🤔 How Chatham House thinks about policy influencing

The simple stuff matters most: relationships and timing

When I was in the civil service, one of my then colleagues said to me that policy influencing was all about relationship building and timing. That's really stuck with me. It plays out in some of Cast from Clay’s ten commandments, and features in all of my internal messaging or when I speak at On Think Tanks or elsewhere, because if you don't have the relationships, it's really difficult to get any kind of traction. Similarly, on timing, you can have the most amazing policy product, but if you miss your moment, then you've missed your moment.

The information cacophony you've got to cut through

Those on the outside of government don’t often appreciate the sheer volume of demand and the amount of information that politicians are exposed to. It's a cacophony. Politicians and senior decision makers are balancing a whole range of things, including personal agendas, the government's objectives, the party's objectives, dealing with topical events, the spinning 24/7 news cycle, responding to campaigns, etc. Just keeping the wheels on the cart is a herculean task. And so any intervention has to be compelling and well-timed, and you have to play the long game if you're going to cut through. It requires patience, staying power, and allies. It is also often about luck.

Relentless messaging is essential

Advertising data tells us that you need to transmit a message seven times before people will take action. For the most part, think tanks tend to produce a report, they do an event, maybe they'll mention it on a podcast and try to get some media coverage, but then they move on to the next project. That's not good enough. If you actually want to influence policy–through the cacophony that decision and policy makers are exposed to–you've got to keep going until you're bored with it.

But first you have to cut through internally

We in communications are very good at planning, preparing, and delivering impressive communications externally. But in my experience, communications teams don’t devote enough time to their internal comms. We have to build up internal credibility and tell our story convincingly in order to get colleagues excited about comms and ultimately gain their buy-in to prioritise communications. It's important for us to do comms on our comms.

And that starts with the CEO

I’ve been fortunate to have bosses who completely get communications. If that’s not the case, I’d encourage comms leaders to invest time in understanding what makes your CEO tick. Why don't they get communications? What's going on there? Listen to your boss. Find what is important to them and then make the case as to why comms will make that easier, better, or more effective. I've yet to encounter a situation where the answer isn't better comms.

What is your unique selling point?

Influencing British foreign policy is absolutely Chatham House territory. If we can't influence the government that’s half a mile down the road from us, then we may as well pack up! When we published our foreign policy priorities for the UK government in May 2024, having compelling analysis and recommendations was important, but so was our brand as the leading British think tank on international affairs. Similarly important was the work that went into developing the priorities. The outreach, partnerships and alliance building, listening to officials and other key influences in the sector, establishing buy-in so that when the report was published our target audience were already warmed up to it. 

Artificial intelligence does not have policy credibility

AI can find a load of facts and put stuff together. But for Chatham House, we've never been about description. We're in the business of ideas and solutions. Compelling arguments and politically savvy recommendations come from accumulated expertise, and deep knowledge of the politics and decision-makers. A Chatham House intervention isn’t just impactful because it's well put together and compelling, but because it comes from Chatham House. We, and other think tanks, have a credibility and brand that’s taken years to establish, one that AI just does not.

Brand and credibility are paramount and matter to decision and policy makers. Traditional media have always taken what people or organisations say and presented it according to their editorial perspective. But politicians and senior officials don’t just read the newspapers, they go to the source because they place value in the brand and established kudos of the organisation, and interacting with that organisation is an important part of the politics of policy development.

→ We at Cast from Clay agree that AI cannot replicate a well-crafted brand, but it can drive significant efficiencies in how you operate. If you are thinking ‘how can I better use AI in my policy communications work?’ then we have just the course for you. Our 5 week online course goes through the fundamentals of AI, how you and your team can practically apply it, and what the broader implications are likely to be. It’s next running on the 15th September. Sign up here.

Show me an AI that can convene… I'll wait

The other obvious thing that Chatham House has that AI doesn't have is the ability to convene. Leaders, key influencers and political VIPs coming through London want to speak on the Chatham House stage. It's not the same as talking to a bot... This is where we add obvious value: through bringing people together and facilitating dialogue. 

The power of convening to build relationships and hash out compromises and potential solutions is immense. AI can help with planning but it cannot convene. This is a uniquely human skill that, with all our other assets like political judgement and empathy, helps us overcome disagreements through dialogue rather than conflict and inspires us to build a better world.

A big thank you to the 58 Policy Unstuck readers who have shared this newsletter with a friend or colleague.