{"id":1370,"date":"2013-10-07T18:35:29","date_gmt":"2013-10-07T23:35:29","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/onthinktanks.org\/articles\/\/"},"modified":"2016-01-20T18:37:03","modified_gmt":"2016-01-20T23:37:03","slug":"quality-control-a-few-options-for-think-tanks","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/onthinktanks.org\/articles\/quality-control-a-few-options-for-think-tanks\/","title":{"rendered":"Quality control: a few options for think tanks"},"content":{"rendered":"

[Editor’s note: you can read more about\u00a0peer review systems\u00a0<\/a>for think tanks and\u00a0research quality control<\/a>.]<\/em><\/p>\n

Last month I visited the Think Tank Fund in Hungary. It was my first time there and I got to meet the whole team (I think). The whole week turned out to be a mini festival of discussion and debate on think tanks that I hope will be repeated soon. Throughout the week we came back to a few issues and questions. One such question is the matter of research quality control (to which I would also add communications quality control, and, why not management, too? just “quality control”, then.) As a way of kicking off the conversation I thought I would share a short reflection on this subject. A few years ago I had to interview candidates for a communications manager. We asked all the candidates about quality control: what would you do to ensure the high quality of the outputs produced? We expected (and got) answers that focused on systems and processes. This particular candidate (who got the job) said: if you want good quality outputs then hire competent people. I will make sure my team is made up of competent people. There is no substitute for having good researchers, communicators and managers. All the systems and processes in the world will be useless without competence.\u00a0What can organisations do to address quality control<\/a>? In particular, what can small and resource-strapped organisations do? Here are some ideas:<\/p>\n