{"id":683,"date":"2015-04-13T21:33:14","date_gmt":"2015-04-13T21:33:14","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/onthinktanks.org\/?p=683"},"modified":"2016-01-15T01:45:43","modified_gmt":"2016-01-15T01:45:43","slug":"what-is-a-think-tanks-endogenous-capacity-and-why-does-it-matter","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/onthinktanks.org\/articles\/what-is-a-think-tanks-endogenous-capacity-and-why-does-it-matter\/","title":{"rendered":"What is a think tank\u2019s endogenous capacity and why does it matter?"},"content":{"rendered":"

[Editor\u2019s note: This is the\u00a0third\u00a0of a series<\/a>\u00a0edited by\u00a0Elizabeth Brown<\/a>,\u00a0Aprille Knox<\/a>, and\u00a0Courtney Tolmie\u00a0<\/a>at Results for Development,\u00a0focusing on think tanks\u2019 context<\/a>. The series addresses a subject of great importance to think tanks as well as to those supporting them. It provides a substantial contribution to\u00a0On Think Tanks\u2019 efforts to promote a more nuanced discussion on the subject<\/a>. If you want to be a\u00a0guest editor for On Think Tanks<\/a>\u00a0please get in touch. This post is based on the study \u201cLinking Think Tank Performance, Decisions, and Context<\/a>,\u201d undertaken by Results for Development Institute in partnership with the University of Washington and with generous support by the Think Tank Initiative.]<\/em><\/p>\n

From macro organization-wide decisions to micro day-to-day project choices, think tanks are strategically, if often implicitly, responding to context.<\/p>\n

They\u2019re doing so by leveraging their endogenous capacities, or the capacities that result from think tanks\u2019 choices in the way that they select, combine, and manage factors of production to meet their organizational objectives. Input factor choices, such as quality and quantity of\u00a0research staff<\/a>, short-term and long-term research\u00a0priorities and topics<\/a>, and the\u00a0balance of research or advocacy-oriented work<\/a>, all contribute to a think tank\u2019s endogenous capacity.<\/p>\n

For the purposes of our research, we divided these capacities into the following four broad categories:<\/p>\n

    \n
  1. Credibility Capital: Factors that contribute to the institutional reputation of a think tank, including:\u00a0research quality<\/a>; type of evidence produced; research agenda; and\u00a0political party<\/a><\/li>\n
  2. Communication Capital: Factors that contribute to the organization\u2019s ability to produce and present high quality, policy relevant research using a broad array of\u00a0channels<\/a>, including: communications capacity and media.<\/li>\n
  3. Social Capital: Factors that help think tanks to build trust over time, including: institutional origins and\u00a0governance<\/a>; institutional ties; and network affiliations.<\/li>\n
  4. Resource Capital: Factors related to the\u00a0funding<\/a>\u00a0strategy undertaken by a think tank that enables it to hire and pay staff, manage the organization, and undertake communications and operations tasks, including: funding and finances.<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n

    We found \u2013through focus group discussions, interviews with think tank staff, a global survey of think tanks, and our literature review\u2013 that there are many ways in which think tanks are taking advantage of their internal capacities as a response to external, exogenous factors. These capacities influence the decisions of think tank executive directors and project teams regarding policy problems to focus on, research decisions, audiences, and communications channels. It is this ability to strategically utilize resources and adapt to shifting contextual issues and priorities that sets think tanks up for success.<\/p>\n

    Below is a smattering of both the seemingly obvious and somewhat surprising strategies that think tanks recommend for leveraging endogenous capacities:<\/p>\n