podcasts.
Framework: Features 40% · Ease 30% · Value 30%
Gitnux may earn a commission through links on this page. This does not influence our reviews. Editorial policy
Holland & Knight is the best pick for teams that need counsel-led public affairs execution on complex regulatory or legislative matters because it turns policy strategy into testimony-ready, compliant submissions, while Brunswick Group fits when you want senior-led advocacy planning that packages monitoring insights into executive-ready outreach sequences and briefings.
Editor’s top 3 picks
Three quick recommendations before you dive into the full comparison below — each one leads on a different dimension.
Holland & Knight
Counsel-led drafting that converts policy strategy into testimony-ready materials and compliant consultation submissions.
Best for: Fits when legal counsel plus public affairs execution are needed for complex regulatory or legislative matters.
Brunswick Group
Editor pickExecutive-focused government relations planning that ties legislative monitoring outputs to specific outreach sequences and briefings.
Best for: Fits when policy advocacy needs senior strategy, structured stakeholder mapping, and executive-ready briefing materials.
Grayling
Editor pickStructured account reporting that turns legislative monitoring signals into decision-ready talking points and engagement plans.
Best for: Fits when advocacy programs need coordinated government and media execution under tight jurisdiction scoping.
Comparison Table
Holland & Knight
enterprise_vendorHolland & Knight delivers public policy, government relations, lobbying, and regulatory advocacy through its law firm.
Counsel-led drafting that converts policy strategy into testimony-ready materials and compliant consultation submissions.
Holland & Knight delivers government relations and public policy advocacy through an integrated legal and policy practice that ties counsel, filings, and stakeholder engagement into a single workflow. Its public affairs work is anchored in legislative monitoring and regulatory tracking, with legal-grade outputs like position papers, testimony support, and policy briefs that align with compliance expectations.
Teams typically get structured issue management, including stakeholder mapping and coordinated strategy across agency and legislative targets. The firm also brings experience handling sensitive advocacy efforts that intersect with legal risk and litigation-grade documentation standards.
- +Legal-grade policy drafting supports testimony, comment letters, and formal position papers
- +Legislative monitoring and regulatory tracking workflows reduce missed deadlines and duplicate work
- +Stakeholder mapping supports targeted grasstops and policymaker engagement planning
- +Issue management ties advocacy strategy to compliance-safe messaging and documentation
- –Governance and review cycles can slow iteration during fast-moving advocacy windows
- –Less suited for buyers seeking purely grassroots execution without policy counsel involvement
- –Automation and API capabilities are not a focus compared with software-led monitoring tooling
Best for: Fits when legal counsel plus public affairs execution are needed for complex regulatory or legislative matters.
Brunswick Group
agencyBrunswick Group advises companies on public affairs, political issues, stakeholder relations, and corporate communications.
Executive-focused government relations planning that ties legislative monitoring outputs to specific outreach sequences and briefings.
Brunswick Group delivers public affairs and government relations support focused on policy advocacy and decision-maker engagement across corporate and public-sector stakeholders. Its core work centers on issue management, legislative and regulatory monitoring, and stakeholder mapping that feeds directly into advocacy campaign planning.
The firm typically operates through senior-led advisory teams that translate policy dynamics into targeted outreach materials and executive engagement. Deliverables often include briefings and position framing for testimony, consultations, and internal alignment ahead of critical policymaker moments.
- +Senior-led policy strategy that converts monitoring into actionable advocacy plans
- +Legislative and regulatory intelligence packaged into decision-maker briefings
- +Stakeholder mapping supports coalition planning and coordinated messaging
- +Clear documentation of engagement plans across jurisdictions and policy issues
- –Collaboration can require tight internal inputs to keep advocacy timelines on track
- –Automation and API-style integration surfaces are not a focus versus workflow-led delivery
- –Grassroots execution depth depends on partner networks in specific regions
- –Technical regulatory impact work can require subject-matter add-ons for narrow niches
Best for: Fits when policy advocacy needs senior strategy, structured stakeholder mapping, and executive-ready briefing materials.
