I worked in that space for seven years. To put it plainly, we were paid to create ideas by entities and individuals who wanted a certain frame or perspective to emerge or persist in the wild.
Thinktank goes and hires a couple of global warming "skeptics" for $50K/year. They produce writings and speakings, which the thinktank personnel shop around to appropriate outlets for minimal fees. Op-Eds are distributed to newspapers. Pre-edited 5-minute segments are distributed to TV news programs. The media outlets are happy to receive ready-to-publish content for cheap.
You the viewer receive all this information against global warming from a "neutral, non-partisan" thinktank. You are likely to believe it. The name of the CEO's oil and gas corporation is never mentioned.
Money laundering is taking money from illegal sources and turning it into clean, usable money. Thinktanks are engaged in the practice of idea laundering.
2. This is mostly how Gartner, Forrester, et. al. work.
- how much you can make working for a think tank
- what kind of skills you need, specifically. for example, if you're doing research, i suppose PhD credential would be necessary
- what made you decide to leave the industry
- Skills: PhDs are not required-you will find more JDs in the fold than one might expect. These shops are often very small and run by older guard and don't have access to HN-audiences, so they are not technically advanced or pay exorbitant rates for graphic design and web presence (arbitrage alert). But what they are good at is proposing ways to change rules. Politicians, rarely, rarely, write laws-this community does. Politicians pull language from us and write bills. Then there office turns those bills into legal language.
So the skills you would need to support those outcomes at any level IMO: Statistics, hitting the phones and a business development acumen. You can be the smartest person in the room, but if you can't move people to do something (hint: statistics is not 'it') you will be like those people who build the perfect product that no one buys. There needs to be an MVP for policy. Too many perfect bills, too few changes in our lives.
-Why I left: I have a very impatient mind. Well sort of impatient-I did work in the field for seven years. I realized that the field adapts to politiking in ways I was uncomfortable with and without a lot of what we would call 'validation.' Ideas would be dropped wholesale given regime change or funding-which was not connected to reality. I worked at an org that was 'policy effective' they knew how to resist such changes (i.e. funding) and hired smart people. But I realize I was the only talking about rapid iteration, validation and business development-which got me strange looks. I've always loved coding, and wanted to start a social enterprise-so I walked out and am doing just that.
If I were giving tips to me in my twenties I would say:
Steer clear of small shops that don't want to support projects in the field. If they think small does not equal nimble (i.e. they just want to put out reports or convene meetings), its not worth your time. In fact if someone tells you they want to convene a meeting-always follow up with...then what? If its another meeting...head for the hills. Meetings are important but if all they do is create additional meetings-you know you are dealing with the old guard and change will be slow.
Think tanks are all wishing to become, at least in part, communications firms. Too many organization's chasing too few minutes in the day to influence you-message inflation. If your organization begins to show signs of leaping into the bubble, leave.
Work on policy that can be practised. Some might think that means work at a large scale. Wrong. Find a shop willing to test its ideas in the wild-you will not regret this policy entrepreneurship experience.
Rhodee