|
A self-assessment questionnaire
for researchers
Life and the literature point to four broad styles of policy entrepreneur:
story-tellers, networkers, engineers and fixers. The description
of these four models of policy entrepreneurship has been developed
by Simon Maxwell at ODI, in order to help researchers identify what
kind of policy entrepreneurs they are, so that they can capitalise
on their strengths, develop their weaknesses and improve the impact
of research on policy.
Story-tellers
Scheherazade was a consummate storyteller. She offered to marry
a sultan who had been so aggrieved by his wife's betrayal that he
had taken to marrying a different woman every day and having her
murdered the following morning. Scheherazade managed to survive
by telling him the most wonderful stories, which she spun out for
so long that she succeeded in bearing him several children and living
to a happy old age. There is a literature about the importance of
telling stories in changing policy. Roe developed the idea of development
narratives. He argued that one of the principal ways that practitioners,
bureaucrats and policy-makers articulate and make sense of complex
realities is through simplified stories or scenarios. Much of the
literature on this topic demonstrates that narratives can be profoundly
misleading and that 'counter-narratives' develop but there is no
doubt that they are incredibly powerful. It is not difficult to
think of powerful narratives which have informed policy: 'getting
the prices right', structural adjustment, the Washington Consensus,
the Post-Washington Consensus, debt-relief as the answer to poverty-reduction.
These are powerful stories which help us to get over to policy-makers
what the problem is and what the solution might be. Successful policy
entrepreneurs need to be good story tellers.
Networkers
Policy-making usually takes place within communities of people who
know each other and interact. If you want to influence policymakers,
you need to join their networks. President Lyndon Johnson talked
about being inside the tent or outside the tent. If you are inside
the tent, your voice is heard and you will have an influence. If
you are outside, you will not. Malcolm Gladwell provides a great
example of a networker in his book 'The Tipping Point' in his story
of Paul Revere, riding out in 1775 in America to raise the militia
against the British. He describes the fact that on that night, two
people set out. One was Paul Revere, and the other was William Dawes.
In all the villages that Paul Revere went to, the militia turned
out and defeated the British. In the villages that William Dawes
went to, no-one turned out to fight. Why is that? The answer is
that Paul Revere was networked and William Dawes was not. Paul Revere
was a well-known pewtersmith and silversmith, who sat on all the
committees, was well-connected, knew people and had their trust.
William Dawes did not. Researchers who are good networkers are likely
to have more policy influence that those who are not.
Engineers
The third model comes from the literature about 'street-level bureaucracy'
and is informed by this phrase: 'policy is what policy does'. There
can be a significant implementation gap between what politicians
and policy-makers think that they are doing and what actually happens
on the ground. Researchers need to work not just with the senior
level policy-makers, but also with the 'street-level bureaucrats'.
Who better to represent that way of working than Isambard Kingdom
Brunel. Unfortunately, the best story about him is apocryphal, but
it illustrates the point well. Brunel was very much engaged in the
debate about whether paddle wheels or screw propellers were more
efficient and powerful for moving boats. In order to test that theory,
the (sadly apocryphal) story is that he built one of each, tied
them together and put them in the Bristol Channel to see which would
tug the hardest. The story captures the idea of being engaged on
the ground and not just sitting in a laboratory. Researchers need
to become practically involved in testing their ideas if they expect
policy makers to heed their recommendations.
Fixers
The fourth and final model of the policy entrepreneur in our field
is the 'fixer'. The examples could include Rasputin and Machiavelli.
This model is about understanding the policy and political process,
knowing when to make your pitch and to whom. The literature on organisation
and management provides much evidence and advice about this approach.
Charles Handy, in 'Understanding Organisations' (1976) said that
if you want to change anything, you need first of all to think about
your source of power. Handy identifies these sources of power as:
physical power, resource power, position power, expert power, personal
power and negative power. As researchers, our 'expert' power is
often very powerful. If you are able to look a Minister in the eye
and tell them that by applying the principles of game theory to
a problem, the solution becomes obvious, they will normally crumble
and do what you say.
What are you?
Most people use all these styles at different times, and it is not
necessary to be adept at every style. However, if you over-use or
under-use any one of the four styles, you might consider whether
you should re-balance your activities - or perhaps find a partner
within your team who can complement your skills. Simon Maxwell has
developed a policy entrepreneurship
questionnaire, which you can fill out to assess which
entrepreneurship methods you are over- or under-using.
View this as pdf
(
130kb)
Back to Tools for Policy Impact index
|