Lead facilitators:

James Georgalakis, IDS Head of Communications

Hannah Corbett, IDS Public Affairs Officer

Developing a strategic approach to Policy Engagement and Communication

How the workshop will be run

• We want you to learn• Not too much lecturing from facilitators• Lots of thinking discussing and working in

groups• Success depends on participation• Mood Monitor

Follow Twitter: @PECSAP @IDS_UKTweet: #PECNepal

Working groups for PEC planning

Participants divided into TT teams for some exercises

Workshop divided into two working groups for some sessions

Each TT supported by their facilitator

Groups record their work on flip charts and worksheets throughout:

- Keep them safe

- Remember label each sheet with Session and group

As a courtesy to your colleagues, please:

Be quiet and listen when others are speaking, respecting each other and their views

Contribute fully, speak loud and clear

Ground Rules

Session 1:

Introduction to PEC concepts

Factors affecting research uptake

Research uptake and changes in

people’s lives

Effective research communication

Research capacity

Political context and power relationships

Gaps between researchers and research users

Character and credibility of evidence

Self perceived roles of research generatorsPielke (2007)

Pure scientists:Only interested in doing research

Science arbiters:Respond to specific questions from policy makers but do not express preferences

Issue advocates:Aim to influence policy in a particular direction

Honest brokers:Clarify and potentially expand the policy options available to decision makers

Reasons to engage

Primary Goals (substantive):To improve policy making processesTo influence policy in a particular directionTo improve quality of policy discourseTo empower marginalised stakeholders

Secondary Goals (instrumental):To grow research communication capacityTo enhance institutional position and profileTo build partnerships and attract funding

Evidence/Science based

Interest/Values based

Confrontation/outside

Cooperation/inside

Advising Advocacy

Lobbying Activism

What is a PEC goal?A brief vision statement that describes a change you hope to contribute to through your policy engagement work. This could include:A change in a specific area of policy.A change in how evidence informs a particular policy. A change in how particular policy actors engage with research knowledge.A change in the prominence of a specific research theme on the public policy agenda.A change in the nature of the policy discourse.

PEC goal ingredients

1. What aspirational change do you seek?External - not just change within your TT

2. Who must change?Be as specific as you can

3. How must they change? Behaviour, attitudes, policy

4. What is the time frame?By date xx

What will success look like?

A great PEC goal is expressed as an outcome not an activity or plan. Write it as if the change has happened.

The long term outcome you seek is likely to be something you hope to contribute to rather than achieve entirely on your own.

Making your PEC goal more strategic

Our PEC goal is…

Before:

“To understand a changing India and to engage in and inform public debate.”

After:“Processes and structures to understand the governance of Indian cities will be better informed by a more transparent, rigorous and diverse evidence base.”

Our PEC goal is…

Before:“By 2014, XX will be positioned a key influencer and source of rigorous evidence within the UK, EU and UN policy spheres in relation to the post 2015 decision making process.”

After:“By 2015, debates within the UK, EU and UN policy spheres around the post 2015 decision making process will be better informed by the realities and experiences of the poorest and most marginalised.”

Our PEC goal is…

Before:“XX think tank will continue to serve needs of the country by undertaking quality research and analysis, and disseminate the same among broader sections of the society; consolidate its position as a leading think tank in xxx country that will focus on national economic and governance issues and build an institution which is comparable to its peers in terms of capacity, competence and credibility.”

After:“By 2015, national macroeconomic policymaking processes have improved and have become more pro-people.”

Session 2:

Introduction to the strategic planning process

How?

Strategic Planning Cycle

Who?

What? 1. Setting PEC goals

3. Situational analysis

2. Capacity assessment

5. Devise PEC action plan

6. M+E

4. Develop strategic approach (impact story)

Revise PEC plans?

1. Goals: What are the desirable outcomes from our PEC activity?

2. Context: How does our approach respond to the situation we are in?

3. Primary audiences and influencers: Who do we want to influence and

inform? What do we know about them?

4. Communications pathways: Who is best placed to communicate with

each of our audiences and what are the best ways to reach them?

5. Timescales: When will be the best times to communicate?

6. Resources: What do we need - what might we have?

7. Indicators: How will we measure progress/success?

Key questions that your PEC strategy should answer:

Do you need cross-institutional PEC strategy?

Fundraising strategy

Marketing & corporate comms strategy

Research strategy

Project research uptake

strategies

Institutional strategy

Project research uptake

strategies

Project research uptake

strategies

Institutional PEC

strategy??

Institutional PEC strategy

Allows TTs to be greater than the sum of their parts.

Supports institutional level strategy.

Provides space to strategise outside of the immediate needs of specific funders.

Provides longer term vision of your TT’s positioning and influence.

Programmatic research uptake

Enables tailoring of research design to needs of users.

Encourages ongoing stakeholder engagement.

Capacity building focused on both supply and demand of research knowledge.

Enables more effective packaging and dissemination of results.

