Posts Tagged Public Sector
Theory of Strategic Action for Public Policy
Strategic scenarios, concepts that assist business managers in developing market interventions, represent the action component of strategic management. In some fields of public policy (especially national defense and electoral politics) scenarios have been discussed for years. For the most part, however, a theory of action involving specific scenarios has not been given attention by scholars of public policy and administration. In this article, the literature of these fields, along with that of business strategy, is reviewed and synthesized for the purpose of beginning the process of developing a theory of action for managers of public policy. Two concepts in particular – the agency power matrix and the change scenario – are presented as necessary components of this theory. When completed, the theory of strategic action should be viewed as an integral part of the literature of strategic management.
Strategic management literature written for business firms provides executives with a sequence of sophisticated procedures for achieving corporate objectives in their chosen markets. Beyond procedures, however, this particular body of literature also conceptualizes possible scenarios that the firm may choose to follow (Leontiades, 1982; Tourangeau, 1981). Scenarios are stimulated courses of action that map alternative moves by the firm and likely reactions of competitors. In short, strategic management procedures allow business executives to plan and implement courses of action in the form of “if … then” propositions.
Related posts
Evaluating Public Policy
Policy studies has been one of the most dynamic parts of the social sciences over the past several decades. There has been substantial growth in the literature, the number of courses, the number of professionals who identify themselves with the field, and, arguably, in the impact on public sector policy and programs. The policy studies field is an eclectic one, claimed by public administrators, political scientists, economists, sociologists, psychologists, educators, environmental scientists, and many others.
The policy studies enterprise, which I define here to include both “policy analysis” and “program evaluation,” (more about this later) has struggled with its identity and with its image of itself. Ever self-critical, the field is as willing to hold up its failures as it is its successes. The assessment of the field in these books (as well as others) raises a number of issues: Does the field have an adequate and appropriate impact on decision making? Does it have credibility with both the academic community and policy decision makers? Is it overly vulnerable to political pressure? Or, alternately, unresponsive to decision maker needs? Does the policy studies field enhance the democratic process or undermine it? Can the field usefully address normative issues? Does it have adequate methodological power to answer key questions? Is it focusing on the key questions? Is the field appropriately organized and integrated or is it just a hodge-podge of sub-fields in the social sciences? How effectively do we convey the knowledge and skill in the field to new practitioners and students?
Related posts
Challenging the public/private divide: feminism, law and public policy.
The concepts of public and private have been central to recent analysis in a number of areas. The evolution of public-private sectors has been a major theme in urban studies and certainly a major theme in feminist studies. One of the reasons for this centrality, as well as one of the frustrations in using a public-private framework of analysis, is the imprecise nature of this conceptualization – both rich in insights and full of ambiguities. Urban researchers, who have often used this conceptualization either in real or virtual spatial terms, can profit from the kind of debate and analysis of the public-private conceptualization that is contained in the book edited by Susan Boyd : Challenging the Public/Private Divide: Feminism, Law and Public Policy. The contributors to the book examine a whole variety of areas of public policy and law – day care, homework, tax policy, maternity benefits, child welfare, child custody – under a sort of double lens; how does the public-private interface play out in the particular area and what are the consequences for women and particularly for specific groups of women.
One of the major themes that emerges in the book is the inadequacies of the current understandings of the public-private divide to take into account the needs and specific conditions of doubly marginalized groups of women. Koshan (Aboriginal women), Ocran (homeworkers in the garment industry), Iyer (low-income, non-white), Buss (Third World women) have been negatively affected by public policy – relating to violence in the case of Koshan, maturity benefits in the case of Iyer and non-regulation of home work in the case of Ocran. It is necessary to look more broadly at the patterns of marginalization and address these fundamental issues rather than focus uniquely on issues of the public-private interface.
Related posts
related information
