Previous
In a gripping and introspective keynote, Damien King dissected the harsh realities of influencing policy from the perspective of a seasoned practitioner. Using a powerful case study from Jamaica’s environmental sector, he took the audience through the lifecycle of a promising policy initiative, from ministerial commitment to total implementation failure. The talk, both analytical and laced with sharp wit, challenged think tanks to move beyond the allure of ministerial applause and into the murky, often resistant world of bureaucracy.
Watch the video below!
A picture-perfect beginning
Damien opened by recalling what he described as the “apogee of success” in think tank influence. On 18 November 2018, at precisely 7:34 pm, CAPRI launched its report Beyond PET Bottles and Plastic Lights: Fixing the Environmental Regulatory Framework. Present at the event was the Minister of Environment, who immediately proclaimed that the report answered every question he had about his portfolio. He pledged to implement all of the recommendations and, just four days later, called for a meeting with his top bureaucrats and the think tank to kickstart execution.
At that moment, Damien felt triumphant. “I could go home and die,” he joked. “Is that not the very summit of success?”
The pyramid of influence
To frame the lessons learned, Damien introduced a conceptual model he called the Pyramid of Influence. At its apex sits the policymaker, the individual with the authority to enact decisions. Direct engagement with this figure is necessary, but not sufficient. Below them lies the “policy constituency”, interested individuals and groups, or “policy wonks”, who can become advocates when armed with the right information. Deeper still are the general public and discourse shapers, often overlooked but essential in creating the atmosphere for change.
Think tanks, Damien argued, must seed public debate with non-sensational issues like fiscal transparency or the state of children in public institutions. “Nobody needs a think tank to discuss crime or poverty,” he quipped. “But they do need us to get them talking about the things that don’t trend on buses.”
He underscored that think tanks must elevate discourse, move debates from opinion to evidence, and expose their own methodologies to promote accountability. Just as importantly, they must model public engagement; visible participation begets broader involvement.
Communications: The real challenge
According to Damien, research is “relatively easy.” The real challenge lies in embedding ideas in people’s minds. He stressed the critical role of communications, urging think tanks to allocate dedicated staff, even if there are only three people in the entire organisation. “If one isn’t doing comms, you’re wasting your time,” he said flatly.
Communications, he added, must be strategic: identify targets broadly, select the right channels, time the release to fit media cycles, and tailor content to resonate with multiple audiences. A poorly timed launch or an unclear message can squander even the most rigorous research.
Stakeholder engagement: Give them ownership
One of the most important principles Damien highlighted was stakeholder ownership, particularly among politicians. “Policymakers don’t want to be told what to do,” he observed. “They want to stand at the podium, beat their chests, and look important.” Thus, think tanks must engage them early, speak their language, and allow them to present recommendations as their own. In short, influence requires tact as much as evidence.
This strategy worked initially. After the ministerial commitment and first meeting, CAPRI was asked to recommend which three policies to begin implementing. There were ten in total. The momentum was palpable.
Bureaucratic inertia: Where good policy goes to die
The story continues.
Then came the reckoning. Seven years after the minister’s public commitment, none of the ten recommendations had been implemented. Not one.
Demian described the reasons in detail, offering a sobering diagnosis of bureaucratic resistance. Civil servants, he explained, operate under entirely different incentive structures than elected officials or think tanks. Their motivations include self-preservation, power consolidation, and sometimes the concealment of inefficiencies or corruption. Bureaucrats often respond to new ideas with refrains like “we’ve tried this before,” “a process is already underway,” or “it’s too complex to implement now.” These aren’t just excuses; they’re survival strategies.
The deeper problem, Damien argued, is cultural. Bureaucrats view policy through the lens of institutional continuity and internal processes. “They are inherently anti-change,” he said. And unlike ministers, they do not rotate every few years; they are the enduring actors, the ones who determine long-term policy trajectories.
Understanding bureaucrats: A call for ethnographic intelligence
Faced with this reality, Damien urged think tanks to invest in “bureaucratic ethnography”, a systematic study of how different departments and agencies function, how information flows, who holds influence, and how decisions are truly made. Every ministry, he noted, operates differently, and effective influence requires tailored strategies.
Think tanks must begin engaging civil servants as early as they engage ministers. Treat them as partners, not executors. Build relationships, understand their needs, and align recommendations with their institutional interests. “Feed their power,” Damien advised. “Cater to their incentives.”
Policy implementation is a multi-stakeholder endeavour
Damien argued that real implementation requires engaging all levels of the policy ecosystem: decision-makers, relevant publics, civil society, and the technocracy. “Unless you get all three right,” he said, “your policy is not going to fly.”
This insight is especially urgent in systems where ministerial turnover is high. In the seven years since the 2018 report launch, Jamaica’s environmental portfolio saw three different ministers. Meanwhile, the same bureaucrats remained. This, Damien said, is not an exception; it is the rule.
Conclusion: Between the Apogee and the Abyss
Damien King’s keynote was a masterclass in realpolitik for think tanks. Celebrated report launches and ministerial soundbites are seductive, but insufficient. True influence, he contended, lies not at the apex of the pyramid, but in navigating its full depth, from public discourse to civil service mechanics.
He closed with a challenge: think tanks must expand their theory of change, sharpen their communication strategies, and take bureaucratic dynamics seriously. Only then can they bridge the yawning gap between commitment and implementation.
This summary was generated with the support of AI tools