The Game of Influence: Policy Professional Capital in Civil Society

Policy professionals in civil society organizations

“…Compared with other professionals working, for instance, in think tanks and governmental offices, this group has rich experience of associational life. This is especially the case for those working in trade unions, who often have experience of voluntary work in the "movement" (Selling & Svallfors 2019;Svallfors 2020;Mellquist 2022aMellquist , 2022b.…”

“…Our core argument is that, ordinarily, policy teams at CSOs working to influence public policy respond to institutional demands for strong and direct influence of member interests by maintaining face, in the sense of Goffman (1982Goffman ( [1967), through decoupling, discretion, and avoidance, and also by investing in the myth of member centrality, fostering hypocrisy as an organizational response to these challenges. Conceptually, the article contributes by connecting the two literatures of civil society professionalization and new institutional theory to the burgeoning literature on policy professionals -i.e., those employed to influence policy at think tanks, CSOs, governmental offices, parliaments, and PR firms (e.g., Heclo 1978;Walker 1981;Garsten, Rothstein & Svallfors 2015;Selling & Svallfors 2019;Svallfors 2020Svallfors , 2016Tyllström 2021;Mellquist 2022a).…”

Do communicators take over? Mediatization and conflicts in civil society

“…For this article, I use the field concept to analytically describe the subfield of policy professionals in civil society, where they compete for consequential positions. Although policy professionals, when asked, would rather identify with the empirical policy matters they are working on, rather than positioning themselves in a generic field of expertise, this study uses the field perspective because policy professionals share very similar goals and methods of working with policy advocacy (Mellquist, 2022a; Svallfors, 2020). As part of this subfield, these professionals will move and fight for positions, attempting to uphold the image of being of consequence within the subfield.…”

“…In this article, I draw primarily on the concept of symbolic capital to understand the assets and characteristics that mediatization implies for the field of policy advocacy. The production of civic, social, and organizational capital in civil society has been widely discussed (Mellquist, 2022a; Putnam, 1995; Skocpol, 2003; Swain, 2003). In short, the field has been characterized by the dominance of, and struggle over, social and symbolic capital related to civil society and organizational skills.…”

“…From earlier research, we know that policy teams comprise a range of competencies based on various educational paths, types of capital, and motivations for entering the labor market of policy professionals (Mellquist, 2022a, 2022b; Selling & Svallfors, 2019; Svallfors, 2020). We also know that organizations relate to and are affected by external processes (see e.g., Arvidson et al, 2018; Berkhout, 2013; Eikenberry & Kluver, 2004; Hwang & Powell, 2009; Sanders & McClellan, 2014; Schmitter & Streeck, 1999).…”