Partnerships and Policy Planning - Coursework Example

Partnerships and policy planning Introduction Partnerships are formed for various reasons, and in business they are formedto fulfill particular needs. These requirements vary depending on the nature and scope of the purpose the partnership was formed. Local enterprise partnerships, in particular, play a major role in the economy of a country (Bailey, 2010). They are voluntary partnerships between the public and private sector and are comprised of the local government, businesses and other stakeholders (Business, Innovations and Skills Committee, 2013a). They integrate the efforts of the business and that of the government to achieve a national target. They span over a geographical area governed by two or more local authorities thus they operate just above the local authorities but beneath the national government. The regions over which they operate are termed enterprise zones (Business, Innovations and Skills Committee, 2010b). The local authority partnerships stimulate local growth and influence development in planning, infrastructure and housing policy domains. Local Enterprise Partnerships tend to have a strong support from the national government to provide economic leadership in activities that will result in economic growth. Thus, Local Enterprise Partnerships have been used by the national government to promote local growth by shifting power to the local communities. This move strengthens the co-operation between the private and public sector. The activities done by the Local Enterprise Partnerships are to view challenges in the local economy in a strategic manner. They also identify ways to tackle them in a way that will be of benefit to the people, nature, and the local economy. Thus, they end up providing a sustainable environment (Hilton, 2013). The policy implementation process can be a complex phenomenon as more likely than not it will involve a significant number of parties working together. It may consist of government agencies, legislation bodies, and at times other economic and political organs (Business, Innovations and Skills Committee, 2011c). Policy implementation is termed as the actions that are performed by people with the aim of achieving the objectives that were set in the policy decision. Policy implementation is, therefore, that which develops the plan of government to do something and what is realized by the actions the government undertakes (Business Innovation and Skills Committee, 2009d). Implementation is, thus, said to begin once the objectives and goals of a particular policy have been established, and the necessary funds have been committed (Smith, 2014). There has been a continuous debate on the most practical and useful ways to implement policies. This discussion has led to the development of a variety of ways in which policies can be implemented. These various angles of implementation are as discussed below. There is the rational top-down approach that indicates the theoretical procedure taken when implementing policies is a separate stage in the policy implementation cycle. According to this approach, policy implementation comes after the policy objectives have been formulated and clearly stated. The other approach is the interpretive bottom up approach. This method summarizes the theoretical procedure taken when implementing policies. The process is grouped as a series of interpretations that indicate what is to be done in delivering the required services to the program and policy recipients. It is done with the location and situation of the project in mind. The third and final approach combines both the bottom up and top down approach and the third generation of the implementation theory. It indicates that the theoretical approach towards the implementation of policies is a process constituting networking, consultation, coalition, structuration, learning and institutionalization. Through these processes, diverse parties involved in the project interact to bring the policy into realization (Pickerill, 2009). The last approach is also keen and addresses the area or domain within which the desired policy is to be implemented to carry out the project. Research has been done on policy implementation for over thirty-five years (Makdisi, 2014). Some of the most crucial disciplines that people have significantly studied are education, social economics, health, environment, and education. Much emphasis has been put on the process of turning policies into practice. Policy implementation requires the initial recognition of several parameters. These requirements are that the policy is a process that involves multiple parties (Milone, 2010). Other relevant theories that may be used in the decision-making theory are the garbage-can, the rational decision-making model, and the conflict-bargaining model (Sapru, 2011). The relational-decision making theory suggest that implementation failures are likely to arise if the objectives of the policy are either unclear or absent. Another source of failure can be if all other possible alternatives have been exhaustively considered. The garbage-can theory states that there is a distinction between the intentions and purpose of the events and actors that are to be explained in accordance with the policy explain (Sapru, 2011). The conflict bargaining model suggests that the decisions made when implementing policies are as a result of compromises. These understandings arise from the conflict and bargaining activities between the parties involved, the goals, and resources available. According to Marzotto (2000) the prerequisites for perfect implementation are: 1. External agencies should not impose major constraints on the policy 2. Dependency relationships should be minimal 3. There should be a minimal number of ‘decision points. 