Guest blog from Vera Heitmann
Head of Public Affairs, IKEA Germany
The format for this guest blog series is quite simple: During 2026, 12 of the best PA Pros in Europe will be invited to contribute with one blogpost each here on my Substack, in which they answer 10 sharp questions about their experiences from working in Public Affairs and what they have learned along the way. So the ambition with this initiative is to provide readers with a realistic view of what Public Affairs is really about: honest and hard work! It is about learning from good or bad habits from some of the best in the business. So remember to subscribe to the blog, so you don’t miss out on the upcoming guest blogs.
The January blogger was Mette Kahlin McVeigh, Senior Vice President of Corporate and Regulatory Affairs at Stora Enso, which you can read here.
The February blogger is Vera Heitmann, Head of Public Affairs, IKEA Germany. Read her reflected and aspiring takes on Public Affairs below.
For how long have you worked in/with Public Affairs, and what drove you in this direction?
I have worked in and around Public Affairs for more than 30 years.
I became a political scientist because of a very simple, very German question: how do we make sure that democracy remains resilient? Growing up in a country with our history, you cannot take democratic institutions for granted. I wanted to understand how political systems actually work in practice, and how decisions are made, influenced, and sometimes quietly prevented.
Over time, that curiosity shifted from pure politics to the space where politics, society and business meet. Today, what keeps me in Public Affairs is exactly that intersection. The pressure on democratic systems is increasing, polarisation is growing, and yet companies have more influence than ever. Helping to navigate that tension responsibly, balancing business interests with long‑term democratic stability, is what still drives me.
What is the split between internal and external meetings for you – and how many external lunches do you have per week?
My time is probably more internal than many people expect, often closer to two thirds internal and one third external, depending on the week.
Public Affairs is often perceived as a very outward‑facing discipline, and it is, but a lot of the work happens inside an organisation: understanding the business impact of political developments, aligning on risk appetite, testing positions and avoiding unintended signals. If that homework is not done, external meetings are rarely productive.
When it comes to lunches, the answer is: fewer than you would expect. What I value about them is that they create a different kind of space, a bit like the coffee‑machine conversation internally. You can listen, compare perspectives and build rapport without having to work through a strict agenda.
For me, the balance between internal and external time shifts with context. The key is to be conscious about it: to know when you need to invest in alignment inside the organisation, and when it is more important to be out and present with others.
Where do you keep up to date on Public Affairs?
I use a mix of primary sources, journalism, and conversations.
On the formal side, I follow legislative and regulatory developments as directly as time permits: government documents, parliamentary debates, consultation papers, and communications from ministries and European institutions. I still think it is important to read the original text before the commentary.
I also rely on a few trusted media outlets and specialised newsletters for politics and business, and I try to balance German, European and international perspectives. No single source is ever enough.
Equally important for me are peers. Some of the best insight comes from short calls or coffees (and lunches) with people who sit in other sectors or institutions and see the same development from a different angle. Public Affairs is still, to a large extent, a conversation discipline.
In practice, it is less about one platform or format and more about staying curious and comparing how different actors frame the same issue.
Name a PA Pro in the industry you respect and why
I hesitate to name a single individual.
Public Affairs sometimes rewards visibility, but the most effective practitioners are often the least visible. They are not performing influence, they are building understanding. They listen more than they speak, translate complexity across systems, and open doors quietly without claiming credit.
They are trusted because they don’t seek the spotlight. They absorb tension, prevent escalation, and enable progress without branding it as their achievement.
If you look at some of the world’s most respected negotiators, whether in diplomacy, conflict mediation or long and complex political agreements, their work is rarely theatrical. It is patient, disciplined and grounded in trust built over time.
The same is true in Public Affairs. Success is often invisible, measured by what did not become an issue.
What is your favourite book in relation to Public Affairs, campaigns or politics?
One book has shaped how I think about Public Affairs, even though it is not specifically about the profession.
The Art of Explanation by Ros Atkins reflects a discipline that is essential in Public Affairs: the ability to distil complexity into clear, concise language. Whether you are drafting a position paper, preparing for a formal meeting, articulating your stance on a broader societal issue, or briefly crossing paths with a decision‑maker in a corridor: every word matters. Clarity is not accidental, it is deliberate.
Just as important as being clear in communicating is being an active listener, and there are several thoughtful books on this topic. In Public Affairs, entering a discussion with a ready‑made answer can close doors before they open. Progress often starts with genuine curiosity: understanding the interests, constraints, and motivations of the other side before advancing your own position.
Public Affairs requires both: expressing your stance precisely and listening openly enough to refine it. This is where Public Affairs earns its credibility – and where it really makes the difference.
Who would you love to read a guest blog from?
There are several figures I would genuinely be curious to hear from, particularly those who have experienced influence from the receiving end.
I would be fascinated to read reflections from Margrethe Vestager on what differentiates credible advocacy from noise. Few decision‑makers have been exposed to lobbying at such scale, especially in the tech and competition space. What makes an argument land when billions are at stake? And what immediately disqualifies it?
I would also value insights from Angela Merkel on how trust is built over time. During her years in office, she encountered constant pressure: from industry, from European partners, from global actors. Which forms of engagement strengthened her ability to govern? Which weakened it?
And someone like Henry Kissinger would bring a different perspective altogether: the discipline of preparation, the management of leverage, the patience required in long negotiations.
What connects them is not ideology or fame, but the view from the other side of the table: how influence really feels in practice, what helps, and what gets in the way. Public Affairs could learn a lot from that perspective.
What is the biggest challenge for the discipline of Public Affairs? And how do we solve it?
This is a big one, and I will use the space to elaborate because it is very dear to my heart: I think the biggest challenge for Public Affairs is to stay credible while the ground under democracy is shifting.
We are working in a time when political systems are under pressure, polarisation is increasing, and some leaders are more willing to test the limits of institutions than to strengthen them. At the same time, companies have more influence than ever. Public Affairs sits exactly in that tension: between business interests on one side and the long‑term health of democratic systems on the other.
At its best, Public Affairs is an integral part of democracy. When I worked as a chief of staff in Parliament, I relied on hearing from those who were affected by the decisions ‘my’ member of parliament had to take: workers, businesses, associations, civil society. Their input helped us see consequences we would not have understood from legislation alone. The question is not whether interests should be heard, but how transparently and responsibly that happens.
If our work is perceived as “just lobbying”, we become part of the problem. But if we ignore business realities, we are not doing our job either. The challenge is to navigate that space honestly.
How do we solve it? With how we work every day:
by being clear about what we are asking for and why,
by making sure our positions are consistent with what the organisation does in practice, and
by accepting regulation when it creates fair and predictable rules for society.
Public Affairs is only one small part of how the political system works. But we can choose whether we add to the noise and mistrust, or whether we contribute to stability and trust in how decisions are made. That choice is where our responsibility starts.