Questions to Ask in a Think Tank Interview
These are questions for a candidate to put to the interviewers at a think tank or policy institute, whether the opening is for a research assistant, an analyst, a fellow or a communications post. They run in the order the decision tends to go: the job itself, the scholar and the team around them, funding and independence, how topics and bylines are decided, how the work reaches people in government, and pay and what the role leads to. The first group ends with one question for communications candidates and one for fellows, so skip those if neither is you.
Want questions from the whole vault instead? Try the random question generator.
The questions
Each question, and why to ask it
The job
How is the job split between research and administrative work?
Why ask it
A research title at a policy institute can also cover a scholar's calendar, travel bookings and event logistics, and the posting rarely gives the proportions. Ask for a rough percentage, then ask whether the last person in the seat would have given the same one. Mostly research with some scheduling and mostly scheduling with some research can share a job title.
Which program or scholar would I be working for, and is that settled?
Why ask it
Some institutes hire into a pool and assign people afterward, so the scholar across the table may not be the one you end up with. If it is not settled, ask who decides and when, and whether you would have a say. The subject matters too, since two years on tax policy and two years on defense lead to different next jobs.
What would I be working on in the first three months?
Why ask it
A good answer names a report in progress, a dataset to build or an event series already on the calendar. If it is 'whatever comes up', ask what is on the scholar's desk this month, because that is what you would inherit.
What would a strong first year in this role look like to you?
Why ask it
Each interviewer rewards a different part of the job. A scholar may describe citations that never needed a second check, and a program director may describe three events that ran without a hitch. Put it to more than one person, and where their answers differ, find out whose opinion decides your review.
What does a finished piece of work look like here: a long report, a short brief, a commentary, a dataset?
Why ask it
The format is the skill you leave with. A program that publishes long reports teaches patience, sourcing and footnotes, while one that turns out commentary every week teaches fast, clean writing. Count last year's publications by type before you go, and use the question to learn which kind the program wishes it did more of.
Which methods would I use most, and is there anyone who would teach me the ones I lack?
Why ask it
Some programs run regressions, some read statutes and hearing transcripts, and some work mostly from interviews. If you are headed for a graduate program with a methods requirement, ask whether anyone would check your code or simply trust it. Being the only technical person on a team means no one catches your mistakes.
How much of the role is events: planning them, staffing them and writing them up?
Why ask it
Panels, roundtables and conferences are how many of these organizations get noticed, and the logistics often fall to the most junior person on the program. A count of last year's events, and a name for whoever handled the invitations, the name cards and the summary afterward, gives you the real size of it. It can be the dull part of the job or the part that puts you in a room with the speakers, depending on what you came for.
When does the communications team first see a project: at the idea stage or once the draft is finished?
Why ask it
This one is for communications candidates. Arriving at the idea stage means you help decide the audience and the timing. Arriving at the finished draft means you are handed sixty pages and asked for a press release by Thursday. Take the most recent launch: when did the communications person first see that paper?
What does the institute expect from a fellow in return: publications, fundraising, time on site?
Why ask it
Fellow can mean a salaried senior post, a visiting year or an unpaid affiliation, and the expectations are often left unwritten. Pin down how many pieces a year, whether you would be raising your own salary, and whether research help comes with the title. Whatever is promised, ask to see it in the offer letter.
Scholar and team
Would I support one scholar or several, and who decides whose work comes first?
Why ask it
Shared assistants are common, and the trouble starts when two deadlines fall in the same week. A named person who sets the order, such as a program director, is the answer you want. 'You will work it out between them' means refereeing two senior people from the most junior chair in the building.
What does the scholar hand off to an assistant, and what do they keep for themselves?
Why ask it
One scholar gives an assistant a question and wants a memo back. Another wants citations checked, charts built and slides tidied. Both are legitimate uses of the job, and only one of them produces a writing sample.
How does the scholar give feedback on a draft or a piece of analysis?
Why ask it
The useful version is about the last draft an assistant handed in: did it come back with line edits, a conversation, or silence followed by a rewrite? People who edit you closely are slower to work for and teach you more. If the scholar is in the room, find out what they change most often in an assistant's writing.
How much of the year is the scholar away: travel, teaching, media, a second affiliation?
Why ask it
Senior fellows often hold a university post or spend weeks on the road. An absent boss can mean freedom, or requests that arrive late at night before a deadline. You will want a name for the person who can answer a question while the scholar is gone.
What is the scholar planning for the coming year: a book, a report series, testimony?
Why ask it
A book year is long and quiet, heavy on reading, fact-checking and permissions, with little that carries your name. A year of short reports and hearings is faster and more visible. Either way, ask which part of it would be yours.
If the scholar left for a government post or another institute, what would happen to this position?