4. Resources should be adequate 5. Policy is based on a valid theory of cause and effect 6. The objectives are clear, coherent and consistent 7. The goals are fully understood and accepted by ‘street level bureaucrats. 8. That those to whom a policy is applied or targeted respond in the anticipated manner. Basing our analysis on these theories, we shall try to see the relationship between policy formulation and its implementation. In general, the logical procedure of implementing a policy would be to ensure that there are enough resources. This verification would then be followed by choosing the appropriate application approach. The best choice would be the relational top down approach for this case, putting in mind Marzotto’s prerequisites (Marzotto, 2000). This proper preparation would create the difference between a well-executed policy and a failure. This paper uses the West of England Local Enterprise for the case study. West of England Local Enterprise spans over four local authorities and has an excellent track record in creativity, innovation and connectivity. It has attracted many people, and its population has risen to about 1.1 million people over the last decade (Khawaja, 2013). With its prosperity, it targets to create 95,000 new jobs by 2030.In 2010 though, the local authorities in the region were drafting plans that would have reduced the housing numbers in the area. When this was discovered, the West of England Local Enterprise Partnerships started working together with the local authorities to deliver a new scheme that will handle the housing needs of its rising population. This coalition is a great indication of the conflict and bargaining theory of policy implementation (Stewart, 2008). The West of England Local Enterprise Partnership created an investment board with the aim of improving the quality of life of its people. This board has a direct approach to the management of funds coming in and out of the Local Enterprise Partnership. It has also secured a total of £230.7m from the government’s growth fund. This money is for use in some of its key projects, namely, transport, infrastructure, and business prospects. This investment board also helps the national government fulfill its plans of development. The Local Enterprise Partnership has also shown significant achievement in the field of education, and they currently have Bristol. This institution is the leading and largest academic center for robotics in the whole of Europe. They have also made tremendous progress in the transport industry by creating a railway network to Paddington in London (Berglund, 2009). Employment rates have also improved by over 185% since 1988. Many of these achievements are in line with the national government’s goals and are a clear indication that partnerships can indeed assist in the implementation of plans. Core to this implementation of projects is the use of the theories previously discussed (Publishing, 2005). Most of these developments are as a result of relational decision-making theory while some may have required some slight modifications, leading to the use of the conflict and bargaining theory. The Local Enterprise Partnership was also able to devise ways to improve intelligence on SME business needs by the use of various policy intervention techniques. Through research, they were able to identify the growth challenges that these companies face in the contexts of employee skills and shortage of staff. The Local Enterprise Partnership could have come up with a support service that would have adequately met these demands so as to counter these deficiencies in the businesses (Knoepfel, 2011). In light of these developments and breakthroughs, it is evident that some policies’ implementation did in fact face challenges. Most of the challenges experienced by this Local Enterprise Partnership came during its start-up period (Business, Innovations and Skills Committee, 2013e). The biggest challenge was funding. As a start-up project, it was not easy to attract external funding that would enable them scale up their operations. This lack monetary aid would have in turn had a considerable impact on the momentum of the delivery process due to the time lag between submission and approval of the staff and other resources. If the Local Enterprise Partnership had leveraged enough funding before the execution of the policy, they would have fared better. The funding issue was a temporary challenge. The Local Enterprise Partnership was successful in acquiring funds from both private and public partners. The time taken for the development of the partnership exceed the estimated period, but it still formed a