{"id":2837896,"date":"2022-09-06T02:00:30","date_gmt":"2022-09-06T07:00:30","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/onthinktanks.org\/articles\/\/"},"modified":"2022-09-06T04:53:28","modified_gmt":"2022-09-06T09:53:28","slug":"patience-as-strategy-how-think-tanks-are-winning-the-long-game","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/onthinktanks.org\/articles\/patience-as-strategy-how-think-tanks-are-winning-the-long-game\/","title":{"rendered":"Patience as strategy: how think tanks are winning the long game"},"content":{"rendered":"

Impatience and frustration with the status quo motivates policy players to act. But patience determines <\/span>how<\/span><\/i> they act. <\/span>Amartya Sen<\/span><\/a> addressed one side of this debate in a chapter from <\/span>An Uncertain Glory: India and its Contradictions<\/span><\/i>: <\/span>\u2018The Need for Impatience\u2019<\/span><\/a>. He blamed patience for society\u2019s tolerance of poor progress. Quoting <\/span>The Devil\u2019s Dictionary<\/span><\/i><\/a>, he described patience as \u201ca minor form of despair, disguised as virtue.\u201d\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n

I agree that impatience drives <\/span>why<\/span><\/i> we act. But the case for patience is equally compelling. Think tanks that strategically channel patience are both discovering a path to achieve their goals and creating the conditions to sustain their wins. \u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n

Patience in collaborations<\/b><\/h1>\n

Joseph Asunka quoted<\/span><\/a> a powerful proverb during the OTT Conference 2022: \u201cIf you want to run fast, run alone. If you want to run far, run together.\u201d His words reminded me of a three-legged race I once ran. The objective was not merely to win, but to win <\/span>together<\/span><\/i>.\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n

The race rewards the patient. Successful pairs take the time to discover a mutual pace and coordinate clearly. They lean on each other. Poor patience damages partnerships. This costs them the race.<\/span><\/p>\n

If <\/span>social change is a team sport<\/span><\/a>, good collaborations are crucial to winning. But good collaborations demand time and effort. They\u2019re difficult to manage in a high-intensity policy environment. Exercising patience tactfully allows think tanks to determine the type of game they want to play, and with who and how they play it.\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n

Playing the long\u00a0game\u00a0<\/b><\/h1>\n

Playing the long game is an invitation for policy actors to \u2018play\u2019 with purpose. It encourages think tanks to make strategic decisions that align with their end goal: building systems that are evidence-informed, equitable, and inclusive – and sustainable<\/a>.\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n

Patience is key to playing the long game. Think tanks must exercise patience to <\/span>\u201cforge and heal relationships, rebalance power, and create new norms\u2026 even in the face of missed goals, injuries, or a string of losses in the short term.\u201d<\/span><\/a><\/p>\n

A compelling <\/span>17 year-long example<\/span><\/a> of this can be found in Latin America: think tanks motivated each other to engage with elections, shared knowledge, reflected on setbacks, and tried again when the political climate was favourable.<\/span><\/p>\n

Resisting the short\u00a0game<\/b><\/h1>\n

The benefits of playing the long game are well-established, but focusing on fast, short-term actions can still be tempting for think tanks. They may be tempted to adopt single-player mindsets in what\u2019s actually a team game when confronted with shortages in resources and time.\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n

In playing \u2018the short game\u2019, they compete to become \u2018star players\u2019. They claim credit, use collaborators to achieve their goals\u2014sometimes without valuing them\u2014and are unwilling to share risks. Working with such self-interest and exclusion risks perpetuating the same ills that think tanks have tried to cure.<\/span><\/p>\n

Resisting the short game means that recognising and pursuing collaborative action isn\u2019t optional, but essential. It bridges the action\u2013aspiration gap (the gap between what you want to achieve and how you achieve it). <\/span>AidData\u2019s<\/span><\/a> (US-based research lab) commitment to undertaking a one-year scoping exercise exemplifies this. Resisting the short game enabled AidData to meet its objective: developing purpose-driven, equitable exchanges with southern think tanks.<\/span><\/p>\n

