"Some researchers want evidence to speak for itself but how likely is it that an MP has time to read the source material and draw their own conclusions?"
Research Unravelled Ep9: Sarah Carter-Bell from UK Parliament's Knowledge Exchange Unit on how to communicate research in a policy maker-friendly way.
Hello,
Last October we launched our new podcast series - Research Unravelled. Since then we’ve been offering up monthly conversations between myself and a range of top research communications experts - hearing about the most complex challenges they face and how they overcome that complexity.
I’ve loved making the series. Every guest has been incredibly generous with their knowledge and they have shared many experiences that get to the heart of what makes this both a challenging and highly rewarding field to work in.
We’re looking forward to continuing the podcast later this year but first we’re going to take a little pause over the summer. That means this month’s episode is the last in this first series of Research Unravelled.
And it’s a fitting end, as we dive into one of the most urgent topics in research comms - how can you generate impact for research by engaging with policy makers?
To help shine a light on this in-demand question is my final guest of the series: Sarah Carter-Bell.
Sarah is Knowledge Exchange Lead at the UK Parliament’s Knowledge Exchange Unit - launched in 2018 to help the research community connect with policy makers and ensure their work feeds into decision making at a local and national level.
How we unravel complexity
Orinoco Communications is a creative agency that specialises in helping research organisations.
Here are some of the ways we ensure that research has the impact it deserves.
Strategy - need help understanding your audience, their values, and how to reach them?
Content creation - are you looking for a video, animation or podcast to tell your story or disseminate your research?
Get in touch for a chat about how we can help you to communicate your research.
The below excerpt has been edited for clarity and brevity…
How did the Knowledge Exchange Unit come about? What is its mission?
Sarah: The Knowledge Exchange unit was established in 2018. It came in as a bridge between Parliament and the research communities, enabling and enhancing connections on both sides.
It covers everything from sessions to enhance researchers’ understanding of UK Parliament, its use of research, to how to connect. Really important to us was to establish a friendly service from the outset, that central point of contact. So any researcher or a professional colleague can reach out with questions or advice to proactively build relationships and networks within the research sector and engaging with Parliament.
In 2020, obviously the world changed and demand for online contact increased. So the KU launched what's become a really popular regular newsletter called the Roundup. It lists all the current opportunities to engage with Parliament. It provides advice, shares other interesting content related to Parliament, and we still issue that.
What aspect of your work is especially complex?
Sarah: It’s often challenging for research to cut through and impact on policy. The hurdles and complexity probably stem from the nature of the two different worlds.
A researcher in an academic institution wears so many different hats. They're an educator providing guidance and support to students, they handle departmental responsibilities, occasionally they even get time to do some research!
And there's all that comes with that research - the bidding for funding, recruiting participants, ethics, submitting to REF. There's a culture of overworking within academia as well. Engaging with policy is often at the bottom of the list for many researchers.
Few universities include it in their workload planning. Some universities recognise ‘engagement with policy’ as a promotional criteria but usually it's not in its own right. So where's the motivation for researchers to engage with policy?
And policy makers wear many different hats too - MPs are elected to represent their constituency. They undertake casework and advocacy, they support local projects, and engage with community. They've got official duties to carry out, and they may want to champion their own passion areas for legislation and debate.
On top of that, they have all the usual office responsibilities, such as managing staff and budgets. So, again, where within all those hats is the motivation for policy makers to engage with research?
This paints quite a bleak picture, but I don't think, happily, that it's the case of ‘never the twain shall meet’. And the barriers can be easily hurdled if a researcher and policymaker can navigate the complexities on both sides.
How do you unravel that complexity?
Sarah: A synergy is that both researchers and parliamentarians are passionate about making change for good in the world.
So, key to cutting through the complexity is to build connections with the policy makers that care about your research area, find the parliamentarians that share your interests. It isn't as opaque as you think, and it's not as complex as it might seem.
The other similarity that I've already alluded to is time.
Policy makers are under significant time pressures, so are researchers. Policy makers are dealing with a huge volume of information, and they're pulled in multiple directions on a daily basis. But this means research is of huge value and it's essential.
Parliamentarians cannot be an expert in all the areas they must take decisions on. The experts are the researchers. But here's where the time complexity comes in again - researchers are really busy and their world expects them to communicate in a respected academic style.
That doesn't suit parliament. Parliamentarians need the research insights distilled into pithy one pagers that communicate the key considerations, simply, devoid of the jargon that comes with immersion in a research niche.
They also value evidence-based recommendations, and that's something not all researchers feel comfortable making. Some researchers prefer the evidence to speak for itself but how likely is it that an MP has the luxury of enough time to read the source material and draw their own conclusions?
So, the onus is very much on researchers to communicate succinctly, in an accessible format. Preparation is key. Having the information a parliamentarian or a specialist needs, ready to go, ahead of time, is essential.
The final thing is visibility.
Researchers often despair when trying to break through to engage with a parliamentarian. Many, many emails are sent and quite often radio silence is received.
Meanwhile, parliamentarians that draw on research face the hurdle of finding the researchers that they want to talk to.
Both sides are looking for each other.
And here's where Parliament's Knowledge Exchange Unit can enter to add some value. We need to enable that bridge between those two worlds. And visibility is the remedy to this complexity.
Parliament moves very, very fast. There may only be a week or a few days notice of the business that takes place in the chambers. We need to find researchers of expertise at are very short notice and engage with them quickly. So that's a challenge.
What helps us is when researchers are visible on the web, when they've highlighted their research expertise, when they've got blogs and accessible information available for us to find instantly, it makes all the difference.
Finding the right researcher quickly leaves us the rest of the time available for them to engage with parliamentarians and parliamentary staff, and it provides that opportunity to support that positive difference that everybody wants to see in the world.
What’s one piece of communications-related advice you’ve received that you keep coming back to?
Sarah: When I was working as a knowledge mobiliser in Bournemouth University, I went along to media training because I thought, ‘how can I get researchers, when they finally break through, to say the right things and prepare for when they get into Parliament or other policymaking environments?’
So, even if you’ve already done media training, my advice is - go back and do it again because it is the most fantastic preparation for giving oral evidence to a select committee.
In a university or research organisation, you're going to have access to a comms team or a press team that likely run training on this.
It might feel painful but get them to video you if you're going to present to a select committee and get them to ask you questions based on the brief that the select committee team provided you with. Then watch it back.
Don't be too critical of yourself, but instead ask yourself: Did I get my key messages across? Were my answers clear? And if you weren't happy with either of those, then perhaps you need to write it down in bullet form and take it with you. If you're going in to a select committee you can take your notes into the room with you.
Just be aware that media or others might be sat behind you and able to see your notes. Also be aware that you're going to be on TV, so be mindful of what you actually write on that paper. And that's another brilliant way to include any key statistics or technical terms that you're concerned you might fumble when you're giving evidence.