The Concept of Coordination in Public Policy Development and Execution - Essay Example

Coordination Name: Coordination Course: Tutor: Institution: Date: This post represents my views and responses to the concept of coordination in public policy development and execution. As such, the views expressed in the post represent the opinions of the author and should be considered as such. Central Command Coordination Although there are different forms of coordination and execution forms, I consider the central command system as the most ideal of all. In this case, the coordination of government policies is managed form a single centralized center that serves as a key decision making unit. Therefore, decision making under such a coordination approach is centralized and all other involved agencies and citizens are tasked with the execution and implementation of the developed public policies. In such a structure, I perceive the approach as rational and relevant as it allows for the empowerment of the respective government agencies. Power is a fundamental basis for policies coordination success. My argument on the role and rationale for centralizing power in government policies coordination is based on the argument understanding that among the fundamental pillars of a successful coordination process and mandate are the concepts of power and communication flow. Therefore, unlike the multi partisan coordination approach that diversifies the coordination powers, the central command system increase the overall power concentration. As such, I perceive the process as a way of enhancing the reduction of the most common challenge in coordination, the lunacae problem. The lunacae problem arises in the event that a coordination process task has no stakeholder handling it. With the fact that the coordination process is a sequential wheel where the success of alone stage is reliant on the efficiency and success of the previous stage, such a failure on one stage leads to the ultimate policy implementation coordination failure. To my understanding, this challenge is especially common in instances where various government agencies have overlapping roles and mandate in a policy coordination leading to a laxity in the coordination process. In addition, I prefer the central command coordination because it reduces the risk of redundancy. This policy coordination challenge emerges due to the problem of overlapping agencies responsibilities. In this case, the challenge is fundamentally high in the multi agencies approach in coordination that encourages agencies to share roles and responsibilities in coordinating public policies on behalf of the government as evidenced in numerous multi agency policy coordination conflicts in the USA. In this case, I presume there is the risk of poor communication between such responsible agents leading to the duplication of roles and responsibilities in the coordination process. This has a consequential effect in the emergence of conflicts between the policy coordination agencies leading to the ultimate public policy coordination failure. However, although I firmly support the use of command centers in public policy coordination, I acknowledge that the coordination approach has its share of limitations. One of the challenges is reduced expertise skills. In this regard, a single command center though effective in coordinating public policies, could fail to optimize on the coordination efficiency due to limited skills and resources by a single government agency. This is especially because a single agency could be required to coordinate more than one public policy, risking a HR deficiency challenge, which is a key potential and cause of policy coordination failures. Therefore, I argue that the global governments and international organs in charge of developing and coordinating the development and execution of public policies should enhance the command center coordination approach. Hence, instead of developing a single agency command center, teams in such command centers should be selected from across agencies to diversify opinions and perceptions. As such, drawing the team members from across the government agencies would ensure that the coordination command centers have the required skills and expertise to coordinate the entire process successfully. Further, such a multi agency team under a command center would ensure that although diversity is enhanced, there is a clear flow of communication, there is a clear management structure and the risks of redundancy is reduced. This alternative would therefore ensure that it draws from the merits and strengths of the command center and the partisan mutual adjustment approaches respectively, while mitigating their individual weakness through a complementary application approach. For instance, the command center coordination approach challenge on lack of perception diversity is resolved through the use of a multi agency team. Similarly, the partisan mutual adjustment coordination approach challenge on communication breakdown is resolved through the establishment of a single center and clear authority and responsibility structure for the policy coordination team. Need for Coordination The process of public policy development is based on the fundamental need and responsibility of the government to improve its citizen’s welfare. In this regard, a strategic approach through which a government can enhance such citizens’ welfare is through a policy development process. However, the process success and the acceptability as well as the suitability of such policies are reliant on the coordination process applied. Therefore, one of the strategic rationale and justifications for the development of a proper public policy coordination system is the need to support government activities. Policy coordination in its own definition includes the policy development and execution process. Therefore, I am of the opinion that policy coordination can be categorized into two broad categories namely the formulation process coordination and the execution coordination process. On one hand, I consider the policy development coordination process essential in ensuring that the developed policies are reflective of the target citizens’ base needs. In this regard, such coordination process efficiency includes the development of a stakeholder’s portfolio and developing the relevant systems and structures through which their interactions and contributions could be obtained. As such, the central command in this coordination phase should ensure the establishment and sufficient inclusion of all the impacted and concerned stakeholders For instance, in the coordination for the development of a children rights public policy, the command center should ensure the involvement of stakeholders such as the ministry of education, children rights groups, and the parents associations among others. The development of such an open policy development coordination process ensures that the developed policies are not only representative of the citizens needs, but also acceptable in the society. On the other hand, I believe that the successful coordination of the execution and implementation public policy phase involves the development of the relevant infrastructure. In this case, one of the fundamental responsibilities of a coordinating agency is the initiation of a sensitization process. In this regard, such a sensitization process should be geared towards the citizen proportion that would be directly or indirectly affected by such a public policy. I believe that a successful coordination process execution of a sensitization campaign ensures reduced public policy resistance by the impacted upon population base. In addition, the public policy implementation stage coordination process should be based on the identification and development of the required infrastructure. In this regard, every new public policy requires substantial resource base and infrastructure to actualize its operation and benefits to the society. As such, while as some would ride on the already existing resources and infrastructure, others require the development of new institutions, agencies and departments among others. The responsibility to ensure the on time development of such infrastructure is the sole mandate of the coordination team. Finally, the implementation phase requires an evaluation mechanism. This is based on the need to access a policy impact on the society against the forecasted and targeted impacts. In this regard, the development of a relevant impact evaluation framework and the actual impact evaluation and assessment process is the responsibility of the coordination function. The coordination function in any public policy, especially for the implementation and execution stage is a continuous process. This implies that the coordination team responsibility on the project is perpetual throughout the policy lifespan. The process occurs in repeated cycles of implementation, impact assessment, improvements incorporation and implementation. The figure below offers a summarized review o the coordination function on the public policy implementation phase. Forms of Coordination In both the policy development and execution stages, there are two alternative approaches to coordination, which the coordinating agency can apply. However, the choice of the coordination approach to apply in either of the stage is reliant on the policy development requirement, its levels and expected impacts in the society. In this case, I recommend that the coordination process should apply the horizontal coordination approach. This approach is most relevant on the coordination for the development of policies that require high consultations and negotiations across the stakeholders. In this regard, this approach is mainly applicable in parliamentary democracies where a majority of the public policies development is often fluctuated with a multi stakeholder approach. In this case, through the approach application, the coordination function should develop a framework through which the respective stakeholders can consult and jointly develop and implement the development of a public policy. On the other hand, the second coordination approach in policy development is the vertical approach coordination. I agree with the theoretical reviews that it is suitable for the development of policies that require authorization. However, I argue that in order to facilitate its success, the coordinating team should establish a hierarchy structure through which the policy would flow. As such, the structure should be based on the subsequential approval process to enhance efficiency in the policy formulation and execution process. Read More