How to communicate effectively with policymakers: combine insights from psychology and policy studies

Abstract

To communicate effectively in policymaking systems, actors need to understand how policymakers process evidence and the environment in which they operate. Therefore, we combine psychology and policy studies to produce a three-step strategy. First, do not bombard people with evidence. Human beings have too much information to process, and they use heuristics to filter information to make decisions quickly. Synthesise and frame evidence to help you tailor it to the ways in which policymakers demand and understand information. Second, find the right time to act. Timing matters during key individuals' patterns of thinking and the alignment of conditions in political systems. Third, engage with real world policymaking rather than waiting for a 'rational' and orderly process to appear. To present evidence during mythical stages of a 'policy cycle' is misguided, and to 'speak truth to power' without establishing legitimacy and building trust may be counterproductive. Our overall message is pragmatic, not Machiavellian: effective communication requires the suppliers of evidence to see the world from the perspective of their audience and understand the policy process in which they engage.

Knowledge management for policy impact: the case of the European Commission’s Joint Research Centre

“…Policymakers seek reliable 'shortcuts' to consider enough high quality evidence to make good decisions quickly (Cairney and Kwiatkowski, 2017). The sheer amount of available evidence is beyond the capacity of the human mind without the assistance of research synthesis.…”

“…First, policymakers do not simply respond to facts, partly because there are too many to consider, and not all are helpful to their aims. Instead, they use cognitive shortcuts to manage information (Cairney and Kwiatkowski, 2017). Second, they operate in a complex policy environment containing: many policymakers and influencers in many levels and types of government; each with their own rules and norms guiding collective behaviour and influencing the ways in which they understand policy problems and prioritise solutions; and, each responding to policy conditions-including demography, mass behaviour, and economic factors-often outside their control (Cairney and Weible, 2017).…”

“…Effective researchers recognise that the evidence does not speak for itself and that a 'deficit model' approach-transmit evidence from experts to non-specialists to change their understanding and perception of a problem-is ineffective (Hart and Nisbet, 2012). Rather, to communicate well is to know your audience (Cairney and Kwiatkowski, 2017).…”

“…Communication skills help researchers connect with policymakers, stakeholders and citizens, as well as they connect with their peers, by reducing the cognitive load required to understand the message, and/ or engaging the audience emotionally to increase interest and the memorability of the evidence (Cairney and Kwiatkowski, 2017). The adoption of these skills requires culture change.…”

The UK government’s imaginative use of evidence to make policy

“…They use two shortcuts to gather information quickly: 'rational' ways to establish the best evidence and sources of evidence, and 'irrational' ways to understand policy problems, drawing on emotions, habits, and deeply held beliefs (Cairney and Kwiatkowski 2017;Kahneman 2012, p. 20;Haidt 2001, p. 818;Alter and Oppenheimer 2009, p. 220). The accumulation of scientific knowledge, and large capacity of government, does not solve this problem (Simon 1976;Botterill and Hindmoor 2012;Cairney and Kwiatkowski 2017;Cairney and Weible 2017). Rather, policymakers have too many problems to which to pay attention, too many solutions to consider, and too many choices to make, based on more information than they can process.…”