Many NGOs, research institutions, and advocacy groups invest significant time and effort in producing rigorous, evidence-based policy recommendations, and they often engage directly with policymakers and stakeholders to advocate for change.

However, despite all that effort, policy recommendations are frequently ignored, misunderstood, or diluted. The challenge is not just about what is being recommended, but how it’s being communicated.

Therefore, to ensure your policy recommendation resonates and drives real-world change, several key considerations must be taken into account, ranging from understanding your audience to anticipating strategic risks.

While demand for evidence-based policymaking has grown, the same cannot be said for the capacity to communicate policy insights. Researchers and advocates often spend months developing solid recommendations, but these fall flat when delivered without strategy or nuance.

One persistent barrier is the difference in worldviews between researchers and policymakers.
Researchers aim to question assumptions, explore complexity, and publish insights for long-term impact. Policymakers, on the other hand, are constrained by bureaucracy, political feasibility, election cycles, and budgetary realities. These diverging motivations often result in miscommunication and frustration on both sides.

Another factor is the dominance of politics over knowledge.
In many contexts, especially in transitional democracies, policy processes are driven more by political interest than technical solutions. This creates an uphill battle for anyone attempting to lead with evidence alone.

Lastly, many NGOs rely on ineffective advocacy models.

• Academic approaches that involve one-way presentations and policy briefs
• Ad-hoc dissemination without clear objectives
• Gap-fill proposals that attempt to solve too much, too fast, without regard to feasibility

In short, good research is not enough, it must be strategically delivered.

Understand your audience beyond their job titles

Before crafting any message, deeply understand who you’re speaking to. Go beyond job descriptions and political affiliations. Investigate stakeholders’ incentives, fears, hopes, and historical biases.

Different audiences require different approaches:

• Experts may want data and detail.
• Informed non-experts need simplified yet accurate insights.
• The general public needs clarity, emotion, and relevance.

Takeaway: A compelling policy recommendation must speak to both logic and emotion, policy and politics.

Shape the message with strategy and empathy
Policy relevance
Make sure your recommendation aligns with existing discussions, government priorities, and upcoming policy shifts. Timing matters.

Actionable solutions
Avoid abstract ideals or utopian visions. Offer feasible, resource-aware solutions grounded in reality.

Keep it simple
Think of your communication like an iceberg: the tip should grab attention and be easily understood; the depth can follow once interest is piqued.

Make It Stick
Use:

• Memorable phrases or "sticky" titles
• Striking facts or figures
• Personal stories that humanize the issue
• Visuals to simplify complex ideas
• Language that audiences can reuse when discussing your message

Balance hope and risk
Don’t just present the benefits; also explain the consequences of inaction. A mix of carrots and sticks can move stakeholders from passive to proactive.

Stay ethical
Never compromise the integrity of your data. Credibility is hard to gain and easy to lose.

Who delivers your message matters as much as what the message says. A trusted messenger can open doors and increase receptivity.

Look for:

• Policy experts with established credibility
• Well-networked insiders or advocates who are respected
• Policy champions within the government willing to sponsor your ideas

Additionally, consider assigning different individuals to various roles. Advocacy is a team sport, and no one person fits all rooms.

Policy windows
Be prepared for "windows of opportunity"—moments when change is more likely due to elections, leadership shifts, crises, or new technologies.

Early involvement
Don’t wait until your research is final. Bring stakeholders into the process early to gain feedback, political legitimacy, and buy-in.

Two-way dialogue
Policy engagement is not a presentation—it's a relationship. Build trust, listen, and be persistent.

Strategic risk assessment
Consider the potential downsides of your advocacy. Could it harm your credibility, upset a funder, or expose your team to risk?

Co-optation & misuse
How might your research be used by actors whose values you don’t share? Anticipate and mitigate this risk.

Anticipate pushback
Be ready to defend your methodology and findings. Practice how you'll respond to questions about your sample, data, or recommendations.

Emotional responses
Avoid personal attacks. Focus on ideas, not individuals. Emotional intelligence is as important as technical knowledge.

Test and adjust
Case-test your message with allies and critics before going public. It’s easier to revise quietly than to recover publicly.

It’s not just about sharing findings, it’s about moving people. If your recommendation is to have real influence, it needs to be timely, feasible, emotionally resonant, and politically strategic.

Ask yourself: Are you delivering insights, or just information?

At Communication for Change (C4C), we’ve supported institutions in crafting and delivering policy recommendations that are evidence-based, politically savvy, and tailored to resonate with their stakeholders.

Contact us to explore how we can help turn your research into strategic, impactful communication, whether through message testing, narrative development, or stakeholder engagement support.