crucial part of the design and development stages. This growth was slowed down by the need to personally reach the local networks and make necessary arrangements to identify the target partners and businesses. The West of England Charter Mark of 2012 major challenge, for example, was gaining the commitment of education investors. Their online form was particularly difficult to comprehend and complete (Business, Innovations and Skills Committee, 2013f). However, they later offered more guidance on how to accomplish this task and did away with the initial difficulties. Another big hurdle was measuring the value for money since no clear benchmarks were present to facilitate the process. The techniques that would have been used to aid with this would involve the development of a monitoring and evaluation framework. This platform would assess the implementation of the process and assist in preparing for ways to get future funding. The West of England Local Enterprise Partnership also had difficulties in the execution of monitoring and evaluation procedures. These procedures were to monitor performance, provide accountability and oversee the entire process. They would then aid in planning the future direction of policy intervention (Stobart, 2004). This case arose when the date set for these interventions was postponed multiple times. Despite the various challenges involved in the execution of policies, there are ways that can be used to determine the success or failure of the implementation process or of the idea of the system itself. Organizations can decide to have regular strategic meetings in which they discuss their progress towards the achievement of their objectives. Through these conventions, the businesses can evaluate their operations and determine if it is fit to continue the execution of the current plan or if a change is necessary. Another technique is the use of reports to measure their operational plans towards the achievement of their strategic plans and objectives. For this to be more effective, every person in the business is keeping appropriate records that indicate the true nature of their activities (Atalik, 2002). Thus, monitoring techniques and a clear and precise evaluation need to be done on them for practical solutions to be determined and executed. The reports can also include statistical values where appropriate. Statistical analysis can be presented in a format that is easier to comprehend and analyze than other methods of data presentation. This analysis enables the creation of charts and graphs that can be useful in comparisons. References GREAT BRITAIN, & BAILEY, A. (2010a). The new Local Enterprise Partnerships: an initial assessment : first report of session 2010-11. Volume 1, Volume 1. London, Stationery Office. GREAT BRITAIN. (2013b). Local enterprise partnerships: ninth report of session 2012-13 : report, together with formal minutes, oral and written evidence. London, Stationery Office. GREAT BRITAIN. (2010c). Local growth: realising every places potential. Norwich, TSO. HILTON, M. (2013). The politics of expertise how NGOs shaped modern Britain. Oxford, Oxford University Press. http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&scope=site&db=nlebk&db=nlabk&AN=551491. SMITH, D. M., & WISTRICH, E. (2014). Devolution and localism in England. GREAT BRITAIN. (2011e). Technology and innovation centres: second report of session 2010-11. Vol. 1, Vol. 1. London, Stationery Office. PICKERILL, J., & MAXEY, L. (2009). Low impact development: the future in our hands. Leicester, University of Leicester, Dept. of Geography]. GREAT BRITAIN. (2009e). Regional development agencies and the Local Democracy, Economic Development and Construction Bill. London, TSO. MAKDISI, S. (2014). Making England western: occidentalism, race, and imperial culture. http://public.eblib.com/choice/publicfullrecord.aspx?p=1575273. MILONE, P., & VENTURA, F. (2010). Networking the rural: the future of green regions in Europe. Assen, Royal Van Gorcum. SAPRU, R. K. (2011). Public policy: art and craft of policy analysis. New Delhi, PHI Learning. MARZOTTO, T., BONHAM, G. S., & BURNOR, V. M. (2000). The evolution of public policy: cars and the environment. Boulder, Colo [u.a.], Rienner. KHAWAJA, S. (2013). Public policy: formulation implementation analyses, Pakistan focused. STEWART, J., HEDGE, D., & LESTER, J. P. (2008). Public policy: an evolutionary approach. Australia, Wadsworth Thomson Learning. BERGLUND, S. (2009). Putting politics into perspective: a study of the implementation of EU public utilities directives. Delft, Eburon. PUBLISHING, O. (2005). Governance of Innovation Systems, 3. Paris, Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development. http://public.eblib.com/choice/publicfullrecord.aspx?p=514825. KNOEPFEL, P. (2011). Public policy analysis. Bristol, Policy Press. GREAT BRITAIN. (2013f). A Severn Barrage: second report of session 2013-14. Vol. 1, Vol. 1. London, Stationery Office. STOBART, J. (2004). The first industrial region: North-west England, c. 1700-60. Manchester [u.a.], Manchester Univ. Press ATALIK, G. (2002). Regional development reconsidered: with ... 32 tables. Berlin ; Heidelberg ; New York ; Barcelona ; Hong Kong ; London, Springer. Read More