Why ask it
Senior people in policy work move, sometimes on short notice after an election, and a junior post can be attached to the person and not the program. What became of the assistants the last time someone senior left is the answer that counts. Reassignment, following the scholar to the new place and a layoff are very different outcomes.
Who would write my performance review: the scholar, a program director or someone in operations?
Why ask it
Scholars are hired for their ideas, and some institutes route reviews, raises and leave requests through a program director or a research manager instead. Find out who that person is and how much of your work they would ever see. A reviewer who hears about you secondhand is depending on the scholar to speak up.
How many other junior researchers are there, and do they work together across programs?
Why ask it
A cohort is where you learn the software, trade edits and hear about openings. At a small institute you may be the only person at your level, which brings more access to senior people and fewer peers for the small questions. A reading group or a shared channel is a sign the juniors are a group and not just a headcount.
What can you do here that you could not do at a university or inside government?
Why ask it
Save this for the scholar or the director, who have often worked in one of the other two. Speed, a direct line to officials and freedom from teaching are the kinds of thing people name, and each says what the place prizes. Turn the answer over as well: it also describes what you would go without here, such as peer review or a hand in the decision itself.
Could I speak with someone who works for this scholar now, or did recently?
Why ask it
The institute's reputation and one person's habits as a boss are separate things, and only a current or former assistant knows the second. Save the request for a late round, when the institute has a reason to arrange it. Deadline weeks and how credit was shared are the two subjects to raise with that person.
Funding and independence
Who funds the institute, and is the list of supporters published?
Why ask it
Read the annual report and any supporters page first, then use the question for what they leave out, such as the rough split between foundations, companies, governments and individual donors. How easily the interviewer answers is part of the answer, though a junior one may simply never have been told.
Who is paying for the project I would be working on, and when does that money end?
Why ask it
Project money shapes your days more than the institute's total budget does. General support leaves the questions open, while a grant or contract for a named deliverable brings the funder's deadlines and sometimes the funder's interest in the result. The end date is also the first date your own post could come into question.
Do funders see drafts or findings before publication?
Why ask it
A courtesy copy the day before release, an invitation to comment and a right of approval are three different arrangements, so get the interviewer to say which one this is. A written rule counts for more than a habit, and a rule posted on the institute's website for more still.
Can you tell me about a time the research reached a conclusion a funder or a board member did not like?
Why ask it
This is the independence question in a form a policy document cannot answer. A real story has a report that came out anyway and perhaps an uncomfortable phone call. If nobody can think of one, either the rule has never been tested or the conclusions never stray far from what supporters expect.
Is there any money the institute will not take?
Why ask it
A refusal policy, for instance on gifts from governments or from companies with a stake in the findings, shows that someone had to decide where the line was. A gift that was actually turned down is better evidence than the policy. A natural follow-up is how funding is disclosed on the reports themselves.
Does the institute do contract research or consulting, and would I be working on it?
Why ask it
Contract work has a client, a scope and a delivery date, and the result may never be published. It can teach you a great deal about how a ministry or an agency really uses analysis. It will not give you a public writing sample, so ask what share of the program's work it is.
How much of the program's time goes to fundraising: proposals, reports to funders, donor meetings?
Why ask it
Where programs raise their own budgets, the drafting of proposals and progress reports often lands on the junior desk. It is a marketable skill and it is not research. A count of the proposals written last year tells you more than a percentage.
Does the institute take positions of its own, or do scholars speak only for themselves?
Why ask it
Some organizations declare an outlook and hire to it, and others say every view belongs to its author. Two scholars who have published against each other are the proof of the second kind. At the first kind, expect to help argue the house position whether or not it is yours.
How would you describe where the institute sits politically, and how do people outside describe it?
Why ask it
The second half matters because a graduate committee or a future employer will read the name on your resume their own way. If the two descriptions are far apart, ask whether it affects who will take a meeting or return a call.
Is there a range of political views among the staff?
Why ask it
The declared outlook and the lunch table are separate matters: an institute with a stated philosophy can have a mixed staff, and one that calls itself nonpartisan can be uniform. You can ask this without saying where you stand. An example, such as colleagues who argue across the corridor and still share a byline, tells you dissent is ordinary there.
Topics and credit
How are research topics chosen: by the scholar, by leadership, or by what a funder will support?
Why ask it
All three usually have a hand in it, so you are asking for the order. The origin of the most recent report is the concrete version: whose idea was it? If every project began as a funding opportunity, supporters are shaping the agenda even where they never touch a finding.
Who gets a byline here, and what would I have to contribute to be named as a co-author?
Why ask it
Practice differs from institute to institute and from scholar to scholar: some thank assistants in the acknowledgments whatever they did, and some share authorship when the assistant ran the analysis. Before the interview, open a recent report from the program and see where the junior names appear. Then ask how that was decided.
