Whether Governments Can Solve Wicked Problems - Coursework Example

Running head: Governments cannot solve wicked problems Governments cannot solve wicked problems Name Course Institution Tutor Date Abstract This report has addressed the question of whether governments can solve wicked problems. The paper has asserted that governments can solve wicked problems that exist and this can effectively be done by acknowledging that, when dealing with wicked problems, governments are likely to face a number of challenges due to the uncertainty that is generated by wicked problems. This in a way makes them apparently intractable. In respect to these, there are three major types of uncertainty that exists and they include the institutional, strategic and substantive uncertainties and these needs to be considered. Governments need to make use of system thinking, collaboration and coordination and mobilizing adaptive work in tackling wicked problems. Introduction This paper sets out to address the question of whether governments cannot solve wicked problems. Wicked problems are termed as those problems that seem impossible or difficult to solve due to the contradictory, incomplete as well as the changing requirements that tend to be difficult to recognize. Wicked problems are very prevalent in the society we live in and thus they are usually termed as ambiguous, ill defined and they are usually associated with strong political, moral and professional issues. Their problems are strongly stakeholder dependent and thus there is little consensus on what the problem is actually a problem and therefore limits suggestions or ideas on how to best solve the problem. Previous attempts of handling wicked problems have led to a number of unforeseen consequences due to the instability of the problems and at the same time the inappropriate use and selection to the methods that can effectively handle them. This has led to more problems than those, which had been detected in the first place. The main argument is that governments can in a way solve wicked problems that are prevalent in the modern society. Discussion It is best to acknowledge that that though the paper will argue that governments can be able to solve wicked problems, it is effective to note that in doing so it is likely to face a number of challenges due to the uncertainty that is generated by wicked problems. This in a way makes them apparently intractable (Van Bueren, Klijn & Koppenjan 2003, Koppenjan & Klijn 2004). In respect to these, there are three major types of uncertainty that exists and they include the institutional, strategic and substantive uncertainty. The substantive uncertainty are termed as those gaps as well as the conflicting understanding in relation to the knowledge base and this leads to having no agreed upon or clear understanding of the exact nature of wicked problems. The strategic uncertainty on the other hand is termed as the aspect in which a great number of actors are involved in different preferences and the interaction between the various actors is unpredictable. The third kind of uncertainty of wicked problems is the institutional uncertainty which relates to where, the various actors are usually attached to a great number of organizational locations, regulatory regimes and networks and this is likely to result to the processes aimed at reaching at the decision on various wicked problems so messy and uncoordinated. All this views of uncertainty hinders greatly and at the same time complicates any efforts that governments may put in place with the aim of addressing the existing wicked problems (Koppenjan & Klijn 2004). It can be also be noted that, despite the challenges that are faced by personnel in the public management and more so those in government, governments have started to address the conceptual difficulties and also the practical challenges that are associated with the tackling of wicked problems and this goes a long way in addressing the complex uncertainties. Governments can solve intractable or wicked problems with the aim of achieving the sustained behavioral change and this can be achieved through collaboration as being the major response to social complexity (Koppenjan & Klijn 2004). There are wide ranges of strategies that the public managers and researchers in government entities can put in place with the core aim of increasing the public sector capacity as well as their effectiveness in dealing with the problems (Lindquist 2004). Government’s can best achieve and solve wicked problems by making use of collaboration. It is crucial to note that, it is not the best option among the various responses to wickedness. This is based on the notion that, collaboration does not in any way address the various aspects of the complexity dimension. Therefore, governments can make use of two other approaches and this includes adaptive leadership and systems thinking. System thinking The outcomes focus which is also termed as system thinking has been a major characteristic when it comes to the management of the public sector and therefore, it has enabled and facilitated a more expansive conception of the various managerial tasks as compared to the previous preoccupation with outputs, inputs and processes (Klijn and Koppenjan 2000). In more precise terms, it can be argued that, the approach offers greater room in which people can discover alternative means that can be applied to solve the problems. This is evident in the fact that, there is a display of the attributes associated with system thinking, which is proposed as a major way in which the involved parties can gain more insight into understanding the nature and nurture of wicked problems and the best way in which they can deal with the various problems. Governments through their personnel needs to make use of system thinking since it