SPN

Answers to Questions About Think Tank Management

Lawrence W Reed, Mackinac Center for Public Policy

A Frequently Asked Questions-type format, Mr. Reed responds to a range of inquiries, with an emphasis on fundraising.

Points covered

The best way to start a fundraising visit
The best approach for fundraising: The emotional or rational
Who is in charge of fundraising
How to determine the amount to be requested from prospects
How to close a fundraising visit
Operational expense fundraising
Build a broad base of small donors, or a narrow base of big donors
Long-term projects and maintaining donor interest

The following questions were submitted by participants in a conference sponsored by the Atlas Economic Research Foundation and the Instituto Desarrollo y Libertad in Bogota, Colombia, in July 2003

What is the best way to start a fundraising visit?
The most successful fundraising visit begins not at the visit itself, but with the preparation period in advance of the meeting. There is simply no good substitute for careful planning and good research. You need to know as much as possible about the person you hope to convince to become a donor. When you know you will soon be meeting with such a potential funder, ask these questions of yourself and others on your staff who assist in fundraising as part of your preparation process:

How did we come up with this prospect's name? Who referred us to him and why?
Do we know anybody who knows this prospect whom we should ask to put in a favorable word for us in advance?
What publications from our organization have we sent (or should we send) to the person in advance of our meeting? How long have they been receiving our mailings?
What do we know about this prospect's business? What does he (or she) manufacture, or what service does his business provide? What are his personal interests? What are his issue-related interests (such as education or economic development or labor reform)? What is his personal charitable giving history or that of his company or foundation?
Who will start the conversation at the meeting (assuming you will be accompanied by a colleague)? What role will each of us from our organization play in the conversation? Who will be the last to speak? How much time will we have?
What do we think the prospect has in mind, or expects, from us at the meeting? Does he understand that we are coming to make a case for him to contribute financially?
What's the best thing to ask him to fund? General operations? A policy initiative on some issue such as education or economic development? A particular program such as a seminar? A study or publication? Or something else?
What points/facts/arguments, etc. should we be sure to bring up at the meeting? Are there any we should avoid?
Have we checked any references on the person? (For example, have we asked our board of directors members what each of them might know about this person?)
How much should we ask for? A specific amount, or some range?
Is there any reason at our meeting with the prospect to NOT ask him, in addition to a contribution, a) for names of others we should be calling on; b) to consider his contribution to be an annual and renewable one? Unless there is a reason not to ask these things, then we certainly should.
What do we need to take with us to give or show him? Possibilities include samples of our best publications; testimonial letters from prominent people; a list of supporters; a list of members of an advisory board; a list of members of the board of directors; a list of members of a board of scholars, etc.

Sometimes a potential contributor will want to know who supports you, or who is in some way involved with you, so that they will feel "safe" and impressed enough to become a supporter themselves; be sure you have the consent of such supporters before you reveal their names.

Of course, it is not always possible to know good answers to all these questions, but the more of them that you can answer before your meeting, the better informed and prepared you will be. Going through the exercise of considering these questions will put you in a position to exhibit interest in the person you are visiting through knowledge of him, his business, and his concerns. That helps in establishing a personal relationship that makes a person feel comfortable in giving you money.

You must be respectful of a person's time and busy schedule, but that doesn't mean you plunge right into serious business from the moment you walk in the door. Be prepared to initiate a short, informal and casual conversation about some other topic, such as a major current news event or something about the office that caught your attention as you entered. Try to get the person to talk a little about themselves.

Then when you are ready to get down to business, start by asking the person what they know about your organization. Tell them you would like to know what their impression is of your group. Show genuine interest in their opinion. Then move into a presentation of what you want them to know. Be concise and direct; don't waste a lot of time with vague or nebulous statements.

As you make your case, remember that a good business executive or foundation official will be less impressed with what you do than they will be with what its impact is or has been. Don't say, "We produce many studies and commentaries on important issues" and expect them to be impressed. Be prepared to explain why your work is important, why it is listened to, why it is needed, and how it has already made a difference. If you are with a new organization with not much track record yet to show, then be sure to explain how ideas really matter and that based on the track record of similar, older organizations elsewhere, yours will make a difference too. Don't sound like a typical academic professor who thinks that pushing paper out the door, whether or not anybody ever reads it, is good enough reason for someone to make a contribution!