Grayling
agencyGrayling provides public affairs, government relations, regulatory engagement, and public consultation support.
Structured account reporting that turns legislative monitoring signals into decision-ready talking points and engagement plans.
Grayling delivers public affairs and communications support built around campaign execution for policy and stakeholder goals. Its work typically combines issue planning, stakeholder mapping, and coordinated government and media engagement into a single advocacy workflow.
Grayling also supports legislative monitoring and risk assessment through structured briefings and account reporting designed for decision makers. Engagement quality tends to hinge on how clearly objectives, jurisdictions, and message boundaries are defined at kickoff.
- +Campaign-style workflows that connect stakeholder mapping to day-to-day engagement
- +Policy messaging assets geared to policymaker, coalition, and media audiences
- +Legislative monitoring outputs framed as actionable political intelligence
- +Account management that translates strategy into execution checklists
- –Deliverables depend on client-provided inputs like positions and constraints
- –RBAC-style governance and self-serve controls are not a focus of service delivery
- –Thorough coverage needs clear jurisdiction scoping and tighter change control
- –Automation and API surfaces are limited because delivery centers on advisory services
Best for: Fits when advocacy programs need coordinated government and media execution under tight jurisdiction scoping.
Portland Communications
agencyPortland Communications handles public affairs, political communications, stakeholder engagement, and policy campaigns.
Campaign-style issue management that coordinates policymakers, staff briefings, and stakeholder alignment around legislative milestones.
Portland Communications is built for public-sector engagement workflows that require consistent narrative discipline across policymakers, staff, and external stakeholders. Service delivery typically centers on issue strategy, stakeholder mapping, and legislative support materials such as briefings and talking points. Engagement also supports regulatory-adjacent advocacy work where agencies, hearings, and public comment timelines influence positioning. Delivery quality is strongest when goals map to a sustained government affairs cadence rather than one-time messaging deliverables.
- +Issue strategy designed for policy timelines and stakeholder sequencing
- +Policy messaging support tailored to hearings, briefings, and testimony needs
- +Direct government affairs execution for staff-level and coalition coordination
- +Clear cadence for managing ongoing advocacy priorities
- –Best results require timely technical input and fast review approvals
- –Less aligned to purely media buying or brand awareness campaigns
- –May need additional support for highly specialized regulatory modeling
- –Coordination workload shifts to the client during active consultations
In-house government affairs teams
Run a policy position through hearings
Cleaner testimony and consistent positioning
Regulatory affairs leaders
Respond to a public consultation
Coordinated submission and outreach
Show 2 more scenarios
Policy directors at nonprofits
Build a multi-stakeholder coalition
Stronger coalition discipline
It structures stakeholder messaging so partners can align on shared asks and talking points.
Corporate public affairs managers
Manage a local issue escalation
Faster response to policy shifts
It supports issue strategy and engagement planning when local dynamics require fast narrative adjustments.
Best for: Fits when in-house teams need hands-on advocacy execution across local policymakers and stakeholder coalitions.
APCO Worldwide
agencyAPCO Worldwide provides government relations, public policy, coalition building, and stakeholder engagement services.
Client-specific public consultation response drafting and briefing packaging aligned to regulatory process timelines.
APCO Worldwide delivers public affairs and government relations services for organizations that need consistent policy execution across agencies and jurisdictions. Its delivery model emphasizes legislative and regulatory monitoring, issue management, and structured policymaker engagement built around client priorities.
- +Policy execution tied to legislative and regulatory milestones
- +Structured artifacts for testimony, briefings, and consultation submissions
- +Stakeholder mapping built for coalition and grasstops engagement
- +Cross-agency issue management for long-running regulatory tracks
- –Client-side input cycles can slow rapid changes to advocacy plans
- –Automation and API surfaces are not a primary part of delivery
- –Service coverage depth can narrow when issues require narrow technical deltas
- –Governance discipline is needed to keep messaging consistent across workstreams
Best for: Fits when in-house teams need end-to-end government affairs execution across multiple policy moments.
Kreab
agencyKreab advises on public affairs, government relations, regulatory policy, and stakeholder communications.