Can junior staff pitch a project or a short piece of their own?
Why ask it
'We are always open to ideas' is not an answer yet. The last pitch that was accepted, and what became of it, is. A commentary that ran under an assistant's name means the door really is open.
Could I publish under my own name, on the institute's site or in an outside outlet?
Why ask it
A short piece that is yours alone is what you can hand to a graduate program or the next employer. The practical details are who has to approve it, how long approval takes, and whether an op-ed placed elsewhere needs sign-off too.
What review does a report go through before it is released?
Why ask it
Internal readers, outside reviewers, a research director's sign-off and a fact-check are the usual pieces, in whatever combination the institute has settled on. For you the answer means two things: how well the work behind your name will stand up, and how many of your weeks go to checking footnotes.
What happens when the evidence does not support the argument the scholar expected to make?
Why ask it
Policy research often begins with a view, so the test is what gives way when the numbers disagree. Listen for a paper that changed, narrowed or was dropped. Put to the scholar directly, it lands better as 'has a project ever surprised you?'
Are the data and code behind published work released, and who keeps them in order?
Why ask it
Where replication files are posted, keeping them fit to post is usually the assistant's job, so this is a question about your own week. The answer also tells you what you would be working in, whether that is R, Stata, Python or a very large spreadsheet.
What are the rules on what I write or post on my own time?
Why ask it
Policies on personal blogs, social media and outside articles differ by institute, so ask to read the one that applies. If you volunteer for campaigns or causes, raise that as well: some organizations restrict partisan activity by staff, and the reasons and limits depend on where the institute is registered.
Reach
Who is the work written for: legislators and their staff, agency officials, journalists or other researchers?
Why ask it
The first reader sets the length, the tone and the speed. Work aimed at legislative staff is short and timed to a vote, and work aimed at academics is long and footnoted. Whichever reader the program names first, check it against what it actually publishes.
How does a finished report get in front of the people it is meant to influence?
Why ask it
A real answer is a sequence: advance copies, a one-page summary, briefings, a launch event, follow-up meetings. 'We post it and send the newsletter' means the reach rests on the scholar's reputation alone. Ask who does the outreach, because it may be you.
Would I attend briefings, hearings or meetings with officials, or mostly stay at my desk?
Why ask it
Being in the room is how junior staff meet the people who hire for the next job. How often the last assistant went along, and whether it was to take notes or to present, is the measure. A program that keeps its juniors out of sight gives you the work without the introductions.
How does the institute judge whether a piece of work had an effect?
Why ask it
Mentions in the press, invitations to testify, language that turns up in a bill, downloads and a satisfied funder each pull the work in a different direction. An interviewer who admits that influence is hard to measure is being straight with you. Whatever goes into the reports to funders is the working definition.
How do the research and communications teams work together, and who has the last word on a headline or a summary?
Why ask it
A careful finding and a line that travels are often in tension. Research candidates learn whether their work could be simplified past what they would sign. Communications candidates learn whether they would have a say or would be formatting other people's decisions.
Where does the institute draw the line between informing policymakers and lobbying, and who explains it to new staff?
Why ask it
Many countries limit how much lobbying a charitable or tax-exempt organization may do, and the rules differ, so ask how it works where this one is registered. A good answer names a person or a training session. You do not want to learn the rule from a mistake in an email to a legislative office.
How does the workload change around an election, a budget or a legislative session?
Why ask it
The calendar of the government you are writing for decides which weeks are heavy. Get last year's busiest months and the hours people kept before a major release. A change of government can also change which offices want to hear from the institute at all.
Pay and next steps
Where have the last few people in this job gone?
Why ask it
Graduate school, a legislative or government office, another institute and promotion in-house are the usual routes, and the names tell you which one this seat feeds. If they all went one way and it is not yours, ask whether anyone has taken a different road.
How long do people usually stay in this role, and is it understood to have an end?
Why ask it
At some institutes a junior research post is treated as a stint of a couple of years before graduate school, and staying longer is unusual. At others people are expected to grow into the next title. Knowing which this is lets you check that your plan and theirs are the same length.
Is there a path from this role to analyst or fellow here without leaving for another degree?
Why ask it
In some places the senior research titles go in practice to people with a doctorate or a government career behind them, and junior staff leave in order to come back. The test is a name: who was last promoted from the junior ranks, and what had they done? If no one can think of a person, the ladder may stop at this rung.
If I applied to graduate school from here, how has the institute supported people doing that?
Why ask it
Useful support is specific: a letter from the scholar, days off in interview season, and permission to submit co-written work as a writing sample. What the last applicant from the program was given is the best guide. Be honest about your own timing, since a scholar who expects three years and gets one will remember it when writing the letter.