Institutional PEC strategy

Encourages cross-institutional learning and collaboration.

Maintains independence and credibility.

Attracts new partners and collaborations.

Enables engagement in new policy spaces.

Programmatic research uptake

Useful data and stories about uptake are captured.

Improves understanding of policy processes in specific contexts.

Increases chances of high quality research informing policy processes.

Channels funding to research communications.

Session 3.1:

Organisational and individual capacity assessment

Assessing PEC capacity

Individual capacitiesPersonal capabilities to engage in policy processes and communicate research

Organisational capacitiesInstitutional commitment to PEC and ability to engage

External capacitiesKey external stakeholders’ knowledge skills and attitudes needed to understand and/or use research

Internal context:ResourcesStrategyStructure

External context:Political SocialTechnological

Individual capacities

Information literacy (i.e. skills in finding and appraising academic literature)

Internal knowledge management

Ability to communicate with non-specialists

Ability to communicate clear messages

Ability to exploit/utilise policy environment (policy entrepreneurship)

Ability to create and support networks

Ability to carry out, monitor and evaluate PEC work.

Organisational capacities

Theory of change that supports policy engagement is embedded in institutional vision and mission.

Ability to deliver high quality research and knowledge.

Ability to ensure sustainability of policy engagement activities.

Ability to plan and manage PEC work.

Ability to respond to changing policy environment.

Ability to involve stakeholders in all stages of research.

External capacities

Ability to understand research and skills in finding and appraising evidence.

Strength of incentives to consider and use evidence in policy making processes.

Ability to bring new ideas/evidence to bear on policy discourse and decision making.

Weighing the risks and benefits of PEC

Depending on your approaches and the local context there may be risks associated with PEC activities.

You need to determine:

What is the risk of carrying out policy engagement and communications activities?

What is the potential benefit of PEC in terms of research uptake, policy impact, changes to people’s lives?

Comparing risks of action or inaction

You also need to consider the risk of not growing your capacity to engage in policy discourse and strategic research communication.

What is the risk to the likelihood of good quality research informing policy and practice?

What is the risk to your reputation and profile?

Assessing risks: what sort of risks?

1. Identify possible risk areas• People, reputation, relationships• Decline in research quality• Misrepresentation of research findings• Lack of demand for evidence• Conflict with funders’ priorities

2. Assess the impact/likelihood of the risk• How severe is the possible impact?• How likely is it to happen?

Assessing risks: what is the level of risk?

3. Think of how to mitigate the risk• What can you do to mitigate the risk?• Can you take action to make it less likely?• Can you make it less harmful?

4. Decide on your course of action• What level of risk remains?• Do the benefits outweigh the risks?

Session 3.2

Situational Analysis

Or CONTEXT IS EVERYTHING!

Mapping the policy and knowledge landscapes

If you intend to build bridges between research and policy or actively engage in policy influencing you must first understand the policy making and knowledge environment.

Some key questions: How is policy made in relation to your key areas? What relevant policy processes are ongoing? What are the workings of your basic political systems? Hidden power – who really controls the agenda? Invisible power – values, norms, social hierarchy? What access do you have to key decision makers and

influencers? Whose knowledge counts? What knowledge systems and networks exist? When are the best opportunities to influence change?

Monitoring and Evaluation

Agenda Setting Decision

Making

Policy Implementation

Policy Formulation

Civil Society

DonorsCabinet

Parliament

Ministries

Private Sector

Young, J (2004)

Value added in policy knowledge

Understanding of policy and knowledge landscape enables you to:

Identify and recognise engagement opportunitiesFlag possible entry points in the policy processTailor research to user needsGrow capacity of users to engage with and understand researchGuide selection of research communications tactics and frame research for policy audiences.

Contextual analysis tools

Power mapping Stakeholder mapping Network mapping Audience analysis Market research Influence mapping SWOT analysis Forcefield analysis

Theory of change and engagement strategy

Network Mapping Steps 1 to 5

Based loosely on the highly respected PIPA process (PARTICIPATORY IMPACT PATHWAYS ANALYSIS) which was developed for research organisations and pioneered by the International Centre for Tropical Agriculture (CIAT).

1. List stakeholders

2. Categorise them

3. Map against one another

4. Analysing policy role and attitude

5. Draft your impact story

The purpose of the Network Mapping exercise is to enable you to draft your impact story:

A brief summary of your strategic approach to achieving the change you want.

Your strategic approach should reflect what you learnt about the policy and knowledge landscape from your mapping exercise.

Network Mapping – step 1

List key stakeholders including those expected to change in some way (behaviour, policy, attitudes) and those that can influence the issue. They may include:

PartnersFundersIndividualsGroups of individualsCivil society organisations AcademicsPolicy actorsMedia

Network Mapping – step 2

Categorise your stakeholders and consider what level of access you have to them:

1. Partners and funders2. Researchers3. Civil society4. Policy maker5. Others including

private sector, media etc

1. Core partner2. Good relationship3. Some relationship4. Distant relationship5. No relationship

Type of stakeholder Access

Network Mapping – step 3

Consider the relationships that your identified stakeholders have

to one another:

Do some influence others?

