Stand up for Science: Practical Approaches to Discussing Science that Matters

Information about Cynthia Wilbanks

What is your name, title, and role at the University of Michigan?

Cynthia Wilbanks, Vice President for Government Relations

I have responsibility for managing the federal, state and community relations activities for the UM.  The Office of State Outreach is also an integral unit of my office.  We have experienced staff members in each of these activities that create and sustain advocacy opportunities with policymakers and legislators at all levels of government. 

I have worked for the UM for 23 years in the government relations role.  My prior 20 years of work was on the staff of two members of Congress, both of whom represented Ann Arbor and the UM.  I managed the District Staff and offices and represented the Congressmen to constituents, organizations and institutions throughout the district. As I like to say, I have had experience on “both sides of the desk.”

Why are your public engagement efforts in education and/or outreach important (to you and/or to the cause you’re working to promote)?

What I find especially exciting is the growing acknowledgement that university expertise, shared more broadly and with the potential for greater impact, is being strongly promoted and supported by the leadership of the university.  This trend has been building for some time, and if we can be successful in this broader type of engagement with the public (in all its forms), the long-standing view of the university as an “ivory tower” can be dispelled for the greater public good.  I feel privileged to do this work on behalf of the UM. 

Cynthia Wilbanks on Audience

Who do you interact with when working in policy and advocacy? What makes this audience different from other groups that you might interact with?

Policymakers and legislators at all levels of government.

What suggestions do you have for making interactions with policymakers, legislators, and/or advocacy groups as effective as possible?

It has been my experience that when working in the advocacy role, you approach the work by being prepared.  If meeting with a policy maker for the first time, I have studied their bio, their resume, their family background, if available.  And generally speaking, a first encounter is not one where I want to “deliver a message” or make a request for support.  My goal is to get acquainted on the “first date,” see what issues they are looking to impact, and determine where or if our interests might intersect.  This first encounter, in my experience, can often set the stage and impact the quality of follow-on interactions.

I also believe that as advocates, we should be prepared to meet policymakers “half-way.”

It’s important to acknowledge that views may diverge – but what we’re looking for is some common ground, a meaningful exchange even if there are areas of disagreement.  My definition of failure is walking out of a meeting with little hope of being able to engage again.

Cynthia Wilbanks on Messaging

When you’re planning to interact with policymakers/legislators, how do you decide what you want to focus on? If a scientist wanted a single idea to “stick” in the mind of a policymaker/legislator, what advice would you give them as to how best to shape/pitch that idea?

Identifying the nexus of the policymaker’s interest and the strategy for your pitch shouldn’t be a casual exercise.  Taking time to study the policymakers/legislators background helps to shape the strategy.  As an example, if I’m interested in providing the School of Education’s recent research studies showing the effect of 3rd grade reading proficiency on a student’s eventual success throughout their educational career – and I know the policymaker has young children at home – I will quite deliberately call out that fact – just to make the connection with their own experience in supporting their children’s educational success.  What that signals is that I’ve done my homework, and second, that I’ve connected with their own experience. 

Not every interaction needs to be action-oriented.  In fact, some of the ways I believe universities bring value is by sharing compelling information, perhaps in front of a legislative committee, or by providing background questions that could lead to proposing different policy directions.   There is one important aspect of interactions that can’t be overemphasized:  being responsive to inquiries in a timely manner. 

Last, it is never my goal to share everything I know or want to share about a particular topic in an interaction.  Generally, meetings are rarely scheduled with enough time for this type of exchange, and there is higher value in being concise and to the point.  Policymakers/legislators are likely trying to fit in dozens of these types of meetings every week – and if you want to be welcomed back, you make the most of a short time, with the promise of a return visit as the policy and decision making process unfolds.

Cynthia Wilbanks on Narrative

Do you use stories or narratives as a tool to communicate with policymakers/legislators? If so, what kinds of narratives? What kinds of documents or presentations are most effective at capturing and maintaining a policymaker’s/legislator’s attention? 

Stories can be a powerful tool to communicate – it generally is a more animated way to engage – and can draw on “real world” examples to share a message. But it’s not the only way.  If I’m trying to convey the importance of support for environmental research to a member of the legislature who represents an environmentally diverse or challenged region of the state, I will attempt to identify research that the university is doing in that region that could be of benefit to the policymaker or organizations in their district.  It is unlikely that a 20 page research study will be read – but a 2 page executive summary will be of higher value.  A few visually organized slides can also be effective – but beware of presentations that are too densely worded and too technical in nature.