Don’t Just Present – Connect! A Researcher’s Guide to Policy Events

Key features in a nutshell

• Policy events offer three distinct dimensions for scientific impact, moving from formal presentation to individual relationship building:

1. Formal engagement: Presenting expertise during panel discussions, lectures, presentations, or workshops.
2. Informal networking: Building direct connections during coffee breaks, lunches, and receptions.
3. Strategic follow-up: Converting brief encounters into sustained, collaborative policy dialogues post-event.

• Scientists should not attend policy events just to deliver a speech or participate in a panel discussion; they should attend to have informal conversation and to secure two to three meaningful follow-up meetings.
• Breaks, lunches, and receptions are as important at the sessions: Organizers of policy events should allow for networking opportunities and informal discussion during breaks.

How does the format work?

To maximize time and impact, researchers must view every policy event through three structural dimensions.

1. The formal dimension (The platform)

This includes panel discussions, keynote presentations, and interactive workshops. Securing an active role as a speaker or panelist establishes institutional credibility and highlights relevant research. But this is merely the hook—not the intended result.

2. The informal dimension (The connection)

Coffee breaks, lunch hours, and evening receptions are where real policy alignment happens. Informal settings encourage participants to speak more candidly about constraints, political timelines, and knowledge gaps than a public panel allows. Researchers should avoid the temptation to check emails, isolate themselves within academic circles, or leave early.

3. The follow-up dimension (The impact)

High-value conversations should conclude with researchers securing permission to reach out again, transforming a brief chat into long-term policy contribution.

Visual blueprint: Why micro-networking beats macro-presentations

Researchers often underestimate verbal exchange compared to publications. At a natural pace, speakers deliver roughly 130–160 words per minute (approx. half a page of text). Consider how two different strategies compare:

Researcher A (The presenter): Delivers a 15-minute presentation plus 5 minutes in Q&A (20 minutes total speaking time = ~10 pages of text transmitted). During breaks, this researcher checks emails, networks only with known academic peers, and leaves early.

Researcher B (The networker): Holds no formal speaking role but actively engages policymakers during breaks and receptions for a combined 50 minutes of conversational speaking time (~25 pages of targeted text transmitted). This researcher secures three explicit agreements for future check-ins. Result: Three scheduled follow-up meetings to pitch evidence directly.

Tasks and resources

Researchers

How can researchers prepare for networking?

Step 1: Analyze & map the room (Pre-event)

• Researchers should review the program and participant list in advance. They should identify the specific policymakers or other practitioners they would like to connect with
• If the list is not public, researchers should ask the organizers about the expected audience profile

Step 2: Prepare policy-ready materials

• Researchers should prepare a 60-second elevator pitch focusing strictly on the policy relevance of their expertise, avoiding pure academic debates or methodology
• Researchers should bring physical copies of brief texts such as policy briefs, factsheets, or infographics.

Step 3: Execute strategic approach & icebreakers

• Scientists should approach targets during breaks; they should respect boundaries (skipping those on active phone calls or those writing emails on their laptops) but confidently join standing groups at tables with a polite, “Mind if I join you?”
• Open-ended icebreakers can include:
• What session are you most looking forward to?
• Which session did you find most interesting so far?
• What did you make of [speaker’s] argument on X?
• Follow-up questions can include:
• What kind of scientific evidence would be useful to you?
• What’s the biggest challenge you face on this topic?

Step 4: Secure the pivot to follow up

• If the connection is positive, scientists should pivot before the break ends: “I’d love to send a brief update when our next research results are out. May I get your card or scan your LinkedIn QR code?”
• Sharing a physical policy brief containing clear contact details is an effective way to create an immediate, professional handoff

Step 5: Lock in the meeting (Post-event)

• Scientists should send a tailored follow-up email within 48–72 hours
• They should provide links to any data or publications discussed and propose a follow-up meeting over the next weeks

Knowledge exchange officers and research managers

Designing events that maximize science-policy impact requires moving away from overcrowded slide presentations and prioritizing structured interaction. Knowledge exchange officers or research managers who organizeing events should consider the following suggestions:

• Protect networking buffers: For any event exceeding two hours, organizers should embed coffee breaks of at least 20 to 30 minutes; organizers must never compress breaks when sessions run over time, and they should inform speakers beforehand that time limits will be strictly enforced.
• Curate high-visibility materials: Organizers should provide large, highly legible name tags; if possible, they can embed QR codes on badges that link directly to professional profiles
• Moderate dynamic Q&A sessions: Moderators should structure Q&A blocks to draw out room expertise. They should announce clearly at the start: “Questions must be limited to 1–2 minutes to allow room for everyone.” This prevents long statements from the audience and helps scientists identify interesting peers for the next break
• Knowledge exchange officers and research managers can support scientists by developing clear elevator pitches and designing digestible factsheets
• Knowledge exchange officers and research managers can actively introduce researchers to participating policymakers on the floor during receptions

Do you want to know more about the policy engagement toolkit?

Do you want to share your experience in policy engagement? Do you think about contributing to the policy engagement toolkit? Feel free to contact Tome Sandevski at science-policy@pvw.uni-frankfurt.de

Resources

Willis, Christina C. (2020), Sustainable Networking for Researchers and Engineers, https://doi.org/10.1117/3.2535500.

Zack, Devora (2019), Networking for People Who Hate Networking: A Field Guide for Introverts, the Overwhelmes, and the Underconnected, Berrett-Koehler Publishers.