Navigating dilemmas with formalization of advisory processes: Views of practitioners in the International Council for the Exploration of the Sea (ICES)

Formalization is an important aspect of the provision of scientific advice, which has received limited scholarly attention, and needs further conceptualization. Drawing on Adler and Bory’s distinction between enabling and coercive formalization, we analyze advisory processes in a boundary organization. We do so with a case study of the provision of annual fisheries advice by the International Council for the Exploration of the Sea (ICES). Based on interviews, we describe advantages and drawbacks of formalization in the views of ICES practitioners. Our findings highlight the importance of formalization and reveals ongoing challenges with navigating trade-offs between formalization and ad hoc adaptation. Despite a high level of formalization, respondents generally perceive that formalization approaches in ICES provide suitable guidance for the processes of stock assessment and advice formulation. However, they also emphasize the needs for deviations from standard procedures, justified with reference to peculiarities of situations. Lessons from ICES’ approach to formalization can be of use for other advisory contexts. • Formalization of advisory processes is an important but understudied topic. • Concepts of workflow formalization can support studies of formalization of advisory processes. • ICES practitioners consider that formalization enables advisory processes. • Formalization is important for achieving consistency in ICES’ fisheries advice. • ICES experiences with formalization are of potential value for other contexts.