At all times, be friendly, upbeat and optimistic. Smile. Look the person in the eye when you speak. Listen and don't interrupt when they speak. Be sure to have a note pad with you to take notes when they offer ideas, or names of other interested parties, or a word of advice. If they tell you things they think are important and you never write anything down, they will get the impression that you really are not interested in what they have to say.

What is the best approach for fundraising: the emotional or the rational approach?
This question is partially answered by the response to the first question, above. The best approach is really a balance of the two-emotional and rational.

I am not certain what the person who asked this question might have meant, but as for me, by "emotional," I mean passionate. Show by your message and your delivery that you truly believe what you are saying and that you are convinced of its critical importance. Be careful not to employ excessive emotion, however. You could come across as desperate or unrealistic or unprofessional. But you do need some passion in your presentation or you may put your prospective donor to sleep.

Be "rational" in that you show objective, tangible evidence that you know what you are talking about. That comes from the kind of advance preparation that I spoke of in my answer to the first question above. Don't promise more than sounds reasonable or more than you are likely to be able to deliver. Be specific in explaining what you want a contribution for and why it is important. Refer to success stories to inspire them-stories from your own organization's past or that of similar groups.

Who must be in charge of fundraising: the president, the board of directors, or the entire think tank staff?
Ultimately, the president must be the primary leader when it comes to fundraising. This is for several reasons: He (or she) is the chief executive officer of the organization, and it cannot function without sufficient funds. He is employed full-time to run the organization, whereas in most cases board members have their primary employment elsewhere. He is the person to whom others on staff, including fundraising staff, report. Finally, the president is the person that most contributors want to meet or know before they give a contribution and no fundraising strategy can succeed if the president himself is not supportive of it and very much a part of it.

Does that mean fundraising is not important to the board of directors or to others on the think tank staff? Not at all! In fact, board of directors members should think of fundraising as their primary responsibility (along with overall supervisory duties). That's even more true, of course, for someone on your staff who is specifically assigned fundraising duties, such as a director of development. But it is the president who is ultimately in charge of fundraising, and who works with both fundraising staff and board members to raise funds-directing them, pushing them to open doors for you and arrange meetings with potential contributors, and in other ways coordinating their fundraising efforts and getting them to do what they promise to do, or what the president hired them to do.

As for the rest of the think tank staff, each and every employee should think of himself as a fundraising official. That does not come naturally, so the president must constantly remind his staff that each person can be very helpful in a fundraising capacity by speaking well of the organization to friends; being alert to names of potential supporters; seizing every opportunity in conversation with others to encourage them to join or make a contribution. One way to accomplish this is to have some sort of reward for members of the staff each time a new contributor joins because of their efforts.

What is the best way to determine the amount to be requested of each prospect?
Don't be afraid to think BIG! Don't ask for unrealistically large amounts, but be aware that most people usually ask for too little. Most donors, even if they can't give as much as you are asking for, will be impressed that you thought they were capable of a larger amount than they are actually prepared to give. Be prepared to explain exactly what their contribution will help you accomplish.

As explained in my answer to the first question above, it is important to do as much research as possible before you meet with a prospect. Resources to do that vary from country to country. Foundations in the United States publish annual reports that usually list the grants they have made. Often, companies do the same. Check with people you know who run charities and find out from them if they use any such lists or other sources of financial information. If no such published lists are available that would tell you something about the prospect you are about to visit, then perhaps the best source of advice might be the person or persons who first referred you to the prospect; ask them what they think would be appropriate. You might also be able to arrive at a reasonable estimate if you know what others in the prospect's business or profession are giving.

If no research sources are available at all and you really have no idea how much to ask for, then you have several options:

Simply tell the prospect what is needed, and ask them if they would be in a position to fund all or part of it, and let them choose the amount.
Give a wide range and ask the prospect if there is a figure within that range they would be comfortable giving. For example, you could say, "Companies of approximately the size of yours are giving to us in amounts from $5,000 to $20,000. Would you be able to give something within that range?"
Admit frankly that you do not know what their giving habits or current situation might be, and that you would be pleased at whatever they decide they could provide. This is the least desirable alternative simply because mentioning no number at all leaves the matter too indefinite, thereby giving the prospect an easy way to give you very little. But in any event, once a new contributor has made his first contribution, you then have a base from which to work him to higher levels in the future, provided your performance, impact, and follow-through are thorough and convincing.

What is the best way to close a fundraising visit?
Don't leave the meeting without either securing a contribution, or a definite pledge to contribute, or at least an agreement that you can follow up after a reasonable period of time to see what the person has decided to do for you.

