Marine and Environmental Researchers Learn to Pitch: A Case Study from DAM and Helmholtz Forum Earth and Environment

Key features in a nutshell

• In 2025, the German Marine Research Alliance (DAM) and the Helmholtz Forum Earth and Environment organized two competence-building workshops on science–policy dialogue; about 40 of the approximately 50 participants went on to prepare and present four-minute policy pitches four to six weeks after the initial workshops
• After each pitch, participants received structured feedback from their peers and the workshop facilitators; mst participants kept to the time limit and delivered well-structured presentations; the most common challenges were explaining the relevance of their research to policymakers, avoiding technical jargon, and especially formulating concrete policy options
• The exercise proved to be an effective way to translate workshop content into practical skills and to prepare participants for future engagement with policymakers

How does the format work?

In January and June 2025, the German Marine Research Alliance (DAM) and the Helmholtz Forum Earth and Environment organized two competence-building workshops on science–policy dialogue in Berlin. Around 60 researchers and knowledge exchange officers from various research institutions participated across both workshops. Each workshop ran from noon to noon over two days and covered topics, including the roles of policymakers, understanding policymaking contexts, and an overview of policy engagement formats.

To make the workshop content applicable in practice, the facilitators invited participants to prepare a policy pitch as a follow-up exercise. The process unfolded in four steps.

Step 1: Introduce the exercise
In the final 30 minutes of each workshop, the facilitators explained the aims and structure of the follow-up exercise. Participation was optional. Participants who chose to take part were invited to present a four-minute policy pitch four to six weeks after the workshop. Several virtual dates were offered, and participants could select the one that suited them best. The exercise instructions were also sent to all participants in writing after the workshop.

Step 2: Participants prepare their pitches
Between the workshop and the follow-up session, participants prepared their policy pitches independently. Facilitators were available for questions by email, though none of the participants made use of this offer.

Step 3: Conduct the virtual pitch sessions
The virtual follow-up sessions lasted between 90 and 120 minutes. Each participant presented a policy pitch of no more than four minutes, followed by peer feedback and input from the facilitators. The peer-to-peer feedback proved particularly constructive, participants’ observations were thoughtful and constructive.

Step 4: Summarize and share the feedback
After the sessions, the facilitators compiled the key feedback points and shared them with all participants. This summary formed the basis for the written guidelines on preparing policy pitches and policy briefs, which were subsequently published on the DAM website.

What the exercise revealed: results and common challenges

Of the 50 workshop participants, 42 went on to present a policy pitch in the follow-up sessions – an outstanding participation rate of 84 percent for an optional exercise.

What worked well:

• Most presentations were well structured and within the four-minute time limit
• Peer-to-peer feedback was consistently constructive and generated substantive discussion
• Participants reported that the exercise helped them apply what they had learned in the workshop to their own research

Common challenges:

• Technical jargon: Several participants used terms familiar within their field without realizing these would be unfamiliar to a policy audience
• Relevance framing: Explaining why their research matters to policymakers – rather than to fellow researchers – proved difficult for a number of participants
• Policy options: Formulating concrete, actionable policy options based on research findings was the most consistently challenging element of the exercise.

Tasks and resources: Brief description of the tasks and resources needed by scientists, knowledge exchange officers/research managers and policymakers

Workshop facilitators

Facilitators introduce the exercise during the final session of the workshop, set the virtual follow-up dates, send written instructions to participants, moderate the pitch and feedback sessions, and compile and distribute a summary of the key feedback points afterwards.

Researchers and research managers (workshop participants)

Participants prepare a four-minute policy pitch on their own research topic between the workshop and the follow-up session, present it in the virtual session, and provide peer feedback on their fellow participants’ pitches.

Policymakers

Policymakers did not participate in the pitch sessions in the 2025 editions of this exercise. However, they did participate in the initial workshops, where they emphasized the importance of concise, accessible, and policy-relevant presentations. Future editions of the exercise could benefit from including at least one policymaker in the feedback sessions.

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 via science-policy@pvw.uni-frankfurt.de