Integrated policy communications production that synchronizes advocacy messaging with government engagement planning across jurisdictions.
Kreab delivers public affairs and government relations support built around account teams that manage policy research, stakeholder engagement, and advocacy materials for specific jurisdictions. It is distinct for combining policy communications and government engagement workflows so deliverables like briefings, testimony inputs, and stakeholder plans stay aligned to the advocacy line.
- +Policy-to-communications workflow helps keep messaging consistent across government touchpoints
- +Legislative and regulatory monitoring supports issue tracking for active advocacy programs
- +Stakeholder mapping and grasstops engagement planning are handled as part of the same engagement plan
- +Account teams typically produce ready-to-use briefing and testimony inputs for decision cycles
- –Engagement planning quality depends on clear client intake and frequent coordination calls
- –Complex automation and API-style reporting for internal systems is not a primary offering
Best for: Fits when advocacy teams need managed public affairs deliverables that tie policy intelligence to stakeholder messaging.
Flint Global
specialistFlint Global advises on public policy, regulatory affairs, government relations, and political risk.
Campaign-ready policy output production that ties monitoring findings to specific stakeholder briefings and engagement materials.
Flint Global delivers public affairs execution across government relations and issue advocacy workflows for corporations and trade organizations. Delivery centers on legislative monitoring, stakeholder mapping, and coordinated policymaker communications that produce campaign-ready materials like position papers and talking points.
- +Legislative and regulatory monitoring built for ongoing engagement cycles
- +Stakeholder mapping supports targeted policymaker and coalition outreach
- +Written outputs for hearings, briefings, and consultation responses are production-ready
- +Account staffing provides tight coordination across research and messaging
- –Requires clear internal ownership to keep issue scope and timelines aligned
- –API and automation surface for self-serve data workflows is not a primary offering
- –Extensibility options for custom datasets are limited compared with tech-first vendors
- –Prioritization depends on the quality of client-provided issue inputs and signals
Best for: Fits when policy teams need staffed government relations delivery with consistent monitoring and messaging coordination.
Cornerstone Government Affairs
specialistCornerstone Government Affairs provides federal and state lobbying, public policy analysis, and government relations.
Campaign assembly around a single issue narrative, with coordinated stakeholder briefing materials and outreach cadence.
Cornerstone Government Affairs targets organizations that require coordinated government relations across multiple decision points, including legislative and regulatory processes. Engagement typically includes issue management support, stakeholder mapping, and preparation of talking points and position papers that align with the client’s stated objectives. The operational model suits clients who need an accountable partner to manage ongoing engagement rhythms and documentation.
- +Converts policy developments into structured, policymaker-ready messaging
- +Provides end-to-end advocacy program management for active legislative cycles
- +Coordinates stakeholder outreach materials built for consistent cross-channel use
- +Supports regulatory tracking workflows tied to action plans
- –Requires steady client input to keep issue priorities and positions aligned
- –Customization depth varies by jurisdiction and policy complexity
In-house government affairs leads
Run a multi-stage legislative push
More consistent outreach messaging
Regulatory affairs teams
Respond to consultations and hearings
Submission-ready, aligned positions
Show 1 more scenario
Corporate communications directors
Coordinate advocacy with media messaging
Reduced message drift
Maintains a unified narrative across stakeholder briefings and external communications.
Best for: Fits when in-house teams need campaign-level advocacy execution and consistent policymaker materials.
Monument Advocacy
specialistMonument Advocacy provides federal government relations, public policy strategy, and coalition building.
Issue-specific campaign strategy that connects legislative monitoring to audience-ready briefing materials.
Monument Advocacy focuses on public affairs execution through issue advocacy and policy-facing engagement rather than broad media-only work. The firm supports legislative monitoring and government relations workflows, plus stakeholder mapping and briefing production for specific policy audiences.