Don't expect someone to give to you if your message is pessimistic or if you sound like you are begging or about to go out of business. People want to support winners, not losers. Always thank them for their time, whether they decide to support you or not. Tell them that if they choose to support you, your door will always be open for them to offer advice, ideas, and criticism. Make sure they understand that you want them to think of themselves as part of your organization's "family" of workers and supporters, and that you really do care that they approve of what you do. Let them know that you will not always be able to utilize their every idea or suggestion, but that you will always be eager for them and will give every one your serious attention.

Tell them you are eager to prove that you are a person of your word, and that your organization is everything you told them it was. As I am leaving a meeting, I like to tell a new supporter, "When I see you again in six months or a year, I want you to be able to say, ‘Well done! You did everything you promised you would do. And I feel like I'm genuinely a part of your organization."

Don't forget that another way to give, besides cash, is "in-kind" or in the form of appreciated shares of stock. In the case of "in-kind" gifts, that can be office furniture, or accounting services, or rent, or any number of items the donor may himself produce or possess in large quantity.

Finally, if I know the donor well, I also look for an opportunity to gently suggest that he or she think of my organization in estate planning. They can perpetuate their support through leaving something behind for you in their will and if you never tell them that this is an option, or that others have already done so, they may not think of you in this way.

What are the best techniques to organize fundraising meetings?
For sure, it is never smart to mislead or surprise a prospect. Don't tell them, for instance, that you're only coming to tell them about your activities but not to ask for support. No one likes to be feel as thought they've been trapped or deceived.

The meetings with the best chances for success are those that involve someone who knows the prospect well and is willing to arrange the meeting for you, attend it with you, or at least put in a good word for you in advance. Once you are in the door, and if you've done your preparation homework as explained above, then you can succeed if your presentation is concise, exciting, and sensible. Also, if you have just made an impressive presentation before a group of people (such as a Rotary Club, for example), then a quick follow-up by calling some of those who were in attendance is a good way to set up successful meetings.

How can we build alliances with institutions whose philosophy is different from ours?
Building such alliances is almost always a very good thing to do. It can broaden your organization's appeal, increase the likelihood of success on the issue you share in common, attract new donors, and make it difficult for the press to stereotype your organization.

The chances of such alliances increase dramatically if your organization cultivates an image of being interested in issues, not personalities. Never attack people with whom you disagree; question their viewpoint but do not denigrate them personally. Keep the discussion friendly and focused on issues. If you do otherwise, you will make enemies of people who might be future allies on one or two particular issues. Be friendly and inviting at all times and do not return hostility with more hostility. Make friends. Invite people from different institutions to your events, or to one-on-one meetings or simply to an informal lunch. Alliances rarely develop from nothing. They usually develop out of at least some prior, personal acquaintance. Be alert to those issues on which you can build bridges to organizations that are usually opposed to your perspective. When you find one, consider holding a joint news conference to make some policy announcement, or jointly conducting a public seminar, or co-authoring a commentary for the newspapers, or in other ways cooperating for mutual benefit.

How should we raise funds for ordinary operational expenses?
The best prospects for funding "ordinary operational expenses" (or what I call "general operations") are the people who know you the best and are most enthusiastic for your mission and philosophy. They should understand that operational expenses may not be as "exciting" as specific program or publication expenses but they are nonetheless critically important. In fact, if your general operations are not paid for, nothing else can happen! Your board of directors and your most faithful supporters elsewhere should be depended upon for financing a major share of your operational expenses. Explain to them that if you can't get such funding from them (the "true believers"), you surely can't get it from those who are less enthusiastic for what you do.

There is often a tendency for groups like ours to understate the operational expenses associated with specific projects. Raising money for a project that only covers its marginal or most-obvious costs isn't enough; the operational costs like heat and light, telephone, rent, and the salaries of those on staff who devote time to the project all have to be covered. Sometimes this is referred to "overhead," but I think that's a bad word to use because in many people's minds, it suggests something that isn't necessary. Instead, in all the proposals my organization has submitted for funding, we include a line item called "Program Support" and we also explain that this includes such necessary things as "administrative supervision, staff time, graphic design, peer review, utilities, and related office expenses."

Because every member of my staff keeps a daily time sheet that records how they allocate their time across many duties and projects, we have been able over time to determine with precision what a project actually costs operationally. That's why most of our grant requests include "Program Support" of approximately 25% of the total project's cost. In effect, if the project gets fully funded, then this 25% takes care of the operational expense the project imposes. So one way I would answer this question is to say, "Be sure you include enough "Program Support" in every project for which you seek funding.