Patience in\u00a0practice<\/b><\/h1>\n

If the long game relies on good collaborations, think tanks would benefit from learning to strategically manage these relationships. One approach is to identify the \u2018pain points\u2019 that cause impatience and to <\/span>strategically exercise<\/span><\/i> patience<\/span><\/i> in these instances.\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n

The Public Affairs Centre\u2019s<\/span> (PAC) knowledge partnership<\/span><\/a> with the Administrative Training Institute (ATI) illustrates this. The partnership\u2019s goal was to develop a foundation course for entry-level Indian state officials.\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n

This case highlights three areas (below), which are important to the strategic application of patience. The actions outlined below also align with the <\/span>principles of scaling impact<\/span><\/a>: justification, optimal scale, coordination, and dynamic evaluation. Although, this framework wasn\u2019t consciously adopted by PAC.<\/span><\/p>\n

1. Build good foundations\u00a0<\/b><\/p>\n

PAC took two years to enter a formal partnership with ATI\u2014a long time for think tanks! They initially reached an early agreement with ATI, but it was reset after a new director general was appointed.\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n

PAC had to re-assess its options: quit the partnership or be a team player. Being a team player would mean agreeing to changes, despite the bureaucratic hurdles!\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n

They decided to work as team players, exercise patience, and renegotiate. This enabled PAC to lay the foundation for a three-year partnership, built on mutual respect and trust.\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n

2. Be transparent and \u2018lay down your cards\u2019<\/b><\/p>\n

PAC\u2019s agreement was signed with ATI\u2019s leadership, but they needed to work with the teaching staff, who initially resisted the relationship. They feared that PAC may try to replace them or take charge.\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n

PAC\u2019s team held a series of workshops to mitigate this and develop a more equal collaboration. They were transparent about their role as co-creators of the course. They listened to the staff\u2019s concerns and ideas to generate solutions and to define the boundaries of the collaboration. These steps shifted how the relationship was seen\u2014from a vertical relationship of top-down power, to a horizontal relationship, where everyone felt more empowered.\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n

\u2018Laying down their cards\u2019 and being transparent changed the power dynamics within the collaboration, increased the diversity and inclusivity of views, and gained the teaching staff\u2019s trust and support.\u00a0\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n

3. Plan for the long term<\/b><\/p>\n

Since developing the course, PAC and ATI have acted to enhance its impact and strengthen their collaboration. They\u2019re now working on a secondary course, to invest in the long-term progress of state officials and facilitate continuous learning.\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n

PAC\u2019s strategic application of patience had a dual effect: it helped to strengthen their partnership in the long term and created opportunities to develop new partnerships, using this model, with other Indian states.\u00a0 By taking these steps, PAC developed a better process and generated important outcomes.<\/span><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

Impatience and frustration with the status quo motivates policy players to act. But patience determines how they act. Amartya Sen addressed one side of this debate in a chapter from An Uncertain Glory: India and its Contradictions: \u2018The Need for Impatience\u2019. He blamed patience for society\u2019s tolerance of poor progress. Quoting The Devil\u2019s Dictionary, he […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":18,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_acf_changed":false,"_relevanssi_hide_post":"","_relevanssi_hide_content":"","_relevanssi_pin_for_all":"","_relevanssi_pin_keywords":"","_relevanssi_unpin_keywords":"","_relevanssi_related_keywords":"","_relevanssi_related_include_ids":"","_relevanssi_related_exclude_ids":"","_relevanssi_related_no_append":"","_relevanssi_related_not_related":"","_relevanssi_related_posts":"","_relevanssi_noindex_reason":"","footnotes":""},"tags":[912,820,216,3266],"acf":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/onthinktanks.org\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/2837896"}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/onthinktanks.org\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/onthinktanks.org\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/onthinktanks.org\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/18"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/onthinktanks.org\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=2837896"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/onthinktanks.org\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/2837896\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/onthinktanks.org\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=2837896"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/onthinktanks.org\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=2837896"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}