How Communications Teams Can Increase Trust – Transparify’s Take

For think tank researchers, governmental transparency is like oxygen. You can operate with little, but it’s hard to get things done. To provide informed analysis, we need data, financial information and other governmental records. For this reason, too, many policy researchers have favored the worldwide movement towards more open government. More openness means faster progress for research and better evidence for assessments.

If you accept some form of this argument, it follows (for most people) that think tanks themselves should be transparent. By being transparent, a think tank is a credible advocate for government to be more open. Moreover, the research itself is more credible if it is transparent about the financial, academic and data resources it draws on. Citizens (and decisionmakers) want to be able to trust an analysis. There are a number of ways of earning such trust, and being open is perhaps the most attractive long-term strategy.

The case in favor of transparency is, of course, well-established. Yet a closer look at the think tank websites, in the UK and internationally, shows that not all think tanks exhibit such transparency in practice. One UK initiative, Who Funds You, showed that only some UK think tanks are highly transparent about their donors. Our own initiative, Transparify, found that less than a quarter of 169 think tanks worldwide are fully transparent about who funds them. In other words, the majority of think tanks consume transparency but do not produce it.

In our view, this is where communications teams should come in to ensure that think tanks are more transparent. At their best, communications teams can connect institutions to the outside world, and bring new ideas in, in addition to pushing ideas out. Moreover, building trust is a critical long-term task for communications teams at think tanks. Getting noticed is only the first step towards having impact. Trust is needed to convert attention into action.

In think tanks, communications teams are best placed to generate this trust. They have time to concentrate on long-term transparency. Think tank managers, by contrast, face divergent tasks, with a strong priority on fundraising. Communications teams can be more aware of the programmatic need to build public trust than researchers, who may be focused on research results and the ongoing discussions among colleagues in their field. Although financial departments are often enthusiastic about being transparent (see the post of World Resources Institute’s CFO, Steve Barker), they are not always aware that they, too, can contribute content to a think tank website. A few development officers may need convincing that donors are not a hoardable treasure. They can worry that donor lists will be raided. It’s an understandable concern, but not one that is overwhelmingly plausible. Most people with minimal charitable instincts receive multiple solicitations a week. Being a highly trusted think tank is one of the best arguments one can make to donors for deserving support.

Bringing these different parts of a think tank together – management, researchers, finances, development – the communications team can play the lead role in ensuring a think tank becomes more transparent. Though other departments are involved, the Head of Communications is the most likely Chief Trust Officer of a think tank, in establishing a connection between the institution and the wider public.

Financial transparency is not the only type of transparency that matters, but it is a great entry point for the move towards more accountability. This, too, may be a reason why many think tanks have embraced transparency in recent years (here, for example, CGD’s post on transparency).

How to go about this practically? Becoming transparent does not need to take much time. Transparify has a list of think tanks that demonstrate exemplary transparency, we are willing to help, and have put together a quick guide on how to become a five-star institution, here.

We will undertake another rating of think tanks at the end of 2014 (current UK results here), and hope to have many of the think tanks that contribute to WonkComms among the leaders in the field. It would be great for the think tanks themselves, and for building the public trust in policy research that we all need to succeed.

—————–

Hans Gutbrod runs Transparify, an initiative aimed at increasing think tank transparency. Transparify is funded by the Think Tank Fund of the Open Society Foundations. Hans has worked in different think tank contexts, is a regular contributor to On Think Tanks, and also set up Find Policy, a site that delivers faster and more focused search of think tank research. Hans is on Twitter.

Tagged with: , ,
Posted in Opinion
3 comments on “How Communications Teams Can Increase Trust – Transparify’s Take
  1. asouth says:

    Transparency is an issue that has become increasingly important in the medical research world in recent years. This is about more than just openness about who funds the research – it includes openness about what research is being conducted, the methods of that research, and all the results. The #Alltrials movement is an example of this, along with the open access and data sharing policies of an increasing number of journals and regulators. This brings challenges with it, but it’s definitely the way things are going.
    Research organisations that don’t engage with the transparency agenda are going to suffer in the long-run.

  2. Thanks for this great post, Hans. You have indeed set the bar high for think tank communications professionals when you write:

    “the communications team can play the lead role in ensuring a think tank becomes more transparent. Though other departments are involved, the Head of Communications is the most likely Chief Trust Officer of a think tank, in establishing a connection between the institution and the wider public.”

    Your piece will be much appreciated where I currently work, at the Center for Global Development, and where I’ll begin working on Oct. 1, at the World Resources Institutes. I’m proud that both have earned a spot on your list of think tanks with five-star transparency rating from Transparify and I hope that other US tanks will soon join the list!

  3. I agree that this is a key role for Heads of Communications. However, the reality is that few think tanks in developing countries have a Head of Communications with any real power. These posts are, for the most part, held by junior officers or researchers doubling as communications coordinators or leads.

    In these cases the private nature of the networks that sustain managers and researchers matters more than the transparency imperatives of the organisation.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: