Policy Paradox: the Art of Political Decision Making - Admission/Application Essay Example

 Policy Paradox: the Art of Political Decision Making Public Administrators must be engaged in decision making, and this involves the aspects of policy formulation. There are six steps that involve policy formulation, and enactment. Namely; 1. Emergence of the Issue 2. Setting of the agenda 3. Alternative Selection 4. Enactment 5. Implementation 6. Evaluation The first step in policy formulation is the identification of the problem that the policy needs to solve. This stage involves analyzing the problem, detailing its root causes (Stone, 2012). At this stage, policy makers analyze the level of public awareness on the issue under consideration, and determining the people who will solve the problem. At this stage, policy holders identify the resources available to help in solving the problem, and the various interest groups that would benefit from the solution arrived at. However at this stage, there are numerous challenges that policy makers face, and one of them is the finding a way of arriving at a consensus amongst policy makers and the various interest groups on the issue at hand. Take for instance; policy makers identify an issue concerning the increase of crime in a given area. The issue here is how to minimize the levels of crime in the area, and to do this, policy makers must put into consideration the various interests of the population before developing a policy. They would have to consult widely with the population, and find consensus on how best to develop help them in ensuring they are fully secured (Stone, 2012). People might come up with different suggestions, such as employing more police officers, increasing patrols, or initiating community policing techniques. The dilemma amongst policy makers would be to find a solution that will best reflect the interests of the community. The second stage of agenda setting determines whether the government will accept the problem identified as an issue or not. In policy formulation, a problem refers to the needs that people have, and they require government intervention to solve such needs, while an issue is when such a need is taken into consideration by the government so that it can initiate a policy out of it. For instance, before the assassination of John F. Kennedy in 1961, guns were easily available, and it became a problem to the American citizens. However, after the assassination of John F. Kennedy, the government sought to control guns, and this became an issue. This stage requires a lot of political will, as it involves a political process. Lack of a political will at this stage can result to the neglect of the problem in question, therefore frustrating this stage of policy formulation. However, institutions such as the media can play a role in influencing the government to take up the problem as an issue. The media does this by mobilizing the masses into criticizing the government and politicians for being insensitive to their problems. Influential people within the government can also push for the enactment of the problem, into a policy process. The alternative selection process is the next step in this model of policy formulation. This stage involves the identification and selection of tools of policy making for purposes of addressing the problem identified. At this stage, policy makers formulate the policy in question, initiate and develop it. At this stage, various interest groups are involved, the executive and also the legislative branches of the central government. For instance, if a government seeks to introduce reforms in the banking sector of the economy, after the identification of the issue, at this stage the government will formulate the specific policy in question. Take an example of the Frank Dodd economic reforms which were in response to the subprime crises. The government identified the issues that led to the collapse of the mortgage market, and invited all the stakeholders to contribute into formulating the policy. This included the private sector, various committees of the legislature, and policy makers situated at the Federal government. The main challenge that might emanate from this stage is the conflicting views and suggestions that various stakeholders might present for purposes of policy formulation. Chances are high that there might be disagreements on the specific clauses to be inserted into the policy, and therefore policy holders would be required to take a middle ground in order to find a viable solution. The enactment stage involves the legislation is passed by government, and the regulations put in place. Take for instance the Dodd Frank Wall Street reforms which were passed into an act of parliament in 2010. These laws gave the Federal government excessive control of the banking and financial sectors of the American economy. The stage of enactment is a political process, and it requires a lot of goodwill from the government and the politicians (Stone, 2012). On this note therefore, the challenge that policy holders face is to convince the political operators that the policy in question is for their own benefit, and relevant at the time. This is because they can refuse to pass the issue in parliament, or enact it at as a policy at the government level. The government is always controlled by politicians, and political operators. The next stage of policy formulation is the implementation stage, and this involves applying the policy formulated into solving the problems that made it to arise. At this stage, the government uses its machineries to implement the policy, but challenges might arise when there aren’t qualified and efficient personnel who have the capability of implementing such kind of a policy. Take an example of the Dodd Frank