Are there groupings by network or policy sphere?

Are there any hidden linkages or influencing pathways?

Can you now think of any more actors - particularly those that

influence others?

Network Mapping - step 4

Analyse each of your stakeholders using the following criteria:

A. What is their attitude towards the issue? Supportive, neutral, negative

B. How influential are they in contributing to the change you seek?

Low, medium, high

Network Mapping - step 5

Based on the discussion you have had about the policy and knowledge landscape and the network map you have produced develop a brief description of your approach to achieving the change you want.

Your impact story (max 200 words) should sit alongside your PEC goal or vision.

PEC goal (vision) = The change we want

PEC impact story (mission) = Our strategy for achieving it

Your impact story should briefly summarise your strategic approach to achieving the change you want. It may contain the following elements:

How will your policy engagement and communication activities influence key stakeholders’ behaviours and attitudes?

Who are you going to prioritise and why? What are you going to have to do? (build internal capacity,

establish networks, engage media etc) When will it happen – is there a broad timeline?

Your approach should reflect what you learnt about the policy and knowledge landscape from your mapping exercise.

Session 4:

Analysing audiences and appropriate communication pathways

Why does research communication matter?

What is research communications?

Research communication is defined as the ability to interpret or translate complex research findings into language, format and context that non experts can understand.

It is not just about dissemination of research results and is unlike marketing that simply promotes a product. Research communications must address the needs of those who will use the research or benefit from it.

Communication not as Dissemination…

but as engagement

Effective research communications

Distillation of research findings Use of plain language Making information accessible Tailored communications for different audiences Identification of the needs of the target groups

Consider technical barriers, language and cultural

factors etc

Three ingredients of effective communication

Main delivery channels

Communications throughout research project that may inform:

Research agendaMethodological choicesCommunications strategy

Research Programmes

Communications Pathways

1. Who is best placed to communicate with each of your target audiences? Who has the skills, knowledge, contacts, legitimacy, networks?

2. How do your audiences access information and what/who influences them?

3. What kind of tactics will help you engage with specific audiences?

4. What kind of communication outputs/activities will be most effective in reaching your audiences? Tweets, blog, policy brief, workshop, report, media, journal?

Timescale

When will be the best time to influence policy or practice?

What are the planned events and processes where you could present your research?

Particular opportunities to collaborate with others?

Are you tracking policy environment to support planning?

Resources

Have you already mapped out the activities you plan to undertake?

What are the major resource implications – time, materials, skills?

Will resource limitations or capability issues mean making any hard choices – how will you prioritise between desirable communications activities?

When Outputs and pathways

Resources Audience(s) Expected outcomes

Launch of project

•Press release to national media and networks

•Launch Website

Project comms officer Policy makers, Civil society orgs

Researchers, funders

Awareness of project and interest in collaboration

Year 1 •Launch Blog • Launch Facebook page + Twitter account•Project e-newsletter•Working Papers online

Researchers time and support from comms officer

All

Academics

Inform policy debate

Grow credibility of project

Year 2 •Workshops•Policy briefings

•Working papers

$$$ Policy makers, civil society orgs

academics

Research design and uptake

Year 3 High level roundtablePolicy briefingsFinal reportPress conferenceJournal articles

$$

$

Comms officer

Researcher’s time

Policy makers

NGOs, funders, decision makers

Practitioners

academics

Policy/practice changes

Influence research agendas

Session 5:

Next steps in developing your PEC strategy

How?

What we covered in this workshop

Who?

What? 1. Setting PEC goals

3. Situational analysis

2. Capacity assessment

5. Devise PEC action plan

6. M+E

4. Develop strategic approach (impact story)

Revise PEC plans?

Template for institutional policy engagement strategy

Strategy preamble - providing context – why is this strategy needed and how does it relate to other strategic planning frameworks such as a wider institutional strategy. Who owns it? How was it developed, who was consulted and who is it reviewed by?

Version – date last reviewed

Timeframe – all strategic planning documents need to be time bound. 18 months/2 years/5 years?

Strategic goals – Broad outcomes that this strategy and the work associated with it is designed to bring about (or contribute to). A series of brief vision statements making it clear what success will look like in year x.

Situational analysis – this may be organised by theme, policy area, or relate to specific goals. It will briefly set out the context in which you are engaging in policy and delivering research communication. It should reflect both elements of internal and external analysis.

Theory of change – You strategic approach/impact narrative

Strategic framework

Goal 1.State any links to how this relates to broader institutional strategy

Specific objectives(steps towards achieving your goal)These should be SMART and identify key stakeholders

Activities/OutputsEngagement activities/plans

IndicatorsMilestonesKPIs

ResourcesPeople/Who?NetworksBudgets

Goal 2.

Goal 3.