Think tank Exchange -lessons and recommendations

Page 1

The Think Tank Exchange: Pilot Phase Enrique Mendizibal Stephen Yeo


What is project supposed to achieve? Foster collaboration among and between "think tanks" Which regions ď Ž

not NA or Western Europe

Which think tanks ď Ž ď Ž

didn't worry too much about definitional issues either free standing NGOs or university based research centres, but stretched even that


Foster Collaboration If that’s what you want, the obvious thing to do is to … … choose a topic to study, choose think tanks or run a competition among think tanks to study it Why didn't we go down that route?


Problems Where is the additionality? 

Want new collaborations but how are the matches made?

Results may be boring 

GDN does a lot of this - topic is X, get institutions to do a study for their country

Sustainability 

not clear that it encourages future collaborations


We tried something different Approach the problem via the people working in the think tanks ď Ž ď Ž

Instead of top down - choose a topic, find institutions willing to bid to work on it Build a cohort (eventually cohorts) of people who know each other, have worked together, and who can "broker" future collaborations with other think tanks

Brilliant idea But there are problems ‌


Problems with this approach Working indirectly (i.e. via think tank staff) is bound to take more time, even if it does in the end produce more sustainable change How long will it take you to influence enough think tank staff to make a difference? If this is a long-term approach, what can you offer participants and their institutions in the short run?


What we said would happen “we expect these participants to work on: 

At least one collaborative project with one other (or more) fellow participants; An action learning project focused on collaboration that involves all participants; A series of online/virtual webinars, online discussions, or other collaborations involving all participants or groups of them; and At least 4 face-to-face meetings to support and encourage stronger personal links between the participants.”

Everything in this list did happen, but not quite in the way we thought it would


What did happen? Everything in the list did happen But not in the way we thought it would


Matchmaking How were the projects conceived and the teams formed? We didn't do very much active matchmaking We used “Open Space Technology”  

OST - a wall and a lot of post it notes Everyone can see all the ideas "on the table” and choose what interests them


The Projects Ideas “on the wall� gradually converged into two projects through discussions among the participants in Lima Overall, we think this approach worked very well, despite the small number of people involved In retrospect a risky approach and it made the participants nervous, but it worked and we would use it again


What kind of projects? We envisaged a mixture of OD and "Policy" projects Some policy issues surfaced in Lima, but weren't enough participants interested to make them viable In the end all the projects were OD


Why did this occur? Probably the result of not specifying topics in the call ď Ž

The result was such a wide range of research interests that all they had in common was working in a think tank

Conclusion - if you want to be sure you have policy projects, you need to narrow the topic in the call


Teams We were expecting bilateral collaborations In the event, we got three projects  

2 multilateral 1 bilateral

Two issues  

Why did this happen? What impact did it have?


Why? Safety in numbers? Probably a result of the OD focus OD was what everyone had in common, but no one was an OD specialist  

Not their field of research Researchers are cautious and aren’t comfortable working outside their field of expertise

Large teams a risk reduction strategy


Did it matter? Slowed down the progress of the projects ď Ž

Harder to organize skype calls, more views to take into account etc

Is it a good or bad thing from the point of view of the overall objective (foster collaboration)? ď Ž

Exposed each team member to a lot of different think tanks, not just one


Communications / dissemination 1. Web portal 2. Blogging and tweeting around events 3. Videos, podcasts, and other multimedia

materials 4. The host’s communications teams would play a role in the event 1, 2 3 worked well, 4 worked ok but unevenly


Support for Collaboration - Technical Intranet for the exchange   

Google Groups for discussions Google Drive for shared documents Google Hangouts for webinars

Our impression 

Worked ok, but participants preferred familiar tools (email, Dropbox and Skype) or tools that they set up for themselves.


Support - Intellectual Comments by Enrique, Vanessa and Stephen Initial round of reviews of proposals by three experts in the field Teams were provided with copies of the reviews


Support - Intellectual No formal reviews after this No mentoring A weakness that needs to be addressed in Phase II? Our research suggests that some projects were very concerned



Future Exchanges? Carry on with the current approach  

General call for participants (no restriction on research interests) Let participants choose topics and allow them plenty of time to work together

Adjust the approach? 

Try to keep the advantages of the current approach but involve more participants and complete the projects more quickly

Organizational Development (OD) Policy Research (PR)


Two streams Two options or streams 

Organizational Development (OD) and Policy Research (PR)

Each characterized by an intensive teaching programme at the beginning, followed by a collaborative project   

Not everyone will progress from course to project A larger group get the teaching A smaller group get the opportunity to do a project as well


Two streams Timing – 15 months    

2 weeks for the course 1 month for project preparation and submission 1.5 months for project selection 12 months for project


Organizational Development (OD) Stream Aimed at those interested in management of think tanks / research projects Two-week intensive course in TT management held at the beginning of the project Mixture of theory lectures and visits to local think tanks Certificate received at end of course


OD Stream Participants find partners (one or multiple) and devise an OD project involving their own and other institutions  

To be carried out over next 12 months Could be an external consultancy for the think tanks being studied

This (second) stage is competitive 

Not everyone taking the course will be funded to do a project


OD Stream Would it work? It could be viewed as the pilot approach plus formal teaching Intensive teaching at the start of the project is designed to allow participants to discover potential partners Since it is a formal course, there is a tangible benefit for the participants (and their institution?)


Policy Research (PR) Stream Aimed at those who want to do research on a particular, albeit broad topic Specify a new topic each year


PR Stream Two week summer school on that research topic at the beginning Idea of intensive “bonding� session at the beginning Those who complete it get a qualification


PR Stream Commission a survey of the literature on the topic by a leading expert in the field ď Ž

aim is to identify what we do and what we don’t know

Participants pair up (?) and write proposals to investigate the "what we don't know" issues over the next 12 months


PR Stream Would it work? This stream is more academic (or at least research oriented) 

Would require links to good researchers / institutions working in the field to have credibility as a qualification

Partnership for Economic Policy (PEP) runs something similar 

Capacity building plus strong “steer” on the content of the research PEP has university partners


Other Possibilities Current design but over a shorter period   

Either OD or Policy Project 15 month period Bilateral or multilateral teams

Arguments against  

Two years is a more appropriate period Budgets are small, hard to give it higher priority


Other Possibilities A combination of the OD and Policy Streams?   

Intensive Course Short initial OD project Longer Policy Project

This was actually the first of the alternatives we considered Problem is the familiar one – how do we get matching on the policy project


Turn static files into dynamic content formats.

Create a flipbook
Issuu converts static files into: digital portfolios, online yearbooks, online catalogs, digital photo albums and more. Sign up and create your flipbook.