Should we orient our fundraising towards building a broad base of small donors, or a narrow base of big donors?
The broadest possible base of supporters, whether large or small, is always the ideal. That helps insulate the organization from financial surprises, such as unexpectedly losing someone's renewed support. And even though you may not be required to publish a list of your donors, it is always a great advantage to tell the media or anyone else that no single contributor comprises more than 10% of your annual budget. When you have a broad base and are not heavily dependent upon a small number of potentially unreliable donors, you are freer to pursue the agenda you choose and less tempted to bend it so as to keep any particular donor's favor. In any event, I would always advise rejecting any donation if the donor expects you to change your agenda or even worse, change your philosophy. In the long run, your independence and integrity will pay off and no donation is worth compromising either one.

To avoid the problem of overdependency upon any one or small number of donors, you simply have to keep finding more and more donors of every size. But it is also important to develop the discipline of putting aside some portion of your revenue for a "stabilization" fund. At the Mackinac Center, we have a policy of putting aside 10% of all general operations contributions into such a fund and building it up to the equivalent of at least half of the annual budget. If you lose a major donor, this stabilization fund can help you get through the difficulty until you find replacement funds from other sources. Many groups say "that's a good idea" when they hear this, but they don't follow through with the discipline necessary to carry it out. They are the groups that get into trouble when revenues unexpectedly fall off.

When I am talking with a donor about the amount of a gift, I always explain that I would like the gift to be as large as he or she is able to give, but not so large as to preclude an annual renewal at least at that level. In other words, if somebody told me, "I can give you $50,000 right now but then I don't want you to ever ask me again," I would first respond by asking if they would be more comfortable with a gift of $30,000 now and a pledge to renew at that level next year and the year thereafter. If they still say they want to do only a one-time gift, then of course you should take it. But with few exceptions, I prefer an ongoing, renewable relationship with a donor instead of a one-shot thing. Remember that your fundraising will be most successful if you think of it more as friend-raising. Making and keeping friends should be of the highest priority. If your work is high-quality, those friends will come through for you year after year.

Nonetheless, most new organizations can't afford to spend most of their fundraising in the early years looking for a lot of very small donors. You have to focus on finding the largest ones first, I admit. But as soon as possible, develop a second-tier fundraising strategy that broadens your base to include an ever-growing number of smaller ones. Think of the smaller donors as more than just sources of small donations; quite often, they are also the people who will show up at your events, refer others to your group, write supportive letters to the newspapers, distribute your literature, and do important volunteer work.

Take time out to attend good fundraising seminars so you know the do's and don'ts and the why's, why not's, and when's of all fundraising strategies, including direct mail, personal meetings, endowments, estate planning, etc. My organization, the Mackinac Center for Public Policy, sponsors twice yearly a three-day "leadership conference" which offers not only good fundraising information, but helpful advice on managing, marketing, communications, and other aspects of running a successful think tank as well. E-mail Kendra Shrode for details: shrode@mackinac.org.

In the case of long term projects, how can we maintain donor interest towards the project over time?
Don't show up once a year just to ask for more money. Donor "maintenance" and nurturing is invaluable. Send occasional notes with updates. Get someone else to send a testimonial letter. Write an annual or semi-annual, personalized report to a donor explaining your progress. Visit in person to share the news without it being yet another fundraising meeting. Be faithful in every way to every promise you've made. When you first secure a donor's commitment, give them some future benchmarks when you will be reporting on progress, and stick to that timetable faithfully.

Can a think tank exist and prosper without a board of directors? What are the criteria for choosing good directors for the board?
You need a board of directors for many reasons: for guidance and supervision, for expertise you don't possess, for opening doors to new supporters and donors, and for the accountability that proves to skeptics that you are well-managed.

Keep the board of directors (your governing board) small-preferably under 20; something between 11 and 15 is ideal. A large board is unwieldy and opens the door to cliques, private agendas, politics and micromanagement. A large board can also appear to cheapen the value and esteem of being on your board; it should be seen as an honor that requires rare talents, abilities, and level of commitment.

What do you do with the people who might be qualified to serve on the board when there's no room for them and you want to keep them interested and involved? Create regional boards of advisors within your state or country and name these other good people to them. They should be business and professional people, separate from your board of scholars where you put your academics. Boards of advisors are not governing bodies, and may only meet a couple times a year, but it's a great way to keep people active and feeling valued.