Reform act, which outlined the formation of the office of financial research. The main purpose of the office was to research on the various risks that the American financial market might face, and develop mitigating factors. A challenge might arise when there aren’t any qualified candidates to fill in the posts created by the office. And finally, the last stage is evaluation, and this involves measuring the performance of the policy enacted. At this stage, policy makers evaluate the effectiveness of the formulated policy in addressing the problem that led to its creation. This stage also includes pooling in resources to ensure that the policy is maintained. The biggest challenge that these stage face is the development of mechanisms in which policy holders can get the various feedbacks from the people that the policy meant to help. It is always difficult to get an accurate data on the effectiveness of a policy, and this is a major limitation of the process. Question Two: There are various limitations of the rational comprehensive model of decision making that makes this process unrealistic, and idealistic. One problem of the model is that it makes an assumption of the availability of information which is accurate, of high quality, and of the required quantity. The problem that emanates from gathering information is because of limited time available, and the costs that come from gathering and collecting the necessary information. For instance, the first stage under this model is to identify a problem. Identification of a problem is usually a costly affair because different stakeholders must be consulted for purposes of understanding the problem in question, and if it warrants the attention of the government. While gathering information, money is required. This is because the information collected must be analyzed, recorded and stored (Stone, 2012). To record, analyze and store information requires money. This would ensure efficiency in the manner in which the same information is processed, and thereafter used. For example, during the Subprime mortgage crises, the Federal governments had to research and identify the causes of the crises. To store data, the government had to use information technology, and develop software’s that would enable it disseminate the information to relevant organs of the government (Stone, 2012). This is expensive, considering the amount of money used to hire information technology experts, who have the skills of storing and disseminating the information collected. It is also expensive to collect information through research, because of the various costs involved such as transportation costs, costs emanating from food, accommodation, etc. On this basis therefore, the process of gathering information for purposes of using in this model of decision making is expensive, and time consuming. Another limitation of this model is that it makes an assumption of the existence of a measurable and rational criterion of formulating a policy based on classification and ranking of values. The model assumes that the issue chosen would be readily agreed upon by policy makers based on its importance and urgency in solving the problem under consideration. However, this aspect is further from the truth. This is because policy making is a social process, and political players play a great role in its formulation. Political players would always seek to protect their interest while formulating a policy, and therefore the notion that issues are developed based on their urgency and importance is false. On this ground, it is impossible to measure issues and give them values, based on their urgency and problem the policy seeks to solve (Stone, 2012). A good example is the health care reforms initiated by President Obama for the purpose of creating an affordable health care system for Americans. The policy was widely debated, and very controversial, dividing the American opinions to almost half in support of it, and half against it. Even in congress, the Obama administration found it difficult to convince legislature on its importance. Politicians were divided along party lines, and they supported the views held by their party. Members of the legislature voted along party lines, and not on the urgency of the policy, or of its importance in solving the health care problems in United States of America. On this basis therefore, the notion that values are classified and ranked for policy formulation is not correct. Another example is the enactment of the Dodd Frank Reform act of 2010. This policy was established by the Federal government to correct the market failures, and the regulation gaps that led to the subprime mortgage crises in 2008. However, it faced lots of scrutiny from the legislature, and the civil society, some criticizing it as being unable to fully protect the market from future recessions (Stone, 2012). On this basis, the assumption that policy formulation through this model is readily agreeable is false, and misleading. Finally, the process of formulating a policy through the rational comprehensive model is time consuming. This is because it has six steps, which a policy maker must follow, and in each of these steps, there are challenges that policy makers must overcame in order to develop the necessary policy. These steps are time consuming because policy formulators must first collect and synthesize information that they need to act upon. This usually takes time, making the process tiresome, and long. Basing on these arguments therefore, it is prudent to denote that the rationale comprehensive model approach is unrealistic for use, in the modern day administrative system References: Stone, Deborah. Policy paradox: the art of political decision making. 3rd ed. New York: W.W. Norton & Co., 2012. Print. Read More