entails the consideration of the outcomes and all that whole chain of outputs, processes and inputs that leads them. By doing so, they will have the consideration of the core production processes and at the same time, a consideration of the parallel or the auxiliary processes that are taking place even outside the organizational boundaries that is in the society and in other organizations. There is need to do this with the aim of searching for the various factors that are likely to contribute to the nature of the problem or at the same time contribute alternatively to addressing of the issue at hand in the most effective manner. While it can be acknowledged that systems’ thinking is of great help when dealing with the complexity dimension of wicked problems, it is also crucial to note that, the approach cannot solely be used to deal with the various wicked problems that are present in the modern day business world. Thus, though governments may use it in tackling wicked problems, it would be important to note that the approach can supplement other approaches that include the leadership in relation to mobilizing adaptive work as well as in collaboration (Koppenjan & Klijn 2004). Coordination and collaboration The other common approach that governments can make use of when dealing with wicked problems, is coordination and collaboration. In the modern day, collaborative work usually takes place between a great number of partners and takes a number of shapes (Wondolleck & Yaffee 2000, Goldsmith & Eggers 20004). This kind of collaboration can occur between various governmental organizations, with different levels of governments, private firms and the community organizations just to mention few of them. Through this, the involved partners can play diverse roles such as delivering the services, arranging services or at times paying for them. Another respect to note is that, the level of degrees on the formation of the contract may also vary. Through the use of the collaborative approach, governments can enhance the understanding as well as have an effective way of addressing wicked problems where there are a great number of parties involved with different kind of interests, knowledge as well as values. In instances when collaboration is said o operate in an effective manner; collaboration will play an essential role in addressing wicked problems in three major ways (Imperial 2004). The first way is that, through the presence of well functioning networks, there is an increase in the likelihood that the problem will be understood in a more better way and at the same time, the underlying causes will also be well articulated (Van Bueren, Klijn & Koppenjan 2003). This will assist a lot in coming up with ways of addressing issues at hand. It is also good to note that, when there are a wide range of actors, they will offer a greater level of insights and more so into why a certain situation has arisen. By making use of this kind of approach, a government can achieve its core aim of addressing wicked problems by making use of the various insights and coming up with the most suitable solution to the existing problem (Klijn and Koppenjan 2000). Additionally, governments can make use of collaboration so as to increase the likelihood that the various provisional solutions that are offered so as to address wicked problems can be ultimately be achieved despite the wider network offering and improving them with more insights in. At the same time, greater cooperation is said to bring about greater chances of the involved parties agreeing on the most appropriate route to take. Governments can also make use of coordination and collaboration in solving wicked problems since the approach will help in facilitating the implementation of the proposed solutions. This will be informed by the fact that the parties involved will have agreed on the preferred approach and since it will enable the mutual adjustments among the involved parties since in instances when problems arise when implementing the solutions they can easily handle the situation with a lot of ease. The various characteristic associated with the collaborative approach enable the associated effects of collaboration to the realized in the best way possible. Through the use of the collaborative networks, governments can tap into greater skills as well as knowledge as compared to what the unilateral decision makers can do (Lewicki et al. 2003). Within the networks, there will be a wider array of parties and they will bring along expert knowledge, based on training, their profession and the situational knowledge. However, at times it may be no guarantee that the various kinds of knowledge will built up and lead to fruitful results. This is based on the fact that may be those who may have conflicting interests. The coordination will also enhance communication between the concerned parties and acts as a way on augmenting the likelihood of them when it comes to engage and ensure that the problems at hand is solved and looking for the way forward. Communication will also in mutual adjustments and more so when issues arise in the implementation of proposed solutions. In instances when the perspectives of the involves parties tends to be diverse, they need to make use of an intensive process by mediating and facilitating dialogue. This will be of benefit and it will allow the various views to be acknowledged as a basis for coming to a conclusion and enhance further negotiation between parties. This will in the end play critical roles in the solving of wicked problems (Lewicki et al. 2003) within a short period of time and through the most appropriate means. Mobilizing adaptive work Another way in which governments can deal with wicked problems is through the use of Heifetz view of leadership as being a key mobilization to adaptive work (Heifetz 1994). This orthodoxy was developed with the main aim of offering critique to the major leadership studies. The studies argued that leaders should play two major roles with the first one being the framing of a vision and the other one is greeting to pursue the direction, visions by inspiring, empowering and enabling them. These assumptions are greatly challenged by Heifetz and based on these governemnets and those in the leadership positions needs to note that leaders at times encoder situations, which surpasses their cognitive capacities and thus they cannot handle the situation on their own. In this respect, those in leadership positions in governments needs to distribute and share their knowledge as well as insights among those being led. Additionally, the situations usually possess issues and thus confronting them with an urgent need to make noteworthy accommodations to the new reality (Heifetz 1994). Therefore, governments can make use of this Hiefetz leadership that aims at engaging in a process termed as the mobilizing of the adaptive work. Therefore, governments ought to ensure that that in leadership positions goes beyond the top-down directions that were mostly applied (Kickert, Klijn and Koppenjan 1997). This means that the organizational members should lead in doing the collective work when it comes to the identification of wicked problems and devise ways of dealing with them. Thus, those that are being lead by the alders should therefore perform a shared role in leadership in terms of setting direction. This will assist them greatly in tackling wicked problems. This process seems to be a complex one and it calls for leadership for the leaders and the situation is made more difficult when the employees expects that their leaders offer them a direction at all times. In such instance, they are more likely to become anxious and more so when they are challenged to undertake tasks without the guidance of the leaders. Thus, the leaders in government entities need to challenge individuals to do their work and offer the much-needed circumstances under which they may thrive. Thus, the leaders in the organizations are required to guide an insubstantial course that lies between the provoking of people with the aim of examining the uncomfortable issues and coping with the level of stress that it provoke. In this respect, the leaders will not play the role offering direction to the others in the organization for them to follow them, but they will play the role of identifying the adaptive challenge. This will be done so as to keep distress within a productive range, directing the attention of the arising issues as opposed to diversions (Heifetz 1994). The mobilization of the adaptive work is very relevant to the solving of wicked problems. These approach offers am effective way of addressing the complexity dimension by offering knowledge, which surpasses the idea that a leader can work alone. It focuses more on the diversity dimension by ensuring that the issues are solved by involving a great number of parties in a manner that offers differential knowledge and at the same time enables the surfacing of the competing interests and values (Roberts 2000) Conclusion Based on the above discussion, it is evident that there are a number of ways and approaches, which governments can put in place with the aim of mapping, conceptualizing and dealing with wicked problems that exist in the society we live in. It is effective to note when dealing with wicked problems governments are likely to face a number of challenges due to the uncertainty that is generated by wicked problems. This in a way makes them apparently intractable (Van Bueren, Klijn & Koppenjan 2003, Koppenjan & Klijn 2004). In respect to these, there are three major types of uncertainty that exists and they include the institutional, strategic and substantive uncertainty and these needs to be considered. Governments need to make use of the three approaches to help deal with wicked problems well and effectively. Thus, though governemnets may use the system thinking approach in tackling wicked problems it would be important to note that the approach can supplement other approaches that includes the leadership in relation to mobilizing adaptive work as well as in collaboration. References Goldsmith, S. and Eggers, W.D. (2004). Governing by Network: The New Shape of the Public Sector, Washington DC: Brookings. Heifetz, R.A. (1994). Leadership Without Easy Answers. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. Imperial, M.T. (2004). Collaboration and Performance Management in Network Settings, Report for IBM Center, Washington DC: IBM Center for the Business of Government. Kickert, W. J. M., Klijn, E.H. & Koppenjan, F.J.M. (1997). Managing Complex Networks: Strategies for the Public Sector. London: Sage. Klijn, E.H. & Koppenjan, F.J.M. (2000). Public Management and Policy Networks. Public Management 2 (2): 135-158. Koppenjan, F.J.M. & Klijn, E.H. (2004). Managing Uncertainties in Networks. London: Routledge. Lewicki, R.J., Gray, B. & Elliott, M. (2003). Making Sense of Intractable Environmental Conflicts, Washington: Island Press. Lindquist, E. (2004). Strategy, Capacity and Horizontal Governance: Perspectives from Australia and Canada. Journal of Public Sector Management, 34 (4), pp.2-12. Roberts, N.C. (2000). Wicked Problems and Network Approaches to Resolution. International Public Management Review 1 (1): 1-19 Van Bueren, E.M., Klijn, E.H. and Koppenjan, J.F.M. (2003). Dealing with Wicked Problems in Networks: Analyzing an Environmental Debate from a Network Perspective. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory 13 (2): 193-212. Wondolleck, J. & Yaffee, S.L. (2000). Making Collaboration Work: Lessons from Innovation in Natural Resource Management, Washington DC: Island Press. Read More