1

How Policy-Makers View Evidence: Lessons from the

RWJF Synthesis Project

Claudia WilliamsAZA Consulting

June 25, 2006

2

Why aren’t research results better used by policy-makers?

Policy-makers are in information overload

Research does not pass the “so what” test

Research results are not translated for policy decisions

• Too technical and indirect

• Isolated findings that have not been synthesized

Results are not fed into best channels

Opinion leaders, lobbyists and press

Use people not paper

Often need basic information

Won’t read long reports

Skim for “story line” and conclusions

Policy-maker Researcher

Journals and research conferences

Peer-reviewed journals

Information is technical and sophisticated

Reports often 50+ pages

Lead with methodology and background. Results last.

Information Channels

Informationhabits

Level ofInformation

Format

Mismatch between policy and research

4

Joseph Nye expressed it well

“It's a totally different world, government, from academics. In academic life, there's no premium on time, the premium is on getting it just right. In government, if you haven't got the right answer by four o'clock this afternoon when the president meets with the prime minister, that perfect paper you get in a little bit late is an "F.” The idea that I would have time to read a thirty page paper -- ! I used to write them, and I found that I couldn't read them (when I worked in government)…

So this problem of how do you take chaotic reality and try to shape the right questions, even before you get answers, is very different in the government setting than in the academic setting. Because in the academic setting there's a luxury, there's no time limit. You can sort your way through it, figure it out; if you don't have the answer you go back to the library and look up more data and so forth. In government you either solve the problem or get the right answer quickly or it doesn't happen at all. And it's quite a different set of skills. The premium we put on time makes a huge difference.”

Joseph Nye, Dean of the Kennedy School of Government1997 University of California at Berkeley Interview

Synthesis development process

6

Synthesis strategies Choose topics carefully

Create meaning not noise

Synthesize bodies of information

Pair research with policy expertise

Use active dissemination

7

Choose topics carefully

Select perennial “thorn in the side” issues

Solicit topic ideas from policy audience• Start with “what is on their plates”• Make sure topics pass “so what” test

Certain policy decisions—often big ideological questions—are not answered or addressed through better information

Work with advisory group to narrow and select best topics

8

9

Create meaning not noise

Help organize and manage information, addressing not aggravating information overload

Make synthesis visual and skimmable, leading with conclusions and telling a story

Policy questions drive the information, not the intricacies of the research

Use multiple layers so users can read at different levels

10

Synthesize bodies of information

Synthesize bodies of evidence instead of producing isolated findings

Organize, structure and make sense of information, putting it into understandable frameworks

Bring diverse findings onto the same footing • Compare and weigh findings• Reach conclusions based on best evidence

11

Pair research with policy expertise

This approach does not come easily to many researchers

Best known researcher often not best synthesizer

Requires a team approach

The process is iterative and intense

12

Use active dissemination

Goals of dissemination: share findings and foster discussion and dialogue

Researchers need a way to communicate more directly with policy-makers

Partner with knowledge broker and convening organizations

13

Methodological issues

Started with notion of a clear bar…but weaker literature sometimes needs to be discussed

Policy staff want to reach their own conclusions about research findings

Synthesis should not mask details on the approach, methodologies and bias of underlying evidence

• Compare results• Evaluate methods• Technical information separated out

Synthesis framework

TRANSLATE AND ORGANIZE• Build conceptual frameworks• Construct bridges• Organize around policy issues

RESEARCH FINDINGS ARE:• Too long and complicated• Fragmented • Unclear and confusing

BUILD INFRASTRUCTURE• Tracking function • Credible review• Advisory group

CREATE FORMAT AND DESIGN• Short and skimmable• Objective and balanced• Provocative• Links to other resources

The Problem

The Synthesis Solution

ENGAGE AND DISSEMINATE• Foster dialogue• Actively engage• Get press attention

Use Results to

Improve

Research

Topics?

Audience?

Partnerships?

15

Rules to live by Government “think tank” staff are ideal audience

Syntheses should lay out areas where the evidence points to a clear conclusion as well as areas where there is debate

Syntheses need policy as well as research input throughout

Syntheses should be candid, objective and credible

16

Contact information

Projectemail synthesisproject@rwjf.orgweb site www.policysynthesis.org

David Colby, RWJF

Claudia Williams, AZA Consulting phone 571.641.3030email cwilliams@azaconsult.com