Do people move from here into government, and do any come back?
Why ask it
Movement in both directions tells you how close the institute sits to the people making decisions. Offices and levels matter here, because an internship pipeline and a route into senior staff roles are not the same. It is also fair to wonder aloud whether that traffic depends on which party is in power.
What is the salary range, and how are raises decided for junior research staff?
Why ask it
Get the figure before a final round, and set it against rent in the city where the job is. Ask whether raises follow an institute-wide scale or come out of the program's own budget, since a program that raises its own money may also set its own pay.
Is there a writing test, a data exercise or a reference check still to come, and when will you decide?
Why ask it
Timed memos and data tasks turn up often in policy hiring. If one is coming, find out how long it is, whether outside sources are allowed and whether the topic comes from the program. Leave with a date and the name of the person to write to.
Is there anything in my background or my writing sample that gives you pause?
Why ask it
At a policy institute the usual doubts are thin quantitative training, writing that reads like a seminar paper, or a suspicion that you will be gone in a year. Hearing it while you are still in the room lets you answer it. Whatever they say, return to it in your thank-you note.
Getting straight answers at a policy institute
Practical guidance for the conversation itself
What to read before you go
Three recent publications from the program
Open the last three things the program published and look past the argument. Who is named on the cover, who is thanked in the acknowledgments, and is a funder credited anywhere? You arrive knowing how credit works on paper, and can spend your question on how it was decided.
The money that is already public
Many institutes post an annual report or a list of supporters, and in some countries a nonprofit's financial filings can be looked up. What is available depends on where the institute is registered, so see what you can find and bring only the gaps to the interview. 'I saw the supporters list. What share comes from the largest few?' gets further than 'who funds you?'
The scholar's last two pieces, and one reply to them
Read what the person you would work for has written lately, and find one critic who answered it. You are not there to debate. You are there to ask something that shows you know what the work is and where it is contested.
What you want the job for
A candidate headed for a doctorate needs methods, a letter and a writing sample. One who wants a career in government needs to be in rooms with officials. One who wants to write needs bylines. Decide which you are, and take your first questions from the group that serves it.
Matching questions to the people you meet
The scholar or program director
Topics, feedback, the year ahead and what an assistant contributes belong here, because nobody else can answer them. Keep pay and paperwork out of this conversation unless they bring it up.
A current research assistant or analyst
This is the person for the split between research and admin, the hours before a launch and how the scholar edits. If nobody at that level is on the schedule, request fifteen minutes with one before you accept an offer.
HR or operations
Salary, raises, the length of the appointment, the policy on outside writing and any test still to come are theirs. They may also be the only people who can say whether the post is tied to a single grant.
A president or research director, if you meet one
Funding, independence and the institute's political reputation are fair questions for the people at the top, and they have heard them before. Ask one, plainly, and listen for an example.
If you are not a research hire
Communications candidates should lean on Reach, plus the questions about review and about who signs off on a headline. Fellows should lean on Funding and independence, since a fellow is often expected to bring money in, and on the question about fellows that closes The job.
Weighing what you hear
A policy is not an example
On independence, review and credit, nearly every institute has a good sentence ready. The sentence tells you what is intended. The example, with a report and a year attached, tells you what happened.
Hold the answer up to the publications
If you were told assistants are regularly co-authors, the reports should show it. If you were told the work is aimed at legislative staff, the output should be short. Where the published record and the answer disagree, trust the record, and raise it if you get another round.
Two accounts of one job
Put the admin question to both the scholar and an assistant. A scholar who says a fifth of the week and an assistant who says half are each describing the job honestly from where they sit. The assistant's figure is the one you would live with.
Not knowing is different from dodging
Some interviewers, junior ones especially, are simply not told much about where the money comes from. If someone does not know, ask who would. An institute that points you to the right person has answered the funding question well.
Where candidates trip up
Making the funding question sound like a charge
Asked coldly, 'who pays for this?' puts people on the defensive. Lead with why you care: 'I would be putting my name near this work, so I would like to understand how it is funded and reviewed.' Said that way it reads as care about the work, which is what a research employer is hiring for.
Debating the policy itself
You may disagree with something the institute has published, and an interview is a poor place to win that argument. Ask how disagreement is handled inside the building instead. What you learn from that is worth more than the debate.
Treating the admin question as beneath you
Candidates skip it for fear of looking unwilling, then find out in the second week. Asking for the proportion, and saying you are glad to do your share of the scheduling, costs nothing.
Hiding a graduate school plan
Scholars who hire assistants generally know that many will leave for a degree, and plenty would sooner hear the timing up front. A plan you conceal becomes a problem at exactly the moment you need a letter of recommendation.