If your advisors are good, your organization will derive a lot of valuable insights and fundraising opportunities. Putting good people on a board of advisors allows you to "try them before you buy them." Take measure of them all, and think of the best ones as possible future board of directors members-a "farm" team, in other words. You'll be able to observe them at meetings to see how they relate to others, and how others react to them.

With regard to board of directors membership, here are some important tips:

Don't invite people who have never contributed to you in the hopes that being on your board might finally get them to. Make board membership something that you bestow on people who have ALREADY demonstrated their support and otherwise proven themselves to you, not as some kind of implicit bribe. If someone has never given to you, then you've got other work to do with them before you ever ask them to join the board.
Chemistry between people is important, so choose people who regard themselves as peers. Many people simply don't enjoy sitting on a board with others who are in one or more ways in a different league or who have conflicting interests. Each and every member must feel comfortable with the group or you won't keep them together for long. Avoid the pontificators who like to hear themselves talk, or drop names endlessly, or try to dominate a board meeting. Avoid the resume builders, who seem more interested in what you can do for them than in what they can do for you. Before you invite them to join, make sure you know someone well enough that you are aware of whatever baggage they may have in the eyes of the community. I advise checking a candidate out thoroughly before you ever even tell them they are being considered.
Pick people who have some areas of expertise of value to you but are also team players. They should be people who understand the crucial difference between the polar extremes of aloofness and micromanagement; preferably they should have prior experience on other boards. Focus on choosing people who can provide your organization with at least two of these three W's: work, wealth, and wisdom.
Don't choose people who have to be begged to renew their financial support annually or to attend meetings. You don't have time to cajole your own board because you need to be out talking to and winning new converts.
Inform prospective board members of their duties and your expectations BEFORE asking for their acceptance. Don't expect them to be surprised and have to learn these things later once they've accepted your invitation to join. This should be a serious face-to-face discussion, not a quick phone call. Explain the three W's: work, wealth and wisdom.
Explain the importance of 100% of the board being regular, annual financial supporters. It strengthens your hand in meeting with prospective donors if they ask, "Does your entire board give?" if you are able to say, "Absolutely, every year, in a significant way, no exceptions." Invite them to consider the organization in their estate plans and ask approval to be able to say you're in them, even if they prefer not to mention any specific amount.
Explain proper conduct at board meetings-promptness, regular attendance, don't dominate, accept committee assignments, etc.
Provide a list of ways they can help outside of board meetings: give money, give names of others who might financially support the organization, make calls, host receptions, write supporting letters, come to occasional board retreats and other public functions, give good advice and be accessible, speak highly of the organization and cite its work in public, etc.
Walk a prospective board member through the organization's history, current activities, and financial statements; explain the oversight and strategic planning responsibilities of the board.
Explain the distinction between aloofness and micromanagement and the importance of maintaining the proper relationship between board and staff.
Provide a packet of key publications, bylaws, articles of incorporation, etc.
Work with your board chairman to establish meeting agendas well in advance of board meetings.
Don't wait until board meetings to lay out important documents like budgets, minutes from the last meeting, etc. These things should be provided well in advance so members come prepared.
Explain the importance of board members acting in concert with the board and staff; the last thing you need is a board full of people who are out in public surprising you with the statements they make on your organization's behalf.
The staff should not pick the board members. You should certainly invite staff input, but make the board live up to its responsibility of taking the lead on choosing its membership and not be manipulated by the staff.
The staff should not determine the meeting agendas. The president should work with the board chairman to fashion an agenda, but remember that a board of director's meeting is the chairman's meeting, not the president's.
The chairman should be a strong leader who knows how to start and end meetings on time, and keep them moving with a minimum of time-wasting side conversations and diversions; he or she should have a good sense for what is properly board business and what belongs in the realm of staff responsibilities.
Insist that strategic planning be done, that the strategic plan be implemented; regularly discuss at board meetings how the staff is doing at keeping faithful and on track.
Never miss the opportunity at board meetings to solicit names of new prospective supporters for the organization; bring names and ask, "Does anybody know them? If so, would you work with the appropriate staff to open a door with them?"
Board members should go away from meetings feeling, "That was great! We dealt with important matters and I was able to make a difference!"

