INSIDE VIEW:
Two years on what to do and what not to do

-By Waldemar Ingdahl, CEO of the Eudoxa think-tank.
The Stockholm Network "Know how" seminar in Brussels February 7th 2003

Ladies and Gentlemen.

It is a pleasure for me to introduce the Eudoxa think tank, and I would like to thank The Stockholm Network for their kind invitation. Our think tank was founded on December 17th 2000 so it feels a bit strange to give counsel already on "what to do and what not to do" to our fellow European think tanks and policy networks. According to the Atlas Foundation a think tank is still to be considered young, up till the age of five years, so we are still not established. But we have had some experiences during these two years, and we have also seen some initiatives to start up think tanks fail, thus we hope to be able to supply some good piece of advice.

Eudoxa was founded since we saw that questions about free markets and a dynamic society were not getting their fair share of attention in the public debate, neither in Sweden nor in Europe. So I founded the think tank with the help of four like-minded partners. We had considered what ought to be done by reading F.A. Hayek's excellent essay "The intellectuals and socialism" in which he emphasized the need for abstract thinking in order for liberal ideas to win. The think tank model seemed as a good alternative for us to construct the interesting, vibrant ideas for tomorrow, while not getting entrenched in today's political debate. From the example of the Timbro think tank we saw that this way of working was possible in Sweden too. But with Timbro the space for a free market think tank was already taken in Sweden. We found it necessary to establish a niche of our own.

So we are not a free market think tank, we are an emerging technologies think tank working from a liberal perspective. Eudoxa focuses on the key areas of GRIN- genetics, robotics, information technologies, and nanotechnology- these are the technologies that will shape the future and our society over the next 20-30 years. Thus it enables us to expand our field of work into the discussion of other fields of the public debate that are affected by them (health care, for instance), while not treading on already trodden ground and getting marred into old conflicts, that often have been decided before the present's debate.

We also had the competence "in house" from both the humanities and science to cover both sides of the rift between "the two cultures" and uniting them to a stronger tool of analysis.

Now, not all of you starting up a new think tank are going into the field of debating emerging technologies and their effect on society, but you will find it good to make yourselves unique in some way; addressing a particular question in a previously undone fashion. Just taking a general "pro-market" stand has been done by others- and it doesn't capture attention or interest as much, neither from the media or the public.

So, we had an idea of what to do. How were we to implement it? Especially for such a long-term project as a think tank that could take years before showing results? We experienced some hesitation.

My advice is to quite simply start! Too often one envisions a very large operation from the beginning, not considering it has some growing to do. Cut the wish list and focus on the bare necessities- after all the most important asset for a new think tank is not accumulation, huge donations and starting big, but to accumulate credibility and reputation. That is the basis that often gets overlooked. We provided the capital ourselves, and in December 2000 we registered the company, and we already had our first customers. You might ask we why we registered Eudoxa as a corporation. This was due to both innovation and desperation. Our funds were limited, and in Sweden we had to consider the problem that donations are not tax deductible, rather they are eligible for taxation. It also made us competitive. If we do not function well, we will rapidly see it in financial losses and give us the opportunity to change tactics quickly or get out. It enables us to speak the same language as other corporations and organisations, and we have to focus on what we can provide for them. We are not relying on them "supporting the good cause" in general, but offering them to buy information that is important for their strategic operations (with a liberal slant added).

Once again, not all of you can use this modus operandi, but I would like to advise you to be very attentive on having multiple donors to your operation. If you are limited to one or just a few, they might switch their support on a strategic time frame and break down all your (quite possibly) successful operation in the process. All too often European think tanks envision themselves as purely academic institutions, overlooking their needs for fundraising and providing practical policies for contacts to adopt. Put the fun back in fundraising!

So, we have to think about the bottom line, and take care to keep our business on a reasonable level for our funding. Warning though! Reasonable level does not mean basement level of operations. You have to keep upgrading your business over time. Think of the enormous resources often held by our opponents that are well entrenched in government, universities, unions and even some corporations. In the start, be humble. You will have to get out of your office and establish a presence. Be sure to visit other think tanks and their seminars (even those of the opposition's), visit institutions, call up business leaders and ask for a meeting where you can introduce them to your good new initiative and some of the benefits it might have for them- in short act like any new company. Thus you can find interesting people to cooperate with and know the scene. When starting out, be very specific about what projects you want funds for- larger donations will come later and will be easier to acquire if you have started to build credibility and reputation through smaller projects that are easier to complete.

In our line of business, publish or perish is vital, especially for building up the credibility and reputation for the larger projects. A quick, inexpensive way for you to start is to write op-eds for newspapers. Don't go into publishing yourselves in the beginning, that is a whole business of it's own, with rather different demands than operating a think tank. Use the channels provided by your partners, customers, established publishers, and the media. The media deserves special mention. It is of utmost importance for you to cultivate contacts. Start by giving away tidbits of information at first (do not always expect credit for it in the beginning) to establish a relation as a media contact's informer. The medias always suffer from the deadline tyranny, so if someone can become their "tap" for good information they will be more opened minded to liberal views too. If you notice great differences of opinion with your targeted media contact- agree to disagree. Do not preach, just state your opinion. Negative publicity will set you back, because you are too small to soak it.

There are costs to incorporate, as we at Eudoxa have done. Besides the usual risks of conducting a business, you also have to stay in for the long term before getting results in affecting the debate, so we cannot expect making profits as soon as a regular company. For many of your partners, you could bee seen as disloyal or fickle, since you are open to working for what they perceive as their opponents.

My advice is: do not be too severely practical either, like F.A. Hayek advised in his essay. Do not get into the present's politics. Be visionary in order to offer the strategic view, which is often sorely lacked in today's European debate. Our strategical view opens up otherwise difficult customers for us since they often do not have the same rigid views on the future as on today's questions.

Develop an internal consciousness of your think tank's ideas. We have "drill sessions" on new ideas and fields in order to build a common narrative for Eudoxa. Thus when we do something we always use the same language and concepts, with a developed "Eudoxa flair", avoiding inconsistencies when communicating. It also builds a strong sense of community "in house"- to counter the effects of our many contacts outside. I think this will keep our ideas vibrant and interesting, and not just something we present on the customers' demand. Otherwise we would just be another PR-firm, and there are many PR-firms that are much better and well more established than Eudoxa.

We at Eudoxa have seen the examples of other think tanks, and it has been those that have been forward looking that have made an impact. Affecting the intellectual climate takes a long time, perseverance, lots of dedicated hard work, but it also requires vision and innovation. Try new forms of operating a think tank; try to break the mould of "how to do things". Seek alliances even where you previously did not see one. It will get you attention and new impressions in order for you to build a new set of ideas. That is why The Stockholm Network's initiative of holding this conference is such a good idea. We need to get multinational even from the start of our operations today. Many of the new strategic debates we are addressing in novel think tanks are too small to be properly addressed in the range our particular countries. Gain force from the rest of the European network!

Ladies and Gentlemen, I thank you for your kind attention and will now take your questions.