A Bridge too far? Reflections on 21st Century Diplomacy @CumberlandLodge

After two days of presentations and conversations with a distinguished group of academics, Foreign and Commonwealth Office officials and think tank professionals, I am in an upbeat mood. I thought it was indeed possible to ‘bridge the academic-foreign policy divide’.

But first what was this divide we were asked to reflect upon? There were a number of divisions at play but I will just briefly reflect on two – an intra-academic one and an inter-professional one. One challenge is actually within the academy itself where they remains a degree of suspicion about how far and in what kind of manner we might engage and liaise with other communities, especially government. Notwithstanding the impact agenda and associated emphases on public engagement and working beyond the academy, delegates did reflect on the fact that academics have mixed views regarding such endeavours.

Inter-professionally, it was repeatedly noted that academics and foreign policy professionals have their own routines and rhythms and one common complaint is that academic writing and speaking is too technical and at times opaque. Academics wishing to reach out to foreign policy professionals need to be mindful that they need to develop a capacity to write and speak straight forwardly without being unduly simplistic. Being concise was also judged to be an advantage. For academics, the foreign policy arena is also filled with its own qualities, which can be off-putting to outsiders (such as the widespread use of technical acronyms and even the very spaces where foreign policy work gets undertaken).

Responding to the provocation that there were divides to be overcome, much of the conversation turned on how academics in particular can help themselves by being straight forward, persistent in terms of making personal contacts and clear on what they thought they had to offer in terms of knowledge sharing. However, they also needed to recognise that their ideas and input might not deliver obvious measures of ‘impact’ and ‘influence’, which in itself is not unique to the foreign policy-academic nexus. At least one academic delegate recalled their role in producing a report for government which bore no record of the role that individual had made to the production process.

One notable feature of the event was the time given over to networking and the exchange of experience and I hope that many participants will go away inspired about how they might engage with one another in the future (including their fellow delegates). As I noted with reference to my own experiences, it can be challenging as you engage with a different community with its distinct professional needs. But it can also be very rewarding as you get the opportunity to have your ideas questioned (at times cross-examined) and indeed consumed in ways that you might not have anticipated.

Finally, we owe a debt of gratitude to Al Pinkerton and Rachael Squire who worked very hard with colleagues at Cumberland Lodge to produce a convivial meeting. Our thanks also to the British Academy for providing financial support.



2 thoughts on “A Bridge too far? Reflections on 21st Century Diplomacy @CumberlandLodge

  1. Reblogged this on The Culture of Enthusiasm and commented:
    Fascinating. Here are some initial thoughts from me on doing engagement, inter-professional working and extending our interest (or do I mean obsession) with policy. Thanks for the post – Klaus.

    This post highlights the challenge for academics who are interested in communicating their work to new audiences but aren’t really sure whether engagement is something they “do” or want to do. The anxiety often relates to: what happens if I don’t? My suggestion: if it isn’t something you enjoy, team up with people who do enjoy it. And go from there. Although I also accept the idea of teaming up might also be going against the grain.

    I have experienced similar challenges and opportunities regarding inter-professional engagement in the environmental policy context – at government, regional and local levels. We work on different timescales, in different languages and different styles. I think secondments can really help here – but this requires openness on both sides and significantly time!

    My final point relates to the focus on “policy” – imagine – academic research influencing, say, foreign policy. Pretty sexy. Holy grail of impact – particularly if you’ve documented it. But, and this relates to most government level work like this, the policy is the product – what about the process and practice? For those of us interested in doing this work: How does our research make a difference there? With those, for example, foreign office workers on the ground in locations around the world? Or in London, taking committee meeting minutes? Being in the back office, dealing with local politics? What difference can academic research have here? What might academic researchers do here? Might “policy” be interested in what academic research might offer? Plus who else might we talk to if we work with middle managers and new starters in policy settings? We are encouraged to look upwards to the highest levels of policy – but I’ve found web editors, press officers, analysts, and the evidence team (to name but a few) to be key agents in bridging the divide. But, of course, it’s easier to measure citations in policy products than conversations over tea at a conference.

    • Thanks Hillary for your response. There is much here that resonated with me. And yes those conversations over tea, dinner, and in the corridor are often the ones that make a lasting impression (rather than impact?).

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 )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ 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 )


Connecting to %s