Praise individual board members for special things they've done, but plan ahead so you don't leave anybody out. End meetings with a hearty thanks and an optimistic, motivating note or inspirational message. Plan periodic board retreats for long-range planning in a relaxed atmosphere; schedule a social occasion every now and then if meetings don't afford sufficient opportunities for board members to get to know one another on a personal level.

What is a good way to provide incentive for people who do volunteer work?
Even though you aren't paying volunteers in cash, you can certainly "pay" them in other ways. Make them feel a part of your team. Invite them to attend your public events. Acknowledge their contribution publicly, at least at meetings of your staff. Make sure you explain to them why their work is important to the organization and how much you appreciate it. When and where appropriate, give them an honorary title. Take them to lunch. Get to know them personally.

How can we measure our impact?
Every project and publication, at the time of release, should have its own timetable of future impact. If you spell this out for your organization's internal use, it will spur you to do things that will achieve those goals. Such timetables could include goals like, "Reprinted in 20 newspapers within 6 months," or "Legislation based on the proposal to be introduced before year-end," or "Distributed to X number of people by a certain date."

While it is useful to measure impact by how many times you are cited in the media, or how many times you are interviewed, or how many times a commentary is reprinted by newspapers, it is even MORE valuable to generate testimonial letters from people who will tell you how your work made a difference: legislators who changed a law because of your idea, teachers who changed the way they taught because of your report, etc., etc.

How should you select the CEO or executive director, and how can you make him/ her accountable?
Start with a very clearly written job description. Many problems can be avoided up front if the lines of authority, areas of responsibility, and all expectations for the job are clear and precise. Specify the minimum qualifications for the job in terms of credentials and experience; this will eliminate many unqualified people from the start. Since the CEO or the ED represent top management positions, you will almost always want prior management experience as a key qualification. Some proof of philosophical compatibility should also be required. Make sure you get a long list of references and don't fail to follow up have detailed discussions with them about the candidate.

Here are some questions you would want to ask a candidate for the CEO or ED position (for that matter, most of these questions would be useful to ask a candidate for almost any position in your organization). I could explain in many paragraphs why each one is important, but for the sake of keeping this document reasonably brief, I will keep my commentary limited and let the reader think about that dimension of each question, as well as the kind of answers you would want to hear from the best qualified candidate:

What was the biggest challenge you faced in your last position? How did you handle it?
What would you have done differently in your last job? Why? What are your strengths and weaknesses as a manager? (Questions like this help you determine if the candidate is introspective, which is a critically important attribute. A non-introspective person is one who thinks he's got nothing to learn, and will be a constant problem in his dealings with other employees.)
How would your past co-workers describe you? With specific, real examples, explain how you handled conflict with or between co-workers?
What do you think will be the most challenging aspects of this job? (This can tell you something of the person's grasp and understanding of the position.)
As you understand it from your knowledge of the organization, how would you describe its corporate culture? (This will tell you lots about the person's insights and how quick they are to grasp a situation. You will then have the opportunity to correct misimpressions, reinforce correct and important ones, and introduce any new ones that the candidate didn't think of.)
What steps have you taken to grow, to become more effective in the jobs you have held? How do you set goals and manage your time? (If you discover from the candidate's answers that he does not understand the importance of measureable goals and time management, then forget them. They will never be able to supervise subordinates if they don't know how to do these things themselves.)
Why do you want to leave your current employment?
What author, teacher, or book or other influence has shaped your view of how to properly manage?
How do you motivate your staff? How do you discipline subordinates?
How important do you regard long-term strategic planning? (A candidate who doesn't think it's important or doesn't know how to conduct it should never be a CEO because strategic planning is an important responsibility of the CEO in conjunction with both staff and board of directors.)

Of course, this is hardly a complete list, but for the purposes of this brief document, I hope at least some of these questions may be new for many readers.

How can we create interest in the media for the work we do?
Issue frequent news releases, so long as each one is substantive and well-written.

Get to know editors and reporters on a personal, first-name basis. Be sure the reputation of your scholars and authors and their research are unassailable. Avoid shrill pronouncements or claims that cannot be readily and irrefutably supported and documented. Don't assume the media is your enemy; "kill" them with kindness and respect. Be timely with your work by anticipating the media's future needs. Get endorsements of your work from noted and respected individuals if that is possible before you meet with media.

Don't focus on sterile numbers and facts. Explain how your research and your proposals will affect real people. Put a human face on your work. Don't be afraid to say "I don't know" if in fact that's the case; nobody likes a liar or a pretender.

Lawrence W Reed is president of the Mackinac Center for Public Policy.