- +Policy deliverables tied to specific audiences, not generic talking points
- +Legislative monitoring support helps keep issue work aligned to calendars
- +Stakeholder mapping output is usable for briefings and outreach sequences
- +Campaign strategy materials translate positions into coordinated engagement
- –Automation and API surface for tracking workflows is not positioned publicly
- –Operational rigor depends on client-provided policy inputs and internal sign-off
- –Coverage depth across technical regulatory analysis is workload dependent
- –Complex multi-agency advocacy may require heavier coordination bandwidth
Best for: Fits when teams need managed issue advocacy support with targeted stakeholder briefings.
Rud Pedersen Group
agencyRud Pedersen Group provides public affairs, government relations, strategic communications, and political analysis.
Engagement orchestration that converts policy tracking into targeted briefing packs and outreach steps for each decision stage.
Rud Pedersen Group is well suited for legislative and regulatory work where clients need structured policymaker engagement and consistent messaging across multiple audiences. It supports stakeholder mapping, briefing production, and campaign planning activities that connect policy analysis to meetings, written submissions, and media-facing narratives. The service fits organizations that require visible advisory stewardship rather than only monitoring inputs.
- +Structured engagement planning that ties policy analysis to policymaker meetings
- +High-quality briefing and advocacy materials built for distinct stakeholder audiences
- +Practical coalition and stakeholder outreach coordination across issue timelines
- +Clear advisory cadence for iterative strategy and message updates
- –Requires consistent client inputs for approvals and message accuracy
- –Less suitable for teams that only need automated monitoring outputs
- –May involve longer cycles when multiple departments must align on positions
- –Not designed as a self-serve tool for in-house advocacy teams
Corporate government relations leads
Advocacy campaign for a regulatory change
Aligned outreach and faster decision access
Policy teams at regulated firms
Consultation submission and parliamentary briefing
Stronger submissions and consistent talking points
Show 1 more scenario
Communications and advocacy managers
Crisis communications around policy fallout
Coherent public and political positioning
Coordinates stakeholder messaging that supports media-facing narratives and policymaker engagement.
Best for: Fits when organizations need full-cycle public affairs support from policy analysis to outreach materials.
Conclusion
After evaluating 10 public affairs, Holland & Knight stands out as our overall top pick — it scored highest across our combined criteria of features, ease of use, and value, which is why it sits at #1 in the rankings above.
Use the comparison table and detailed reviews above to validate the fit against your own requirements before committing to a tool.
How to Choose the Right Public Affairs
Public affairs providers like APCO Worldwide, Brunswick Group, Holland & Knight, and Kreab support government relations work that turns policy developments into briefing materials, consultation submissions, and decision-maker outreach. The providers covered across this guide also include Cornerstone Government Affairs, Flint Global, Grayling, Monument Advocacy, Portland Communications, and Rud Pedersen Group, with delivery styles that range from counsel-led drafting to campaign assembly around a single issue narrative.
The buying focus stays on how each provider packages legislative monitoring into specific advocacy artifacts and how much control the engagement gives in-house teams over messaging and timelines. Integration depth matters most when advocacy operations need repeatable workflows and an automation or API surface rather than ad hoc document production.
Public Affairs services that convert policy intelligence into stakeholder action
Public affairs is government relations and public policy advocacy work that connects legislative monitoring and regulatory tracking to stakeholder mapping, policymaker engagement, and audience-specific messaging. Public affairs services typically produce testimony-ready drafts, consultation response packages, talking points, and structured stakeholder briefings that match policy milestones rather than generic communications. Holland & Knight uses counsel-led drafting to convert policy strategy into testimony-ready materials and compliant consultation submissions, while Grayling turns monitoring signals into decision-ready talking points and day-to-day engagement plans.
The practical decision for buyers is whether the provider builds workflow-led execution around advocacy milestones like legislative and regulatory moments or centers delivery on managed campaign-level messaging that requires steady client intake to stay aligned. When internal teams need tighter operational control, providers that offer more automation and integration surface area reduce rework for recurring issue cycles.
Public Affairs delivery capabilities to compare across providers
Public affairs buyers need more than policy content drafts because legislative monitoring and regulatory tracking only matter if they get converted into usable advocacy artifacts on real timelines. APCO Worldwide and Holland & Knight show how that conversion can include packaged consultation responses, testimony-ready materials, and compliance-aware submission formats.
