Impact case study database

Before O’Loughlin’s research, the practice of how soft power was used by governments and other cultural institutions had been overlooked and misunderstood. His research changed this in ways reflected both in policy and in practice.

Strategic Narratives fed into national policy debate through the House of Lords Committee. Its report compelled an Her Majesty’s Government (HMG) response that demonstrated the influence of O’Loughlin’s research, leading directly to policy decisions regarding Chevening Scholarships and diplomatic training. It informed public policy further by transforming how the British Council conceptualised soft power and used that conception to justify its value within government and to create new dialogue with external stakeholders. Between 2016 and 2018 the research led to changes in international policy practice. Co-production of research and evaluation with the British Council and Goethe Institute made it possible to both enact and demonstrate the value of audience research techniques recommended in O’Loughlin’s Strategic Narratives (2013) [R.3] and Forging the World (2017) [R.1] in Ukraine and Egypt as well as through global digital campaigns.

The main findings of Strategic Narratives [R.3] informed the 60,000 word report O’Loughlin wrote for the House of Lords Soft Power Committee. This allowed HMG to first learn about, formally acknowledge, and affirm the appropriateness and use of his theory of how strategic narratives shape soft power. Furthermore, they were willing to act upon his findings and recommendations, introducing a number of changes to policy and practice in 2014 following the report [E.2]. Strategic Narratives’ findings also led the British Council to invite O’Loughlin to work directly with them to enact these findings, notably through a global digital campaign in 2016. His work also informed policies in the Goethe Institute, by exploring new methods to understand target audiences’ understandings of the cultural ‘value’ of engaging with Germany.

Changing HMG’s understanding and practice of narrative influence: In the 2013 book Strategic Narratives [R.3] strategic narrative was defined as ‘a means by which political actors attempt to construct a shared meaning of the past, present, and future of international politics to shape the behaviour of domestic and international actors’ (p2). This conceptualisation was central to the Soft Power report. HMG’s official response [E.2] used this conceptualisation to explain how they practised strategic narrative and why they did not require an additional strategic narrative ‘unit’ in the Cabinet Office because they thought they were already achieving a coherent narrative across government. HMG asserted ‘There is already a mechanism in place’ for this (p11). By 2020 there is documented evidence this has become accepted thinking in UK foreign policy. Parliament’s Foreign Affairs Committee published its ‘five strategic narratives through which the UK can make a global contribution’ [E.8].

HMG’s actions to achieve narrative influence: In line with O’Loughlin’s finding that audience reception must be understood, HMG ‘agrees with the Committee’s recommendation to urge all concerned to gain a much deeper understanding of how others see the UK’ [E.2]. It presented policies that avoided ‘a UK-centric vision’ [E.2]. To his finding that instances of observable immediate influence in international affairs are rare, HMG ‘agrees with the Committee’s recommendation that there should not be an overemphasis on immediate returns on soft power investment, as many of the benefits may be longer term’ [E.2]. On that basis – again reflecting O’Loughlin’s conceptualisation – HMG committed to increase funding for the Chevening Scholarship Programme from 2015 to 2016 [E.2]. Regarding O’Loughlin’s findings on conducting digital engagement and thinking of communication in which media are treated as an ecology, HMG ‘agrees with the Committee’s [and thus O’Loughlin’s] recommendation on the need for diplomats to receive training in … the power of social media and be competent in its use’, and, concretely, ‘skills training will also be included in the material offered by the Diplomatic Academy … which will be open formally in early 2015’ [E.2].

The current [text removed for publication] at the Foreign, Commonwealth & Development Office has confirmed that further government spending commitments reflected advice in O’Loughlin’s Soft Power report [E.3]. His testimony states, [text removed for publication]. This testimony also signalled the report’s soft power recommendations still inform policy in 2020, stating [text removed for publication] [E.3].

HMG’s 2014 response enabled O’Loughlin to directly guide a UK public sector organisation, the British Council, in enacting these reforms. HMG’s response stated, ‘To further enable UK arts and cultural activity overseas to achieve lasting impact and value, the British Council is developing a forward-looking framework to capture and promote major UK cultural and arts seasons and ‘years of culture’ with key countries all around the world’ (p24) [E.5]. O’Loughlin, with Gillespie (The Open University), developed regular relations with the British Council in 2015 to receive funding from the British Council to evaluate their #ShakespeareLives 2016 global campaign of events, competitions and other activities to celebrate 400 years since Shakespeare’s death.

The British Council’s [text removed for publication] Programme, Policy and External Relations, testified that for her organisation the report was [text removed for publication] [E.6]. Internally, she described how they used the report to help prepare their within-government case for funding for cultural relations and to explain to the Foreign and Commonwealth Office (FCO) how the British Council contributes [text removed for publication] in the longer term. The report also helped them [text removed for publication]. The effect of this was to start [text removed for publication], she writes.

The Cultural Value project involved O’Loughlin and Gillespie implementing qualitative alongside the usual quantitative methods used by the British Council and Goethe Institute to understand their audiences-cum-users. They conducted this research in Ukraine and Egypt. The research influenced how the British Council and Goethe Institute construct evaluation of their cultural relations programmes [E.4, E.5, E.6]. The British Council include this framework in their Arts Evaluation Toolkit [E.7]. This evidences how O’Loughlin’s research with Gillespie altered how the British Council and Goethe Institute conceptualise influence and their willingness to use qualitative methods to identify what audiences understand by cultural ‘value’, in line with O’Loughlin’s research findings. The British Council’s [text removed for publication] adds that this improves performance because they are better able to understand how and why the goals of their stakeholders differ and how then to seek alignment and shared understanding [E.7].

These relationships bring sustained engagement that will generate further impact [E.3]. The British Council is committed to these approaches as of late 2020 [E.7]. The 2019 Thinker in Residence position in Brussels [E.9] has brought ongoing dialogue about an impact-focused event. O’Loughlin will attend COP26 in Glasgow in November 2021 to evaluate the UK’s strategic narrative on climate change for the UK government, with the permission of COP26 CEO Peter Hill and working with the Cabinet Office. These relations in the UK and abroad are institutionalised and will continue.