Milestone-timed advocacy artifacts
APCO Worldwide ties public consultation response drafting and briefing packaging to regulatory process timelines, while Holland & Knight converts policy strategy into testimony-ready materials and compliant consultation submissions.
Monitoring to outreach workflow structure
Brunswick Group turns legislative monitoring outputs into executive-ready outreach sequences and briefings, while Grayling converts monitoring signals into decision-ready talking points and coordinated engagement plans.
Campaign execution around a single issue narrative
Cornerstone Government Affairs assembles campaign-level advocacy messaging with consistent policymaker materials, while Flint Global produces campaign-ready policy outputs that connect monitoring findings to stakeholder briefing and engagement materials.
Governance and client review cycle fit
Grayling and Portland Communications both rely on client-provided positions, constraints, and fast approvals to keep deliverables aligned to jurisdiction and policy timelines.
Legal-grade drafting depth for formal submissions
Holland & Knight provides counsel-led drafting that supports comment letters, formal position papers, and testimony formats, while APCO Worldwide focuses on regulated process outputs and briefing packaging.
Multi-jurisdiction messaging coordination
Kreab synchronizes policy communications production with government engagement planning across jurisdictions, while Monument Advocacy packages issue-specific campaign strategy into audience-ready briefing materials.
How to choose a Public Affairs service by workflow control and delivery scope
Start with the delivery philosophy that matches internal capacity. Providers like Holland & Knight and APCO Worldwide emphasize counsel-led or process-aligned drafting for formal submissions, while Grayling and Brunswick Group emphasize turning monitoring into structured messaging and engagement plans.
Select the artifact type that matches the moment
If regulatory consultations and formal submissions dominate the workload, Holland & Knight and APCO Worldwide align drafting and packaging to compliance timelines and submission formats. If policymaker outreach cycles and day-to-day engagement dominate, Grayling and Brunswick Group structure messaging and briefings around engagement sequences.
Pick workflow ownership based on internal input capacity
If internal teams can provide positions, constraints, and fast review approvals, Cornerstone Government Affairs and Portland Communications can keep campaign-level materials aligned to hearings and stakeholder sequencing. If internal teams need lower dependency on rapid intake, providers like APCO Worldwide and Holland & Knight may fit better because delivery centers on structured drafting and milestone packaging.
Decide whether the service is campaign-led or engagement-system-led
Choose Cornerstone Government Affairs or Flint Global when the organization needs a consistent issue narrative and campaign assembly that produces coordinated briefing materials and outreach support. Choose Rud Pedersen Group or Grayling when the organization needs engagement orchestration tied to decision stages and coordinated stakeholder briefing packs.
Check multi-jurisdiction consistency requirements
If advocacy must stay consistent across jurisdictions and government touchpoints, Kreab synchronizes policy intelligence with stakeholder messaging planning. If the workload is narrower and issue-specific, Monument Advocacy focuses on targeted audiences tied to legislative calendars.
Align legal compliance intensity with delivery scope
When filings must reflect counsel-led drafting quality, Holland & Knight includes testimony-ready and consultation submission drafting as a core service shape. When the work centers more on policy-to-briefing packaging for engagement moments, Grayling and Brunswick Group emphasize decision-ready messaging rather than purely legal drafting.
Who benefits from each Public Affairs service style
Public affairs providers fit different buyer operating models because deliverables and internal dependencies vary. Some providers concentrate on counsel-led or process-aligned drafting, while others concentrate on turning monitoring into structured engagement execution and stakeholder briefing cadence.
Regulated policy and legal operations teams that manage consultations and testimony timelines
Holland & Knight and APCO Worldwide convert policy strategy and monitoring context into formal, submission-ready materials that support compliant consultation and testimony workflows.
Government relations leaders who need monitoring-to-executive outreach conversion
Brunswick Group and Grayling translate legislative monitoring outputs into executive-ready briefings and decision-maker talking points tied to outreach sequences.
Advocacy program managers running active legislative issue cycles
Cornerstone Government Affairs and Flint Global provide campaign-style advocacy program management that produces consistent policymaker materials and engagement outputs across an active legislative calendar.
Organizations coordinating messaging across multiple jurisdictions
Kreab manages policy-to-communications workflow across jurisdictions to keep messaging consistent across stakeholder touchpoints and government engagement planning.
Stakeholder engagement teams that need full-cycle orchestration from analysis to briefings
Rud Pedersen Group and Grayling build distinct briefing packs for different stakeholder audiences and connect policy tracking to engagement steps for decision stages.
Common Public Affairs buying mistakes and how to avoid them
Public affairs projects fail most often when buyers assume policy monitoring output can be handed off without tight message and timeline coordination. Providers repeatedly flag that deliverables depend on client-provided positions, constraints, and fast internal approvals.
Buying for automation features when the engagement is delivered primarily as managed services.
APCO Worldwide, Brunswick Group, and Flint Global emphasize workflow-led delivery rather than an automation or API surface for self-serve data workflows, so buyers should confirm how work moves from monitoring to artifacts inside the delivery model.
Underestimating how much client intake is required to keep issue positions aligned.
Cornerstone Government Affairs and Portland Communications require steady client input and fast review approvals to keep issue priorities aligned to legislative or hearing timelines.
Expecting purely grassroots or communications delivery on complex regulatory submissions.
Holland & Knight is built for counsel-led drafting that supports testimony-ready materials and compliant consultation submissions, while providers like Grayling focus on messaging assets and engagement plans that still rely on positions and constraints.
Assuming multi-jurisdiction consistency will happen without coordination calls.
Kreab’s policy communications production across jurisdictions depends on clear client intake and frequent coordination, while Monument Advocacy centers issue-specific audiences tied to calendars rather than broad cross-jurisdiction governance.
How analysts checked the Public Affairs providers list
Analysts used a structured method that starts with searching the original publication for relevant provider statements and copied each figure next to the passage that described it. Analysts then compared the captured figure with official documentation and the provider changelog, and they used an independent review when one was cited.
Analysts kept the figure only when it matched the provider’s documentation and included a published benchmark only when that benchmark was the cited source. Analysts wrote the coverage description for what the page would cover before opening the documents.
Frequently Asked Questions About Public Affairs
Which providers handle legislative and regulatory monitoring for ongoing issue management?
How do agencies compare government relations delivery models when internal teams can’t provide fast inputs?
When is a legal-policy integration model useful for testimony support and consultation submissions?
Where does stakeholder mapping feed directly into advocacy campaign planning versus staying as a standalone research artifact?
What breaks if a provider’s workflow needs a tight jurisdiction and objective scope upfront?
How should teams handle integrations and automation when public affairs work needs data model consistency?
How do providers approach SSO, RBAC, and audit log needs for shared client workflows?
When does data migration matter for moving from internal trackers to a public affairs engagement archive?
What extensibility options exist if advocacy workflows must add new jurisdictions or new audience segments?
Tools reviewed
Primary sources checked during evaluation.
Referenced in the comparison table and product reviews above.
Funding and competing interests
This study was co-funded by several of the vendors assessed in it. No single vendor funded it. Funders could propose the market studied.
They had no role in selecting vendors, setting or weighting criteria, analysing data or drawing conclusions, and they received the same factual-accuracy check as every other vendor assessed.
Market definition, inclusion rules and criteria weights were fixed by an editor before research began and did not change afterwards. Editorial process →
- Service review · 2026 · Policy Government MattersPolicy
- Service review · 2026 · Communication MediaOnline Public Relations
- Service review · 2026 · Marketing AdvertisingPromotional
- Review · 2026 · Non Profit Public SectorGovernment Affairs Software
- Review · 2026 · Marketing AdvertisingPublic Relations Project Management Software
Keep exploring
Comparing two specific tools?
Software Alternatives
See head-to-head software comparisons with feature breakdowns, pricing, and our recommendation for each use case.
Explore software alternatives→In this category
Policy Government Matters alternatives
See side-by-side comparisons of policy government matters tools and pick the right one for your stack.
Compare policy government matters tools→